195

PART II.

OF THE AUXILIARY EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.

CHAPTER I.

PROPHECY.

ISAIAH lii. 13., liii. 1. "Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. As many were astonished at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men so shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider. Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land

of the living for the transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors."

These words are extant in a book, purporting to contain the predictions of a writer who lived seven centuries before the Christian era.

The material part of every argument from prophecy, namely, that the words alleged were actually spoken or written before the fact to which they were applied took place, or could by any natural means be foreseen, is, in the present instance, incontestable. The record comes out of the custody of adversaries. The Jews, as an ancient father well observed, are all librarians. The passage is in their copies as well as in ours. With many attempts to explain it away, none has ever been made by them to discredit its authenticity.

And what adds to the force of the quotation is, that it is taken from a writing declaredly prophetic; a writing, professing to describe such future transactions and changes in the world, as were connected with the fate and interests of the Jewish nation. It is not a passage in an historical or devotional composition, which, because it turns out to be applicable to some future events, or to some future situation of affairs, is presumed to have been oracular. The words of Isaiah were delivered by him in a prophetic character, with the solemnity belonging to that character: and what he so delivered, was all along understood by the Jewish reader to refer to something that was to take place after the time of the author. The public sentiments of the Jews concerning the design of Isaiah's writings, are set forth in

the book of Ecclesiasticus :* "He saw by an excellent spirit what should come to pass at the last, and he comforted them that mourned in Zion. He showed what should come to pass for ever, and secret things or ever they came."

It is also an advantage which this prophecy possesses, that it is intermixed with no other subject. It is entire, separate, and uninterruptedly directed to one scene of things.

The application of the prophecy to the evangelical history is plain and appropriate. Here is no double sense; no figurative language, but what is sufficiently intelligible to every reader of every country. The obscurities (by which I mean the expressions that require a knowledge of local diction, and of local allusion) are few, and not of great importance. Nor have I found, that varieties of reading, or a different construing of the original, produce any material alteration in the sense of the prophecy. Compare the common translation with that of bishop Lowth, and the difference is not considerable. So far as they do differ, bishop Lowth's corrections, which are the faithful result of an accurate examination, bring the description nearer to the New Testament history than it was before. In the fourth verse of the fifty-third chapter, what our Bible renders "stricken," he translates "judicially stricken ;" and in the eighth verse, the clause, "he was taken from prison and from judgment," the bishop gives, "by an oppressive judgment he was taken off."(a) The next words of these, "who shall declare his generation?" are much cleared up in their meaning by the bishop's version; "his manner of life who would declare ?" that is, who would stand forth in his defence?(b) The former part of the ninth verse, " And he

Chap. xlviii. ver. 24.

(a) This version of Lowth is adopted by Hengstenberg. Others translate, "Without restraint, and without sentence he was taken away." But this is less literal than the common version, and more difficult to explain clearly. The simplest and most exact translation seems to be, "From restraint and from judgment he was taken away.' In other words, "After being violently apprehended, and judicially sentenced, he was hurried to punishment."-EDITOR.

(b) Of this clause the versions have been equally numerous as of the former. The following are the chief of them:-"His manner of life who would declare?" Lowth, "Who will declare the length of his life? that is, after the resurrection." Luther, Calvin, and Vitringa : "Who of his contemporaries will consider it?"Storr, Rosenmuller, Gesenius: "Who can express the number of his posterity, or descendants ?"-Kimchi, Hengstenberg: "Who can declare his miraculous birth?"-Chrysostom, Cajetan: "And who can speak of his habitation?"-Mar

goliouth.

After all these various suggestions, the common version is the simplest and

made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death," which inverts the circumstances of Christ's passion, the bishop brings out in an order perfectly agreeable to the event; "and his grave was appointed with the wicked, but with the rich man was his tomb." (c) The words in the eleventh verse, "by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many," are, in the bishop's version, by the knowledge of him shall my righteous servant justify many."

It is natural to inquire what turn the Jews themselves give to this prophecy.* There is good proof that the ancient Rabbins explained it of their expected Messiah :† but their modern expositors concur, I think, in representing it as a description of the calamitous state and intended restoration of the Jewish people, who are here, as they say, exhibited under the character of a single person. I have not discovered that their exposition rests upon any critical arguments, or upon these in any other than a very minute degree. The clause in the ninth verse, which we render "for the transgression of my people was he stricken," and in the margin, was the stroke upon him," the Jews read, "for the transgression of my people was the stroke upon them." And what they allege in support of the alteration amounts only to this, that the Hebrew pronoun is

66

most accurate; the word generation being taken in its most usual sense, for posterity or descendants. This is the meaning of the word adopted by Barnes and Hengstenberg; but they have reversed the real scope of the clause, and obscured its connexion with the context. It is not a promise of numerous posterity, but an apostrophe, to describe the seeming hopelessness of any descendants, after so premature a death. In this light, the connexion is clear, and the whole verse may be thus paraphrased:-" From restraint and a judicial sentence he was taken to punishment, and who shall reckon up any descendants that he can have left? for he was prematurely cut off out of the land of the living." Thus a deeper force of contrast is given to the promise: "He shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand."— EDITOR.

(c) The reading of Lowth, bamoth, tombs, is probably an erroneous conjecture. But the received text will give the same meaning. We may render it, as Barnes and Margoliouth, after his death; or the plural, deaths, may answer to the Latin word funera, and denote all the funeral rites for the dead. The last is probably the true sense: "And they appointed his grave with the wicked, and he was with the rich in his funeral; because he had done no violence, neither was there deceit in his mouth."-EDITOR.

"Vaticinium hoc Esaiæ est carnificina Rabbinorum, de quo aliqui Judæi mihi confessi sunt, rabbinos suos ex propheticis scripturis facilè se extricare potuisse, modò Esaias tacuisset." Hulse, Theol. Jud. p. 318. quoted by Poole, in loc. [This prophecy of Isaiah is the torment of the Rabbins, respecting which some Jews have confessed to me, that their Rabbis could easily have extricated themselves from the prophetic Scriptures, if only Isaiah had kept silence.EDITOR.]

f Hulse, Theol. Jud. p. 430.

capable of a plural as well as of a singular signification ; that is to say, is capable of their construction as well as · ours.*(d) And this is all the variation contended for; the rest of the prophecy they read as we do. The probability, therefore, of their exposition, is a subject of which we are as capable of judging as themselves. This judgment is open indeed to the good sense of every attentive reader. The application which the Jews contend for, appears to me to labour under insuperable difficulties; in particular, it may be demanded of them to explain, in whose name or person, if the Jewish people be the sufferer, does the prophet speak, when he says, "He hath borne our griefs,

* Bishop Lowth adopts in this place the reading of the Seventy, which gives smitten to death, "for the transgression of my people was he smitten to death." The addition of the words "to death," makes an end of the Jewish interpretation of the clause. And the authority upon which this reading (though not given by the present Hebrew text) is adopted, Dr. Kennicott has set forth by an argument not only so cogent, but so clear and popular, that I beg leave to transcribe the substance of it into this note:-" Origen, after having quoted at large this prophecy concerning the Messiah, tells us, that having once made use of this passage, in a dispute against some that were accounted wise among the Jews, one of them replied, that the words did not mean one man but one people, the Jews, who were smitten of God, and dispersed among the Gentiles for their conversion; that he then urged many parts of this prophecy, to show the absurdity of this interpretation, and that he seemed to press them the hardest by this sentence, -'for the transgression of my people was he smitten to death.' Now as Origen, the author of the Hexapla, must have understood Hebrew, we cannot suppose that he would have urged this last text as so decisive, if the Greek version had not agreed here with the Hebrew text; nor that these wise Jews would have been at all distressed by this quotation, unless the Hebrew text had read agreeably to the words to death,' on which the argument principally depended; for by quoting it immediately, they would have triumphed over him, and reprobated his Greek version. This, whenever they could do it, was their constant practice in their disputes with the Christians. Origen himself, who laboriously compared the Hebrew text with the Septuagint, has recorded the necessity of arguing with the Jews, from such passages only as were in the Septuagint agreeable to the Hebrew. Wherefore, as Origen had carefully compared the Greek version of the Septuagint with the Hebrew text; and as he puzzled and confounded the learned Jews, by urging upon them the reading to death' in this place, it seems almost impossible not to conclude, both from Origen's argument, and the silence of his Jewish adversaries, that the Hebrew text at that time actually had the word agreeably to the version of the Seventy."-Lowth's Isaiah, p. 242.

(d) The difficulty here is rather understated, for the particle lamo has commonly a plural sense. This, however, is here plainly excluded by the context, unless the construction of the clause is entirely changed. We have only to substitute the version, they were stricken, and the incongruity becomes apparent. But there are three other alternatives, each consistent with the usual application. If we allow the reading of Origen, we must suppose the original word to be lamoth, and that it has been altered since his time. This is the view of Lowth and Kennicott, but the authority seems too slight, against the consent of all manuscripts. Again; if we retain the plural sense of the particle, we may translate with Margoliouth, "He was cut off out of the land of the living, for the transgression of my people, for the stroke that should have been upon them." Or, finally, we may retain the singular version of the particle, since it is clearly so used in a few other places, and is adopted here by the Syriac and Ethiopic versions. This is, perhaps, after all, the true construction, and the ambiguous form may be used for greater euphony and dignity in the expression.-EDITOR.