Sivut kuvina

ution. Besides this would only make the ju part of the word Jes, and the iss?IRED and apocryphal writers use the word constantly for angther name. It must then be this otber, even (pon) Jekoska or Joshua for which Jesus stands in these authors ; in the speech of the angel, and throughout the New Testament, and was particularly used by CHRIST, when He spake to Saul, A&s xxvi, in HEBREW, and which it pleased God to take from amidst the thoufands of the typic names in the Old Testament, and make the distinguishing title of the MESSIAH. For in the GREEK word the I is put for the () }, the (H) e long for() and ()v; the (E)s for the (v) s; and the (or) ou (Eng. v) for the (9)o', (which is not dropped for the harshness sake as supposed by Aben Ezra, but retained,) the last (E) s being added as usual, as in ABIAS, ELIAS, ESAIAS, &c. to terminate the name; and so put together, Jesus for JehOsHu A or Jo

Phile the Jew therefore calls fo$Hun Jesus, in his treatise concerning the change of names, P. 825. " Mosęs alsó," says he, “ changes' the name (S2EHA) OsHea into

(IHEOTN) Jesus;'? and this he does repeatedly. Whence the first Christians asserted it, and argued from it to their face without any contradi&tion of this particular. In after times in their famous book, called (Nizzechon, in Engliņ] " victory!' or “ conqueror” over



[ocr errors]

CHRISTIANS, we find the author trying to evade the argument drawn from the name, in favour of Christ's Divinity, by saying that we may as well prove it from the name (vorne) JeHOSHUA. The author of Toldoth Jesu afa firms that “ His mother gave to CHRIST the “ name (vvu) JehoshuA;” which is a plain proof he understood, and wrote to them who understood JESUS to be the very same name as Joshua. It is true, fome, as observed, have called him (10* Jsv) by way of reproach, as Tisbi owns under the word, who says, “ the “ CHRISTIANS called him (as he writes the reputed abridged form of Joshua) “ (vico Je“ svo] THE SAVIOR, by the command of the " ANGEL GABRIEL, because that He was is about to deliver the whole world from hell ," e but that the Jews would not call him fo, “ but take away (R) o, because they do not is believe Him to be (9 10 11 E-MUSIO) THE “ SAVIOR;" though others allign very blasphe mous reasons for it. (a) Abravanel and others write Him also Jesuo. So that we find, by the providence of God, the truth concerning this name attested by the Jews, who translated the

Old " Christ from the name of him -- the fuc“é cellor of Moses;”. Pareus in Jof. calls him d the true Joshua ;Mather affirms Joshua is called Jesus in GRÉEK; Dean Stanhope does the same, and Mr. Pyle on Num. xiii. 16, fpeaking of Ostea adds, “ otherwise called do Jesus, or Josfiua, or JehosHUA, &c. as “ Joshua bore the name of the holy Jesus:" the pious Mr. Wogan says (á), “ the name is " the same.” Prideaux also allerted this as the vulgate and the translators of the Bifhops or G. Bible had done before them, and Walton at the end of his Polyglot Bible, and many others, &c. After which concurrent evidence of the fameness of the names, one might expect to have leave to proceed in our enquiry after the signification of this name. But this can not be had without first settling the HEBREW letters, of which we have remarked the name confifts for : which is a very material point. That it was antiently written [sun) Je HOSHUA is certain, and therefore granted; but “ in after “ times, says Grotius, “ after others, it came “ to be written (sovu) Jes HUA, the () E and (1) ú being omitted according to the usage of the Syriac, which puts Bar-jona for Bar-joanna ; whence he concludes because he is called Jeshua after the captivity as well as JeHOSHUA in Hag. i. 1, 2, 24, and Zech. iii. i, that this


(a) Some of them wickedly form it by Rafhe teboth of the forf letters of (1939) 1 Men (1930) shem-v (152n) vezec HCRU; " His name and his memorial shall be blotted dut”' or

“ fulfilling still to their great confusion what the 56. royal DAVID, as the type of CHRIST, the BILOYED," come plains of Pf. xli. 5

« rish;

name (a) Ejay on the proper leffons, &c. vol. ITI. p. 418.

name Jesus stands for that. Now how unwarrantable this is must appear to any one conversant in the language, wherein there is not an infance of this fort. What comes nearest it, the use of Jonathan and JeHONATHAN, &c. for the Jame persons is not to the purpose ; as they are different names: which there is as much reafon to say these are; since two letters would not be found so constantly in the body of a word, as they are throughout the book of Joshua, without some important cause. And BARJOANNA and Bar-JONA are two diftinct names, as much as JeHoHaN-an and Jonah are, which these stand for; so that his premises fail. Besides not only the prophets after this retain the antient [001] JehOsHun for this person, but the 70, the apostles and primitive CHRISTIANS and Jews, &c. have been proved to have understood Jesus to be the word substituted for it: which made Tyndal in his old version put Josue, where we read Jesus in Aets vii. 4, 5, and Heb.iv. 8. Whence we may safely conclude, not Jeshua but [yvin'] JeHOSHUA are the HeBREW letters, for which Jesus is used in the New Testament; and that Jeshua is a different name, though called also Jesus in the Greek of the 70, because they might think it an equivalent title for the person, they had all along called so, and cared not to alter it, as imagining it more clearly to point him out. Indeed the



Old Testament into GREEK, and afterwards flowing through the mouths of its very enemies, in the midst of their confeffion of a malitious perverfoon of it. Amongst CHRISTIANS we have proofs of it in Ignatius, p. 96, 196, and Bar. nabas, p. 238, in their epiftles; the latter saying, “ again, what says Moses to Jesus the son of “ Nave (Nun), imposing this name upon “ him, as a prophet, that all the people might “ hear that THE FATHER shewed all things « concerning His son JESUS to the son of 4 NAVE?Tertullian, p. 193, and 406 says, « this man (JOSHUA) was inaugurated with the

figure of the LORD's name, being called Je“ SUS;” and p. 408. the name of the Lord Jesus fought, in Exod. xvii. 13. and p. 401. Cyprian, p. 405, 406, repeatedly calls him Jesus, as does Ruffinus in his creed; (see Jerom, vol. IX. p. 64,) saying, “Oshea is changed “ into JESUS to shew the name suited those “ alone who wrought salvation, &c. therefore " that person was called Jesus, who led the “ people, brought from Egypt and delivered “ from their wanderings in the wilderness, into “ the promised land.” Jerom frequently calls him so. Cyril in the place above mentioned says, “ It is the name given to Joshua the fon " of Nun" -" that this name, our LORD " JESUS, was graciously foretold by the pro& phets," with which Ambrose agrees, vol

. I. p. 948,

« EdellinenJatka »