ARTICLE II. And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord. THE second Article of the CREED presents unto us, as the object of our faith, the second person of the blessed Trinity; that as in the Divinity there is nothing intervening between the Father and the Son, so that immediate union might be perpetually expressed by a constant conjunction in our Christian confession. And that upon no less authority than of "the Author and Finisher of our Faith," (Heb. xii. 2.) who in the persons of the apostles gave this command to us, "Ye believe in God, believe also in me." (John xiv. 1.) Nor speaketh he this of himself, but from the Father who sent him for "this is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ." (1 John iii. 23.) According therefore to the Son's prescription, the Father's injunction, and the sacramental institution, as we are baptized, so do we believe in the name of the Father, and the Son. Our blessed Saviour is here represented under a threefold description: first, by his nomination, as Jesus Christ; secondly, by his generation, as the only Son of God; thirdly, by his dominion, as our Lord. But when I refer Jesus Christ to the nomination of our Saviour, because he is in the Scriptures promiscuously and indifferently sometimes called Jesus, sometimes Christ, I would be understood so as not to make each of them equally, or in like propriety, his name. "His name was called Jesus, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb:" (Luke ii. 21.)" who is also called Christ," (Matt. i. 16.) not by name, but by office and title. Which observation, seemingly trivial, is necessary for the full explication of this part of the Article: for by this distinction we are led unto a double notion, and so resolve our faith into these two propositions, I believe there was and is a man, whose name was actually, and is truly in the most high importance, Jesus, the Saviour of the world.' I believe the man who bare that name *Eadem regula veritatis docet nos credere post Patrem etiam in Filium Dei, Christum Jesum, Dominum Deum nostrum, sed Dei Filium; hujus Dei qui et unus et solus est, conditor scilicet rerum omnium.' Novat. de Trinit. c. 9. Si tamen nomen est Christus, et non appellatio potius; Unctus enim significatur. Unctus autem non magis nomen est, quam vestitus, quam calceatus, accidens nomini res.' Tertull, adv. Prax. c. 28. 'Quorum nominum alterum est reprium, quod ab Angelo impositum est; alterum accidens, quod ab unctione convenit.' Ibid. Christus commune dignitatis est nomen, Jesus proprium vocabu lum Salvatoris.' S. Hieron. in Matt. xvi. 20. Jesus inter homines nominatur; nam Christus non proprium nomen est, sed nuncupatio potestatis et regni. Lactan. de ver. Sup. 1. iv. c. 7. Dum dicitur Christus, commune nomen dignitatis est; dum Jesus Christus, proprium vocabulum Salvatoris est.' Isidor. Orig. 1. vii. c. 2 Ἰησοῦς καλεῖται φερωνύμως. S. Cyril. Car tech. 10. to be the Christ, that is, the Messias promised of old by God, and expected by the Jews.' 66 For the first, it is undoubtedly the proper name of our Saviour, given unto him, according to the custom of the Jews, at his circumcision: and as the Baptist was called John, even so the Christ was called Jesus. Beside, as the imposition was after the vulgar manner, so was the name itself of ordinary use. We read in the Scriptures of "Jesus which was called Justus," a fellow-worker with St. Paul; (Col. iv. 11.) and of a certain sorcerer, a Jew, whose name was* Barjesus," (Acts xiii. 6.) that is, the son of Jesus. Josephus, in his History, mentioneth one Jesus the son of Ananus, another the son of Saphates, a third the son of Judas, slain in the temple: and many of the high-priests, or priests, were called by that name; as the son of Damnæus, of Gamaliel, of Onias, of Phabes, and of Thebuth. Ecclesiasticus s called the Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach, and that Sirach the son of another Jesus. St. Stephen speaks of the "tabernacle of witness brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles;" (Acts vii. 44, 45.) and the Apostle in his explication of those words of David, "To-day if you will hear his voice," (Psal. xcv. 7.) observeth that, "if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterwards have spoken of another day." (Heb. iv. 8.) Which two Scriptures being undoubtedly understood of Joshua, the son of Nun, teach us as infallibly that Jesus is the same name with Joshua. Which being at the firstt imposition in the full extent of pronunciation Jehoshua, in process of time contracted to Jeshuah, by the omission of the last letter (strange and difficult to other languages), and by the addition of the Greek termination, became Jesus. Wherefore it will be necessary, for the proper interpretation of Jesus, to look back upon the first that bare that name, who was the son of Nun, of the tribe of Ephraim, the successor of Moses, and so named by him, as it is written, "and Moses called Oshea, the son of Nun, Jehoshuah." (Num. xiii. 16.) His first name, then, imposed at his circumcision, was Oshea, or Hoshea; the same with the name of the "son of Azaziah, ruler of Ephraim," (1 Chron. xxvii. 20.) of the "son of Elah, king of Israel," (2 Kings xvii. 1.) of the "son of Beeri, the prophet:" (Hos. ì. 1.) and the interpretation of this first name Habuit et Judæa quosdam Jesus, quorum vacuis gloriatur vocabulis. Illa enim nec lucent, nec pascunt, nec medentur.' Bernard. in Cant. Serm. xv. First yw as generally in the books of Moses, in Joshua, Judges, Samuel, the Kings, yea even in Haggai and Zechariah: then contracted into yw, as in the 1 Chron. xxiv. 11. 2 Chron. xxxi. 15. and constantly in Ezra and Nehemiah. Next the last letter y was but lightly pronounced, as appears by the Greek translation, 1 Chron. vii. 27. where p is rendered in the Roman and Alexandrian copies 'Incou, in the Aldus and Complutensian editions 'Iwn, and by Eusebius, who expresseth it truer than those copies, Ἰωσουέ. At last y was totally left out both in the pronunciation and the writing, and the whole name of Joshua contracted שר to Hoshea is Saviour. Now we must not imagine this to bet no mutation, neither must we look upon it as a total alteration, but observe it as a change not trivial or inconsiderable And being Hoshea was a name afterwards used by some, and Jehoshua, as distinct, by others, it will necessarily follow, there was some difference between these two names; and it will be fit to inquire what was the addition, and in what the force of the alteration doth consist. First, therefore, we observe that all the original letters in the name | Hoshea are preserved in that of Joshua; from whence it is evident, that this alteration was not made by a verbal mutation, as when Jacob was called Israel, nor by any literal change, as when Surai was named Sarah, nor yet by diminution or mutilation; but by addition, as when Abram *Osee in lingua nostra Salvatorem sonat, quod nomen habuit etiam Josue filius Nun, antequam ei a Deo vocabulum mutaretur.' S. Hier. in Osee, c. i. 1. et 1. i. ade. Jovinianum, col. 474. I read indeed of other interpretations among the Greeks, no good expositors of the Hebrew names as in an ancient MS. of the LXX. Translation of the Prophets, now in the library of Cardinal Barberini, at the beginning of Hosea, Ωσηέ, λυπούμενος, and again, Ωσηέ, σεσωσμένος, ἡ συσκιάζων. (Οf which the first and last åre far from the original and the middle agreeable with the root, not with the conjugation, as being deduced from yw not in Niphal, but in Hiphil.) And in another MS. of the Prophets in the King's Library at St. James's, 'Ωσης, σκιάζων, ή φύλαξ, and again, 'Ωσης, έρμ. σωζόμενος, which is the interpretation inserted into Hesychius ; in whom for 'op we must read 'nens and so I suppose Salmasius intended it, though the Holland edition hath made bis emendation 'Ωσκέ. As the Samaritan Pentateuch makes it the same name, which he was first named, and which he had afterwards; as if Moses had only called Oshea, Oshea. So Justin Martyr speaks of Hosea as μετονομασθέντος τῷ Ἰησοῦ ὀνόματι. And comparing it with that alteration of Jacob's name : τὸ ἐπώνυμον Ἰακὼβ τῷ Ἰσραὴλ ἐπικληθέντι ἐδέθη, καὶ τῷ Αἰσῇ ὄνομα Ἰησοῦς ἐπεκλήθη· where, to pass by his mistake in supposing him first named Israel, and after called Jacob, he makes the alteration of Hosea to Joshua equal to that of Jacob to Israel. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 300 334.538. 340. The reason whereof was the Greek version of the name, who for Hoseah translated it Αὐτῆς· ἐπωνόμασε Μωυσῆς τὸν Αἰσῆ υἱὸν Ναυὴ, Ἰησοῦν. Numb XIII. 16. Dum Moysi successor destiparetur Auses filius Nave, transfertur certe de pristino nomine, et incipit vocari Jesus.' Tertull. adv. Jud. c. 9. et adv. Thus This Justin Martyr charges upon the Jews as neglected by them, and affirms the reason why they received not Jesus for the Christ, was their not observing the alteration of Hosea, into Joshua or Jesus: Αὐτῆν καλούμενον Ἰησοῦν Μωσῆς ἐκάλεσε, τοῦτο σὺ οὐ ζητεῖς· δι ̓ ἣν αἰτίαν ἐποίησεν, οὐκ ἀπορεῖς, οὐδὲ φιλοπευστεῖς, τοιγαροῦν λέ ληθε σε ὁ Χριστὸς, καὶ ἀναγιγνώσκων οὐ συνίης. Dial. cum Truph. p. 340. And whereas they spake much of the change made in the names of Abram and Sarai, which were but of a letter, they took no notice of this total alteration of the name; so Πε: Διὰ τί μὲν ἓν ἄλφα πρώτῳ προσετέθη τῷ ̓Αβραὰμ διόματι θεολογεῖς, καὶ διὰ τί ἓν ῥῶ τῷ Σάρρας ὀνόματι ὁμοίως κομπολογεῖς ἡ διὰ τί δὲ τὸ πατρόθεν ὄνομα τῷ Αὐτῇ τῷ υἱῷ Ναυῆ ὅλον μετωνόμασται τῷ Ἰησοῦ, οὐ ζητεῖς ; wid Where, to pass by the vulgar mistake of the Greeks, who generally deliver the addition of a in the name of Abraham, and p in the name of Sarab, when the first was an addition of, the second a change of into , he would make that of Hosea into Jesus a far more considerable alteration than that of Abraham, or of Sarah. הושע יהושע || was called Abraham. Secondly, it must be confessed that there is but one literal addition, and that of that letter which is most frequent in the Hebrew names: but being thus solemnly added by Moses, upon so remarkable an occasion as the viewing of the land of Canaan was, and that unto a name already known, and after used; it cannot be thought to give any less than a present designation of his person to be a Saviour of the people, and future certainty of salvation included in his name unto the Israelites by his means. Thirdly, though the number of the letters be augmented actually but to one, yet it is not improbable that another may be virtually added, and in the signification understood. For being the first letter of Hoshea will not endure a duplication, and if the same letter were to be added, one of them must be absorbed; it is possible another of the same might be by Moses intended, and one of them suppressed. If then unto the name Hoshea we join one of the titles of God, which is Jah, there will result from both, by the custom of that Hebrew tongue, Jehoshua, and so not only the instrumental, but also the original cause of the I was דלותי ולי יהושיע .6 .and Psal. cxvi brought low, and he helped me. And although there be another in the future than in the name, yet being it is also found sometimes with the lesser Chiric, and so without the latter, or without any Chiric at all, as frequently with the addition of 1, yer, there is no reason, but y, the name of the son of Nun, may be of the same force, as consisting of the same letters with the third person of the future in Hiphil. Again, being added to the future, as formative thereof, stands in the place of 1 (for the avoiding of confusion with conjunctive) which is nothing else than the abbreviation of , we may well assign at least this emphasis to the mutation which Moses made that whereas before there was nothing but salvation barely in his name, now there is no less than he shall save in which the & or is a peculiar designation of the person, and the shall or tense a certainty of the futurition. Thus will the design of Moses appear to be nothing else but a prediction or confirmation of that which was not beft re, but by way of de sire or omination; and this only by changing the imperative into the future, y serva, the expectation of the people, into yw servabit, the ratification of Moses. So did the ancients understand it. to the Greeks Jesus is σωτήριον Θεοῦ, to the Latins, Salvator Dei. So Eusebius Demonstr. Evang. 1. iv. ad finem. 'Erreì dè σωτήριον Θεοῦ εἰς τὴν ̔Ελλάδα φωνὴν τὸ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ μεταληφθὲν ὄνομα σημαίνει. Ἰσουὰ μὲν γὰρ παρ ̓ Εβραίοις σωτηρία, υἱὸς δὲ Ναυῆ παρὰ τοῖς αὐτοῖς Ἰωσουὲ ὀνομάζεται· Ἰωσουὲ δέ ἐστιν Ἰαὼ σωτηρία, τοῦτ' ἔστι, Θεοῦ σωτή ρίου. Where nothing can be more certain than that 'Ia is taken for the name of God, and 'la sarnia, together, the salvation of God. And yet Theophylact has strangely mistaken it, Matt. i. 1. To 'Inσους ὄνομα οὐχ Ελληνικόν ἐστιν, ἀλλ ̓ Εβραϊ κὸν, ἑρμηνεύεται δὲ σωτὴς, Ἰαὼ γὰρ ἡ σωτηρία παρ' Εβραίοις λέγεται· which words seem plainly to signify that Jesus is interpreted Saviour, because 'la in the Hebrew tongue signifieth salvation. I confess the words may be strained to the same sense with those of Eusebius, but not without some force, and contrary to what he seemeth to intend. Especially considering those which followed him in the same mistake, as Moschopulus περὶ σχεδῶν, p. 6. Ἰησοῦς ἀπὸ τοῦ Ἰαὼ γίνεται, ὃ δηλοῖ παρ' ̔Εβραίοις τὴν σωτηρίαν. Whereas Ἰαὼ in Eusebius is certainly no other than , and 'lovà than ny, and so 'Irovi contracted of 'là 'Irovà, the salvation of God. Nor is this only the opinion of Eusebius, but of St. Jerome, a man much better acquainted with the Hebrew language; who on the first chapter of Hosea. Jews' deliverance will be found expressed in one word: as if Moses had said, 'This is the person by whom God will save his people from their enemies.' Now being we have thus declared that Jesus is the same name with Joshua; being the name of Joshua was first imposed by divine designation, as a certain prediction of the fulfilling to the Israelites, by the person which bare the name, all which was signified by the name; being Jesus was likewise named by a more immediate imposition from heaven, even by the ministration of an angel: it followeth, that we believe he was in-fallibly designed by God to perform unto the sons of men whatsoever is implied in his nomination. As therefore in Hoshea there was expressed salvation, in Joshua at least was added the designation of that single person to save, with certainty of preservation, and probably even the name of God, by whose appointment and power he was made a Saviour; so shall we find the same in Jesus. In the first salutation, the angel Gabriel told the blessed Virgin, she should "conceive in her womb, and bring forth a son, and should call his name Jesus." (Luke i. 31.) In the dream of Joseph the angel of the Lord informed him not only of the nomination, but of the interpretation or etymology ;* Ithou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins." (Matt. i. 21.) In which words is clearly expressed the designation of the person He, and the futurition of salvation certain by him, He shall save. Beside that other addition of the name of God, propounded in Joshua as probable, appeareth here in some degree above probability, and that for two reasons. First, Because it is not barely said that He, but as the original raiseth it, He himself shall save.+ Joshua saved Israel not by his own power, not of himself, but God by him; neither saved he his own people, but the people of God: whereas Jesus himself, by his own power, the power of God, shall save his own people, the people of God. Well therefore may we understand the interpretation of his name to be God the Saviour. Secondly, Immediately upon the prediction of the name of Jesus, and the interpretation given by the angel, the evangelist expressly observeth, "All this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet saying, Behold, a vir shewing that Joshua had first the same name with that of the prophet, saith: Non enim (ut male in Græcis codicibus legitur et Latinis) Ause dictus est, quod nibil omnino intelligitur, sed Osee, id est, Salrator: et additum est ejus nomini Dominus, ut Salvator Domini diceretur.' Comment. in Osee, c. i. 1. col. 9. What then was it but the Dominus added to his name? For as in the name of Esaias, St. Jerome acknowledges the addition the name of God: Interpretatur autem Esaias, Salvator Domini:' Comment. in Is. c. i. 1. col. 2. in the same manner did he conceive it in the name of Joshua, only with this difference, that in the one it begins, in the other it concludes the name. 'Jesus Hebræo Sermone Salvator dicitur. Etymologiam ergo nominis ejus Evangelista signavit, dicens, Vocabis nomen ejus Jesum, quia ipse salvum faciet populum suum.' S. Hier. Comment. in Matt. c. i. 21. col. 587. † Aùròc. ipse. |