« ZurückWeiter »
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 is 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 first * 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 Elab, king of Israel," (2 Kings xvii. 1.) of the “son of Beeri, the prophet:” (Hos. i. 1.) and the interpretation of this first name Hoshea tis Saviour. Now we must not imagine
* First yunti as generally in the col. 474. I read indeed of other inbooks of Moses, in Joshua, Judges, terpretations among the Greeks, no Samuel, the Kings, yea even in Hag- good expositors of the Hebrew names: gai and Zechariah : then contracted as in an ancient MS. of the LXX. into you', as in the 1 Chron. xxiv. 11. Translation of the Prophets, now in 2 Chron. xxxi. 15. and constantly in the library of Cardinal Barberini, at Ezra and Nehemiah. Next the last the beginning of Hosea, 'lonè, Autoúletter y was but lightly pronounced, uevos, and again, 'Ronè, geowouévos, û as appears by the Greek translation, ovokiálwv. (Of which the first and last 1 Chron. vii. 27. where yung' is ren- are far from the original: and the dered in the Roman and Alexandrian middle agreeable with the root, not copies 'Ingovè, in the Aldus and Com- with the conjugation, as being deplutensian editions ’Iwonè, and by duced from yvi pot in Nipbal, but in Eusebius, who expresseth it truer Hiphil.) And in another MS. of the than those copies, 'I woové. At last y Prophets in the King's Library at St. was totally left out both in the pro- James's, 'Qonè, oriášwv, ñ púrač, and nunciation and the writing, and the again, 'Donè, épu. ow Sóuevos, which is whole name of Joshua contracted to the interpretation inserted into Hesy
chius ; in whom for 'long we must t‘Osee in lingua nostra Salvatorem read 'lonéand so I suppose Salmasonat, quod nomen habuit etiam Jo- sius intended it, though the Holland sue filius Nun, antequam ei a Deo edition bath made his emendation vocabulum mutaretur. S. Hier. in 'Doké. Osee, c. i. 1. et l. i, adv. Jovinianum,
this to be * no mutation, neither must we look upon it as a + total alteration, but observe it as a change not trivial or Iinconsiderable. 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 Sarai was named Sarah, nor yet by diminution or mutilation; but by addition, as when Abram 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
As the Samaritan Pentateuch ròs åvayopetel. Euseb. Eccl. Hist. I. i. makes it the same name, which he c. 3. Thus was the Hosea something was first named, and which he had disguised by Auses, and was farther afterwards; as if Moses had only estranged yet by those who frequently called Oshea, Oshea.
called him Navons, as Euseb. De+ So Justin Martyr speaks of Ho- monstr. Evang. I. v. c. 17. thrice. sea as μετονομασθέντος τω Ιησού ονό | This Justin Martyr charges upon μάτι. . And comparing it with that the Jews as neglected by them, and alteration of Jacob's name: TÒ ÉTwvv- affirms the reason why they received μον Ιακώβ το Ισραήλ επικληθέντι εδό- not Jesus for the Christ, was their θη, και το Αυσή όνομα Ιησούς επεκλήθη" not observing the alteration of Hosea where, to pass by bis mistake in sup. into Joshua or Jesus: Avoñv radoúmeposing him first named Israel, and νον Ιησούν Μωσής εκάλεσε, τούτο συ ου after called Jacob, he makes the al- Enteiso di nv airiav étroingev, our åtoteration of Hosea to Joshua equal to ρείς, ουδε φιλοπευστείς, τοιγαρούν λέληθε that of Jacob to Israel. Dial. cum σε ο Χριστός, και αναγιγνώσκων ου συνTryph. p. 300. 334. 338. 340. The ins. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 340. And reason whereof was the Greek ver- whereas they spake much of the sion of the name, who for Hoseah change made in the names of Abram translated it Avons ét wvóuage Mwvons and Sarai, which were but of a letter, TÒV Avon viòv Navr, 'Incoûv. Numb. they took no notice of this total alteraxiii. 16. Dum Moysi successor de- tion of the name; so he: Alà ti jèv Èv stinaretur Auses filius Nave, transfer- άλφα πρώτη προσετέθη τω'Αβραάμ ονόtur certe de pristino nomine, et inci- ματι θεολογείς, και διά τί εν ρώτη Σάρρας pit vocari Jesus. Tertull. adv. Jud. óvóuarı ouoiwg coje Toloyecs; duà ti dè tò c. 9. et adv. Marcion. I. iii. c. 16. 'Igi- natpódev' ovoua Tab Avoợ tư viço Navn tar Moyses his administratis Ausem όλον μετωνόμασται τω Ιησού, ου ζητείς; quendam nomine præponens populo, ibid. Where, to pass by the vulgar qui eos revocaret ad patriam terram. mistake of the Greeks, who generally S. Clem. Rom. 1. i. Recogn. §. 38.' Qui deliver the addition of a in the name cum primum Auses vocaretur, Moses of Abraham, and p in the name of Sajussit eum Jesum vocari.' Lactan. de rah, when the first was an addition of vera Sap. I. iv. e. 17. Oů apótepov yoūv 1, the second a change of into 17, (Μωϋσής) τον αυτού διάδοχον τη του he would make that of Hosea into JeΙησού κεχρημένον προσηγορία, ονόματι sus a far more considerable alteration δε ετέρω τώ Αυση, όπερ οι γεννήσαντες than that of Abraham or of Sarah. αυτώ τέθεινται, καλούμενον, Ιησούν αυ Ś '
הושע יהושע $
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
* For it may well be thought that serva, the expectation of the people, is added to make the name your into yunyi servabit, the ratification the same with the third person of the of Moses. future in Hiphil, you. For al + So did the ancients understand though ,J the characteristical letter it: to the Greeks Jesus is owthplov of the conjugation Hipbil be exclud- coữ, to the Latins, Salvator Dei. So ed in the future tense, and so the re- Eusebius Demonstr. Evang. I. iv. ad gular word be your frequently in use; finem. 'Etei dè owthplov OkoŨ eis tiiv yet sometimes it is expressed, as it 'Elláda owvijv tÒ TOŨ ’Inooữ metalnogèv is used, 1 Sam. xvii. 47. annars ovoua onpaivel. 'Isová mè yap Map
' young mandi And all the 'EBpaious ournpia, viòs dè Navn napà assembly shall know that the Lord rois aurois ’Iwgovề óvouá%etai' 'Iwoovè saveth (or will save ) not with sword and dé totuv ’law
owrnpia, toūr' ēOTI, DEOū spear: and Psal. cxvi. 6. 59 7957 owrýplov. Where nothing can be juny I was brought low, and he more certain than that 'Iaù is taken helped me. And although there be for the name of God, and 'Iaw owonpía, another • in the future than in the together, the salvation of God. And name, yet being it is also found some. yet Theophylact has strangely mistimes with the lesser Chiric, and so taken it, Matt. i. 1. Tð ’Inooũs óvoua without the latter 9, or without any ούχ Ελληνικόν έστιν, αλλ' Εβραϊκόν, Chiric at all, as frequently with the ερμηνεύεται δε σωτήρ, Ιαώ γάρη σωτηρία addition of 1, yol), there is no rea. Tap' 'Eßpaíois Méyerai which_words son but you, the name of the son seem plainly to signify that Jesus is of Nun, may be of the same force, as interpreted Saviour, because 'Iaw in consisting of the same letters with the the Hebrew tongue signifieth salvathird person of the future in Hiphil. tion. I confess the words may be Again, being added to the future, as strained to the same sense with those formative thereof, stands in the place of Eusebius, but not without some of 1 (for the avoiding of confusion foree, and contrary to what he seemwith conjunctive) which is nothing eth to intend. Especially considering else than the abbreviation of 897, we those which followed him in the same may well assign at least this emphasis mistake, as Moschopulus trepi oxedav, to the mutation which Moses made: p.6. ’Inooûg ånd Toở ’Iaw yiverai, o onthat whereas before there was nothing λοί παρ'Εβραίοις την σωτηρίαν. Wherebut salvation barely in his name, now as 'Iaw in Eusebius is certainly no there is no less than he shall save, in other than 57', and 'Ioovà than which the X977 or is a peculiar de- you, and so 'IWOOvề contracted of signation of the person, and the shall ’Iaw 'Ioovà, the salvation of God. Nor or tense a certainty of the futurition. is this only the opinion of Eusebius, Thus will the design of Moses appear but of St. Jerome, a man much better to be nothing else but a prediction or acquainted with the Hebrew lanconfirmation of that which was not guage; who on the first chapter of before, but by way of desire or omi- Hosea, shewing that Joshua had first pation; and this only by changing the the same name with that of the proimperative into the future, yw phet, saith: ‘Non enim (ut male in
cause of the 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 infallibly 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;* “ thou 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 Græcis codicibus legitur et Latinis) it in the name of Joshua, only with Ause dictus est, quod nihil omnino this difference, that in the one it beintelligitur, sed Osee, id est, Salvator: gins, in the other it concludes the et additum est ejus nomini Dominus, name. ut Salvator Domini diceretur.' Com * •Jesus Hebræo sermone Salvator ment. in Osee, c. i. 1. col. 9. What dicitur. Etymologiam ergo nominis then was it but in the Dominus added ejus Evangelista signavit, dicens, to his name? For as in the name of Vocabis 'nomen ejus Jesum, quia Esaias, St. Jerome acknowledges the ipse salvum faciet populum suum.' addition of the name of God: Inter- Š. Hier. Comment. in Matt, c. i. 21. pretatur autem Esaias, Salvator Do- col. 587. mini : Comment. in Is.c. i. 1. col. 2. † Avros, ipse, in the same manner did he conceive
by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted, is God with us." (Matt. i. 22, 23.) Several ways have been invented to shew the fulfilling of that prophecy, notwithstanding our Saviour was not called Emmanuel; but none can certainly appear more proper, than that the sense of Emmanuel should be comprehended in the name of Jesus: and what else is God with us, than God our Saviour? Well therefore hath the evangelist conjoined * the prophet and the angel, asserting Christ was therefore named Jesus, because it was foretold he should be called Emmanuel, the angelical God the Saviour being in the highest propriety the prophetical God with us.
However, the constant Scripture interpretation of this name is Saviour. So said the angel of the Lord to the amazed shepherds, “Unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.” (Luke ii. 11.) So St. Paul to the Jews and Gentile proselytes at Antioch, “ Of this man's seed hath God, according to his promise, raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus.” (Acts xiii. 23.) Which explication of this sacred name was not more new or strange unto the world, than was the name itself so often used before. For the ancient Grecians usually gave it at first as a title to their gods;t whom after any remarkable preservations they styled
* Βλέπεις ίσαρίθμους ευαγγελιστού feasts they mentioned him always at και προφήτου ρήσεις, μεθερμηνευόμενον the third cup. Τον μεν πρώτον Διός γάρ το μεθ' ημών ο θεός, ό έστι σωτηρία Ολυμπίου και θεών 'Ολυμπίων έλεγον, του λαού, το μετά δούλων δεσπότην εμ- τον δε δεύτερον ηρώων, τον δε τρίτον φιλοχωρείν. Andreas Cretensis in Cir- Σωτήρος, sub. Διός: which is onmitted in cumc. p. 30. ed. Combef. 1644. Hesychius, as appears out of Athe
+ Jupiter, the chief of them, was næus, l. ii. c. 2. and xv. c. 5. And most usually worshipped under this especially that of Alexis the comedian: title. Euripides makes Amphitryo
'Αλλ' έγχεον sitting by his altar, which Hercules Αυτό Διός γε τήνδε Σωτήρος θεών had built: Βωμόν καθίζω τόνδε Σωτή θνητοίς απάντων χρησμιώτατος πολύ poç Alós. Herc. Fur. 48. And Aris “Ο Ζεύς ο Σωτήρ. topbanes introduces Bacchus swear
Athen. l. xv. c. 14. ing, Nı) Tòv Aía Tòv Ewrñpa, Plut. 878. Pausanias in Corinthiacis, Messenicis, as if it were the familiar oath among Laconicis et Arcadicis, mentions sethe Athenians, as well it might be, he veral statues and temples anciently having his temple in their Piræeum, dedicated to Jupiter, énikl nou Ewrñpu. as Strabo testifieth, l. ix. p.606. al. 396. Of which title Cornutus in his book (where Demosthenes by virtue of a de- De natura Deorum gives this account: cree was to build him an altar. Ρlut. 1η Κατά τον γεννώντά έστι και το σώζειν Vit. Demosth. §. «8.) and his porch in a yevvợ, kai toŰ ALÒS ÉVTEūDev £wrñpos the city, which was called indeed vul- elvai leyouévov. And though this title garly του Ελευθερίου Διός στοά, yet was was so generally given to Jupiter, as it also named του Σωτήρος, as Ηarpo- that Ηesychius expounds Σωτήρ, ο cration and Hesychius have observed. Zeus, yet was it likewise attributed "OTi dè étruyéypattai pèv Ewang, óvouá- to the other gods: as Herodotus reζεται δε και 'Ελευθέριος, δηλοί και Μέ- lates how the Grecians in their naval vavopog' so the first. Tūv Mýdwv ŠKDU- war against the Persians made their γόντες ιδρύσαντο τον Ελευθέριον Δία, νows Ποσειδέωνι Σωτήρι, and that they τούτον δέ ένιοι και Σωτήρα φασι: So the preserved the title to Neptune in his latter. As in their oaths, so in their days, l. vii. c. 192. And Artemidorus