12, 13, xii. 10, 50. Conclusion.
1. Havine considered the first great promise concerning the Messiah, and evinced from thence the nature of his work and office,
186 PROMISES OF THE [ EXERC. IX.
as also showed in general how testimony is given unto him through- out the Old Testament, and whence his name is derived, we shall now, moreover, inquire in particular into those places where he is expressly foretold, promised, or prophesied of; that we may thence gather what further light concerning his person and natures, with his employment, was granted unto the church of old, which the pre- sent Jews wilfully reject. And herein, as I am not to collect all the prophecies and promises which God gave concerning him by the mouth of his holy prophets from the foundation of the world, but only to single out some of the most eminent, that give us a direct description of his person or his grace, in answer unto or in confir- mation of what hath been already discoursed about them; so I shall have an especial respect unto them which the Jews themselves do acknowledge to belong unto him. There is a book written by Abar- banel, which he calls 7Ayyw your, wherein he undertakes to explain all those texts of Scripture or prophecies which cannot be under- stood either spiritually, or of the second temple, but of their re- demption by the Messiah. This at present, among others, I am forbidden the use of, which might have been of advantage in the present design. I shall therefore principally insist on those places which are applied unto him in the Targums, the most authentic writings amongst them; whereunto some others shall be added, which I have observed to be interpreted unto the same purpose in the best of their commentators.
2. The name “ Messiah” is but twice or thrice at most used in the Old Testament directly and immediately to denote the promised Seed, namely, Dan. ix. 25, 26; whereunto Ps. ii, 2 may be added. ~ But this name, on the reasons before given, prevailing in the Judai- cal church, it is frequently made use of and inserted in the Targums where he is treated of, although he be not expressly named in the original. Elias, in his Methurgamim, reckons up fifty of those places ; whereunto one and twenty more are added by Buxtorf. The principal of these deserve our consideration, considering that some of the most eminent of them are denied by the later Jews to belong unto him, those especially which give testimony unto that part of the faith of Christians concerning him, his person and office, which by them is opposed or denied. And this consent of the Tar- gums is of great weight against them, as containing an evidence of what persuasion prevailed amongst them before such time as they suited all their expositions of Scripture unto ther own infidelity, in opposition to the gospel and doctrine thereof. And unto these, as was said, such others shall be added as their chiefest masters do yet acknowledge directly to intend him.
3. The first of this sort that occurs is the first promise, before in- sisted on and vindicated: Gen. iii. 15, “It,” the Seed of the woman,
SECT. 2-4. ] MESSIAH VINDICATED. 187
“shall bruise thy head,”’—the head of the serpent. Mention is made here expressly of the Messiah in the Targums of Jonathan and Jerusalem; and this promise is applied unto him after their manner. The Seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent, and they shall obtain sn'wp xobp tpya sapya xa, “healing,” or a plas- ter for the heel (the hurt received from the serpent), “in the days of Messiah the King.” So Jonathan; and the Targum of Jerusalem useth words to the same purpose. Both of them expressly refer the promise to the days of the Messiah ;—that is, to himself, or the work that he was to do; whence they insert his name into the text. And this is perfectly destructive unto the present pretensions of the Jews. The work here assigned unto him, of recovering from the evil of sin and misery, brought on the world through the temptation of the serpent, is that wherewith they would have him to have nothing to do. Besides, his suffering is intimated in the foregoing expression, that the serpent should “ bruise his heel;” which they much desire to free their Messiah from. But that which principally lies against them in this testimony is, that whereas they appropriate the pro- mise of the Messiah unto themselves, and make the doctrine con- cerning him to belong unto the law of Moses,—whereof, say some (those that follow Maimonides), it is one of the fundamentals, others (as Josephus Albo), that it is a branch of the fundamentals concerning rewards and punishments,—it is here given out, by the testimony of their Targums, unto the posterity of Adam indefinitely, two thousand years before the call and separation of Abraham, from whom they
_ pretend to derive their privilege, and much longer before the giving
of their law, whereof'they would have it to be a part; which is dili-
gently to be heeded against them.
4, Concerning the promises made unto Abraham we have spoken before. The next mention of the Messiah in the Targum is on Gen. xxxv. 21, where occasion is taken to bring him into the text: for unto these words, “And Israel journeyedand spread histent sara: ,” —“unto” (or “beyond”) “the tower of Edar,” Jonathan adds, sins SY ANDI NMwID NDd\9 “Some Ty ponot;—‘ Which is the place from whence the King Messiah shall be revealed in the end of the days.” And this tradition is taken from Mic. iv. 8, Iya nas) -—< And thou, tower of Edar,” (or “of the flock”), “unto thee shall it come,