Of the Prophecies of the Old Teftament which are fuppofed to prove the Divinity of Jefus.

TH

HE next point Mr. Hawker attempts to establish, is, that there are feveral paffages, in the prophecies of the Old Teftament, which the divinity of Jefus Chrift.

prove

The first he produces is the fecond Pfalm, where Jefus is called the King of Zion, the Son of God, and where it is faid, his inheritance was to extend to all the kingdoms of the world. (d)

Now all this Unitarians acknowledge to be true concerning him. But furely there is nothing in either of the expreffions which proves him to be God. Nor do I think, that even Trinitarians will agree with Mr. Hawker, that there is, 'till he has fupported his affertion by fome kind of proof.

"Similar to this," he says, " in the 89th Pfalm, we find the fame perfon predicted under the title of the Holy One, and one that is mighty, and declared

tq

(d) P. 126.

to be God's first born, higher than the kings of the earth." It happens, however, that no person is predicted by the Pfalmift, under the title Holy One. The phrafe occurs but twice in the whole Pfalm. In the 18th verfe it is evidently applied to Jehovah, and in the 19th to the prophet Samuel, (e) or more probably Nathan, who received from the Holy One of Ifrael, in vifion, the greater part of the prophecy which follows. See II Sam. vii. 4-17 Or he might intend both, (f) part of the prophecy being delivered to Samuel, and part to Nathan.

It should feem, from what has now been obferved, that Mr. Hawker has laid much greater stress on the phrafe holy one, than he ought to have laid on it. It is, I allow, fometimes in the fcriptures applied to Jefus Chrift, but here we have a ftriking inftance of its being applied to other perfons; and therefore nothing can be concluded from it in favour of our Lord's divinity.

It seems alfo, from comparing this Pfalm with II Sam.

(e, Bishop Patrick thus paraphrafes the verse, "Who then d dft reveal thy mind in a vifion to the holy prophet Samuel." See Patrick in loc.

(f) The LXX render it Tos viois; and the old translation of the 'falms has it, Thou fpakeft fometime in vifion to thy faints.

II Sam. vii. 4-17, and with the hiftory of Da vid's life, that the Pfalm throughout relates to David, nor is there a fingle expreffion which Mr. Hawker has produced from it, which will not, with the greatest propriety, apply to him. He is called God's first born, for the fame reason that Ifrael is called God's first born, Ex. iv. 22, and Ephraim, Jer. xxxi. 9. And he was certainly a very mighty prince, much more fo than any of the kings his neighbours. The expreffions, therefore, if they prove any thing, will prove the divinity of David. At least they will as much prove David to be God, as that Jefus Chrift is.

After this Mr. Hawker afferts, that "the children finging fongs of triumph before our Lord at his entrance into Jerufalem which the Pfalmift predicted (8th Pfalm); his perfecutions by the princes of the earth (22. 69); the reproaches, and fufferings fuftained by his facred perfon; the circumstances which attended his crucifixion; the foldiers piercing his fide; the parting his garments, and cafting lots for his vefture: nay, the very words our Lord ufed in thofe trying moments, (Pf. 22). All these particulars, and many more to the fame purpose, * which we find in the writings of this Prophet, and which are either by our Lord himself

"See 110th Pfalm, and compare the 40th with 10th chapter of Hebrews."

himself, or his Apoftles, declared to refer to him, clearly imply a fuperiority of his nature whom they predicted."

"But above all, the refurrection of Jesus from the dead, his afcenfion into heaven, and his poffeffion of an eternal throne, at the right hand of power; these are fuch predictions as, when explained by the correfponding events, can leave no room to doubt the divinity of that person to whom they referred, and in whom they are accomplished." (g)

I

Now all this might have been alledged in proof of the divine miffion of Jefus Christ, in proof of his being the Meffiah; but fo far is it from proving the fuperiority of his nature, the divinity of his perfon, that I think, at first fight, it must appear to every one to prove the contrary. Was it God, may afk, who was perfecuted and reproached? Was it God who fuffered and was crucified? Was it God who had his fide pierced, and who cried out in the agony of death, My God, my God, why haft thou forfaken me? Was it God who died, and was buried? Was it that great Being, who fills with his prefence heaven and earth, who afcended up into heaven? Was it God who fat down at his own right hand? If it were not God, who did, and fuffered all these things, then furely it muft

L

(g) P. 127. 128.

must have been for want of proper thought, that Mr Hawker has brought forward fuch flrange arguments in proof of the deity of Jesus Christ.

I will now proceed to examine all the other paffages, which Mr. Hawker has produced from the prophecies of the Old Teftament, in the order in which he has quoted them.

Pfalm xlv. 6. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever." And behold," fays Mr. Hawker, "the very words quoted by an infallible expofitor that cannot be mistaken, and without hesitation applied to him whom he calls God's eternal Son, the brightnefs of his glory, and the express image of his perfon.*" To this it may be answered, that the words, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, might have been rendered in both places with much greater propriety, God is thy throne, &c. And with respect to the affertion, that the writer of the epiftle to the Hebrews calls Jefus Chrift God's eternal Son, I may answer that no fuch expreffion is to be found, either in the epiftle to the Hebrews, or in any other part of the fcriptures. Mr. Hawker, I fuppofe, muft have inferred it from Heb. i. 10. 11; which has been shown, p. 53, to relate not to Jefus Chrift, but to HIM who in the preceding verfe is called the GOD of Jefus Chrift. And here I cannot help obferving how very careful in quoting fcripture,

"Compare Pfalm XLV, with Hebrews i.""