Page images
PDF
EPUB

scription, 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," not by name, but by office and title, Mat. i. 16. 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 to be the Christ, that is, the Messias promised of old by God, and expected by the Jews.

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. Besides 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 fellowworker with St. Paul, and of "a certain sorcerer, a Jew, whose name was Bar-jesus," 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 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. 45 and the apostle in his explication of those words of David, "To-day if you will hear his voice," 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 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, Jehoshua," 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, of the son of Elah, king of Israel, of the son of Beeri, the prophet: and the interpretation of this first name Hoshea, is Saviour; 1 Chron. xxvii. 20; 2 Kings xvii. 1; Hos. i. 1. Now we must not imagine this to be no mutation, neither must we look upon it as a total alteration, but ob serve it as a change not trivial or inconsiderable. And seeing 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 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 seeing 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 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 seeing we have thus declared that Jesus is the same name with Joshua; seeing the name of Joshua was first imposed by Divine designation, as a certain prediction of the fulfilling to the Israelites, by the person who bare the name, of all which was signified by the name; seeing 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." 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." In which words is clearly expressed the designation of the person, He, and the futurition of salvation certain by him, He shall save. Besides, 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 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," Matth. i. 22. Several ways have been invented to show 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

[merged small][ocr errors]

:

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 H. 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, whom after any remarkable preservations they styled Saviours, and under that notion built temples, and consecrated altars to them. Nor did they rest with their mistaken piety, but made it stoop under their baser flattery, calling those men their Saviours for whom they seemed to have as great respect and honor as for their gods.

Nor does it always signify so much as that it may not be attributed to man; for even in the scriptures the judges of Israel were called no less than their Saviours. "When the children of Israel cried unto the Lord, the Lord raised up a deliverer to the children of Israel, who delivered them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz." And again, "When they cried unto the Lord, the Lord raised them up a deliverer, Ehud the son of Gera." Judg. iii. 9, 15. Where though in our translation we call Othniel and Ehud Deliverers, yet in the original they are plainly termed Saviours.

Now what the full import and ultimate sense of the title of Saviour might be, seemed not easy to the ancients; and the best of the Latins thought the Greek word so pregnant and comprehensive, that the Latin tongue had no single word able to express it.

But whatsoever notion the heathen had of their gods or men whom they styled Saviours, we know this name belongeth unto Christ in a more sublime and peculiar manner. "Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved," Acts iv. 12.

It remaineth therefore that we should explain how and for what reasons Christ truly is, and properly is called, our Saviour. First then, I conceive, one sufficient cause of that appellation to consist in this, that he hath opened and declared unto us the only true way for the obtaining eternal salvation, and by such patefaction can deserve no less then the name of Saviour; for if those apostles and preachers of the gospel, who received the way of

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »