humanity. The wisdom of the masters will be slighted, and all who strive to avoid transgres'sion will be contemned, and great will be the dearth of truth. Young men will cover the faces of the aged with shame; and the aged will rise before the young. The son will dis⚫ honour the father: and the daughter will rise up against her mother: and the daughter-in-law ' against her mother-in-law. And a man's enemies will be they of his own household. In a word, that age will have a canine appearance. Nor will the son reverence the father. What then shall we do? Let us trust in our heavenly Father.-May the coming of Elias be hastened. And may the eternal God graciously vouchsafe that we may be preserved to that ⚫ time.' This passage may deserve an attentive regard, and will require divers observations. But I shall take no particular notice of what is here said about the coming of Elias,' that not being reckoned certainly genuine. a 1. In the first place, this passage ought to be compared with Jerom's commentary upon Is. ch. viii. 14, where he mentions divers of the Jewish masters, who flourished and were very eminent about the time of our Saviour, and some while after; Sammai, Hillel, Meir, Akibas, Johanan the son of Zachai, and some others. In another place he censures the numerous traditions, or secondary laws, of the Pharisees. Undoubtedly Jerom was not unacquainted with Jewish traditions. But I cannot say that these passages amount to a proof that he had seen the volume of the Mishna. 2. Here is another testimony to the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem. 3. I suppose likewise that here is a reference to the disasters of the Jews, occasioned by the rebellion of Barchoehebas in the time of Adrian. This I suppose to be intended in these words: ⚫ And the whole land of Judea will be laid waste, and excellent men will wander from place to place, and experience no offices of humanity.' Moreover, in the passage first cited, the taking of the city Bither is mentioned as one of the most remarkable calamities that had befallen the Jewish people. It was the concluding event of the Jewish war with Adrian, about the year 136. Which shews that the Mishna was not composed till some while afterwards. с 4. Meir, the first rabbi here mentioned, is said to have been one of the principal of the Jewish doctors after the destruction of Jerusalem. d 5. Rabbi Akibas was a man upon whose praises the Jewish writers enlarge mightily: and his sayings are often mentioned in the Mishna and the Talmud. He was a zealous follower of the impostor Barchochebas, who took upon him the character of the Messiah, in the time of Adrian, about the year of Christ 132; and he perished with him. This shews the temper of Akibas: and we can hence conclude how he stood affected to the Lord Jesus. The honourable mention here made of him shews also the temper of the compiler of this work, the Mishna. 6. Gamaliel the Aged is supposed to be Gamaliel St. Paul's master, mentioned by him Acts xxii. 3, and in ch. v. 34, to be "one of the council, a pharisce, and doctor of the law, had in reputation with all the people." From what is here said of him, in the passage now before us, he appears to have been in great esteem with the Jewish people; and he is often mentioned in Mishna. What is here said of him, therefore, confirms the truth of what is said of him in the book of the Acts. Moreover, we are hereby assured that Gamaliel never was converted to Christianity as some Christians, especially of the church of Rome, have fondly and weakly imagined. And indeed from what St. Paul says, in the text before quoted, it may be argued that Gamaliel was still a firm Jew: otherwise it had not been to the purpose to take notice of his education under him, in the critical circumstances which he was then in. 7. Of Rabbi, [Jehudah], the compiler of the Mishna, here and elsewhere called Rabbi, or the master, without any other distinction, so much has been said already, that little more needs a Duas domus Nazarai-duas familias interpretantur, Sammai et Hillel: ex quibus orti sunt Scribæ et Pharisæi, quorum suscepit scholam Akibas, quem magistrum Aquila proselyti autumant: et post eum Meir, cui successit Johanan filius Zachai: et post eum Eliezer, et per ordinem Delphon : et rursum Joseph Galilæus: et usque ad captivitatem Jerusalem Josue. Sammai igitur et Hillel non multo priusquam Dominus nasceretur, orti sunt in Judæâ, quorum prior dissipator' interpretatur, sequens profanus:' eo quod per traditiones et deuTepwoes suas legis præcepta dissipaverit, atque maculaverit, &c. In Is. cap. viii. T. 3. p. 79. b Quantæ traditiones Pharisæorum sint, quas hodie vocant dEUTEpwolf, et quam aniles fabulæ, evolvere nequeo. Neque libri patitur magnitudo; et pleraque tam turpia sunt, ut erubescam dicere. Ad Algas. Qu. x. T. 4. P. i. p. 207. See Basnag. Hist. des Juifs. 1. 6. ch. x. sect. iv. &c. Of Akibas may be seen Basnage Hist. des Juifs. liv. ví. ch. ix. sect. 14-25. Vid. et Basuag. ann. 134. num. iii. Raymund. Martini Pug. Fidei. p. 256-264. Edzardi Avodazara, Vol. i. p. 162, 338. Lightfoot in the Fall of Jerusalem, sect. iv. vol. i. p. 366, 367. Dr. Sharpe's Argument for Christianity, p. 55. b to be added now. It is here said that when he died, there remained no longer any modesty or fear of transgression.' Maimonides, in his character of Jehudah the Holy, did not omit this particular. But here is somewhat which could not be said by himself: it must have been inserted after his death. Wagenseil therefore acknowledgeth that there were some additions made to the Mishna. But he says there are not many, and they were soon made, and chiefly regard R. Jehuda himself, which I see no reason to contest. For I am willing to allow this volume to be a work of the second century. Nevertheless this manner of speaking may perhaps induce us to think that more hands than one were employed in compiling it. 8. Once more in the eighth place. This whole passage appears to me to be a disguised and invidious representation of the state of things under the gospel dispensation since the appearance of Jesus, whom his disciples and followers have received as the Messiah: and especially after the destruction of Jerusalem, when Christianity prevailed and Judaism declined. For (1.) The destruction of the Jewish temple is acknowledged. Nevertheless here are no tokens of repentance and humiliation, but complaints and reflections upon others. The times were bad. But the blame is all laid upon others. (2.) The supreme empire of the world,' he says, will be,' or is overwhelmed with bad opinions' meaning, as I think, the Christian religion, and the several sects and heresies which arose in the second century, and some of them not far from the beginning of it. (3.) Synagogues will be turned into brothel houses.' He refers to the common reports among the vulgar, that the Christians practised promiscuous lewdness in their religious assemblies. And he adopts the calumny. (4.) In what follows, the author adopts the words of our Lord, recorded Matt. x. 35, 36, and Luke xii. 51-53; which words are also in Micah vii. 6, concerning the dissensions that would be in families; some cheerfully embracing his doctrine, whilst others obstinately rejected it, and were bitter towards those who received it. Which the compiler of this work represents as the utmost distress and misery, and as hitherto unknown and unparalleled wickedness. (5.) And what do all the clamours of this paragraph mean concerning the failure' or dearth of truth, the multiplicity of bad opinions, whilst there was no room left for reproof or 'correction?' What is intended by the complaints that the wisdom of the masters was slighted, ⚫ that there was an end to purity and sanctimony, to modesty and the fear of transgression, and 'that the young covered the faces of the aged with shame, and the aged rose up to the young?' and the rest. All these complaints, as seem to me, refer to the resolution and steadiness of the converts to Christianity from Judaism and Gentilism, who judged for themselves, and admitted the evidences of the truth of the new religion, which overpowered their minds. Of which therefore they made an open profession, notwithstanding the sophistry, the entreaties, and the menaces of the world about them; many of whom were their superiors in age, learning, and outward circumstances and condition. Of all this we have in this passage, as seems to me, a graphical description. I cannot but understand this passage after this manner. And I refer these thoughts to the consideration of my readers. This paragraph, if my interpretation be right, is very curious. I am unwilling to enter into a controversy about the Mishnical tract Avoda zara, de cultu peregrino,' [of strange or idolatrous worship.] I pay a great regard to the judgment of those learned men who say there is in it no reference to the Christians. Nevertheless there seems to me a defect in their reasonings upon that point. I think that when the Mishna was compiled the Christians were more numerous, more considerable, and of more consequence, than those learned men suppose in their argument concerning that tract. III. I have done with the Mishna. I proceed to the Talmud. 1. The first passage to be taken thence will relate to our Lord's nativity. Upon a certain day, when several masters were sitting at the gate of the city, two boys a In summo etiam pietatis, et humilitatis, et abstinentiæ a voluptatibus gradu: uti etiam dixerunt: Ex quo mortuus est Rabbi, cessavit humilitas, et timor peccati. Maim. Porta Mosis. p. 35. Accessisse, post obitum R. Judæi, quasdam interpolationes, non negaverim: sed ea paucæ sunt, ac mature fuerunt adjectæ, ipsumque R. Judam potissimum respiciunt. Wag. ib p. 55. Juramentis vero illorum nihil prorsus est tribuendum quia in ipso Talmude docentur, posse juramenta, dum præstantur, confestim in mente aboleri, ut non obligent. Exem plo est R. Akifa, de quo Cod. Kolla fol. 18, col. 2, med. sequens refertur historia. Cum aliquando Seniores sederent in portâ [urbis] præterierunt ante ipsos duo pueri, quorum alter caput texerat, alter retexerat. Et de eo quidem, qui caput [proterve, et contra bonos mores] retexerat, pronuntiavit B. 'passed by bofore them; one of whom covered his head, the other had his head uncovered. Concerning him who, contrary to all the rules of modesty, had boldly passed by with his head uncovered, Elieser said he believed he was spurious: R. Joshua said he believed he was the son of a woman set apart: but R. Akiba said he was both. The others said to Akiba, Why do you differ from the rest of your brethren? He answered that he would prove the truth of 'what he had said. Accordingly he went to the mother of the boy, whom he found sitting in the market, and selling of herbs. of herbs. He then says to her, "My daughter, answer me a ques tion which I am going to put to you, and I assure you of a portion of happiness in the world to 'come." She answered: "Confirm what you say with an oath." Akiba then swore with his lips, but at the same time absolved himself in his mind. Then he said to her: "Tell me the origin of this your son?" Which she did, and confessed that it was as he had said. When he ' returned to his colleagues and told them the discovery he had made, they said: "Great is Akiba, who had corrected the rest of the masters."" a An absolute fiction, the fruit of deep-rooted malice! Though no person is here named, there can be no doubt who is intended. And it is adopted by the author of Toldoth Jeschu. b 2. Upon Matt. ii. 14, Lightfoot observes as follows: There are some footsteps in the Talmudists of this journey of our Saviour into Egypt, but so corrupted with venemous blasphemy (as all their writings are,) that they seem only to have confessed the truth that they might have matter more liberally to reproach him: for so they speak [Bab. Sanhedr. fol. 107. a.] "When Jannay the king slew the rabbins, R. Joshua Ben Perachiah and Jesus went away 'unto Alexandría in Egypt. Simeon Ben Shelah sent thither, speaking thus: From me Jerusalem, the holy city, to thee, O Alexandria in Egypt, my sister, health. My husband dwells with thee, while I in the mean time sit alone. Therefore he rose up and went. And a little after he brought forth four hundred trumpets, and anathematized" [Jesus.] And a little before that," Elizæus turned away Gehazi with both his hands, and R. Joshua Ben Perachiah 'thrust away Jesus with both his hands."' And [Schabb. fol. 104, 2.] "Did not Ben Satda bring enchantments out of Egypt in the cutting which was in his flesh?" Under Ben Satda they wound our Jesus with their ' reproaches.' d The story of our Lord's journey to Alexandria with Joshua Ben Perachiah, when king Jannay killed the rabbins, may be seen more at large in some other authors to whom I refer. And I shall transcribe it below, though I do not translate it entire. It is obscure. Nevertheless the folly, the malice, and the falsehood of it, are apparent. Elieser, quod esset spurius. R. Josua autem dixit, eum esse a muliere menstruată conceptum. At R. Akifa subjecit, esse illum et spurium et filium menstruatæ. Unde cæteri interrogârunt R. Akifam, quomodo tam audacter collegis suis contradiceret. Sed ille regessit, se dicta sua esse confirmaturum. Abiit ergo ad matrem pueri istius, quam cum videret sedentem in foro, et vendentem legumina, dixit ad illam. Filia mea, si tu mihi ingenue indicaveris id quod sum interrogaturus, efficiam, ut potiaris vitâ seculi futuri. Ipsâ autem postulante, ut jurejurando assertum suum roboraret, juravit R. Akifa labiis suis, sed corde suo jusjurandum hoc statim reddidit irritum. Tum R. Akifa, Dic, inquit, mihi qualis sit hic filius tuus? Ad quæ illa: Quando ego nuptias celebrarem, laborabam a menstruis. Ideoque secessit a me maritus, paranymphus autem meus [occasione arreptâ] congressus mecum est. Atque ex eo concubitu exstitit mihi filius hic. Unde appa ruit, puerum istum esse non modo spurium, sed et menstru atæ filium. Cumque id percepissent cæteri assessores, dixerunt: Magnus est Akifa, quando correxit doctores suos. Edzard. Avoda Sara. Tom. i. p. 279. Conf. Wagenseil. Confut. Tol. Jeschu. p. 14, 15, et Buxtorf. Syn. Jud. c. vii. p. 132, 133. Hæc historia tecte videtur loqui de Christo. Buxtorf. ubi supr. p. 133. Ac de infantiâ quidem et natalibus Jeschu, credo ego, creduntque Judæi hoc mecum, sermonem esse, quanquam nomine penitus suppresso, in Massechet Calla, quam et ipsum allegare convenit. Wagens, ut supr. p. 14. b Apud Wagens. p. 5. VOL. III. • Hebrew and Talmudical Exercitations, p. 111, 112. d Vide B. Scheidii. Loca Talmudica, in quibus Jesu et discipulorum ejus fit mentio, p. 6. et Wagenseil. Confutatio, libr. Toldos Jeschu. p. 15, 16. • In Tr. Sanhedrin, f. 107, 2. et Sota, f. 47. 1. Quuni Jannai Rex interficiebat Rabbinos, fugiebat R. Josua filius Parachiæ et Jesus Alexandriam Ægypti. Pace redditâ, in hæc verba Simeon Schetachides R. Josua Perachiæ filio scribit. Hierosolymæ civitas sancta, tibi Alexandriæ Ægypti. O soror mea, maritus meus in medio tui degit; at ego sedeo desolata. Surgens ergo ille veniebat eo, et pervenit ad quamdam hospitam, quæ omnibus honoris officiis eum prosequebatur. Tum dicebat [Josua], Quam pulchrum est hoc hospitium. Sed discipulus de hospitâ sermonem excipiens, dicebat ei: Mi magister, oculi ejus sunt teretes. Cui ille respondebat: Impie, taliane tu curas? atque feminas spectas intentius? Nec mora. Productis ergo 400 tubis, proclamari curabat eum [Jesum] esse excommunicatum. Sæpenumero adibat [discipulus] magistrum, obsecrans, ut sese denuo reciperet. Verum ipse ejus nullam habuit rationem. Die quodam, cum recitâsset [Josua Perachides] lectionem, Audi Israël, Deut. vi. 4. accedit [Jesus] Perachidem. Nam putabat se receptum irf. Indicabat ei R. Josua filius Perachiæ manu suâ, quod vellet recipere eum. Ipse [Jesus] putabat, quod repellendo repelleret se. Abibat ergo, et suspendens laterem, eum adorabat. Dicebat [Perachides] illi: Resipisce. Cui ille respondebat : Sic a te-ipso didici: Quod nulli, qui peccavit, et ad peccandum multis fuit auctor, facultas agendi pœnitentiam suppeditetur? Nam dixerat Mar [ doctor Talmudicus'] Jesus ad 4 B It should be observed that this story of our Lord's journey into Egypt, with Joshua Ben Perachiah, has little agreement with the true history in Matt. ii. 13-23. For, according to the evangelist, Jesus was carried thither when an infant, and was soon brought back again into Judea. But, according to the Talmudists, Jesus was a young man when he went thither with Joshua Perachides, who is supposed to have been his master or tutor. And according to them, when Perachides and Jesus had been some while in Egypt, they were informed that peace was restored in Judea. As they were returning back they were well received at an inn. Here Perachides and Jesus disagreed, and parted asunder; nor could they ever be reconciled again, though some attempts on both sides were made toward a reconciliation. After that Jesus, as is said, wholly gave up himself to magical practices, and was excommunicated. a If by king Jannai be intended Alexander Jannæus, here is a great anachronism; for he died fourscore years before the Christian epoch. But I do not insist upon that; for, perhaps, it is owing to design and not to ignorance. If, in the discourse between Perachides and Jesus at the inn, where they first disagreed, there be an aspersion of our Lord's moral character, as if he too attentively observed the faces of women, it is of a piece with another charge of theirs, that Jesus endeavoured to seduce men to idolatry which we shall see presently. I do acknowledge, however, that when I first observed this paragraph, I was not a little surprised. For Origen says that, though innumerable lies and calumnies had been forged against the venerable Jesus, none had dared to charge him with any intemperance whatever. So says Origen about the middle of the third century. He speaks confidently with full assurance. If he had ever met with such a calumny, he would not have denied it; for he was perfectly honest and sincere. And if such a calumny had appeared he was as likely to know it as any man; for he was acquainted with all sorts of people: and he had often conversed with the learned men of the Jewish nation, as well as others. This story therefore was not in being in his time, nor till after it. But reflections upon a man's character, unknown till long after his departure out of the world, are destitute of authority, and deserve no regard. They only shew the bad temper of those who receive, or who invent and forge them. Let me add one thought more here. We may reasonably conclude, and reckon it certain from Origen's work, that Celsus knew nothing of this story; consequently it was not yet invented: for he had conversed with Jews, and made use of them to assist him in his argument against the Christians, and had picked up all the scandal he could get. I must be allowed to observe yet farther: Celsus had made use of some disparaging expressions concerning our Saviour. Whereupon Origen says: If Celsus had alleged any kind of infamous ' actions in the life of Jesus, we would have done our best to answer to every thing that might appear so to him. As to the miserable death of Jesus, the same may be objected to Socrates and Anaxarchus just mentioned.' Celsus therefore knew not of any such thing. Finally, I do not recollect in the remains of Celsus, who wrote in the second, nor in Origen, who wrote in the third, century, any traces of this journey of our Lord into Egypt, with a tutor. This story therefore is a late, as well as a malicious, fiction without ground. • Ind the The second quotation in Lightfoot shall now be more distinctly transcribed. Mishnical tract, called Schabbath, it is said: "If any one, especially on the sabbath, draws a line, or makes a cut in his flesh, he is obliged to bring a sin-offering: but the wise men absolve him." Upon which words it is remarked in the Gemara, a tradition, R. Elieser said to the wise men: "But did not the son of Stada bring magical arts out of Egypt, in a cutting in his rwy SoxerTWY EIYα auтw eπippyToTaTWY. d In tractatu Schabbath, fol. 104, 2. in Mishnâ dicitur. Si Scheid. flesh ?" The Gloss says: "the reason of that was that he could not bring them away in writing, because the priests diligently searched all at their going away, that they might not carry out magical arts to teach them to men dwelling in other countries."' This is said, I suppose, to insinuate that all the great works ascribed to our Saviour were performed by virtue of magical arts which he had learned in Egypt. This insinuation has been considered, and well confuted, by Grotius," to whom I now refer. Hereafter I shall transcribe his words at length, in the chapter of Celsus, where this charge will come over again. 3. Let us now observe whether Jesus gained any disciples. Lightfoot, upon Matt. ix. 9, speaks to this purpose: Five disciples of Christ are mentioned by the Talmudists, [Bab. Sanhedrim. fol. 431.] among whom Matthew seems to be named. The rabbins deliver there were five disciples of Jesus, Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Boni, and Thodah. These they relate were led out and killed. Perhaps five are only mentioned by them, because five of the disciples were chiefly employed among the Jews: namely Matthew, who wrote his 'gospel in Judea, Peter, James, John, and Judas. I shall now transcribe at length the passage of the Babylonian Talmud, to which Lightfoot refers; though it is so silly, that, when produced, some may think it might have been omitted. • The rabbins have taught that there were five disciples of Jesus, Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Boni, and Toda. When Matthai was brought forth [to be condemned to death] he said to the judges: Shall Matthai be slain? But it is written: "When shall I come" [Matai]" and appear before God?" Ps. xlii. 2. But they answered: Yes, Matthai shall be slain. For it is 'written: "When" [Matai] "shall he die, and his name perish!" Ps. xli. 5. When Nakai ⚫ was brought out, he said: Shall Nakai be slain? But it is written: "Thou shalt not kill the innocent" [Nakai] "and the just:" Ex. xxiii. 7. But they said: Yes, Nakai shall be slain. For it is written: "In the secret places does he murder the innocent." [Nakai.] Ps. x. 8. • When they brought forth Nezer, he said to them: And shall Nezer be slain? But it is written: "A branch" [Nezer] "shall grow out of his roots." Is. xi. 1. But they answered: Yes, • Nezer shall be slain. For it is written: "Thou art cast out of thy grave as an abominable 'branch." Is. xiv. 19. When they brought out Boni, he said: And shall Boni be slain? But it is written: Israel is "my son" [Beni] "even my first born." Ex. iv. 22. But they said: • Yes, Boni shall be slain. For it is written: "Behold, I will slay thy son" [bincka.] "thy 'first born." Ex. iv. 23. When they brought out Toda, he said to them: And shall Toda be 'slain? It is written: "A psalm to praise" [Lethoda.] Ps. c. But they answered: Yes, Toda ⚫ shall be slain. For it is written: "Whoso offereth praise" [Toda]" glorifieth me."" Here it may be asked: Why do the Talmudists speak only of five disciples of Jesus? Lightfoot, as before seen, supposeth it to be, that these five men were chiefly employed among the Jews. Edzardus says: We hence see how false and fabulous every thing is which the Talmudists say of Christ and his disciples.' Which surely is not amiss. However, to me it 'seems that the Jewish rabbins affected silence and reserve about Jesus and his history, and said little about it, the better to keep their own people in ignorance and bondage. Wagensel's reflec a De V. R. Chr. 1. 5. cap. iii. Sanhedr. cap. vi. fol. 43, fin. Quinque tantum discipuli dicuntur fuisse Jesu Nazareno, quorum nomina, Matthai, sc. Matthæus, Nakai, Nezer, Boni, et Toda, sc. Thaddeus, qui alio nomine Lebbæus fuit appellatus. Matt. x. 3. Verba integre ita habent. . Rabbini docuerunt, quinque discipulos fuisse Jesu, Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Boni, et Toda. Cum adduxissent Matthai, [ut capitis ipsum damnarent,] dixit ille ad Judices: Num Matthai occidetur? Atqui scriptum est. Quando [Matai] veniam, ut compaream coram facie Dei? Ps. xlii. 2. Sed illi regesserunt: Omnino, Matthai occidetur, quia scriptum est, Quando [Matai] morietur, ut pereat nomen ejus? Ps. xli. 5. Cum adduxissent Nakai, dixit ille: Num Nakai occidetur? Atqui scriptum est. Ex. xxiii. 7. Insontem [naki] et justum non occides. Sed illi responderunt: Omnino, Nakai occidetur, sicut scriptum est. Ps. x. 8. In latibulis occidit insontem. [Naki]. Cùm adduxissent Nezer, dixit ad illos: Num Nezer occidetur? Atqui scriptum est, Es. xi. 1. Nezer e radicibus ejus fructum feret. Sed illi reposuerunt. Omnino Nezer occidetur, quia scriptum est. Es. xiv. 9 Tu autem ejectus es e sepulcro tuo, ut surculus [nezer] abominabilis. Cum adduxerunt Boni, dixit ille: Num Boni occidetur: Atqui scriptum est. Ex. iv. 22. Filius meus [Beni] primogenitus est Israël. Sed illi regesserunt: Omnino Boni occidetur, sicut scriptum est. Ex. iv. 23. Ecce Ego occidam filium tuum [bincka] primogenitum. Cum adduxissent Todam, dixit ad illos: Num Toda occidetur? Atqui scriptum exstat. Ps. c. 1. Psalmus [Lethoda] eucharisticus. Sed illi responderunt: Omnino Toda occidetur, quemadmodum scriptum est. Ps. 1. 23. Qui sacrificat laudem [Toda] is honorabit me. Ap. Edzard Avoda Sara. T. i, p. 298, 299, Conf. B. Scheidii Loca Talmudica de Jesu et Discipulis ejus et Wagenseil. Confut. T. I. p. 17. Quod si autem quinque tantum discipuli hi Jesu Nazareno fuerunt, unde ergo sextus, Jacobus Sechaniensis, cujus nomen inter quinque numeratos non apparet? Constat hinc, quam fabulosa sit Talmudistarum narratio de iis quæ contra Christum atque discipulus ejus deblaterant. Ut aliâ confutatione non sit opus, cum seipsos suis contradictionibus jugu, lent. Edz. ibid. p. 299. |