« 이전계속 »
to his father's house, to testify to his brethren lest they also should come into that place of torments. This certainly was to let his brethren know that there was a future state of rewards and punishments. The answer is “ That if they believe not Moses and the
prophets, neither would they be persuaded though one rose from the dead."
Then there is greater evidence for this truth in the writings of Moses and the prophets than even a message from the other world would be. * This inference is so direct that whilst the words have any meaning, it will be impossible to elude the force of them, or to explain them away.
Agreeably to this place we find St. Paul preached a future state and resurrection of the body upon Moses' authority, (Acts xxvi. 22. 23.) “I continue unto this
day witnessing both to small and great, saying none 6 other things than those which the prophets and Moses “ did say should come: that Christ should suffer, and 66 that he should be the first (which necessarily implies " that others after him were also) to arise from the dead. Doth Moses then say that Christ was to suffer and to arise from the dead? And doth St. Paul affirm that he doth say so ? And can any Christian after this doubt whether such doctrines are really taught by Moses? It is almost a demonstration, that if St. Paul was inspired, of course infallible, and therefore could not possibly be ignorant of what was contained in Moses' writings, and that if he hath said a future state was mentioned there, that therefore it must be there.
* Whitby on the New Test. Vol. 1. p. 398. D. Stellæ in Lucam Comm. Tom. 2. p. 302. Martinus Bucerus in 4 Evang. p. 216. “ Si Mosen & prophetas non audiunt," &c. His enim significavit (Christus) nos scripturam habere de his satis testantem, ad quam more tuorum testimonium nibil possit adjicere. J. Lindsay on the New Test. Lon. 1736, p. 216. Marlorati Biblioth. Expositionum in Nov. Test. 333. J. Tirinus in Nov. Test. p. 999. “ Neque si quis ex mortuis “ resurrexerit, credent.” Quàm facilè enim erit explodere ejusmodi apparitionem, & vel phantasiæ vel dæmoni ascribere ? Nonne Lazarus alter, nonne Christus a mortuis ridivivi ? An illes ideò crediderunt Judei ? Unde meritò omni mortuorum apparitioni præfertur S. Scriptura, tanquam certior testis tormentorum inferui.
But let us hear Christ himself preaching the same doctrines from Moses that St. Paul did. All his disciples after his death doubted of his resurrection, and yet before they could preach this fundamental article to others, they were to be convinced of it themselves. To this end in his conversation with two of them, who were going to Emmaus, he reproves their slowness in believing, that he ought to have suffered, died, and rose from the dead, as Moses and the prophets had foretold. The words are these (Luke xxiv. 25, &c.) “ Then he « said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe “ all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not Christ
to have suffered these things, and to enter into his
glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets “ he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the “ things concerning himself," viz. what Moses and the prophets had wrote about his sufferings and resurrection. * In the following part of the chapter this truth is more fully expressed, " These, says Christ to his dis“ciples, are the words which I spake unto you while I " was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled « which were written in the law of Moses, and in the
Prophets, and in the Psalms concerning me. Then “ opened he their understanding that they might un“ derstand the scriptures, and said unto them, thus it is as written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to “ rise from the dead the third day." Doth Christ then affirm that it was written in the law of Moses, that he was to suffer, and to arise from the dead ? And shall there be a Christian priest suffered in a Christian country with equal impudence and blasphemy to contradict Christ, and to maintain that such doctrines are not written in the law of Moses? Hath Christ said that those persons “ do greatly err, and do not know the
scriptures," who affirm that Moses hath not mentioned a future state, and is it possible that man can believe Christ to be God, who positively declares, that he “ neither doth err, nor is ignorant of the scriptures," whilst he directly writes against the true literal meaning of Christ's words ? And how doth it alleviate his crimeto tell us, that he intends to strengthen the evidence of revelation by his system ? Doth it not require too much credulity and ignorance for any man in his senses to believe, that those persons are supporting the superstructure, who are removing and taking away the foundation ? Christianity hath no support if Christ should fall, and either he or Moses must fall, if he affirms, that Moses hath wrote about certain subjects, and it could not be made appear that he hath once mentioned them.
* Grotij Op. Theol. Vol. 3. p. 465. F. Gaspari á Melo Comm. in Lucam. p. 1145, 1146, &c. D. Stellæ in Lucam Comment. Ludg. 1592. Tom. 2. p. 516, 517. Acts xvii. 2, 3.
But there is a passage in St. John, (v. 39, &c.) where, if words have any meaning, it is asserted, not only that Moses wrote about a future state, but that the Jews also knew he had. “Search the scriptures, says Christ, “ for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me.”
All the scriptures testify of Christ, and Moses in a particular manner; for as he adds, “ had ye believed Moses, ye would “ have believed me, for he wrote of me.”* So the Jews had, or however thought they had eternal life in Moses' writings. f Moses then did write about eternal life, if Christ knew what he wrote about, and if the Jews all along believed that he had. And this sense, and this only the argument will bear. $ There is evidence,
* Poli Synopsis Cr. Vol. 4. p. 1217, 1218. Critici Sacri. Vol. 6. p. 1626. Notæ Cameron. in v. 39. Hammond on the N. Test. p. 280. J. Piscator in N. Test. Vol. 3. p. 323. J. Lindsay on the N. Test. p. 276. Assemblies Annot. on the Old and New Test. Vol. 2. and Notes on 39, 40, &c. ver. of the fifth chap. of John.
J. le Clerc, sur le N. Test. p. 281. Moise auquel vous esperez ; par la doctrine duquel vous esperez d'obtenir la vie eternelle.
| Erasmi Paraph. in N. Test. p. 539. M. Bucerus in 4 Evang. 257. J. Toletus in Evang. Johannis Comm. Cologne, 1611. p. 503. “Scrutami Scripturas," &c. Vos, inquit, scrutamini & inquiritis Scripturas, quia putatis in observantiâ earum vitam positam æternam, & illæ sunt quæ testimonium perhibent de me, & tamen non vultis venire ad me, ut banc vitam habeatis, Malitiam eorum arguit significans eos proprio
says Christ, in Moses, that the Messiah was to entitle you to eternal life,
have this evin dence in Moses, and yet you act inconsistently with yourselves by not believing in me the Messiah and life eternal. I will not therefore accuse you hereafter, be
you did not believe my words or miracles. Moses shall accuse
have not made the right use of that evidence which he gave you, and which ought to have determined you to accept me as the Messiah ; and thereby that life eternal, which you think you have, and which you cannot otherwise have in his writings.
That the Jews had such a belief and hope founded upon Moses' writings, St. Paul will abundantly convince us: in his vindication of himself to the Governor Felix, he makes this confession, “ After the way which “they (the Jews) call heresy, so worship I the God of
my fathers, believing all things which are written in “ the law and the prophets, and have hope towards “ God, which they themselves also allow, that there “ shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just “ and unjust ?" (Acts xxiv. 14, 15.) Then St. Paul was induced from his belief of what was written in the law of Moses and the prophets to have hope, which hope from the same belief the Jews also had, and allowed they had, that there was to be a resurrection of the dead both of the just and unjust. And therefore both St. Paul and the Jews must have thought that there was in Moses sufficient evidence to determine them to believe, that there was to be a future state of rewards and punishments. Some part of this evidence St. Paul himself hath explained to us, (Heb. ix. 7, 8, &c.) 66 But into the second (tabernacle) went the high priest 6 alone once every year not without blood, the Holy “ Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of “ all was not yet made manifest while 'as the first taScripturarum studio convictos esse de veritate Christi, præ malitiaâ tamen nolle eum recipere, nec in ipsum credere, quamvis per Christum vita hæc æterna consequenda esset.
“ bernacle was yet standing; which was a figure for “ the time then present." Then it was signified to the Jews who had that tabernacle, and by Moses who constituted it, that there was to be a way made manifest into the holiest of all. The apostle is here talking of the Jewish times, and of the ceremonies appointed by Moses, and says that he made those ceremonies figures to them of something farther : that the high priest going into the boly of holies was a figure to them, and therefore of course understood by them, that there was to be “ another high priest who should carry other “ blood, (ver. 24.) not into the holy places made with “ hands, the figures of the true holy places, but into “ heaven itself.” This chapter, and indeed this whole epistle deserves to be seriously considered by every infidel Sadducee: for if Moses hath by expressive actions or figures described the Jews' hope in a future state, and in Christ who is life eternal, and if St. Paul asserts that he hath, and that the Jews knew he had, and if we still find those very figures in the law, can any thing be more plain than that a future state ought to have made a great part of the writings of Moses? For why doth the apostle assert, that the law was spiritual, was intended to keep up the Jews' faith and hopes in Christ? Why doth he recapitulate the chief part of the religious ceremonies of the Jews, and apply them to Christ and his actions ? Call them figures for the time then present. Figures of the true things—The example and shadow of heavenly things—– The shadow of the good things to come—and from hence prove, that a true notion of the law must of course lead men to the gospel, if either those ceremonies had not that meaning, or if the Jews did not allow that they had ?
But those happy effects which flowed from not taking the ceremonies of the law in a literal sense, and the consequent hopes of future happiness, are so fülly described in the 11th chapter of the Hebrews, that every Christian must believe the Patriarchs and Jews did not rest upon the temporal promises, but were as