The works of the Reverend and learned John Lightfoot D. D., late Master of Katherine Hall in Cambridge such as were, and such as never before were printed : in two volumes : with the authors life and large and useful tables to each volume : also three maps : one of the temple drawn by the author himself, the others of Jervsalem and the Holy Land drawn according to the author's chorography, with a description collected out of his writings.

VERS. XXXV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

I know that Messias cometh.

IF the Samaritans rejected all the Books of the Old Testament, excepting the five Books of Moses, it may be a question whence this woman should know the name of Messias, for that it is not to be found throughout the whole Pentateuch. From whence also may further arise a twofold enquiry more; one, whether the Samaritans were of the same opinion with the Sadducees; the other, whether those Sadducees that liv'd amongst the Jews, rejected all the Books of the Old Testament, excepting those of Moses only. Perhaps they might so reject them as to forbid their being read in their Synagogues, in the same manner as the Jews rejected the Hagiographa; but the question is, whether they did not use them, read them, and believe them as the Jews did those holy writings.

p 1.1 They snatch all the sacred Books out of the fire (though on the Sabbath day) whether they read, or whether they read them not. The Gloss is, Whether they read them, that is, the Pro∣phets; which they are wont to read in their Synagogues on the Sabbath-day, or whether they read them not, that is, the Hagiographa. It is likely that the Sadducees and Samaritans (I mean those Samaritans that liv'd about our Saviours time and before) might disown the Prophets and the Holy writings much after the same manner and no more. For is it at all probable that they were either ignorant of the Histories of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, the Kings, and the writings of the Prophets, or that they accounted them tales and of no va∣lue? There were some amongst the Samaritans, as Eulogius in Photius q 1.2 tells us, who had an opinion that Joshuah the Son of Nun was that Prophet (of whom Moses spake) that God would raise up to them out of their brethren like to him. Do we think then that the History and Book of Joshua were unknown or disown'd by them? However I cannot omit with∣out some remarks, some few passages we meet with in Sanhedr. r 1.3

The Sadducees asked Rabban Gamaliel, whence he could prove it that God would raise the dead, from the Law (saith he) and from the Prophets, and from the Holy Writings. And ac∣cordingly he alledgeth his proofs out of each Book, which I hope may not be very tedi∣ous to the Reader to take notice of in this place. I prove it out of the Law, where it is written, And the Lord said to Moses, Deut. XXXI. 16. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers and rise again. They say probably it is meant, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 This people will rise up and go a whoring. I prove it out of the Prophets according as it is written, thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise, awake and sing ye that dwell in the dust, Isa. XXVI. 19. But perhaps (say they) this may be meant of those dead which Ezekiel raised. I prove it out of the Hagiographa, according as it is writien, The roof of thy mouth is like the best wine for my beloved, that goeth down sweetly, causing the lips of those that are asleep to speak, Cant. VII. 9. But perhaps (say they) it is meant they move their lips in the world. I add [say they] though it is not, I confess, in the Gemarists Text, because reason and sense makes it evident, that this ought to be added, and the Gloss confirms it.

Now it would have been a most absurd thing for Gamaliel to have offer'd any proofs of the Resurrection, either out of the Prophets, or the Hagiographae against the Sadducees, if those Books had been either not known, or of no authority amongst them. And we see that the Books themselves out of which these proofs were brought were not excepted against, but the places quoted had another sense put upon them, and pleaded for by them. s 1.4

It is a Tradition of R. Simeon ben Eliezer, I said unto the Scribes of the Samaritans, ye therefore err because you do not interpret according to R. Nehemiah, for it is a Tra∣dition of R. Nehemiah's, where ever we meet with a word which ought to have the let∣ter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the beginning of it; if it have it not, you must then put an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the end of it. e. g. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they answer R. Nehemiah;

but behold it is written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Now those that return this answer to R. Nehemiah, if they be the Samaritan Scribes, then do they themselves quote the ninth Psalm.

But further, the Book of Ezekiel is quoted by a Samaritan in this story: t 1.5

Rabban Jonathan went to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Neapolis (i. e. Sychar) of the Samaritans.—A certain Samari∣tan was in his company. When they came to Mount Gerizzim, the Samaritan saith un∣to him, How comes it to pass that we are gotten to this holy mountain? R. Jonathan saith how comes this mountain to be holy? the Samaritan answer'd, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 because it was never plagu'd with the waters of the deluge; saith R. Jonathan how prove. you this? the Samaritan answer'd, is it not written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Son of man, say unto her, thou art the land not cleansed, nor rain'd upon in the day of indignation, Ezek. XXII. 24. If it were so, saith R. Jonathan, then should the Lord have commanded Noah to have gone up into this mountain and not have built himself an Ark. We also meet with a Sadducee quoting the Prophet Amos * 1.6: A certain Sad∣ducee said to a certain Rabbi, He that created the Hills did not make 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a spirit, or the wind. And he that created the wind did not make the hills; for it is written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Behold he that formeth the mountains and createth the wind Amos, V. 13. The Rabbi answer'd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 thou fool, go on but to the end of the verse, and thou wilt find the Lord of Hosts is his name.

That passage also is remarkable x 1.7, They do not snatch 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Books and Volums of the Hereticks from the flames, they may be burnt where they are. The Gloss is, The Books of Hereticks, i. e. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Idolaters (or those that use any strange worship) who wrote out the Law, the Prophets, and the Holy writings for their own use, in the Assyrian cha∣racter and holy language. But 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 upon the place renders it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They snatch not away the Volums and Books of the Sadducees. If by Hereticks the Sadducees are to be understood as the latter Gloss would have it, then comparing it with the former, they had the Law, Prophets, and the Holy writings writ in the Assyri∣an Character in the Holy language.

If by Hereticks the Christians are understood, as in the former Gloss, (for as to the Gen∣tiles there is no room to understand it of them in this place) then we see what Copies of the Old Testament the Hebrew-Christians anciently had in use.

It may be objected, that if the Sadducees admitted the Books of the Prophets, and the Holy writings, with this exception only, that they had them not read in their Synagogues, how came they to deny the Resurrection from the dead, when it is so plainly asserted in those Books?

To this may be answer'd that this argument might have something in it if it had not been one fundamental of the Sadducees Faith, that no article in Religion ought to be ad∣mitted, that cannot be made out plainly from the five Books of Moses. Compare this with that of the Pharisees y 1.8, However any person may acknowledg the Resurrection from the dead, yet if he does not own that there is some indication of it in the Law, he denies a funda∣mental. So that whereas Moses seemed not clearly and in terminis to express himself as to the Resurrection, the Sadducees would not admit it as an article of their Faith, though something like it may have occur'd in the Prophets, so long as those expressions in the Pro∣phets may be turn'd to some other sense, either Historical or Allegorical. But if they had apprehended any thing plain and express in the Books of Moses, the Prophets also asser∣ting and illustrating the same thing, I cannot see why we should not believe they were receiv'd by them.

It is something of this kind the passage now in hand, where we find the Samaritan wo∣man using the word Messias, which though it is not to be met with in the Books of Mo∣ses, yet Moses having clearly spoken of his coming, whom the Prophets afterward signa∣liz'd by the name of the Messias; this foundation being laid, the Sadducees and the Sama∣ritans, do not stick to speak of him in the same manner, and under the same title where∣in the Prophets had mention'd him. But then what kind of conceptions they had of the person, Kingdom, and days of the Messiah, whether they expected the fore-runner Elias, or the Resurrection of the dead at his coming, as the Scribes and Pharisees did, is scarcely credible.

Notes

• p 1.1

  Schabb. fol. 115. 1.
• q 1.2

  Cod. CCXXX
• r 1.3

  Fol. 90. 2.
• s 1.4

  Hieros. Jeva∣moth. fol. 3. 1.
• t 1.5

  Ell••h haddth∣herim Rabba, fol. 292. 2. 3.
• * 1.6

  Cholin. fol. 87. 1.
• x 1.7

  Schabb. fol. 116 1.
• y 1.8

  Gloss in Sanhedr. fol. 90. 1.