VERS. XXXIII.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
In the second Psalm.
u 1.1 WHY are the daily Prayers to the number of eighteen? R. Joshua ben Levi saith, it is according to the eighteen Psalms, from the beginning of the Psalms to The Lord hear thee in the day of trouble [Psal. XX. 1.] But if any one say to thee, they are nine∣teen 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 say thou to him, Why do the heathen rage, [i. e. the second Psalm] is not one of them. Hence they say, he that prays and is not heard, it is necessary for him to fast too.
I. Judge hence whether this second Psalm were joyned or confounded with the first, when it seems in some measure sequestred from the whole number. And do you ob∣serve the Rabbins way of arguing? Being to prove that the number of the daily Prayers being eighteen, was adapted to the number of the eighteen Psalms, from the beginning of the Book to that place, The Lord hear thee in the day of trouble, &c. Psal. XX. he takes refuge in a common Axiom of theirs, He that prayeth and is not heard, must fast also. As if that Maxim was founded upon the equality of numbers, and the authors of that Maxim did so design it. q. d. He that pours out eighteen Prayers, according to the num∣ber of those eighteen Psalms, and is not head, let him Fast and he shall be heard, accor∣ding to the tenor of the Psalm immediately following, The Lord hear thee in the day of trouble, i. e. in the day when thou troublest and afflictest thy self with Fasting.
II. I will not make any nice enquiry for what reason they should exclude the second Psalm out of the number. We find in it, however shut out of the number, a consider∣able testimony to the resurrection of the Messiah: and perhaps to this the Apostle may have some respect in these words. But if not, by this his noting the number and order of the Psalm, we may guess he spake to this sense, viz. ye have a testimony of the Resur∣rection of Christ in the very entrance of the Book of Psalms, so near the beginning of it, that we meet with it even in the second Psalm.
〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee.
R. Solomon confesseth that the Rabbins do interpret this Psalm of the Messiah, but he had rather it should be applied to David. For the Jews take special care that the Messias should not be acknowledged as the genuine Son of God. Hence Midr. Till. * 1.2 Thou art my Son: Hence we may answer the Hereticks who say he is Son to God. Do thou answer, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He doth not say, thou art Son to me, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but, thou art my Son. (A very learned distinction indeed!) As the Master speaking kindly to his Servant, may say to him, I love thee like my own Son. So the Targumist ‖ 1.3, The Lord said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thou art beloved to me as a Son is to his Father.
They do indeed acknowledge that the Messiah is concerned in this Psalm w 1.4, but then, if you will be a true Jew indeed, you must have a care how you acknowledge him the