A supplement to Dr. Hammond's paraphrase and annotations on the New Testament in which his interpretation of many important passages is freely and impartially examin'd, and confirm'd or refuted : and the sacred text further explain'd by new remarks upon every chapter / by Monsieur Le Clerc ; English'd by W. P. ; to which is prefix'd a letter from the author to a friend in England, occasion'd by this translation.

CHAP. IX.

Vers. 1. Note a. IT is a perfect force our Author puts upon that expression in Acts v. to lie to the Holy Ghost, of which see what I have said on that place, as also of the Vow that Ananias is groundlesly supposed by learned men to have made.

Vers. 4. Note c. Col. 2. Lin. 38. After the mention of Heb. ix.5.] By the glory of God in Acts vii.55. I rather understand some dazling glorious Light, than Angels. See my Note on Mark xvi.19.

Ibid. In that Note, Lin. 41. After the words, most High.] There is no such expression as this in Job i.5. and I cannot tell whence our Author took it, unless it were from some Greek Interpreter on that place.

Vers. 5. Note d.] It were to be wished our learned Author had ex∣amined here the Animad version of Grotius on this place, rather than copied out Jewish Fables that make little to the purpose; especially seeing Erasmus had long ago written enough to overthrow all that can be inferred from them. For if what Grotius, and before him Eras∣mus, have observed stand good, Dr. Hammond's reasoning cannot be thought of any force. Let those that are inquisitive into these mat∣ters compare both places.

Vers. 9. Note e.] By the place in 2 King. iv.16. it appears that the Doctor was in the wrong, to think that the Passage in Genesis was corrupted, on which see my Notes.

Vers. 11. Note g.] There is no election or chusing without preferring, and therefore there was no need of observing that the Hebrew word is rendred to prefer as well as to chuse.

Vers. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.] It being certain that these words are alledged by St. Paul in the same sense that they are used in Gen. xxv.23. they must here be understood not of the Persons of Esau and Jacob themselves, but of their Posterity: for these are the words of the Oracle; Two Nations are in thy Womb, and two manner of People shall be separated from thy Bowels, and the one shall be stronger than the other, and the greater shall serve the less. Of which prediction see my Notes on that place in Genesis. Therefore in this Passage of St. Paul, the Phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ought not to have been ren∣dred in the English Translation, the elder shall serve the younger, but the greater shall serve the less. And so the Apostles scope also requires, who manifestly speaks of the Election, not of particular Persons, but of whole Nations.

Vers. 13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.] It is manifest from the Prophet, that this has a reference to the Nations that descended from Jacob and Esau, and not to them themselves. So that I wonder our Author in his Paraphrase, on occasion of these words, should observe that that Prophecy, the greater shall serve the less, was fulfilled personally in them, especially seeing the contrary appears from the History of Moses, as in my Notes on the forementioned Chapter of Genesis I have observed.

Vers. 15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.] This place I have interpreted on Exod. xxxiii.19. and shewed the meaning of God to be, that "because he had began to shew Favor and Mercy to the "Israelites, he would continue to do so: and this is all that is here intended by these words. The Apostle having said that the Poste∣rity of Jacob were preferred by God before the Idumaeans, because it so seemed good to him, and not because Esau's Posterity were worse than that of Jacob, proposes to himself an objection, Is there unrighte∣ousness with God? Which he denies with detestation, saying, God for∣bid; for, saith he, he said to Moses, I will have Mercy on whom I have Mercy, and I will have Compassion on whom I have Compassion: that is, as God began to shew kindness to Jacob himself, so he continued his kindness to his Posterity, without the least injustice; because he did not deny any benefit to the Idumaeans which they had deserved, but

only went on to do good to the Israelites tho unworthy. For it is no injustice to be merciful to those that do not deserve it, tho it would be so to punish those that do not deserve it. Mercy may be justly shewn, when punishment cannot be justly inflicted.

As this Interpretation is favoured by the place referred to in Moses, as I have shewn in my Comment on Exodus, so it agrees also with the Greek words as they are here accented, for we read them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the present tense Indicative, which is not so favourable to the vulgar Translation, according to which we ought rather to read in the Sub∣junctive 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as it is generally accented in the Greek Copies of the Septuagint, so that it might be rendred as it is by Beza; Miserebor cujus misertus fuero, & commiserabor cujus commiseratus fuero; I will have Mer∣cy on whom I shall have Mercy, and I will have Compassion on whom I shall have Compassion. But this is contrary to the Hebrew words which are thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 I have favoured him whom I will favour, I have had Mercy on whom I will have Mercy; where one of the Verbs is in the future tense, and the other in the preterperfect; which preterperfect is rendred here in the Present, be∣cause it is the same thing, for God did still then shew Mercy to the Israelites, and had never ceased to shew Mercy to them, when he so spake. Which being so, I wonder that Beza should find fault with the Vulgar, and Erasmus for making use here of the present Tense, and rendering it cui misereor, or cujuscunque misereor, To whom I shew Mercy, or to whomsoever I shew Mercy, and give this reason for it, that in the Hebrew the Verb is in both places in the future, which the Reader has just now seen to be false. He adds that the Particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 shews it must be interpreted by the future as past; and I cannot deny but that Particle uses to be joined to a Subjunctive, but it being joined to a Preterperfect tence Indicative, it may be also joined to the Present, especially where the purity of the Greek Language is not observed, as it is not in St. Paul. It must be observed further, that the words of Moses are in∣verted; for whereas in him it is, I have favoured him whom I will favour, &c. the Septuagint understood it as if it had been said, I will favour him whom I do favour, &c. because tho those Phrases signify the same thing, yet the order of the words in the latter sutes better with the Greek Language.

Vers. 16. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.] This seems to be a prover∣bial form of Speech, commonly used to signify that all human endea∣vours are insignificant unless God countenance them. I suppose it was taken from the Grecian Games, to which St. Paul often alludes. In like manner an unknown Poet, in Grotius's excerpta, says that,

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. A Man void of Counsel, labours and runs in vain.

The meaning is, that from the meer arbitrary pleasure of God proceed∣ed that favour he continued to shew to Jacob's Posterity, rather than to Esaus; not from any thing that the Israelites had done to deserve the divine Favor more than the Idumaeans. From which Doctrin it fol∣lowed that God might without any injustice, call the Heathens to the knowledg of the Gospel, and reject the carnal Jews, tho otherwise the Heathens had done no more to merit this token of God's favour than the Jews. Having thus far endeavoured to clear the Apostle's sense in this place, I shall subjoin a Paraphrase of seven Verses, from the tenth to the sixteenth, to shew how aptly what I have said agrees with St. Paul's scope, and the series of his Discourse.

Vers. 10. And not only the Example of Isaac and Ishmael teaches us, that it is not sufficient for any Nation to have descended from the Patriarchs, to claim to themselves a right in the Divine Pro∣mises, or entitle them God's People. This appears likewise by the instance of Esau and Jacob, which Rebecca bare to one Isaac. 11. For before ever they were born, and consequently had done good or evil, by which to procure the favour of God, or make him their Enemy; that the purpose of God concerning chusing a certain Peo∣ple to himself, might appear to proceed from his own arbitrary pleasure, and not to have been excited by any Virtue or Merits of that People; 12. God answered Rebecca when she consulted him a∣bout her Children striving in her Womb: That she carried in her Bowels the Fathers of two great People; of which People that which did first become the most numerous, and acquired the greatest Riches and Power should afterwards serve the other, tho in the be∣ginning not so powerful. 13. To which purpose also is that saying of God in Malachi, that he had preferred Jacob and his Posterity, to Esau and his Progeny, and upon the former conferred much greater Benefits. 14. Perhaps some may object that God, accord∣ing to this Doctrin, seems to be unjust, who, as I affirm, so much prefers one People before another, that are no better than they. But that does not in the least follow from this Doctrin. 15. For Moses, whom none will affirm to charge God with any injustice, tells us, that when he had prayed God to continue to go before the Camp of the Israelites, tho they had deserved his anger, and prevailed, he received this answer from him, that the Israelites, tho they had

heinously offended him, since he had begun to shew them favour, should find him also for the future gracious to them, and still be ac∣counted by him his People. 16. So that the Mercy of God in cal∣ling any Nation to the knowledg of himself, and making them his peculiar People, does not use to depend on the Merits of that Na∣tion, but on his own free Will and arbitrary Purpose.

This is, if I am not mistaken, the Series of the Apostle's discourse; which being so explained, directly answers his design in this place, and admirably agrees with the sense of the places he refers to in Moses, as it is in Moses himself. About the 12th Verse we must con∣sult Grotius.

Vers. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.] The Particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here seems to refer to the sense latent in the foregoing words, in which tho St. Paul speaks only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 concerning the election, yet by this very thing, that he declares God to chuse a Nation whom he may shew a peculiar kind∣ness to, he intimates that he leaves other non-elect Nations in their Sins. For as I before suggested, there can be no election where some∣thing is not cast off, because that which is not chosen must necessarily be rejected. And to this the Apostle's words in this and the Verses fol∣lowing refer, wherein he discourses separately concerning rejection, as in the foregoing he had mostly treated about election. So that I should paraphrase this 17th Verse thus:

Moses also teaches us that, as to the rejection or praeterition of sinful Nations, whereby it comes to pass that the People so abandoned fall into the greatest evils and calamities, that may without blasphemy be imputed to God, be∣cause he says he was commanded to speak to Pharaoh in God's name to this sense, that he, if he so pleased, could easily destroy both the King himself and the whole Egyptian Nation, and so make his People a free passage, which they had so often refused them, out of their Country; but he would suffer Pharaoh still to live, that he might give further demonstrations of his Power, and make his Name great and famous throughout the World.

See what I have written on Moses's words, in Exod. ix.15, 16. for what our Author says in the following Annotation, does not agree with them.

Ibid. Note h. Tho the Hebrew word be in the Preterperfect tense, yet I have rendred it in its proper place, as if it were the Future, be∣cause of the Verse foregoing, which seems to require its being so ren∣dered: See my Notes on that place, by which this must be under∣stood.

Vers. 18. Note i. By God's hardening the Heart of Pharaoh, I think is neither intended any action of God upon Pharaoh's Mind, nor so

much as any withdrawing of his Grace from him, seeing there is neither any mention made of such withdrawing in Moses, nor is it necessary to suppose it. Nor do I think that Moses purposely abstained from using the Phrase, the Lord hardened his Heart, till the sixth Plague that he inflicted upon that Egyptian King was past, as if then, and not before, he particularly forsook him. For before ever Moses went to Pharaoh, God foretold that he would harden him, Exod. iv.21. which refers to all his obstinacy from first to last. See therefore my Notes on that place.

Vers. 28. Note k. What our Author says in this Annotation he took from Grotius, with whom nevertheless I cannot agree in correcting this place out of one Alexandrian Copy, contrary to the Authority of all the rest, and the Antient Interpreters. It is harsh I confess for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be put after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the construction is intricate; but neither is it much clearer in the Septuagint. Besides, in alledging Testimonies of Scripture, there is but little regard had to the series of the Discourse, provided the Writers words are but to the purpose, and rightly quoted. The words in the Hebrew are thus, vers. 21. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which the Septuagint render, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, finish∣ing and making up his account in Righteousness; whence it is probable they read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hhorets, the Participle Benoni for Pahul. Then follows in v. 22. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which they render, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, because an account cast up will the Lord make in all the Earth, by which it appears that they thought 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 chiljon & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 chalah, to signify an account; and if that be true, we may render the words something more commodiously, tho to the same sense, thus: he will hasten an ac∣count exactly cast up in Righteousness; for an account, and that exactly cast up, will the Lord God of Hosts make in the whole Earth. The words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signify diligently and particularly cast up; and this very thing in part 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 also seems to signify, so as to be the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to cast up, or draw together several sums into one. And the Verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, according to the use of the Chaldee, I render by to hasten. In French the words might be translated thus: il dépêchera de faire ex∣actament son compte avec justice, car le Seigneur créateur, Dieu des ar∣mées, fera un compte & un compte exact, dans tout le païs; He will hasten to make exactly his account with Justice, for the Lord God of Hosts will make an account and an exact account in all the Land. The Prophet's meaning is, that as one who carefully casts up an account of his expences and receits, sees if there remains any thing over, and tho it be but a small sum lays it safe up; so God will destroy all the wicked, and save only

the good, tho they be but very few: which admirably well sutes with the design of the Apostle. I shall add nothing more in this place, be∣cause I intend hereafter, if God permit, to handle this matter more largely in a Commentary on the Prophet Isaiah.

Vers. 33. Note m. As there are two Passages here in the Prophet Isaiah, at a considerable distance from one another, put together by the Apostle, so there are two Figures also conjoined. First, Christ is considered as a stone of Offence, at which whether it be in walking or running, if any one do stumble, he is in danger of falling; and this refers to the Metaphors the Apostle had before taken from the Gre∣cian Games, and particularly that of Running, which made him think of a stone of Offence, than which, in a swift motion, nothing can be more dangerous. Afterwards in the next words, every one that believeth on him shall not be confounded, Christ is represented not as a stone of Of∣fence, but as a corner stone, which he that builds any Wall upon, must trust to the firmness of; and if he be deceived in his confidence, after he has finished his Structure, his building falls, and that fills him with shame.

This latter Similitude is in Isa. xxviii.16. where God speaks thus; I lay in Sion for a foundation, a Stone, an elect Stone (if we read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 behhourah elect, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bohhan a Tower) a corner Stone and pretious, a most firm foundation. He that believeth shall not make hast, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; that is, shall never be judged to have made too much hast in choosing it, nor ever be ashamed of his choice. And the former is in Chap. viii.14. He shall be for a stone of Stumbling and for a rock of Offence to the two Houses of Israel; where the Metaphor is quite different, and it is no longer a corner Stone that is spoken of, but a stone on which a Per∣sons foot or the wheel of a Chariot happens to strike, as the following Verse more clearly shews.

Notes

• Chapter X.