Exercitat. Divine. 1.

HVmane Sciences and Arts, have Humane Sciences and Arts compared to the dough brought out of Egypt, and Divinity to Manna. beene fitly compared to the dough which the Israelites brought out of Egypt, Exod. 12. 34. which they fed upon untill they got Manna: This dough was prepared by much labour; by plowing, by sowing, by rea­ping, by grinding, kneading, and baking: So humane Sciences which are the birth of reason, are bred below here: but Divinitie is like unto Manna which was pre­pared [Page 2] or ready to their hand; they neither plowed for it, neither did sow it, nor reaped it. So Divinity is pre­pared in heaven, and sent downe to teach the Church here below. The dough which they brought out of Egypt, Deut. 16. 3. is called, panis pauperum, the poores The dough the bread of the poore. bread; it is called the poores bread, because the poore in their necessity could not bee at leasure to ferment it, and it had not so pleasant a relish; therefore it is called the poores bread: but Manna is called the bread of Manna the bread of Angels. Angels, Psal. 78. 25. It is called the bread of Angels, be­cause it was brought downe by their ministerie; and it was so pleasant in taste, that if the Angels had eaten bread, it might have served them: So 1 Cor. 13. 1. If I speake with the tongue of Angels, that is, if the Angels had tongues to speake with: And as farre as Manna surpas­sed the poores bread, as farre and farther doth Divinity surpasse humane Sciences and Arts.

Againe, the world hath beene well compared to E­gypt, The world compared to Egypt, and the Church to Canaan. and the Church to Canaan: Egypt was a Land that was watered with the feete of men, Deut. 11, 10. It was said to be watered with the feete of men, as a garden, Egypt watered with the feet of men. because they carried water on foote out of Nilus, and watered their Land with it: but Canaan was a Land Canaan a land blessed of God. blessed of God, and his eyes were upon it from the be­ginning of the yeere to the end, Deut. 11. 12. It was a land of hils and valleyes, and drinketh water of the raine of heaven. The world is but watered with hu­mane Sciences and Arts, which are drawne out of the troubled reason of man like Nilus: but the Church is watered with these celestiall graces which come from above.

Now that we may see the excellency of Divinity a­bove A comparison betwixt Divinity, and all other Sciences and Arts in generall. all other Sciences and Arts, let us observe where­in they differ in generall, and then let us make a particu­lar comparison betwixt Divinity & other Sciences and Arts.

First, they differ origine, in the originall: humane Differ. 1 Sciences and Arts proceede from God as hee is God and generall ruler of the world, but Divinity procee­deth from the Father by the Sonne to the Church, Revel. 22. 1. And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, cleare as cristall, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lambe: but these humane Sciences and Arts, al­though they proceede from God, yet they proceede not from God and the Lambe like a cristall ri­ver.

Secondly, these humane Sciences and Arts, are but Differ. 2 humano-divinae, they are but the broode of reason, which proceedeth from God enlightning every man that commeth into the world, Iohn 1. 9. Some againe are humane and the birth of corrupt man onely, as Sophi­strie: Scientia hūano-divinahumana.diabolica.divino-divina And thirdly, some are Diabolicae, as necromancie and witch-craft: But Divinity is Divino-divina, that is, it is originally from God and immediately.

And if we shall compare Faith the daughter of Di­vinity, Dyffer. 3 with Reason the mother of all other Sciences A comparison betwixt sense, reason, & faith. and Arts, we shall see how farre Divinity excelleth all other Sciences and Arts.

There are in man, sense, reason, and faith; and as farre as reason surpasseth sense, much farther doth faith sur­passe reason; and by consequent Divinity surpasseth all other Sciences.

Reason differeth much from sense, for sense the far­ther How sense, reason, and faith apprehend things. that the object is from it, it is magis universale & magis confusum, it is the more universall and more con­fused; and the nearer that the object comes to the sense, it is the lesse universall and more distinct: Example, when we see an object a farre off, we take it up first to be ens somewhat, then we take it up to be a living crea­ture, then we take it up to be a man, and last to be Peter or Iohn; Here the neerer that the object commeth to [Page 4] our sense, it is lesse universall and more distinct; and the farther that it is removed from our sense, it is the more universall and more confused. The knowledge which a Simile. young child hath at the first is wonderfull confused, and he will sucke any woman for his nurse, this know­ledge is very confused: then his knowledge becom­meth more distinct and more generall, and then he be­ginneth to know, this is not my nurse, and this is not my nurse, but this is my nurse; here his knowledge begin­neth to be more distinct, and he will sucke none but his owne nurse: and his knowledge now, resembleth the knowledge which we have by reason, which ascendeth from the particular to the generall, and the farther that it is from sense, it is the more universall and lesse con­fused. But faith the daughter of Divinity, ascendeth higher than reason or sense, and the further that it goes from sense and reason the more perfect it is, and it go­eth from minus universale, to the supreame and highest cause, God himselfe; and the neerer that faith commeth to reason or sense, the weaker it is and more indistinct. Thomas his faith was an indistinct faith and weake, and could not beleeve unlesse hee put his fingers in the wounds of Christ, Iohn 20. 28. here his faith leaned too much to sense; but faith the higher that it goes from sense and reason, the more perfect it is; We have a no­table example of this, Gen. 49. when Ioseph tooke E­phraim and Manasse, Ephraim in his right hand towards Israels left hand, and brought him neere unto him, and Manasse in his left hand toward Israels right hand, Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it upon Ephraims head, and his left hand upon Manasses head, guiding his hands wittingly, or as Onkelos the Chaldee Para­phrast hath it, Prudenter egit manibus suis, when he dealt wisely with his hands: But when Ioseph saw that his fa­ther laid his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, it [Page 5] displeased him, and he held up his fathers hand, and he said to his father, not so my father, for this is the first borne, put thy right hand upon his head: and his father refused and said, I know it my sonne, I know it truly, the younger shall be greater than he, Gen. 48. 19. Ioseph thought because his father Iacob was blind that his faith was a confused and weake faith, but Iacob knew that the farther his faith was from sence, and the higher that it ascended from reason, it was the more perfect, and therefore he sayd jadanghti bene jadanghti, I know it my sonne, I know [...] it; that is, certainely I know it. This is then the excel­lencie of faith, that the higher that it goes from sence and reason the more perfect it is, which sheweth the excellency of Divinity above all other Sciences and Artes; for if faith the daughter of Divinity surpasseth them all, much more doth Divinity it selfe: and it may bee said of faith, as it was said of the vertuous woman, Prov. 30. Many daughters in Israel have done vertuously, but thou surpassest them all.

Last of all, other Sciences and Artes are but hand­maids Differ. 4 to Divinity, and as the Nethinims the posterity of the Gibionits were appointed by Iosuah to hew wood and draw water for the Sanctuary, but never to meddle with the Sacrifices, neyther to kill them nor offer them, Iosh. 9. 23. so humane Sciences and Arts are appointed but to attend and serve Divinity, they are but to hew the wood, and draw the water onely to the Sanctua­rie.

There are three principles from whence Sciences A comparison betwixt Divinity and other Sciences. and Arts are derived, the first is contemplation, the se­cond is action, the third is operation.

For contemplation, the metaphysicks are the most abstract, considering ens ut ens onely: the second are the mathematicks, which considereth the quantity and [Page 6] the number of things; geometry the quantity, and arith­meticke the number. Thirdly, the Physicks consider onely naturall properties of the body.

These who are exercised in actions and morall phi­losophie, are lawes and such.

Arts which are exercised in operation are rhetoricke and grammer.

Metaphysicke considereth God onely, ut ens vnum, A comparison betwixt Divinity and Metaphy­sicks. verum et bonum, as he hath a being, as he is one, as hee is truth and goodnesse; but it considereth not God as Creator, Christ as Redeemer, it considereth not God in his attributes as Divinity doth, & therefore they say metaphysica parit scientiam tantum, sed theologia fidem.

Secondly, compare Divinity with physicke and A comparison betwixt Divinity, Mathema­ticks, and Physicks. the mathematicks, the mathematician searcheth visible formes in visible things, the Physition invisible formes in visible things; but the Divine invisible formes in vi­sible things.

Thirdly, let us compare the Divine, the Lawyer and A comparison betwixt the Divine, the Lawyer, and the Physition. Physitian; the Physitian est minister naturae, the servant of nature, the Lawyer est minister justitiae, but the Di­vine est minister gratiae: and looke how farre grace ex­ceedeth nature or justice, so as farre doth Divinity sur­passe the Physitian or the Lawyer.

Fourthly, let us compare Divinity and morall philo­sophy, A comparison betwixt the Divine, and morall Philosopher. the Philosopher saith, that Iuvenis non est idone­us auditor moralis Philosophiae, that a young man is not fit to heare morall philosophy, but David saith, Psal. 119 9. Wherewith shall a young man cleanse his wayes. Chry­sostome hath a good observation to shew the force of Divinity above all morall philosophie, when he com­pareth Plato the moralist and Paul the Apostle toge­ther: Plato saith he, that wise Philosopher came three times to Sicilie to convert Dionysius the tyrant to mo­rall philosophy, yet he went away without any successe: [Page 7] but Paul a Tent-maker did not onely convert Sicilie, but ran from Ierusalem to Illyricum, Rom. 15. 19. and conver­ted thousands of soules by the preaching of the Gospel. See how farre Divinity excelleth morall philosophie. August. de Civitate Dei. lib. 6. cap. 11. And Augustine observeth how Seneca the most excellent of all the moralists, mocked the Iewes, because they spent (as hee thought) the seventh part of their life in idlenesse, which was the Sabbath day. Iustine Martyr being first a philosopher, and after a martyr, searched thorow all the sects of philosophy, and could never find contentment to his soule till hee came to Di­vinity. First he came to the sect of the Stoickes and gave himselfe to be a scholler in that schoole, but hearing nothing of God in Stoa in that schoole, he turned to be a Peripatetick: but when he entred with the Peripateticks, he perceived his master nundinantem sapientiam mercede (as he speakes) selling his wisedome for gaine, then hee left that sect also. Thirdly, he came to the sect of the Pythagoreans, but having no skill in geometrie (which knowledge Pythagoras required of his Schollers before he taught them philosophy) he left the Pythagoreans and fell into the society of the Platonickes: at last he met with a Christian Divine Philosopher who perswaded him to cast aside all these circular disciplines, and to stu­die Divinity which should give him greater content­ment than all the philosophy in the world, and he re­nouncing all gave himselfe to the studying of the holy Scriptures, and of a Philosopher became both a Christian and a Martyr. A comparison betwixt Divinity, and Physicke alone.

Fiftly; let us compare Divinity and Physicke alone, they say ubi desinit physicus ibi incipit medicus, Where the naturall philosopher leaveth, there the Physitian beginneth, but we may say, ubi desinit Physicus, ibi inci­pit Theologus, where the Physitian leaveth off, there the Divine beginneth; for when the Physitian hath done [Page 8] his last cure and given over the patient, heresignes him into the hands of the Divine, or if he be a religious Physition, hee is glad to play the Divine to him him­selfe; the Physitian sheweth the patient that his health consisteth in letting of blood, but the Divine sheweth that the health of his patient consisteth by the letting of the blood of Christ.

Sixtly, compare Divinity and the mathematicks, the A comparison betwixt Divinity and the Ma­thematicks alone. mathematician considereth the length, the height and the breadth of things, but be never considereth what is the height, the breadth and the length of the love of Christ, Ephes. 3. 8. he never teacheth a man to number his dayes, that he may apply his heart to wisedome, Psal. 90. 12. as the Divine doth. A comparison betwixt Divinity, Grammer, and Rhetorick.

Lastly, compare Divinity with grammer and rheto­ricke: hearing of others teacheth us to speake; gram­mer teacheth us to speake congruously, and rhetoricke teacheth us to speake eloquently, but Divinity teach­eth us to speake the language of Canaan, Esay 19. 18.

Whether commeth Lawes or Physicke nearer to Quest. Divinity?

Wee must answer here by distinction, the Law Answ. hath two parts in it, the first is that which is called [...], of constituting and making of lawes: the se­cond is that ligitious part which is exercised about the Pars legis. [...]. [...]. pleading of causes; the first part commeth nearer to Divinity than physicke doth, because the Physitian is exercised onely about the health of the body, and if he speake any thing to his patient of temperance or re­straining of his passions, all this he doth but for his patients health. But the nomotheticke or maker of the law, doth all things for the well ordering of the people; and looke how much more excellent it is to live well, than to live in good health: so much more that part of the law excelleth physicke. But physicke againe is to [Page 9] be preferred to that part of the Law which is called li­tigiosa or the litigious part of the law, because that part of the law doth not respect the commonwealth, or the manners of the people, but to give this or that particu­lar man his right: But to cure this or that particular man, is better than to restore this or that particular man to his goods; for skin for skin, and all that a man hath will he give for his life, Iob. 1. therefore physicke excelleth the litigious part of the Law.

It may be said that Divinity borroweth many things Object. of other Sciences, therefore it may seeme not to be so absolute in perfection.

This argueth no want in Divinity, but onely a defect Ans. in our understanding; for by these inferiour things we are led to the knowledge of more divine things.

Divinity is not [...] or a generall summe of all Sciences and Arts, or one universall director to all our actions as they are naturall, civill, or oeconomi­call.

But Paul biddeth Timothy take a little wine to comfort Object. him, 1 Tim. 5. 23. So Moyses setteth downe weights and measures in the Law.

When Paul biddeth Timothy take some wine to com­fort Answ. him, he is not playing the Physition here: so when Moses setteth downe weights and measures, this is not his last end that there may be commutative justice a­mongst the children of Israel; Pauls last end and cheife consideration is this, that Timothy having a sound body may be able to glorifie God in his ministery. So Mo­ses considereth weights and measures, that Gods people might doe no wrong, but glorifie God in their calling; And as one thing may belong to the mathematitian in respect of the middest, and to the Physitian in respect of the thing it selfe, as when a Physitian sheweth that a round wound is more hardly cured than a long [Page 10] wound, although the Physitian shew this by the prin­ciples of geometry, yet he cureth not the wound as a Goemetrician but as a Physitian. So when a Divine speaketh of weights and measures, and health of body, although they belong to the politickes or physickes in respect of the midst, yet in respect of the end they belong to Divinity.

Other Sciences are not directly subordinate to Divi­nity; these sciences which are directly subordinate, the conclusions of the superior Sciences are the principles of the inferior, as the conclusions of arithmeticke are the principles of musicke, and these sciences which are directly subordinate here, have but some new accident added to them, to make a distinction betwixt them and the superior Sciences, as musicke subordinate to arithmeticke hath this accident superadded to it, to be numerus sonorus a number with sound, but Divinity and other Sciences toto genere differunt, they are alto­gether different.

Other Sciences are not directly subordinate to Di­vinity but onely in respect of the end, the Apothecary Subordi­natio directa.ratione finis. is directly subordinate to the Physitian; therefore hee prescribeth unto him all his ingredients, what hot Sciences and Arts sub­ordinate to Divinity, in respect of the end. things he must use and what cold, what drachmes and what scruples: the Taylor againe is not directly subor­dinate to the Doctor, but onely in respect of the end, therefore the Doctor prescribeth not unto him how much he should make in a gowne; aske the Doctor why he giveth physicke to a man? and he will answere, for the preservation of the body: So aske the Taylor why he maketh cloathes for him? he will answer for the same end; here the inferior, the Taylor, is subordi­nate to the Doctor, onely in respect of the end: So all Sciences and Arts are but indirectly subordinate to Divinity, and in respect of the end, and therefore [Page 11] they have not their particular directions from Divini­ty.

The conclusion of this is: All Sciences are found out Conclusio. 1 for the benefit of man, but all of them can doe him but little good, untill Divinity come in and rectifie him.

All Sciences are subordinate to Divinity in respect Conclusio. 2 of the end; therefore every man should studie to be ho­ly, what Science soever he professe: but profane men thinke that it becommeth not a Physitian to bee holy, because they understand not that these Sci­ences are subordinate to Divinity in respect of the end.

EXERCITATI. II.

AS God in the creation set up two lights to guide and to direct the world, Gen. 1. 16. so the Lord hath given two lights to direct man; the light of rea­son to direct him in things below here, and Divine light to direct him in things above: these two lights the Grace doth not extin­guish reason, but recti­fieth it. one of them doth not extinguish the other, but onely diminish it, and maketh it fall downe and give place, and then rectifieth and exalteth it. Esa. 42. 15. I will make the rivers ylands, and I will dry up the pooles. The rivers come from the fountaines, but yet when the light of grace commeth in, then the rivers are dimi­nished and they decrease that the dry land may ap­peare: reason is not taken away here, but it falleth downe and giveth way to grace; but the pooles shall be [Page 12] dryed up, that is, grace taketh away schismes and heri­sies and drieth them up: but when reason submitteth her selfe to Divinity and is rectified, shee hath good use in Divinity. And even as a Dwarfe set upon a Gyants shoulders seeth much further than hee did before: so doth reason when it is rectified by Divinity; and so grace doth not extinguish reason but perfecteth it: and therefore Iustine Martyr called religion true philosophie, and then he saith, he became a Philosopher when he became a Christian.

Let us consider first what is above the reach of rea­son Things that reason is not able to do in Divi­nity and matters of Faith. in Divinity. First, reason cannot bee a judge in matters Divine, for reason can never judge of the ob­ject of supernaturall verity. Reason sheweth this much to a man: when it seeth the antecedent and the consequent, that this followeth rightly upon that: but reason never judgeth of the object of supernaturall ve­rity, but Divinity enlighteneth the mind and maketh the spirituall man to judge of this. A Carpenter when he is working, doth see by his eye when he applieth the Simile. square to the wood, whether it be streight or not; but yet his eye (without the which he cannot see) is not the judge to try whether the tree be streight or not, but onely the square is the judge: So reason in man (with­out the which he could not judge) is not the square to try what is right or what is wrong, but the Word it selfe is onely the rule and square; reason cannot con­sider how faith justifieth a man, or whether works bee an effect of faith or not, but reason can conclude one­ly ex concessis, of things granted, if faith be the cause and works the effect, then they must necessarily goe toge­ther, and reason goeth no higher.

Secondly, no midst taken from philosophy can make up a Divine conclusion, neyther would it beget faith in a man. Example, God is not the efficient cause [Page 13] of sinne, the efficient cause is a terme attributed to God: here if a Divine should goe about to prove eyther by logicke or grounds of metaphysicke, this conclusion were not a Divine conclusion, whereupon a mans faith might rest, as if he should reason this wayes, No effici­ent cause can produce a defect but an effect, God is an efficient cause, and sinne is a defect, therefore God cannot produce sinne; this were but an humane con­clusion and could not beget faith. So if he should rea­son from the grounds of metaphysicke this wayes, God is ens entium, and the properties of ens are vnum verum bonum, therefore God who is ens entium cannot produce sinne, because hee is goodnesse it selfe; the conclusion were but an humane conclusion and could not beget faith: but if a Divine should prove the same by a midst taken out of the Scriptures, and should rea­son thus. 1 Ioh. 2. 16. All that which is in the world, is ey­ther the concupiscence of the flesh, or the lust of the eye, or the pride of life, not from the Father, this midst will make up a Divine conclusion which will beget faith in a man, and then the Christian man may say to the Philosopher as the Samaritans said unto the woman of Samaria, I beleeve not now for thy reason, but for the authority of God, which is the ground of my faith.

Thirdly, Philosophy doth not inlighten the minde with spirituall knowledge, it inlightneth the minde one­ly with a generall knowledge whereof Iohn speaketh, Iohn 1. 9. Rom. 1. when he beleeveth, his reason at the first is mere passive; therefore this speech of Clemens Alexandrinus would be very warily taken, Philosophiam Lib. 1. Strom. [...] vocat; as though philosophy made an in­troduction to saving faith: And this speech of some Divines is harshly spoken, lumen natura accendit lumen gratiae, and Basils comparison must not be stretched o­ver farre, as Dyers before they bring on the most [Page 14] perfect dye, they dye first with the baser colour, to make it the more fitte to receive the more bright co­lour: So humane learning may be a preparation to grace. But the comparison is too farre stretched here, humane learning is a preparation to make a man under­stand the axiomes, syllogismes and logical part in Divi­nity; but a heathen philosopher having the helpe of nature, is no sooner converted to the truth. A learned Philosopher converted to the faith, may have a grea­ter Certi­tudo evidentia.adhaerentia. certainty of evidence than a laicke, and may know the literall sense better, but hee hath no greater cer­tainety of adherence, as wee see oftentimes when it commeth to the poynt of suffering. But seeing zeale is not alwayes according to knowledge, therefore know­ledge of humane Sciences is a great helpe to the knowledge of faith once bred, when it is sancti­fied.

Philosophie must not transcend her bounds and Reason must not tran­scend her bounds. commit Saltum, as they speake in the Schooles, when shee taketh midsts which are mere philosophicall to prove any thing in Divinity; this was the fault of most of the Schoolemen: but when shee doth keepe herselfe within her bounds, then she hath good use in Divinity. Matth. 22. the Sadduces reason this way concerning the resurrection. If there were a resurrection, then there should follow a great absurdity, that seven men should have one wife at the day of judgement: but this is absurd: therefore, &c. But Divinity telleth reason, that here she goeth without her bounds, measuring the estate of the life to come, by the estate of this life, and borroweth midsts which are not Divine to prove this conclusion; for in the life to come wee shall be like Angels, who neyther marry nor give in marriage, and neede not to propagate their kind by generati­on.

Another example. Nicodemus reasoned this wayes, He that is borne againe must enter into his mothers womb, Ioh. 3. 4 no man can enter againe into his mo­thers womb, therefore no man can be borne againe: but Divinity teacheth reason that she transcendeth her bounds here, and useth a midst which is mere naturall to prove a supernaturall conclusion.

A third example, Arrius reasoneth this wayes; hee that is begotten is not eternall, Christ is begotten, therefore he is not eternall: here Divinity telleth rea­son that shee is out of her bounds, and applyeth her midsts falsly. There is a threefold generation, first a Gene­ratio Physica.Metaphysica.Hyperphysica. physicall generation, secondly a metaphysicall, and thirdly an hyperphysicall: physicall generation is this, when a mortall man begetteth a sonne, and this is done in time: metaphysicall generation is this, when the mind begetteth a word, and this is alwayes done in time: but hyperphysicall generation is that eternall ge­neration, and this is done before all time; and Divinity sheweth reason how shee misapplyeth her physicall and metaphysicall generation, to this eternall generation.

Whether is such a proposition true in Divinity, and Quest. false in reason, the Sonne of God begotten from all eterni­ty, true in Divinity, the Sonne of God begotten from all eternity, false in the court of reason: So Mary the Vir­gin bare a Sonne, true in Divinity: Mary the Virgin bare a Sonne, false in the court of reason?

That which is true in one Science, is not false in ano­ther. Answ. In Israel there was a judicatorie of seventy who judged of matters of greatest weight, and there was an inferior judicatory, consisting of three, and these judged of goods and matters of least moment: that which was truly concluded in the highest judicatory was not false in this inferior judicatory, although they [Page 16] could not judge of a false Prophet as the great Synedri­on did, yet they held it not false in the lowest judicato­ry, when the great Synedrion concluded such a one to be a false Prophet: So that which is true in Divinity is not false in reason, but onely above her reach; and if any thing were true in one Science, and false in ano­ther, then verum non esset reciproca affectio entis, that is, that which hath a being should not bee true, and that which is true should not have a being, these two pro­positions should not be converted. There is a verity Veri­tas suprae rationem.juxtae rationem.infrae rationem. that is above reason, and there is a verity which is agreeable to reason, and there is a verity that is under reason, the first is of things taken up by faith, the se­cond is of things taken up by reason, the third is of things taken up by sense, but there is no verity con­trary to reason, it is not against reason to beleeve that a Virgin conceived and bare a Sonne, but it is above reason.

Wee must not seclude reason altogether from Divi­nity, What use reason hath in Divinity. Christ himselfe used the helpe of reason against the Sadduces, and Paul against the Iewes, Heb. 7. 17. Thou art a Priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek. This is revealed by God himselfe that Christ is the King of peace and righteousnesse, yet to prove this and to make it manifest to the misbeleeving Iewes, he borroweth a helpe of a logicall notation, saying, which is by interpre­tation, the King of righteousnesse, the King of peace, Heb. 7. 2. So Christ useth reason against the Sadduces: God is the God of Abraham, Isaack and Iacob, hence he infer­ferreth this consequent, that they must live.

But they say that Christ and Paul were immediatly Object. directed by God, that they could not erre in their Midsts, and conclusions as we doe.

If Pauls extraordinary calling had given him power to use reason, then they had spoken to the purpose, but Ans. [Page 17] he useth reason as common to him and to all other men, whether Apostles or not Apostles.

But they say, that Christs authority and Pauls was Object. greater than ours is.

This wee grant, they disputed against those Answ. who acknowledged not their authority, but yeelded onely to them, in respect of the force of the argu­ments, is it not lawfull for us to doe the same against our adversaries? which Christ did against the Sadduces, and Paul against the Iewes.

But whatsoever was pronounced by Christ against Object. the Sadduces, or by Paul against the Iewes, it became by and by holy Scripture, which we cannot say of our conclusions.

Although arguments used by Christ and his Apo­stles Answ. became by and by the Word of God, yet it will not follow that we may not use these midsts brought forth by reason, although they become not Scripture; but then that would follow if wee brought forth these principles of reason, to make them the object of our saving faith.

Whether were the Sadduces bound to beleeve this Quest. argument of Christs, as an article of their faith, or not?

By the force of this consequence as it were the Ans. worke of reason, they were not bound to beleeve it, but as it was proved to them out of the Scriptures they were bound to beleeve it.

Seeing humane midsts have no force to binde of Quest. themselves, why are they used in proofe against men?

This is done for the infirmity of man, who is hard Answ. to beleeve, and the Divine midsts will not serve to refute the naturall man. These who have good and per­fect Simile. sight need no other midst to see by, but the light; but a man who is of a weake sight and purblind, useth [Page 18] Spectacles as a helpe to his sight: so the perverse heri­ticks make us to bring in these humane midsts, where­as the midsts taken out of the Word of God should serve by themselves to convince. When Christ rose againe, Thomas doubted of the resurrection and thought that his body had beene but a Spirit, but Christ bea­ring with his infirmity, by this humane midst proveth that hee is flesh, because hee may bee touched and felt.

Observe againe that in Divinity some propositions are merely Divine, and some are mixtly Divine. These that are merely Divine, reason can doe little thing here, it can but joyne the tearmes together, but it cannot take up these great mysteries; example, if I were disputing against the Monothelites who denyed that there were two natures in Christ, and should reason thus; Where there are two natures, there are two wils; but in Christ there are two natures, therefore two wils. That in Christ there are two wils, this is a proposition merely Divine, rea­son can never take up this, yet reason sheweth this much, where there are two natures there must bee two wills, and it judgeth onely of the connexion of these two, but it cannot judge of the verity of this, whe­ther there be two wills in Christ or not.

Yee will say then, what doth reason in the ve­rity Quest. of these propositions which are merely Di­vine?

Reason in a regenerate man concludeth not that to Ans. be false which is above her reach, but onely admireth and resteth in this great mystery; and reformed reason enlightened by the Word of God, goeth this farre on, that she beleeveth these things to be possible with God which shee cannot comprehend; but reason in a corrupt man will scorne and mocke these things which shee cannot comprehend, as the Stoicke called [Page 19] Paul a babler, Act. 17. 18, when hee disputed against them for the resurrection, and called it a new do­ctrine.

In these propositions againe which are mixtly Di­vine, reason hath a further hand; example, No naturall body can be in moe places at once, Christs body is a naturall body, therefore it cannot be in moe places at once; this is mixtly Divine, for the properties of a na­turall body sheweth us that it cannot be in moe pla­ces at once, and the Scripture also, sheweth us that Christs body is a naturall body.

But is not this a mixture of Divinity and humane Quest. reason together, when wee borrow a midst out of the Scriptures, and then confirme the selfesame thing by reason?

This maketh not a mixture of Divinity and philoso­phie, Answ. but maketh onely philosophie to serve Divini­ty.

When we use reason to helpe our weaknesse, we doe not ground our faith upon reason or upon the light of nature, but upon that supernaturall light; and the light of nature commeth in, but as in the second roome Simile. to confirme our weaknesse: and as we ascribe not the price of the Ring, or the worthinesse of it to the Ham­mer which beateth it out, but to the Gold it selfe, so our faith is not grounded upon humane reason or the light of nature, but upon the Word of God it selfe.

How can reason serve in Divinity seeing the naturall Quest. man perceiveth not the things of God, and the greater Philosophers, the greater enemies of grace?

Wee must distinguish inter concretum & abstractum Ans. betwixt philosophie and the Philosopher: many of the Philosophers oppugned the mysteries of Divinity by their corrupt and naturall reason: but true philosophie [Page 20] impugneth it not, and the greater light extinguisheth not the lesser, and verity doth not contradict it selfe; and truth in philosophie, is but the footestep of that truth which is in God by way of excellency.

The conclusion of this is, contra rationem nemo sobri­us Conclusi. dicit, contra scripturam nemo christianus, & contra ec­clesiam nemo pacisicus: we must learne then to give eve­ry one of these their owne place and not to reject rea­son altogether from Divinity, but to captivate her and make her a handmaid to Divinity.

EXERCITAT. III

THe end of our Divinity here consisteth in doing rather than contemplation. If we speake properly, doing is not in the understanding but in the will; when reason divideth, compoundeth, or frameth any propo­sition within it selfe, then the understanding is not sayd The understanding is speculative, and setteth the will on worke. properly to doe, but contenting it selfe within it selfe, then it is speculative: but when the understanding set­teth the will on worke, then the will doth, & the under­standing but directeth the will; and when the understan­ding reasoneth within it selfe, they call this actus elicitus; Actus elicitus.imperatus. but when the understanding setteth the will on worke, they call this actus imperatus.

A proposition in Divinity commandeth us eyther A proposition in Divi­nity commandeth pra­ctise, virtually or for­mally. virtually to practise, or else formally. Virtually it com­mandeth us to practise; example, This is life eternall, to know thee to be the onely true God, and whom thou hast sent, [Page 21] Christ, Ioh. 17. 3. 11. This is a proposition which vir­tually includeth in it practise; for as the Hebrewes say, verba notitiae includunt verba affectus, Words of know­ledge include words of affection: if it be life eternall for us to know God, then it is life eternall also for us to love God.

This proposition againe in Divinity, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soule, and with all thy mind, Matth. 22. 37. and thy neighbour as thy selfe, vers. 39. commandeth practise formal­ly.

Secondly a proposition in Divinity urgeth practise A proposition in Divi­nity, commandeth pra­ctise, mediately or immediately, eyther mediatly or immediately: imediatly, as God is summum bonum the chiefe good; out of this mediate proposition we gather an immediate, therefore we are to love him above all things.

Thirdly, these conclusions in Divinity which con­clude for practise, the propositions out of which they If the conclusions be practicke, the propositi­ons must be practicke. are drawne, must also be for practise and not for con­templation, nam nihil agit extra genus suum, as they say in the Schooles; as we cannot gather grapes of thornes, or figgs of thistels, Matth. 7. 16. So new wine cannot be the cause why the Apostles spake with divers tongues; Act. 2. So we cannot gather conclusions of practise from speculative propositions.

Fourthly, these rules which serve to direct men to practise may be called rules of practise, as the Carpen­ters The word of God is a line and rule of practise. line in his hand is a line of practise, because it lea­deth him to practise. So the Word of God is the line by the which wee should walke, therefore it is a rule of practise, Gal. 6. 6. As many as walke according to this rule, peace be unto them: [...] is to worke by rule or line, [...]. the Word is the rule of our working, therefore it tea­cheth us practise.

But it may be said, that contemplation is the end of Object. [Page 22] Divinity in heaven to see God face to face, therefore is the end of our Divinity here upon earth.

Contemplation in heaven leadeth us alwayes to pra­ctise, and they can never be separate; for as below here Answ. those Sciences which we call inspectrices; as the mathe­maticks, physicke, and such (whose end consisteth not in doing) are the parents of morall philosophie and of doing, for by these we take up the nature of things, the goodnesse and the truth of them, and then we begin to esteeme of them, and love them when wee know them; so that contemplation bringeth forth alwayes practise. The glorified Saints in heaven, comming nea­rer to the first cause, esteeme more highly of him, and therefore they love him more sincerely, and returne all praise to him.

But it may seeme that contemplation is more excel­lent Object. than practise; for Mary is preferred unto Martha, Mary for her contemplation to Martha for her acti­on.

When Mary and Martha are compared together, they Answ. resemble not the contemplative and the active life, but the naturall and spirituall life; Mary careth for the spirituall life, and Martha for the naturall. Did not Mary care for practise as well as Martha? sate shee not at Christs feete that shee might learne practise, that she might wash them with her teares and wipe them with her haire?

And because practise is joyned alwayes with know­ledge, therefore the wisedome which is proper to the understanding is ascribed sometimes to the will, Iob. 28. 28. to depart from evill is understanding: and there­fore it is, that justice and judgement are joyned toge­ther in the Scripture, and they are called fooles who doe not according to their knowledge. And Salomon saith Eccle. 10. 2. The heart of a wise man is at his right [Page 23] hand, because his heart teacheth his hand to put things in practise.

The end of our Divinity is more in practise than in contemplation; therefore these onagri or wilde asses, the Heremites who lived without all society of men, for­get the cheife end wherefore they were set here, living rather like beasts than like men: and if wee shall take a view of the ecclesiasticall history, as out of Theodoret and Zozomen, wee shall see how unprofitablie these men have spent their time, leaving the congregation of the Saints of God. Theodoret writeth of one Mace­donius Cap. 13. de historia reli­giosa. [...] qui [...] & gubba dict us est; gubba in the Syri­acke tongue is a Ditch, he was called gubba because he stoode in a Ditch all his time, and he was called [...], because he eate nothing but Barley pulse: See how unprofitablie this man spent his time, not giving himselfe to reading of the holy Scriptures, for he was altogether ignorant of them; for when Flavianus the Bishop sent for him that hee might make him a Mini­ster, he was so ignorant of that which the Bishop had done unto him when he ordained him Minister, that being required the next Sabbath day to come againe to the Church, answered him who came for him, that he was affraid to be made Minister the next Sabbath day also, and so refused to come; see how this holy man spent his life for forty yeares in contemplatin and what great progresse he made in Christian Religi­on. So Theodoret maketh mention of one Styllites who From [...] a pillar. stoode under a pillar all his life time, and never came in­to a house. So Zozomen in his ecclesiasticall history, Lib. 6. 29. writeth of one Pior, who going out of his fathers house into a desert, vowed solemnely that he should never see any of his kinsmen or friends againe, and living fifty yeares there he had a sister who longed to see him be­fore shee dyed: the Bishop pitying the poore woman, [Page 24] granted leave to Pior to come and visit her, and he re­turning into his countrey, & standing before the doore called out his sister, and shutting his eyes, he said unto her, behold, I am your brother Pior, looke upon mee as much as you please; but shee entreating him earnest­ly to come to her house, he altogether refusing went backe againe to the Wildernesse: and so wee reade in Theodoret of one Adynus; who lived ninety yeares in the In Sacra hist. lib. 14. 8. Wildernesse and never spake to any man, as if he had beene possessed with a dumb Divell: this is that holy contemplative life which the Church of Rome com­mendeth so much, but this is pure Religion, to visite the fatherlesse and widdow in their necessity, Iam. 1. 27. These Heremites living this contemplative life were like Poly­phemus having but one eye in his head, and looking e­ver up but never downe.

The Schoolemen differ but little in this poynt, how The opinion of the Schoolemen in this point. Divinity teacheth us practise. Thomas and his follow­ers say, that fides non est recta ratio agendi, sed recta ratio sentiendi; and therefore Contra gentiles hee compareth faith to hearing rather than to sight, but he addeth that practise followeth faith as the fruit of it: but Scotus maketh faith to be habitus practicus. Yee see how both of them insist in this, that Divinity consisteth in pra­ctise.

The Lord Num. 15. 38. 39. commanded the Israelites The end of the Sadduces and Pharises Divinity. to make fringes upon the borders of their garments, that they might remember the Commandements of the Lord and keepe them; the Sadduces gave them­selves onely to looke upon the fringes, and if they had onely remembred the Law, they thought then they had discharged their duties; but the end of the Pharises was to remember their owne traditions. So the end of The end of the Monks and Iesuites Divinity. the Monkes Divinity now is onely idle contemplation with the Sadduces; and the end of the Iesuites Divinity [Page 25] now is onely to practise mischeefe: and many Christi­ans when they reade the Scriptures now, they reade them not for practise, but for to passe the time with; they are like little children who seeke Nuts to play, but not to breake them and eate the kernels.

The conclusion of this is, Iam. 1. 22. Be yee doers of the Conclusi. word, and not hearers onely, deceiving your selves.

EXERCITAT. IIII.

FIrst, consider in Adams knowledge, the manner how he got this knowledge, and secondly the measure of his knowledge.

His knowledge was inbred knowledge and not ac­quired; for as soone as he did behold the creatures, ne­ver Of the manner how Adam got his know­ledge. having seene them before, he gave them all names according to their nature. This knowledge being in­bred it could not be acquired also; nam duplex ejus­dem scientiae in vno subjecto, non datur causa, there cannot be two causes given of one, & the selfe same knowledge in one subject, although one and the selfe same know­ledge cannot be said both to be acquired and inbred, Adams inbred know­ledge, and our acquired knowledge, are not di­verse sorts of know­ledge. yet Adam might have had experimentall knowledge, afterward of his inbred knowledge: His inbred know­ledge and our acquired knowledge, are not divers sorts of knowledge, for as the sight restored to the blind al­though it was miraculous, yet when he saw, it was one sort of sight with our sight: so these inbred habites and acquired habites, are but one sort of habits; but [Page 26] these inbred habits in Adam, and infused habits, were more excellent than acquired habits; for these things which God doth, are such that nature cannot produce the like, or so perfect: as that wine which Christ made miraculously at the marriage of Cana in Galilee, Ioh. 2. Things done miracu­lously, are more excel­lent than nature can produce them. was more excellent wine than other naturall wine: so when Christ cured the blind, their sight was more per­fect than our naturall sight; so when he made the lame to goe Act. 3. 16. So the habites of inbred knowledge in Adam, were more perfect than any other sinfull man could ever attaine unto, after him.

The creatures are lesse than the knowledge of God; Of the measure of Adams knowledge. they were equall with the knowledge of Adam before his fall, but they exceed our knowledge now. When the eye looketh upon the white colour, it scattereth the Simile. sight, and the white colour exceedeth it; but when it looketh upon the greene colour, exaequat visum, and it is a proportionable object for the eye: but when it looketh upon a taunie colour, it is lesse than the sight. So the creatures are lesse than Gods sight; they were equall with Adams sight before his fall, like the greene colour, and they exceed our sight since the fall, as the white colour doth exceede our sight; and because the heart since the fall is not so capable and so large to com­prehend the knowledge of these creatures as it was be­fore the fal, therefore it is said, 1 King. 4. 29. that the Lord gave Salomon a wise heart as the sand of the Sea shoare, that is, to know an innumerable kind of things like the sand of the sea. When a man is to infuse liquor into a Simile. narrow mouthed vessell, that none if it runne by, hee enlargeth the mouth of the vessell: So did the Lord enlarge the heart of Salomon that hee might conceive this heavenly wisedome, and the knowledge of all things; but the minde of Adam before his fall nee­ded not this extention to rcceive these gifts.

Secondly, the great measure of this knowledge which Adam had before his fall, may be taken up this wayes. The Hebrewes write that there were foure gates by the which Adam entred to see the Lord: the first Porta creaturarū visibiliūintelligentiarum.majestatis.gloria. was the gate of the visible creatures, the second was by the gate of the Angels, the third was by the gate of majestie, and the fourth was by the gate of glory; and they say that Adam entred three of these gates, but the fourth was shut that hee entred not in at it in this life.

The first gate was opened unto him, for in the crea­tures below, here he saw the majesty and glory of God. The Scriptures when they express any great thing, they joyne the name of God with it, as Ezek. 13. 9. great [...] est epitheton omnis rei admirandae & magnae. [...] haile is called Gods haile or sent by God, el gabbish. So 1 Sam. 26. cecidit sopor domini super eos, that is, a great sleepe fell upon them. So a strong Lyon is called ariel, the Lyon of God, 2 Sam. 23. 10. So Moyses is said to be faire to God, that is, very faire, Act. 7. 20. So Ni­nive was great to God, that is, very great. The beau­ty [...] and greatnesse in the creatures led Adam to take up how great the Lord was. Iacob when he saw Esau re­conciled unto him, sayd, I have seene thy face, as though I had seene the face of God, Gen. 33. 10. This glimpse of goodnesse in the face of Esau, made Iacob take up, how good God was unto him.

The second gate was porta intelligentiarum, the know­ledge of the Angels, they resembled God more than any visible creature doth, therefore they are called Gods Sonnes, Iob. 1. Chapt. and 38. Chapter, 7. verse, and they see his face continually. Mathew 18. verse 10. As the Kings courtiours are sayd to see his face con­tinually, 2 King. 25. 25. and the Angels conversing with him, made him to come nearer to the knowledge of God.

The third gate was porta Majestatis, he saw the ma­jesty of God more clearely than any other did. Moyses is sayd to see the face of God, and yet it was but the sight of his backe parts, compared with Adams; and we see him but through a grate, Cant. 2. 11. Heb. 11. 26.

The fourth gate was porta gloriae. That gate was reserved to bee opened for him in the hea­vens.

Let us compare the most excellent men with Adam, and see which of them came nearest unto him; in some things Moyses came nearest to him, in somes things Sa­lomon came nearest unto him, and in some things Daniel, in some things Ioseph, but Christ the second Adam excel­led them in all.

In the knowledge and sight of God and his attributes, Moyses came nearest to him. Exod. 33. 13. Teach mee thy A comparison betwixt Moses and Adam. wayes, that is, thy attributes. So Psal. 103. 7. He made knowne to Moyses his wayes, that is, his attributes, for hee subjoyneth, the Lord is mercifull and gracious, slow to an­ger, and full of compassion, and he chideth not for ever; here his wayes are his attributes, Moyses came nearest to Adam in this knowledge.

Salomon in the knowledge of the politickes came nea­rer to Adams knowledge than Moyses did; Moyses sate A comparison betwixt Salomon and Adam. all the day long to judge the people, Exod. 18. and hee stoode in need of Iethro's counsell to make choyse of helpers; but Salomon could have found out all these things by himselfe without the helpe of another. Salo­mon begged wisedome of God, and it was granted unto him, he desired wisedome to be his [...], to be pre­sident of his counsell, and to be his assister or [...], [...] & to be his [...], to rule happily, Wisedom. 9. 4. Sa­lomon came nearest to the knowledge of Adam in the Politickes, and he is preferred to the wisest within the Church, as to Heman and Dedan, 1 King. 4. 3. and [Page 29] to the wisest without the Church, as to the Egypti­ans.

As he came nearest to Adams knowledge in the Po­litickes, Salomon came neerest to Adams knowledge in the Politicks. so likewise in the knowledge of naturall things, for as he wrote from the Cedar of Lebanus to the Hyssope that grew out of the Wall, 2 King. 4. 33. that is, as Iosephus explaineth it; he wrote parables and similitudes taken from every one of these kinds: and Tertullian saith well, Familiare est sacris scriptoribus ut sublimiores veritates ex­plicent per sensibilia; nam idem qui est author naturae, est author gratiae: It is an usuall thing to the holy writers to illustrate heavenly things by earthly comparisons, for he that is the God of nature is also the God of grace. Salomon wrote from the tall Cedar to the small Hyssope that groweth out of the wall, that is, from the greatest to the smallest, then he passeth by none of them: for it is the manner of the Hebrews to marke The Hebrewes marke the two extreames and leave the midst for brevity. the two extreames, and to leave the midst for brevi­ties cause, as Num. 6, 4, from the kernell to the huske, here the Scripture omitteth the wine which is the midst betwixt the kernell and the huske. Another example, Exod. 11. 5. And all the first borne of the land of Egypt shall dye, from the first borne of Pharoah that sitteth upon the throne, unto the first borne of the maidservant that sitteth behind the Mill. The Scripture omitteth the midst here, the rest of the people for shortnesse, and expresseth one­ly the two extreames, the highest and the lowest. A third example, Iob 24. 20. The wombe shall forget him, and the wormes shall feede sweetly upon him, the birth, and the grave, the two extreames include the whole life. So Psal. 121. 8. The Lord shall keepe thy going in, and going out, that is, all thy wayes: So Salomon writing of the two extreames, the tallest and the least, includeth all the rest. Now if Salomon had such knowledge of these na­turall things, much more had Adam.

Adam had such knowledge of the creatures that he Adam gave fit names to the creatures, know­ing their qualities and nature. gave them fit names in the Hebrew expressing their na­tures, he was a good nomenclator to give every thing the right name. Plato in Cratillo sheweth that he who giveth the right name to a thing, must know the nature of it very well; but since the fall men impose wrong names to things, as they call light darknesse, and dark­nesse light.

When hee gave names to the creatures, hee gave To what things Adam gave names and to what he gave no names. not names to these creatures in particular that had not principium individuationis in se, and which differed not something in subsistence from others, as all hearbes of the same kind, and trees and stones of the same kind; he gave not a name to every one of them in particular, but gave one name to them all of the same kind: but these who differed not in essence but in the manner of their subsisting, to these he gave diverse names, as hee called himselfe Adam and his wife Eve. And wee are to observe that there are many names which Adam Adam gave names to many things which are not found now in the Scripture. gave to the creatures in the first imposition, which are not found in the Scriptures now: the Elephant the greatest beast upon the earth, yet it hath no proper name given to it, in the Scripture it is called Behemoth, Iob 40. [...] dens eboris compositum ex [...] dens & [...] ebur. 15. and the teeth of the Elephant are called Shenhab­bim, the teeth of Ivorie, but not the teeth of the Ele­phant; and usually the Scripture expresseth onely the word teeth, as 1 King. 10. 18. he made a Throne of teeth, but not of the teeth of the Elephant, because the Ele­phant was not so knowne to the Iewes; therefore the [...] cornua dentis. Ezek. 27. Scripture doth onely circumscribe this beast and the hornes of it; but Adam gave the greatest beast a pro­per name when he imposed names to the beasts.

When Adam imposed names to the beasts, he im­posed proper names to them, not circumscribing them Adam gave proper namer to the creatures. as the Scripture doth now for our capacity; example, [Page 31] Shemamith with the hands of it takes hold on kings houses, [...] Seemeth to be Simia, and Solomon sent for such, 1 King. 10. 22. [...]. because this word is a hard word to be understood, and may signifie eyther a Spyder weaving with her hands; or else [...] a Monkie with a long tayle (for kings are delighted in their palaces with such when they see them hung by the hands) because wee cannot take up the nature of this beast by the name alone, therefore the Scriptures by the effects and properties of it, de­scribeth it more at large for our capacity; but Adam at the first imposed the simple name.

These names which Adam gave to the beasts at the Names which Adam gave were perfect names. first were most perfect names, therefore yee shall see other languages to keepe some footesteppe still of the first imposition, as 1 King. 10. 22. Tukkijm are called [...] Peacoks, the Talmud calleth it Tabhas, the Arabick cal­led it Taus, and the Latine Pavo.

David came nearest to Adam in prudencie, for al­though A comparison betwixt David and Adam. he was not so wise as Salomon, yet erat prudentior Salomone he was more prudent than Salomon; therefore the woman of Tekoah sayd to him, Thou art wise as an Angell of God, 2 Sam. 14. 20.

The Lord asked the king of Tyrus if he could match A comparison betwixt Adam and Daniel. Daniel in wisedome, Ezek. 28. 3. Behold thou art wiser than Daniel, there is no secret that they can hide from thee. Daniel exceeded all the Chaldeans in wisedome, and the Chaldeans exceeded the Tyrians, therefore Daniel farre exceeded all the Tyrians: but yet if we will compare Daniels wisedome with the wisedome of Salomon, it will come farre short; for Salomon exceeded all the children of the East in wisedome, and came nearest to Adams knowledge, no sort of wisedome was hid from Salo­mon, Daniel onely exceeded in interpreting of secrets and heavenly visions.

Ioseph came nearest to him in oeconomie, Psal. 105. 22. A comparison betwixt Ioseph and Adam. he exceeded the Princes of Egypt in wisedome, & taught their senators.

Iesus Christ the second Adam, the personall wise­dome A comparison betwixt the first Adam, and the second Adam Christ. of God his Father, farre excelled Salomon; here is a greater than Salomon. Iesus Christ the second Adam as he excelled Salomon farre; so did he the first Adam in wisedome, Psal. 45. 2. Thou art fairer than the Children of men, in the originall it is Iophjaphitha, which the Hebrews doubling, expresse the great beauty that was in him; and [...] sometimes it is put in two words, as Ier. 46. gnegla jephe pija, that is, very faire. Christ the second Adam in out­ward [...] beauty exceeded not, Non erat decor in facie ejus, He had no forme nor comelinesse: and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. Esay. 53. 2. but in inward wisedome and grace he was fairer than the Sonnes of men, and excelled the first Adam.

The conclusion of this is, Adam having such measure Conclusion. of knowledge before his fall, what great presumption was it in him to presume above that which was revealed unto him. Let us be content not to be wise above that which is written, 1 Cor. 4. 6. and let us remember that saying of Augustine, Multi propter arborem scientiae amit­tunt arborem vitae.

EXERCITAT. V.

FIrst, let us enquire how these first Principles which are called primo-prima, are made up in the hearts of man. Secondly, how these secundo-prima principia are [Page 33] deduced out of these. And thirdly, how these principia make up this which wee call Conscience: and lastly, we shall shew that man by this naturall knowledge ingraft in his heart, cannot come to the true and saving know­ledge of God.

These first Principles are made up after this manner: The Lord hath put two faculties into the Soule, one which we call speculative in the understanding, and another which we call a practik facultie in the will, to prosecute these things which the understanding sheweth to her. God hath placed first the speculative in the un­derstanding, that it might follow that eternall reason that is in Gods Law; for as it is the perfection of Art to imitate nature, so it is the perfection of nature to imitate this eternall reason, which is Gods Law; Then he hath placed the will into the soule of man to prosecute those things, which the understanding the speculative facultie sheweth unto it.

There are some primo-prima principia, in the specu­lative Some principles in the speculative, and some in the practicke faculty. faculty, and some in the practick facultie; this is a principle in the speculative facultie; Omne totum est majus sua parte, and this is the first principle in the pra­ctike faculty, the will, Matth. 7. 12. Whatsoever yee would that men should doe to you, doe yee even so to them.

These primo-prima principia are not naturally knowne How the first principles are knowne. quoad actum perfectum, but they are in potentia propin­qua, that is, they may be most easily knowne; for that which is actually perfect in the first degree, is alwayes knowne, and as soone as the creature existeth, so soone they are knowne; as the knowledge of an Angel is not potentiall but ever actuall: but these first principles are made up without any reasoning discourse or foraigne helpe. And as it is naturall for a stone to move downe­ward, although it be not alwayes moving downeward, yet because it hath that weight within it selfe, and nee­deth [Page 34] no other helpe to make it move downeward, as it needeth of a foraigne helpe to cause it to ascend; there­fore this motion is said to be naturall to it. So because How the first principles are naturall to the mind. the mind can make up these principles without any dis­course; therefore they are sayd to be naturall to it: but when we make up a conclusion in a syllogisme, the knowledge of this conclusion is not so easily knowne to me: but we must borrow some midsts, which are more knowne to us, to make up this conclusion. These first principles are naturally knowne, but the conclu­sion in the syllogisme is ratíonaliter knowne onely, by way of discourse. These first principles the Divines First principles are naturally knowne, but the conclusions are knowne by discourse. call rationes eternas, dignitates, immobilia principia, and the Greekes call them [...]. If the judgement be sound and well disposed, then it agreeth to those first principles; but if it be corrupt it declineth them. It is not necessary that all agree in these first principles, for although some be found who deny them, yet they stand as principles to those who are of sound judge­ments; children and mad men understand not these first principles, yet those who are of sound judgement, doe acknowledge them.

These first principles are not actually written in the The first principles are not actually, but poten­tially written in the minde. heart of man, but potentially: the mind of man is not like a seminarie, which containeth in it diverse sorts of seedes: neyther is it like the Flintstone which hath the fire lurking within the veynes of it, and being struc­ken upon the steele, casteth out the sparkels of fire which lurked in the veynes of it before: but it is like unto the eye, which being inlightened by the Sunne, hath that naturall facultie in it to discerne colours: So the mind frameth these principles when the objects are laid before it. A difference betweene the first inbred princi­ples, and the second in­bred principles.

And out of these primo-prima principia, the minde frameth, and maketh up secundo-prima principia: the [Page 35] difference betwixt these primo-prima principia, and se­cundo-prima is this: these primo-prima principia, first inbred principles are contained in the conclusions; but these secundo-prima principia, these second inbred principles, are as conclusions contained in the princi­ples: now to cleare this by example; this is a first in­bred principle in the mind; whatsoever yee would that men should doe to you, doe yee even so to them: this is a se­cond imbred principle drawne from the first, yee shall not murther; this conclusion drawne from the first principle, containeth in it this first principle, whatsoever yee would men, &c. So that any man may inferre thus; I may not kill my neighbour, because I will that no man should kill me; here this principle is contained in the conclusion. There are other conclusions drawne from these secundo-prima principia, which may be cal­led Difference betweene the conclusions drawne from the first principles, and the conclusions drawne from the second inbred principles. tertiae conclusiones, and these are not so easily made up as the first; here the conclusions are contained in the principles, and not the principles in the conclusions as before; example, honour thy father, and thy mother; this is a second principle; and this; thou shalt rise up be­fore the hoare head, Livit. 19. 23. is a conclusion of the third sort: for this followeth not so clearely as the former conclusion, Yee shall rise up before the hoare head; therefore yee shall honour your father and your mother: but rather this wayes, yee shall honour your father and your mother; therefore yee shall rise up before the hoare head: heare the conclusion is contained in the principle and not contra.

This law written in the heart of man, maketh up this Conscience, what. which we call conscience, which is an inbred light in the mind of man, teaching him to follow that which is good, and to eschew that which is evill: and it is called conscientia, quasi concludens scientia; and it hath a two­fold A twofold act of the conscience. Act; the first is to give testimony to things, whe­ther [Page 36] we have done them well or ill; if wee have done them well, then it giveth testimony for us, Rom. 9. 1. my conscience also bearing me witnesse; and if we have done evill, then it testifieth against us. Gregory Nazianzen Greg. Nazain. used to call the conscience paedagogum animae; for as a Pedagogue waiteth upon a child, and commendeth him when he doth well, and whippeth him when he doth evill; so the conscience when a man sinneth, it stingeth him like Hornets, Deut. 7. 20. but when hee doth well, it alloweth him: and that which wee call conscience, the Syriack calleth it Tira, Rom. 2. 15. Which signifieth [...] conscientia a [...] formavit, pin­xit. a paynted thing, for the conscience now is like a table, in which sundry things are paynted; and this sort of writing in the consciences, hath not beene unfitly com­pared to that writing, which we write with the juice of an Onion; here the letters at the first are not legi­ble, Simile. but hold the paper to the fire, and that maketh the letters legible: So these evill deeds, which sinke first into the conscience, and are not legible, yet when the conscience is put to the fire of Gods wrath, then they begin to appeare legible, and then the Lord set­teth their sinnes in order before them, Psal. 50. 21. The se­cond act of the conscience is to binde or loose; for even as a man, when he is bound hand and foote, he can­not stirre out of the place; so the light which is in the conscience, bindeth the will of man, so to doe a thing; that he cannot doe any other thing unlesse he sinne a­gainst it. Rom. 14. 23. Whatsoever is not of saith is sinne, that is, whatsoever he doth against his conscience, in that, he sinneth.

This conscience is eyther a good conscience, a bad conscience; a doubting conscience, a probable consci­ence, or a scrupulous conscience. Conscientia recta.erronea.dubia.probabilis.scrupulosa.

A good conscience is that, which is well informed, and concludeth rightly.

A bad conscience is that, which is wrongly informed, and concludeth falsly.

A doubtfull conscience is that, which neyther doth assent nor dissent, and therefore concludeth nothing.

A probable conscience is that, which concludeth as it thinketh, upon probable and good reasons.

And a scrupulous conscience is that, which conclu­deth, but with some feare or doubting, which troubleth the minde. Let us take but this one example for all in the case of eating of meate: The good conscience A difference betweene these sorts of conscience. saith, To the pure all things are pure, and therefore I may eate of this meate: the bad conscience of the Iew saith, Touch not, taste not, handle not; therefore I will eate none of this, because it is uncleane. The doubt­full conscience doubteth whether hee may eate of it, Rom. 14. 23. but doth not fully conclude with the Iew, that he may not eate of it. The probable conscience is this, which upon probable grounds, concludeth to eate of it. In Corinth some doubted whether they might eate of flesh sold in the Shambles, 1 Cor. 10. because perhaps they might light upon that in the Market, whereof the other part was sacrificed to Idols; but the probable conscience concludeth to eate of it, be­cause in the Shambles it hath no relation to the Idoll, and it knoweth, by all probability, that the rest of it was not sacrificed to Idols, but that the Priest got the rest for his portion; he seeth others who are men of a good conscience, eate of such; and upon these probable grounds he eateth of it. The scrupulous conscience is this which inclineth to eate, but with feare and greefe to his minde, when he eateth it.

The light in the conscience since the fall maketh not The light of nature since the fall maketh not up a good conscience. up this good conscience, but it maketh this ill consci­ence, and it troubleth the scrupulous conscience, and this doubtfull conscience.

This bad conscience it excuseth or accuseth: it ex­cuseth When the bad consci­ence excuseth or accu­seth falsely. an unregenerat man falsly, when he heareth the curses of the Law, and blesseth himselfe in the meanetime, Deut. 29. 19. Ioh. 16. 2. Secondly, it ex­cuseth him falsely, when he assenteth to the principles in generall; but when he commeth to the particular ap­plication; he concludeth not rightly. When the Hus­bandmen killed the Lord of the Vineyard, Christ asked of the Iewes, what should become of these Husband­men? Matth. 21. 41. they answered, he will destroy these wicked men: but Luk. 20. 16. when they consider this, that the matter touched them more nearely, then they sayd God forebid. The thing which they assented to in the generall, they shune it in particular, as if they should say, we are no such men, and wee hope that God will not so deale with us. So when it accuseth for the breach of any superstitious ceremonie, as it did the superstitious Philistims; if they did but tread upon the Threshold of the Doore, where Dagon breake his necke, 1 Sam. 4. 5. So a bad conscience accuseth a man truly sometimes, as Eccles. 7. 22. for oftentimes also, thine owne heart knoweth that thou thy selfe hast cursed o­thers.

The conscience bindeth as the Lords deputie; the The conscience is Gods herauld. conscience may be compared to the Kings Herauld. The Herauld intimateth to the Subjects the Kings lawes; When they are intimated, the Subjects are bound to obedience: but if the Herauld should make intimation, of that which were not the Kings Law, un­to the Subjects; yet they are to give obedience to it, untill they know the contrary: so a man is bound to obey his conscience, that is, to doe nothing con­trary to it, although it intimate a falsehood unto him.

How can an evill conscience binde a man to that Quest. [Page 39] which is evill; it being Gods Deputie, and God can binde no man to doe evill?

It bindeth him not simply to doe the evill, but it bin­deth Answ. him to doe nothing against it: God cannot bind a man so, but he simply bindeth him alwayes, to doe right because he cannot erre; judging that to be done which is not to be done, as the conscience doth.

When a good conscience doth bind a man, and Quest. when an evill conscience doth binde a man, what is the difference betweene these two sorts of binding?

A good conscience bindeth a man for ever, but a bad Answ. conscience bindeth not for ever, but onely so long as he taketh it to be a good conscience: he is bound to doe nothing against his conscience, albeit it be errone­ous: but he is bound to search the truth, and then to lay aside this erroneous conscience.

So out of these principles naturally bred in the heart, A difference betweene the law of nature and the lawes of nations. arise all these lawes which are written in the heart; and they differ from the lawes of nations, or municipall lawes of countries. Esay 24. 5. saith, they have transgres­sed the lawes, changed the ordinances and broken the ever­lasting covenant: they have transgressed the Lawes, that is, the municipall Lawes of the common-wealth: they have changed the ordinances: that is, these things where­in all nations agree; as not to doe wrong to strangers, to embassadours and such: and then he commeth to the greatest of all; they have broken the everlasting cove­nant; A greater sinne to breake the law of na­ture than the law of na­tions. that is, the law of nature: it is lesse to breake a municipall law, than the law of nations; or it is lesse to transgresse the law of nations, than to violate the Law of nature; for this Law is that: light which lightneth eve­ry man, that commeth into the world, Ioh. 1. 9.

A man by this naturall knowledge, cannot be brought Naturall light cannot bring a man to the knowledge of his owne salvation. to the knowledge of his salvattion; therefore the Law must be written anew againe in his heart. It is a strange [Page 40] position of Clemens Alexandrinus, who holdeth that there was alia justitia secundùm legem naturae, alia secun­dùm legem Mosis, et alia secundùm Christum; and hee calleth these two first [...], or degrees to leade to Strom. cap. 6. 7. Christ; and as the Law led the Iewes to Christ, so did philosophy leade the Greekes; and hence he con­cludeth, that the good men amongst the Heathen were saved, or at least had some steps to salvation.

The conclusion of this is, seeing the conscience is so Conclusion. obscured, and corrupted through the fall, we must la­bour to reduce it to the first estate againe. When a compasse is out of frame, we touch the needle of the compasse with a Loadstone, that the stone may draw it right to the pole againe: So the mind must be tou­ched with the Loadstone of the Spirit of grace, that it may come backe againe to the Lord, as to the pole.

EXERCITAT. VI.

BEfore the Law was written, the Hebrewes say, that the Lord gave to Noah seven Precepts, which were delivered of Noah by tradition to his posterity after him; these the Iewes call pirke abhoth, capitula patrum, [...] the traditions of the fathers. The most ancient & first tradition that we reade of, was that, Gen. 32. 32. because Iacob halted upon his thigh, therefore the children of Isra­el eate not of the sinew wbich shranke, which is upon the hol­low [Page 41] of the thigh unto this day; So were these seven pre­cepts delivered by tradition.

The first was against strange worship or idolatry, 1 [...] that they should not worship false gods; and this they 2 [...] called gnabhuda zara, strange worship. The second they called it gnal birkath hashem, that is, they should blesse 3 [...] the name of God. The third was gnal shepukoth dan [...] ­mim, that is, he was forbidden to shed innocent blood. 4 [...] The fourth was gnalui gniria, that is, he should not defile 5 [...] himselfe with filthy Insts. The fift was gnad hagazael, de rapina; that he should take nothing by violence or 6 [...] theft. The sixt was, gnal hadinim de judiciis. The se­venth was, abhar min achai, ne menbrum de vivo; that 7 [...] he should not pull a member from a living creature, and eate of it. This precept they say, was given last to Noah, Gen. 9. 4. but the flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall yee not eate: that is, (as the Iewes How this precept of Noah not to eate blood is to be understood. interpret it) yee shall not pull a member from a living creature, & eate of it, as the wild beast doth; but to stay untill the beast be killed, and then eate the flesh thereof: neyther shall ye eate the blood while it is hot, as if it were yet in the body: this is cruelty, & against a morall precept; to eate hot blood while the life is in it; for where the reason of the Law is perpetuall, the Law must Where the reason of the Law is perpetuall, the Law is perpetuall. be perpetuall. The reason of the Law is; ye shall not eate blood because the life is in it; so long as the life is in it, yee must not eate it: and see how this sinne, Ezek. 33. 35. is matched with other great sinnes. Yee eate with the blood, and lift up your eyes towards your Idols, and shed blood, and shall yee possesse the land? The morall trans­gressions of the Law joyned with it here, sheweth that it is cruelty to eate hot blood. But Levit. 7. 27. was the ceremoniall part of the Law: and the Apostles in the councill, Act. 15. forbiddeth them to eate any thing that was strangled; whereby they meant the ceremoniall part of the Law.

Whether are we to take these precepts as ceremo­niall or as morrall? Quest.

The most of these are morrall precepts, and the Answ. same which are set downe againe in the Law: For when the Apostles biddeth them abstaine from fornication, Act. 15. It is the same that is forbidden in the fourth See Beza, Act. 15. precept given to Noah, not revelare turpitudinem, and to interpret here, fornication, for eating of things sa­crificed to Idols, seemeth to be a strained sense: for that is forbidden already by the first precept, to Noah. And to uncover the nakednesse according to the phrase of the Scripture, is meant of bodily pollution and not of spirituall fornication.

Now besides these morrall precepts set downe by Of eating of blood, see more in the appendix of Command. 6. the councill; they interlace this ceremoniall precept de suffocato, forbidding to eate things strangled; and they give the reason wherefore the Gentiles should ab­staine from these, Act. 15. 21. For Moyses is read in their Synagogues every Sabbath, as if Iames should say, they Why the Apostles for­bid to eate blood or things strangled. professe not onely the morrall Law, but also the cere­moniall Law yet; therefore yee Gentiles shall doe well to abstaine, from these things which may give them offence. The Iewes respected these precepts most, because they were kept in the Church even from Noahs dayes.

The Hebrewes adde further; that there was no other precept given untill Abrahams dayes; then God added the precept of circumcision, and afterwards taught them to separate tithes.

The Lord taught his Church in her infancie this God at the beginning taught his Church by tradition and not by write. wayes by traditions, and not be write: and even as parents teach their children the first elements by word, Simila. and afterwards by write; so the Lord taught his Church first by word, and then by write.

The conclusion of this is. The Lord never left his Conclusion. [Page 43] Church without his word to direct her: before the fall, he spake immediatly to Adam and Eve, & taught them. In the second period, he taught them by these seven pre­cepts. In the third period, by the Law written, and in the fourth period by the Gospel.

EXERCITAT. VII.

GOd manifested himselfe to his Church; first by prophesie, secondly, by the holy Spirit, thirdly by God revealed himselfe to his Church foure wayes. Vrim and Thummim, and fourthly by the poole Bethes­da.

First by prophesie. There were sundry sorts of pro­phecie: Sundry sorts of pro­phecie. [...] the first was lepi face to face, to Moyses one­ly.

This sort of prophesie was the highest degree of re­velation; and it drew nearest to that sort of vision, which we shall get of God in the heavens. He mani­fested himselfe to Moyses face to face, and hee knew How the Lord mani­fested himselfe to Moses. him by his name, that is, not onely by the face, as Prin­ces know many of their Subjects; but he knew him inwardly, and liked him: this was notitia approbationis.

Moyses saw God face to face, yet he saw not the es­sence of God, for hee dwelleth in a light inaccessable. Iohn saw Christ [...]. Iohn saw God three manner of wayes. First, in his incar­nation, he saw God dwelling amongst men in the flesh [Page 44] here. Secondly, in his transfiguration upon the Mount. Thirdly, in the Spirit upon the Lords day, Rev. 1. 10. Although Iohn lay in the bosome of Christ and was his beloved Disciple, yet he saith, No man hath seene God at any time: the onely begotten Sonne, which is in the bosome of the Father he hath declared him. Ioh. 1. 18.

When God spake to Moyses, he spake to his under­derstanding Differences betwixt the revelations made to Mo­ses, and to the rest of the Prophets. immediatly. A man hath a right eare, and a left eare; the understanding is like the right eare and the phantasie is like the left eare: hee spake to Moyses Differ. 1 right eare, to his understanding: but when he spake to the rest of the Prophets, by some shapes and visible formes; he spake first to their left eare. Moyses saw no visible shapes nor formes, except onely in the entry of his calling, when he saw the bush burning, Exod. 3. 6. and the Angell comming to kill him in the Inne, Exod. 4. 24. and when he saw the paterne of the Tabernacle in the Mount, Heb. 9. but usually God manifested him­selfe to his understanding.

Secondly, the other Prophets were astonished and weakned at the sight of God. Dan. 8. 27. and I Daniel Differ. 2 fainted and was sicke certaine dayes, and I was astonished at the visions. So Ezekiel fell upon his face when the Lord revealed himselfe unto him. Chap. 3. 27. But Moy­ses was never affrayd at the sight of God but thrice. First when he was to enter in his calling when he saw the bush burning. Exod. 3. 2. Secondly, at the giving of the Law, Heb. 12. 21. Thirdly, in the Inne.

Thirdly, Moyses needed not such preparations before he prophesied, as some of the other Prophets did. Elisha Differ. 3 before he prophesied, called for a Minstrell to settle his passions; that he might be the more fit to receive his prophesie. 2 King. 3. 15. But Moyses needed not such a preperation. So Paul when he was ravished to the third heaven, this knowledge which he got, was intellectuall, [Page 45] and it was neyther by the sight, nor by the phantasie: and whether the soule was in the body here tanquam in organo, vel tanquam in sede onely, it may be See Iunius de purgatorie. doubted.

The second sort of prophesie, was by vision; as when Moyses saw the bush burning, this was presented to him when he a was awake; this was the meanest sort of revelation, [...].

The third sort was [...], when something Visio [...]. [...] was presented to their phantasie in a dreame.

These visions which he shew to the Prophets, some­times they were of things which really existed; as Zacha­rie saw Iosuah the high Priest, and Sathan standing at his right hand. Zach. 3. Sometimes of things that might be and was not: as Zacharie saw two women carrying an Ephath, Zach. 5. 5. and sometimes of things that were not, nor never could be: as the monstrous beasts showne to Daniel, and to Iohn in the revelation.

When the Lord revealed himselfe to the Prophets The Lord appeared to his Prophets, sometimes immediately, and some­times by an Angell. in these visions: sometimes he spake mediatly to them by an Angel. As Exod. 3. 2. God is sayd there to ap­peare to Moses; but Act. 7. 30. an Angel is sayd to ap­peare in the burning bush. Sometimes againe in these apparitions, he immediatly appeared to the Prophets. Ioh. 12. 40. Hee blinded their eyes, &c. these things hee sayd when hee saw his glorie, that is, when he saw Christs glory.

When the Angels did appeare to the Prophets in these visions, they appeared in the shapes of men, but The Angels ever appea­red in the likenesse of men, but not in the like­nesse of women or beasts they never appeared in the likenesse of women, farre lesse in the likenesse of beasts, as the Divell doth: there­fore Levit. 17. 7. they shall no more offer their sacrifices un­to Divels, in the Hebrew it is, leshegnirem, to the hoarie [...] ones; because the Divell appeared in these shapes. When the Cherubims appeared they carie the face of a man, [Page 46] the crest of a Lyon, the feete of the Oxe, and the wings of an Eagle; they had not foure faces (as some thinke) but in something they represented man, in someting the Lyon, in something the Oxe, and in something the Eagle: panim here should be translated, [...]. [...] When the Angels ap­peared in the likenesse of man, they were more glorious than any man.

When the Angels appeared to the Prophets, there was more glory in them, then in other men; although sometimes they concealed this glory for a while, as may be seene Gen. 18. comparing it with Heb. 13. 2. When Paul saw an Angell standing by him in the like­nesse of a man of Mecadonia; there was more glory in him, than in all the men of Mecadonia, Act. 16. 9, Be­cause the glory of an Angell did shine in him: and in this sense it is sayd, Act. 6. 15. that they saw the face of Steven as it had beene the face of an Angell, that is, his face did shine above the face of mortall men, as when the Angels appeared in humane shape. But when the Lord appeared in the likenesse of a man, then his glo­ry farre exceeded the glory of an Angell, Esa. 6. 1. I When the Lord ap­peared in the likenesse of man, he exceeded the glory of an Angel. saw the Lord sitting upon a throne. First, he was set upon a high throne. Secondly, his cloathes reached downe to the ground, which signifieth his glory▪ the hemme of his garment touched the ground, which signyfied the humanity of Christ: and the Seraphims covering their faces, because they could not behold the glory of God. And when the Lord appeared in these visions, he appeared in the likenesse of an old man: as Daniel saw the Ancient of dayes sitting upon a throne, Dan. 7. 9. and Reve. 1. 14. when the Sonne of God appeared, his haire was white as wooll, and white as Snow: but the Angels of the Lord appeared in the likenesse of young men, Mark. 16. 5. and the Cherubims were made like young men.

Which of the Prophets saw the most excellent vi­sions.

Quest. Ezekiel saw the most excellent visions. Esay saw the Ezekiels visions for the most part were of Christ: and the spiri­tuall Temple. Lord sitting upon a throne, Esa. 6. 1. but this was a visi­on of judgement, to make fat the hearts of the people: but the visions of Ezekiel for the most part were of Answ. Christ and the building of the spirituall Temple. These visions were so high, that the Iewes forbad any to reade them ante annum sacerdotalem, that is, before they were thirty yeares of age.

Whether were the revelations by visions, or by Quest. dreams, or that which was intellectuall more perfect?

Thomas answereth; that the vision which was to the Ans. phantasie, was more agreeable to the nature of man, and to his estate here: But that which was immediatly to the understanding, commeth nearer to our estate in glory.

It is generally to be observed here; that in all these The Prophets under­stood these things which they phophecied. sorts of visions, and apparitions, they understood that which they prophesied: and therefore the Prophets were called videntes, Seers, Iob. 13. 1. mine eyes hath seene all these things, mine eares hath heard them, and I understand them all. Pharoah did not understand these things which he saw; therefore he was not a Prophet: So Belthasser when he saw fingers writing upon the wall, he under­not that which he saw, and therefore he was not a Pro­phet: and so Caiphas understood not what he prophe­sied. Ioh. 11. They were like unto men who are purblind and see not a thing distinctly: and therefore desires o­thers to tell them more distinctly what it is. The Iewes say of these, that they were [...] non [...], that is, [...] they were stirred up by God, but they sought not the Lord. And of Balaam they say, prophetavit ex voluntate Dei, sed non cepit quod prophetavit. Daniel at the first un­derstood not the prophesie, but the Angel revealed it unto him, Dan. 8. 17.

So the Lord appeared to them in Dreames as he did [Page 48] before to them when they were awake, and sometimes these dreames were [...], dreames in which they saw some shapes and visions; as Iacob saw a ladder in his dreame: so Abraham in his dreame, saw the Car­kases, and foules lighting upon them. Gen. 15. 8. Da­niel saw the foure monarchies, represented befoure vi­sible shapes, Dan. 4. and sometimes he revealed him­selfe sine symbolo, without any visible shape; as to Ioseph, Matt. 2. and to the wise men, Mat▪ 2. 12.

The Lord was onely author of these dreames, there­fore. [...] Gen. 37. 7. when Ioseph is called bagnal chalamoth, it is not well translated Lord of dreames, for God him­selfe is onely Lord of dreames. The Seventie translate it [...], infomniator, and it signifieth not simple a [...]. dreamer but him who dreameth often, therefore chalamoth is in the plurall number. If the Lord revea­led himselfe in the forepart of the night as hee did to Abraham, then it was called Tardema, a dead sleepe, 1 Sam. 26. cecidit sopor domini super eos id est magnus. But [...] if in the latter part of the night, then it was called cha­lam, a dreame. To some hee revealed himselfe in a dreame, but he gave then not the interpretation of it, as to the Butler and Baker. Some had the interpretati­on of the dreame, but not the dreame, as Ioseph. Nebu­ch [...]dnezzer had the dreame, but Daniel the interpretati­on of it, but the Prophets of God: had both the dreame and the interpretation of it, as Daniel. The heathen sometimes had both the dreame and the interpretation, The Prophets had the dreames with the inter­pretations of them. as the Midianites had of the Barly cake. Iud. 7. but this was for their destruction: but the comfortable dreames and visions, with their interpretations; were onely revealed to the Prophets, for the good of the Church.

Whether was the revelations by dreames, or by vi­sions the more perfect revelation? Quest.

Intensive the revelation by vision was the more ex­cellent, but extensive the revelation by dreames was the Revelatio intensiva.extensiva. more excellent, and that by vision came nearest to that which was intellectuall, for they had no use of their senses in it, & the visions were presented to their under­standing only. When we take up a thing by sense; first Somethings are presen­ted to the sense, some­things to the phantasie, and some things to the understanding. the sense transmiteth it to the phantasie, and then the phantasie sendeth it to the understanding; this is the most imperfect sort of knowledge. Secondly, when the vision is presented to the phantasie onely, and the phantasie sendeth it to the understanding, this is more perfect then the former. And thirdly, when the visi­on is presented to the understanding onely, this is a higher degree.

In the Knowledge which they got by dreames, first, they had the dreame, and when they were awake they got the understanding of it: but in a vision they pre­sently understood the thing presented unto them. Be­cause the revelation by vision was the more perfect sort of knowledge, therefore Ioel saith your young men shall see visions, and then he added, your old men shall dreame dreames, as the more imperfect sort of revelati­on, Ioel. 2. 28.

It may be asked why God revealed himselfe this way Quest. by dreames?

The reasons were these. First these things which Ans. we begin to thinke upon when we are awake we begin The reasons why God revealed himselfe by dreames. to try them by reason, and if reason approve them not then we reject them, but in a dreame the mind recei­veth Reason 1 things not examining them by reason. In mat­ters Divine the lesse that reason have a hand in admit­ting of them the better it is, and here it was better for the Prophets to be ruled by God, and fitter for them to be schollers then judges.

The second reason why he taught his Prophets by Reason 2 [Page 50] dreames was this, to let them see how farre his power exceeded the power of man; for masters cannot teach schollers; but when they are awake and giving heed: but God can teach his Prophets in a deepe sleepe and in a dreame: which gave the Prophets to understand what great commandement, the Lord had over all the faculties of their mindes.

Hee revealed himselfe in dreames to them, to let Reason. 3 them understand, that death tooke not away all know­ledge from man, and that there was another way to get knowledge, than by discourse or reason.

The third way, how the Lord revealed himselfe to [...] How the Lord revealed himselfe to his Prophets by the holy Spirit. his Prophets; was by ruah hakkodesh, by the holy spi­rit: then the Prophets had all the use of their senses; hearing one speaking to them, as we doe every one ano­ther, and seeing, &c. and the more use that they have of their senses, the more unperfect was their revelation. Drusius in Pen­tateuchum. Others distinguish this sort of revelation which was by the holy Spirit, from that which was properly cal­led prophecie: they say these who spake by the holy spirit, & were Prophets in that sense, they were not cal­led to attend still as Prophets; such as was David a King; & Daniel a Courtiour: But Esay and Ieremy were Pro­phets properly so called: because they waited still, and attended in the schoole of the Prophets.

The fourth way, how God revealed himselfe, was by [...] vrim & thummim, and they are alwayes joyned toge­ther except in two places of the Scripture, Exod. 17. 21. What sort of revelation was by Vrim and Thummim. and 1 Sam. 28. 8. This was a different kind of revela­tion from the former: for by this the Priest did not pro­phesie, neyther made songues to the prayse of God: but having put on this breastplate, it was a signe to him that God would answer these doubts, which he asked of him, & it is called the Brestplate of judgement, mishpat [...] signifieth, eyther the administration of publike judge­ments, [Page 51] Esa. 41. 3. or private affaires, Pro. 13. 23. est qui absumitur absqe judicio, that is: because his family is not rightly administrat. It is called then the breastplate of judgement: because the Lord taught his people in their doubtfull cases; what to doe, by this vrim and The breastplate and the Vrim and Thumim are distinguished. thummim.

Exod. 28. 30. Thou shalt put in the breastplate Vrim and Thummim. Some hold that the twelve pretious stones set in the brestplate, were called vrim and thummim: as Kimchi; but the Text maketh against that: for the breastplate, and the vrim and the thummim are distin­guished vers. 30. Some of the Iewes againe incline most to this sense; that these two words vrim and Thummim were set in the breastplate as holinesse to the Lord was written in great letters upon a plate of Gold, What this Vrim and Thummim were. and set in the forehead of the highpriest. But it see­meth rather that they were two pretious stones given by the Lord himselfe, to be set in the brestplate: and an Ancient Iew called Rabbi Bechai marketh, that these [...] demonstrativum. two are set downe cum he demonstrativo for their excel­lencie. Neyther saith the Lord thou shalt make vrim and thummim as hee sayd of the rest of the orna­ments of the Highpriests, thou shalt make this or that. The letters did not make up the answer.

It is commonly holden that the letters did shine out of the breastplate of Aaron, when the Lord gave his answers to him, that he might read the answer by the letters: but this could not be, as may appeare by the forme of the brestplate following.

When David asked of the Lord, 1 Sam. 23. 12. will the men of Keila deliver me and my men into the hands of Saul? [...] the Lord sayd ijsgiru, they will deliver thee: here the letters in the brestplate would have made up this whole answer; Iod from Iehuda, Samech from Ioseph, Gimel from Gad, Iod from Levi, Resh from Reuben, and Vau from Reuben, but Iudges 20. 8. when the Israelites [Page 53] asked counsell of the Lord, who shall goe up first to battell against Benjaman? it was answered, Iehuda Batte­chilla, [...] Iuda shall goe up first, now there was not so ma­ny letters in the brestplate to expresse this answer, for there wanted foure letters of the Alphabet in the brest­plate [...]. 2 Sam. 5. 23. when David enquired of There wanted foure letters in the Breast­plate. the Lord, shall I goe up against the Philistimes? the Lord answered, Thou shalt not goe up but fetch a compasse behind them and come upon them over against the Mulberry trees. The letters in the brestplate could not expresse all this, therefore it was not by the letters that the Lord answe­red the Priest: but when hee had on this brestplate, [...], or rationale upon him, then the Lord taught How the Lord taught the Priest by Vrim and Thummim. him what to answer; and this brestplate was but a signe unto him, that the Lord would answer him, as Sampsons hayre was a signe unto him, that the Lord would continue his strength with him as long as hee kept his haire; how was the strength in Sampsons haire? not as in the cause, or in the subject, but onely as in the signe, so in the Apostles garments and shaddow; they The Vrim and Thum­mim were a signe onely that the Lord would answer the Priest. were but a signe of their power which they had in hea­ling miraculously; and so was vrim and thummim but a signe of this, that the Lord would answer the Priest.

The vrim and thummim were not alwayes with the The Vrim and Thum­mim were not ever with the Arke. Arke; for all the time of Saul they asked not counsell of the Arke, 1 Chron. 13. 3. Let us bring againe the Arke of our God unto us: for we enquired not at it, in the dayes of Saul; they went usually to aske counsell in the Taber­nacle and Sanctuarie of the Lord, Iud. 20. they went up to Silo, where the Tabernacle was, to aske the Lord then the Arke was in the Tabernacle: but when the Arke was separated from the Tabernacle, they might sacrifice in the Tabernacle. So they might aske the Lord here by vrim and thummim although the Arke [Page 54] was not there. When the Highpriest asked counsell for David, at Nob: the Arke was not there nor the Taberna­cle; but onely vrim and thummim: but when the Arke and the vrim and thummim were together, they al­wayes enquired the Lord before the Arke; and when they were separated; they turned their faces towards the Arke, wheresoever it was, when they asked coun­sell by the judgement of vrim and thummim. When David was in Ziglaeg, 1 Sam. 30. he asked counsell of the Lord by the Priest: but neyther the Arke nor the Tabernacle was ever in Ziglag a towne of the Phili­stims.

When any are sayd, to aske counsell of the Lord, They asked counsell of the Lord at the Arke by the High Priest. who were not Highpriests; as the Israelites are sayd thrice to aske the Lord. Iud. 20. 18. 1 Sam. 14. 37. & 23. 2. 1 Chron. 14. they are understood to have done this by the Highpriest, for Num. 27. 21. Ioshua is commanded to aske counsell at the Lord, by Eleazer the High­priest.

The manner how he stood who asked counsell of the Lord by the Highpriest, He shall stand before Eleazar How he stood who as­ked counsell by Vrim and Thummim. the Priest, who shall aske counsell for him after the judgment of Vrim before the Lord. Num. 27. 21. he stood not direct­ly before the Highpriest, for then he should have stood betwixt him and the Arke: therefore liphne should be translated juxta, a latere, or beside the Priest. Hee stood by the Highpriest when he asked counsell, and hee [...] heard not what tht Lord sayd to the Priest; but the Priest gave him his answer.

When two things are demanded of the Lord, he an­swered The Lord by Vrim and Thummim answered distinctly to every que­stion. in order to them. As 1 Sam. 23. 9. will they come up? The Lord answered, they will come up. So he an­swered to the second question, will they deliver me? They will deliver thee.

They asked not counsell of the Lord by Vrim and [Page 55] Thummim but in great and weighty matters; as David They asked counsell by Vrim and Thummim onely in matters of weight. after the death of Saul, 1 Sam. 2. So 2 Sam. 5. they asked the Lord, for the King, for the common wealth or for a tribe, or for making of warres, but in matters of lesse moment they asked not the Lord, by Vrim and Thum­mim: as if any thing had beene committed to ones cu­stodie, and it was lost; they did not aske the Lord for it by Vrim and Thummim, but the oath of the Lord was betwixt them, Exod. 22. 11.

When they got their answers by Vrim and Thummim, God confirmed his an­swers sometimes by lot. the Lord confirmed their answers sometimes by lot. As 1 Sam. 10. 8. he asked first by Vrim and Thummim, who should bee King? and then it was confirmed by lot. So when Ioshua divided the Land, First, he got his answer by Vrim and Thummim, and then hee bid­deth them cast lots, & as their lots ascended, he distribu­ted unto them, Num. 26. 55. When the Highpriest con­sulted, he stretched out his hands unto the Arke of the Lord. 1 Sam. 14. 19. collige manum tuam, draw in thine hand.

The difference betwixt the predictions of the Pro­phets A difference betweene the predictions of the Priests by Vrim and Thumim, and the pre­dictions of the Pro­phets. and the Priest, by Vrim and Thummim was this. The Prophets when they foretold things, vt futura in seipsis, as to fall out in themselves; then they alwayes fell out: but when they foretold things as they were in their causes; then they might fall out, or not fall out. Example, Esay saith to Ezekias, set thy house in order for thou shalt dye, and not live, Esay. 38. 1. looking to the se­cond Prophesies as the re­spect the second causes and events. causes, and to Ezekias, he shall dye. But looking to the event, he shall not dye. So 1 King. 21. 20. The Lord threatned to bring a judgement upon Achab, and yet upon his humiliation spared him. So the Lord threatned [...]ve, forty dayes and Ninive shall be destroy­ed, Ionah. 3. 4. and yet when they humbled themselves they were not destroyed. But that which was revealed [Page 56] by the Highpriest, when he tooke on Vrim and Thum­mim, tooke alwayes effect.

But it may be sayd, Iud. 20. 23. shall I goe up to the Object. battell against the children of Beniamin our brother? The Lord answered, goe up against him. And yet they were killed.

In this first answer the Lord sheweth, that they had Answ. just cause to make warre against Benjamin; but he an swered not to the successe of the battell, because they were not as yet humbled; and they trusted too much to their owne strength. But when Phineas demanded what they should doe, vers. 28. when they were hum­bled: they got a direct and more distinct answer: goe up, for to morrow I will deliver them into thine hand.

Bellermine the Iesuite, that he may prove the infalli­bility De pont, Rom. lib. 4. 3. of the Pope in judgeing in matters of faith; al­ledgeth the Vrim and the Thummim, which were upon the brestplate of the Highpriest; which directed him [...] a radice, [...] a false derivation. that he could not erre in judgement. But this reason is faultie many wayes. First, in the derivation of the names; for he deriveth Vrim from the root jara which [...] a radice, [...] a false derivation to exclude the radicall letter, for there is duplex Mem, here and Aleph is excluded. [...]. signifieth, to teach; whereas it is derived from or to give light. So he deriveth thummim from the root A man, which signifieth to beleeve; whereas it com­meth from tamam, to make a thing perfect. The se­ventie translate these words, [...], as yee would say, manifestatio & veritas. And so doth Hie­rome. But this they doe [...], and they respect more the end here, wherefore they were put into the brestplate, than their proper significations. For as Vrim properly signifieth brightnesse, and figuratively [...], because that which maketh all things manifest is the light, Ephes. 5. 13. and this Thummim properly signifieth perfection; so figuratively in things spiritu­all, [Page 57] it signifieth verity. The Seventy looking to the fi­gurative signification, translate them this wayes.

Secondly, put the case that Vrim and Thummim sig­nified doctrine and verity, yet it will not follow that the Highpriest might not erre: for by these were sig­nified not what sort of men they were, but what sort of men they ought to be. Prov. 16. 10. A divine sentence is in the lippes of the King, and his mouth transgresseth not in judgement. Here is a clearer place that the King of Spaine cannot erre in judgement, than that the Pope cannot erre in judgement; if yee will take words as they stand. But the meaning of the words is, a divine sentance ought to be in the lippes of the King; and then his mouth will not transgresse in judgement. So these two are set in the brestplate of Aaron, to teach him his dutie: but they were not notes of his infallibility. And if by Vrim, they would inferre his infallibility in judge­ment: so by Thimmim, they may inferre his holinesse of life: and so none of the Popes were profane and wicked men.

Thirdly, this brestplate served not for a triall of his doctrine, but onely for foretelling of the doubtfull events of things; for their doctrine was to be tryed by the law and by the testimony, Esa. 8.

Fourthly, if Vrim and Thummim signified verity and The High priests might erre. judgement, then it should follow, that none of the Highpriests could erre: but wee know that Vrijah the Highpriest in the time of Achaz, brought the paterne of the Altar of Damascus, and placed it in Ierusalem. 2 King. 16. 6. And Caaiphas erred, when he condemned Christ to death.

Lastly, let this be granted, that the Highpriest under the law could not erre; therefore that eyther Peter or the Pope his successor (as they alledge) could not erre, it will not follow. For this priviledge, not to erre, be­longeth [Page 58] to none, but to Iesus Christ, of whom the Highpriest was a type; who had both Vrim and Thum­mim, purity of doctrine and perfection of life.

How long did the gift of prophesie endure in the se­cond Quest. Temple.

The gift of prophesie endured under the old Testa­ment Answ. untill the time of the Macedonian Empire. When How long the gift of prophesie indured un­der the old Testament. Alexander the great did raigne, Nehemiah maketh men­tion of one Iaddus the Highpriest, Neh. 12. 7. who met Alexander, when he came against Ierusalem. Now See Shinlerus in [...] if there had beene none, who were infallibly directed by the Spirit of God at this time; who could have put this into the canonicall Scripture it being histo­ricall? therefore there behoved to be one at this time, who had the spirit of prophesie, and was one of the masters of the great Synagogue, who did this: and then the Sunne went downe upon the Prophets. Micah. 3. and the gift of prophecie ceased.

Thse gift of prophesie was bestowed anew againe, in The gift of Prophesie given under the new Testament, the second Temple, under the new Testament. Ioel. 2. I will powre out my spirit upon all flesh, and your young men shall see visions, &c.

This gift lasted in the Church, till the second Tem­ple was destroyed. The Iewes by a certaine kind of Kabbala called gematrja, observe upon Hagg. 1. 8. it is [...] written there ekkabhda, I will be glorified, because the word wanteth the letter [...] in the end of it, which let­ter standeth for five; they say that the want of this [...], sheweth the want of five things in the second Temple, which were in the first. The Arke, the mercy seate, and Cherubims. Secondly, the fire from Heaven. Thirdly, the majesty of Divine presence called shekena. Fourthly, the holy Ghost. And fiftly, Vrim and Thummim. But this rabbinicall observation is most impious, and ser­veth The Iewes cabbalisticall observation blasphe­mous. to overthrow all the whole New Testament, to [Page 59] deny Iesus Christ, and to condemne his Apostles and Evangelists; as though they had not the gift of the holy Spirit when they wrote, during the time of the second Temple: and this is contrary to the very scope of the Prophet, Hagg. 1. 8. Goe up into the mountaine, and bring wood to build this house, and I will take pleasure in it, and I will be glorified saith the Lord, and Hagg. 2. 9. The glory of the latter house shall be greater then the former, and in this place will I give peace saith the Lord.

Whether were the Arke, the Vrim and Thummim, and Quest. the holy fire in the second Temple or not?

Although there was greater spirituall beauty in the Answ. second Temple, than in the first; yet the second Tem­ple The Arke was not in the second Temple. wanted this typicall Arke, the Vrim and Thummim, and the fire; therefore it is but a fable of theirs, who Iosephus ant. lib. 14. say, that Titus after he had destroyed the second Tem­ple, brought the Arke to Rome in his triumphes; but the Arke was never seene in the second Temple; and Iosephus, who was an eye witnesse of Titus triumphes sheweth, that it was onely but the table of the shew­bread which Titus carried away in his triumphes, and is seene yet pictured there.

The Vrim and Thummim were not in the second Tem­ple, but the graces signified by them.

But it may be sayd. Nehem. 7. 65. and Ezra. 2. 63. That Object. they should not eate of the most holy things, untill there stood up a Priest with Vrim and with Thummim.

It is the manner of the Scriptures to expresse the na­ture Answ. of the Church under the New Testament; by fi­gures The new Testament expresseth things some­times under types of the old Testament. and types which were under the Old Testament: so by Vrim and Thummim which were in the first Tem­ple; to expresse the perfection of the Priests, which should be in the second Temple.

The last way, how God revealed himselfe in the se­cond How the Lord revea­led himselfe by the poole Bethesda. Temple, was by the poole Bethesda: when the [Page 60] Angel came downe at certaine times to stirre the poole, then whosoever after the first troubling of the water stepped in, he was cured of whatsoever disease. Ioh. 5. 4. It was not the Angell that cured them here: for it is a true Axiome of the Schoolemen, pars natur a non potest super are na­turam, An Angell cannot worke a Miracle. an Angell is but a part of nature, therefore hee cannot worke a miracle, which is above nature. It was Christ himselfe who wrought the miracle, it was hee What Angell wrought this Miracle. [...] who loosed the prisoners, Psal. 146. Mattir, is so to loose the bound, that they have use both of their hands and feete, to leape as freely as the Grashopper doth, which hath legges to leape upon the earth, Levit. 11. 21. So the di­seased were loosed, that they might leape and goe streight upon their owne feete. By Angell here some understand the power of God, who useth his Angels, as his ministers to worke many things below here; and therefore the Seventy put God in place of the Angell, as Eccles. 5. 6. Say not before the Angell, that it was an er­rour. But the Seventy translate it [...], for the Chaldes use to ascribe the worke of God to his ministers, the Angels. But it is better to ascribe this miracle here, to the Angell of the covenant Iesus Christ. Tertullian saith, that the operation of the fish­poole being now to cease and to loose the vertue of it, our Saviour curing him who had beene long diseased, being at the poole, gave thereby an entrance to all sicke persons to come unto him: as if he should have sayd, he that desires to be whole; let him not come to the poole, or expect the comming downe of the Angell: for when he commeth, he healeth but one; but come unto me, and I shall heale you all.

The conclusion of this is, seeing wee have a more Conclusion. cleare manifestation of the will of God by Christ, than they had under the Law; let us beware to offend him now. He that despised Moyses law, Heb. 10. 28. dyed with­out [Page 61] mercy, under two or three witnesses, of how much sorer punishment shall we be thought worthy of, if we treade under foot the Sonne of God.

EXERCITAT. VIII.

GOd thought it necessary, after that he had taught his Church by Word; next to teach her by write. There is a twofold necessity. The first is called an ab­solute necessity: the second, of expedience. Againe, Necessitas absolutaexpedientia Gods revealed will was necessary to all men, as a cause; but his written word was necessary as an instrumentall Scriptura est necessaria [...] verbnm [...]. The word considered essentially or acci­dentally. cause; and this word is considered eyther essentially, or accidentally. Essentially for the written word: this written, and unwritten word, differ onely as a man na­ked, and cloathed; for there is no change in the nature Simile. and substance here. And that we may the better under­derstand the necessity of the writing of the word, wee must distinguish here the states of the Church. First, The estate of the Church considered three wayes. shee was in a family or oeconomike. Secondly, she was Nationall, dispersed through the countrey of the Iewes. Thirdly, she was Ecomenicall or Catholicke, dispersed through the whole world. So long as shee was in a fa­mily, and the Patriarches lived long, to record to the posterity, the word and the workes of God; then God taught his Church by his word unwritten. But when his Church began to be enlarged, first through Iudea, & then through the whole world, then he would have his [Page 62] word set downe in write; because then the Fathers Why God would have his word written. were not of so long a life, to record to the posterity, the word and the workes of God. Againe he did this to obviat the craft of the Divell, and the counterfeite writings of the false Apostles.

It was necessary then, that the word should be writ­ten, God revealeth himselfe most surely to us by his word. that the Church might have a greater certainety of their salvation. See how farre the Lord commen­deth unto us, the certainety which wee have by the Scriptures; above all other sort of revelation. 2 Pet. 1-19. We have also a more sure word of prophesie: here the [...]. certainety of the Scriptures, is preferred to the trans­figuration in the mount. Secondly, the Apostle Gal. 1. 8. preferreth it to the revelation made by Angels, If an Angell should come from heaven and teach any other Gospel, let him be accursed. Thirdly, Christ himselfe pre­ferred the certainety of it to Moyses and the Prophets. If one should come from the dead and teach us. Luke 16. 31.

The Church of Rome then doth great wrong to Chri­stians; The Church is not the last resolution of our faith. when they would make the last ground and stay of Christian faith, to be the Church onely; But wee are built upon the foundation of the Prophets, and Apostles, Ephe. 2. 20. the Lord when he dwelt betweene the Che­rubims, he set the Candlesticke upon his right hand, and the table with the shewbread upon his left hand: to teach us, that the Scriptures are to be preferred still to the testimony of the Church; and that wee must rest upon their testimony primariò.

Whether is it an Article of our faith, to beleeve that Quest. the Scriptures are the Word of God or not?

Some things are both de fide, & de verbo fidei; as Ans. Christ is Emmanuel. Secondly, somethings are de ver­bo Somethings de fide & de verbo fidej, somethings de verbo fidej, but not de fide primario, some­things neither de fide neither de verbo fidej. fidei but not de fide primariò; as Paul left his cloake at Troas. Thirdly, somethings are de fide, but non de verbo [Page 63] fidei, which are the conclusions drawne from the cano­nicall word by consequence. And these are eyther drawne from the word generally; as this, that the Scrip­tures are the word of God. for this is evident from the whole word generally, and although this be a princi­ple in it selfe, which ought first to be beleeved; yet in my conception, and manner of taking up, it is a con­clusion arising from that majesty and Divine character which is in the word it selfe, or the particular conclu­sions drawne from the word. They are de fide, non de verbo fidei, as when a man concludeth, his owne parti­cular justification from the word; as I Iames am justi­fied, est de fide mea, and not a part of the canonicall word, but an application arising from it. Fourthly, something are neyther de fides nor de verbo fidei.

Secondly, we may answer to this: whether the word written be an article of our faith or not. The articles Articles of our faith, taken generally or spe­cially. of our faith are eyther taken generally, or specially: ge­nerally, for all that is contained in the Scriptures, or may be deduced by way of consequence from the Scrip­tures: then it is not an article of our faith, to beleeve the canon of the Scriptures. Secondly, specially for that which is contained in the Creede; for the Creede is the substance of that which is contained in the Scrip­tures; and then it is an article of our faith to be­leeve the Cannon of the Scriptures.

The Scriptures of God, are considered essentially, The Scriptures conside­red essentially or acci­dentally. or accidentally. Essentially, as they proceede from God; accidentally againe, as they were written by such and such men. As they proceede from God, we must beleeve them to be true, and to be the meanes of our salvation; for saving truth is onely from God. But if we consider them but accidentally, as they are written by such and such men, then it is not an article of our faith to beleeve them; for it maketh not to our [Page 64] salvation primariò, to know that they were written by such and such men.

When the books in holy Scripture, carry the names of those who wrote them; as the bookes of Moyses carrie his name; if a man should deny these bookes to be writ­ten by Moses, & then be ignorant altogether of the mat­ter contained in them; then his ignorance were damnable, and the denyall of them hereticall; they Ignorantia damnabilis negatio haretica. have Moses and the Prophets, Luk. 16.

But if the writer of the booke be not set downe in the Scripture; if a man should deny such a man to write it, he should not be reputed as an hereticke for that; and to be ignorant that such a man wrote it, this Negatia est haerètica per accidens sed igneratio non est damnabilis. were not damnable ignorance. Example, it is holden that Paul wrote the Epistle to the Hebrews; now if a man should deny that Paul wrote this Epistle, he were not to be holden a hereticke for that, neyther were his ignorance damnable. A man may be ignorant of this or that booke, and yet be saved, and many were saved before the bookes were written, and now many are saved who cannot reade the Scriptures.

But when a man doubteth of the order and number Ignorantia hic est infir­mitatis & negatio est hae­ritica per accidens. of the bookes in the Canon, this argueth but his un­skilfulnesse and infirmity, and the denyall of the num­ber and order of these bookes, is but hereticall by acci­dent, and the ignorance is not damnable.

When we beleeve such a booke to be written by such Quest. a man, whether beleeve we this by a justifying faith, or by an historicall faith?

When we beleeve that such a man wrote this booke, Ans. this is but an historicall faith, and this we have by the Church: but that which is dogmaticall in this booke, that we must beleeve out of the word it selfe; we being illuminate by the Spirit.

The conclusion of this is. Seeing God hath revealed Conclusi. [Page 65] his will in his word written to us, and remitted us al­wayes to the law and to the testimony, Esay 10. 8. Ioh. 5. 49. search the Scriptures: therefore those who leave the Scriptures, and make choyse of traditions; they for­sake the fonntaine of living waters, and digge Cisternes to themselves that can hold no water, Ier. 2. 13.

EXERCITAT. IX.

THe holy men of God, who were inspired by the holy Spirit to write the Scriptures: First they Prorogative. 1 were immediatly called by God. Gal. 1. 12. For the Gospel which I preached, I received it not of man, neyther was I taught but by the revelation of Iesus Christ, they had not their calling from man, but immediatly from God. They had their calling intuitu Ecclesiae, 1 Cor. 3. 2. sed non Voca­tio vel est intuitu ecclesiae.inter ventu eccle. interventu Ecclesiae: that is, God ordained these offices for the good of the Church, and it was for the Church cause that he appointed them; but they had not their calling from the Church: But Preachers now have their calling both intuitu Ecclesiae, & interventu Ecclesiae. There Immediata suppositi.virtutis. is immedietas ratione suppositi & immedietas ratione vir­tutis: the first is, when the person is immediatly sepa­rated by God to such a calling; the second is, when the graces and calling, are immediatly given by God. When Ministers are called, they have their gifts imme­diatly [Page 66] from God, and so they have their calling; there interveneth no suppositum, or midst betweene God and them: but for the appointing and designing of them to such places; that they have from the Church. But the Apostles were called immediatly, both ratione suppositi & vírtutis; they had their gifts immediatly from God, neyther were they designed to such and such plaees as the Ministers are now.

The Prophets and Apostles were immediatly called by God, and therefore Matthias was chosen by lot to be an Apostle, because the lot is immediatly directed by the hand of God; but Preachers now should not be chosen by lot. Zeno the Emperor tempted God in this case, laying a paper upon the Altar, that God might write in the paper the name of him, who should be Bi­shop of Constantinople: but Flavitius corrupting the Nicephorus, Lib. 2. Sexton of the Church, caused him to write in his name, and so was made Bishop of Constantinople.

But Moyses learned from the Egyptians, and Daniel from the Chaldeans: therefore it may seeme that they Object. had not their calling immediatly from God.

They had the learning of humane sciences and trades Answ. from men; as Paul learned from men to be a Tent ma­ker: The Apostles and Pro­phets learned their hu­mane Sciences and Artes from men but not their divine knowledge. so Moyses learned these humane sciences from the Egyptians, & Daniel from the Chaldeans; but their know­ledge, as Prophets & Apostles imediatly was frō God. Although they had their divine knowledge immediate­ly from God, yet they were to entertaine it by reading, Simile. As the fyre, that came from heaven upon the Altar The Prophets know. ledge was kept by rea­ding. Dan. 2. 9. and 1 Tim. 4. 13. was miraculous; yet when it was once kindled, they kept it in with wood, as wee doe our fire: So the Prophets knowledge was preserved by reading, as ours is.

Their second pretogative, was the measure of know­ledge Prerogative. 2 they had in matters Divine. Their knowledge far The measure of the Pro­phets and Aopostles knowledge. differed frō the knowledge of Christ; this was visio vni­onis, & this excelled the knowledge of all creatures, even [Page 67] of the Angels: this was not called prophesie, as he was comprehensor; but as he was viator here upon the earth, this his illumination is called Prophesie; he is called the great Prophet, Deut. 18. 15. and in this sort of knowledge hee excelled both men and Angels. Secondly, their knowledge differed from the knowledge of Angels, and the glorified Spirits: for prophesie as Peter saith, 2 Pet. 1. 19. is like a light shining in a darke place, but in Visio vnionisgloriaraptusprophetiae Heaven there is no darkenesse.

Thirdly, their knowledge differed from the know­ledge that Paul had, when he was taken up to the third heaven; and this was called visio raptus: their knowledge was farre inferiour to all these sorts of knowledge; but it farre exceeded all the knowledge that we have.

Whether had the Prophets of God, and the Secreta­ries Quest. of the holy Ghost; this their Prophesie, and divine knowledge, by way of habit or no? Answ.

They had not this gift of prophesie by way of habit, The Prophets had not the gift of prophesie by habite. as the children of God have their faith: and as Bezaliell and Aholiab, although they had their knowledge im­mediatly from God, to worke all curious workes in the Tabernacle; yet they kept still this their know­ledge as an ordinary habit; but this gift of prophesie, the Prophets had it not as a habit, but they had neede still of new illumination when they prophesied. Peter compareth prophesie to a light shining in a darke place, 2 Pet. 1. 19. how long continueth light in a darke house? no longer then a candle is there: so this coruscation, Simile. or glimpse of the Spirit, continued no longer with them; but when the Spirit was illuminating them, and teaching them: they had the gift of prophesie even as they had the gift of healing; but they could not heale when and where they pleased. Paul saith, I have left Trophimus sicke at Miletum, 2 Tim 4. 20. So they could not prophesie when and where they pleased, [Page 68] 2 King. 4. 27. The Lord hath hid it from me and hath not told it me, they had not this prophesie as a permanent habit; but as that, which was now and then revealed unto them. Ier. 42. 7. And it came to passe after ten dayes; here the Prophets behoved to attend, untill he got a new revelation from the Lord; and sometimes they waited longer, and sometimes shorter for this revela­tion.

How differed the Prophets then from other men, Quest. when they prophesied not?

First, yee shall see a difference betweene them and Ans. others who prophesied. Num. 17. It is sayd of those Prophets, prophetarunt & non addiderunt, that is, they Prophetia momentanea. prophesied but that day onely, that the Spirit came upon them, but never after; as the Hebrews expound it: but the Prophets of the Lord, prophesied often. So 2 King. 2. 3. The children of the Prophets came forth: they prophesied, but this gift of prophesie continu­ed not with them: but these Prophets of the Lord, often prophesied: And although they had not the habit of prophecie, yet they were separated by God for that purpose, to expect still for new illumination.

The third prerogative, which the holy men of God had, was this, that they could not erre in their writing, Prorogat. 3 [...]. 2 Pet. 1. 21. The holy men of God spake as they were inspi­red by the holy Ghost, Matth. 10: 2. Luk. 21. 15. Luk. 1. 17. The Peophets erred not in writing the Scrip­tures. therefore the Prophets were called, the mouth of God, Luk. 1. 70. Ier. 15. 19. thou shalt be as my mouth. Hee spake not onely by their mouthes, but also they were The Prophets are called the mouth of God. his mouth. And contrary to this is that lieing Spirit in the mouth of the false Prophets. 1 King. 22. 22.

The secretaries of the holy Ghost, erred sometimes in some of their purposes, and in some circumstances Wherein the Prophets and Apostles erred. of their calling; but in the doctrine it selfe they never erred. Peter in the transfiguration, knew not what hee [Page 69] sayd, Luk. 9. 33. David was minded to build an house to God, he asked of Nathan if he should doe so, 1 Chro. 17. 2. Nathan sayd to him; doe what is in thine heart. So when Eliab stood before Samuel, 1 Sam. 16. 6. Samuel sayd: surely the Lords annointed is before me. So the Di­sciples erred in their counsell, which they gave to Paul, forbidding him to goe up to Ierusalem, Act. 21. 4. But the spirit of God, taught the contrary by Agabus, vers. 17. David Psal. 116. sayd in his hast, that all men are lyars: he meant, that Samuel the man of God had made a lye to him; because hee thought the promise too long defferred in getting of the kingdome. So when he wrote a letter to Ioab with Vriah, in this he was not Gods secretary, but the Divels. But as they were the secretaries of God, and spake by divine inspiration, they could not erre.

But it may seeme, that all which they wrote in holy Object. Scriptures, was not done by divine inspiration: for Paul wrote that he would come to Spaine, Rom. 15. 24. and yet he never came to Spaine.

We must distinguish betweene their purposes exter­nall, Answ. and their doctrine: they might erre in these ex­ternall purposes, and resolutions; but all which they wrote of Christ, and matters of salvation, was yea and Amen, 2 Cor. 1. 20. He wrote that he was purposed to come to Spaine, and so he was; but he was let, that he could not come.

But Paul repented that he wrote the Epistle to the Object. Corinthians to grieve them, 2 Cor. 7. 8. If this was writ­ten by the inspiration of the holy Ghost, why did he repent of it?

Paul wrote this Epistle to humble them, and when Answ. he saw them excessively sorrowfull, that was the thing that greeved him; but it greeved him not simply that he wrote to them to humble them. When a Chyrur­gian [Page 70] commeth to cure a wounded man, he putteth the Simile. poore patient to great paine, and maketh him to cry out, that grieveth him; but it greeveth him not when he cureth him: So it repented not Paul, that he had writ­ten to the Corinthians; but it repented him to see them so swallowed up with greefe.

But if the Scriptures be Divinely inspired, how say Object. they, Iud. 16. 17. there were about three thousand upon the roofe of the house. So Act. 2. 40. and that day there were added to the Church, about three thousand soules. Is not the number of all things, certainely knowne to God?

The Scriptures set downe the number that way: be­cause Answ. it is little matter, whether we know the number or not. And secondly, the Lord speaketh to us this way in the Scripture after the manner of men.

Peter erred in a matter of faith, Gal. 2. 14. Object.

The error was not in the substance, but in the cir­cumstance of the fact: and where it is sayd, Gal. 2. 14. Ans. Wherein Peter erred. That Peter walked not uprightly, according to the Gospel; it is to be understood onely of his conversation; hee erred here onely, in this principle of Christian Religi­on; not walking according to his knowledge, but hee erred not in his writing.

All men are subject to error, the Prophets and Apo­stles Ob. are men, therefore subject to error.

The Prophets and Apostles are considered as members Ans. of the Church, and so they might erre; and they pray The Apostles conside­red two manner of wayes. as other men, Lord forgive us our sinnes. Secondly, they are considered according to their functions and immediate calling; and then they were above the Church, and could not erre.

What needed Nathan to be sent to David to attend Quest. him continually, one Prophet to another?

Although one Prophet stood not in need of another; Answ. yet he who was both a King and a Prophet had neede [Page 71] of a Prophet to admonish him: for Kings stand in slip­pery places, and have neede of others to advertise them.

The Prophets, as they were Prophets, could not erre; therefore, that collection of the Iewes, is most impious: they say that David wished to the sonnes of Ioab foure things, 2 Sam. 3. 29. First that some of them might dye by the sword. Secondly, that some of them might dye of the bloody flixe. Thirdly, that some of them might leane upon a staffe. And fourthly, that some of them might begge their bread. And so they say, it befell Davids posterity, for his sinfull wish. One of them leaned upon a staffe, Asa was goutish. One of his posterity was killed by the sword, as Iosias. One of them dyed of the flixe, as Rehoboam. And one of them beg'd his bread, as Iehojachim. But this collection is most impious; for David spake not here by a private spirit of revenge, but as a Prophet of God: and there­fore when they assigne these to be the causes, why these judgements befell Davids posterity; they assigne that for a cause, which was not a cause.

The fourth prerogative, they were holy men. Holi­nesse Prerogat. 4 distinguished them from those Prophets which were profane and unsanctified; who had the gift of The pen-men of the holy Ghost, were holy men. illumination, but not of sanctification: the Lord made choyse of none such to be his secretaries, who were not sanctified. The Lords Prophet is called vir spiritus, the man of the Spirit, Hos. 9. 7. because he is ruled, and guided by the holy Spirit, that he become not profaine. If the very women, who spun the curtaines to the Ta­bernacle were wise hearted, Exod. 35. 25. Much more will the Lord have those, who are to build his house; wise and holy men. Those who translated the Bible into Greeke, yee shall see how often they changed their faith, and were turne-coates: Aquila of a Christian [Page 72] he became a Iew. Symmachus was first a Samaritane, and then he became halfe Iew, halfe Christian. Then Theodoton, first he was a fllower of Tatianus the here­ticke, and then he became a Marcionite, and thirdly he became a Iew. But the Prophets of God, after they were called, continued holy men, and never fell backe againe.

God will have no man, but holy men to be his secreta­ries, See more of Salomon in the Politiks. Luk. 1. 70. As he spake by the mouth of his holy Prophets. Therefore Salomon being a Prophet, and one of Gods secretaries, behoved to be a holy man; and being holy he could not be a reprobate: hence he is called Iedidiah, The beloved of God, 2. Sam. 12. 25. and whom God loveth, he loveth to the end.

The holy men of God wrote as they were [...], inspired by God, the Spirit inlightned them, and di­rected [...]. them when they wrote: they were inspired three Illu­mi­nati antecedenter.per concomitantiāsubsequenter. manner of wayes, first, antecedenter. Secondly, per con­comitantiam; and thirdly, subsequenter.

First, they were illuminate antecedenter: when the Lord revealed things to come to his Prophets, and made them to write his prophesies; then their tongue, was the pen of a swift writer, Psal. 45. 1. That is, he not onely indited these prophesies unto them; but also ruled them so, and guided them in writing; even as a master guideth the hand of a young child, when he is learning to write.

Secondly, he inspired them in writing the Histories and Actes, after another manner per concomitantiam: for that which was done already, hee assisted them so in writing it downe; that they were able to discerne the re­lations which they had from others, to be true: as Luke knew [...], accurately the truth of these things, which How Luke differed frō Tertius and Baruch. he had from those, who had heard and seene Christ: and he made [...], a perfect declaration of them. [Page 73] There was a great difference betwixt him and Tertius, who was Pauls Scribe, and wrote out his Epistles, Rom. 16. 22. or betwixt him and Baruch, who was Ieremies Scribe, Ier. 38. they were not [...] the secretaries of the holy Ghost, but [...] discribebant ab alio, they wrote onely these things which Ieremiah and Paul indi­ted to them; neyther was sanctification required in them, as they were their Scribes. But the Evangelists who saw not Christ, yet they were the Secretaries of the holy Ghost, and holy men; as they were his Se­cretaries, and directed by him to write.

Thirdly, he assisted them in writing subsequentèr; the holy Ghost revealed things to the Prophets long be­fore; but when they were to write these things, the spirit of the Lord brought the same things to their me­morie againe; and indited these things unto them which they had seene before in vision. Ier. 36. 2. Take thee a roule, and write therein all the words that I have spo­ken to thee, against Israel and against Iuda, and against all the Nations; from the day that I spake to thee, even from the dayes of Iosias, unto this day. So Ioh. 14. 26. the comfor­ter which is the holy Ghost whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all thing, and bring all things to your memory which I have told you.

These Secretaries of the holy Ghost, when they wrote, habebant libertatam exercitij, sed non specificationis, Libertas exercitijspecificationis as they say in the Schooles, they were not like Blockes or Stones, but the Lord inclined their wills freely to write: which putteth a difference betwixt them, and A difference betwixt the Prophets of God and the Sybiles, or Pro­phets of the devill. the Sybils, and other Prophets of the Divell, who were blasted, and distracted in their wits, when they prophesied. When Elisha sent one of the children of the Prophets, to annoynt Iehu; one sayd to him, where­fore commeth this madde fellow, 2 King. 9. 11? they tooke the Prophets to be madde, like unto the Heathish Pro­phets, [Page 74] but they were inlightened by the Spirit when they prophesied, and the Lord rectified their under­standing, and tooke not away from them the right use of their will. It is sayd of Saul, when he prophesied, that the evill spirit of Lord came upon him, 1 Sam. 18. 10. And the Chaldie Paraphrast paraphraseth it, caepit furere, he began to be mad: the Divell stopping the pas­sages of his body, he wrought upon his melancholious humor, which is called Esca diaboli, the Divels baite; and then it is sayd, ijthnabbe, impulit se ad prophetandum, which is never spoken of the true Prophets in this Con­jugation. [...]

Although the Lords Secretaries had libertatem ex­ercitij, yet they had not libertatem specificationis; that is, they might not leave that subject which they were called to write, and write any other thing, as they plea­sed; they were necessitated onely to write that, al­though they wrote it freely.

Againe, these men when they wrote as the holy Ghost enspired them, they did it not with paine and The Prophts did not write with paine and studie. study, as we doe; but it came freely from them with­out any paine or vexation of their spirit. The Princes when they heard Baruch read the prophesie of Ieremiah, after that it was endited, they asked how did he write all these words at his mouth? and Baruch answered them, He pro­nounced all these words to me with his mouth, and I wrote them with inke into the Booke, Iere. 36. 17. 18. Salomon saith, Eccles. 12. 12. In making many bookes and in reading there is much wearinesse of the flesh, but this was no wea­rinesse to them; for they wrote this without any paine or labour: and hence it followeth, that those to whom their writing hath beene troublesome and painfull, have not beene the Secretaries of the holy Ghost; as Mac. 2. 26. He that assayed to abbridge the five Bookes of Iason sayd, that it was not an easie thing, to make this abridge­ment; [Page 75] but it required both sweate and labon.

Seeing all that wrote the holy Scriptures were en­spired Quest. by the holy Ghost; why was this Epithete ap­propriate Why was Iohn called a Divine. [...]. to Iohn, to be called a Divine, Revela. 1. 1. For they were all Divines who wrote the holy Scrip­tures?

The Greeke Fathers, when they spake of Christ, Answ. and specially Chrysostome, they distinguish betweene Quomodo differunt [...] & [...] [...], & [...], and they say, Apud caeteros aeco­nomiae fulmen, sed apud Iohannem theologiae tonitrua ex­tare. The rest when they discribe the humanity of Christ, they doe it [...]; but when Iohn discribeth the Divinity of Christ, hee doth it [...]; and they say Mattheus [...] & Iohannes [...], incipit

Observe a difference betwixt these speeches. The The Lord came to the wicked, but the word of the Lord came to his Prophets. Word of the Lord came to Esay, to Ieremiah; and this phrase: The Lord came to Balaam, to Abimelech, to Laban. The first signifieth, that the Lord put these holy men in trust with his Word to be his Prophets; but he never concredited his word to these prophaine wretches: therefore it is sayd onely, He came to them, but never the Word of the Lord came to them. Hee concredited his Word to his Prophets, as to Esay, and Ieremiah [...], that is, as a pupill is concredited to the trust of his Tutor; but he never concredited his Word to these wretches.

The Lord spake in his Prophets, Hosea 1. 1. The Spirit [...] Notat internam revelationem. of the Lord spake in me, that is, inwardly revealed his se­crets to me. Marke a difference betwixt these two phrases, Loqui in aliquo, & Loqui in aliquem.

Loqui in aliquo, is when the Spirit of the Lord spea­keth inwardly to the Prophets; sed Loqui in aliquem est Loqui in alique & loqui in aliquem vt differunt. maledicere, to raile against him: thus Num. 12. Miriam loquuta est in Mosem, id est, maledixit Mosi.

The conclusion of this is, Matth. 10. 20. It is not yee Conclusion. that speake, but the Spirit of our Father which speaketh in you. So it was not they who wrote, but the Spirit of the Lord in them. 2 King. 13. When Ioash the King of Israel tooke a Bow in his hand, Elisha laid his hands upon the Kings hands, and Elisha bad him shoote; and he sayd, the Arrow of the Lords deliverance and the Arrow of the deliverance from Syria; it was not the Kings hand that directed the Arrow here, but it was the hand of the Prophet laid upon the Kings hand which gave this mighty blow: so it was the hand of the Lord laid upon the hands of his Secretaries, which directed them to write the holy Word of God.

EXERCITAT. IX.

THe Testimonies which prove the Scriptures to be Divine, are first, the Testimonie of God himselfe when he approved them by his Spirit, and when they were laid before him, by Vrim and Thummim. Se­condly, arguments drawne out of the Scriptures them­selves. Thirdly, the Testimonie of the Church. Fourth­ly, the Testimonie of those who were without the Church, Deus testatur, Scriptura contestatur, & Ecclesia subtestatur.

God beareth witnesse to the Scriptures two wayes, Deus testatur. First, by the internall Testimony of his Spirit. Second­ly, by his externall Testimony.

When the Spirit testifieth unto us such Bookes to be Quest. his Word, whether is this a publike or a private Te­stimony?

This is a publike Testimony, which the Spirit Testi­fieth Ans. to the whole Church, and to the severall mem­bers of it, that these Bookes are holy Scripture: for the same Spirit which endited the Scriptures to the Church, testifieth still to the Church, and to the par­ticular members thereof; that the Scriptures are the Word of God.

The second Testimony which God gave to the Scrip­tures, was his externall testimony given by Vrim and Thummim, testifying these Bookes of Moyses and the Prophets, to be the holy Scriptures.

What are we to thinke of these Bookes, written and Quest. set in order after the captivitie, seeing they had not the approbation of the Lord by Vrim and Thum­mim?

These Bookes were called Ketubhim, written Bookes, Answ. to put a difference betweene them, and these Bookes [...] which were confirmed by Vrim and Thummim: they who wrote these Bookes were inspired by the holy Ghost as well as these who wrote the former; and they were confirmed by the masters of the great Synagogue, [...] a radice such as were Esdras Zacharie and Malachie. The Greekes called these Bookes [...]: and the Iewes [...] abscondere. distinguish them still, frō the Apocryphall Bookes cal­led [...]. Gannazim abscinditi, and the Greekes called them [...], Bookes of whose authority it was still doubted.

Reasons taken out of the Scriptures themselves pro­ving them to be Divine; the first reason is taken from Reason. 1 the antiquity of the Scriptures: all this time was tempus Scriptura contesta­tur. [...] to the heathen, that is, it was an hid or an un­knowne time to them. After the flood, the Scriptures [Page 87] goe on, and they set downe to us the history of the Church: but the Heathen history is Tempus [...], or fabulosum; as that which we reade of Hercules, and Tempus [...] [...]Historicum. Prometheus: and nothing is set downe in the Heathen history before the Olympiads of the Graecians, which was but in the dayes of Vzziah. See how farre Gods Word exceedeth humane history, in antiquity; It beginneth with the world and endeth with it, Luk. 1. 70. as he spake by the mouth of his holy Prophets, which have beene since the world began.

Secondly, the matter contained in the Scriptures shew­eth Reason 2 them to be Divine. Many histories shew us the hea­vy wrath of God upon man for sinne; yet the Scriptures only shew us morbum, medicinam, & medicum, it sheweth us both the sicknesse, the physicke, and the Physitian to cure it.

Thirdly, the Scripture setteth downe things necessa­ry Reason. 3 onely for our salvation, and nothing for our curio­sity. The Scriptures not written to satisfie mens curiosity. It is often repeated in the Bookes of the Kings and Chronicles. The rest are they not written in the Bookes of the Chronicles, of the Kings of Iuda and Israel, So Ester. 10. 2. The rest are they not written in the Bookes of the Kings of Persia. The holy Ghost would meete here with the curious desires of men, who desire still to know more and more, and to reade pleasant discour­ses, to satisfie their humours: as if the Spirit of God should say; I have sufficiently told you here of the Kings of Iuda and Israel, and of Persia, and so farre as concerneth the Church, and may serve for your edifi­cation: it is not my manner to satisfie your curiositie, if ye would know more, go to your owne Scrowles and Registers; where yee shall finde matter enough to passe the time with. To bee short, the Scriptures are not given to passe the time with, but to redeeme the time.

Fourthly, the prophesies set downe in the holy Reason 4 Scriptures shew them to be Divine, for they distinguish the Lord from all the Idols of the Gentiles, and the Divels themselves, Esa. 41. 22. Let them shew the former things what they be, that we may consider them and set our hearts upon them: and shew us the things that are to Renunciare proet [...]rita anunei are presentia p [...]enunciare futura. come hereafter, that we may know that yee are Gods. Here the Prophet distinguisheth the true God from the false Gods, and true prophesies from false: If they could tell of things by-past, and relate them from the begin­ning and joyne them with the things to come; then he would confesse that they were Gods, and that their pro­phesies were true. To tell of things past is not in respect of time; for the Angels and Divels can tell things fal­len out from the beginning of time: but it is in respect of the things themselves, when they tooke beginning, & this is onely proper to God, Psal. 139. 16. In thy Booke all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there were none of them. Hee can joyne things by-past with things that are to follow; and can tell certainely of things to come. There is a twofold beginning of things. The first is, exordium rei: The second is, exordium temporis. The Angels know ex­ordium Exordium temporis rei. temporis, but not exordium rei; for the Lord one­ly knoweth things before the foundation of the world was laid, Ephe. 1. 4. He who knoweth certainely the be­ginning of things, can onely certainely fortell the event of things, as though they were present, Hos. 12. 4. hee wept and made supplication to him: he found him in Bethel, and there he spake with us. Here the thing past, he apply­eth to the generation which was present, because hee knew exordium rei.

The plaine, and cleare manner of setting downe the Scriptures, sheweth them to be Divine, Esa. 8. 1. Take Reason 5 a great roule, and write in it with a mans pen, Behheret enosh. [...] [Page 80] That is cleerely, that the simplest amongst the children of men may understand it, Deut. 30. 11. This commande­ment which I command thee this day, is not hidden from thee, neyther is it farre off: In the Hebrew it is, Lo niphleeth, non [...] separatum a te, that is, it is not separated from thy know­ledge, that thou cannot understand it: and it is not farre from thee, for these things which are obscure and doubtfull which we cannot take up, are sayd to be farre from us; these things which wee understand againe are sayd to be neare us, Rom. 10. 8.

But it may be sayd that there are many things hard in Ob. the Scriptures, and cannot well be taken up.

We must distinguish these three, the obscurity in the Ans. things themselves, the perspicuity in the midsts as they are set downe, and thirdly, the dulnesse of our Obscu­rita [...] est vel [...]n rebus ipsis.modo tradendi.conceptione. conception to take them up. There are many matters handled in the Scripture, which are hard to be under­stood, and we are dull in conception to take up these things; yet they are clearely and plainely set downe in the word. Christ sheweth all these three, Ioh. 3. 12. If I have told you earthly things, and yee beleeve not: how shall yee beleeve if I tell you of heavenly things. If I have told you earthly things, that is, illustrated heavenly things to you by earthly comparisons; here is Christs plaine manner in setting downe his word. And yee beleeve not; here is our dulnesse in taking up these things which are plainely set downe. How shall yee beleeve if I shall tell you of heavenly things, here is the obscurity of the heavenly matters contained in the Scriptures. The Church of Rome confoundeth still these three, Obscuritas rei, & no­stri conceptus, cum perspicuo modo tradendi, the obscurity in the matter the dulnesse of our conception, with the cleare manner of manifestation of these things in the Scriptures.

The Heavenly consent and agreement, amongst the Reason 6 [Page 81] writers of the holy Scriptures, sheweth them to be Di­vine. There were in the Church Patriarches Prophets The agreement of the writers of the holy Scriptures. and Apostles: Amongst the Patriarches Abraham was the cheefe; therefore the revelations made to the rest of the Patriarches, as to Isaack and to Iacob, had al­wayes relation, to the promises made to Abraham. Amongst the Prophets Moyses was the cheefe, and therefore all the Prophets grounded themselves upon Moyses. And upon the revelations made to the Apo­stles, the faith of the Church is grounded, under the New Testament: and yee shall never finde any contra­dictions amongst these holy writers; there may seeme some contradiction amongst them, but indeed there is none. Epiphanius useth a good comparison to this purpose: when a man, saith he, is drawing water out Simile. of a deepe Well with two Vessels of a different metall; the water at the first seemeth to be of a different colour; but when he draweth up the Vessels nearer to him, this Although there seeme some contradiction in the Scriptures, we should labour to reconcile them. diversity of colours vanisheth, and the waters appeare both of one colour, and when we taste them, they have but one relish. So saith he, although at the first, there seeme some contradiction in the holy Scrip­tures, yet when we looke nearer and nearer unto them, wee shall finde no contrarietie in them, but a perfect harmonie. When we see the Heathen history, or Apo­cryphall Bookes contradicting the holy History, wee should stand for the holy Scriptures against them: but when wee see any appearance of contradiction in the Scriptures, we should labour to reconcile them: when Moyses saw an Aegyptian and an Israelite striving toge­ther; he killed the Aegyptian, and saved the Israelite, Exod. 2. 12. But when be saw two Israelits striving to­gether, he laboured to reconcile them, saying, yee are brethren why doe yee strive. So when we see the Apo­cryphall Bookes, or heathen History, to contradict the [Page 82] Scriptures, we should kill the Aegyptian and save the Israelite. Example, Iacob cursed Simeon and Levi, for murthering of the Sichemites, Gen. 49. 7. but Iudith bles­sed Simeon for killing of them, Iudith 9. So Ieremiah saith, they shall returne in the third generation, Ier. 27. 7. but Baruch saith, they shall returne in the seventh ge­neration Baruch, 6. here let us kill the Aegyptian but save the Israelite: but when wee see any appearance of contradiction in the holy Scriptures, wee should labour to reconcile them, because they are breth­ren.

The heavenly order set downe in the Scriptures Reason 7 showeth them to be divine; there is in the Scriptures, Ordo naturae, Ordo conjugalis thori, Ordo historiae, & Ordo dignitatis; all these the Scriptures marke, and for sundry Ordo natura.conjugalis thori.historiae.dignitatis. reasons setteth one before another: and although there be not prius & posterius in Scriptura (as the Iewes say) in respect of the particular occasions, yet there is still prius & posterius in respect of the generall end of the history. First, in setting downe the Patriarches, it ob­serveth ordinem naturae, as they were borne; as Ruben in the first place, because he was the first borne; and then Simeon, thirdly Levi, and fourthly Iudah, &c. Se­condly, The Tribes are set downe sometimes ac­cording to their nativi­ty, and sometimes as they were borne of free women. there is Ordo conjugalis thori, according to their birthes, and so the free womens sonnes, are set first in the Brestplate of Aaron, Exod. 28. Thirdly, there is Ordo dignitatis, as Sem is placed before Iaphet for dignitie, although he was younger. So the Scripture else where observeth this order, Matth. 13. He bringeth fourth new and old, & Ephe. 2. Apostles and Prophets. So the Scripture observeth the order of history, Matth. 1. 1. The Booke of the generation of Iesus Christ, the Sonne of David the Sonne of Abraham. why is Abraham put last after Da­vid? because the history is to begin at him. So 1 Chro. 3. 5. Salomon is placed last amongst his brethren, because [Page 83] the history was to begin at him: and if we shall marke the heavenly order that is amongst the Evangelists, they The heavenly order a­mongst the Evange­lists shew the Scrip­tures to be Divine. will show us that the Scriptures are divine. Marke be­ginneth at the workes of Christ. Matthew ascendeth higher, to the birth of Christ. Luke goeth higher, to the conception of Christ, and Iohn goeth highest of all, to the divinity of Christ and his eternall generation. Who would not admire here, the steps of Iacobs hea­venly ladder, ascended from Ioseph to Adam, and from Adam to God.

The matter contained in the Scriptures, shewes them Reason. 8 to be divine, and to make a wonderfull change in man, which no other booke can doe, Iam. 4. 6. The spirit in us lusteth after envie, yet the Scriptures offer more grace, The Scriptures offer grace to resist sinne. that is, the Scriptures offer grace and ability to doe more, then nature can doe: Nature cannot heale a Spirit, that lusteth after envie, or after money or after uncleanesse; but the Scriptures offer more grace to overcome any of these sinnes, be they never so strong. The Law of the Lord is perfect converting the soule, Psal. 19. 17. when it is dead in sinne, it quickneth and reviveth it againe; and when it is decayed in grace, it The Word of God is a restorer of the spi­rituall life. restoreth it againe, even as Boaz is sayd to be a resto­rer of the life of Naomi, and a nurisher of her old age, Ruth 4. 15.

The rubukes and threatnings of the holy Ghost in Reason 9 the Scriptures, fall never to the ground in vaine, but take alwayes effect, when people stand out against them. And as Ionathans bow did never turne backe, and the Sword of Saul never returned empty, 2 Sam. 1. 22. So the Arrowes of the King are sharpe to pierce his ene­mies, Psal 45. 5.

Ioh. 10. 35. The Scriptures cannot be broken, the argu­ments Reason 10 set downe in the Scripture, are so strong; that all the heretickes in the world could never breake them, [Page 84] and they stand like a brasen wall against all oppositions; therefore the Lord challengeth men to bring forth their strongest reasons, Esa. 41. 21. produce your cause saith the Lord, bring forth your strong reasons saith the King of Iacob.

The Church is the Pillar of Truth, shee holdeth out Ecclesia subtestatur. the Truth to be seene, shee expoundeth and interpret­eth the Scriptures; yet her testimony in but an inducing testimony, and not a perswading testimony: shee can teach the Truth, but shee cannot seale up the truth in our hearts, and make us to beleeve the Truth of the Scripture. Her testimony is but in actu exercito, but non Actus exercitus.signatus. signato. Her testimony is informativum, sen directivum, it informeth and directeth us, sed non certificativum & terminativum fidei; that is, shee cannot perswade us of the Truth by her Testimony.

Testimonies of these also, who are without the Church prove the Scriptures to be Divine, and these are of two sorts; eyther Heretickes, or Infi­dels.

First, the testimonies of Heretickes prove the Scrip­tures Hereticks prove the Scripture to be Divine, ex accidente. to be Divine; for Heretickes labour alwayes to ground themselves upon the Scriptures. The habite goeth alwayes before the privation, & omne falsum in­nititur vero, every falshood laboureth to cover it selfe under the Truth. When the Husbandman had sowne his good seede, then came the evill one and did sow his Tares: when Heretickes labour to ground themselves upon the Scriptures; it is, as when a theefe goeth to cover himselfe under the pretence of Law. This argu­eth the Law to be just and equall. The testimonies also of the Heathen history proveth the Scriptures to be Divine. Observe the discent of the Babylonian and Assyrian Kings, and looke backe againe to the holy Scriptures: yee shall see clearely, how they jumpe with [Page 85] the Scriptures: and as those who sayle along the Coast, have a pleasant view of the Land; but those who stand Simile. upon the Land, and behold the Shippes sayling along the Coast, have a more setled and pleasant sight of the Succession of Heathen Kings proved out of the Scripture. Shippes: so when we looke from the Heathen history, and marke the discent of the Heathen Kings, wee shall see a pleasant sight: but a farre more delectable and sure sight, when we looke from the Scriptures, to the Heathen history. Marke the discent; Belochus the third called Pul King of Assyria came against Menahem, and tooke his sonne, 2 King. 15. Then Pileser called Tiglath, came against Hoshea, King of Samaria, and tooke him in the sixt yeare of the reigne of King Ezekias: and then Shalmaneser, who caried away the ten Tribes into cap­tivity, in the ninth yeare of Hoshea, 2 King. 17. and his sonne Sennacherib, 2 King. 18. came against Iuda, in the foureteenth yeare of Zedekias, and Esarhaddon succee­ded his father Sennacherib, and his sonne Berodach-bala­don, sent letters and a present to Hezekias, then Be­rodach, 2 Chro. 33. caried away Iechonias, and then Nebu­chadnezzer caried away Zedekias; then Nabuchadnezzer the great, burnt Ierusalem, and caried away the people captive. Then Evil Merodach, who succeeded him had three sonnes, Ragasar, Babasar and Belshassar, of whom we reade Dan. 5. and in Belshassers time, the kingdome was translated to the Medes and Persians. Here we see the descent of the Heathen history, agreeing with the holy Scriptures.

There are other testimonies of the Heathen, to prove How the Heathen testimonies prove the Scriptures to be divine. the Scripture to be Scripture, but not so clearely; when we finde the rubbish of some old monuments, wee ga­ther that there hath beene some great building there: So when we finde some darke footesteps of holy Scrip­ture amongst the Heathen, we may gather, that once the holy Scriptures▪ have beene read amongst them, [Page 86] although they have depraved and corrupted them.

Example 1. They of the East Indians have this fa­ble Montan. in his Essayes. amongst them, that the Gods drowned the world for sinne, and that they tooke some just men, and put them up in the clifts of Rockes, to save them: those men to try whether the waters were abated or not; sent forth some mastive Dogges, and the Dogges returning as cleane as they went out; they gathered by this, that the waters were not yet abated: they sent them forth the second time, then they returned full of mudde, by this they gathered that the waters were abated: then they sent them forth the third time and they returned no more. Here we see how this fable is taken out of the history of the deluge, and from Noahs sending forth the Dove out of the Arke; and that this history was knowne of old amongst the Heathen, we may per­ceive because the Dove and the Raven are called the messengers of the Gods, by the Heathen Po­ets.

Example 2. Gen. 36. 24. This is Anah who found out [...] Hajemim mules, in the Wildernesse, others reade it Iamin [...] waters: now because it was hard to finde out the right translation of the word, some translating it Mules, and some translating it Water: the Heathen made up a no­table lye on the Iewes, saying; when Anah was feeding his Asses in the Wildernesse, because the Mules and Asses found out water in the Wildernesse for them to Tacitus. lib. 5. Plutarch. in symposiasis. 4. cap. 5. drinke, therefore the Iewes worshipped the golden head of an Asse: see how some shaddow of holy histo­story was still amongst the Heathen.

Example 3. When the destroying Angell destroyed the first borne of their children, & beasts in Aegypt, the Lord caused to sprinkle the blood of the paschall Lamb, upon the Lintels of the doores, that so their first borne might be saved, Exod. 12. 13. Epiphanius re­cordeth Epipha. contra hareses. lib. 18. [Page 87] that the Egyptians afterwards, although they had forgotten the history of the worke of God, yet they rub'd over their Cattell with a red sort of Keill, to save them that no evill should befall them that yeare, ignorantly counterfeitting that blood, which saved the Israelites once in Egypt: which fable letteth us to under­stand, that this Scripture was once taught amongst them.

Example 4. Plato did hold that in the revolution of so many yeares, men should be just in the same estate, wherein they were before; which is drawne obscurely from the resurrection, when we shall be in [...], as we were in [...] Matth. 19. 28.

Example 5. Clemens Alexandrinus and Basill note, The Heathen grounded many of their fables up­on the Scriptures. that the Heathen Philosophers did make their fables, counterfeitting the Scriptures; and founded their false­hoods upon the truth of God, that men might give cre­dit to their lies: as upon this, Ionas was swallowed up by the Whale; they made up this fable of Arion, sit­ting upon a Delphin, and playing upon an harpe, and a thousand such. Conclusion.

The Conclusion of this is. Seeing the Scriptures are Divine, we must pray with David, Psal. 119. 18. open thou mine eyes, that I may behold the wondrous things out of thy Law in the originall it is, Devolue ab oculis meis [...] velamen, scilicet, caliginis, and let us be diligent sear­chers and dwell in them, as Paul biddeth Timothy, [...] Panormitan writeth of Alphonsus King of Arragon, that in the midst of all his princely affayres, hee read over the Bible fourteene times, with the glosse and commentaries upon it. The Iewes say, let a man divide his life in three parts; a third part for the Scriptures, a third part for mishneth, and a third part for gemara, [...] that is, two for the Talmud, and one for the Scriptures, see how well they were exercised in reading of the Law.

EXERCITAT. X.

THe Old Testament was written originally in He­brew, and the New Testament in Greeke.

The Character, in which the Old Testament was In what character the Scriptures were writ­ten at the first. written first, was the Samaritane Character; It was cal­led the Samaritane Character, not because the Samari­tans used it first, but because it was left to the Samari­tans after the Iewes refused it.

This Samaritane Character was the first Character as may be seene by the inscriptions upon their shekels set Why called the Sama­ritane character. downe by Arius Montanus, Beza, and Willet upon Ezekiel. And sundry of the Iewes ancient monuments have these letters upon them.

The Character at the first was the Iewes and not the Samaritans, as is proved by the inscriptions of the she­kels. The inscriptions upon the Shekels, shew the Sa­maritane character to be the first. The inscription is this, Ierusalem hakkodesh; but no Samaritan would have put this inscription upon it: for they hated Ierusalem and the Iewes, therefore this in­scription must bee the Iewes, and not the Samari­tans.

Secondly, most of these ancient shekels are found about Ierusalem, therefore the shekel and letters upon it, The Iewes kept the Samaritane character in the captivitie. was at the first the Iewes, and not the Samaritans.

This Samaritane Character the Iewes kept still, in the time of the captivity, when Belshasser saw fingers wri­ting upon the wall, Mene mene tekel, &c. Dan. 5. 25. These [Page 89] Characters were the Samaritan Characters: therefore the Babylonians could not reade them; because they knew not that Character; neyther could the Iewes un­derstand the matter although they knew the letters: to the Babylonians, it was like a sealed booke; and to the Iewes it was like an open booke, to an unlearned man; because they understood it not, Esa, 29. 11. But Daniel read it and understood it, both because he knew the let­ters, and also understood the Chaldee tongue.

Esdras changed this Character after the captivity, Hieron. in [...]erfat. lib. regune. and left it Idiotis, to the Samaritans: and he set downe this new Character, which before was the Chaldee, Character.

The reason why he changed it, was this, because be­ing long in the captivitie, they forgot their owne lan­guage, that they could neyther reade it rightly, nor write it rightly: and therefore he changed the Chara­cters, in these which we have now.

But the ancient Samaritan Character seemeth to bee Why Esdras changed the Character. kept still in Lamina sacerdotali, in the plate of Gold which was upon the forehead of the Highpriest, after the captivity; for they might change none of the or­naments of the Highpriest. So neyther that which was written upon the plate of Gold, Kokesh Laihova, ho­linesse to the Lord: because the Lord commanded these cloathes and ornaments, to be made for him, and his seede after him, Exod. 28. 43.

The New Testament was written originally in the Greeke Character; and there were two translations of it, Syriacke and Arabicke; the Syriacke was written in the Syriacke Character, which differed much from that, which is called Alphabetum Salomonis, or the Character which Salomon found out. This Character Pineda setteth downe in his booke De rebus Salomonis. These diverse Characters may be seene setdowne here, as followeth.

• [Page 91] [...]
  • Character
    • Antiquier Mo­sis sive Sama­ritanorum.
    • Recentior Sa­maritanorum
    • Hebraeorum sive Mer [...]bha Ezrae recen­tior.
    • Chaldaeorum antiquorum nunc Rabbino­rum.
    • Antiquorum Arabum, seu Alphabetum Salomonis.
    • Arabum Recentior.
    • Syrorum.
    • Graecorum.
• [...]
• [...]
• [...]
• [...]
• [...]
• [...]
• [...]

The Old Testament was originally written in the Hebrew tongue, and some of it in the tongues derived from the Hebrew, as Chaldee.

We may know the Hebrew was the first originall tongue; because it hath fewest Radicall letters: what­soever tongue is derived from thence, it addeth some letters to the first originall; as from the Hebrew word Galal, commeth Golgotha the Syriacke word. So Gabba­tha Bethsaida, from Gabha and Chased. Secondly, that language which the Lord spake, to Adam, Abraham and Moyses, and they to him, must be the originall language. But God spake to them in the Hebrew, and he wrote the two Tables with his owne hand in this language. And thirdly, that language which expres­seth the nature, of things, and their affections most clearely, and in fewest words; that must be the ori­ginall language: but the Hebrew doth this; therefore it is the first language.

These tongues which were Propagines and Dialects of The Iewes understood these tongues which had affinity with the Hebrew. the Hebrew, the Iewes understood them, when they heard them spoken, and when they read them, but they understood not the strange tongues, which had but small affinity with the Hebrew. When Laban and Iacob made a covenant; Laban called the heape of stones jegar Sagadutha in the Aramean tongue, which had small affinitie with the Hebrew; but Iacob called it Ga­leed, Gen. 31. 47.

But if there was little affinity betwixt the Aramean Object. language and the Hebrew, how is it that they say, 2. King. 18. 26. Speake to thy servants in the Syrian language, for we understand it?

They might understand it, for they were Courtiours and States men; and so learned it, as we learne now the Answ. The Hebrewes under­stood not the Syrian language but by learning. Italians and French language. And Abrahams servant spake to Nachor in the Aramean language, hee being [Page 93] borne in Damascus, which was in Cylo-Syria: and wee may thinke that Nachor and his house, understood the Hebrew tongue, being of the posterity of Heber, and keepe that tongue as Abraham did, who came out of Vr of the Chaldees.

Assyria or Syria hebraice, Aram, comprehended all Pa­lestina, The large extent of the Syrian language Damascus, the Kingdome of Assyria, Chaldea, baby­lon, Arabia, Cylo-Lyria and Antiochia, Zoba, Adiabena, therefore all the languages which were spoken in these parts, tooke their generall denomination from Syria, as Syro-aramaea the language which Laban spake in Mesopo­tania: Syro-Chaldaea or Babylonica was that which they spake in Babylon, Syro-Antiochena which they spake in Antioch or Phoenicia: although they were Propagines or Dialects of the Hebrew, yet they understood them not while they were taught: therefore Nabuchadnezzer cau­sed to instruct the children of the Iewes in the Chaldee tongue, Dan. 1 4. but the Syro-Arabean and the Palestine or Cananitish language they might understand it; be­cause it came nearer to their owne language.

The Aegyptian tongue differed much from the He­brew, The Iewes understood not the Egyptian tongue. Psal. 81. 5. Ioseph heard a language in Aegypt, which he understood not. Ioseph here is put for the whole peo­ple of the Iewes, because there was no affinity betwixt the Hebrew and the Aegyptian tongue, therefore they understood not this tongue. So Psal. 114. 1. they depar­ted from a people of a strange language, or a barbarous [...] people: they called them all barbarous whom they understood not: and because the Iewes understood not the Aegyptian tongue, therefore Ioseph made him to speake to his brethren by an Interpreter, Genesis. 42. 23.

The Cananitish language, was a daughter of the He­brew The Cananites lan­guage a diolect of the Hebrew. tongue, or rather one, with the Hebrew tongue: and this we may perceive by the names of the townes; [Page 94] men and places which were imposed to them by the Cananites; as Iericho, Salem, Kiriath-arba, Kiriath-Sepher, Beth-dagon: so the names of men, Melchizedeck, Adoni­bezek, Abimelech. And if the Cananitish tongue, had not beene all one with the Hebrew, how could the Patri­arches have kept conference with those in Canaan, and made their Bargaines and Contracts with them? this is cleare also by the example of Rahab, who could speake to the Spyes, and they understood her; and so Ioshua to the Gibionites. The Lord would have this tongue continued amongst the Cananites, because the Hebrewes were shortly to inhabite that land, and to converse with the Cananites for a while, untill they had rooted them out.

There is some of the Old Testament written in the Some of the Old Te­stament written in the Chaldee tongue. Chaldee tongue, which hath great affiance with the Hebrew: and some of it written in the Syrian dialect, as Iob, which the Idumeans used, and it differed little from the Hebrew tongue; but it differed much from the Syrian language now, but more from Arabia Ismae­litica, which the Turkes speake now, in Asia and Africa.

There are some words found in the Old Testament which are Egyptian, Gen. 41. 43. Some Phaenitian, as Chabbul, 1 King. 9. 13. Some Persian words as Pur, Esth. 9. 24. and some moabitish.

There is one verse in Ieremy originally written in the One Verse in Ieremie. originally written in the Chaldee tongue. Chaldee tongue, Ier. 10. 11. whereas all the rest of that prophesie, is written in the Hebrew tongue. The gods that have not made the heaven and earth, even they shall pe­rish from the earth, and from under these heavens. The rea­son why this verse was written in the Chaldee tongue, was this; because the Iewes now, were to be carried to Babylon, and when they should be sollicitated there to worship their gods, they should answer them in their [Page 95] owne language; cursed be your gods, for they made neyther heaven nor earth.

That of Daniel and Ezra which is written in the Chal­dee tongue, was transcribed out of the roules, and re­gisters Somethings taken of the registers of the Chaldeans, and in­sert in the Scriptures. of the Chaldeans; and insert in the bookes of God: but that which the holy Ghost indited originally to Daniel and Ezra, was written in the Hebrew tongue; the rest was borrowed but out of their registers, as first, Nebuchad-nezzers dreames, Dan. 2. So Nebuchad-nezzer setteth up a golden image, Cap. 3. So Nebuchad-nezzers dreame, Cap. 4. and Belshassers visions Cap. 5. all these were written in the Chaldee tongue: the se­venth Chapter is onely excepted; it is written also in the Chaldee tongue although it was originally endited to Daniel: because it is a more cleare exposition of the monarchies revealed before to Nebuchad-nezzer, and Belshasser; and set downe in their owne Registers in the Chaldee tongue, but the eight Chapter and the rest, are wholly written in the Hebrew tongue, which were indited immediatly by God to Daniel, and not transcribed out of their registers as the rest were: So that part of Ezra which is written in the Chaldee tongue, is but transcribed and written out of the decrees, and let­ters, of the Kings of Media, and Persia; from the eleventh verse of the fourth Chapter, to the seventh Chapter.

The Chaldeans and Persians used to register, and keepe a Chronicle of all their memorable deedes, and what befell them: and so of their visions and dreames; and they caused to write them, and inter­pret them; so did the Persians, Esth. 9. 32. and Daniel wrote these visions in the Chaldee tongue, and he set them downe for the good of the Church; that they might understand, that their conditions should be un­der the Heathish Kings.

The holy Ghost borrowed somethings first from Somethings in the Scriptures borrowed from the Heathen History. the Poets, and secondly, from the history of the Hea­then; and the Secretaries of the holy Ghost insert them in the Booke of God. From the Poets; as Paul borrowed from Aratus, Menander, Epimenides or Callima­chus, some verses; and inserted them in his Epistles. So the Scriptures borrow from the history, which were eyther Heathenish, or Iewish. Heathenish againe, were of two sorts; eyther Chaldean or Persian. Daniel borroweth from the Chaldeans: So from the history of the Persians, as that memorable history of the de­liverance of the Iewes under Haman; was first written in the Persian language, Esth. 9. 32. and he who wrote the Booke of Esther, borrowed the history out of that booke. These things which are borrowed from the Somethings in the Scripture borrowed from the Iewish History. Iewish history; as the facts of those registrate in the Bookes of the Maccabees, Heb. 11. So Iude out of the prophesie of Enoch, borrowed the history of the strife, betweene Michael and the Divell about the body of Moyses. So the Apostle Heb. 11. out of the traditions of the Iewes, borroweth, that Esay was cut with a saw under Menasse. So there are sundry proverbiall spee­ches in the Talmud, as, Cast out the beame which is in thine owne eye, and then thou shalt see chearely to cast out the mote that is in they neighbours eye, Matth. 7. 5. So it is easi­er for a Camell to goe thorow the eye ef a Needle, Matth. 19. 24. So it is hard to kicke against prickes, Act. 9. 5. Some of our Divines, to prove that the Apocryphall Bookes are not Canonicall Scripture, use this midst; because they are not cited by the Apostles, in the New Testa­ment: but this is false, for the Apostle citeth them, Heb. 11. And Scaliger in his Eusebianis, proveth out of Geor­gius See Scaliger Euseb. Pag. 245. Cyncellus that the Apostle citeth many testimonies out of the Apocryphall Bookes, and out of the traditi­ons of the Iewes. As Matthew, that Salmon maried Ra­hab. [Page 97] Salmon, his genealogie is set downe, 1 Chro. 2. but not whom he maried, this Matthew had by traditi­on, Matth. 1. 5.

Things in the Heathen history, which are not neces­sary to be knowne to the Church: the Scripture pas­seth by them, and remitteth us to Heathen History, and saith still; The rest are they not written in the bookes of the Chronicles of Iuda and Israel? and when the knowledge of them is necessary to the Church; it borroweth them out of the Heathen history, and inserteth them in the booke of God.

These things which were written out of the Iewish, Heathen sentences were sanctified by the Apo­stles when they cited them. or Heathenish history were not sanctified; untill they were insert in the booke of God: therefore Tertullian writing to his Wife, and citing that verse, Evill speeches corrupt good manners, 1 Cor. 15. 33. saith, Memor illius versiculi sanctificati per Apostolum, the Apostle sanctified this verse when hee borrowed it from the Heathen. And as a woman that was Heathenish, when she became a Proselyte, shee might enter into the con­gregation, and a Iew might marry her: so these Iewish and Heathenish histories, God sanctified them, that they might enter into the Congregation and become holy Scriptures, and so the holy Spirit sweetned the salt waters of Iericho, that the children of the Prophets might drinke of them, 2 Kings. 2. 21.

There are many proper names set downe in the Many names in the Scriptures which are not Hebrew names. Scriptures which are not Hebrew names, but some of them are Chaldee, some Assyrian and some Per­sicke names, Ier. 39. 3. And all the princes of the King of Babylon came in, and sat in the middle gate, even Nergal-Sharezer, Samger Nebo, Sersechim, Rabsaris, Nergal Sharezer, Rahmag, with all the residue of the Princes of the King of Babylon. And that wee may know [Page 89] what names are Chaldee names, what Syriacke and what Persicke. Marke this Table following, concer­ning these names, and the composition of them, taken out of Scaliger.

How shall we discerne in what language a booke was Quest. written?

There be two speciall notes whereby wee may di­scerne Answ. this; the first is Interpration, and the second is Allusion.

First is Interpretation, when the Spirit of God inter­preteth a strange word, into another tongue; then the To know in what language a booke was written. [...] booke was written in that language, in which the word is interpreted. Example, Esth. 9. Pur this persicke word is interpreted by the Hebrew goral, therefore the booke was written in the Hebrew, and not in the Per­sicke tongue by Mordecai, or by him who else wrote the booke. Example 2. Abba Pater, Rom. 8. 15. Abba is the Syriack word, and Pater the Greeke word, because Abba is interpreted by Pater, therefore the Apostle hath written this Epistle in Greeke, and not in Syriack. And so Thomas is called Didymus; Ioh. 11. 16. therefore the Gospel of Iohn was written originally in Greeke, and [...] Contracte not in Hebrew. So Heb. 7. 2. Melchisedeck the King of [...] gemelli. [...] gemi [...]us [...]. Salem, first, by interpretation King of righteousnesse, and after that King of peace. The word Melchesedeck which is one word, for the understanding of the Graecising Iewes he divideth it in two, and showeth in Greeke, that Act. 13. 8. Elimas by interpretation Magus, this word Magus is degenerate in a Greeke word, therefore this booke was written in Greeke. Salem signifieth peace, and Zedek Iustitia, righteous­nesse; as if yee would say, frugifer, qui fert fructum, cor­nifer qui fert cornua: here because the interpretation is in Greeke; we may know that this Epistle hath beene written originally in Greeke.

The second note, to know in what language bookes have beene written, is by the Allusion of words in the Scriptures. for there are many allusions in the He­brew, and in the Chaldee tongue, when they are tran­slated in the Greeke or any other language they loose [...] Elegans Paranomasia apud Th [...]rg [...]misto [...] inter Cabhal & Cebhel. that grace, as Cabhal is [...], and Cebhel is [...], Cobal apud Tergumistos est caligare, but Ioh. 1. 5. [...]. [Page 100] And the light shined in darkenesse, and the darkenesse comprehended it not; Here the sweet allusion which is in the Chaldee, perisheth in the Greeke. So Ioh. 10. 1. [...]. the Syriacke expresseth it by a [...] sweet allusion Min tirghna letira, which is not in the Greeke, where the words fall alike which will not fall Elegans paranomasia apua Syros inter tirghna & tua. out in other languages. There was a question betwixt Origen and Africanus, whether the history of Susanna was written in Hebrew or in Greeke. Africanus de­nyed that it was written in Hebrew, but in Greeke, and he proved it thus. When Daniel examined the Witnesses who testified against Susanna, he tooke the witnesses a part and enquired at one of them, under what tree hee saw her commit that villanie? he said it was [...], the Lentish tree; then Daniel alluding to this sayd, [...], The Angel of God hath received sentence of God to cut thee in [...]. Divido seco findo peeces. So he inquired at the other, under what tree he saw her; he answered, [...], Vnder a Prime tree. [...]. Serra divido seco. Then Daniel sayd [...], The Angel of the Lord waited with the sword to cut thee in two. Africanus by this allusion of words gathered, that this history was not originally written in Hebrew, but in Greeke.

The Conclusion of this is, the Old Testament was first written in Hebrew. This was the first language Conclusion. by which the Lord spake to the Patriarches, and in which the Angels spake to men, and it was the lan­guage which all the world spake before the confusion of Babylon, and it is the mother tongue from whence ma­ny other tongues are derived, and it is holden by some, to be that tongue, in which we shall speake one to ano­ther in the life to come. Therefore we should be de­syrous to understand this holy language.

EXERCITAT. XI.

VVHen we describe a mans speech, first we de­scribe it by that which is naturall, as whe­ther he be [...], of a weake voyce, or [...] [...]. of a slow tongue. Secondly, in what language hee speaketh. Thirdly, in what Dialect he speaketh. Fourth­ly, whether it be Soluta oratio or [...]. Fiftly, the Pro­perty of the speech. Sixtly, the Evidence of the speech. Seventhly, the Fulnesse of the speech. Eighthly, the Shortnesse of the speech. Ninthly, the Coherence, and lastly the Efficacie of the speech.

First, we describe that which is naturall, and procee­deth from some defect of the organs, as if he spake with a weake voyce, or be of a stammering tongue, or thicke lippes, which Exod. 6. 12, are called Vncircum­cised lippes: Contrary to this is a thinne lippe which is a signe of Eloquence, Iob. 12. 20. for these who have thinne lippes, commonly are Eloquent. Moses the Penman of the holy Ghost, although he was defective in speech; yet read his writings, and yee shall see such The writers of the Scriptures although weake in person yet powerfull in words. eloquence in him, that no Heathen could ever match it, and as it is sayd of Paul, when he was present in person he was weake, 2 Cor. 10. 10. and his speech base and con­temptible yet his letters were weighty and powerfull: so whatsoever want or infirmity was in Moyses per­son, yet there was no want or defect in his wri­tings.

Secondly, in what language hee speaketh. The holy Ghost spake and wrote in Hebrew in the Old Testa­ment, The Old Testament was written in He­brew, and the New in Greeke. and in the New in Greeke. Hee wrote the Old Testament in Hebrew, a language which had this bles­sing spoken of in the Law, Deut. 28. 12. Thou shalt lend and not borrow, so this language lendeth to many Nations, but borroweth of none. Hee wrote the New Testa­ment in Greeke, a most copious and fertile tongue, The Hebrew tongue lendeth to many, but borroweth of none. which was then Lingua communis to the Iewes although not vulgaris.

Thirdly, in what Dialect he speaketh. The Dialects of the Hebrew tongue were sundry, first, Dialectus Hie­rosolymitana, that Dialect which was spoken in Ierusa­lem and about it, Ast. 1. 19. [...]. In their owne [...] Dialect, or proper tongue. So the Dialect of the Ephra­mites, who sayd, Sibboleth & not Shibboleth, Iud. 12. 6. and the Dialect of the Galileans, as Peter spake in the Gali­lean Dialect, Matth. 26. 73. So in the new Testament there are sundry Dialects as Ionick, Dorick Attick, &c.

Fourthly, whether it be in prose or in verse. The Iewes divide the Old Testament according to the style into Charutz; rithmum; Shir carmen, & Halatza, Oratio­nem solutam, that is prose.

Charuz is Soluta oratio, but in fiue Rithmo colligata; that [...] Rithmus. is, it beginneth in prose, but endeth as it were in mee­ter, such is Iob.

Shir, canticum; writen in meeter, as the Psalmes [...] Carmen. and Canticles.

Hallatza, written in prose; such are the Histories and [...] Oratio soluta the most of the prophets.

Fiftly, the property of the speech. The phrase in Hebrew is much to be observed, for in the Hebrew it will signifie one thing, and in other languages, ano­ther thing.

Example, Num. 19. 20. Dies numeri, signifieth A few Dies numeri quid apud Hebraos. dayes, so Homines numeri, Gen. 34. 30. A few men, Deut. 4. 27. Ezek. 12. 16. So Esay 10. 19. The rest of the Trees of his Forrest shall be number, that a child may write them, that is, They shall be few. In other languages this phrase would signifie many men, and many trees, &c.

So some phrases of the Scripture have a contrary Some phrases with the Hebrewes have a con­trary signification. signification with the Hebrews, as Zack. 11. 24. Ascendit visio a me, that is, It perished. So Ier. 47. 15. Moab is spoyled and gone up out of her Cities, that is, Shee is destroyed. Sometimes againe it signifieth to waxe and increase, as 1 King. 22. 35. Bellum ascendit, The battell increased. So Psal. 74. 23. The tumult that arise up against thee ascendeth, that is, Increaseth continually.

So Levare peccatum is to take off the burden of sinne, Exod. 10. 17. and Iohn alludeth to this, 1. 29. Behold the Lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world. [...] Lapidare.Elapidare And Levare peccatum, Is to take up the burden of sinne, Levit. 5. 1. So Sakal, Lapidare & Elapidare, signifieth ey­ther to cast stones upon a thing, as Deut. 22. 24. or to take away the stones out of a place, as Esa. 62. 10.

Another example, I am like a drunken man whom the wine hath gone over, Ier. 23. 9. that is, whom the wine hath overcome, but Matth. 26. 39. Let this cuppe passe over me, that is, let it not touch me; in a contrary significa­tion. So Gen. 25. 18. Cecidit coram fratribus suis, He dyed in presence of his brethren, but the Seventie translated it The New Testament useth often times the Hebraismes of the Old [...], He dwelt before his brethren.

The New Testament usually followeth these He­braismes of the Old Testament as Hos. 8. 8. A vessel in which there is no pleasure, Rom. 9. 21. A vessell of dishonour. So 1 Sam. 21. 5. The vessels of the young men are holy, 1 Thess. 4. 4. That yee may know to possesse your vessels in holinesse. So Exod. 1. 8. there arose a new King in Aegypt who knew not Ioseph, Matth. 11, 11. there arose not a grea­ter then Iohn the baptist.

So in the New Testament there are many peculiar phrases which are found in no other Greeke writers, and here we must distinguish inter Hellenismum & Grae­cismum. Difference betwixt Hellenismus & Graecismus. Hellenismus quid. Hellenismus is that sort of phrase which the Se­venty use, for they translating the Scriptures for the use of the grecizing Iewes, followed the Hebrew Chaldee and Syriacke in many things: so that they have a pecu­liar stile which is not to be found in other Greeke wri­ters, The Seventy follow the Hebrew, Chaldee and Syriacke in many things. example [...] in the New Testament signifieth wrath and poyson Reve. 18. 3. Ex vino veneni, that is, poysoned wine. So Iob 4. 6. The reason of this is, be­cause Hbema in the Hebrew, signifieth both wrath and [...] ira.venenum. poyson. Another example, 1 Cor. 5. 45. Death is swallow­ed up into victory: the Seventy hath it [...] In perpetuum, but [...] doth not signifie perpetuum amongst the Hea­then, why doe they then translate it, For ever? because Amos 8. 7. and 2 Sam. 2. 26. Lament. 5. 20. the word Netzahh, signifieth both Victory and Eternitie. A third example, Gen. 8. 21. Dixit ad cor suum dominus; [...] Victoria.Aeternitas. but the Chaldee saith, Bemeria [...] which phrase the Evangelist Iohn followeth; but this is not a [...] phrase used amongst the Greekes. A fourth example, Give us this day, our daily bread, Matth. 6. 11. The Greeks say, [...] Panem quotidianum, but the Syriacke hath it [...], Crastinum panem, that bread which may feede us to day and to morrow. So Iam. 4. 6. The Lord exalteth the humble, but according to the Hebrew and Syriacke phrase, to Exalt, is to lift up on the Crosse, Ioh. 8. 28. When yee have lift up the Sonne of man, or exalted the Sonne of man, that is, lifted him up on the Crosse. These parti­cular phrases used by the Seventy would be marked. And besides these, if we shall looke more nearely to the stile of the Scripture, as to the simplicity of it, then we The simplicity of the stile of the Scripture is admirable. shall much more admire it, 1 Cor. 2. 4. My preaching was not with inticing words of mans wisedome, but in de­monstration of the Spirit, and of power.

Againe the Evidence of the stile, the judgements of [...] oculata fides cum qu [...] ipse videt. God are set downe, so vively in the Scripture, as if a man were looking on with his eyes, this is called [...] by the Greekes, as we may see in the deludge, the overthrow of Sodome, and the miracles in the Wilder­dernesse, set downe so clearely before us, as if we had beene eye witnesses of them. See a notable example, Psal. 7. 12. 13. By a borrowed kind of speech he setteth forth the judgements of God which were to over take the wicked, as if we were looking on. If he turne not he will whet his Sword, he hath bent his bow, and made it rea­dy, he hath also prepared for him the instruments of death: he hath ordained his arrowes against the persecutors.

Eightly, the Fulnesse of the speech. The Greekes [...]. call this [...] wherein nothing is wanting, neyther in the enumeration of the parts, or explication of the causes, or reciting of the circumstances: for the holy The holy Ghost setteth downe all circumstan­ces belonging to the purpose whereof hee intreateth. Ghost setteth downe all the circumstances belonging to the purpose. So the Apostle Rom. 1. describeth at large the vanity and impiety of the Gentiles. And Rom. 2. the hypocrisie of the Iewes, and Cap. 3. he ma­keth a full description of the corruptions of man, recko­ning up the parts. There is none righteous, no not one, vers. 10. There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God, vers. 11. They are all gone out of the way, they are altogether become unprofitable, there is none that doth good, no not one, Vers. 12. Their throate is an open Sepulcher, with their tongues have they used deceit, the poyson of Aspes is under their lippes, Vers. 13. Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitternesse, Vers. 14. Their feete is swift to shed blood, Vers. 15. Destruction and misery are in their wayes, Vers. 16. And the way of peace they have not knowne, Vers. 17. And there is no feare of the Lord before their eyes, Vers. 18.

Ninthly, the Shortnesse of the speech: and here we [Page 106] cannot enough admire the fulnesse of the stile and the shortnesse of it, & that which Cicero sayd of Thucycides Every word of the Scripture carrieth a weight. may here be applyed fitly, Eum esse adeo plenum refer­tum (que) rebus, ut prope verborum numerum, numero rerum exaequet, That every word carried a weight with it, and therefore we may call it Laconica Scriptura.

Tenthly, the Coherence: all things in the Scriptures are fitly joyned and coupled together. The Heathen All things in the Scrip­are fitly joyned. sayd that there were three things unpossible, Eripere, Iovi fulmen, Herculi clavam & Homero versum; to pull Iupiters Thunder-bolt out of his hand, Hercules Club out of his hand, and a verse from Homer: for they thought, that there was such a connexion betweene Homers verses, that not one verse could be taken away without a great breach in the whole worke: but this may bee much more sayd of the Scriptures of God which have such a dependance and connexion, that if yee take away but one verse, the whole shall be mar­red.

But it may be sayd that there are sentences which Ob. seeme not to cohere or agree fitly together, Gen. 48. 7. And as for me when I came from Padan, Rachel died by me in the Land of Canaan in the way, when there was but yet a little way to come to Ephrath, and I buried her there in the way of Ephrath, the same is Bethlehem, Vers. 8. And Israel beheld Iosephs sonnes. How doth this cohere with that which goeth before; it would seeme that there is no dependance here.

They cohere well enough with the words going be­fore; for Iacob had adopted two of Iosephs children, Ans. How sentences in the Scripture seeming to disagree cohere very well. then hee giveth the reason of this adoption in these words; as if he should say, whereas I might have had moe children by my first wife Rachel, if shee had lived; it is great reason that I supply this defect in her, by placing some in sted of these children, which she might [Page 107] have borne to me; and I adopt those thy sonnes since she is dead.

The second place which seemeth to have no cohe­rence with things going before, Esa. 39. 21. Take a lumpe of figges, and lay it for a plaister unto the boyle and he shall recover, vers. 22. Ezekias also had sayd what is the signe, that I shall goe up into the house of the Lord. What coherence is betwixt these words, and the words going before?

There is a right coherence here, and hee setteth downe that last, which was first for brevities cause; which is more at large set downe in the booke of the Kings; and therefore Iunius translateth it well, Vajomer, [...] In plusquam perfecto, Esay had sayd.

Ier. 40. 1. The word which came to Ieremiah from the Object. Lord, &c. The words following seeme not to cohere with the former.

The beginning of the fortieth Chapter, with the se­venth Answ. Verse of the fortiesecond Chapter, and these things which are insert betweene them, doe containe but the occasion of the prophesie, to wit; when Godo­liah was killed, the rest of the Iewes would have gone into Aegypt, which Ieremiah forbiddeth them to doe. And it came to passe ten dayes after, Chap. 42. 7, &c. This should be joyned with the first Verse of the fortieth Chapter, and all the rest should be included in a paren­thesis.

As we have spoken of the stile of the Scripture in generall, so let us observe the stile of some of the writers in particular. Esayes stile differed much from the stile of Amos, he being a Courtiour, and he but a Neat-herd. So the stile of Ezekiel differed from the stile of the rest of the Prophets: he calleth himselfe The Sonne of man, not because it is a Chaldee phrase, but because of the excellent visions which he saw, therefore [Page 108] he is called the Sonne of man, that is, an excellent man; as Iesus Christ in the New Testament is called The Son of man, that is, an excellent man. So this is peculiar to Iohn the Evangelist, to call Christ the Sonne of God [...], for the Chaldees and the Talmud usually call him so: Iohn opposed himselfe to Ebion and Cerinthus two Iewes who denyed the divinity of Christ, wherefore he hath usually the word [...], 1 Ioh. 7. 5. which was frequent in the Chaldee paraphrast, and read often by the Iewes.

So there are some things peculiar to Paul; for hee useth some words according to the manner of the speech in Tarshish and Cilicia, as Collos. 2. 18. [...] in their language, signifieth insidiose alteri praeripere pal­mam. So 1 Cor. 4. 3. Mans day according to the phrase of Tarshish, is put for the time of judgement; because they had some appointed times for judgement.

The Conclusion of this is, here we may admire the Conclusion. wisedome of God, who gave most excellent gifts to his Secretaries for the edification of his Church. Moses was a man of a slow speech, and of a slow tongue, and Aaron God gave excellent gifts to his Secretaries, for the good of his Church must be his spokesman, Exod. 4. Yet Moyses was mighty in words and deeds, Act. 7. 22. It is sayd of Paul that his bo­dily presence was weake, but his letters were weighty, 2 Cor. 10. 11. By his preaching he converted many, from Ie­rusalem to Illiricum, Rom. 15. 19. but by his letters hee converted moe, both in Europe Africa and Asia; such Paul converted moe by his writing, than by his preaching. was the majesty and grace in his writing, that they ac­knowledged it to be from the Lord.

EXERCITAT. XII.

THe Church of Rome, that they may advance the au­thority of the vulgar Latine translation, which they The Church of Rome maketh the vulgar Latin translation to be cano­nicall. have made canonicall; doe labour to disgrace the ori­ginall Text, the Hebrew and Greeke, holding that they are corrupt in many things.

Master Iames Gordon our Country man, observeth Controvers. 1. Gordonij. cap. 9. foure distinct periods of time. The first period, he maketh to bee the Iewes Synagogue before Christ came in the flesh; he granteth that all this time, the Hebrew Text was not corrupted by the Iewes. The second period of time he maketh to be from the ascen­sion of Christ untill the dayes of Hierome and Augu­stine, and he saith, that in this second period, the Iewes went about to corrupt the translation of the Se­venty: because the Christians then began to use argu­ments taken out of that translation against them, as Iustine Martyr testifieth, writing against Tripho. The third period he maketh to be after the death of Saint Hierome, untill the time that the Talmud was compo­sed and set together, and then he saith, there arose great contention betwixt the Orientall and Occidentall Iewes: (the Orientall Iewes were those who dwelt upon the East side of Euphrates in Babylon Media & Persia, those What Iewes were called orientall, and what oc­cidentall. Peter called the Church at Babylon, 1 Pet. 5. 13. The Occi­dentall Iewes were those to whom he wrote, Scattered abroad in Pontus Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 1 [Page 101] Pet. 1. 1.) because of the diversity of their reading, and corruptions in the Text. He saith that the Iewes met at Tiberias, Anno 508. and there set downe the Points; and made their Masora; to obviat this, that no more corruption should enter into the Text. The fourth pe­riod he maketh to be after the Iewes had met at Tibe­rias; they decreed that none should use any copy, but such as were corrected by the Masoreth: and so from this time he freeth the Text from corruption: but hee laboureth much to prove that the Hebrew Text was corrupt before, and that the vulgar Latine is sound and free from corruption, which was translated by Saint Hierome under Pope Damasus; and so continued in the Church of Rome.

The Iewes to whom The Oracles of God were committed, The Iewes kept faith­full the booke of God without corruption. Rom. 3. 2. (therefore it was called Their Law, Ioh. 8. 17.) would they have corrupted their owne Evidents? Au­gustine calleth the Iewes Capsarios nostros, who faithful­ly kept the booke of God, and reserved it unto us without corruption, & he saith, Dispersos esse Iudaeos, infi­deles ut testarentur Scripturas esse veras. The unbeleeving Iewes were scattered through the world, that they might testifie the Scriptures to be true: and shall wee thinke that the Iewes would have corrupted the Text, The Iewes numbred the Verses, Words and Letters of the Bible. who have numbred the words, letters, and verses of the Bible: and R. Zaddias hath numbred the letters words and verses, and summed up all the verses at the end of every booke, and they have observed that all the let­ters are found in one verse, Zeph. 3. 8. as also foure of the finall letters: they carry such respect to the Law, that if it but fall to the ground, they institute a fast for it.

The superstitious Iewes at this day, are so carefull to They would write no language but in He­brew letters. keepe the letters and words of the Law, that they will have neither Chaldee, Syriacke, nor Hebrew [Page 111] words wrirten; but in Hebrew letters: and it greeved them when they saw in Origens Hexupla, Hebrew words Vide Guiliel. Sc [...]ickardum de jure regio. [...] written in Greeke Characters, when they saw the co­pie which was presented to Alexander the Great, having the name Iehova still written in Golden letters, they were much greeved at it, and when they see any thing changed in our copies now, in disdaine they call it, Hhomesh pesul shel gelahhim, that is, Pentateuchus rasorum Monachorum, the Pentateuch of the shaven Monkes.

The Iewes after the death of Christ were dispersed among many Nations and they never met together againe: and albeit they would have corrupted the Scrip­ture, how could they have falsified all the Co­pies?

Bellarmin maketh this objection to himselfe. Some Bellarm. lib. 2. Cap. 2. De verbo dei. men will say, that the Hebrew Text was corrupted after the dayes of Saint Hierome and Augustine. Hee answe­reth, that Augustins reasons serve for all times against the corruption of the Hebrew Text: And Serrarius Serrarius in prolegom. Bibliacis. acknowledgeth, that there is but small or no corrupti­on in the Hebrew Text, & he maketh a threefold cor­ruption. The first Physicall, the second Mathematicall, Corruptio PhysicaMathemati­caMoralis. and the third Morall. Physicall corruption he maketh to be this, when it wanteth any member which it should have. Mathematicall corruption hee maketh to bee this, when there are some faults in the print which we call [...]. And a morall corruption he maketh to be this, when one of purpose goeth about to corrupt the Text, and in effect he commeth to this, that the errours which are found in the Text, are but errours in the print, and not in the matter.

But now lately there is one risen up, called Morinus, who hath set himselfe to improve the originall Hebrew Text, and to preferre the Samaritan to it as the origi­nall.

We must put a difference betwixt Hebraeo-Samaritana Difference betwixt hebraeo-samaritana, and hebraeo-samaritano-samaritana, in their Copies. and Hebraeo-samaritano-samaritana. Hebraeo-samaritana is that which Moyses wrote from the Lord and delive­red to the Iewes, it is called Hebraeo-samaritana; because the Hebrew was written in the Samaritan Character at the first and so kept still till after the captivity, and this wee grant to be the first and originall writing by which the Church should be ruled.

But that this Hebraeo-samaritano-samaritana should be the first originall; that in no way must we grant, and the reasons are these.

First, the Samaritans were Idolaters they were Reasons to prove that the Samaritan copy is not the originall. brought out of Assyria by Salmanasses, and they erected a false worship in Iudea, for the which they Reason 1 were hated by the people of God, Ioh. 4. They branded them alwayes with these two letters, Gnaijn Zain, that is, strange worship. The Lord concredited his oracles [...] pro [...] cultus alienus. to his owne people, Deut. 33. 4. The Law is the inheri­tance of the congregation of Iacob. Therefore the Law was not committed to their custodie, who were not Gods people, they had no right to his inheritance.

Secondly, if the Samaritan copie were the originall, then it should follow that the Church hath wanted the Reason. 2 true originall Text untill the yeare of God, 1626. when Petrus de Valle brought it from Damascus.

The Samaritan Copie differed as much from the ori­ginall, as the Seventy doe, but none of them hold that Reason 3 The Samaritan diffe­reth as much from the originall, as the Seventy doe. the translation of the Seventy is the originall by which all others should betryed, why then should they give this prerogative to the Samaritan Copie, to be the ori­ginall? this Samaritan Copie addeth to the originall Text which was The inheritance of the Iewes, Deut. 33. 4. and diminisheth also from it. It addeth to the originall Text, Iosh. 21. two Verses, 36. 37. Verses. So Gen. 4. it addeth a long speech or conference betwixt Cain [Page 113] and Abel which is not in the originall Text. So Targum Hierosolymitanum supplyeth the same 28. verses here, which are not in the originall Hebrew Text, a con­ference betwixt Gain and Abel, whether there be any providence of God or not? or whether there be any reward for the just, or punishment for the wicked? Abel holdeth the affirmative, and Cain the negative part. But this note of the Masoreth in the margent should not be read this wayes, Pesu pesuki bimtzegno [...] pesuk. Viginti octo versus desiderantur in medio hujus ver­sus, There are twenty eight Verses wanting in the midst of this verse. But it should be read this wayes, Pesukim pasekin bimtzeghnoth pasuk, that is, There are twenty [...] eight verses whose sense endeth in the midst of the verse: therefore when the Scripture saith that Cain talked with his brother, it was to perswade him to goe out to the field, and not that he had a long conference with him. Both the Samaritan Copie then, and the Targum of Ierusalem wrong the Text as defective, put­ting in these 28. verses which the Spirit of God never indited.

As it addeth to the originall Hebrew Text, so it di­minisheth somethings from it, Hos. 4. 11. I have called my Sonne out of Egypt. These words are not in the Samaritan Copie. So these words, Zach. 12. 10. They shall behold him whom they pierced. Reason 4

If this Samaritan Copie were the originall Copie, what is the reason that Origen setteth it not downe in his Octupla, as hee hath done other translations? and what is the reason that Hierome never citeth it, nor followeth it in his translation, if it be the originall?

Fiftly, the manner of the Samaritans writing sheweth Reason. 5 that this was not the originall, w^ch Moses received from the Lord, and delivered to the people of God after­wards, as you may perceive in the page following, out of Exod. 31. from vers. 12. to 18.

Observe the forme of this writing of the Samaritans and yee shall finde it to be meere Cabbalisticall, by which they would finde out the diverse readings, in framing the lines, words and letters, and setting them downe after such a curious forme, as the Cabbalists doe, by their Gematrija, notaricon, and temura: that is, by the [...] number of letters, the diverse significations of them, and the diverse situation and placing of them, they make diverse senses in the Scriptures, as by elbham, and ethbhash; sometimes putting the last letters for the first, and the first for the last; sometimes reading up and downe; sometimes crosswayes, and sometimes from the left hand to the right: this we may see in this example of the Samaritan Copie, where they summe up the observation, the breach, and punishment of the Sabbath in a round circle; which curiosity the Spirit of God never used in writing the holy Scriptures.

Christ speaking of the originall Text, and the per­petuity of the Law which we have, he saith, One jote, or one title of the Law shall not passe, in the originall it is, [...] answerable to the Hebrew Iod; and [...], which is not properly translated, A tittle, as if it made a diffe­rence betwixt some letters, as the top of Daleth from Resh: for the Syriacke calleth it Sharat, incisura vel [...] incisio, the small lines which are in ones hand. The meaning is then, that not one part of a letter, neyther the least letter, nor any part of the least letter shall pe­rish, hence we may reason from Christs words. In that copie whereof the Lord speaketh, [...] or Iod must be the least letter; but in the Samaritan copie Iod is not the least, but the biggest of all the Letters: therefore the Samaritan copie, is not that copie which Christ spake of, but the Hebrew as we may see by the difference of [...] Hebrae. the Letters in the margent here: hence we may gather that this Samaritan letter was abolished in Christs [...] Samarit. [Page 117] time, and therefore wee ought neyther to imbrace the copie nor the Characters, as authenticke or ori­ginall.

The Conclusion of this is, If the light that is in the Conclusion. body be darkenesse, how great is that darkenesse, Matth. 6. 23. The Scriptures are the light of the Church, and if the originall Text were corrupted, how great were the darkenesse of the body; God hath Conjuncta instru­menta, Instru­menta gratiae. conjuncta.remota, & remota instrumenta gratiae. Remota instrumen­ta gratiae are the Preachers and their writings, and they may be corrupted. But Conjuncta instrumenta gratiae are the Prophets and Apostles and their writings, these the Lord kept from errour and corruption for the good of his Church.

EXERCITAT. XIII.

WHen a thing wanteth an essentiall part, this is the greatest want. Secondly, when it wanteth an integrall part, this is likewise a great defect. And thirdly, when it wanteth accidentall ornaments. When Defe­ctus partis essentialis.partis integratisornamenti ac­cidentalis. the soule is separated from the body, here is a separati­on of the essentiall parts. When a man wanteth a hand or a foote, then he wanteth an integrall part. And when hee wanteth his cloathes, hee wanteth some orna­ments.

There is no booke in the Scripture that wanteth any No booke in the Scrip­ture wanteth any essen­tiall part. essentiall part; for the Law and the Gospel which are essentiall parts, are found in every booke.

Secondly, the Scripture wanteth no integrall part Vide Iunium in Iudam, and Perkins reformed Catholike. since the Canon was sealed, before the Canon was sealed they had as much as served for their infancie: but after that it was sealed the whole Canon was compleate, and none of those Bookes perish­ed.

Great was the care which the Lord had to preserve Gods care in preser­ving the Scriptures. the Scriptures. First, hee commanded the Levites to take the booke of the Law written by Moyses, and to put it in the side of the Arke of the covenant of the Lord, Deut. 31. 26.

Secondly, the Lord commanded the King, when he should sit upon the Throne of his kingdome to write a Copie of this Law, Deut. 17. 18. and the Iewes adde fur­ther, that he was bound to write out two copies, one which he should keepe in his treasurie, and another which he should carry about with him; and they say moreover, if Printing had beene found out then, yet hee was bound to write them out with his owne hand.

Thirdly, the Lord commanded the Prophets to write their visions upon Tables, and to make them plaine, Habak. 2. 2. Esay 8. 1. and the Seventy read it, to be gra­ven [...] vocant Graeci. upon the bush tree, which is a sort of wood that corrupteth not, and it will preserve that which is writ­ten upon it and it were to the worlds end.

Fourthly, when any booke which was necessary for Bookes necessary for the Church albeit lost, yet they were found againe. the use of the Church was lost; the Lord had a care that that booke should be found againe, as the booke of the law found by Hilkiah, 2 King 22. 8. Or the Lord endited it a new againe, when it was lost; as when Iehojakim cut the roule of the lamentations of Iere­mie, [Page 119] yet the Lord inspired him a new againe to indite this booke to his Scribe Baruch, Iere. 36. 32. because he thought it necessary still for the Church: therefore he would not have it to perish.

Fiftly, in that generall destruction which the Babylo­nians made at Ierusalem, burning their houses, and rob­bing them of their goods; yet as Hierome and Basil ob­serve well, it was a speciall providence of God that The Israelites kept the musicall instruments in the captivity, to put them in minde of the worship of God. they should leave to those captives, their instruments of Musicke, wherewith they used to serve God in the Temple: that they might preserve some memorie of their former worship, they brought these instruments to Babel with them, Psal. 137. 2. we hung our harpes on willowes. If the Lord had such a care of these instru­ments to have them preserved for his praise, much more care had he to have the Scriptures preserved; which taught them to worship: and he who had a par­ticular care of the parts of the Scripture, before it was compleate, and numbreth the haires of our heads, Matth. 10. 30. and the starres of the heavens, Psal. 147. 4. will he not have a speciall care that none of these Bookes should perish which are canonicall?

That fable of Esdras then is to be rejected, lib. 4. The fable of Esdras rejected. cap. 4. 23. So cap. 14. 21. to the 24. verse, he sheweth how the booke of God was lost in the Captivity, and that Esdras the Scribe, by holy inspiration wrote it all anew againe: but this is false, see we not how Dani­el read out of the prophesie of Ieremie, how long the captivitie should last, Dan. 2. 9. The booke of God then was not lost in the captivity, and written anew againe by Esdras, but onely he set the bookes in order after Esdras wrote nothing of the Scriptures but onely set the bookes in order. the captivity, & nihil ad [...] fecit sed ad [...]. Hee did nothing in correcting the booke of God, but onely set it downe in order.

But we reade often times in the Scriptures of many [Page 120] Bookes wanting now, which were extant before; as the Bookes of the battels of the Lord, Num. 21. 14.

By this it cannot bee inferred that any canonicall Ans. booke is perished; for this word Sepher, signifieth a [...] relation, as well by word, as by write. Secondly, although wee grant that it was a written booke, yet it will not follow that it was a holy Booke. Thirdly, although we grant that it was an holy booke, yet it will not follow that it was a canonicall booke. The bookes of the Chronicles of the Kings of Iuda and Israel were but civill records, and belonged nothing to the canon of the Scriptures. Some things written by the Prophets not as they were Prophets.

Secondly, some bookes that were written by the Pro­phets, were not written by them as they were Prophets. Salomon wrote of Hearbes, Trees and Plants, 1 King. 4. 33. But what bookes were these? They were but bookes of things which were under the Moone and of things corruptible, and because they served not for the edification of the Church afterwards, therefore the Hezekiah buried Salo­mons bookes of physick. Lord suffered them to perish. Suidas saith, that the booke which Salomon wrote of Physicke, was affixed upon the gate in the entrie of the Temple; and because the people trusted too much in it, neglecting the Lord (as Asa put his trust in the Physitians, 2 Chro. 13.) therefore Hezekiah caused to pull away this booke, and bury it. And the Talmud saith, that Hezekiah did two [...] memorable things. First, Ganaz Sepher rephuoth. Abscon­dit librum medicinarum, He hid the bookes of Physicke which Salomon had written. And secondly, Cathath nahhash hannehhushoth shegnashe Moshe, Comminuit aeneum [...] serpentem quem fecerat Moses, He brake the brasen Ser­pent which Moyses made.

Salomon spake three thousand Proverbes, 1 King. 4. 32. yet of all these Proverbes scarce eyght hundred are put in the Canon. Some of these Proverbes the servants [Page 121] of Hezekiah King of Iuda copied out, Prov. 25. 1. And as they saw the King their master bury Salomons booke, which he knew was hurtfull to the Church: so those servants copied out these Proverbes which were pro­fitable Salomons Proverbs and Songs, which were not profitable to the Church perished. for the Church, whereas the rest perished. So Salomon wrote a thousand and five Songes; of all which Songes, the Lord made choyse but of one to be insert in the Canon, which is called the Song of Songes, or can­ticum [...] est utriusque numeri quae vel quod. canticorum quae Salomonis rather then canticum can­ticorum quod Salomonis, it was the most excellent Song of all Salomons Songs, rather then the excellentest Song compared with other Songes.

But all bookes written by thē for the whole Church none of them are perished: as the Prophesies of Nathan Ahija, and Iddo. For Burgensis observeth well upon, 1 Chro. 29. That the first booke of Samuel is holden to be written by Samuel himselfe. So the second Booke of Samuel, and the second booke of the Kings were written by Nathan and Gad, who lived with David and Salomon, and wrote untill the death of Salomon, then Iddo and Ahija wrote the historie following of Ieroboam interlacing somethings of Salomon and Rehoboam.

1 Chron. 29. 29 Now the acts of David the King, first Object. and last behold they are written in the booke of Samuel the Seer, and in the booke of Nathan the Prophet; and in the booke of Gad the Seer, with all his reigne and his might and the times that went over him, and over Israel and all the Kingdomes of the Countries. But these words cannot be understood of the bookes of Samuel; for wee reade not in these bookes, what David did abroad in these Countries: therefore some other bookes must be un­derstood here, written by Gad and Nathan, which are not extant.

Not onely the things, which David did in Israel, are Ans. set downe in the booke; of Samuels but also the things [Page 122] which he did abroad in other Countries, as against Zoba King of Hadadezzar, against the Moabites, and a­gainst Tobh King of Hemath. And where it is sayd over Hieron. in Esa. 13. all the kingdomes of the countries, it is the manner of the Scripture (as Hierome marketh) by the whole Countries, to understand the next adjacent countries whereof it speaketh; and therefore in the originall it is, Haaratzoth, [...] Of that earth.

2 Chro. 33 19. The prayer of Manasseh and how God Ob. was intreated of him, and all his sinne, and his trespasse and the places wherein he built high places, and set up groves and graven images before he was humbled: behold they are written among the saying of the Seers, or Hosai. But in the whole booke of the Kings there is no mention made of his affliction, or of the cause which mooved him to repent or of his prayers which he made to God in time of his affliction: then this booke of the prophet is not now extant. So the acts of Baasha, Zimri, and Omri are they not written in the Bookes of the Chronicles of Israel, 1 Kings 16. 5. & 27. But nothing concerning their actes are found in the bookes of the Kings, or in the Chroni­cles: therefore those bookes are perished, when the Scriptures remit us to those bookes, it giveth us to un­derstand that these bookes are worthy to be trusted, as written by the Seers of God: neyther doth the Scrip­ture cite them, as it doth some short sentences out of the Heathen Poets. The Apostle saith of those Poets, that they sayd the truth, Tit. 1. 13. But the Spirit of God remitteth us to these bookes, that we may be fully in­structed by them in the whole truth of the Acts of those Kings.

First we must know that there were many Prophets Answ. who prophesied, whose prophesies were never written; as the prophesies of the children of the Prophets, and the prophesies of those, who prophesied from the Some prophesies of the Prophets were not written. [Page 123] dayes of Eli, to David, as some of Asaph Heman and Ieduthun. Secondly, all the things which were written by the Seers, were not written by them as Seers: Salo­mon wrote many things, which he wrote not as a Pro­phet, and so did David. Thirdly, many things which Somethings written by the Prophets profitable for the Church then, but not profitable now. they wrote then as Seers, and were profitable to the Church for that time, were not profitable for the Church now: and the Spirit of God remitted them then to the civill records and to some prophesies which were then extant, but are perished now; because now they were not necessary for the Church: but all these things which the Lord endited to them by his Spirit and which he thought to be necessary for his Church, to be the Canon and rule of our faith, all those the Lords watchfull eye hath kept and preserved, that none of them are perished.

The Conclusion of this is: The bookes of Emperours Conclusion. and Kings are lost, yet the Lord hath kept the regi­ster of the little Kings of Iuda and Israel, both in whole and in parts, although they were but Shepherds, and banished men. And the Church would rather spend her best blood, then shee would part with that pretious Iewell or any part of it: therefore they called those who delivered the booke of God to the persecuting Tyrants, Traditores.

EXERCITAT. XIIII.

WE have showne that the Scriptures are not cor­rupt, and that no essentiall or integrall part is wanting in the holy Scriptures: Now it resteth to show that the Points, the accidentall ornaments were not from the beginning.

The Iewes who are faithfull keepers, but bad inter­preters of the Scriptures, interpret these words, Nehe. 8. 8. after this manner, vaijkreu bassepher betorath, They read in the booke of the Law, this they expound, to be [...] the litterall sense, which Ezra gave. Mephorash, distinctly that is, adding the Points and distinctions. Veshom Shecel, Apponentes intellectum, and gave the sense, that is, he ad­ded [...] the Targum or paraphrase to it. Vajabhinu bammikra and caused them to understand the reading of the Law, [...] that is, he added the Kabbala. But this is a false Glosse, Ezra read the Law to them, & gave them not onely the grammaticall sense, but also the spirituall and true mea­ning of the words; he neither added points nor Targum, or Kabbala to it. The points were not then from the be­ginning, as may be seene by these reasons following.

The first reason is taken from the Samaritan Chara­cter. The Iewes acknowledge that the letters of the law Reason. 5 which they have now, are not the ancient Characters in which Moyses wrote the Law. But to these ancient [Page 125] Characters there is no vowell subjoyned as we may see in the forme of the Shekell set downe by Arias Mon­tanus, Beza, and Villalpand upon Ezekiel.

The second reason is taken from the first exemplar Reason 2 of the Iewes, which they kept in their Synagogues; and they have most exactly written and rouled up this [...]. booke, which is the cheefe booke in their estimation, and whereof they account more then of any other He­brew Bible; yet there is neyther Poynt nor Accent in this booke, but onely Consonants. This may be seene also in their ancient billes of divorce wherein are ney­ther Points nor Accents: Therefore the Points were not from the beginning.

The third reason is taken from the names of the Reason 3 Points, and Accents, which are Chaldee names, therefore they were imposed after the captivity.

But they who maintaine that the Poynts were from Object. the beginning, say, that this reason holdeth not; for the names of the Moneths are Chaldee names, imposed after the captivity; and yet the Moneths were from the beginning: So the Points may be from the begin­ning, although the Chaldee names were given to them after the captivitie.

As the Moneths were from the beginning, and had Answ. Chaldee names given unto them, after the captivity: so the value of the Points were from the beginning; but the figures and the names of the Points, were set downe a long time afterwards.

The fourth reason is taken from the translation of the Reason. 4 Seventy: for when the Seventy read the Hebrew Text wanting the Points, they differed very farre from the Hebrew in many things. The difference of their rea­ding arose from this; because the Hebrew Text wan­ted [...] baculus. [...] l [...]ctus. the Poynts. Example, Gen. 47. 31. and Israel bowed himselfe, gnal rosh hamitta, upon bis beds head. But the [Page 126] Apostle followeth the translation of the Seventy tran­slating it, He bowed upon the top of his rod, Heb. 11. 21. So [...] Ʋolumen. [...] caput, cranium. Psal. 40. 7. for Megilla the Seventy read gilgoleth, in ca­pite libri, for in volumine libri: because they wanted the Points, and the Apostle followed this reading.

The fift reason is taken from, Ketibh volo keri, when Reason 5 the words are written one way, and read another. This [...] diversity of reading and writing arose because the let­ters wanted the Points from the beginning: this made them to reade one way and write another way.

The Chaldee, Arabian, and Assyrian language, which Reason 6 are but daughters proceeding from the Hebrew tongue, have no Points: therefore it is not probable that the Hebrew Text had Points from the begin­ning.

The seventh reason is taken out of the Talmud. They Reason. 7 write, that Ioab killed his master, because he taught him to read Zacar Masculus, for Zecer Memoria, and so made [...] masculus [...] memoria. him to spare the females of the Amalekites, whereas hee should have blotted out their memorie and killed them all. Now if the points had beene from the begin­ning, then Ioabs master could not have taught him, to have read Zacar for Zecer.

The Points were not from the beginning then, but found out afterwards by the Masorath.

There were three sorts of teachers, amongst the Iewes. The first was [...], who gathered the [...] vel traditions of the Fathers together; such were the Pha­risees. The second were the Sopherim afterwards cal­led the Masoreth: these observed the letters and words [...] in the reading. The third sort were the Midroseth, the [...] Cabbalists, who expounded the Scriptures allegorically. The Scribes were from Moyses time, who taught the people to reade the Law, because the Law wanted the [Page 127] Points: and Christ calleth these The learned Scribes, and saith to one of them; How readest thou? Luk. 10. 26. But afterwards Shammai and Hellel were the first of the Shammai and Hillel the first of the Sects of the Scribes and Pharisees. Scribes and Pharisees, who were the originall of these sects. Shammai was the first of these Scribes who drew out the Cabbalisticall readings, and Hillel was the first who gathered their traditions toge­ther.

Because the Text wanted the Vowels before the Ma­sorets time, hence arose these diverse readings margi­nall and Textuall; here wee must take heed of two errores. The first is of those who hold, that both the Two errors to be shun­ned concerning the Marginall and Text reading. Textuall and Marginall reading were from the begin­ning, and both authenticke and originall from Moses. The second error which we must shunne, is this, that the marginall reading implyeth some corruption, where as it serveth for illustration of the Text.

There is but small difference betwixt the Marginall and the line reading. There are three sorts of reading. The first is [...], when there is no difference at all in [...]. the words. The second is [...] when there is some small difference in the reading. And the third is [...], when there is a contrarie reading. Now for [...]. [...], we may see it in the originall Text it selfe, as 2 Sam. 22. and Psal. 18. the same argument is handled almost word by word in both these places, there is some diversitie of words onely: for 2 Sam. 22. 43. It is Adikem, I did stampe them as the myre of the streetes, but [...] a [...] Evacuare. [...] a [...] Comminuere. [...] mutatur in [...] Psal. 18. 42. it is Arikem, I did cast them out as the myre in the streets. Here is but small difference, Daleth is onely changed into Resh, the sense is all one. So 2 Sam. 22. 11. and Psal. 18. 11. So 2 Sam. 22. 27. and Psal. 18. 26. So 2 Sam. 22. 8. and Psal. 18. 9. here is [...], but The Marginall and the Text reading make not a contrary but a diverse reading. not [...]. So the Marginall reading, and the Text reading makes not a contrary reading, but a diverse rea­ding: [Page 128] therefore ye shall see that the Translaters follow sometimes the Marginall reading in their first transla­tions, as Iunius 2 King 8. 10. in his first translation, [...] illi. [...] non. he saith abi, dic ei, but in this second translation he saith, abi, dic non, So Ezr. 4. 2. In his first edition, sacrificabimus eidem which is the marginall reading, but [...] fecit. [...] decem. in his second translation, non sacrificabimus alt eri which is in the Text. Example, 3. 1 King 22. 49. Iehosaphat prepared shipes, Gnasha fecit; but in his second translation Translaters sometime joyne both the margi­nall and text reading together. Iehosaphat made decem naves which is in the Text. So Prov. 31. 4. Eccles. 3. 4. Ier. 2. 20. and 5. 8. He fol­loweth Ketibh in his last Edition, that is, as it is written and not read in all these places. And sometimes ye shall see them, joyne both the Marginall and Text rea­ding together. Psal. 22. 17. They Lyon like digged. So the Chaldee Paraphrast and the Seventie readeth it. So Iunius▪ (Exod. 21. 8. If she please not her Master who hath not betrothed her unto himselfe, non sibi) joyneth [...] non sibi. [...] voluit est ketibh [...] custodivit est keri lo, lo, both together, both the Text and Margi­nall reading. So Iosh. 8. 12. The line reading hath gnir, vrbs, and the Marginall reading hath Hai, and hee joyneth them both together vrbs Hai. So Prov. 23. 26. Let thine eyes observe my wayes. Ratza, and Natzar, he joyneth them both together, studiose custodivit. So Eze. 22. 16. They joyne them both together. So 1 King. 22. 18. the Tigurin joyneth them both toge­ther▪ [...] The Masoreth put the vowels some times in the text, and the conso­nants in the margent. [...] and the English joyne them both together, Prov. 19. 7. They are wanting to him.

In these diverse readings set downe by the Masoreth, sometimes the Points are put in the Text and the Con­sonants in the Margent, as Ier. 31. 39. Behold the day saith the Lord. Here is a blanke in the Text, the vowels are onely set downe and the word Baim, is understood by the Points of it, which are in the Text, and so it is Baim, although it be not expresly written in the Text. [Page 129] The reason why they set the consonants in the Margent and the vowels in the Text, was to signifie, that they enclined rather, to follow the Marginall reading than the Text, and yet not to exclude the Text reading: therefore they set the vowels in the Text.

Againe, when the Masoreth thinke that some words The Masoreth put not points to a word which they thinke doth re­dound. abound, they set downe the Consonants of the word in the Text, but they point not the word, which they would have to be be omitted, Example, Ier. 51. 3. A­gainst [...] him that bended, let the Archer bend his bow. El ijddroch ijddroch hadderech. And thus the Masoreth keepe us that we goe not amisse, and their observations are a hedge to the Law: therefore the Iewes say, Se­jag [...] lahhochma shethea, Silence is the hedge of wisedome, for when a man holdeth his peace he is then thought to be wise. So they say Megnasheroth sejag legnosher, [...] Tythes are the hedge of our riches, and therefore pay thy Tythes and bee rich. So Nedarim sejag liphrishoth, vowes are the hedge of the first fruites. Lastly, they [...] say, Masoreth sejag latora, that the Masoreth is the hedge to the Law. By great paines and wonderfull care those [...] Masoreth, numbred the letters and words of the Scrip­ture, that none of them might perish: and as in a well [...] constituted family, the master of the family taketh a [...] note of all the things in his house from the greatest to the least: So did these Masoreth of the whole Law: therefore the Hebrewes say, Gnim shimmureth [...] hatorah, that is, the studie of the Masoreth was Cum con­servatione legis, [...] for the preserving of the Law from cor­ruption.

These diverse readings make not up diverse senses but helpe us better to come by the right sense of the Scripture. When it is objected to us by the Church Diverse reading, make not up diverse sense in the Scripture. of Rome that we have not the true meaning of the Scrip­tures, because of our diverse translations: Our Divines [Page 130] answer, that these diverse translations make not diverse senses in the Scriptures; for the sense is still one and the same: but these diverse translations helpe us one­ly, to come to the true meaning of the Scriptures, and so we must use these marginall and line readings, as we use these interpretations. When we see a blanke left in the the Text, and supplyed in the Margent; this ad­deth nothing to the Text, as a word added sometime by a translatour, addeth nothing to the Text: So when the Masoreth putteth another word in the Margent, A word set downe for explanation addeth nothing to the text. which is not in the Text; that word is set downe onely for explanation, and it addeth nothing to the Text. We take up the meaning of the Text, by the antecedent, The meaning of the text is knowne by the antecedent and conse­quent. and consequent. Example, Prov. 4. 3. Tender and young was I, Liphni, before my Mother; but in the Margent it is, Tender and young was I, Libhni, amongst the Sonnes of my Mother: for Salomon had moe brethren 1 Chron. 3. 6. But these readings may stand, he was tender and young [...] before his Mother, and best beloved of all his Mo­thers Sonnes.

The Conclusion of this. A certaine Iew gave God thankes for foure things. First, that hee was a Iew and Conclusion. not a Samaritane. Secondly, that he was bred at Ieru­salem and not at Pambiditha. Thirdly, that he said Shib­beth and not Sibboleth. Fourthly, that hee needed not ex Tihni-deni. cap. 7▪ the helps of Tiberias, meaning the Points and Accents. But we who are not naturall Iewes should bee thanke­full to God; because wee have these helpes to further us in the reading.

EXERCITAT. XV.

THere are three speciall meanes by which God maketh the Scriptures plaine unto us. The first is translation of the Scripture. The second is parapra­sing Three speciall meanes for making the Scrip­tures plaine. of the Scripture, and the third is the interpretati­on of the Scripture.

In the Translation of the Scripture consider, first, What things are neces­sary for translation. what is a Translation. Secondly, the necessitie of tran­slation. Thirdly, what things a Translator should ob­serve, and what things he should shunne. Fourthly, who they were who translated the Scriptures. Fiftly, the authority of the translation of the Seventy. Sixt­ly, the authority of the vulgar Latine translati­on.

First, what is a translation. We translate when we What is translation. change out of one language into another, and it is called [...] or [...]. If the Translator consider the words a part, then it is called [...] or [...], there is great force in the words, and therefore the Translatour must observe them. Plato was wont to call Socrates, [...], seu obstetricem; because when he sought out the words, then he brought forth the truth.

Secondly, let us consider the necessity of Translation The necessitie of tran­slation proved by sun­dry reasons. without a Translation wee can not understand a strange language, but it is barbarous to us.

Reasons proving the necessitie of translation.

First, when the old testament hath words altogether Reason 1 [Page 132] unknowne to the Iewes, it useth to interpret them. Ex­ample, Words in the old Te­stament, unknowne to the Iewes, are interpre­ted. Purim was a Persicke word unknowne to the Iewes; therefore the Holy Ghost interpreteth it, cal­ling it a Lot. So the Evangelists writing, in Greeke, and having sundrie Hebrew and Chaldee words, they expound them in Greeke as Siloe, that is, sent, Ioh. 9. 7. Abba interpreted by Pater, Rom. 8. So Tabitha kumi, by interpretation, Daughter arise, Mark. 5. 21. So Thomas called Didymus. See Mark. 7. 34. and Act. 1. 27. and Revela. 1. 7. amen by nai, So Abaddon be [...], Reve. [...]. 9. 11. So Rabboni by Master, Ioh. 20. 16. why doth the holy Ghost interpret these names? but to teach us that he would have the Scriptures translated into knowne tongues, that the people might understand them.

Why doth the holy Ghost interpret Elymas by Ma­gus, Quest. Act. 13. 8. But Elymas the Sorcerer (for so his name is by interpretation) withstood them, Seeing all translations should be in a more knowne tongue, but Magus, is as obscure as Elymas?

Magus was first a Persicke word, but afterwards it Answ. was well enough knowne to the Iewes, Elymas was but a part of Persia, so called from Elam the sonne of The Persians are called Elamites. Sem: therefore the Persians are called Elamites, Act. 2. and Luke interpreteth Elymas by Magus, as by that which was well enough knowne to the Iewes, and to us now; for we take Magus commonly for a Magitian: [...] magus a [...] formare vel fingere. the Arabick▪ translateth Magus, by Hhartom, from Hharat, fingere or formare; because the Magitians draw figures and circles when they conjure.

Why is the prayer of Christ upon the Crosse set Quest. downe in Hebrew by the Evangelists? Eli, Eli, lama sa­bacthani, Matth. 27. 46.

The Evangelist doth this, that we may perceive the Ans. Why the prayer of Christ upon the crosse is set downe in He­brew. bitter mocke that the Iewes used against Christ, saying, He calleth upon Elias, for in no other language the mocke will so appeare.

Secondly, it was a curse pronounced against the peo­ple of God, when the Lord should send strangers a­gainst Vnknowne tongues were a curse pronoun­ced against the people of the Iewes. them who should speake unto them in an un­knowne tongue, Esa. 28. 11. So it is a curse to the Church, as the Apostle applyeth it, to speake to the people the misteries of their salvation in an unknowne tongue, 1 Cor. 14. 21.

The Lord at the Pentecost gave the gift of tongues to the Apostles, that they might speake to the people Reason 3 in a knowne language, Every man heard them speake in his owne language, Act. 2. 6. And to some hee gave the tongues, but not the interpretation of them; but lest the people should not understand these languages, he gave God gave the gift of tongues to some, and to others he gave the in­terpretation of them. to others the gift of interpretation, 1 Cor. 12. 10. but the Church of Rome studieth of purpose to keepe the Scrip­tures in an unknowne tongue, and thinketh, that there­by the mindes of the people are more affected and stir­red up to devotion.

The third thing to be considered in a translation is A Translator must take heed, ex quo, & in quod vertit. what a Translator should observe and what hee should eschew in his translation. A Translator must observe Ex quo vertit & in quod vertit, or Terminus a quo & ter­minus ad quem, and he must consider first the sense, and then the words; he must looke first to the sense and see that he carry it with him, and next to the words; and Simile. even as Merchants when they sell their wares they He must have the worth of the words in his translation. looke for the worth of their wares in Money: So should a Translator in his translation see that hee have the worth, or meaning of the sense in his Translation, hee must consider first the aptnesse of the phrase into which he is to translate it, and hee is not [...] A Translator should consider the aptnesse of the phrase. servilly to follow it. Example, the Hebrew saith, I will multiply thy seede as the sand upon the lippe of the Sea, Gen. 22. 17. But our language saith upon the Sea shoare. So the Hebrew saith we must not eate with common hands, [Page 134] but we say, with unwashen hands: now in this meta­phrase changing one phrase into another, the Translator must take good heede.

Secondly, where the sense beareth it a Translator may A Translatour may adde a word where the sense beareth it. adde a word without any hurt to the Text. The origi­nall Text it selfe, affecteth sometime more brevity and in other places supplyeth this brevity. As, 2 Sam. 6. 6. Vzzia put fourth to the Arke, it is expounded more at large, 1 Chron. 13. 9. He put forth his hand to the Arke, So 2 Chron. 10. 9. is expounded by 2 Chron. 13. 9. At more length. The holy Ghost addeth a word for illustation where the sense beareth it, Deut. 27. 26. Cursed be hee that confirmeth not all the words of this Law to doe them; But the Apostle Galat. 3. 10. Cursed is every one that con­tinueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them. So a Translator may adde a word for illustration when the sense beareth it, Gen. 3. Hast thou eaten of the tree of which I forbad thee to eate? the Seventy adde, Hast thou eaten of the tree which I (onely) forbad thee to eate.

When Christ Mark. 5. 4. interpreteth tabitha kumi Quest. arise daughter, how addeth hee here, [...] tibi dico?

He doth not this as an interpreter, but to show the power and authority of him who speaketh; and there­fore Answ. [...], should be in a parenthesis.

A Translator must adde nothing of his owne in his A Translater must not adde of his owne to the text. translation, Exod. 16. 15. The vulgar translation addeth something which is not in the originall: when the chil­dren of Israel saw it, they sayd one to another, what is this? These words (what is this) are not the words of the holy Ghost: for Man signifieth, prepared or ready, and there­fore [...] interrogat apud Chaldaeos, sed non apud Hebraeos. it should be interpreted, this is ready or prepared meate. So Exod. 12. 11. they translate Phase, id est tran­situs, it should not be translated, id est transitus, but tran­situs, it is the Lords Passeover.

A Translator must not affect [...], that is, new­nesse [...], is an af­fecting of new words. of words: those doe contrary to that of Salomon, Prov. 22. 28. Remove not the ancient markes which thy fa­thers have set. This was the fault of Castalio who transla­ted Sequester, for Mediator, Genius, for Angelus, Infundere, for Baptizare, Histrio, for Hypocrita, Respublica, for Eccle­sia, When the matter re­quireth, a new word may be used in a tran­slation. and such. We are not so bound to words, but when the matter requireth, a new word may be used. Nice­phorus telleth of Spiridion, when hee heard the word [...], read for [...]; he rose and went out of the Church in a chafe: so another could not abide Cucur­bita, for Hedera, Ionas 4. 6. Esa. 45. 9. Woe be to him that striveth with his Maker: let the potsheard strive with the potsheards of the earth. Hierome hath it, testa de Samijs, he translated it terra Samiae; there is not such a word in the originall, neyther were these vasa Samiae, in use, in the dayes of the Prophet; yet because these vessels [...], is hee who hunteth for strange words that is not in use. were in use in his time, hee useth it in his translation: neyther can he be thought to be [...] a hunter of new words for this. So Nahum 3. 8. Art thou better than No. But Hierome translateth it, art thou better than Alexandria: because in his time No was called Alexandria: being built anew by Alexander.

A Translatour must not use a great circuite of words, [...], pigmenta ora­toria, the flowing speeches of Orators. or the floorishing speeches of Rhetoricke in his translation; for as men pouring wine out of one Ves­sel into another, take heede that the vent bee not too Simile. great; for then the wine would corrupt: So the Transla­tour if he take too much liberty to himselfe he may cor­rupt the sense.

Words that are transeunt, passing and received in [...]. all languages should not be translated: as Sabbath, Amen, Halleluia, Hosanua. So Iam. 5. 4. and the cryes of them which have reaped, are entred into the eares of the Lord of Sabbath. For as some sort of coine passeth in all countries Simile. [Page 136] so doe some words. Secondly, some words which come not originally from the Hebrew but from the Greeke, yet they should be kept still untranslated, as Phylacterie, Tetrach and such.

There are many Latine words which are made Many Latine words made Greeke in the new Testament. Greeke in the New Testament, and these are to bee translated. For as Daniel borrowed some words from the Ionians who dwelt in Asia minor and made Chaldee words of them, as sabucha from sambucha an instrument which they played upon. Angaria a Persicke word made Greeke, Matth. 5. 41. So Gazophylacium, all these Latin words which are made Greeke, should be translated. should be translated: So the Latine words which are made Greeke should bee translated, as [...] Census, Matth. 17. 25. [...] Centurio, quadrans [...], Matth. 5. 26. So Colonia [...], Act. 16. 12. So custodia [...], Matth. 26. So Legio, linteum, Macellum, membrana, modius, praetorium, [...], Matth. 27. sudarium, Luk. 19. 20. Spiculator, Matth. 6. 27. Semieinctum, Act. 19. 12. and Sicarius, Act. 21. 38. All these should bee transla­ted.

Words appropriate should not be translated to any [...] other use, but unto the use, to which they are appropri­ated. Example, Rachab received into her house [...]. A Translator cannot translate it Angels (because that word is appropriated to the blessed Angels) but Messen­gers. Example 2. Phil. 2. 25. Epaphroditus, [...], a Translator cannot translate it your Apostle (for that word is appropriated to the the Apostles) but your Messenger. So Act. 19. 23. [...], a Translator cannot translate it, The Church was confused, because this word Church is appropriated to the meeting of the Saints of God for his worship; but onely, The assembly was confused.

So words not appropriat should not bee appropriat Words not appropriate should not be appropri­ate. as the Church of Rome doe appropriat this word Sy­nagoga [Page 137] to the Old Testament, and Ecclesia to the New Testament; but Synagoga is sayd of the Church of the New Testament, and Synagoga & Ecclesia are promis­cuusly taken. So this word [...] should not be tran­slated Gods Cleargie, but Gods inheritance, 1 Pet. 5. 3. This word which is common to all Gods people, should not be appropriated to a few.

Words that are degenerate, we cannot use them in a Words degenerate, should not be used in a translation. translation. Example, 1 Cor. 14. 16. He that occupieth the roome [...], it cannot be translated Idiot here (un­lesse we would begge them for fooles,) but Vnlearned. So the word [...] is a degenerate word in our lan­guage, and taken in an evill sense, we cannot translate it, the Magitians came from the East, but the Wise men came from the East, Matth. 2. 1, So [...] should not bee Vide Rainoldum con­tra Hart. translated Priest, for the word Priest now is taken for a sacrifycing Preist: and God himselfe would not be called Baal, but ishi because Baal was a word degene­rate and given to Idols, Hos. 2. So [...] at the first was he that had the charge of the corne which the La­tines called Epulo, but now both are degenerate. So should not a degenerate word be used in a translati­on.

Words that are proper should not be translated as Words that are proper, are not to be translated as appellatives. appellatives or contra, 2 Sam. 23. 8. The Tachmonite that sat in the seate cheefe amongst the Captaines, this same was Hadino the Eznite, but 1 Chro. 11. 11. Iashobeam an Hach­monite, the cheefe of the Captaines he lift up his Speare against three hundred. It was a proper name of a man, as we may see, 1 Chro. 27. 2. And therefore should not be translated, he sate in judgement. So Adino and Eznite [...] gratum erat huic hasta­to. are not proper names, but are to be translated thus, His delight was to lift up his speare against three hundred. So Iosh. 14. 15. The Vulgar translation hath it thus, This is Adam who was buried amongst foure. Adam here is an [Page 138] appellative name and not proper; therefore the article He, is put before it. Secondly, he addeth Situs est, which [...] is not in the originall. Thirdly, he translateth Arba, Four, which is a proper name here▪ and hence came that fable, that foure men and their wives are buried there, Adam and Eve, Abraham and Sara, Isaac and Rebekah, and Iacob and Lea. So Act. 19. 9. Schola Tyranni, cannot be translated, in the Schoole of a Tyrant, but In the Schoole of Tyrannus, because it is not an appellative but a proper name.

Words that are Mediae significationis, a Translator [...]. must take heed how he translateth thē. Example 1. Esa. 3. 2. I will take away your Kosem from you. The Translator cannot translate it here, your Soothsayer but your Prudent. [...] So Ioshu. 13. 22. Balaam also the sonne of Beor the Kosem, did the children of Israel slay. It cannot be translated, Balaam the Prudent, but Balaam the Soothsayer.

Another example gnarum is called subtile or craftie and also prudent or wise, Gen. 3. 1. the Serpent was gna­rum, [...] it cannot be translated, More wise than any beast of the field; but More craftie and Prov. 1. 4. It cannot bee sayd to give Subtiltie, but Wisedome to the simple. So Matth. 10. 16. It cannot be sayd, be yee Craftie as Ser­pents, but Wise as Serpents.

A third example, Sheol signifieth both the grave and hell; when it is set downe without He locale, then it ever Vide Simeon, de Muis, in Psal. 9. [...] locale. [...] et▪ signifieth the grave, but when He locale, is put to it, and the godly, are sayd to goe Lesheolah, then it signifieth the lowest grave, as Psal. 86. 13. But when Sheol hath He [...] quomodo differunt. locale joyned to it, and the wicked are sayd to go Lesheo­lah, then it signifieth the Hell, and it should be translated, They went downe to hell, Num. 16. 30.

A fourth example, Pethi is taken in an evill sense for [...] Foolishnesse, as Prov. 1. 22. and in a good sense for Simpli­citie, as Psal. 116. 6.

Words [...] (and as the Iewes say [...] vel [...]. Quae nullum habent fratrem) they should be warily taken heede unto, how they be translated, because there is not another word to cleare them by. Example, Num. 24. [...] The Masoreth put this marke [...] ubi no­tant vocem aliquam semel reperiri, & quae bis occurrunt, they call them [...] that is, gemellj. 3. Hag gebher shethum hagnaijn, Vir apertis oculis. It is not taken in this sense in all the Scriptures but onely here: in other places of the Scripture it is taken in a contrary signification for Shutting of the eyes.

Another example, Mat. 13. 25. The enemy came and sow­ed, [...], it should not be translated Tares or Fitches, but Evill seede, [...] is that which we call blasted Corne, or the deafe eares, which grow up with the good Corne, & cannot bee discerned from the good Corne untill the Harvest; and then it proveth naught: for Fitches and [...] quid. Tares may be presently discerned, and pulled up; the one signifieth the Hypocrites and the other Hereticks. And where it is sayd, His enemy came and sowed Tares, The parable must be understood thus, that the enemy cor­rupted Vide Suidam in [...] & Sculteri Exercitati­ones. that seede which seemed to be good seede: In a parable wee must not stretch every word, but onely look to the maine scope; for then we may gather that the wicked in Hell have tongues now, and the glorified have bodies now in the Heavens.

A third example. Mark. 14. 3. She brought a boxe [...] quid. [...] Of liquid nard, it should be translated Of up­right and perfect nard: for according to the phrase of the Seventy, that is [...] which excelleth in the owne kind of it, and so they call the Temple of Salomon [...] [...]; An excellent Temple. The Syriack hath it Pis from the Greeke word [...].

The fourth thing that is to be considered here, are they who translated the Scriptures. Iunius saith that Lib. 1. contro vers. cap. 5. contra Bellar. there are twelve translations of the Bible into the Greeke, the first translation of the Ptolemies was Lagi­ana which Ptolemaeus Lagi caused to be translated. The There were twelve translations of the Bible into Geeeke. [Page 140] next translation, was the translation of the Seventy, which was translated in the dayes of Ptolomeus Phila­delpus, the third was Herodiana in the time of Ptolo­mie the last, the fourth that of Aquila, the fifth of Symmachus, the sixt of Theodosion, the seventh Hieri­chuntina found in Iericho, the eight Nicapolitana found at Nicapolis, the ninth Origenaria, translated by Origen, the tenth Luciana translated by the martyr Lucian, the eleventh Hesychiana, translated by Hesychius, the twelfth Exhieromineana translated out of Ieromes tran­slation into Greeke.

There is such a profunditie in the Scriptures, that it is unpossible for any Interpreter to sownd the depth of them, but as it fareth with the oyle of the widow, 2 King. 4. So long as the children brought vessels, so long there was oyle to fill them: So there is such plen­ty in the Scriptures, when they have filled the wits and understanding of the best; yet there is sufficient for these who goe about to translate anew againe, to bee drawne out of them.

And it is no marvell why they differ so in their tran­slations, for one roote hath so many significations The cause of the dif­ference in translations. sometimes, that all the Translators cannot agree in one. Let us take but this one example, Iob. 4. 18. Pagninus translateth it, In angelis suis ponit lumen. 2. In angelis suis indidit vesaniam, Tigurin. 3. In Angelis suis ponit lucem exactissimam, vatablus. 4. In angelis suis posuit gloriatio­nem, Regia. 5. In angelis suis reperit vanitatem, Symma­chus. 6. Adversus angelos suos pravum quid advertit, Sep­tuaginta. [...] laudare.gloriari.fulgere.splendere.insanire, &c. The diversity of these translations ariseth from the word Halal, which signifieth Laudare, gloriari, fulgere splendere, insanire.

The first translation which was in any account was Translations which were in estimation that which was in in the dayes of Ptolomeus Philadelpus.

The second that of Aquila who translated the Old [Page 141] Testament into Greeke, an hundred and twenty yeares after Christ. The third was that of Symmachus who li­ved in the time of the Emperor Severus, fifty and sixe yeares after the translation of Aquila. The fourth tran­slation was that of Theodosion who lived under the Em­peror Commodus (as Symmachus lived under Severus) and hee and Symmachus lived at one time. These foure were joyned together by Origen, and he called them Tetrapla. And then he added the Hebrew Text and his How Ori­gen made up his Tetrapla, Hexapla, & Octupla. owne translation, and then he called them Hexapla. And lastly he added that translation which was found in Ie­richo, and at Nicapolis, and then he called them Octupla or [...], because every Page contained eight Co­lumnes, as may be seene in this Table following.