not yet consecrated Priest 2. And for the same reason Aarons rod though it were a testimony that God had chosen Aaron his seed for the priesthood yet it was not this Testimonie for at that time when Aarons rod budded he was the high Priest but at the erection of the Tabernacle Aaron was not yet consecrated 3. Neither was the booke which Moses writ this Testimonie for that is supposed to bee the booke of Deuteronomie which was not yet written and that booke was given by Moses to the Levites by them to be put in the side of the Arke Deut. 31.26 but this Testimonie was put by Moses himselfe in the Arke 4. Therefore this Testimonie was no other than the tables of the Law called the tables of the Testimonie chap. 31.18 and 34.29 which were so named because they testified Gods will unto the people and were witnesses and testimonies of the league and covenant which the Lord made with his people Tostatus quaest 6. QUEST VII Whether the tables of the law were put into any other Arke beside the Arke of the Testament Vers. 20. HE put the Testimonie in the Arke 1. R. Salom. thinketh that the tables of the Law were put into another Arke which Moses made and when the Arke with the Mercie seate was finished then he put them into that for there were seven moneths betweene Moses comming downe with the second tables untill the Tabernacle was erected when and not before Moses put them into the Arke of the most holy place it is not like that all that time the tables were kept without an Arke and Deut. 10.5 Moses saith I made an Arke of Shittim wood and hewed two tables of stone c. There was then one Arke made before Moses hewed the tables of stone 2. But this Arke heere mentioned by Moses was none other than that which was made by Bezaleel for the tables of stone for Moses saith Deut. 10.5 there they be they were at that time long after the erecting of the Tabernacle in the same Arke before mentioned but that was the Arke of the Sanctuarie And during all that time after Moses comming downe the tables of the Law were kept in some convenient place till the Arke was made so that it is not necessarie to imagine any other Arke beside that Tostatus qu. 7. QUEST VIII When the Priests were consecrated whether at the erecting of the Tabernacle or after Vers. 27. ANd burnt incense thereon Moses did supplie the office of the Priests in burning of incense setting up the lampes offering sacrifices upon the brasen altar at the erecting up of the Tabernacle because as yet Aaron and his sonnes were not consecrated 1. Some thinke that their consecration began together with the erecting of the Tabernacle and so continued seven daies and the eigâ—th day their consecration was finished as is set forth Levit. 8.8 and then began the Princes their offerings for twelve daies together Numb 7. and some will have these seven daies to end at the first day of the first moneth of the second yeare some to begin then as Tostat. qu. 2. But neither of these can stand for as soone as Moses had made an end of consecrating the Tabernacle the Princes the same day began to offer Numb 7.2 But they offered not before the people were numbred for they were the Princes over them that were numbred Now these Princes with their people were not numbred before the first day of the second moneth of the second yeare Numb 1.1 therefore the erecting of the Tabernacle was not finished and the Priests consecrated in the space of seven daies immediately before the first day of the first moneth or immediately after 2. R. Salom. hath a conceit that there was a double erecting of the Tabernacle one was every day for seven daies in which time the Priests also had their seven daies of consecration which ended upon the first of the first moneth and then there was another solemne erection of the Tabernacle to continue when the Princes began to offer But this Rabbinicall conceit is confuted before qu. 4. neither did the Princes offer in the first but in the second moneth as is shewed before 3. Some thinke that Aaron was first consecrated before the Tabernacle that he might consecrate it and the other things thereunto belonging But it is evident in the text that Moses is commanded to anoint the Tabernacle himselfe and all things therein Simlerus 4. Yet it is not to be supposed that the whole Tabernacle and all the implements and vessels thereof were sanctified before Aaron and his sonnes were consecrated for immediately after that Moses had made an end of sanctifying the Tabernacle and the instruments therof the very same day began the twelve Princes of the tribes to offer the summe of whose offering for sacrifice was twelve bullockes twelve rammes twelve lambes for a burnt offering twelve hee-goats for a sin offering 24. bullocks 60 rammes 60. lambes 60. hee-goats for peace offerings Numb 7.8.88 all these could not bee sacrificed by Moses alone therefore it cannot be but that Aaron and his sonnes were consecrated before the Princes brought their offerings 5. I incline therefore to Iunius opinion that after Moses had consecrated the Tabernacle with the instruments thereof then last of all hee consecrated the Altar with the instruments thereof and because the Priests office was most exercised about the altar at the same time also their consecration concurred with the sanctifying of the Altar or went immediately before And this may bee gathered that the Altar was last of all consecrated and somewhat after the rest because they are distinguished the anointing of the Tabernacle and all the instruments thereof and the anointing of the Altar with the instruments thereof Numb 7.1 6. Seeing then that the Princes began to offer immediately after the Altar was anointed which was the second day of the second moneth for upon the first day of the moneth the people were numbred Numb 1.1 and they were so numbred before the offerings began Numb 7.2 it is like as Iunius well noteth upon that place that the first moneth was spent in the erecting of the Tabernacle and the consecrating thereof QUEST IX Why the Priests were commanded to wash their hands and their feet Vers. 31. SO Moses and Aaron and his sonnes washed their feet thereat c. 1. The literall reason why they were commanded to wash their hands and their feet was this that seeing it was meet that they which should handle the holy things should approach even with pure hands in respect of outward cleannesse these parts are especially commanded to be washed because the hands with handling touching of things and the feet with walking are most apt of all the parts of the bodie to gather soile 2. There might be uncleannesse also in other parts of the bodie as by nocturnall pollutions by the flux of seed and such like but in these cases the partie was uncleane sometimes onely
cubit and an hand breadth which was foure fingers or three thumbs more than the ordinary But seeing this great cubit was used among the Persians called regius cubitus Persarum the Kings cubit or Persian cubit which was not in use among the Hebrewes before the captivity it is not like that this measure was followed in the making of the Tabernacle 4. Wherefore I thinke rather that the usuall and ordinary cubit is here to be taken which contained two hands breadth of the greater fift and six of the lesse the great or large hand breadth called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contained twelve fingers the space betweene the thumbe and the little finger stretched out the lesse called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contained but foure fingers So then whereas Iusephus saith that the Arke was five palmeâ— or hand breadths long and there broad he meaneth the large and great palme or hand breadth called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so they make two cubits and halfe in length and a cubit and halfe in breadth Beda followeth this account of Iosephus saying Nec putuâ—dum hominum Iudaum in scripturis divinis secularibus doctissimum hoc petuisse latere c. It is not like that a Jew being learned in divine and secular writings could be ignorant herein And in this sense doe Bâ—rrhaius and Ribera take the cubit here QUEST XX. Whether the rings and barres were in the length or breadth of the Arke Vers. 12. TWo rings shall be on the one side c. 1. Tostacus therein following the opinion of R. Sâ—lamo thinketh that these rings thorow the which the barres were put to carry the Arke were not in the length but the breadth of the Arke for if the barres had beene put long wayes then there had beene but a cubit and halfe the breadth of the Arke betweene barre and barre which space had beene too narrow for two to carry behinde and two before one should have hindred another But this is a slender conjecture for they which carried the Arke may be supposed to have borne it upon their neere shoulders and so they might have roome enough without hindring one another Cajetane is of the same opinion that the Arke was carried secundum latitudinem at the breadth not long wayes and his reason is for more dignity sake that it should not be carried as a thing of burthen long wayes But there is no more grace or dignity in carrying one way than another it seemeth they rather respected in the carriage easinesse and comelinesse which was performed in carrying it in length more than in breadth 2. Therefore Iosephus opinion is more probable that annuli inerant exâ—troque longiore latere the rings were set on each of the long sides So also Montanus And this is more agreeable to the text that saith the rings were in the sides of the Arke which were in the length the other were the ends not the sides Lyranus QUEST XXI Whether anything were in the Arke beside the tables of stone Vers. 16. THou shalt put in the Arke the Testimonie which I shall give thee 1. Rupertus here by this Testimony understandeth not only the Tables of stone but the pot of Manna also and Aarons Rod. But that cannot be as Tostatus reasoneth because this Testimony here spoken of was given by God himselfe so were neither of the other And although the other were in some sense testimonies also unto Israel as the pot of Manna testified unto them how God miraculously fed them in the wildernesse and Aarons Rod testified that the tribe of Levi usurped not that calling but were therein appointed of God yet the Tables of the Law were specially so called quia testes erant c. because they were witnesses betweene God and his people that they had received these precepts of God and promised obedience Lyran. 2. But though Tostatus herein dissent from Rupertus in the exposition of these words yet he thinketh that all these three were in the Arke quaest 11. and that the booke of Deuteronomie which Moses writ was there also which Moses commanded the Levites to put in the side of the Arke Deut. 31. And this they thinke to be confirmed by the Apostles testimonie Hebr. 9.3 After the second vaile was the Tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all which had the golden censer and the Arke of the Testament overlaid with gold in the which the golden pâ—t which had Manna was and Aarons rod that had budded and the tables of the Testament But in this place as Iunius Ribera Pelargus have well observed the relative 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in qua in the which is not referred to the Testament but to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Tabernacle before spoken of for it is not unusuall for the relative to be referred to the former antecedent as may be observed in divers places 3. Therefore the truth is that there was nothing in the Arke beside the tables of the Law as is evidently testified 2 King 8.9 and 2 Chron. 5.10 Some doe answer that in Moses time all these were in the Arke but not in Salomons so Catharinus and some conjecture that the enemies might have taken away the other when the Arke was in their custody sic Genevens But Iosephus evidently witnesseth that there was never any thing put within the Arke saving the tables of stone Thomas Aquinas thinketh that the tables of stone are said to be there because although the rest were there also the Arke was made specially to keepe those tables of stone But the text is plaine that there was nothing there beside Anselmus saith that they are said to be in the Arke because they were neere to the Arke But it is evident that the tables of stone were not only neere the Arke but in the Arke it selfe therefore in the same sense they are not all said to be in the Arke Lyranus in 2 King 8. Abulens qu. 6. and Cajetane affirme that the tables of the Law were only in the Arke and the other two were in a little cheâ—t or coffer in the side of the Arke But this Ribera saith is comâ—â—entitium imagined for we reade not of any such thing made without the Arke Therefore the best resolution is this that the tables of the Law were only in the Arke the other two Aarons Rod and the pot of Manna were only placed before the Arke As Exod. 16.34 the pot of Manna is said to be laid up before the Testimony to be kept So Num. 17.10 the Lord said to Moses Bring 〈◊〉 Rod before the Testimonie to be kept but we reade not that it is any where said of the two tableâ— that they were laid up before the Lord. And concerning the booke of Deuteronomie which Moses did write it was not put into the Arke but without neere unto the Arke in the Tabernacle because it was found afterward in Iosias time in the place where the treasure was 2 Chron. 34.14 Ribera
And therefore it was the old use in the consecration of Bishops to aske of him that was consecrated vtrum velit Episcopatum whether he would have a Bishoprike who was twice to say nay but if any such desired a Bishopricke induceret illum ad mentiendum he that asked such question should enduce him to lie Thus farre Tostatus proceedeth well 2. But whereas that place of the Apostle will be objected If any man desireth the office of a Bishop he desireth a good worke 1 Tim. 3.1 he answereth he desireth indeed bonum opus a good worke but not bene he desireth it not well whereas the Apostle in these words as Hierom expoundeth them Ad operis desiderium non ad honoris ambitum provocat doth rather provoke and stir up unto the desire of the work not ambitiously to seek the honour c. The Apostle then in these words reprehendeth not but alloweth their desire which affect the callings of the Church rather prodesse quam praesse to profit others than to rule as Augustine saith 3. Wherefore this further may be added that in seeking or desiring the places and offices of the Church there are two extremes to be shunned the one was the fault of former times when they which otherwise were well qualified and enabled for Ecclesiasticall functions did altogether decline them and utterly refused to take that calling upon them as one Ammonius when he should have been ordained a Presbyter cut off one of his eares and threatned if they would not let him alone to cut out his tongue to make himselfe altogether unfit for that calling The other fault is incident to this age ambitiously to sue and seeke for the preferments of the Church such an one was Diatrephes who loved to have preeminence Wherefore that a meane may bee kept in desiring the places in the Church three things must bee considered 1. Hee that hath any mind to an Ecclesiasticall calling must first examine himselfe whether hee bee fitted and enabled with gifts and that in an humble opinion not in a blind selfe-love but such an one as is not furnished with gifts sinneth in putting himselfe forward to that place for the which he is not meet 2. He must propound unto himselfe as the chiefe and principall end the glorie of God and the edifiing of the people and not for maintenance or living sake offer himselfe 3. Hee must take heed that he use no indirect or unlawfull meanes by flatterie or briberie to creepe in and intrude himselfe 4. These conditions being well observed and these times withall considered wherein partly because of the great number and choice to bee had of sufficient men but most of all because vertue and learning is not duely respected and rewarded preferment is not offered unasked and undesired he that desireth a place in the Church as the Apostle saith desireth a good thing and therein is not to be discommended QUEST V. When the Tabernacle began to be set up Vers. 17. THus was the Tabernacle reared up the first day of the first moneth c. 1. Cajetane hereupon noteth that the Tabernacle was set up before one yeare was expired since their comming up out of Egypt whence they departed upon the fifteenth day of the first moneth so that there wanted fifteene daies of a full yeare This collection is verie evident out of the text and therefore Lippoman following the Septuagint had no reason to reject it 2. Simlerus thinketh that the Tabernacle which could not be set up in one day was begun to be set up before and now finished on the first day of the moneth which used to be a solemne day and it is like they kept not that solemnitie untill the Tabernacle was erected But it is evident by the text that Moses began now only to set up the Tabernacle upon the first day of the first moneth because the Lord appointeth that day for Moses to set it up in vers 2. therefore he began not before And the day wherein they began to set it up might be kept as a solemne day as well as the day wherein it was finished yet it may be thought that the feast of the new moone was not yet observed the Priests being not yet consecrated to whose office it belonged to solemnize that day with sacrifices 3. R. Salomon saith there were two erections and setting up of the Tabernacle one was quotidiana every day when it was set up in the morning and taken downe againe at night the other was stabilis erectio the sure or firme erecting of it which continued till the campe removed the first erecting of it began seven daies before but the second solemne and stable erecting was upon the first day of the first moneth Contra. This is the Rabbines owne device that the Tabernacle was every day set up and taken downe againe for it is contrarie to the text which saith that the cloud of the Lord was upon the Tabernacle by day and fire by night vers 37. untill the cloud ascended and then they went forward but if the Tabernacle were taken downe in the night the fire could not rest upon it 4. Calvine taketh this erecting of the Tabernacle for the removing of it from without the campe where it was set up and bringing of it within the host for his opinion is that the Tabernacle was set up before Moses going up the second time into the mount when he removed it without the host chap. 33.7 Contra. But that Tabernacle was not this great Tabernacle but another where Moses used to consult with God as is further shewed in the handling of that place And the great Tabernacle was made after Moses second comming downe as it is set downe in storie which without great necessitie is not to be transposed and as soone as the work was finished they brought it to Moses and then the Lord spake to Moses to set it up 5. Wherefore I encline rather to thinke that Moses according to the Lords commandement began onely upon the first day of the first moneth to set up the Tabernacle and so continued untill he had finished for in one day it was not all set up as it may be gathered chap. 7.1 VVhen Moses had finished the setting up of the Tabernacle hee did not then begin and finish in one day QUEST VI. What Testimonie was put into the Arke Vers. 20. HE tooke and put the testimonie in the Arke c. There were in and beside the Arke these foure things the tables of the Law the pot of Manna Aarons rod and the booke of the Law which Moses writ but none of these are heere understood by this Testimonie but only the tables of the Law 1. The pot of Manna was a testimonie of Gods mercie that he had fed the Israelites with the bread of heaven fortie yeares in the wildernesse but that was not this Testimonie for Aaron is bid to take the pot of Manna and put it there chap. 16.33 who was
as the water in the red sea did or that though it were covered with water it might be preserved as the Olive tree whereof the Dove tooke a branch or that God might restore Paradise againe after the floud the first is presumptuous to imagine a miracle without warrant of Scripture and if it had beene so Noah needed not to have made an arke he and his sonnes and the cattell might have beene preserved there the second is not sufficient for though Paradise which is not like had beene so preserved yet Henoch must have beene drowned The third is frivolous for if the terrene Paradise had beene planted againe seeing it was situated in a knowne place in Mesopotamia it could not have beene hid In this question Pererius is an adversary to Bellarmine Senens and the rest that yet dreame of a terrene Paradise 5. Confut. Henoch shall returne into the world to die IT is also the constant opinion of the popish writers that Henoch shall come againe toward the end of the world and then shall die being to be slaine by Antichrist Pererius cum Bellarm. Cont. But this is contrary to the Apostle That Henoch was taken away that he should not see death neither was found Heb. 11.5 Ergo Henoch shall not see death nor bee found in a mortall state in earth whereas they object that place Heb. 9.27 It is appointed unto men that they shall once die The answer is ready like as they which are alive at Christs comming shall not die but be changed 1 Cor. 15. which notwithstanding shall bee in stead of death so Henoch was changed in his taking up though he died not a common death 6. Confut. Henoch shall not returne to preach repentance to the world COncerning the end and causes wherefore Henoch was translated 1. Wee admit that God hereby would put the righteous in comfort that notwithstanding the sentence pronounced against Adam there was a way of righteousnesse whereby to recover Adams lost state 2. To minister comfort to the afflicted members of Christ that they should not doubt but that their reward is with God as Habel though he had an untimely end yet lived with God as Henoch did thus Theodoret. 3. Wee refuse not the collection here of Thomas Aquinas that God both by Henochs translation before the law and Elias under the law would nourish the hope of life in his Church as by types representing the ascension of Christ in whom the promise of salvation should be accomplished These causes of Henochs translation may safely be received 4. But we neither thinke as it is in the booke of Wisdome which is no Canonicall Scripture and therefore we may safely dissent from it That hee was taken away lest wickednesse should alter his understanding for as he walked with God before God kept him in his feare and preserved him from evill so he could have guided him still as the Apostle saith He shall be established God is able to make him stand Rom. 14.4 speaking of the faithfull servants of God as Mathuselah the sonne of Henoch being the longest lived of all the Patriarkes continued righteous to the end 5. Neither is that surmise fit to be received that Henoch is kept alive to preach repentance in the end of the world and to maintaine the Gospell against Antichrist which is the common opinion of the papall professors For of Henochs preaching in the end of the world there is no mention in Scripture but only of the sending of Elias which is not understood of Elias person but of his spirit and zeale And this Elias the Angell expoundeth to be Iohn Baptist who should goe before Christ in the spirit and power of Elias And there is no such necessity that Henoch should be preserved so many yeares by miracle to that end seeing the Lord is able to raise up Prophets and Ministers as he did Iohn Baptist in the spirit of Elias and Henoch to maintaine the truth against the Pope and Antichrist which we see plentifully performed in these dayes 7. Confut. Of the Prophesie and booke of Henoch WHereas S. Inde in his Epistle vers 14. maketh mention of the Prophesie of Henoch the seventh from Adam which is not found in any other part of the Canonicall Scripture lest the adversaries might hereupon build their traditions and unwritten verities I will briefly declare what is to be thought of this Prophesie of Henoch 1. I neither thinke with Tertullian that there was any such propheticall booke of Henoch then extant who conjectureth that though it perished in the floud yet it might be restored againe by Noah thereunto inspired 2. Neither yet with Hierome that this booke of Henoch was an Apocriphall booke yet some part of it might be true which the Apostle might alleage For it is not like that the Apostle would derive a testimony from an hidden and obscure booke of no authority in the Church 3. Neither yet is it like as Michael Medina thinketh that there was no such booke at all under Henochs name for the fathers Origen Hierome Augustine doe in many places make evident mention that such a booke there was but thought it to be forged 4. And it is as unlike that the true book of Henoch was extant in the Apostles time which was afterward corrupted with fables and so rejected of the Church for then the Church would rather have purged the true booke from such errours and preserved the rest pure as they did discerne the true Gospels from the forged and adulterate Our opinion then is 1. With Augustine that the booke of Henoch which in his time was produced by Heretikes was altogether forged and no part of it of Henochs writing Non quod eorum hominum qui Deo placuorunt reprobetur authoritas sed quod ista non creduntur ipsorum not that saith he we refuse the authoritie of such men as pleased God but for that they were thought not to be theirs 2. We judge it not unlike with Origen that there might be such an authenticall booke of Henochs prophesie out of the which Iude did take his testimony which is now lost as some other parts of the Canonicall Scripture are as the books of God Nathan Iddâ— and other Prophets mentioned in the Chronicles 3. Or this prophesie of Henoch might be preserved by faithfull tradition in the Church of the Iewes which is approved by the Apostle But this is no warrant for other unwritten traditions unlesse some had the like Apostlike spirit to judge of them as Iudas had and further this prophesie of Henoch is a greeable to the Scriptures so are not many unwritten traditions urged by the Church of Rome 6. Places of exhortation 1. IN that the line only of the race of the faithfull is rehearsed in this chapter it both sheweth that God will alwaies have his church in the world and that in the most corrupt times God will have a remnant that shall
excellent and he shall be nourished with the delights of Kings C. Assher his bread shall be fat and he shall give pleasures for a King caet v. 21. Nepthali his lot shall fall in a good ground c. they shall praise and blesse over them C. Neptali a trunke or post remissus sent backe sending forth beautie in the branch S. Nepthali as an hinde let goe or sent forth giving goodly words caet aial signifieth an hart and a post oomer a word amir an high branch v. 22. Ioseph a sonne increasing H.S.C. a fruitfull bough cater ben sig a sonne and a bough Pleasant to behold H.S. as a fruitfull bough beside the fountaine caet gnen sig an eye and a fountaine His daughters ran upon the wall H.P. my young sonne returne unto me S. two tribes shall come out of his sonnes and shall receive their part and inheritance C. his small branches run upon the wall caet baenâ—th daughters branches v. 22. The men of dissention C. the archers or shooters caet v. 2.44 Their bowes were broken with strength S. his how abode strong caet jashab to sit to rest to continue The sinewes or strings of his arms were dissolved H.S. the arms of his hands were strengthened T.B.P. the hands of his arms were strengthened G. phazzaz to strengthen From thence Israel is strengthened of God thy father S. of whom was the feeder appointed by the stone of Israel G. of him shall come a shepherd or herd-man B the stone of Israel T.H.B.P. the Chalde translateth here very corruptly comming nothing neare the text thus the prophecie was fulfilled in them because he kept the law in secret and propounded his constant hope then gold was put upon his armes c. v. 25. The blessing of the earth having all things S. the blessing of the deep beneath caet With the blessings of thy father and mother C. with the blessings of the breasts and the wombe caet v. 26. The blessing of thy father and mother above the blessing of the stable hills S. the blessings of thy father shall be added above the blessings of my fathers C.B.G.P. the blessings of thy father are strong with the blessings of his fathers H. or of mine elders T.H. he Har an hill harah a father a progenitor v. 26. In the blessings of the everlasting hills S. untill the desire of the everlasting hills come H. which the Princes have desired which were since the world C. to the utmost hills of the world B. to the end of the hills of the world T.G. ta ah sig to limit avah to desire which was ruler over his brethren S. which was a Nazarite or separate among his brethren caet nazar to separate v. 27. In the land of Benjamin shall dwell the majestie of the temple and in the possession thereof the sanctuarie evening and morning shall the Priests offer sacrifices and in the evening they shall divide the rest c. the rest agree in the vulgar reading v. 31. There they buried Leah S. there Leah lyeth buried H. there I buried Leah caet v. 32. The possession of the field and cave therein of the sonnes of Heth. S.T. the purchase of the field c. of the sonnes of Heth. B.G.C.P. chanah sig both to possesse purchase this verse is omitted in the vulgar Latine 3. The Explanation of doubtfull questions QUEST I. Of the propheticall testament or Iacobs in generall Vers. 1· THen Iacob called his sonnes c. 1. Iacob not by any naturall instinct as some hold an opinion that the soule is more divine and apter to foretell things to come when death approcheth as Xenophon reporteth of Cyrus lib. 8. Plato of Socrates in apolog but by a divine inspiration doth prophesie what shall befall his children as Isaack did blesse his two sonnes Gen. 27. Moses the tribes of Israel Deut. 33. David blessed Salomon 1 Chron. 29. our blessed Saviour praied for his disciples immediately before his death Ioan. 17. Perer. 2. Iacob doth not blesse all his children three of them he censureth for their sinne Ruben Simeon Levi but Moses blesseth all the tribes Deuter. 33. the cause is not as R. Salomon imagineth that Iacob purposed to blesse all but being forsaken of Gods spirit and beside himselfe he falleth into a fit of phrensie which were impious to thinke Perer. 3. Some make question whether Iacob spake these words or Moses rather so penned them Mercer But it is more like that Iacob being moved by the spirit spake after this concise manner as a prophet though not altogether in the same forme of words· 4. Some doe wonder how Moses should come by the knowledge of these words which Iacob spake 200. yeares before to his sonnes in a corner they may as well muse how Moses should describe the particular places of the land of Canaan which hee never saw and set downe the historie of the creation which things Moses might have by godly tradition but most of all by the revelation of the spirit Calvin 5. Iosephus is too slender in the reporting of this propheticall speech of Iacob making onely mention thereof in generall that he prophesied how his children should inherit the land of Canaan lib. 2 antiquitat Some other have beene too bold to forge other fables upon this occasion as Origen maketh mention of a booke entituled The narration of Ioseph the sonne of Iacob tom 2. in Ioâ—uâ— out of the which he citeth certaine testimonies to prove the incarnation of Angels and the prognostication of things done in the world by the starres but Athanasius in Synops. holdeth this to be a forged booke so is that other called The testament of the twelve Patriarkes mentioned by Origen hom 15. in Iosun ex Perer. Some also of our own have beene too bold in allegorizing Iacobs words whereas the literall and historicall sense is full enough and containeth excellent matter Calvin QUEST II. What last times Iacob speaketh of GAther your selves c. I will tell you what shall come in the last daies 2. He calleth all his children to be present who were not all before assembled when Iacob blessed Ephraim and Manassâ—h and he stirreth them up also to attention to consider diligently what he saith Mercer 2. We need not with Rupertus by Iacobs sonnes to understand his spirituall seed the Church of Christ seeing this prophecie was literally accomplished in his carnall ofspring 3. By the lust daies wee understand not onely the times of the Messiah as David Kimhi Hierome and Lyranus will have it alwaies taken in the prophets but sometime it betokeneth the age next ensuing as Dan. 2.28 God sheweth the King what shall be in the latter daies that is vers 29. what shall come to passe afterward some part of his dreame fell out in the next times and age after Nabuchadnezzar Like as then in this place Iacob speaketh of the comming of the Messiah vers 10. so also he propesieth
and terror love and feare for a Fountaine cannot make both salt water and sweet Iam. 3.12 But the law is the minister of death of feare and terror Ergo not of life and peace and so consequently not of the faith of the Gospell which bringeth all these 3. The same thing doth not both make the wound and give a plaister to heale it The law doth shew us our sinne faith by grace in Christ healeth it the law reviveth sinne Without the law sinne is dead Rom. 7.8 but we are dead to sinne and alive to God in Iesus Christ our Lord Rom. 6.11 The same cannot make us both to die unto sinne and revive sinne the law doth the one therefore not the other So Augustine saith Ad hoc data est lex ut vulnera ostenderet peccatorum qua gratiae benedictione sanaret Therefore was the law given that it should shew the wounds of our sinnes which it should heale by the benediction of grace August de poenitent medic 4. The Preachers publishers and givers of the law and Gospell are divers The law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ Ioh. 1.17 But if justifying faith were commanded in the law then grace also should come by the ministrie of Moses that gave the law This is Bernards reason who further inferreth thus Venit prâ—inde gratia plenus veritate Dominus noster c. Therefore Christ our Lord came full of grace and truth that what could not bee done by the law might bee fulfilled by grace Serm. parâ— 28. 5. The qualities and conditions of the law and the Gospell are divers the law promiseth life to him that worketh Moses thus describeth the righteousnesse of the law That the man which doth these things shall live thereby Rom. 10.5 But the Gospell requireth not the condition of working but beleeving to him that worketh not but beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Rom. 4.5 If then faith were commanded in the law to beleeve should also be a worke of the law then the Apostles conclusion were in vaine I conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law But if faith be excluded out of the works of the law then it is not commanded or contained in the law for then it should be a worke of the law 2. Further the invocation of Angels and Saints which is commonly practised and stifly maintained in the Church of Rome is another apparent transgression of this first commandement because they give a speciall part of the divine worship which consisteth in prayer and invocation unto the creature First we will see and examine the arguments produced by the Romanists in defence of this superstition and then by other reasons out of the Scriptures convince and confute them The Romanists Arguments answered brought in defence of the invocation of Saints 1. THe Saints doe pray for us therefore we may and ought to pray them The antecedent or first part that the Saints doe pray for us they would prove by these places of Scripture Exod. 32.13 Moses thus saith in his prayer Remember Abraham Izhak and Iakob thy servants c. Ierem. 15.1 Though Moses and Samuel stood before me yet could not my affection be toward this people Baruch 3.4 O Lord God almightie heare now the prayer of the dead Israelites 2 Macchab. 14.15 And Onias spake and said This is a lover of the brethren who prayeth much for the peoplâ— to wit Ieremias the Prophet of the Lord. Answ. 1. As for the testimonies cited out of Baruch and the booke of Macchabees they prove nothing because they are no books of Canonicall Scripture 2. The other testimonies are impertinently alleaged for in the first Moses maketh no mention of the prayers which Abraham Izhak and Iakob should make for the people but of the covenant which the Lord made with them In the other of an hypotheticall and conditionall proposition they make a categoricall and absolute affirmation The text is If Moses and Samuel stood they inferre that Moses and Samuel did stand Simler But it may better be answered that if these were alive among the people to stand before the Lord for them in prayer c. as see the like Ezech. 14.14 Though these three men Noah Daniel and Iob were among them they should deliver but their owne soules by their righteousnesse 3. The Saints doe pray unto God by their generall wishes and desires as wishing that the Kingdome of God were accomplished as Revel 6.10 The soules under the Altar crie with a loud voyce saying How long Lord c. doest thou not judge and avenge our bloud But our particular necessities they are ignorant of and so doe noâ— make particular requests for us therefore the argument followeth not they pray by their generall desires for the Church Ergo they pray for us in particular 4. Seeing that the Romanists doe hold that the Patriarks and Fathers of the old Testament were in Limbo which they make a member or part of hell they doe contradict themselves in making them mediatours and intercessours in heaven 2. Argum. The Angels they say know our affaires and pray for us As Zachar. 1.12 The Angell of Iehovah answered and said O Lord of hosts how long wilt thou bee unmercifull to Ierusalem c. Therefore it is lawfull to pray to the Angels Answ. 1. That the Angels doe report our affaires unto God and so may make relation of our prayers and words also as of our other gests and acts unto God as the Lords messengers and ministers we will not denie but that they make any particular requests for men the Scripture no where speaketh and we are not bound to beleeve the relation of our prayers unto God is one thing and mediation and intercession is another 2. That Angell of Iehovah which prayed for Jerusalem was the Lord Christ who maketh intercession for his Church unto whom the rest of the Angels returne their message vers 11. who is also called Iehovah vers 20. 3. Neither doth it follow if it could bee proved out of Scripture that the Angels prayed foâ— us that we are to pray to them because they are not alwayes present to heare us and we are forbidden in Scripture to worship them Revel 22.9 and therefore to pray unto them which is a part of divine worship 3. Argum. The Saints that are living doe one pray for another much more the Saints being dead because their charitie is more perfect and seeing there is a communion of Saints as of the living so also of the dead which communion being not in faith and hope whereof there is no more use with them that are at rest it remaineth it is in charitie As therefore we may request the living to pray for us so we may pray the dead also to entreate for us Answer 1. The argument followeth not for the Saints alive doe one know anothers necessitie so do not the