Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n lord_n moses_n write_v 3,199 5 6.0636 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A04774 Miscellanies of divinitie divided into three books, wherein is explained at large the estate of the soul in her origination, separation, particular judgement, and conduct to eternall blisse or torment. By Edvvard Kellet Doctour in Divinitie, and one of the canons of the Cathedrall Church of Exon. Kellett, Edward, 1583-1641. 1635 (1635) STC 14904; ESTC S106557 484,643 488

There are 18 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

and the other Sacred Writings of Moses perhaps also books of other men to which he alluded and yet there was no writing before the Law Concerning the book Numb 21.14 suppose the word runne in the present tense Dicitur It is said in the book of the Warres of the Lord yet it is expounded by the Chaldee as of a thing past What God did in the Red Sea and in the brooks of Arnon which latter clause necessarily implyeth that the book was written after the Law for The battle of Arnon was the fourtieth yeare after their Exodus saith a Jew by Vatablus his commendation very eminent Or say it be read as Robert Stephen in his Annotations on the Pentateuch gathered from the Kings Professours at Paris hath it Sicut fecitin Mari Rubro sic faciet in torrentibus Arnon which sense Cornelius à Lapide embraceth yet those words evince that the book was written since their going out of Egypt which was but fourty dayes before the giving of the Law saith Helvicus But indeed first the word Sepher doth not alwayes signifie a book but sometimes a Narrative of things past whereupon Tremellius readeth it Idcirco dici solet IN RECENSIONE BELLORUM JEHOVAE And so others have held saith Vatablus plainly denying that there was ever any such especiall book of warres Others read it in the future It shall be read and thereupon some of the Jews think it is the Book of Judges which handleth the Warre with Amalek or another book which recounted the miracles of God in the Red Sea and by the river Arnon which book perhaps is now perished as divers others of the holy Scriptures and amongst them a book made by Samuel 1 Samuel 10.25 Which I wondred that neither Drusius nor any who handled the controversies whom I could yet meet with ever observed before me And indeed Jeamar is the future tense It shall be said or it shall be written So Vatablus the Interlineary Eugubinus and the Genevians So the words are rather propheticall then historicall and so no particular book of the warres of the Lord was written before the two Tables Lastly that I may leave no objection unanswered adde this to the answer of S. Augustine That Christ speaking of a prophesie in Paradise concerning himself doth not say It was written before Moses but It is written by Moses of me John 5.46 Moreover if we can read the Hebrew now without vowels much easier and better could they whose daily speech it was The necessity of pronouncing the consonāts by the vowels evinceth not the writing of consonāts the necessity of writing the Hebrew tongue by consonants evinceth not the necessity of writingvowels they may be of a later invention Secondly saith he * Quum duae linguae Syriaca Arabica quae ab Hebraea ortae sunt vocales habeant ut ex libris manuscriptis impressis apparet Matrem uempe Hebraeam illis carere verisimile non est Seeing that the two tongues the Syriack and the Arabick which came from the Hebrew have vowels as it appeares out of manuscripts and printed books it is not likely that the Mother-tongue to wit the Hebrew wants them I answer it followeth not Because the Syriack Arabick have now points therefore they had ever so when they were written and if they had ever points it is likely they invented them and added them to their consonants the rather because the Hebrew wanted them Thirdly * Quâ Linguâ Deus Sacra sua oracula promulgavit banc certam miniméque ambiguant esse necessariò statuendum est We must needs hold that tongue to be certain and no way ambiguous or doubtfull in which God hath published his sacred Oracles I answer Then God should have writ in any other language for the Hebrew of all other is most dubious and ambiguous And whereas he addeth That the Hebrew without vowels hath no certain signification but from the antecedent and consequent and admitteth three foure or five significations according to the diversity of vowels I answer the antecedents and consequents are guides sufficient and God did it purposely to exercise our wits and to make us know that though in things necessary to salvation the Scripture is easy yet in some matters there are depths not to be sounded in others The lips of the Priest should keep knowledge and they should seek the law at his mouth Malach. 2.7 which the unlearned scorn now adayes to do though there be much ambiguitie but how bold-daring self-willed would they be if there were no difficulties I return from the words to the matter and say That as the strong births of the wombe are a blessing of God whether in women or in beasts Deuter. 30.9 So an abortion is a curse and abortives I mean that had life and reasonable souls by the ordinary rules of Genes 17.14 when Circumcision was in force and of John 3.3 whilest Baptisme is in force is a fearfull estate Howsoever God may dispense with his own Law and shew mercy extraordinarily yet David when he wished his enemies to be like abortives wished them no good but evill yea if he did not curse them but foretold what they should be like and that they were not the words of imprecation but prediction yet he did not fore-divine or fore-prophesie any good estate to them whom he likeneth to abortives Let this suffice concerning abortives incapable of sinne or punishment and abortives whose estate of soul is dangerous being measured by the rules of precepts Which I say against Anabaptists and the contemners or causelesse delayers of that gracious Sacrament 5 It is now supposed and shall if it please God hereafter be demonstrated That humane souls are not traducted nor causally brought out of the flesh yet are they occasionally that I may touch at the manner God having resolved and decreed after generation and fit organization of the Embryo to create and infuse a reasonable soul which soul because it is united to a masse corrupted in such a manner as a spiritlesse masse may be corrupted or rather to a masse inclining or inducing to corruption in the very unition it contracteth originall sinne Hugo Eterianus thus descanteth on this point * Cum anima languore afficitur non voluntate non necessitate sed solâ societate peroellitur si voluntate corrumperetur anima non originale sed actuale peccatum censeretur si necessitate c●deret von ultrà esset imputandum illud vitium Hugo Eter de Animarum regressu ab Inferis cap. 4. When the soul languisheth it is neither cast down by the will nor by necessity but onely by fellowship if the soul were corrupted by the will it should not be counted originall sinne but actuall if it should fall by necessitie that vice were no further to be imputed Concerning the latter part I answer if in his necessity he imply coaction he saith true otherwise by this concurrence of our condescending will in Adam or by
the living God and not with penne and ink For though the sense and words of this Epistle to the Galatians be from God and most divine yet there is no reason to imagine that S. Paul intended to include that sense under these words Videte or Videtis qualibus literis scripsi vobis manu meâ You see how large a letter I have written to you with mine own hand But if the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie quantitie though S. Paul wrote in great letters and characters yet it might be a verie good and fair hand as there are few fairer writings then some where the letters are large and full drawn and I doubt not but he who gave them the extraordinary gift of tongues and languages did also as a necessarie appendant give them the power to write well those languages especially since their writings were to benefit more then their voices could reach unto We never reade that the holy Apostles Peter James or John were learned or could reade or write before their calling or learned it by degrees after their Apostleship yet they could and did write and as the Spirit guided their thoughts and words so did he their hands and they wrote both divinely for matter and as I think exquisitely for the manner yea more exquisitely then other men as being governed and actuated by the hand of God which is perfect in all his works And indeed the true sense of the place in my opinion toucheth not at the deformednesse of the characters or at the grand-greatnesse of them but at the length or prolixitie of the Epistle which is excellently rendered by our English You see how large a letter I have written as if S. Paul had spoke thus more at large I who before told you that we must not be weary of well-doing but must do good unto all men whilest we have time especially to the houshold of faith I say I my self have not been wearie in writing this Epistle though it be long and whilest I had time I have spent that time in doing you good by writing this letter by writing this long and large letter to you For though I have written longer Epistles yet I did rather subscribe to them and wrote not all of any one of them with mine own hand but you may take it as a token of my heartie love that I wrote all this Epistle my self You see how large a letter I have writ to you with mine own hand And this sense better answereth to the coherence then that of S. Hierom or of the other learned man whom S. Hierom wondered at So much for the third Lemma 8. I come now to the first Question viz. Whether it was necessarie that Scripture should be written for mens instruction That it was not absolutely necessarie must be confest for God might have used other means He is liberrimum agens the freest agent or rather ipsa libertas libertie it self not chained to fate nor bound in with nature or second causes Necessitie freedome of our will or indifferencie to either side and contingencie are the issues of his will Yea God did use other means in the law of nature for above 2450 yeares the Patriarchs were nourished with agraphall Tradition onely No word was ever written till God wrote the Law the two first Tables the work of the onely-wise Almightie The writing was the writing of God graven upon the Tables Exod. 32.16 Written with the finger of God Exod 31.18 The Jews say The book of Genesis was written by Moses before God wrote the Law For though God spake all the words of the Decalogue Exod. 20.1 c. yet he delivered not the Tables to Moses till Exod. 31.18 but Exod. 24.4 it is related that Moses wrote all the words of the Lord and vers 7. that he took the book of the Law and read it in the audience of the people Kemnitius answereth That the things are recorded per Anticipationem seu per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The last is recorded in the first place for the writing and dedication here mentioned were accomplished afterward Exod. 34.32 The pillar of stone and that other of brick which Josephus Antiq. 1.4 saith the children of Seth did write in before the floud were either fictions or antidated The prophesie of Enoch was not written by him as S. Augustine de Civit. 15.22 and Origen Hom. 28. in Num. think but Enoch prophesied Saying Jude 14. As the prophesie of Adam Genes 2.24 and of God himself Genes 3.15 both of them concerning Christ were spoken in Paradise not written and as the Apostles wrote not the Creed but delivered it onely vivâ voce by word of mouth saith Irenaeus 3.4 and Augustine de Fide Oper. cap. 9. and Ruffinus on the Creed and divers others so is it likely that Enochs prophesie was not written or rather was written long after it was spoken for writing was not so necessarie for the Patriarchs First because they were purer in minde saith Chrysostom Hom. 1. in Matth. And it is the fault of our corrupt nature and we may be rightly impleaded that ever there was any writing as may be gathered from Isidorus Peleusiota lib. 3. epist 106. Secondly the long lives of the Patriarchs supplied the room of writing for Methusalah who lived 240 yeares with Adam with the first Adam who was AETATIS ILLIUS EPISCOPUS Bishop of those times saith Kemnitius in Examine part 1. pag. 13. lived also 90 and odde yeares with Sem and Sem lived 50 yeares in Jacobs time by the calculation of Helvicus and there were not 200 yeares from Jacobs death to the writing of the Law Thirdly besides such aged venerable Prophets as were Adam Enoch Noah and Abraham who was an eminent instructer with authoritie and as it were with a Pretorian power Gen. 18.19 I know that Abraham will command his sonnes and his houshold after him that they keep the way of the Lord other Patriarchs knew the will of God by immediate revelation by dreams and visions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 At sundrie times and in divers manners Heb. 1.1 Gods speech was in stead of writing But when men grew more impure and upon the increase of sinne mans dayes were shortened God did withdraw himself and his familiar conversation was not so common but because their hearts of flesh were hardened in which was printed the law of nature by them even obliterated and they received new evil impressions in stonie hearts God himself wrote the Morall Law in two Tables of stone and Gods own handie-work being broken by the occasion of their sinne to shew that the Morall Law should continue for ever the broken Tables were removed and none knoweth what ever became of them and Moses was commanded to frame two new whole Tables of stone like the former Two extreams about the written word are here to be avoided The first is of the Papists who too much disgrace the Scripture at least comparatively
suggestion and inspiration then a proper command I reply Of precepts properly so called some are hid and secret others more manifest the internall command bindes as much as the externall divine suggestions oft times have the force of an expresse inward precept and commands are sometimes manifested by inspirations Praeceptum propriè dictum which is by word or writing and Imperium internum may be equivalent and so long as it is Imperium internum what need we care though it be not Praeceptum propriè dictum And the command was to write which is an outward act The second Objection brought by Bellarmine against himself is from the Revelation where S. John is commanded divers times to write To this he answereth most unclerk-like That S. John was commanded to write certain hidden visions not the doctrine of the Gospel and precepts of manners But this is easily confuted for Revel 19.9 it is said Write Blessed are they which are called to the marriage-supper of the Lambe Is not this the doctrine of the Gospel what is more Evangelicall He might have considered the marriage-feasts in the Gospels Matth. 22.2 c. and Luk. 14.16 And a voice from heaven said Revel 14.13 Write Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth yea saith the Spirit that they may rest from their labours and their works do follow them Are these hidden visions Is not this the doctrine of the Gospel The like might be amplified out of the first second and third chapters of the Revelation where matters of moralitie and precepts of manners are commanded to be written and are written and not hidden visions but rather the doctrine of repentance and of the Gospel Christ saith to his Apostles Act. 1.8 Ye shall be witnesses unto me He forbeareth the word of preaching and useth more generall words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ye shall be witnesses and they bare witnesse by writing Joh. 21.24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things and wrote these things and we know that his testimonie is true not onely he himself but Peter and the rest WE know that his testimonie is true what testimonie but his writings d Toti operi suo fidem vult conciliare He would have all his works or writings beleeved saith Luc. Brugensis and Maldonate When the seven thunders had uttered their voices I was about to write saith S. John and a voice from heaven saith Write them not Revel 10.4 The Apostles forwardnesse or pronenesse to write argueth not necessarily that he was not commanded first to write but rather presupposeth it and this present inhibition Write not may serve as an exception to a former generall command that he might have to write Indeed there is no expresse record that all and every of the Apostles were enjoyned to write nor is it likely they were for then they would have obeyed whereas not the one half of the Apostles committed any thing to pen ink and paper for ought we know But we are sure that some writers of the Old Testament were commanded to write Exod. 17.14 And the Lord said unto Moses Write this for a memoriall in a book Jerem. 36.2 Take thee a roll of a book and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee c. and S. John was commanded eleven or twelve times to write and thence it is more then probable that the rest of the Apostles which wrote were commanded to write they might be expressely appointed to write though in their writings so much be not expressed To say as Bellarmine doth It is false that God commanded the Apostles to write because so much is not written is rash and ill-advised inferring that they were commanded nothing except those things which are written Is every thing false that cannot be proved is nothing true but what can be proved To evince a thing to be false is required a reall proof of truth positive which Bellarmine wanteth and the falsitie may justly be retorted home to the Cardinall himself from the authoritie of a prime man of his own part Wiser Aquinas 3. part quaest 42. artic 4. 2. thus When the disciples of Christ had written what he shewed and spake unto them we must in no wise say that Christ himself did not write since his members wrote that which they knew by the dictate of him their Head For whatsoever he would have us reade of his deeds and words he commanded them as his own hands to write Now let Bellarmine say It is false that the Apostles were commanded by God to write And thus much shall serve for the third question The fourth question Whether the Prophets Evangelists and Apostles were compelled to write As when it is said Luke 1.70 GOD SPAKE BY THE MOUTH OF HIS HOLY PROPHETS per LOQUENDI verbum SCRIPTIONEM quoque comprehendit so what I propound of Propheticall Evangelicall and Apostolicall writing must also be understood of their speaking or dictating Whether they were compelled to it Compulsion is of two sorts Proper and absolute Improper or mixt Proper when a man is forced as we say in spight of his teeth against his will as some who have been drawn to punishment Thus were they not compelled Mixt when a man doth that which he would not do unlesse he feared a greater losse as when a Merchant or Mariner cast their goods into the sea to save their lives which hath in it part of the voluntarie and part of the involuntarie And of this there may be some question for Jonah fled from the presence of the Lord Jon. 1.3 that is was unwilling to do the message Moses again and again refused to be Gods embassadour to Pharaoh Exod. 3.11 and to the Israelites Exod. 4.1 10 13. Isaiah was also backward Isa 6.5 One answer serves for all They were at first fearfull rather then unwilling but when they were confirmed they readily and boldly did their duties So farre were they from shadow of compulsion that they offered their service When the voice of the Lord said Whom shall I send and Who will go for Vs Isa 6.8 the Prophet said Here am I send me Yea but they were impulsi rapti agitati acti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Pet. 1.21 I answer The word rather excludeth voluntarie and arbitrarie will-worship or self-will-service then includeth compulsion for all this was performed Libero motu voluntatis With the free motion of their will or as others take it Salvo pleno usu liberi arbitrii Without any impeachment of the freedome of their will e Acti à Spiritu sancto loqunti sunt à Deo afflati compositos tamen intellige bos motus non quales fuere profauorum vatum They who were led by the holy Ghost spake being inspired by God yet know that their motions and inspirations were setled and composed unlike to the profane heathen priests or prophets for they were wilde senslesse not knowing what they did or said saith Tremellius
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Tremellius and the Preacher ex ratione carnis saith the same that is as I interpret him out of carnall reasoning he might rather have said ratione carnis because the flesh of the abortive was buried and the churls carcase unburied Nor let any man thwart me by saying that in the Septuagint is no such matter but the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Vulgat accordeth Supercecidit ignis and the whole troups both of Greek and Latine Fathers so read it and so expound it I answer ingenuously that ascribing so much as I do to the Septuagint and Vulgat I wondred how there should be so great difference from the uncorrupt originall The Vulgat thought I trusted to the 70. and the 70. to some Hebrew Copy varying from others more perfect The 70 rendred Gen. 4.8 not according to the Hebrew which is certainly defective saith Vatablus and somewhat is to be understood for indeed there is an extraordinary pause but according to the Samaritan Pentateuch Cain said unto his brother Let us go into the field as Mr. Selden evinceth by the authority of Hierom and Cyrill of old and by a Samaritan Copy now in the hands of Bishop Usher which the Hierusalem Targum amplifieth relating That Cain told Abel there was no future world nor reward for goodnesse nor punishment for sinne all which Abel contradicted and thereupon Cain slew him So might the 70. or the Vulgat or both translate the passage of the Psalmist not accordant to those Copies which are now in price but answerable to some other Hebrew one At length I rested assured that the Copies which they used differed onely in one letter and in the points For instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with five points as it is most commonly read and with six points saith Kimchi which signifieth abortivus and is in the Psalmist their Copies had it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth cecidit there being the same Radicals and no letter changed Secondly for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mulieris which is in David they read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth fire the omission onely of one letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath caused abortivus mulieris to be translated cecidit ignis For as for the variety of punctations that is of small moment by reason of their often interchangings and easie mistakings and points were not used in the dayes of the Septuagint as some say scarce when the Vulgat first was as others say not from the beginning say I if the names of the points and accents be Syriacall Drusius in his Henoch chap. 1. saith Hieronymus ante Masoritarum tempora à quibus apices habemus ut communis opinio est qui nunc in vsu vixit Mercer in the great Dictionary of Pagnine on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relates that when the Chaldee translates Deuter. 26.5 Laban Syrus quaerebat perdere patrem meum and when the Vulgat rendred it Syrus persequebatur patrem meum whereas indeed it ought to be read as it is in our last Translation A Syrian ready to perish was my father non est dubium saith he quin sine punctis quibus tunc carebant Biblia legerint in Pihel non in Kal. Yea Sine dubio novas literas habemus if we may beleeve Bellarmine De Verbo Dei 1.1 And indeed the three fundamenta laid by Balthasar Bambach That the points were coëtaneall to the Hebrew letters are founded on the sands First saith he Sine vocalibus consonantes proferri non possunt omnis lingua quae illis destituta est manca imperfecta mutila efficitur What of all this how followeth this Because the consonants cannot be pronounced without vowells therefore the vowells were underwritten Let him know the Hebrew Tongue was most perfect when it was least written and till Moses his time there were not so much as consonants written howsoever they fable of a pillar written upon long before for God invented the letters first when he made his Two Tables and writ the Law in them See this proved by our learned Whitaker saying * Deus ipse scribendi exemplum modúmque ost endit quando Legem suis digitis conscriptam Mosi tradidit Sic Chrysost Theophylact in 1 Matth. Papistae in confess Petrocoviensi cap. 15 Screckins Jesuita Thes 13 De Verbo Dei Whitak De Script Controvers 1. quaest cap 2. God himself hath shewed an example and manner of writing when he delivered to Moses the Law written with his own fingers So Chrysostom and Theophylact write on the first of Matthew and the Papists in their Confession c. But though Eusebius Praeparat Evangel lib. 18. saith Moses first taught the use of letters to the Jews yet Saint Augustine De Civitate 15.23 saith Enoch wrote * Nonuulla divina some divine things since Saint Jude testifieth so much But that ever honoured Father considered not that Jude said onely Enoch prophesied which he might do by saying onely and not writing as Adam Genes 2.24 yea God himself prophesied of Christ in Paradise Genes 3.15 which Moses first wrote for ought that we know and S. Judes words are Enoch prophesied saying in which writing is rather excluded then included Drusius in his Enoch cap. 27 saith There was a book called LIBER BELLORUM DOMINI out of which Moses bringeth a testimony Cornelius à Lapide saith It was written before the Pentateuch Aben Ezra saith The book was in the dayes of Abraham In the book of Job who lived before Moses is mention of writing and of books as of things common and of graving in stone with a pen of iron Cusanus prinketh higher in his Compend chap. 3. pag. 241. he saith Our first parents had the art of writing since by it man hath many helps for things past and absent are by it made present By the same reason he may say Adam knew the art of Printing of Brachygraphy of Characters Let us passe-by the unauthorized vast fancy of Cusanus and answer the objection drawn from Jobs book which if it were written by his three friends or their Scribes at their dictate as saith Bolducus the Carthusian since they could make Job no better satisfaction then to historifie his innocency and their own petulancy or if by Elihu the Buzite as is very probable for he was young when they were old Job 32.6 and might well live till after the writing of the Pentateuch and publishing of books or by Job himself for Job himself might have conferred in Midian with Moses saith Bolducus who also died but thirteen yeares before Moses died saith that Carthusian yea Job lived after Moses if he lived 248 yeares as the Septuagint and Olympiodorus do account And certainly after all Jobs misery he lived in prosperity 20 yeares longer then the whole yeares of Moses compare Job 42.16 with Deuter. 33.7 and so Job might know the writing of the Law in Tables of stone
Titus Bostrenus died saith Bellarmine Thirdly both Titus and Theophylact say That Christ resumed the circumcised part at his resurrection If they had but one authour of that antiquitie that Christ left it on earth as a relique of his how would they triumph After this Innocentius the third somewhat above 400 yeares since enquiring whether Christ did arise with his foreskin saith Some beleeve it to be kept at S. Johns of Laterans others say Charles the great translated it to Aquisgrane and afterwards it was left at Carosium and determineth nothing but this b Melius est totum Deo committere quàm aliquid temerè definire It is better to referre all unto God then rashly to determine any thing Yet in the sixth book of the revelation of S. Briget cap. 112. it is said That the glorious mother of our Lord kept it about her wheresoever she went I yet do question if it were so Who kept it till Brigets dayes and Which is the true prepuce that at Rome or that which Charles the great received from an Angel and left in Germanie not at Rome But these books of revelations may want credit with us when the learned Francis Collius de sanguine Christi lib. 5. disput 8. cap. 5. saith thus of a revelation in the very chapter c Etsi ea sit maximi ponderis tamen non tanti támque efficacis censenda est ut ab ea discedere impium irreligiosum fuerit Though it be of most especiall moment yet it is not to be so thought of as that it is impious or irreligious to differ from it If it be maximi ponderis of chiefest account and of greatest weight it is impious and irreligious to depart from it But since he departs from one Legend we may from the other After this the prepuce of Christ was stoln buried lost found torn in two pieces and is now in high esteem if Cardinall Tolet on Luk. 2. may be beleeved The summe of his narration is this That 1527 when Rome was sackt by the souldiers of the Duke of Burbon one of them stole away among other reliques the prepuce of Christ and buried it in a cellar and as he was dying revealed what he had done Pope Clement the seventh caused it to be searched for yet it was not found Thirty yeares after a Priest findes it carrieth it to the land-ladie of the place she thrice trieth to untie the things wherewith it was covered and thrice by a miracle is inhibited Clarix a young virgin her daughter untieth all and puts the prepuce first in a silver bason then in a silver casket Thus it is placed in the Church of Calcata then removed into the Chancel Miracles are wrought The Pope sends Commissioners to search the truth One of the Priests ere he was aware tore the prepuce in two pieces Is it still eadem numero membrana the same numericall skinne O learned Collius the Commissioners certifie it was the true relique of Christ and it is kept at this day at Calcata in the temple of S. Cornelius and Cyrian where God daily works miracles In the yeare 1584 at a womans request Sixtus quintus granted plenarie indulgence for ten yeares in the same Church of Calcata upon the day of our Lords Circumcision Thus farre Tolet. You may observe that from 1527 when it was stolne by the souldier to 1584 or perhaps so long as the indulgences lasted the prepuce of Christ was not in S. John of Laterans and so besides the prepuce at Caresium there are two other fore-skinnes of Christ on the earth One at Calcata 20 miles from Rome kept to this day saith Tolet commenting on Luke And the book was printed 1611. Of the other Collius the Millanoise de sanguine Christi lib. 5. disput 7. cap. 2. saith It is now kept at S. John of Laterans in that place of the Church which is called THE HOLY OF HOLIES as Innocent the third and the Cardinal S. Petri ad vincula and Carthagena and all and every of the writers of this age who have handled this point do say Collius might have excepted Tolet whose preceding narrative checketh him The same Collius ibid. thinks it very credible d Salvatoris pr●putium non resurrexisse idem numero quod in circumcisione ceciderat sed divinâ virtute aliud suisse comproductum That Christ rose not with that self same fore-skinne which was cut off at his circumcision but by a divine vertue another new one was comproduced Christ being in heaven uncircumcised but yet he upholdeth the gainfull vanitie of Impostours who deserve to be branded yea to be burnt to ashes for feigning two or three fore-skinnes on earth of our Saviour I cannot forget their vaunts That they have intimam vestem the smock or at least the peticoat of the most gracefull Virgin and her milk honoured almost as Christ his consecrated bodie The breeches of Joseph The combe of S. Anne and her very head saith Sleidan Comment 15. fol. 170. And so many pieces of the crosse as would almost lade a ship of burthen saith Erasmus on Matth. 23.5 Calvin de inventor reliquiarum proveth some of the Romish Saints to have three heads some three bodies shewn in severall places The Rhemists on Matth. 14. annot 2. say Honour is now done to the Baptists head at Amiens in France Fulk addeth The same part that is at Amiens is at S. Angely the rest of his head from his fore-head to his neck is at Malta yet the hinder part of his skull is at Nemours his brain at Novium Rastroviense another part of his head is at Jean-Morien his jaw-bone at Vesalium at the Church of S. John the greater another part at Paris a piece of his eare at S. Floride his fore-head and hairs in Spain at S. Salvadores another piece of his head at Naion another at Luke in Italie and yet for all these pieces his whole head is at S. Sylvesters Abbey at Rome to be seen and worshipped Half of S. Peters bodie is at S. Peters at Rome half at S. Pauls yet he hath an head at S. John Laterans and his nether-jaw with the beard upon it is in France at Poyters at Triers are many of his bones at Geneva was part of his brain saith Fulk in Rom. 16. annot 1. See Sleidan Comment 15. pag. 169. summing up a book of Calvins to the same purpose I could make you laugh in disdain at what a chief printer at Paris hath written in his preface to the defence of Herodotus touching these horrible impostures and the sudden quick-cousening wits of the Friars as how a strange feather was promised to be shewn for a holy relique as being one of an Arch-angels feathers and when a cunning hand had stoln it away and placed a coal in the room of it the nimble jugling Friar perswaded his besotted auditorie that they were unworthy to see so great a relique as an Arch-angels feather but
in heaven The place of Revel 11.7 concerning the two Witnesses winnowed by Bishop Andrews Enoch and Elias are not those two witnesses 200 CHAP. III. 1. SOme others hereafter shall be excepted from death The change may be accounted in a generall large sense a kinde of death The Papists will have a reall proper death Aquinas an incineration This is disproved 1. Thessal 4.17 which place is handled at large The rapture of the godly is sine media morte without death The resurrection is of all together The righteous prevent not the wicked in that 224 2. By the words of the Creed is proved that some shall never die The same is confirmed by other places of Scripture with the consent of S. Augustine and Cajetan The definitions Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum of the sentences and tenents of the Church leave the words doubtfully Rabanus his exposition rejected 227 3. The place of S. Paul 2. Corinth 5.4 evinceth That some shall not die Cajetan with us and against Aquinas Doctour Estius and Cornelius à Lapide the Jesuit approve Cajetan S. Augustine is on our side and evinceth it by Adams estate before the fall which state Bellarmine denieth not Salmerons objections answered 228 4. Some shall be exempted from death as is manifested 1. Corinth 15.51 The place fully explicated The common Greek copies preferred The Greek reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We shall not all sleep standeth with all truth conveniencie probabilitie and sense The other Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We shall therefore all of us sleep and the more different Vulgat Omnes quidem resurgemus sed non omnes immutabimur Indeed we shall all arise but we shall not all be changed justly exploded as adverse to sense 230 5. The Pelagians though accursed hereticks yet held truely That some shall not die S. Augustine dubious Others stick in his hesitancie Yet other Fathers and late Writers are constant That some shall be priviledged from death yet that change may be called a kinde of death 235 FINIS A Catalogue of the severall Authours quoted in these three books of MISCELLANIES A ABen Ezra Abraham de Balmis Abulensis Adrichomius Cornelius Agrippa Albericus Gentilis Albertus Magnus Alchabitius Alexander ab Alexandro Ambrosius Bishop Andrews Anselmus Apollinaris Appianus Alexandrinus Aquila Aquinas Petronius Arbiter Arboreus Franciscus Aretinus Aretius Arias Montanus Aristoteles Athanasius Avenarius Augustinus B BAlthasar Bambach Moses Bar Cepha Baronius Barradius Basilius Beda Bellarminus Bernardus Bertram Beza Bilson Boëtius Bolducus Bonaventura Bosquier Brentius Broughton Lucas Brugensis Bucer Bullinger Busaeus C Coelius secundus Curio Caesaris commentaria Cajetanus Calvinus Melchior Canus Carafa Carthusianus Casaubonus Cassander Cassiodorus Catharinus Centuriatores Cevallerius Chaldee Targum Christopher Castrensis Chrysostomus Cicero Clemens Romanus Clemens Alexandrinus Joannes Climachus Philip de Comines Concilium Elibertinum Concilium Milevetanum Franciscus Collius Coverdale Cusanus Cyprianus Cyrillus Alexandrinus D DAmianus à Goës Rabbi David Del Rio. Demosthenes Petrus Diaconus Didymus Dionysius Areopagita Dorotheus Drusius Andreas Dudithius Durandus E ELias Levita Epimenides Epiphanius Erasmus Espencaeus Estius Eugubinus Eusebius Eustathius Antiochenus Euthymius F FAber Stapulensis Felisius Fernelius Ferus Festus Feuardentius Dr. Field Dr. Fox Fulgentius Dr. Fulk G GAgneius Galenus Gasparus Sanctius Genebrardus Gerson Gorranus Gregorius Greg. Nyssenus Greg. de Valentia Gretser H HAlensis Haymo Heinsius Helvicus Hermogenes Hieronymus Hilarius Hippocrates Hippolytus Holcot Homerus Horatius Hugo Cardinalis Hugo Eterianus I JAcobus de Valentia K. James Jansenius Ignatius Illyricus Irenaeus Isidorus Isidorus Pelusiota Josephus Justinus Benedictus Justinianus K KEmnitius Kimchi L LAertius Cornelius à Lapide Laurentii historia Anatomica Joannes Leo. Rabbi Levi. Libavius Livius Lombardus Lorinus Ludolphus Carthusianus Ludovicus de Ponte vallis Oletani Ludovicus Vives Lutherus Lyranus M MAjoranus Maldonatus Marianus Scotus Marsilius Andreasius Martin Marre-prelate Martinus Cantipretensis Justin Martyr Masius Matthew Paris Melchior Flavius Rabbi Menachem Mercer Minshew Mollerus Bishop Mountague Lord Michael de Montaigne Montanus Peter Morales Mr. Fines Morison Rabbi Moses Peter Moulin Muncer Musculus N HIer. Natalis Nazianzenus Nicephorus Nicetas Nonnus O OCkam Oecolampadius Oecumenius Jofrancus Offusius Olympiodorus Origenes P PAcianus Pagninus Paracelsus Paulinus Pererius Peter Martyr Petrus Pomponatius Philo Judaeus Photius Pighius Pineda Plato Plinius Plotinus Plutarchus Polybius Julianus Pomerius Porphyrius Postellus Primasius Procopius Gazaeus Propertius Prosper Ptolomeus R Dr. Raynolds Ribera Richeomus Jesuita Rodulphus Cluniacensis Monachus Rosinus Ruffinus Rupertus S EMmanuel Sa. Salianus Mr. Salkeld Salmanticensis Judaeus Salmeron Rabbi Salomon Mr. Sands Sasbout Scaliger Scharpius Dr. Sclater Scotus Mr. Selden Seneca Septuaginta Mr. Sheldon Barthol Sibylla Sixtus Senensis Sleidanus Socrates Sohnius Sophronius Soto Stapleton Robertus Stephanus Stow. Strabo Suarez Suetonius Suidas Surius Symmachus T TAcitus Tertullian Theodoretus Theodosius Theophylactus Petrus Thyraeus Tichonius Titus Bostrensis Toletus Tostatus Solomo Trecensis Tremellius Trelcatius Historie of the councell of Trent Turrianus V VAlla Terentius Varro Vasques Vatablus Didacus Vega. Ludovicus Vertomannus Blasius Viegas Joannes Viguerius Godfridus Abbas Vindocinensis Virgilius Vorstius Bishop Usher Leonardus de Utino W WHitakerus Willet Z ZAnchius Zimenes O Blessed God Father Sonne and holy Ghost whose deserving mercie to me hath been so infinite that nothing in earth which I enjoy is worthy enough to be offered unto thee yet because thou hast so plentifully rewarded the widow of Sarepta for sharing that little which she had unto the Prophet and hast promised even the kingdome of heaven to them who in thy name give a cup of water of cold water and hast most graciously accepted the poorest oblations both of the goats hair toward thy Tabernacle and the widows two mites into the treasurie receive I most humbly beseech thee the free-will-offering of my heart and weak endeavours of my hand in this intended service and as thou didst fill Bezaleel and Aholiab with an excellent spirit of wisdome and subtill inventions to finde out all curious works to the beautifying of thy Tabernacle so I most meekly desire thee to enlighten my soul to elevate my dull understanding that I may search for such secret things as may be found and finde such things as may be searched for lawfully and modestly and that I may like Joshuahs good spies acquaint my self and others with the desert wayes and the severall tracts and paths which our souls immediately after death must travell and passe over toward the Celestiall Canaan O God my good God grant me to accomplish this through the safe conduct of Him who is the faithfull Guide the onely Way the Light and Joy of my soul my Lord and Saviour JESVS CHRIST So be it most gracious Redeemer So be it MISCELLANIES OF DIVINITIE THE FIRST BOOK CHAP. I. Sect. 1. THe subject of the whole Work The reason why I chose the Text of Hebrews 9.27 to discourse upon The division of it 2 Amphibologie prejudiciall to truth Death appointed by GOD yet for Adams fault The tree
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie a vast and immense longitude of time but there are also besides them other evident words arguing such pawses and spaces of times As also because the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or post itself is so expounded by Pererius on John 5.4 * Post motionem aquae significat idem ac st dictum fuiss●t Postquam coepta erat motio turbatio aquae After the troubling of the water signifieth as much as if it had been said After the moving and troubling of the water was begun saith he for the infirm did wait and expect the moving of the water ver 3. and the impotent man said to Christ ver 7. I have no man to put me into the pool when the water is troubled that is so soon as the water beginneth to be troubled for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first descendant into the water 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the troubling was healed Therefore you must expound the word after for immediately after instantly there upon For if he had first stepped in he had been healed whereas if you expound after the motion that is a long while after he might indeed have been put into the water but never the nearer to be healed So also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 John 5.19 and divers other places evince that the phrase implieth not length of time intervenient but rather an historicall narration of things succeeding and sometimes depending one of the other So here first death after that i shortly after that cometh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 judicium judgement Judgement is taken two wayes first for the assenting or dissenting of the intellect in this sense we say I like or like not such a mans judgement so judgement is taken for ones opinion perswasion or determination The Text is not meant of judgement in this sense Secondly it is used for an act of justice giving to every man what belongeth to him Thus is it here taken An act of justice not proceeding from man but from GOD and terminated upon man The judgements of GOD upon man are manifold both in this present life and in the life to come The judgement here mentioned is the judgement after death And of judgements after death there are two Private of souls Publick of bodies and souls Whether of these two judgements is to be understood we hope to finde out when we have considered the last thing propounded the words in a lump together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 After that the judgement 5 That there are two judgements after this life we take it here for granted but by GODS assistance it shall be in a fitter place of this discourse demonstrated at large But whether the generall judgement of souls and bodies be especially here meant or the private and particular judgement of souls or both of them is the question now and must be determined by authority and reason Oecumenius is for the first way and wittily interprets these words as if it had been said When all and every one which ever were in the world are dead then followeth after the universall death universall judgement To him assenteth * Bell. de Purgat lib. 2. cap. 4. Bellarmine and the book of Esdras long before either of them * 2. Esdr 14.35 After death shall the judgement come when we shall live again c. where the generall judgement is pointed at and not the particular And from hence S. Paul may be thought to have borrowed the words I answer that the Apostle had them not from that author for there is neither Greek nor Hebrew copie of that book of Esdras * Bell. de Verbo Dei lib. 1. cap. 20. saith Bellarmine from S. Hierome onely it is preserved in Latine and no Councel ever held it as canonicall saith Bellarmine Again I can finde no passage of either of these books of Esdras cited in the New Testament though out of other apocryphall books there be divers things taken And though Ambrose cited the second book of Esdras commonly called the fourth book of Esdras in his book de Bono mortis and in his second book on Luke and in his second epistle to Horatianus yea though * Sixt. Sen Bib. Sanct. lib. 1. Sixtus Senensis saith of Ambrose that Ambrose thought Esdras wrote this book by divine revelation and that S. Paul did follow Esdras in those things which he hath concerning the diversitie of order of glory of brightnes in the elect when they shall be raised yet Sixtus Senensis himself esteemeth not the book to be either canonicall or deutero-canonicall but meerely apocryphall and in it he saith are * Quaedam suspecta dogmata regulis orthodoxae fidei apertè contradiceutia some suspected doctrines manifestly gainsaying the rules of orthodox faith and he instanceth in the * 2. Esdr 4.35 36 39 41 42. fourth chapter maintaining * Omnes animas detineri quibusdam abditis promptuariis in inferuo that all souls are kept in certain hidden floores or chambers in hell till the generall judgement Sixtus Senensis addeth that S. Ambrose seemeth to approve of this opinion Also saith he in chap. 6. vers 49. there are fabulous Jewish fooleries of Henoch and Leviathan two fishes Upon these grounds I may confidently say that though some ignorant people might be seduced by this book and thence perhaps arose the error of the souls not being judged till the resurrection yet S. Paul would never take a testimony from that book which hath such palpable untruths and is not extant in Greek or Hebrew Moreover it hath no place vouchsafed in Arias Montanus his Interlineary Bible nor doth Emanuel Sa comment on any word of it and Bellarmine himself marvelleth why Genebrard would have it held canonicall Estius saith * Liber ille non habet autoritatem in Ecclesia Est in 2. Sent. Dist 19. num 4. That book hath no authoritie in the Church But I return to the first exposition The generall judgement may be meant and is involved I will not deny it Yet these reasons perswade me that the particular judgement is not excluded First if the Apostle had intended it onely of the generall judgement it is likely he would as he doth in other places have used fittest expressions and terms properly advancing to that sense as thus At the second coming of Christ or At the end of the world or When the corruptible hath put on incorruption or After the resurrection cometh judgement But since it is written It is appointed for men to die and after that cometh judgement to interpret it onely of the generall judgement is in my opinion to leave a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a great gulf between death and judgement which hiatus will handsomely be filled up if there be reference to the particular judgement Secondly what if I say that the words do denote rather the not passing of judgement while we live and the beginning of it to be shortly
Tim. 6.16 GOD onely hath immortalitie Neither was the body of Adam immortall as the Angelicall spirits and souls of men which had a beginning but shall have no end Nor immortall as the counsels of GOD which had no beginning but shall have an end His bodie was not eternal but eviternal or immortall not absolutely immortall but conditionally it should never have tasted death if he had not first tasted of the forbidden fruit Immortall not as if it could not die but because it might and could have lived ever He had not non posse mori and so he was mortall he had posse non mori and so was immortall As mortall is taken for earthly animall and contra-distinct to spirituall so his bodie was mortall and terrene not spirituall or celestiall As he could not possibly die unlesse he had sinned his very bodie was immortall In the Schoole-phrase thus both mortall and immortall are taken two waies Mortall for one who must needs die thus Adam was not mortall in innocency but by sinne was made mortall who can die thus was he mortall yet onely in sensu diviso because he could sinne therefore could die Immortall for one who cannot die so Adam in innocency was not immortall save onely in sensu conjuncto * Adam in natura sua habuit mortalitatem quandam scilicet aptitudinem moriendi it à aliquam immortalitatem in natura sua habuit id est aptitudinem quâ poterat non mori he was immortall and could not die unlesse he sinned upon whom there is no necessity laid that he should die thus was he simply immortall Lumbard thus Adam had in his nature some mortalitie an aptnes to die so he had in his nature some immortality that is * Pet. Diac. de Gratia Christ lib. 1. cap. 6. Fulg. lib. 2. cap. 13. Max. Profess Fidei snae cap. 8. to wit an aptnes by which he might not die 2. Sent. dist 19. lit F. Further as some have said Adam was neither mortall nor immortall for thus wrote Petrus Diaconus and Fulgentius * Corpus Adae ante peccatum mortale secundum aliam immortale secundum aliam causam dici poterat De Genesi ad literam lib. 6. cap. 25. and Maxentius so others have written that Adam was made both mortall and ●●mortall and all and every one of these in some sense is most true Augustine saith that Adams body before sinne may be said to be mortall in one respect and immortall in another as he there proveth at large Hierome hath a different strain and an unusuall phrase in one of his * Epist ad Paulum Concordiensem epistles wherein he maketh the body to be eternall till the serpent by his sinne prevailed against Adam and ascribeth a second kinde of immortality to the body because some of the first ages lived so long a time as about or above 900 yeares Even they who say Adams body was mortall agree in sense with me They distinguish thus It is one thing to be mortall and another thing to be subject to death If they grant to us that he was not obnoxious to death and could not die without finne I will not be offended much though they say he was mortall As this our flesh which now we have is not therefore not to be wounded because there is no necessitie that it should be wounded so the flesh of Adam in paradise was not therefore not mortall because there was no necessitie that it should die De peccat Meritis Remis l. 1. c. 3. saith Augustine So that this is but a meer logomachy They who call him mortall expound themselves that he could not mori unlesse he had sinned and I mean no more when I say he was immortall that is he could not have died in the state of innocencie without a precedent transgression he could not have been subject or obnoxius to death They say though he should not have died yet he was mortall I say he was therefore onely immortall because in that blessed estate he could not die Whether of these two contraries Mortall or Immortall do best fit Adam before he sinned let the reader judge As bodies are compounded of contrarieties they are subject to dissolution to the evidencing whereof let me recount what Holcot saith on Wisedome 12.22 upon these words We should look for mercy 2 Aristotle saith Holcot spake these his last words IREIOYCE THAT I GO OUT OF THE WORLD WHICH IS COMPOUNDED OF CONTRARIES BECAUSE BACH OF THE FOURE ELEMENTS IS CONTRARY TO OTHER AND THEREFORE HOW CAN THIS BODY COMPOUNDED OF THEM LONG ENDURE Then he dyed and the Philosophers prayed for him saith Holcot And because he did scorn to be behinde the Philosophers in love to Aristotle Holcot himself secondeth their prayers thus * Ille qui suscipit auimas philosophorum suscipiat animam tuam He that receiveth the souls of Philosophers let him receive thy soul This he speaketh to Aristotle by a part of that little Rhetorick that Holcot had or was used in his dayes or otherwise it might be the prayer of the Philosophers related by Holcot for the words are doubtfull No marvell therefore if after this our Christian Peripateticks the Divines of Culleyn have made Aristotle a Saint as they did if we beleeve * Corn. Agr. De Vanit Scient Cornelius Agrippa and perhaps prayed to him as devoutly as others prayed for him * Dinis annumerant They count him among the Gods saith Agrippa in his 45 Chapter though Agrippa himself be of a contrarie opinion for he saith * Ipsis Daemouibus dignum factus sacrificium Aristotle killed himself being made a sacrifice worthy of the Devils Sure I am I have read in a book Of the life and death of Aristotle in the beginning whereof the Poët prayeth to GOD from heaven to help him to write concerning Aristotle acceptable things and to speak in his words De sapiente viro cujus cor lumine miro Lustrâsti Divae super omnes Philosophiae Quem si non fractum lethi per flebilis actum Adventus prolis Divae veri quoque Solis Post se liquisset fidei qui vi micuisset Creditur à multis doctoribus artis adultis Quòd fidei lumen illustrans mentis acumen Defensatorem vix scivisset meliorem From whence the commenting questionist examineth Whether Aristotle would have been in an high degree the great champion of the Christian faith if he had lived after Christs time And he resolveth affirmatively because Aristotle had the best intellect among all the creatures under the sunne for supernaturals saith he are given according to the disposition of naturals * Cum conatu hominum with mens endeavour grace distilling on man according as he well useth the talent of nature But at the end of that book the Expositor strikes all dead in these words * Concludendo finaliter cum veritate dico c. Concluding
the branches being saved the root also should not be saved But in his book De praescript advers Haereticos as it is cited by Bellarmine there is no mention of Tatian in Rhenanus his Edition Augustine saith of the Tatians and Encratites * Quòd contradicunt primorum hominum saluti Aug. De Haeresib cap. 25. That they gainsay the salvation of the first men Where Bellarmine used another Edition then Erasmus his or was mistaken in the collation He who will see more into this point let him consult with Bellarmine in the place above cited and Salianus ad Annum Mundi 930. where he justly taxeth Rupert for saying in this third book on Genes chap. 31. * Salvationem Adami à multit liberè negari ànullo satìs firmiter defendi That the salvation of Adam is freely denied by many and by none strongly enough defended And he bringeth many authorities and proofs to the contrary From Irenaeus he bids them blush for saying Adam was not saved and more vehemently That by saying so they make themselves Hereticks and Apostates from the truth and Advocates for the Serpent and Death God cursed not Adam and Eve but the earth and the Serpent Yea before God pronounced any punishment against Eve or Adam even in the midst of his cursing of the Serpent with the same breath he both menaced Satan and comforted Adam and Eve with the gracious promise of the Messiah Genes 3.15 Now there was never any unto whom God vouchsafed a speciall promise of Christ but they were saved Indeed the Apostle reckoneth not Adam among the faithfull ones Hebr. 11. but one reason of this omission is because he entreateth of such faithfull ones onely as were much persecuted which Adam was not so farre as is recorded If it be further objected That God is called THE GOD OF ABRAHAM ISAAC AND JACOB Exod. 3.6 Matth. 22.32 and is no where called THE GOD OF ADAM let it be answered That Adam is called THE SONNE OF GOD Luke 3.38 And I think he is too severe a judge who saith a sonne of God is damned The Targum or Chaldee Paraphrase set forth by Rivius on the Canticles chap. 1. vers 1. saith * Et veuit dies Sabbati protexit eum aperuit os suum dixit Psalmum Cantici diei Sabbati That the first song that ever was made was indited by Adam in the time when his sinne was forgiven him Damianus à Goes De Moribus Aethiopum makes this the belief of Zagazabo and the Ethiopians for whom he negotiated That Christs soul descended into Hell for Adams soul pag. 93. and that Adam was redeemed by Christ from Hell pag. 55. How glorious was it for Christ to save his first sheep and how would the Devil glorie if it were otherwise Adams fig-leaves may be thought to be sharp afflictive and penitentiall Epiphanius Haeres 46. calleth Adam Holy and saith We beleeve he is among those Fathers whom Christ reckoneth alive not dead God is not the God of the dead but of the living Irenaeus saith Adam humbly bare the punishment laid upon him Can humility be damned then may pride be saved Josephus 1.2 recordeth That Adam foretold the universall destruction of the World one by the floud the other by fire And can the first of Mankinde the first King Priest and Prophet of the World be condemned Others probably conjecture that before his death he called the chief of his children grand-children and their descendants and gave them holy and ghostly counsel as Abraham did Genes 18.19 and Jacob Genes 49.1 c. and Moses Deuteron 31.1 c. Salianus fits him a particular speech at his death and a witty Epitaph Feuardentius on Irenaeus thus relateth Nicodemus Christs Disciple in the History ascribed to him OF THE PASSION AND RESVRRECTION OF THE LORD reporteth That our Lord Jesus Christ when he descended into Hell in his soul spake thus to Adam and held his hand PEACE BE VNTO THEE VVITH ALL THY SONNES MY IVST ONES But Adam falling on his knees such spirituall knees as before his spirituall hand which Christ held while both their bodies were in the grave weeping-ripe thus prayed with a loud voice * Exaltabo te Domine quoniam suscepisti me nec delectâsti inimicos meos super me Domine Deus clamavi ad te sanâsti me eduxisti ab inferis animam meam salvâstime à descendentibus in lacum I will magnifie thee Lord because thou hast received me and hast not made glad mine enemies over me Lord God I have cried unto thee and thou hast healed me Thou hast brought up my soul from Hell thou hast saved me from those that go down to the pit Thus Salianus in his Scholia ad Annum 930. Another ancient Apocryphal book affirmeth that Adam repented Didacus Vega in his second Sermon on the fifth penitentiall Psalme pag. 443. thus Leonardus de Vtino in his Book De Legibus Sermon de Poenitentia saith That Adam repented not of his sinne but remained obstinate till the death of Abel but when he saw him lye dead at his feet wallowed in his bloud and yet pale and as in a glasse saw the deformity of death he began to repent Strabo saith He was so sorrowfull that he vowed chastity for ever and would have performed it if an Angel had not injoyned him the contrary And from the authority of Josephus he saith Adam was so sorry for Abel that he wept an whole hundred yeares But I beleeve saith Vega He rather wept for the cause which was sinne then for the very death of Abel Ludovicus Vertomannus in his sixth Book fourth Chapter of his journey to India hath recorded that a Mahumetan Merchant told him that at the top of an high mountain in the Iland of Zaylon subject to the King of Narsinga there is a den in which Adam after his fall lived and continued very penitently And though their tradition rests on an idle conjecture because there is yet seen the print of the steps of his feet almost two spannes long for how should they know they were his feet rather then some giants and because how Adam should come to this Iland and why cannot be shewed yet so farre as is probable we will joyn issue with their beleef to wit That he was penitent and so saved Thus much be spoken concerning the salvation of Adams soul Concerning Adams actuall sinne though I said truly before That as it was private and personall it was not imputed to us yet I must needs say as it was ideall and representative it was and is imputed to us He who denieth this let him also deny that Christs active and passive Merits are imputed to us Neither can the Divine providence be taxed with rigour much lesse with injustice for imputing Adams sinne unto us For first he imputeth not our own actuall and personall iniquities but forgiveth us both this sinne of Adam and all manner of
to the first place of Matth. 13.35 and say Who ever denyed but that some Copies have been corrupted and in some of them some words foisted in but all Greek all Latine Copies with the Arabick and Syriack translations reade Abraham and not Jacob Whereas some Copies were alwayes perfect in that place of Matthew Now if you grant corruption in any point or title in all the Greek and all the Latine Copies how will you prove any part or word of the New Testament to be uncorrupt Which razeth up the very Corner-stone of our Faith Mr Beza again objecteth that the name of Jeremie is written for Zacharie Matth. 27.9 I answer that the Authour of the book of Maccabees giveth us to understand that Jeremie wrote other things which now we have not 2. Maccab. 2.1 and so did divers of the Prophets and why may not this be then taken from some of those works which are perished Secondly S. Hierome saith a Jew brought him an Apocryphall book of Jeremie in which he found this testimonie word for word and this book was called APOCRYPHA or OCCULTA JEREMIAE The Apocryphals or hid writings of Jeremie saith Erasmus on Matth. 27. As what S. Paul saith of Jannes and Jambres 2. Tim. 3.8 and what S. Jude saith of Michael the Archangel striving with the Devil is thought to be taken out of the books Apocryphall so might this testimonie be cited also out of Jeremies Apocryphals Thirdly Erasmus supposeth that Zacharie had two names and was called both Zacharie and Jeremie and so no inconvenience followeth Fourthly not onely the Syriack leaves out the name of Jeremie but even in Augustines time the name of Jeremie was not in many Latine Copies as Augustine himself testifieth de Consensu Evangelistarum lib. 3. cap. 7. The ordinarie glosse also saith that in some editions it is onely thus By the Prophet and the name of Jeremie is left unmentioned Fifthly Augustine in the last recited place of his resolveth that the Divine providence purposely set down Jeremie for Zacharie and what the holy Spirit did dictate S. Matthew did truely write And one reason why the Spirit of God confounded the names of Jeremie and Zacharie was this saith Augustine To insinuate that all the Prophets wrote by one Spirit and wonderfully consented in one and therefore we must beleeve that e Quacunque per eos Sp●itus Sanctus dixit singula esse omnium omnia singulorum What the holy Ghost spake by them is not to be appropriated unto any one but to all and every of them What was said by Jeremie was as well Zacharies as Jeremies and what was said by Zacharie was as well Jeremies as Zacharies God spake not by the MOUTHS but by the MOUTH of all his holy Prophets since the world began Act. 3.21 and they had but one Spirit to guide them into all truth The Prophesie of Amos is called The book of the Prophets Acts 7.42 and the Word of God which in divers places is called in the plurall number Scriptures as John 5.39 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Search the Scriptures is also oftentimes called in the singular number The Scripture as John 2.22 they beleeved the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said Beleef was to rest as well on his Word onely without Scripture as on Scripture though he had said nothing and the word Scripture is not to be restrained onely to that place of Scripture before pointed at but to the whole Word of God written which they beleeved The Scripture hath concluded all under sinne Gal. 3.22 where not one single place onely but either common places of that point or the whole bodie of the Scripture is to be understood A few words of a Psalme of David is called by Christ himself The law of the Jews It is written in their law They hated me without a cause John 15.25 which is onely so written Psal 35.19 Again he saith to the Jews John 10.34 Is it not written in your Law I have said ye are Gods but it is written so onely Psal 83.6 Yea though one and the same thing in effect be written both Isa 28.16 and Psal 118.22 as also Matth 21.42 and Acts 4.12 yet S. Peter reckoneth all but as one All but one Scripture though severally written by these foure It is contained in the Scripture saith he 1. Pet. 2.6 in the singular number he mentioneth Scripture as if what one wrote the rest wrote S. Peter saith not It is contained in the Word with reference to one Spirit inditing or inspiring though that might have also been truely spoken but contained in the Scripture with relation to the unity and consent of the Pen-men Lastly the words of the Evangelist are these Matth. 27.9 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the Prophet Jeremie saying And they took the thirty pieces of silver 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 effatum Jeremiae dicentis That which was spoken by Jeremie saying c. Now Jeremiae might say it speak it dictate it which is most true and is all that S. Matthew saith who by the Spirit might also know that Jeremie did teach preach prophesie and utter these words and yet for all this and after all this Zacharie by the same Spirit might write transcribe and insert those words of Jeremie into his own Prophesie which S. Matthew denieth not as Baruch wrote divers things which he had heard from Jeremie as Agur collected some Proverbs of Solomon Again there was no necessitie that all things whatsoever Jeremie as a Prophet did speak g Jerem. 36.2 he himself or Baruch should write much lesse presently since there were many yeares between Jeremie his speaking and his writing for Enoch prophesied as it is in the 14. verse of the Epist of S. Jude but he prophesied Saying c. as it is there written for writing was none till God set the Copie unto Moses by writing the Law in the Tables on the mount Again S. Paul Act. 24.35 remembreth the words of our Lord Jesus how he said It is more blessed to give then to receive yet none of the Evangelists record such words but this might the Apostles relate unto S. Paul or by divine inspiration he might know that Christ spake them or they might be part of the words which Christ himself spake unto S. Paul for there is no certaintie that they were written S. John the Evangelist was commanded to conceal and not to write the words of the seven thunders Revel 10.4 If he had wholly concealed such a thing we could not know it he spake it but wrote it not Jeremie might speak this and not write it or write it and not speak it Any of these answers is better then to incline to Beza that the Text is erroneous or patched up with a false addition or to Erasmus on Matth. 27. intimating there was lapsus memoriae in Evangelistis howsoever he qualifieth it That if there were memoriae lapsus in Nomine duntaxat he
Vpon just occasions and newly emergent occurrences the Spirit of God inspired them to write who otherwise would not have written I will say they wrote casually for casualtie in this notion presupposeth things done upon reason and who dareth say that God did ever any thing without good ground or reason saith the divine S. Augustine They wrote fortuitò say the Papists non fortuitò saith Vorstius Cleare the terms by the former distinction and the question is ended No part of Jeremie is in Chaldee but one verse onely and upon what occasion was that The Chaldee Paraphrast thus relateth it saith Vatablus Jeremie wrote to the Elders in the Captivitie If the Chaldean people did say House of Israel worship idols the Israelites should answer The idols which ye worship are idols indeed in which is no profit they cannot draw forth rain from heaven or fruit out of the earth Let them and their worshippers perish from the earth and be destroyed from under heaven And to that effect speak Lyra and Rabbi Solomon but the words of God by the Prophet are thus to be rendered Jer. 10.11 Thus ye shall say unto them May the gods or Let the gods that have not made the heavens and the earth perish from the earth and from under these heavens PEREANT so the Vulgat Vatablus the Interlinearie and translated Chaldee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say the Septuagint And this doth somewhat ammuse me why our last English Translation with others embrace the Future tense reading They shall perish when the words are a present execration of past present and future idols I come to the point If the Jews had said the effect of these words in Hebrew the Chaldeans could not have understood it nor had it been written in Chaldee if the Chaldeans had had no intercourse with the Jews and in this sense that verse was written casually As Ananias and Sapphira their with-holding of things consecrated ministred occasion to the holy Spirit both to impart the knowledge of their sacriledge to S. Peter and to inspire into him that particular prophesie Act. 5.9 which S. Peter otherwise had never spoken So if Onesimus had not been a bad servant and after converted S. Paul had not written that Epistle to Philemon at least not the greatest part of it Chemnitius in Examine part 1. declareth at large Quâ occasione propter quam causam in quem usum primùm Scriptura tradita sit à Deo And he speaketh of the Old Testament Concerning the New Testament neither Christ nor any of his Apostles wrote any thing for many yeares nor did any one Evangelist or Apostle singly write till the Church was pestered with Schismaticks Who troubled them with words subverting their souls Act. 15.24 To remedie which discord a Councel was gathered at Jerusalem of the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church and they wrote Letters or an Epistle to the brethren And a Acts 15.28 Visum est Spiritui Sancto nobis It seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us was the forefront of their main decree And this was the beginning of writing of any part of the New Testament saith Chemnitius in his Examen of the Councel of Trent part 1. pag. 32. though others dissent from him I will onely say If that schisme had not been that Councel had not been gathered that Epistle had not been written Briefly thus Eusebius in the second and third book of his historie specializeth the causes and grounds why each of the foure Evangelists did write which is exemplified by Chemnitius in the place before cited even to satietie whilest he at large describeth the occasions and inducements or reasons why all and every book of the New Testament was written Thus the conclusion being firm That the word of God was written casually that is the sacred Pen-men were inspired to write all of it upon just motives and fair occurrences and yet not casually if we take the word in sensu profano usu forensi I proceed to the third Question Whether they were commanded to write They who reade the Scripture may think this question idle and impertinent but who hath been conversant in the thornie paths of controversies shall finde much opposition by our adversaries Bellarmine de Verbo Dei non scripto 4.3 saith thus b Falsum est D●um mandâsse Apostolis ut scriberent Legimus mandatum ut praedicarent ut scriberent nunquam legimus Deus nec mandavit expreseè ut scriberent nec ut non scriberent It is false that God commanded the Apostles to write We have read they were commanded to preach Matth. 28.19 we have not read that they were commanded to write God did not command expressely either that they should write or not write To the place alledged by Bellarmine I answer They are not there commanded Praedicare but his verie Vulgat hath it Docere which may be by writing as well as by preaching The Original hath it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 discipulate or discipulas facite omnes gentes where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not taken neutro-passively for discipulum esse for that implieth that the Apostles should learn of the Gentiles and not teach them but actively as if it were in the Conjugation HIPHIL ac si dicas DISCIPULARE saith Beza The very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praedicate preach used Mark 16.15 doth not necessarily imply onely the Apostolicall preaching vivâ voce in suggesto aloud in a pulpit but doth signifie a publication in generall not onely a going up into the pulpit as idiots imagine for an Angel did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Revel 5.2 preach or proclaim as it is in our last Translation and Christ preached to the spirits in prison 1. Pet. 3.19 and the possessed of a legion of devils being dispossessed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mark 5.20 Began to preach or publish how great things Jesus had done for him None of these I dare say climbed up into the pulpit Moreover publication may be by writing aswell as by preaching and more disciples have been made by Evangelicall and Apostolicall writings then ever were by their preachings in their own times I answer again He saith It is false To prove a falshood a man must have expresse truth which he confesseth he hath not and how lamely followeth this Because we now reade it not Ergò they were not commanded He would have laught at such a negative proof of ours Augustine saith c Quicquid Christus de suis factis dictis no● legere voluit hoc scribendum Evangelis●is tanquam suis manibus imperavit Whatsoever Christ would have us reade of his words and works that did he command the Evangelists as if they had been his own hands to write Bellarmine answereth d Lequitur de imperio interno quod suggestio quaedam inspiratio potiùs quàm praeceptum propriè dictum existimari debet He speaketh of the inward command which is rather a
Either of these wayes is better then that of Canus But the truth is The father of the faithfull knew that though himself did kill Isaac yet God who is able to stones to raise up children unto Abraham Matth. 3.9 was able to raise up Isaac even from the dead Heb. 11.19 and in hope or full assurance thereof might say I and the lad will return and yet intend faithfully to sacrifice his sonne And who knoweth but he might be divinely and extraordinarily assured that his childe should return with him The third Objection consisteth of these parcels 1. Pet. 5.12 By Silvanus a faithfull brother unto you as I suppose 2. Cor. 11.5 I suppose I was not a whit behinde the very chiefest Apostles In both places is used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 computo supputo Existimo saith the Vulgat I suppose 1. Cor. 7.40 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I think I have the Spirit of God Joh. 21.25 There are many other things which Jesus did the which if they should be written I suppose that even the world it self could not contain the books that should be written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 arbitror I opine think or suppose From which or the like places the objection thus ariseth Opinion is conversant about those things which are changeable and is onely of all the powers of the soul busied about contingents and is a trembling pendulous shaking and uncertain habit circa complexa upon probable reasons inclining to one side yet fearing or doubting the contradictorie for opinion is framed on likelihood as knowledge is upon truth Where opinion or supposall is there is not certain knowledge But our Apostles did think or suppose Therefore they had not immediate divine revelation or certaintie in the points supposed and therefore wrote somewhat which they knew not I answer to each of these Apostles in particular and first to S. Peter who seemeth to be in doubt and uncertainty what was to be thought concerning Silvanus Divers say he speaketh modestly of him as the Apostolicall men were wont to do of themselves S. Augustine Tract 37. in Joan. averreth that under those words is couched an asseveration As if one should say to a stubborn servant Thou dost contemn me Consider I suppose I am thy master where the seeming supposall makes him neither to be nor seem to be ever a whit the lesse his master But I answer That the holy Ghost having not revealed unto S. Peter fully what the heart of Silvanus was or was like to be left him to suppose and according to the supposall of his soul did dictate unto S. Peter what the blessed Spirit knew better then S. Peter these words The supposall of the Apostle inferreth not a supposall of the Spirit The Spirit was most certain when the Apostle might be dubious The holy Ghost spake if I may so say representing Peter and in Peters person which might be subject to a supposall and yet divinely inspired to know certainly what he wrote namely to know this that he did suppose And that upon good motives Whereas S. Paul saith 2. Cor. 11.5 I suppose I was not a whit behinde the very chiefest Apostles and 1. Cor. 7.40 I think I have the Spirit of God he speaketh not so much doubtingly as humbly To use diminuent and sparing phrases concerning ones self is lawfull 2. Cor. 11.23 I speak as a fool saith S. Paul yet there was as great a dissimilitude between a fool and him as between any I think then breathing Ephes 3.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnto me who am lesse then the least of all Saints is this grace given that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ No man had the like priviledge in every degree as he had in this S. Peter was Doctor Judaeorum the Doctour of the Jews S. Paul Doctor Gentium the Doctour of the Gentiles yet no man can speak more modestly then S. Paul doth of himself Lesse then the least of the Apostles had been much but lesse then the least of all Saints is the depth the heart the soul of humilitie which yet is further evidenced in that he saith not this grace was given when he was a persecuter and so indeed worse then any Saint yea almost worse then any man but to me even now when I am called now when I am turned to me now lesse then the least of all Saints is this grace given Lesse then the least is contrary to the rules of Grammar which admit not a comparative above a superlative contrary to common sense contrary to the literall truth of the things themselves for he was a chosen vessell a chief Apostle few if any more chief though he should boast more of his authoritie he should not be ashamed 2. Cor. 10.8 No whit inferiour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the very chiefest Apostles 2. Cor. 12.11 A Minister of Christ more then others 2. Cor. 11.23 Now though S. Paul used terminis diminuentibus and spake sparingly and modestly in some places concerning himself yet otherwhere he revealeth the whole truth he knew the certaintie of things to wit that he was not lesse then the least that he was not as a fool and when he said I suppose or I think he did know Dum minus dicit majus innuit Whilest he speaketh the lesse he intimateth the more he was never a trumpeter of his own worth but when he was urged unto it by opposition Concerning the place of S. John thus I answer The Apostle was governed by the holy Ghost to use an Hyperbole or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Orientall Idiotisme and perchance aimed at the words Gen. 13.6 The land was not able to bear Abraham and Lot that they might dwell together Or at the place of Amos 7.10 The land is not able to bear all his words as is well observed by the curious Heinsius He also here is guided by the same Spirit to write I suppose or I think that even the world could not contain the books as for other reasons to us unknown so perhaps because both the Spirit would qualifie the Hyperbole and speak within truth which is allowed rather then beyond truth which is disallowable I suppose rather then I know Secondly I answer more punctually If the holy Spirit did leave S. Paul nescient whether he were rapt in bodie yea or no and Paul did know his own nesciencie 2. Cor. 12.2 why might not the same Spirit leave S. Paul S. Peter S. John in supposals and yet no inconvenience ariseth thencefrom since they perfectly knew that they did suppose This is the disciple which testifieth of these things and wrote these things and we know that his testimonie is true John 21.24 as S. John saith of himself To conclude this point No man ever said that whatsoever the holy Penmen mentioned or treated of they understood perfectly invested with all their circumstances for they spake and writ of the day of judgement and other
Hellenists Chaldee Paraphrase or any heathen Authours yet it doth not necessarily evince that the holy Actuaries or Notaries did oversee reade heare or transcribe those things out of their knowledge from the said Authours but both the names of those Authours and the things themselves were presented to them by that blessed Spirit which knew all things and this among the rest That these words phrases and sentences were fit to be inserted into the holy Writ which now are in it All Scripture is of divine inspiration But the very words are part of Scripture Therefore even they were inspired Revel 19.9 The Angel said Write Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage-supper of the Lambe Did not the Angel speak the words Did not he give the Apostle both matter and words When the Apostle was commanded Revel 14.13 by a voice from heaven to write Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord c. was he commanded to write his conceits and thoughts apprehended in Syriack and translate them into Hellenisticall Greek or did the heavenly voice suggest onely an holy inspiration into him and left him to coyn words as Heinsius would have it or rather did not the voice teach the very words which should be written viz. Blessed are the dead c. Now let us passe to the fifth and last Conclusion in which we must dissent from the worthy Heinsius and disarm him of his often-inculcated but not once proved Tenet The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Writers of holy Scripture conceived in one language and writ in an other Upon which ground he hath raised a strange structure but his very ground-work is sandie slipperie and false And this I hope to evince by Scripture Authoritie and Reason All which shall be squared to that Corner-stone which more then once before I hewed upon more roughly and now by Gods grace intend to polish namely That the very words and letters were dictated unto the holy Scribes and therefore they had no power to change or transchange to adde or diminish or to expresse by their own words their internall irradiation but in the language which they conceived they also wrote their heavenly dictates 2. Pet. 1.21 The Prophesie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost Therefore their very speech being according to the motion of the holy Ghost their words were not of their own choice but from above and not onely divine thoughts but sacred words were also given them 1. Cor. 2.13 S. Paul spake in words which the holy Ghost taught Did the holy Ghost inspire thoughts into them in one language and teach them words to speak in an other language Cui bono To what end and purpose and why not all done in the language which they conceived 2. Tim. 3.16 Scriptura per Spiritum scripta est The Scripture was writ by the Spirit saith the Syriack not onely inspired as it is from the Greek but written and as it was inspired written Revel 19.9 The Angel saith concerning very words which he commanded to be wrote These are the true sayings of God Not inspirations onely of God and the words of Men but the sayings of God Exod. 34.27 Write thou these words for after the tenour of these words I have made a covenant God was not tied to the words Moses was to the writing of the very words Jerem. 30.2 Write thee all the words which I have spoken unto thee in a book He gave him no power to put in words of his own Twelve times in the Revelation was S. John commanded to write and knew he not the words Hos 8.12 I have written to Ephraim the great things of my Law Even all what my Prophets have done I challenge as mine own writing Authorities of men The Scriptures were written y Magisterio Spiritus in obedience to the Spirit saith Sasbout on Peter Therefore the Apostles had not the power left unto them of writing their own conceits but were fitted with words by the Spirit z Si Spiritu saucto inspirati ab eo impulsi locuti sunt Prophetae caeteri librorum sacrorum scriptores Consequens est Scripturam totam esse verbum Dei non aliter à nobis accipiendam quàm si Deus immediatè absque humano vel Angelico ministerio eam edidisset ut ità dicam digito suo scripsisset If the Prophets and other writers of holy Scripture spake by the moving and inspiration of the holy Ghost it followeth that all the Scripture is the word of God no otherwise to be esteemed of by us then if God immediately without the ministery of men or Angels had set it forth and as I may say had written it with his own finger saith the learned Estius Even Cornelius Cornelii à Lapide himself on Timothie thus a Prophetae alii scriptores 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocantur calami instrumenta Spiritus sancti quast scribae velociter scribentis inspirantis dictantis sacras literas The Prophets and other holy Penmen of Scripture are styled the pens and instruments of the holy Ghost as of that scribe who speedily writeth inspireth and dictateth the divine writ Where he confesseth the holy Spirit not to inspire onely but to dictate yea to write like a swift scribe the holy Scripture Gregorius Praefat. in Job cap. 2. b Scriptores sacri Eloquii quia repleti Spiritu sancto super se trahuntur quasi extra semetipsos fiunt sic Dei sententias quasi de labiis proferunt The writers of the heavenly word because they are filled with the holy Ghost are elevated above themselves in him and as it were out of themselves and so the sentences of God are uttered as it were by their lips Athanasius Epist ad Lib. saith c Christus vetus novum Testamentum composuit Christ made the Old and New Testament d Quid est illud o● Domini nisi Scripturae per quas loquitur Dominu● What is the mouth of the Lord but the Scriptures by which the Lord speaketh saith Rupert on Matth. lib. 4. Philo Judaeus in lib. Quis rerum divinarum haeres thus e Propheta nihil ex se proloquitur sed omnia submonente alio A Prophet prophesieth nothing out of his own brain but all things by the prompting of the holy Ghost as he wittily concludeth Therefore not so much as the words are his own Chrysostom de Lazaro Homil. 4. Though a dead man revive and an Angel come from heaven you must beleeve Scriptures above all for the Master of Angels the Lord of the living and the dead he himself framed them The same Chrysostom de expulsione ipsius sheweth the manner I reade his own handwriting c. They are done by his hand the very writing it self is his and therefore called Chyrographum Dei A writing under Gods own hand by Augustine
shalt rest and stand in the lot at the end of the dayes IN FINE DIERUM Which words are applied by Vatablus to the resurrection of the last judgement which was mentioned Dan. 12.2 And lest any should interpret the rising out of the dust vers 2. as Porphyrie did for their creeping out of the holes and caverns in the time of the Maccabees Lyra expressely contradicteth it and saith it is to be understood c De resurrectione vera in fine mundi of the true resurrection in the end of the world implying that Daniel shall then arise as he arose not saith Lyra at the time of the Maccabees nor at the opening of the graves before Christs resurrection d Ergò resurrexit Job sanctissimus Therefore most holy Job arose also saith Pineda equalling Noah Daniel and Job in this priviledge But the consequence is lame for Ezechiel doth not mention the equall priviledges of these three in their resurrection though perhaps this latter is figured out but onely the delivery from famine or death by famine Ezech. 14.13 c. of Noah Daniel and Job or rather of other holy men also designed out by their names and like them in their severall vertues Noah overcoming the world Daniel the flesh and Job the devil Concerning Pineda his other proof That Gregorie Nissen in his third Oration of the resurrection saith That the day of their resurrection who arose out of the graves was much more joyfull to them then the day of the generall resurrection If I should grant that he said so and that he said so truely yet it followeth not necessarily scarce probably that they went with their bodies into heaven The day of the generall resurrection is not yet come and could not be rejoyced at but in hope More especially concerning Job though Salianus ad ann mundi 1544. num 783. makes Jobs tombe-stone speak thus e Clausit viator hoc marmor aliquando mortuum emis itque gloriosum eum Principe Messia resurgentem Jobum This stone O wayfaring man kept under it dead Job and sent forth also Job in glorie arising from the dead with Messiah our Prince though Pineda his fellow-Jesuite in the end of his Commentaries on Job saith That Jobs sepulchral pyramis and kingly monument was made for him by his seven sonnes and three daughters and was framed and erected f Ad pietatis memoriam sempiternä spémque resurrectionis cum Redemptore certissimain for an eternall memoriall of pietie and most certain hope of his resurrection with our Redeemer yet none is ignorant that these are tricks of wit panegyrick Eulogies poeticall Epitaphs even a little thwarting one another rather then divine truths or historicall relations 4. And further it is evident that Job spake of the generall resurrection when he said Job 19.25 c. I know that my Redeemer liveth and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth and though after my skin worms destroy this bodie yet in my flesh shall I see God By which latter or last day we may fitly expound not the last day of judgement saith Pineda but the state of the Evangelicall Law and of Christs suffering and rising ending by his death and resurrection the former times and beginning to appoint a new for he is THE FATHER OF THE WORLD TO COME Isa 9.6 Did ever man thus delude Scripture and make it a nose of wax It is scarcely worse used by our unlearned lay-Rabbies the Doctours of Doctours Who ever dreamed that Dies novissimus should signifie so unlikely a matter and if it did how vain is his proof The words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pater aeternitatis The father of eternitie as the Interlinearie Bible reads it and Vatablus with it expounding the words g Anthor vitae aeternae The authour of eternall life which hath no reference to Pineda's wilde Comment or the everlasting Father as we translate it 5. The Seventie indeed and the Book of Job thus Job died being old and full of dayes so farre also goeth the Hebrew and it is added in the Greek But it is written that he shall again be raised up with those whom the Lord shall raise These words are not in the Original nor in Aquila nor in Symmachus nor in the Seaventie used by Vatablus but Theodotion so reads it and the Vatican Edition of Sixtus so acknowledgeth it and Origen in his epistle to Africanus confirmeth it and Clemens Romanus cap. 5. lib. 6. approveth it Two wayes there are of expounding the word Rursus Again Francis Turrian the Jesuite on the place of Clement collecteth that Job shall not onely be raised up in the last day at the generall resurrection but that he should be first raised when Christ arose and afterward at the last day Nicetas saith better The word AGAIN was therefore put that his first resurrection might be understood to have been when he was delivered from his troubles Which way soever you follow we have it That Job shall be raised at the last day of the world And therefore he arose not with Christ or died again and so went not into the eternall happinesse of bodie and soul for glorified bodies shall not be raised 6. Lastly there is an opinion even to this day among the Turks grounded no doubt on some old Tradition That Jobs bodie was removed from the place of his buriall to that citie and place which is now called Constantinople as Mr. Fines Morison in the first part of his Itinerary pag. 243. witnesseth These are all that ever I read of by name that are thought by Pineda or others both to rise with Christ and to partake with him at that time of the eternall happinesse both in soul and bodie 7. Bartholomaeus Sybilla Peregrinarum quaestionum decade 1. cap. 3. quaest 7. dubio 3. citeth Henricus de Assia as Authour that Perhaps not onely Enoch and Elias are kept in Paradise to preach against Antichrist but both John the Evangelist and those that rose with Christ Observe saith Sybilla the word PERHAPS for S. Hierom saith formerly concerning S. John WE DOUBT BUT BOTH S. JOHN THE EVANGELIST AND THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARIE DO REJOYCE IN THEIR GLORIFIED FLESH VVITH CHRIST And Aquin. in 4. sentent distinct 43. artic 3. cited by Sybilla saith It is a point of faith holily to be beleeved concerning the blessed Virgin Marie and S. John the Evangelist that their resurrection is not deferred to the end of the world Also Holcot saith on Wisdome cap. 2.2 h Corpus benedictae Virginis non fuit resolvendum in cineres quia in ca fomes extiuctus extitit The bodie of the blessed Virgin was not to be turned into ashes because in her was no fountain of ill from whence her asportation into heaven may seem to be confirmed The feast-day of her assumption is greater and more festivall then any other holy-day for her saith Durandus Rational 7.24 Surely I must needs say we reade
as Hierom styleth them will hardly beleeve 3. Bellarmine de Rom. Pontif. 3.6 draweth the second and third part of his third demonstration from two places of Ecclesiasticus The first is Chap. 48. vers 10. Who wast ordained for reproofs in their times to pacifie the wrath of the Lords judgement before it brake forth into furie and to turn the heart of the father unto the sonne and to restore or establish the tribes of Israel First I may answer Ecclesiasticus is not held Canonicall but Apocryphall even by such as for the many divine and admirable things in that book could wish if it were no sinne to wish that it were truely Canonicall And Apocryphals are not held sufficient to settle a point of controversie Secondly it may be also said that Jansenius maintaineth this place evinceth not that Elias shall come personally because Ecclesiasticus wrote according to the received opinion of those times which from the words of Malachi beleeved that Elias was to come in his own proper person Bellarmines reply upon Jansenius is shallow in this point saying d Si it à est ut Jansenius dicit sequitur Ecclesiasticum errâsse falsa scripsisse If Jansenius saith truth it followeth that Ecclesiasticus hath erred and writ some false things as if he who writeth the opinion of others may not relate an errour and write false things though he erre not himself nor beleeveth the false things S. Matthew chap. 2.6 wrote what the Jews said concerning the place of Christs birth the things were miscited and yet no errour or fault in S. Matthew The Spirit of truth hath written that The fool hath said in his heart There is no God Because the fool thought foolishly and untruly God forbid that we should turn fools also and think that the holy Ghost did erre because he truely recordeth an untrue opinion or an untrue thing true onely in the relation This have I said to defend both Jansenius and Ecclesiasticus against Bellarmine Thirdly I might answer Onely these last words have the shadow of an argument To restore or to establish the tribes of Israel which because John did not do Elias must do hereafter For indeed it is but a shadow since as John the Baptist did turn the heart of the father unto the sonne as was before proved so he may be also said to establish or restore the tribes of Israel not to any temporall kingdome which cannot be proved to be intended by Ecclesiasticus for in Malachi there is altum silentium not a word spoken concerning this point but to the true service of God from which they were fallen for he preached unto some of all sorts of the two tribes of the ten tribes yea of the Gentiles There went out unto John Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region round about Jordan Mat. 3.5 and Jordan divided Galilee from Judea yea Christ himself came from Galilee to John to be baptized Matth. 3.13 And he taught both Publicans and Souldiers and Herod and some of all sorts thereabouts Luk. 3.13 14. c. and thus did he restore or establish the tribes of Israel The Bishops Bible hath the controverted words thus To set up the tribes of Israel So Coverdale Vt constitueres tribus Jacob saith Tremellius according to the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated also by the Interlinearie ad constituendum or as Vatablus ad constituendas tribus Jacob to establish the tribes of Israel Many are the significations of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but no where doth it signifie to restore unto a dispersed people their lost kingdome which is the hope of the Jews or the exposition of the Jewishly affected nor is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so expounded otherwhere either in the Septuagint or in the New Testament or in any classicall Authour It is rendred usually by constituere Restituere is a black swan But mine own opinion is that Ecclesiasticus prophesieth not what should be thereafter viz. after the day of his writing either concerning John or Elias but onely relateth what was past and it is an Eulogie and laudatorie of Elias his worth as appeareth by the antecedent and consequent narratives where all runnes in terms designing out times passed and gone none touching at the present tense or time much lesse at the future and so it can be no prophesie concerning Elias personally to come hereafter especially since there is never a passage in Ecclesiasticus concerning Elias which Elias did not accomplish before his assumption and more particularly he reconciled God to his children the Israelites and turned their hearts to him Thus did he restore or establish the tribes of Israel in his time for 1. King 18.21 Elias said unto all the people that were gathered out of Israel How long will ye halt between two opinions if the Lord be God follow him but if Baal then follow him And then by miracle under God he established them or restored the tribes to the right religion from which they were fallen by idolatrie the fall of all falls fowlest Even Bellarmine himself expounds Restituerunt they restored by Converterunt they converted in this very chapter thus farre truely proving that Zuinglius and Luther were not the Enoch and Elias prophesied of because Elias was to convert the Jews and indeed converted many as I proved before which neither Luther nor Zuinglius did for ought that I have read 4. The second place insisted upon by Bellarmine is Ecclesiasticus 44.16 Enoch was translated being an example of repentance to all generations The Septuagint have it thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Translatus est exemplum poenitentiae generationibus He was translated being an example of repentance to following generations saith the Interlinearie Nationibus to the nations saith Vatablus Vt det Gentibus sapientiam that he may give wisdome to the Gentiles saith the Vulgat edition printed by Petrus Santandreanus 1614 and it hath in the margin Poenitentiam repentance But to leave that varietie the Vulgat is not properly translated for it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gentibus to the Gentiles as opposed to the Jews but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Posteris or Generationibus to future posteritie And if it were Gentibus as Bellarmine readeth it yet it maketh the more against him who would have Enoch and especially Elias do greater things for the Jews then for the Gentiles Lastly it is not so much as intended by any word of Ecclesiasticus that Enoch shall hereafter appeare in the flesh personally and then die and be an example of repentance to the Nations for after he had so long pleased God and walked with God in this world and after he was taken by God from amongst men and no doubt much more then pleased God and walked with God if he should come again into this world here to live should he sinne again that he might be an example of repentance The conceit is vast harsh and improbable if the
Abraham or any other But Melchisedech though he had none at all from Abraham or his ascendents none at all mentioned in any authentick records or tradition yet had he one or other of which hereafter There was one Theodotus saith o De praes●riptione cap. 53. in fine Tertullian and he brought in a novel opinion and held That what Christ doth for men Melchisedech doth for the Angels But this cannot be for the good Angels needed not any Mediatour of Redemption no not Christ himself nor ever had nor ever shall have This Arch-heretick had other Melchisedechians who taught that Melchisedech was a certain vertue or power greater then Christ because Christ is said to be a Priest according to his order So Epiphanius relateth lib. 2. Haeres 55. Yet this holdeth not for the majoritie or betternes but for the prioritie or typicall resemblance Some have held that Christ was a Priest according also to the order of Aaron and then by that argument the Aaronicall Priesthood should be better then Christs which is plainly confuted in the Epistle to the Hebrews Christ accomplished every type of him and according as they signified did he fulfill This doth not prove their betternes or efficacie greater then his no more doth his being a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech either magnifie Melchisedech above Christ or any way vilifie Christ Varietie of conjectures have been manifold I hold it probablest with Josephus the Jew with divers late Writers with the ancient Fathers p Coelestis Hierarchiae cap. 9. Dionysius q Haeres 51. Epiphanius r In Genes quaest 63. Theodoret Procopius and others that Melchisedech was one of the Kings of Canaan and came from Cham not from Sem. And this God might ordain purposely that the Gentiles might not despair of salvation but though Christ came of the seed of Abraham and the Jews were Gods peculiar people yet Christ himself was a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech who descended from the cursed seed That Melchisedech was the holy Ghost was a mad opinion now forsaken of all That he was not an Angel nor a vertue greater then Christ I proved before but a man a meer man whose pedigree is not to be reckoned from Abraham or his predecessours for Abrahams predecessours dwelt in Vr of the Caldees Genes 11.28 and 31. and Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the floud in old time Joshuah 24.2 that is Beyond Euphrates Eastward even unto the East-Indies did Sems posteritie reach and multiply propagating true religion with the histories both of the Creation and of the Deluge In the East-Indian Shaster which is the Canon of their devotion esteemed by them as the sacred Bible is by us there are now many fables intermixed savouring more of humane invention then of faith yet their rationall traditions make nearer approaches to the divine truth concerning the creation then the more ignorant Theologie of the Romanes till Christs time and as good laws and precepts have the East-Indians for moralitie and government Oecomenick and Politicall if not better for a settled State And I hold it a most remarkable thing that the East-Indian language to this day hath farre more affinitie with the Hebrew then any one of our Occidentall languages yea then all of them put together And those Indi Aurorae or as one calleth them Indi Diei have scarce a word but it is found in the Caldee Arabick or primitive Hebrew and by perfect knowledge in the Hebrew one may easily attain to the knowledge of all other the Eastern tongues Whence we may conclude the prioritie of the Hebrew tongue See the learned William Postell in his alphabet of twelve tongues different in characters and more specially de Indica lingua One great errour I cannot omit in the said learned Postellus in his Tractate de lingua Samaritana for from S. Hierom in prooemio libri Regum and with him he maintaineth that it is certain that Esdras after the instauration of the temple under Zerubbabel invented other letters which now we use and that the characters of the Samaritans and Hebrews were all one till then and withall himself found out a very probable specious reason why Esdras should forsake the old characters and framed new and yet he bringeth in the characters of Hebrew now in use as delivered by God in the tables given to Moses whereas if he would be constant to himself either God gave to Moses the Samaritan letters and Esdras invented new ones or if God gave these now in use to Moses the Samaritans may be thought to invent new characters that they might differ from the Hebrews and make their schism more irreconcileable by the strangnesse of misfigured letters Moses was farre more ancient then Esdras and the Samaritans who received no Scripture but Moses his writings in all likelihood used the letters and characters used by Moses and so in conclusion it will arise that the Samaritan letters and the Hebrew were all one a long time which Postellus confesseth and that they were exactly the same which God gave to Moses which Postellus denieth and after that Esdras might invent new characters upon the ground which Postellus framed and the Jews as he saith approved and these commonly we enjoy I cannot omit that you shall finde other characters of the alphabet of that language which was used beyond Euphrates different from the Samaritan but more from the Hebrew And it is in the Hebrew Grammar of Abraham de Balmis q Prout inveni in libro vetustissimo As I found saith he in a most ancient book and he saith It was r Scriptura transitus fluvii the writing used beyond Euphrates The characters of both which I would have described exactly if I had been sure our Printers had the stamps for others have not In regard of which defect Mr Selden in the preface to his book called Marmora Arundeliana excuseth his printing of the Samaritan the Syriack and Arabick words and passages used in his Commentarie by the Hebrew letters rather then by their own proper characters I am come back to Jerusalem where Melchisedech reigned And though he was a most holy man and an extraordinary type of Christ yet I say he came of the cursed seed For C ham possessed all Canaan and it was called the land of Canaan from Canaan the sonne of Cham. And he was one of the Kings in that land for it had many Kings Genes 14. Melchisedech and Job and many other in the old Testament do prove that God was not the God of the Jews onely but also of the Gentiles This place of the Apostle Hebr. 11.5 concerning Enoch Nè videret mortem hath occasioned much discourse but I cannot leave Enoch yet Indeed it is said Genes 5.24 God took him ſ Id est abstulit eum Deus per mortem that is God sent for him by death saith Aben Ezra and so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
compared Book 1. p. 13 14 15. The Ascension of Christ represented in the assumption of Enoch and Elias Book 3. p. 191 to 195. B BEauty desired Book 1. pag. 19. The Being or not Being of a thing may be said divers wayes Book 2. p. 77. Bristoll built of old by Brennus ibid. p. 23 24. C WHence the Capitol in Rome had its name B. 2. pag. 18. Ceremonies Leviticall died at first by degrees and now they are not onely dead but deadly Book 1. p. 3. There is no Chance where Providence reigneth Book 2. p. 71 72. Cherubims with reall flaming swords were placed in Paradise Book 1. p. 2 3. and why ibid. p. 23. Christs beautie in his humanitie described together with his Passion B. 1. p. 18 19 20. compare ibid. p. 193. Christ doth us more good then Adam did us harm ibid. p. 185 to 188. Christ saved more in number then Adam condemned ibid. p. 188 189. c. Whether Christ were in Adam and how ibid. p. 82 83. The judgement of the essentiall Church of Christ is infallible ibid. p. 148. Circumcision of women by the Turks ibid. p. 144. A wicked Companion is very dangerous Book 3. p. 184 185. Conception what it is and how B. 1. p. 93 to 99. Confirmation in grace is of two sorts ibid. p. 48. Generall Councels are the highest earthly Judges of Scriptures controversed ibid. p. 136 148. D DEath is threefold Book 1. p. 4. Death is common to all ibid. Death Naturall and Violent ibid. p. 17. Sinne is the onely cause of Death ibid. p. 26 27. Death is bitter because painfull ibid. pag. 28 31. Death is sweet to some men because God makes it beneficiall unto them ibid. pag. 32 33 c. Death was inflicted on Adam for one sinne ibid. Death was inflicted for the sinne of the man Adam not of the woman Eve ibid. pag. 36 to 44. Speedy death by some is accounted best Book 3. pag. 187. Whether all Adams posteritie without priviledge or exception must and shall die Book 3. Chap. 1 2 3 throughout The difference between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Book 1. pag. 192 193 c. Disciples of Christ were none of them Noble at least not Nobly bred Book 2. pag. 86. E OF the East-Indians and their language Book 3. p. 204. Of Elias and Enoch whether they be yet living or dead Book 3. Chap. 2. throughout Divers questions about Enoch more especially ibid. p. 181 182 c. Equivocation in what sense and in what cases it may be allowable Book 1. pag. 165 167. The second book of Esdras was never held Canonicall ibid. p. 7. Eve remained an intemerate virgin untill after the sinne of Adam ib. p. 39 40. Whether Eve sinned before she talked with the serpent ibid. pag. 60. Excommunication was of three sorts in the Jewish politie Book 2. pag. 48 49. F THe word Father is diversly taken in the holy Scripture Book 1. pag. 120. and Book 2. pag. 113 c. G GEnealogies were ever drawn from the Males Book 1. page 40 41. H THe Healed by Christ were never a second time cured of any disease Book 2. p. 8. Heavenly influences which are noxious are the causes of much sicknesse and destruction Book 1. p. 17. All languages have some words retaining the foot-steps of the Hebrew Book 2. p. 45. When the Hebrew points were first used Book 1. p. 100 101 102. Hebron the citie Book 2. page 19 to 29. Humilitie ibid. p. 161 162. The humilitie of S. Paul Book 2. p. 84 85. The Husband represents the wife Book 1. p. 140. I JEr 10.11 was the onely verse of his whole prophesie that was written in Chaldee which every captive Jew was commanded to cast in the teeth of the Babylonians Book 1. p. 180. Jerusalem the holy citie Book 2. p. 154 155 156. Ignorance threefold Book 1. p. 60. Interpretation of Scriptures is the Pastours right with whom the Laitie must consult ibid. p. 149 150 156 181 182. Book 2. p. 63. Interpretation of Scriptures by Anagrams is profane B. 1. p. 152 153. Whether interpretation of Scriptures or judgement of doctrine do in any sort belong unto the people and how farre ibid. p. 157 159. Helps and cautions prescribed unto the people for interpretation of Scriptures ibid. pag. 160 to pag. 169 c. John the Apostle his death Book 3. p. 187 188 189. Joseph was the first-born of Jacob. Book 1. p. 142 143. Joseph was a type of Christ Book 2. p. 33. A twofold acception of the word Judgement Book 1. p. 6. Judgement after death is private of souls publick of bodies and souls ibid. K. KIngs represent the people under them Book 1. p. 183 184. Of the honour due unto the King ibid. Whether Korah Dathan and Abiram descended with all their goods truly into hell Book 3. p. 214 215 to p. 221. L WHerein the confusion of Languages consisted Book 2. p. 45 46. Orientall languages conduce much to the understanding of Scriptures therefore necessarie to be studied ib. p. 48. Of the same languages also B. 3. p. 204 205. Of Lazarus raised by Christ Book 2. p. 7 8 9. Humane Learning is an handmaid to Divinitie ib. p. 88 89. Literall sense of Scripture is hardest to be found Book 1. p. 149. M MAgistrates not to be reviled Book 1. p. 168 169 170. Maran-atha expounded Book 2. p. 48 to p. 54. Of Melchisedech and why he is said to be without father and mother Book 3. p. 201 202 c. to p. 206. Members of the bodie are not all of equall worth Book 1. p. 63. God is very Mercifull unto all ib. p. 186 187. Whether Moses at the Transfiguration appeared in his own true person or not Book 3. p. 208 209 c. O IN Oaths we must be warie of mentall reservations and unlawfull equivocations Book 1. p. 166 167. Opinion Book 2. p. 83. Originall sinne See Sinne. P OF Paradise Book 3. pag. 194 195 196 197. The Pastours wisdome both for the matter and manner of his doctrine Book 1. p. 158. The Patriarchs were buried in Sychem Book 2. chap. 10. Meerly Personalls are not propagated B. 1. p. 109 to p. 138. S. Peter represented all the Apostles Joh. 21.15 16. Book 1. p. 147. The Pope is servus servorum Dei ibid. p. 132. The Priviledges of a few make not a law Book 2. p. 160. Whether God may justly Punish the Fathers for the childrens actuall delinquencies B. 1. p. 119 120. In what cases God may and doth punish the children for their Parents faults either with temporall or eternall punishment ib. p. 118 to p. 124. Every individuall man is justly punished for originall sinne in Adam ib. p. 145 146 147 c. R REdemption was of a double kinde in the Leviticall law Book 1. p. 143. Of Reliques Book 2. chap. 12. and the Authours esteem of a true choice Relique ibid. p. 130 131. The Resurrection was typified in
Samson and how Book 2. p. 31. Compare Book 3. p. 220. at the bottome of the page Why all men shall rise again at the last day Book 1. p. 195. Whether such as have been raised from the dead did die the second time Book 2. p. 1 to p. 12. Of holy men there is a double resurrection ib. p. 4. The raising of the dead was an act appropriated unto Christ himself no way communicated to his Apostles in his life time ib. p. 6 9 10. Who they were that rose at Christs death ib. p. 12. wherwith compare ib. chap. 8.11 12 13 14. throughout The raised Saints ascended not into heaven with Christ ib. ch 15 16 17 18. throughout Christs resurrection was typified in Elias 2. King 2.13 ib. p. 146. The figure of Rome at its first building ib. p. 24. S THe whole Scripture is but one though penned by divers Book 2. p. 38 39. The Penmen of the holy Scriptures as such could not forget ibid. p. 40 41 c. Whether how it was necessarie that the Scripture should be written for mens instruction ibid. p. 68 69 70 c. Whether the holy Penmen of the Scriptures understood all that they wrote ibid. p. 80 to p. 86. Whether they read profane Authours ibid. p. 86 to p. 90. They did cite Poets or profane Authours ibid. p. 89 to p. 93. Whether they studied the things they wrote before-hand ib. p. 92 to p. 96. There was no difference between the Penmen of the divine Writ of the Old and New Testament in the point of conceiving and writing in different languages ib. p. 96. We must have recourse unto the allusions of Scripture which are not rest on what the Apostles conceived in their mindes onely ibid. p. 97. The Pen-men of Scripture had no libertie to put in their own conceits or in writing to adde or blot out what they had done ib. p. 98 to p. 104. They had no power to clothe their inward apprehensions with words of their own ib. p. 104 105 106. The Penmen of Scripture wrote their heavenly dictates in the same language in which they conceived them ibid. p. 107 to p. 112. Whether the holy Penmen of Scripture wrote the Scripture casually ibid. p. 71 72. When the New Testament began first to be written and upon what occasion ibid. pag. 73. Whether the Penmen of Scripture were commanded to write ibid. p. 73 to page 76. Whether the Prophets Evangelists and Apostles were compelled to write ibid. 76 to p. 80. Whether Christ wrote any part of Scripture himself immediately ibid. p. 64 65 c. Why Sinne is called Originall Book 1. p. 129. Styles given to originall sinne ib. p. 36. Some sinnes are greater then other ibid. p. 62 63 64. The greatnesse of a sinne is two wayes considered ibid. p. 66. Of originall sinne as conveyed unto us from Adam ib. p. 74 to pag. 90. Originall sinne is matter of repentance ib. p. 76. How we sinned originall sinne in Adam ib. p. 78 79 80. Not by imputation onely nor onely by imitation p. 84 85. Originall sinne is propagated to mankinde ib. p. 90 91. p. 129. When originall sinne beginneth ib. p. 91 92 93. The manner how the soul is by it made sinfull ib. p. 103 to p. 109. Adams actuall sinne was private and personall ideall onely and representative therefore not imputed unto us ib. p. 88 89. p. 129. The foure principall faculties of our Souls with their severall objects Book 1. p. 56. T A Twofold kinde of Temperature the one of weight the other of justice Book 1. p. 18. Tithes are by an everlasting law due to the Priesthood of Melchisedech ibid. p. 83. Curses that follow those who sacrilegiously rob the Church of Tithes Book 2. p. 50 51. The Transfiguration of Christ with the manner of it and how it was not painfull to him B. 1. p. 29. Of the Translation of them who shall be found alive at the last day ibid. p. 30. The use of the Tree of life in Paradise unto Adam ibid. p. 20 23. Whether Adam did eat of the tree of life before he fell ibid. p. 21 22. V VIator is considered according unto a twofold estate Book 1. page 51 52. FINIS The severall places of Scripture explained in these three Books of Miscellanies The first book GEn. 3.20 pag. 40. Gen. 4.15 64 65. Exod. 13.2 140. Exod. 20.5 110 116 127 128. Job 14.4 95 96. Ps 51.5 92 93 94. Ps 91.11 25 26. Ps 109.14 121 122. Ps 131.1 161 162. Isa 53.2 18. Vers 4. 20. Jer. 25.26 153 unto 157. Matt. 15.14 174. Joh. 8.44 37. Joh. 9.2 132. Act. 23.5 168 169. 170 c. Rom. 5.12 79 80. vers 13. 186. ver 18. from page 190 to the end of the first book Rom. 11.16 106. 1. Cor. 3.1 2. 158. 1. Cor. 7.14 106. 1. Cor. 15.47 42. Ephes 4.23 24. 56. Heb. 9.27 from the 1 to the ninth The second book GEn. 22.5 p. 83. Gen. 31.53 32. John 8.56 30 31. Joh. 20.7 146 147. 1. Cor. 9.16 78. 1. Cor. 16.22 48 49 c. 2. Cor. 5.14 78. Gal. 6.11 67 68. Heb. 11.35 4. The third book EXod 34.29 p. 210. Mal. 4.5 6. 174 175 c. Matt. 17.11 177 178 c. ¶ Faults escaped in the first Book thus to be corrected Page 18 line 11 for proportion reade proportio Page 20 line margin for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Page 24 line 2 for tree life reade tree of life Page 29 line 13 for not reade no. Page line 39 for ecclipsed reade eclipsed Page 30 line margin for tran-seuntis reade trans-euntis Page 32 line margin for laborantos reade laborantes Page 44 line 20 for yae reade yea Page 57 line 20 for he did for a while reade he did fulfill for a while Page 62 line 22 for Cittien reade Citizen Page 65 line 30 for Wheter reade Whether Page line 43 for Gensis reade Genesis Page 82 line 41 for lisienesse reade likenesse Page 86 line 20 for this reade his Page 96 line margin for doctus nec doctus reade doctus nec indoctue ¶ In the second Book Page 2 line 39 for istance reade instance FINIS