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 consonaÌ„ts by the vowels evinceth not the writing of consonaÌ„ts 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 câ—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
finally and with truth I say that Aristotle who heartily implored the mercy of GOD praying * ENS ENTIUM MISEREREMEI O BEING OF BEINGS HAVE MERCY ON ME by an holy and bodily death is translated * Ad solium aeternae beatitudinis to the Chair of Estate the Seat-royall and Throne of everlasting blisse Yea he holds the man mad who doubts hereof because Aristotle had the knowledge of the Almighty because he loved GOD as the fountain of all goodnesse because Aristotle was as necessary before the incarnation of Christ as the giving of grace necessarily presupposeth nature Whereupon he presumeth that Aristotle was * Praecursor Christi in uaturalibus sicut Joannes Baptista fuit praecursor ad praeparandam ipsiplebem perfectam in gratuitis fuit unus ex iis in Lege Veteri qui per gratiam personalem fuerunt de Lege Nova the forerunner of Christ in naturals as John the Baptist in supernaturals and that he was one of them in the Old Law who by a personall grace were of the New Law Just as the Fathers say David was a man in the Old not of the old Testament If Aristotle had grace if he be the fore-runner of Christ if he be placed in eternall happinesse it is a question not unworthy these curious times Whether they sinned most who prayed unto him or Holcot or the Philosophers cited by Holcot who prayed for him And without just offence to Aristotles Lycaeum I hope I may say though Jofrancus Offusius that great Mathematician in his preface to Maximilian which is before his book Of the divine power of starres saith that Aristotle was the High-priest of Philosophers yea * Vir coelestis Hens Prolegom in Nonnum an heavenly man saith Heinsius others have deified him Yet there were divers Philosophers from Aristotles death till some hundreds of yeares after Christs time who were in greater estimate among all the learned of those times then ever Aristotle was and perhaps there may be a farre perfecter body of Philosophie compiled from the dispersed tenents of other ancienter Philosophers and more accordant to truth and Scriptures then ever could be gathered from Peripatericall principles Theodoret in his fift book De curandis Graecorum affectibus as some have it or De Graecarum affectionum curatione lib. 4. which some do intitle De Naturâ hath these words * Aristoteles animam corruptibilem esse impudenter asseruit aequè ac Democritus Epicurus Aristotle hath impudently affirmed that the soul was corruptible as much as Democritus and Epicurus Again Who be now the Presidents of the Stoicall sect and who are the defenders of the doctrine of Aristotle the Stagiritan c. And as for Plato who made many speeches of the immortalitie of the soul he could never perswade that assertion no not to Aristotle his own hearer Concerning Plato Augustine saith he was most eagerly studious and Vives there addeth that Justin Martyr Eusebius and Theodoret report that Plato translated many things out of Hebrew books into his own And Numenius a Philosopher said * Quiuam hodie inveniuntur Stoicae sectae praesidentes quive etiam sunt qui Aristotelis Stagiritae doctrinam corroborant c. Aâ— Plato quidem qui complures sermones de animae immortalitate disseruit nè Aristoteli quidene auditori suo persuasit eam positionem Aug. de Civit. Dei lib. 8. cap. 11. What is Plato but Moses atticizing Moses the Athenian Hierome Dialog adversus Pelagianos lib. 1. bringeth in the Orthodoxal though personated Atticus against the feigned hereticall Critobulus saying thus * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I care not what Aristotle but what Paul teacheth And on Ecclesiastes 10.15 The labour of the foolish wearieth every one of them * Neque enim mihi curae est quid Aristoteles sed quid Paulus doceat Reade saith he Plato peruse the subtilties of Aristotle * Lege Platonem Aristotelis revolve versutias and That text is fulfilled upon them Though there he nibble at Plato aswell as he biteth Aristotle yet others have stiled him The divine Plato And when Plato so often in his works saith thus * Antiqui perhibent In priscis habetur Oraculis The ancients do affirm It is in the old Oracles and the like he points not at his master Socrates or the preceding Pythagoras but to those learned Sages and ancient Magi who delivered these depths to the Egyptians as they did to him Augustine thus Therefore I was willing to treat of this point with the Platonicks because their books are better known For both the Greeks whose tongue excelleth among the Gentiles have highly extolled them and also the Latines being moved hereunto either by their excellency or by their glory and renown or by their sweetnesse c. So much for the great esteem of Plato hath Augustine Ludovicus Vives on this place addeth that from the dayes of Plato and Aristotle till the reigne of Severus the Emperour Aristotle was rather named then read or understood Then arose Alexander Aphrodisaeus to expound Aristotle yet Plato was more in request * Ideo cum Platonicis placuit hanc causam agere quia eorum sunt literae uotiores Nam Graeci quorum lingua in Gentibus praeeminet eos magnâ praedicatione celebrârunt Latini permoti earum vel excellentiâ vel gloriâ vel gratiâ c. Aug. De Civit. 8.10 untill Schools were publikely erected in France and Italy that is so long as the Greek and Latine tongue flourished Then falleth an heavy censure * Crebrior in manibus hominum notior usque ad Scholas in Gallia Italia publicè constitutas id est quamdiu Graeca Latina lingua viguerunt After that sciences began to be theatricall * Postquam theatricae coeperunt esse disciplinae omnisque earum fructus existimatus est posse disputando fucum faâ—ere os obturare pulvereÌ„ ante oculos jacere idque imperitissim â peritiâ nominibus ad libitum confictis accommodatiores ad rem visi sunt libri Logici Physici Aristotelis and all their profit was thought to be able to deceive in disputing and throw dust before the eyes by a most ignorant dexteritie and with words coyned at pleasure the Logick and Physick books of Aristotle seemed to be more fit And now was Plato not named and though Vives confesseth he thinketh Aristotle no lesse learned then Plato yet he calleth Plato the most holy Philosopher nor can endure to have him neglected And when Scaliger saith * Mancipia paucae lectionis qui in rebus divinis an eferunt Platonem Aristoteli Jul. Scal. Exercit. 365. sect 3. They be slaves of small reading who in divine things preferre Plato before Aristotle he speaketh partially neglecting diviner words of Plato then those cited out of Aristotle and straining the words cited to a more celestiall sense then ever they were intended as if Aristotle
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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
Charles the fifth his Edicts n Nè quis de Sacra Scriptura maximè de rebus dubiis difficilibus privatim aut publicè disputet aut ejus interpretationem sibi sumat nisi sit Theologus qui probatae alicujus Academiae testimonium habeat Let no man take upon him to dispute publickly or privately of the sacred Scripture especially of doubtfull and hard points or to interpret it except he be a Divine that hath the testimonie of some approved Vniversitie It was an holy Edict breeding reverence to the sacred word of God and I could wish it were in practise with us though I must needs confesse the breach of the edict was too severely punished for the men were to be beheaded and the women to be buried alive though they desisted from their errour but if they were obstinate they were to be burned and their goods confiscated Yet the rebellions of the Anabaptists in Germanie may be some cloke for that cruell sentence which rebellions also forsooth were moved by the Spirit of God if for example sake you wil give credit to Thom. Muncer his oration unto the armed rebellious clowns o Constat nobis auspicatum esse me hanc actionem non meâ quadam autoritate privatâ sed jussu divino We are sure saith he that I began not this action by any private authoritie of mine but by a divine injunction c. And again p Videbitis ipsi manifestum Dei auxilium Ye your selves shall see the manifest help of God And he had Scripture to confirm it Scripture in word not in sense Scripture misapplied things falling out contrary to his propheticall Spirit for they were overcome and he beheaded Likewise Sleiden Comment 30. fol. 28. saith of the Anabaptists q Cum Deo colloquium sibi esse mandatum se habere aiebant ut impiis omnibus interfectis novum constituerent mundum in quo pii solùm innocentes viverent They said they had conference with God and a mandate from him to kill all the wicked and then to frame a new world wherein none but the godly and innocent should live This I will say of mine own knowledge that when that man of happy memory the late right Reverend now most blessed Saint Arthur Lake Lord Bishop of Bath and Wells appointed Doctour Sclater now also a Saint of heaven then my most learned loving friend and sometime fellow-Collegian in the two royall Colledges at Eaton and Cambridge with my self to conferre with an Anabaptisticall woman we heard her determine great depths of Divinitie as confidently as ever S. Paul did though he was taught by Christ himself and as nimbly as ever an ape crackt nuts yet so ignorantly and with such non-sense that we both wondred at her incredible boldnesse The Revelation she had at her fingers ends she thought that she understood it better then S. John himself and defined in a few houres conference more depths of Divinitie then six Generall Councels would in a long time Mysteries were no mysteries to her if an Angel of earth or one from heaven instruct her contrary to her frantick prepossest imagination she would conclude Because the Spirit bloweth where it listeth that the Spirit instructed her in the right way A fit consequence for such a pseudo-prophetissa 7. But what do I speak of her self-conceit when of late an other of her sex hath printed a book of her phantasticall crudities and by English anagrams expoundeth Scripture A new kinde of interpretation never thought of fit for a woman to be the inventour of She teacheth Daniel to reveal himself after a new fashion and such things which were he alive and racked he must say he never thought of She thinks she untieth knots and gives light to prophesies but indeed misapplieth things past and perhaps future contingents to present times and while she gathereth many excellent strains of words and sentences out of the divine Writ in coupling them together she maketh such a roaring hotch-potch as if she had vowed to write full-mouthed non-sense in loftie terms others not knowing nor perhaps herself what she aimeth at Take a taste of her anagrams DANIEL I END AL. Yet did not he end all prophesies nor all things MEDES AND PERSIANS SEND MEE SPANIARDS What would she do with them It was feared that they would have come too soon for her and others too THE ROUGH GOATE THE GOTH ROAGUE Like you this you shall have more as bad as void of wit PRINCE OF PERSIA I CAN POPE FRIERS If Friers should come and prevail they would teach her to be more humble DARIUS THE MED I DREAMED THUS Awake dreamer no sense is in thy dreams much lesse religion Was ever Scripture made such a nose of wax did ever any religious heart think such could be the meaning of those words Let me but touch at her obscene exposition of the end of Christs Circumcision pag. 5 and consider her fanaticall imagination that the Spirit of God by Michael understood King James pag. 50 And the warre in heaven with Michael and his Angels against the Dragon and his Angels is thus expounded by her pag. 55. The fray is fought by seconds by Michael is meant King James the Dragon is the Pope whom Michael overcame by the bloud of the Lambe and by the testimonie of so many Bishops and other faithfull crowned with the glory of Martyrdome whereas King James had never a Bishop so crowned and never a Bishop was so crowned since he was born Holy peaceable and harmlesse King James who would scarce hurt a worm is now interpreted to be the greatest fighter among the celestiall host I could wish she would repent for her blasphemy pag. 70 where she writeth That the person of the sonne of God not made was turned into a lump of clay and for her pointing out the day of judgement For though she confesseth pag. 90 Of the day houre no man knoweth no not the Angels that are in heaven nor the Sonne but the Father yet she addeth The account of this book of note is by centuries of yeares Suppose it were so as it is not could not Christ and his Angels know the day by the computation of centuries as well as she but she by a new account hath found out as she imagineth what Christ and the good Angels were ignorant of namely the exact day of doom For thus she determineth pag. 100 There is nineteen yeares and a half to the day of judgement July the twenty eighth one thousand six hundred twenty five Had not this woman been better never to have seen Scripture then thus to profane it and take Gods word in vain You think you have the Spirit of God as you write in the last page but I am sure if you repent not betimes for your wire-drawing of Gods word and intruding into hidden and unsearchable depths of Divinitie you are in a desperate case and all the Separatists and Enthusiasts of
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 quà m 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
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 fuissâ—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
after death excluding judgement in this life and placing death rather before judgement then any great distance betwixt death and judgement according to the native use of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which before The second exposition is of Gregory de Valentia * Tom. 4. Disp 1. quaest 22. punct 9. who applieth the words to the particular judgement immediately upon death So doth Ludovicus de ponte Vallis Oletani * Part. 1. Meditat. medit 9. who sets it down as a veritie of faith * De particulari judicio animae quod sit proximè post mortem judicium singulorum exerceri invisibiliter statim post eujusque mortem Concerning the particular judgement of the soul which is done immediately after death every one is judged invisibly presently after his death and evinceth it by this Text. So doth Joannes * Viguer Instit pag. 692. Viguerius * Bus initio Panarii Antidotorum spiritual Busaeus the Jesuite likewise accounteth * Secundum novissimum est judicium particulare mortem proximè consequens the second last thing to be the particular judgement following death immediately the severitie whereof saith he Job the holy patient feared Job 31.14 What shall I do when God riseth up and when he visiteth what shall I answer him S. Ambrose on this place hath it thus * Post mortem judicabitur unusquisque â—uxta userita sua Every one shall be judged after death according to their own deservings Which words do point at the particular judgement saith Suarez Lastly lest I may seem too eager against the second book of Esdras let me borrow a testimony or two from thence 2 Esdr 9.11 12. They that lothed my law while they had yet libertie and place of repentance open unto them must know it after death by pain And 2. Esdr 7.56 While we lived and committed sinne we considered not that we should BEGIN to suffer for it AFTER DEATH Whence we may probably collect That the beginning of punishment is immediately after death upon the particular judgement and the increase or additament at the generall judgement 2 That some are in torments before the generall day of retribution 3 That the beginning to suffer is not after a long time GOD onely knoweth how long but after death yea presently after it All these proofs on each side make way for the third and best interpretation That the Apostle meaneth not onely either of these judgements but both of them Benedictus Justinian on these words thus * Post eujusque obitum sequitur judicium privatum in quo quisque suarum actionum reddit urus estrationem post finem mundi erit judicium omnium tum hominum tum daemonum After every ones death private judgement follows in which every one is to give an account of his actions after the end of the world shall be the judgement of all both men and devils Of both the Apostle may be understood saith he So also Salmeron and Hugo Cardinalis and Carthusianus Oecolampadius thus * Sive speciale judicium intelligas sive generale uihil refert Whether you understand the speciall judgement or the gener all it matters not Thus have I brought you back to the point where I first began That this text is fitted to my intentions affording me just liberty to write whatsoever may be conceived or expressed concerning the estate of humane souls in their animation or in death or after it in the life future because the words must be expounded of both judgements And now the text being cleared from ambiguities the termes explained the state being made firm and sure not rolling and changeable and being fixed upon its basis and foundation three questions do seem to arise from the first words of the text and each of them to crave its answer before I come to my main intendment First How and when Death came to be appointed for us Secondly Whether Adam and his children all and every one without priviledge or exception must and shall die It is appointed for men to die Thirdly Whether they that were raised up from the dead at any time did die the second time It is appointed to men once to die O Gracious LORD who orderest all things sweetly and who dost dispose whatsoever man doth purpose I humbly implore thy powerfull guidance and enlightning assistance in all this work for his sake who is Alpha and Omega the Way the Truth and the Life thy onely SONNE my blessed SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST Amen CHAP. II. 1 How GOD is immortall how angels and the souls of men how Adams body was mortall and yet immortall though compounded of contraries 2 Aristotles last words his death Holcot or the Philosophers pray for him Aristotle canonized by his followers Plato and Aristotle compared Vives taxed Adams body was not framed of â—he earth or dust of Paradise 3. Adam should not have been subject to any externall force he was Lord of the creatures inward distemper he could not have Adams bodily temperature Christs who was fairer then the children of Adam the helps for Adams body meat drink and sleep 4. Divers opinions of the tree of life If Adam had eaten of the tree of life before or after his fall he had lived for ever If he had not sinned he had not died though he had not tasted of the tree of life To what use the tree of life should have served 5. The Councel of Millan Cardinall Cajetan Richeomus the Jesuite Julianus Pomerius and S. Augustine think that Adam could not have died if he had not sinned The book of Wisedome Holcot Doctor Estius and two passages of Scripture Canonical are authorities evincing that Adam had in the state of innocency an immortall body 1. TO the full answering of the first question how or why Death was appointed for us I shall need to cleare but these two points That Adam for sinne was appointed to die That Adams sinne and punishment was propagated to us Thus sinne was the mother of death thus we were appointed to die because of sinne As a preparative to the first of these two points I hold it fit to demonstrate that Adam at first was made an immortall creature Concerning Adams soul and the spirits of all men descended from him that they are immortall I hope to prove it so soundly in an other part of this tractate that I will fear no other reproof but this that I bring too much proof for it Therefore supposing or rather borrowing that truth which by GODS grace shall be repayed with interest I now come to shew that Adams bodie was created immortall Immortall I say not as GOD is immortall who neither had beginning nor shall have end with whom is no shadow of change much lesse any reall substantiall change who hath as all other good things else so immortalitie eminently and so eminently that our Apostle in some sort excludeth all others and appropriateth it to him saying 1.
had a knowledge of the Trinitie and apprehended it above humane reach and therefore is by him stiled the divine man Augustine saith Plato and the Platonicks were so farre preferred before others in the judgement of posterity that when Aristotle a man of excellent wit and though not comparable to Plato for eloquence yet surmounting many others had set up the Peripatetick sect and even while his master lived by his excellent fame * Plurimos discipulos in suam haeresin congregâsset tamen recentiores Philosophi nobilissimi quibus Plato sectandus placuit noluerunt se dici Peripateticos aut Academicos sed Platonicos Aug. De Civitate Dei lib. 8. cap. 12. had gathered very many disciples unto his sect yet the most noble later Philosophers whom it pleased to follow Plato would not be called Peripateticks or Academicks but Platonicks Vives on this place of Augustine confesseth that Aristotle was before Plato in varietie of knowledge c. above most in wit and industry above all skilfull in arts that the Greeks called Aristotle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 now both the same Greeks called Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latines DIVINUM These things are ill observed by Vives First though Laërtius bringeth the saying of Plato * Aristoteles in nos recalcitravit ut in matrem pulli Aristotle hath kicked against us as colts against their damme yet others deny that he taught publickly in Platoes life-time Vives little remembreth that the precedent words of S. Augustine may incline to the contrarie besides other authorities aswell as Laërtius Secondly that Augustine his term haeresis in the Greek is but secta in the Latine yet by Vives his leave S. Augustine could would have said Congregâsset in suum Lycaeum in suam scholam partem sectam disciplinam or any othersuch word rather then in suam haeresim unlesse Augustine had intended to lay some aspersion upon Aristotle by the word of haeresis which is homonymous Thirdly Vives reporteth without his authour that Plato should say of his two disciples Xenocrates and Aristotle that the former needed the spurre and Aristotle the bridle whereas Cicero in his third book De Oratore ascribeth the saying to Isocrates concerning two of his disciples Theopompus and Ephorus Ephorus the dull Theopompus the witty and apprehensive more distinctly Suidas saith it was spoken of Theopompus Chius not Theopompus Gnidius Again Vives is mistaken in taxing Plotinus for obscuritie * Nè degeneraret à more sectae lest he should degenerate from the custome of the sect Whereby he would insinuate that either Plato was obscure or Plotinus an Aristotelian when S. Augustine accounteth Plotinus among the famous Platonicks in the same place which Suidas also confirmeth For Plotinus his disciples were the great Origen and Porphyrius and divers other famous Platonicks and as all the Platonicks did Pythagorize so did all the Fathers Platonize and Plato was in that high esteem that it was an ancient Proverb * Jovem Graecè loqui si vellet non aliter loquuturum quìm Platonem That if Jupiter would speak Greek he would speak no otherwise then Plato I return from the comparison of Plato with Aristotle and from the oscitancy of Vives to the old matter Strong delusions rightly befall them who make Philosophy equall to Divinity and ascribe asmuch authoritie to Aristotle as to Moses or the Prophets or to any Apostles or Evangelists and who do answer their Texts with equall reverence If they pray to them or for them let them see to it I proceed from the Philosophicall axiome That no Body compounded of contraries can perpetually endure which was spoken onely of the decayed estate beyond which Philosophers could not aspire and not of the state of integritie which is our Quaere and I come to a passage of Divinitie tending that way It is true that Adam was made of earth or rather of the dust of the ground Genes 2.7 of the worst of the elements and the worst part of it God framed man dust of the ground as it is there in the Original Not of the dust or earth of Paradise but of other earth Vives in Aug. De Civit 13.24 Pulvis aridus inidoneus erat ad plasmandum as it is in the Chaldee Targum saith Vives of earth severed and distinct from that blessed garden Cornelius à Lapide the Jesuit saith Drie dust was unfit for to be formed as if God could not work but like a potter by fit and necessary materialls and he citeth Tertullians words God by adding some fat liquour Deus addito opimo liquore in limum quasi argillam coagulavit cruddled it into slime and clay as it were I say though God had done so yet he could have done otherwise he could have made Man of water without earth or of earth without water or of any some-thing or of nothing I will confesse de facto Pulvis humectus Aug. De Civit. 13.24 with Augustine it was wet dust because it is said Genes 2.6 There went up a mist from the earth and watered the whole face of the ground Augustine readeth it Fons ascendebat the Chaldee Paraphraze hath it Nubes but properly it is a vapour or a mist and immediately The Lord formed Man Now it was of earth out of Paradise for the Lord took the Man therefore he was before created and put him into the garden to dresse it and keep it Genes 2.15 therefore he was out of it ere he was put into it after Adam sinned God sent Adam forth from the garden of Eden to till the ground or that ground from whence he was taken Genes 3.23 therefore the ground from whence he was taken was a different ground from Eden from whence he was expelled and so Adam was not molded or framed of the earth or dust of Paradise All this being granted I say God could frame as lasting and as good a body and as durable against the force of contrarietie of the dust out of Paradise as of the dust of the Garden And questionles Adam was made of the earth before it was cursed and why not then equall to the earth of Paradise So that my Position is not yet shaken The contrarie disposition of the elements had not forced dissolution but Adam had an immortall body Which that you may the rather beleeve let me confirm it by reason and authoritie 3. The first reason is this Death cometh not but by outward violence or inward distemper in which regard Death is divided by Aristotle into these two branches Violent Arist lib. de vita morte Naturall But Adam should not have been subject to externall or internall force or dyscrasie if he had not sinned Therefore he had a bodie that during innocency was immortall and not subject to death The Assumption is onely questionable Concerning the former member of it I evidence it thus Before Man was created the dominion over the Creatures
Israel Exod. 17.8 though they were presently punished by being vanquished in battell yet God said vers 14. Write this for a memoriall in a book I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek under heaven And the Lord did swear he would have warre with Amalek from generation to generation Exod. 7.16 And above foure generations after about 400 yeares Saul destroyed them A Quaere indeed may be made Whether God can justly punish the fathers for the childrens actuall delinquencies And this resolution is easie That he may do it if the father hath doted on the children not duely corrected them for so did God to * 1. Sam. 2.29 Eli or if wicked children do tenderly love their parents which though it be not usuall yet it hath been so and in this case the punishment of the father is indeed a punishment also of the childe But if an holy father do his duty and hate his sonnes courses and thereupon the childe loveth not his father if God can punish the father with temporall punishments for the notorious faults of his sonne yet he will not punish him eternally Nay I will go yet further and truely avouch that the sinnes of predecessours which are not of consanguinitie with us but are fathers onely by our imitation fully may be punished on their children First the word father is taken two wayes in Scripture for either there are fathers by imitation or fathers by nature from whose loyns we lineally descend The Jews though they came not of Cain whose posterity ended at the floud yet may be said to be his sonnes by imitation yea they are called the sonnes of Satan Joh. 8.44 because they followed his steps and did the work of their father vers 41. which is one degree more remote Those who thus take a pattern for themselves out of example of wicked ancestours God justly punisheth Satan having been a murderer from the beginning John 8.44 Cain being as it were the head of murderers among men and the Jews treading in their steps to an inch they may justly be cast into the same fire prepared for the devil and his angels Matth. 25.41 And the Apostle S. Jude justly pronounceth vers 11. Wo to them that have gone in the way of Cain Yea our blessed Saviour himself foretelleth the Jews that for their bloudy proceedings Vpon them shall come all the righteous bloud shed upon the earth from the bloud of the righteous Abel unto the bloud of Zacharias whom they slew c. Mat. 23.35 Where first the distinct deaths of severall martyrs or just ones as the Syriack hath it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one just bloud secondly they are said to slay Zacharias whom others slew thirdly the bloud is not said in the preterperfect tense to have been shed but in the present tense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is shed or is now a shedding as Jerusalem is called vers 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quae occidisti occîdis occisura es as Erasmus well expounds it All these circumstances concurre to make as it were one continued act of murder from the beginning of the world till the destruction of Jerusalem repayed with one and the same punishment upon the father and all the sonnes of imitation Now as the punishment of the fathers by imitation may in an extended sense be communicated to posterity so their sinnes cannot be said to be communicated For how can the sinne of Cain be communicated unto him who last of all killed his brother and unto the Jews who descended not from him but from the younger brother Or can we think that God will inflict damnation upon men for others personall transgressions Temporall chastisements he may justly inflict for the ungracious perpetrations of parents x Non est tibi Israel ultio in qua non sit uncia de iniquitate vituli There is no vengeance taken on thee Israel wherein there is not an ounce of the iniquitie of the calf saith Rabbi Moses Ben Nachman whom they call Ramban or Gerundensis See an excellent place for both points together Jerem. 32.18 19. And eternall torment can he rightly adjudge the soules and bodies of men unto for original sinne which is our second proposition 5. God may and justly doth punish some children eternally and all temporally for originall sinne whether they be like their parents in actuall aversion and back-sliding yea or no. For the most righteous sonnes of Adam endure pain labour sicknesse death which are the orts and effects of the primogeneall offence and the death both of soul and body was inflicted in Morte moriemini and this shall hereafter be fully proved 6. God justly inflicteth eternall punishment on wicked children if they resemble their wicked parents y Malorum imitatio facit ut non solùm sua sed etiam eorum quos imitati sunt merita sortiantur August in priori Enarrat Psal 108. The imitating of wicked men makes a man to be punished not onely for his own sinnes but for theirs also whom he imitates This is a truth so apparent that it needeth no further proof 7. God oftentimes punisheth one sinne with an other And in my opinion this manner of punishing if it continue all a mans life is worse then the torment of hell-fire which were better to be speedily undergone then to be deferred with the increase of sinne Psal 69.27 Adde punishment of iniquitie or Adde iniquitie unto their iniquitie Thus God gave the Gentiles over to a reprobate minde Rom. 1.28 and then such offenders do but treasure up wrath against the day of wrath Rom. 2.5 But this happeneth not for the foregoing offences of our progenitours but for our own transgressions 8. The personall holinesse of the parent never conveied grace or salvation to the sonne Abraham the father of the faithfull prayed for his sonne Gen. 17.18 Oh that Ishmael might live in thy sight yet was he a cast-away Temporall blessings indeed he had for Abrahams sake vers 20. Isaac had an Esau David an Absalom and often the like 9. God never punished eternally the reall iniquities of fathers upon their children if the children were holy Let an instance be given to the contrarie Indeed it is said Psal 109.14 Let the iniquitie of his fathers be remembred with the Lord and let not the sinne of his mother be done away But he speaketh first of a very wicked man equalling if not exceeding his parents in sinne And the New Testament applieth it to Judas Act. 1.20 to Judas the monster of men Secondly the remembrance mentioned hath reference rather to penalties consequent then onely to sinnes precedent z Memoratur quantum ad poenam quoniam puncti sunt filii pro iniquitate patrum qui occiderunt Christum It is remembred in regard of the punishment because the children were pricked for the iniquitie of their fathers who slew Christ saith Cajetan on the place And this is not our question Thirdly why may there not
be proved Therefore the other answer may stand good that there is no necessitie of making the word Sheshach to be the proper name of King City or Idol it may rather be an appellative For Jeremy 25.26 Rex Sheshach bibet post eos which as I said you may interpret Rex diem festum celebrans bibet post eos The King celebrating a festivall day shall drink after them though Tremell hath it thus Rex Babyloniae festa habentis bibet c. I cannot deny but if there were such an idol among them as was termed Sheshach which is our main enquiry yet unproved it might as well as Bel Merodach and Melcom signifie the people which worshipped it Till that point be evidenced I will say with Tremellius that the forbearing to name the King or veiling the name of the city and describing him or it by what was prophesied they should be doing or acting as indeed it fell out is to be referred ad r De qua Hermog Tom. 4. de inventione 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 orationis to the gravitie and weight of the speech wherein the Scripture keepeth its majestie and neither with bitter invective nor harsh exprobration but with composed gravitie and eloquent solemnitie designeth the King or Babylon out not expressely by his or her name but by their actions as Nabals name was applied by his own wife to signifie his churlish nature 1. Sam. 25.25 Nabal is his name and folly is with him and Jerusalem is called the holy city for the holy things there done there contained I conclude thus If anagrammes from the Hebrew Chaldee Syriack or Greek languages in which the words of holy Scripture were writ may not be admitted as indeed they may not much lesse may we expound the sacred Originall by English anagrammes the flashes and fire-works of luxuriant brains Hearty reverence and a kinde of ceremonious civill adoration beseemeth the word of God It is not much prating or pridy-self-love that makes the good expositour The silence of swannes is not overcome by the noise of swallows but when the swallows are grown hoarse the swannes shall sing saith Nazianzen The application is easy Josephus in his second book against Apion saith of the Jewish high priest He shall judge of doubtfull matters and punish those that are convinced by the law Whosoever obeyeth not him shall undergo punishment as he that behaves himself impiously against God The great dubious perplexed scruples difficulties were not left to the judicature of private fancies Artificum est judicare de arte It belongs to artificers to judge of the art is a maxime of infallible truth Hierome upon these words Eccles. 3.7 A time to keep silence and a time to speak thus s Omnes artes absque dectore non discimus solae haec tam vilis facilis est ut non indigeat praeceptore We learn no art without a teacher onely this is so mean and so easie that it needeth no teacher and he speaketh by Ironie of those who are rath-ripe in religion Aristotle Ethic. 1. Every one judgeth aright of those things which he knows and this is a good judge And this is called by Ockam our countryman t Judicium certae veridicae cognitionis the judgement of certain and veridicall knowledge Luther divinely u Non licet Angelis nedum hominibus verba Dei pro arbitrio interpretari It is not lawfull for Angels much lesse for men to interpret Gods words as they list much lesse for women say I. Tertullian in his time styled them hereticall women that dared to teach and contend in argument and nothing truer then this that x Imperitia considentiam eruditio timorem creat Ignorance breeds confidence learning fear and distrust Who is more bold then blinde bayard To the word of God we must adde nothing contrarie or forein saith Aquin. No prophesie of the Scripture is of any private interpretation 2. Pet. 1.20 Know this first saith the Apostle there Or is Daniel no Prophet and his writing not propheticall If the wit of men or Angels from heaven should make a law a written law by which people should be ruled or judged as for example concerning theevery and appoint no living judge to determine who offend against the law and who are punishable or not punishable but leave every one to judge himself by this written law and every one to interpret the law to his pleasure were it not a foolish law a mock-law and indeed a no-law And shall God give us a law concerning our souls and permit the interpretation of it to every one The living judge in matters of Faith and Religion in every Kingdome of Christian government is the Nationall Councel thereof till there be found that panchrestum medicamentum that medicine good for all diseases for the Universall Church of Christ a true and free generall Councel from which is no appeal it being the supremest externall judge on earth Yea but the Bereans received the word with all readines of minde and searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so Acts 17.11 Shall they examine the very Apostles doctrine and not we the doctrine of our Pastours I answer first These Bereans were learned and eminent men But every unlearned skullion now that hath skill onely in the English originall will contest with the profoundest Clerks Secondly these Bereans were unbeleevers before the examination of those things for immediately it followeth Therefore many of them beleeved and many honourable Greek women and men Art thou an unbeleever Do thou then as those unbeleevers did If thou beleevest shew me one passage of Scripture where ever the unlearned people did call the doctrine of their learned Pastours into triall I confesse that the judgement of the Scripture and Creed is onely authentick and perfectly decisive And if we could exactly hit on the true meaning all differences were quickly at an end Nor do I monopolize learning to the Clergy when I confine and restrain the judgement of learning to the learned Many there are among the people who in all literature humane and divine exceed many Priests and I wish they were more in number and that way more abundantly qualified With the Churchmen it would be better since y Scientia neminem habet inimicum praeter ignorantem Learning hath no enemy but the ignorant There are sonnes of wisdome and sonnes of knowledge As Wisdome is justified of her children Matth. 11.19 so learning is not to be judged by the unlearned but by her children I acknowledge that all and every one of the people are to answer for their thoughts words and deeds and that God hath given them a judgement of discretion in things which they know but in matters above their knowledge and transcending their capacitie they have neither judgement to discern nor discretion to judge Nè sutor ultra crepidam Shall blinde men judge of colours Sus Minervam Phormio Hannibalem Asinus
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here whereas in the place of Exodus it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Also in the Septuagint the first place is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Leviticus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may well be expounded one manner of pleading their causes as there was one law This I am sure of the verb is so used Micah 7.9 I will bear the indignation of the Lord because I have sinned against him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 untill he plead my cause Why may not then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be the pleading of ones cause And why may not the meaning of our Apostle be That as Adam was ostium mortis The doore of death so Christ is clavis resurrectionis The key of the resurrection as Tertullian sweetly calleth him And as by Adam all and every one was guilty of death and damnation so by Christs merit every one shall arise to free himself from it if he can and to plead wherefore he should not be condemned to defend himself and answer for himself as Paul did Acts 26.2 to apologize And herein Adam and Christ to be like That as every one was made guilty by one of condemnation so every one for Christs all-sufficient condignity shall be permitted yea enabled to speak for himself why the sentence shall not be executed But these things I leave to the Professours of the Greek tongue and suo quisque judicio abundet So much for the second exposition of the words and for the similitudes and dissimilitudes between Adam and Christ from which resulteth That Adam representing us did not so much hurt us as Christ representing us did do good unto us And therefore since we are acquitted from sinne from all sinnes originall and actuall since we are acquitted from eternall death and have grace and abundance of grace and the gift of righteousnesse and shall have life eternall and shall reigne in life by ones obedience by one onely Jesus Christ who in his life and on the altar of the crosse merited all these things for us it is no hard measure no iniquity of God if for Adams sinne and disobedience when he sustained our persons both himself and his posterity in his loyns implicitly consenting with him be appointed to die And thus much shall suffice for the first generall Question upon the words of the Text. The second followeth Drusius towards the end of his Preface before his book called Enoch thus * Haec alia quae hoc libro continentur ut in aliis omnibus à me unquam editis aut edendis subjicio libens Ecclesiae Catholicae judicio à cujus recto sensu si dissentio non er◠pertinax These and other things which are contained in this book as also in all other books which have been or shall be set forth by me I willingly submit to the censure of the Catholick Church from whose right judgement if I dissent I will not be pertinacious O Deity incomprehensible and Trinity in Unity in all respects superexcellent and most admirable with all the faculties of my soul and body I humbly beg of thee to shew thy mercy upon me for Jesus Christ his sake and O blessed Redeemer accept my prayer and present it with favour to the throne of grace where thou canst not be denied If thou O gracious Jesu art not able to help me and to save my sinfull soul let me die comfortlesse and let my soul perish but since thy power is infinite I beseech thee to make me one of those whom thou bringest to more happinesse then all our enemies could bring to miserie Heare me for thy tender mercies sake and for thy glorious name O great Mediatour Jesu Christ AMEN AMEN MISCELLANIES OF DIVINITIE THE SECOND BOOK CHAP. I. Sect. 1. THe question propounded and explained 2. Armenius or rather his sonne Zoroaster dead and revived 3. Antillus dead and living again because the messenger of death mistook him in stead of Nicandas Nicandas died in his stead 4. A carelesse Christian died and recovered life lived an Anchorite twelve yeares died religiously SECT 1. THe second Question which from the words of my Text I propounded is this Whether such as have been raised from the dead did die the second time yea or no because it is said It is appointed for men once to die I speak not of those who have been thought to be dead and have been stretch't out and yet their soul hath been within them though divers for divers daies and upon severall sicknesses have had neither heat nor breathing discernable but onely of such who have suffered a true separation of their souls from their bodies Whether these have again delivered up the ghost and died I make my question 2. Before I come to mention those whom the Scripture recordeth to be truly raised I hold it not amisse to propound to your view a few stories out of other authours Theodoret lib. 10. de fine judicio hath two strange relations The first is out of Plato of one Armenius but Clemens Alexandrinus Stromat 5. relateth from Zoroaster himself that it was Zoroaster the sonne of Armenius He who onely of all the world laughed so soon as he was born saith Plin. 7.16 and was so famous a Magician One of these two either father or sonne the twelfth day after he and others fell in the battell and was to be buried ante pyram constitutus revixit and being come to himself told what he had seen apud inferos namely that his soul being divided from his bodie came with many others who died with him to an admirable and incredible place in which there were two gulfs opes or ruptures of the earth and two open places of heaven right over them In the midst of these hiatus or gulfs judges did fit who when judgement was ended bade the just souls ascend by the heavenly opennes and gaps the judges sowing on their breasts the notes of their judgement But the souls of the wicked men were commanded to go on the left hand and to be hurried to hell carrying with them on their backs the memoriall of their passed life But as for himself being now come in fight the judges bade him diligently heare and see all things and tell all those things which were done when he revived These are sayings worthy of Philosophy saith Theodoret. 3 A second storie is cited in the same place by Theodoret from Plutarch among those things which he wrote De anima Sositiles Heracleon and I saith Plutarch were present when Antillus told us this of himself The Physicians thought Antillus to be dead but he came to himself as one out of a deep sleep and neither said nor did any other thing * Quod emetae mentis signum possit censeri which might argue him to be crazy or light-headed but he told us that he was dead and that he was again revived and that his death upon that sicknesse
these words Ephes 5.14 Wherefore he saith Awake thou that sleepest c. telleth how he heard one disputing in the Church of this place thus This testimonie is spoken to Adam buried in Calvarie where Christ was crucified Which place was called Calvarie because there was placed Caput antiqui hominis Adams skull Therefore at that time when Christ being crucified did hang over his sepulchre this prophesie was accomplished saying Arise Adam that sleepest and stand up from the dead and not as we reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ shall give thee light but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ shall touch thee because by the touch of his bloud and of his bodie hanging over him he might be enlivened and rise Now though Hierom himself saith that this sense agreeth not with the context yet he leaves it to the Reader to judge whether the thing be true or no and confesseth that the words were pleasingly entertained by the people and b Quodam plausu tripudio sunt accepta approved with applause extraordinary both of hand and foot And c Haeres 46. contra Tatian in fine Epiphanius expresly affirmeth that Adam was buried in Calvarie and that the mountain was so called from Adams head there found adding d In quo crucifixus Dominus noster Jesus Christus per aquam sanguinem qui fluxit ab ipso per compunctum ipsius latus in aenigmate ostendit salutem nostram ab initio massae primi bominis reliquias respergere auspicatus Where our crucified Lord Jesus Christ by water and bloud which flowed from his pierced side figuratively shewed our salvation from the primitive lump whilest auspiciously he sprinkled the reliques of the first man Therefore Now was fulfilled saith he Surge qui dormis Arise thou that sleepest c. Ambrose and Paulinus seem to have read it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Augustine on these words Psal 3.5 The Lord sustained me citeth this place thus e Surge qui dormis exurge à mortui◠continget te Christus Arise who sleepest and stand up from the dead and Christ shall touch thee which reading was used also by others in Hieromes time 5. Theophylact on Matth. thus They that hold Traditions say Adam was buried in Calvarie It is a Tradition saith he on Mark from the ancient Fathers adding this Therefore Christ who healed the fault and death of Adam was there buried that where was the beginning there should be the end and destruction of death On Luke he alledgeth this reason f Vbi per lignum casus illic per lignum resurrectio Where the fall was by the tree there by the tree also should be the rising again Now as this reason is but weak so his words on John are worthie remembrance That the Tradition is Ecclesiasticall not Judaicall that it was published by Noah after the floud Whence we may justly tax Drusius in his first commentarie ad voces novi Testamenti on the word Golgotha who ascribeth the finding of Adams skull and his buriall on Golgotha to the too much credulitie of the Fathers in beleeving the Jews It rather makes against the Jews and the Jews gain nothing in my opinion by that report Certain old verses fathered on Tertullian prove directly that in the same place that Adam died Christ died also and of Golgotha and Calvaria in particular thus runne the verses Hîc hominem primum suscepimus esse sepultum Hîc patitur Christus sic sanguine terra madescit Pulvis Adae ut veteris possit cum sanguine Christi Commistus stillantis aquae virtute lavari The first man here they say was buried The earth was here with Christs bloud watered That Adams dust commixt with Christ his bloud Might so be bath'd as in a soveraigne floud Tertullians Latine verses may be seconded with Nonnus his Greek verses on John 19.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which are thus translated Donec in locum venit nominati cranii Adam prisci nomen ferentem ambitu capitis Vntill he came toth ' place as goes the fame Which from old Adams skull did take its name Where Nonnus concludeth as many other more ancient did before him that it was called the place of a skull from the first Adams head The learned Heinsius Exercit. sacr pag. 196. contradicting saith The Evangelist did not think the place was so called from Adams skull nor that the word SKULL inclines to that sense nor is it called ADAMS SKULL but THE PLACE OF A SKULL And whereas Epiphanius saith that Adams skull was found in that place which gave occasion to the words of Nonnus I marvell that they who were conversant in books of the Hellenists found not the beginning of that fable For in them the word ADAM is taken Collective after the Hebrew manner So in the Latine 1. Sam. 7.9 g The words are in 2. Sam 7.19 This is the law of men saith Heinsius not of Adam Our translation hath it This is the manner of man without restraining it to the first Adam Ista est lex Adam hoc est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Moreover Symmachus interpreteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Humane nature So where Josiah 2. King 23.20 is said combussisse ossa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have burnt the bones of Adam the Seventie have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He burnt the bones of men on it Because therefore in this place were the skuls of Adam that is of men the place is called so And whereas ADAM should be taken for MEN Nonnus by signing out the first Adam hath increased the absurditie of this errour To this effect Heinsius on that place In this my defence of Nonnus I give but a touch at the slip 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Septuagint have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 answerable to the Hebrew at the other slip of citing 1. Sam. 7.9 in stead of 2. Sam. 7.19 and granting that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken sometimes Collectivè both in Scriptures and some Hellenists do desire to know how it is applied to this place For though there be mention of Adam in Nonnus yet there is none in the Text which might give the hint to the errour of Nonnus as Heinsius mistermeth it And when Heinsius produceth one Hellenist expounding Golgotha and there using 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Collectivé he shall say something But saith the worthy Heinsius it is not called Cranium Adami The skull of Adam but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The place of a skull I answer Neither are the words Crania Adam The skulls of men as Heinsius understandeth it For Luke 23.33 it is said expresly The place is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other three Evangelists have it also all and every of them in the singular number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the place Golgotha which is being interpreted the place of a skull Mark 15.22 Called Golgotha that is to say a
while of Christs resurrection c Solenne autem fuit priscis illis Patribus ut quisque in suam inferreretur possessionem Each of those Fathers were solemnly brought into their own possession saith the same Masius which is thus confirmed because Abraham did bury Sara in his own possession Genes 23.19 20. Isaac and Ishmael buried Abraham in the field which Abraham purchased of the sonnes of Heth Genes 25.9 10. And to summe up the rest In the cave that is in the field of Machpelah the purchased cave and field which is before Mambre was buried Abraham and Sara Isaac and Rebeka Jacob and Lea Genes 49.30 31. The distance of which cave or field from Calvarie I gathered before from Adrichomius to be 250 Stadia which upon allowance of eight Stadia to one Mile amounteth to one and thirty miles and a quarter from which account S. Augustine differeth but little considering the various reckoning of miles with the diverse measurings of beginnings and endings for Augustine Quaest sup Genes lib. 1. quaest 161. thus reporteth d Dicunt ab eo loco quod ABRAHEMIUM vocatur ubi sunt ista corpora abesse locum ubi crucifixus est Dominus ferè triginta milliaribus From the place called Abrahemium or Abrahams church-yard where are these bodies namely of Abraham and Sara Isaac and Rebeka Jacob and Leah to the place where our Lord was crucified there is almost thirty miles distance Now as the sepulchre of the three Patriarchs was thus farre from Jerusalem South-west-ward so Sychem where Joseph his bones were buried was farther from Jerusalem toward the North. 4 One difficultie more there is and a great one I may not passe it for the length will be recompensed by the sweetnesse Acts 7.15 16. Jacob and our fathers died and were carried over unto Sychem and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a summe of money of the sonnes of Emor the father of Sychem Which passage seemeth to contradict what out of other parts of Scripture I proved concerning the Patriarchs sepulchre That this is a knot hard to be untied all confesse S. Hierom promised in his 101 Epist to clear it saith Lorinus And in his Questions on Genes saith Beza but he hath not performed his promise say both of them on Acts 7. Nodum nectit Hieronimus nec eum dissolvit saith Erasmus And I onely propound it saith he that the studious reader may be stirred up to discusse it But this is a shallow slurre unfit for so great a Critick for many had done so much before and more then so I come to the point That there are invented many wayes and means of answering cannot be denied but some are vast and improbable some more fair and expedite The absurd answers are two The first That the Originall is there corrupt and that for Abraham Jacob is to be written and read I say not meant expounded or interpreted but exchanged and intruded into the Text and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be expunged as needlesse it being with equall ignorance and boldnesse added by one or other saith Andrew Masius on Josh 24.32 With Masius agreeth Beza in this that the name of Abraham is crept into the Text adding that the erring in notes of number or proper names must not be ascribed to the Authours but to the ignorant transcribers But I say that the erring in a proper name or notes of number may breed as great and unsufferable confusion unlikelihood inconvenience yea untruth as the errour in any other common word And why the errours in proper names should be ascribed to ignorant transcribers rather then errours in other words or that the holy Spirit doth priviledge other words and not proper names or numbers from being mistaken misplaced misadded or superadded in the Text I see not Aretius bluntly blundereth it out that you must understand Jacob for Abraham yet by what example or for what reason he mentioneth not but stumbleth on a truth of which hereafter Drusius Praeterit lib. 5. on the words Quod emit Abraham hath yet some shew of reason It seemeth saith he it was sometimes written EMIT IPSE that is JACOB into whose place the name of ABRAHAM is crept 5. Beza defends it by two parallels the first out of Hierom who in his book de optimo genere interpretandi ad Pammachium noteth that the name of Isaiah was crept into many copies on Matth. 13.35 that afterward the name of Asaph was substituted for Isaiah and now neither of them is there read I answer to the misapplied instances of Beza that I cannot abide to hunt after errours in the Scripture and to cast aspersions on it To question the corruption of the Canon to passe our judgements whether the square or rule be right or crooked to put into the Text or to take from it as some Philologizing Neotericks endeavour in their super-nice criticisme is to tear up the very foundation of religion Whilest other answers may be found though but probable I should not have such a thought as Beza had on Luk. 24.13 where he acknowledgeth both the Syriack and all our Copies have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sexaginta Threescore and the exact truth is accordant to that reading for Emaus is seven miles from Jerusalem as Mr Sands who rode from Jerusalem to Emaus witnesseth pag. 174. and threescore Stadia allowing eight Stadia to a mile make seven miles and an half which halfe-mile upon diversitie of measures or the beginning of measuring or ends thereof maketh small difference Yet Beza saith Aut hîc peccatum est in numero aut apud Josephum de Bello Judaico 7.27 non rectè scribuntur stadia triginta The more favourable phrase should have been by Beza ascribed rather to the Scripture then to Josephus Or can we think that all Copies do erre He maketh us fight upon the ice and to have no firm footing Why should he use the first part of the disjunction when he might better distinguish and so reconcile all Likewise Beza on Luke 22.20 confessing the uniformitie of reading both in the Syriack and all the Greek Copies which he had seen yet addeth boldly Aut manifestum est soloecophanes aut potiùs cùm haec essent ad marginem annotata ex Matthaeo Marco postea in Contextum irrepserunt Now though he would sleek it over afterwards saying Potest excusari soloecismus c. yet the wound which he gave to the Word of Truth is too deep to be so healed and the very plaister is offensive for he committed a soloecisme who looking on the earth cried out O Coelum and casting his eyes up to heaven cried O Terra Had the Reverend Beza no handsomer word for his plaister might he not have defended it by the Hebrew Idiotisme without calling it a Soloecisme Soloecophanes might have well been spared but Soloecismus is not to be endured Much more might be said but I dwell unwillingly on this point and return
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 Spâ—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
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
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
perfect of himself and by or of that one were all things made Vers 28. seemeth to be taken from Xenophanes Colophonius who cometh home to that point as he is cited by Clemens Alexandrinus Stromat 5. or els from Orpheus who acknowledgeth that in God cuncta moventur Ignis aqua tellus All things are moved Fire water earth Concerning those words vers 29. We are his off-spring they are the very words of Aratus in the beginning almost of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ipsius enim genus sumus We are his off-spring Clemens Strom. 5. and Vasques Tom. 1. part 1. disputat 28. num 17. expound it as if we were his Genus Creatione By creation That is true but not enough for Genus may be taken for Soboles an off-spring and men may be said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jovis proles Born of God The issue of God or as another hath it to an other purpose SemideÃque homines semihominésque dei Men half gods and gods half men Another place in S. Paul is 1. Cor. 15.33 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Evil communications corrupt good manners Tertullian ad uxorem 1.7 saith This versicle was sanctified by the Apostle Hierom ad Demetriad virg Epist 8. cap. 10. saith S. Paul assuming this secular verse made it Ecclesiasticall Socrates 3.40 and out of him Nicephorus 10.26 say It is borrowed from Euripides Hierom Peter Martyr and many mo report it to be Senarius Menandri an Hexameter of Menander I reconcile them thus That it is in both of the Poets Justinian the Jesuite relateth that Photius apud Oecumenium saith Some such thing is in the Prophet Isaiah But I could never finde it saith the Jesuite Perhaps he mistook Photius for if Photius had any relation to the precedent words vers 32. Let us eat and drink for to morrow we die the Jesuite might finde the same Isa 22.13 And so Athanasius on the place of the Apostle or rather Theophylact if we beleeve Bellarmine de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis ad annum 340. in Athanasio saith Those words were taken from Isaiah Acts 20.28 Take heed unto your selves and to all the flock Attendite vobis c. That Thales Milesius was the first that said Non sine oculo Domini .i. attentione equum non sine vestigio Domini id est attentione agrum pinguescere was a good observation of Bishop Andrews in his Concio ad Clerum in Synodo Provinciali pag. 29 but that grave Prelates intimation for indeed at the utmost it is no more that Paul alluded to that saying of Thales is a conjecture farre enough fetched Eodémque in loco Paulus jam Milesius Nec sine attentione bene esse Ecclesiae dicit So he Much more may be said to the point concerning the Apostles citing Apocryphall or not Canonicall writings S. Paul knew the names of Pharaoh his Magicians 2. Tim. 3.8 Jannes and Jambres as we reade it according to the Greek and Syriack which is also followed by Numenius apud Euseb de praeparat Evangel 9.3 though the Vulgat hath Mambres in stead of Jambres and the Hebrew Talmud and Rabbi Nathan as Genebrard cites them in the first book of his Chronologie o Apostolus è Talmud habet nomina principum Magorum Pharaonis ut communis opinio est It is commonly thought that the Apostle took from the Talmud the names of Pharaohs chief Magicians saith Drusius in Henoch pag. 25. and in the margin p Credibilius est ipsum sumpsisse ex libro Apocrypho qui Jannes Mambres vocatur nam Talmud indè habuit It is more credible the Apostle took it out of an Apocryphall book called JANNES AND MAMBRES for from thence the Talmud fetched it saith Drusius I for my part will not define whether S. Paul was onely immediately from heaven assured that these were the names of the Magicians or whether he had read their names also in some Apocryphall book now perished or in the Talmud James 1.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above Which words I have both heard and read alledged for the lawfull use of humane literature though I for my part cannot guesse whence the Apostle took them That S. Jude had the historie of the strife between Michael and the devil about the bodie of Moses the 9 of Jude in part from Deuteronomie and in part from an Apocryphall book Aretius maintaineth The title of the book was Assumptio Mosis The assumption of Moses as some say or Ascensio Mosis The ascent of Moses as others say That S. Jude might also have read the book of Henoch and his prophesie I will not denie for he citeth some words of it vers 14. So think Hierom in Catalogo and in his Commentarie on Titus 1. Augustine de Civitat 15.23 ibid. 18.38 and Beda on the place But the book of Henoch is Apocryphall That S. John read the Targumists in many places the learned Heinsius proveth or laboureth to prove by many passages Thus much clearly must be confest that the gifts both of reading and of writing and understanding of strange tongues was conferred on all the Apostles not one was an illiterate man after the cloven tongues like as of fire sat upon each of them Act. 2.3 and I make no question but they also read the Old Testament after that time and might reade other books Talmudists Targumists Hellenists Apocryphall books yea Heathen writings and perhaps did so But in all these or the like places which the Apostles cited or pointed at this is now my last resolution as a Corollarie to the Question before briefly answered Either the sacred Penmen never read those things themselves but the all-knowing Spirit did tender and dictate both matter and words to them Or if they did reade profane authours and were conversant in them yet they used the words not as their own reading not as humane learning not as drawn out of the treasurie of their own memories not as if they had the choice to insert those sentences above others but the holy Ghosts inspiration guided them wholly and reached forth words unto them both in things which they knew and in things unknown unto them before Yea I beleeve that if Plato or Aristotle Tullie or Varro had lived after Christs dayes and been called to write any part of Scripture they should not would not have conceived one thought or written one word of humane literature as from themselves or any part of their own great knowledge but would have quitted themselves and been wholly led by the holy Ghost The seventh Question Whether they studied the things before-hand That both Prophets Apostles and Evangelists were filled with holy thoughts and heavenly meditations we certainly beleeve and know Psal 45.1 My heart is enditing of a good matter or as it is in our margin boyleth or bubbleth up a good matter Eructavit cor meum verbum bonum saith the Vulgat Verily good
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
supposall should have a certain accomplishment but that this and all other controverted points of moment concerning Enoch or Elias may be the better cleared let us examine these questions 1. Whether Enoch in his life-time was ever any great sinner 2. Whether Enoch did ever die 3. Whether Enoch and Elias now live in and with their bodies in Paradise 4. Whether ever they shall die or do live with glorified bodies in the highest heavens Concerning the first Whether Enoch in his life-time was ever any grievous sinner First I answer and say I speak not of the first Enoch the sonne of Cain the grand-childe of Adam and Eve in honour and memoriall of whom Cain built a citie and called the name of the citie after the name of his sonne Enoch Genes 4.17 but of the second and younger Enoch the sonne of Jared Genes 5.18 of the posteritie of Seth. Secondly I question not but that this latter best Enoch was a sinner and in his own estimate a great sinner and he might have said and doubtlesse did say in effect as David did and as Adam and all his of-spring except Christ Have mercie upon me O God Psal 51.1 and Create in me a clean heart O God Psal 51.10 O Lord pardon mine iniquitie for it is great Psal 25.11 And in the ballance of God setting aside mercie he might have been weighed found light and accounted for a main delinquent But this is the Quaere Whether comparatively and in respect of other men even of such whose lives ends also pleased God he was so notorious a sinner that he alone was the fittest example of repentance to succeeding generations My answer is negatively for I am sure Adam and as I think Noah and Lot and divers other holy Patriarchs might as well yea rather be an example of repentance to future times then Enoch especially if we measure sinnes by the records of Scripture for the holy Writ hath more amply insisted upon their sinnes then upon Enochs and no part of the Canonicall Scripture toucheth at any thing that was extraordinarily offensive in Enoch but magnifieth his goodnesse Gen. 5.22 and his faith Heb. 11.5 Yet because the divine Writ might omit the offences of Enoch and because I cannot think that Ecclesiasticus wrote without some ground let us search what other Authours have conceited or written for or against Enoch Some think that Enoch all the course of his conversation amongst men in this world lived unblameably and walked with God Some Jews held that Enoch was an incarnate Angel e Vixit dum vixit laudabiliter Whilest he lived he lived worthy of praise saith Drusius Others write that in his youth he was very wicked but after repented and turned heartily to God redeeming the time Drusius proveth that Enoch was a good man still by these arguments Josephus Antiq. 1.5 at the end saith Seth was a vertuous man and left f Nepotes sui simileâ— issue like himself and they were all good men therefore Enoch was so The posteritie of Seth according to the best Interpreters are called Filii Dei the sonnes of God Genes 5.2 g Filii Dei sunt judicio Augustini qui secunditm Deum vivunt Augustine accounteth that they were called the sonnes of God who pleased God Hischuni also an Authour cited by Drusius saith Because Enoch was just the Scripture h Honoris cauâ—â to dignifie him used a new phrase concerning him saying HE WAS NOT. And It is a probable reason that Enoch was not any time so ill as some imagine because he lived with Adam 308 yeares and ministred so long unto him as it is in libro JOH ASIN saith Drusius On the other side i Sunt qui insimulan eum levitatis inconstantiae nam aiunt modò justum modò improbum fuisse Id relatum in Genesi magno Some say he was light and inconstant sometimes just sometimes wicked as is recorded in the great Genesis a book called in Hebrew BERESITH RABBA made by one Ibbo so relateth Drusius in his book called Henoch chap. 5. If Ibbo had said Henochum fuisse modò improbum modò justum That Enoch was now and then wicked now and then just I should farre rather have consented for every just man except Christ was sometime wicked But that Enoch after he was once just turned to be extraordinarily wicked I can never beleeve For the Spirit would never have given him this testimonie that he pleased God and walked with him if he had after returned as the dog to his vomit or as the sow to her wallowing in the mire Rabbi Levi the sonne of Gersom thus k Enoch ambulavit in viis Domini postquam genuit Methusalem annos 300. Enoch walked with God after he begat Methusalem 300 yeares whereby he intimateth that he walked l Non in viis domini sed in viis seculi sui Not in the narrow paths of the Lord but in the high wayes of the world and by that account he might be wicked sixtie fiye yeares of his age or thereabouts The arguments of either side are but weak and may be easily answered Seths posteritie might do some notable wicked acts and most heartily repent and be both holy and accounted the sonnes of God The phrase used concerning his being taken out of this world evinceth not that all the former passages of his life were just Thirdly he might live in Adams time yet not neare him and he might live with him and yet not minister unto him and he might minister unto him and yet be wicked before he ministred yea even for a time whilest he ministred unto Adam Many godly parents have lived to see wicked ones of their of-spring and it may be that Adam converted him not till after some time that he ministred unto Adam and had seen evident signes of Adams own great repentance and holinesse On the other side Ibbo writeth like a fabler and his words were before rejected as improbable Rabbi Levi alledging nothing but conjecture wanteth weight for an argument Now as there is nothing certain either pro or contra so if my opinion be asked I shall manifest my self to think that Enoch was sometimes a grievous sinner and after a most contrite repentant and a most holy man My reason is Because I ascribe more to the books called Apocryphall then to any humane Authour for they alone are and have been many hundreds of yeares joyned with the Canonicall Scripture and read in all Churches except the Jewish at set times as well as the Canonicall as no other writings of any other are And if no part of them were divinely inspired yet were the men that wrote them both holy and learned and the Churches of God have dignified them above all other writings Now though the undoubted Canon mentioneth not any evill act or acts of Enoch as millions of millions of matters are omitted both in the Old and New Testament yet some passages of
raised incorruptible and we shall be changed For this corruptible must put on incorruption c. What coherence subsequent then shall you make unto these words None at all The coherence must be with the antecedent words But say I take the antecedent words as the Vulgat hath them and reade as you must the connexion in this sort We shall indeed all arise but shall not all be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye at the last trump For the trumpet shall sound c. I say even in this reading there is little sense also yea much untruth Is it not certain that we shall be changed in a moment Or how long shall the time of change be There is no way to avoid this foul absurditie which cometh by the Vulgat edition unlesse it be by a greater that is by saying that you will make an Hyperbaton and include these words We shall not all be changed in a Parenthesis and then the sense will be We shall arise in a moment c. For though it be true that we shall arise in a moment yet there is no ground that we shall not be changed in a moment In all likelihood a change may rather be more speedie which is without death then that change which is made through death and resurrection If they may be and shall be raised and changed in a moment they may in a moment be changed and not raised Secondly no authoritie that I know runneth for such a needlesse Parenthesis and I deem it as a violence offered to the Text so to strain it when the sense will runne fairly otherwise according to the best Greek copies We shall not all sleep but we shall all be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye at the last trump Let this also serve to have been spoken against the Latin Vulgat edition and its bad reading Omnes quidem resurgemus sed non omnes immutabimur In momento in ictu oculi in novissima tuba canet enim tuba mortui resurgent incorrupti c. By how much the lesse sense is in this by so much the more are we bound to adhere to the Originall and the most common and best copies of it This I may be bold to averre That if some shall not die and yet be changed there shall be an infallible yea demonstrative proof unto sense That the very self same bodie which man had shall inherit eternall glorie For if they die not they must needs keep and have the same bodies from which they are not parted by immutation Yea the identicall resurrection of the same very bodies which were dead may thus farre be proved That if the changed bodies shall be still the same in substance though differing in qualities the raised bodies also shall be no otherwise nor any way different and Pythagoras will then disprove his * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transmigration of souls into diverse bodies and his heathenish * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 regeneration to which Nicodemus seemed to have an eye Joh. 3.4 when every soul cometh arayed with its own bodie and when they who by change put not off their bodies shall come alive to judgement 5. The Pelagians were wont thus to argue If sinne came in by Adam then all must needs die But some shall not die namely those y Qui reperientur vivi who shall be found remaining alive Therefore sinne came not into the world by Adam S. Augustine answereth this argument very sufficiently otherwise and it may easily and briefly be answered All shall die reatu though not actu Yet that holy Father and that great just enemie of the accursed Pelagians z In majorem cautelam for the greater and better securitie and safetie would seem to rest doubtfull of their assumption which he needed not Whereupon de Civitat 20.20 he saith a Dormitio praecedit quamvìs brevissima non tamen nulla Death goeth before a most short and speedie one yet a death And in the same place b Per mortem ad immortalitatem mirâ celeritate transibunt They shall slip sail or passe over by death to immortalitie with wonderfull speed Again de peccat merit remiss 2.31 c Hoc quibusdam in sine largietur Deus ut mortem istam repentiuâ commutatione non sentient God at the end of the world shall grant this priviledge unto some That by reason of their sudden change they shall not feel death And Retract 2.33 d Aut non morientur aut de vita ista in mortem de morte in aeternam vitam celerrimâ commutatione tanquam in ictu oculi transeundo mortem non sentient Either they die not or otherwise they glide from this life into death and from death into eternall life as it were in the twinkling of an eye by a most speedie alteration taking no notice or sense of death He leaves it doubtfull as you see in these his last books though sometimes before he thought That all should die and otherwhere as ad Dulcitium quaest 3. That they should not die The Master of the Sentences saith concerning the question Whether the change be by death or without it e Horum quid sit verius non est humani judicii definire Man cannot determine certainly which of these is truest Rabanus lib. 4. de sermon proprietat having alledged the consent of divers Fathers to establish his own opinion That all must die yet annexeth this Because there are others alike Catholick and learned men who beleeve That the soul remaining in the bodie those shall be changed to immortalitie who shall be found alive at the coming of our Lord f Et hoc eis reputari pro resurrectione ex mortuis quòd mortalitatem immutatione deponant non morte c. and that it stands them in stead of rising from the dead that they cast away mortalitie by change not by death Let any man rest on which opinion he pleaseth c. Which very words also you shall finde in the book de Ecclesiast Dogmat. cap. 7. Now though S. Augustine was dubious and some with him and though some also have imbraced the contrary opinion yet equally Catholick and learned men have been constant to maintain That some shall not die but be changed as you have heard confessed If you please you may take a view of some more particularly The afore named Theodorus Heracleotes cited by Hierom in his epistle to Minerius and Alexander hath it thus i Sancti qui in die judicii in corporibus reperiendi sunt non gustabunt mortem erúnt que cum Domino gravissimâ mortis necessitate calcatâ The Saints who in the day of the last judgement shall be found to be alive and remain in their earthly bodies shall not see death or taste of it and shall be with the Lord kicking and spurning at death and the greatest inforcing necessitie thereof Apollinaris cited in
the same epistle said Some shall not die but be snatcht out of this life that with changed and glorified bodies they might be with Christ Chrysostom on the 10. to the Romanes and on 1. Thess 4. and upon this place to the Corinthians saith Some shall escape death With him agreeth Epiphanius Haeresi 64. saying k Qui rapitur nondum mortuus est Who is suddenly snatched up is not yet dead And before them Origen lib. 2. contra Celsum so opineth Theophylact on 1. Corinth 15. thus l Etiam qui non morientur ad incorruptibilitatem transferentur Even they who shall not die shall be transchanged out of this corruptible life to incorruptibilitie And again m Nonnulli nè morientur quidem Some indeed shall not die at all To that effect S. Hierom in his epistle to Marcella quaest 3. num 148. and in his epistle to Minerius and Alexander bringeth the saying of Christ Matth. 24.37 c. of the dayes of Noah when the floud swept them away as they were eating and drinking to prove that at the last judgement some shall not die Theodoret evinceth the same truth producing the passage of Matth. 24.40 of two in the field one assumed the other rejected And Chrysostom in his Sermon de Ascensione Domini instanceth in the verse following of two in a mill one refused the other accepted which proofs aim at this That all shall not die Cajetan is rich in proofs That all shall not die See him on Act. 10. upon Timoth. 4. upon 1. Corinth 15. upon 1. Thessal 4. Tertullians words must not be omitted in his book de resurrectione carnis n Hujus gratiae privilegium illos manet qui ab adventu Domini deprehendentur in carne propter duritias temporum Antichristi merebuntur compendio mortis per demutationem expunctae concurrere cum resurgentibus This gracious priviledge belongs unto those who at the coming of our Lord and Saviour to judgement shall be found alive upon earth and for the grievous afflictions and pressures of the times under Antichrist they shall have granted unto them this indulgence That they shall not die but shall be suddenly changed and so go to meet Christ together with those which shall then be raised from the dead Salmeron being peremptorie That all and every one shall die properly upon 1. Thessal 4. hath a wilde crotchet That all who shall be alive toward the end of the world shall be consumed with the fire of conflagration which shall go before Christ and so dead and raised shall be snatched up But S. Augustine de Civitat Dei 20.16 setting down the order of the last judgement saith The fire of conflagration shall be after the last judgement I will close this point with the sound and learned words of Calvin which fully accord with what I rested on in the beginning of this chapter upon 1. Corinth 15. o Cùm mutatio fieri nequeat quin aboleatur prior natura ipsa mutatio meritò censetur species mortis sed cùm non sit animae à corpore solutio non reputatur in morte ordinaria Since there cannot be a change saith he but the former nature must be abolished the very change on good grounds may justly be accounted a kinde of death but since there is not a separation of the soul from the bodie it is not to be reputed as if it were the common and ordinarie death Upon 1. Thessal 4. he wittily observeth that they p Qui dormiunt aliquo temporis spatio exuunt corporis substantiam qui innovabuntur non nisi qualitatem who are dead or do die for some space of time or other longer or shorter their souls put off the substantiall clothing of the bodie or flesh but they who shall be changed shall put off onely the qualitie not the substance The summe of all is this The third main question by me at first propounded was Whether all and every one without exception must and shall die The Papists are obstinate for the affirmative I have proved the negative That some may be some have been and some others shall be excepted and not die And so I end my third and last Chapter of my third book of Miscellanies O Most gracious Lord God who hast committed all judgement to thy onely sonne our onely Lord and Saviour I beseech thee to have pitie upon me and for Jesus Christ his sake receive me into thy especiall favour O blessed JESU accept of these my poore and weak endeavours and receive my prayers and present them with mercie to the throne of Grace hasten thy coming and thy kingdome Come sweet JESU come quickly and prepare my soul to meet thee with joy If it be thy holy will let me be one of them that shall be changed and changed to the better from pain to comfort from sicknesse sorrow and labour to rest and blessednesse eternall Amen Amen Amen VNI-TRINO DEO LAVS ET GLORIA FINIS An Alphabeticall Table of the principall things contained in these three Books of Miscellanies A ABortion is a curse Book 1. pag. 103. Two kindes of Abortives ibid. pag. 98 99. Adams body was created immortall and how ibid. p. 11. Adams body was framed of other dust then the dust of Paradise ibid. p. 16. viz. out of the red earth of ager Damascenus ibid. p. 85. Book 2. p. 23. The contrarie disposition of Elements had not caused a dissolution of Adams body had Adam stood Book 1. p. 17 to 28. The naturall temper and constitution of Adams body in state of innocencie ibid. p. 18 and 20. Whether if Adam and Eve had stood confirmed in innocencie any of their children could have sinned ibid. p. 44 to 54. The endowments of Adam in state of innocencie ib. p. 55 56. Whether Adam and Eve foreknew their fall ibid. p. 59. Whether Adam and Eves sinne were the same ibid. p. 61. Whether of their sinnes were the greater ibid. p. 62 65 to 73. where also of Adams first sinne by which he fell ibid. Adam mourned 100 yeares for the murdered Abel ibid. p. 85 87. Adam was a type of Christ therefore saved ibid. Adam was buried in Golgotha and his skull found upon mount Calvary Book 2. from p. 13 to 29. Whether Adam could naturally understand all languages ibid. p. 47 48. Amphibologie prejudiciall to truth Book 1. p. 2. Angels fell the second instant of their creation ib. p. 108 and 126. Christ merited for Angels ib. p. 189 190. Angels representing men are called men in the Scripture Book 2. chap. 16. Apocryphall books too much slighted Book 2. p. 145. They are to be preferred before any other humane Authours Book 3. p. 183. Of the diverse Appointment of things by God Book 1. p. 2 3. The Apostles represented the whole body of Christs Ministers ibid. p. 147 148. The Apostles were none of them learned before their calling Book 2. p. 87 88. Aristotle and Plato
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
the Nether-lands where they say your book was printed cannot defend you Let the women rather go to their needle and their spindle Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection 1. Tim. 2.11 But I suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man as she doth if she turn expositrix but to be in silence saith S. Paul Quis expedivit psittaco suum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Picásque docuit nostra verba conari Cornelius Cornelii à Lapide deserveth the severest censure of the Inquisition for expounding the word of God by an Hebrew anagram on Exod. 25.18 though he cite a piece of Scripture for a parallell Indeed S. Hierome on those words Sheshach shall drink after them Jeremie 25.26 interprets it to be Babel because if you mingle in the Hebrew Alphabet the first letter with the last the second with the last save one and so forth till you come to the middle and invert the order of reading which we do for the memory of children as for example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when you are come to the middest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do meet then that which in the ordinary and forward reading is Babel in the inverted reading is Sheshach I apprehend him thus write in one line the Hebrew Alphabet beginning with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and ending with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in another line begin with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and end with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what in the right way is Babel in the froward way is Sheshach For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the second letter being doubled and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the twelfth letter in their proper places and rank make with their vowels Babel and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the second letter being also doubled with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the twelfth letter in the alphabet in the preposterous posture of them with the same vowels do make Sheshach therefore Babel is called Sheshach Magno conatu meras nugas Great ado about meer trifles Indeed the Rabbines have many mutuall oppositions of letters in the inverted alphabet and none so ancient as this as Bertram in his Comparatio Grammaticae Hebraicae Aramicae truly observeth and of the Cabalisticall interchangeing of letters he preferreth this Athbasch above all yet is it more nice and curious then sound or religious neither can S. Hieroms authority give authority or allowance to this minglemangle-kinde of interpretation his authority in this point being weakened by his slender conjecture I think saith he that the Prophet Jeremy did prudently conceal the name of Babel lest the besiegers of Jerusalem should be enraged against him but say I otherwhere he nameth Babel as Jeremy 50.18 and layeth a burden upon the kingdome and citie of Babylon upon her Princes and her wise men both in the 50 and 51 chapters Yea in the same 25 chapter ver 12 Jeremy saith from God I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation Which inconvenience Lyra foreseeing therefore perhaps the rather thinketh that Sheshach is the name of the Egyptian King and that Pharaoh was the common name as afterward Cesar was the common name of the Emperours and Julius a proper name This is evident there was a Sheshach king of Egypt in the dayes of Solomon 1. King 11.40 and there might also be a second Sheshach after But Lyra himself on Jer. 51.41 saith that Sheshach in that place is used for Babel and I am forced to say that no part of the 51 chap. toucheth on the woes of Egypt but purposely is bent against Babylon and it is not likely that the same Prophet would call two distinct kings or two distinct kingdomes by the same word Sheshach Therefore Lyra is out of tune in this strain But why then is Sheshach put for Babel If no reason could be assigned yet the word of God is not so to be dandled withall or rather to be tortured as to draw expositions out of anagrams and therefore the Jesuit was justly blameable to make this place a pattern of his anagrammatisticall interpretation Mr. Selden de DIs Syris Syntagm 2. Cap. 12. saith Sheshach may seem to be an idol of the Babylonians a she-idol or perhaps as it is in his Addenda a masculine Deity but he leaveth all to conjecture wherein though he hath done excellently yet I rather follow in this point Tremellius who on Jeremy 25.26 observeth that Sheshach in the Babylonish tongue doth signifie Diem festum celebrans and so may signifie either the King or the City keeping a festivall day Which was never without feasting Now that both the feast was kept and the festivall day designed to the worship of their idols may be judged by the event Daniel 5.4 where they praised the gods and for so doing was Belshazzar reprehended vers 23. Tremellius addeth that Jeremy by this one word did demonstrate with his finger the very day of the King of Babel and Babylons fall as if he had said At a feast he shall be slain or In her feasting the city shall be destroyed For as the Lord prophesied by Isaiah Prepare the table watch in the watch-tower eat drink Isa 21.5 where both the feast and the fall of the King of Babel and of the city also is divinely foretold so God gave a second warning Jeremy 51.39 In their heat I will make their feasts and I will make them drunken that they may rejoyce sleep a perpetuall sleep Where Babylons feasting-destruction is named then followeth I will bring them down like lambes to the slaughter ver 40. whereupon he crieth out in the 41. ver How is Sheshach taken that is Diem festum celebrans either the feasting Belshazzar or the feasting city overthrown Concerning the King the Scripture saith Daniel 5.1 He made a great feast to a thousand of his lords and drank wine and whiles he tasted the wine he commanded to bring the golden and silver vessels of the temple of Jerusalem and in the same houre the fingers of a mans hand wrote his destruction and that night was he the wine-bibbing Sheshach slain Concerning the city I proved before out of Jeremy that her destruction was to wait upon her intemperance and so Quomodo capta est Sheshach id est Civitas diem festum celebrans And indeed I rather incline to this latter exposition in this place because also of the words immediately following How is the praise of the whole earth surprised but neither Belshazzar nor Sheshach if it were an idol were the praise of the whole earth How is Babylon become an astonishment among the nations If you judge it to be a she-idol because it is said Quomodo capta est Sheshach I first answer that at that feast service was done to many idols of gold and silver brasse and iron wood and stone Daniel 5.23 but that Sheshach was the chief among them or that any one idol of them was so named is yet to