whereof Polanus thus gathereth from the 2. of Darius Nothus to the death of Alexander are yeares 99. from thence to the destruction of Ierusalem 391. which make 490. yeares Contra. 1. In the place giuen in instance Ezr. 6. 14. it is said they builded and finished the house by the appointment of God and by the commandement of Cyrus and Darius and Artashasht king of Persia seeing then that all these gaue commandement for the building of the Temple from which of them rather must the account beginne then from the first for they onely finished the worke of the Temple now it could not be begunne and made an ende of in foure yeares 2. Neither is his computation of yeares certaine and agreed vpon for some beginne to account from the 3. yeare of Darius Nothus M. Lively p. 216. Iunius reckoneth but 98. yeares from the 2. of Nothus to the death of Alexander further in this reckoning counting 70. yeares from the birth of Christ to the destruction of the citie 33. and an halfe to his passion and 36. with an halfe afterward he leaueth in the summe of 391. from Alexanders death 321. yeares for the kingdome of the Greekes and Macchabees vnto the 30. yeare of Herod but others allow not so much Melancthon not much aboue 300. yeares counting them thus from Alexanders death to the beginning of the Macchabees 146. yeares from thence to Herod 127. yeares then in the 30. yeare of Herod was Christ borne Oecolampadius thus maketh vp the reckoning an 160. yeares from Alexanders death to the Macchabees thence to Herod an 127. and 30. yeares of Herod to Christ the whole summe is 317. Others recken 300. yeares from the beginning of Alexanders raigne vnto the raigne of the Roman Empire after Cleopatra her 22. yeares and from thence to the death of Christ 60. yeares so Africanus as Lyranus citeth him and H. Br. in his proleg in Dan. Therefore the computation of Polanus is not so certaine to be builded vpon 6. Concerning the last opinion of Apollinaris who beginneth to count the 70. weekes at the birth of Christ it neede no long refutation for then there went forth no word for the building of the citie and there must be 7. weekes and 62. weekes before the Messiah so that he beginneth Daniels weekes where they almost ende 43. Quest. That Daniels 70. weekes must take beginning from the proclamation made by Cyrus for the returne of the people There remaine then onely to be examined the opinions of the third sort of those which beginne the account of the 70. weekes from Darius and Cyrus who raigned together Tertullian beginneth them from Darius and endeth them in the ouerthrow of Ierusalem Origen taketh the same beginning but goeth no further then the natiuitie of Christs so also Melancthon in his first account The Hebrewes making the same beginning doe extend the time to the last subuersion of Ierusalem by Adrian the Emperour Clemens Alexandr beginneth from Cyrus and endeth in the subuersion of Ierusalem lib. 1. stromat Origen doth ende them too soone and the rest extend them too farre but touching the ende of these weekes more shall be said in the next question but that all these doe take the beginning right of these weekes from the edict of Cyrus who raigned together with Darius the Mede it may thus euidently be prooued 1. First when the seuentie yeares of captiuitie were expired the 70. weekes of libertie immediatly beganne as M. Calvin sheweth vpon the 24. verse Certum est quinquaginta annos quinquaginta hebdomadas simul coniungi the 70. yeares and 70. weekes are ioyned together And this proposition is confirmed Ier. 29. 10. Thus saith the Lord After seuentie yeares be accomplished at Babel I will visit you and performe my good promise toward you and cause you to returne to this place But the 70. yeares were expired in the first yeare of Cyrus 2. Chron. 36. 22. therefore then the 70. weekes beganne 2. The 70. weekes beganne from the going forth of the word to cause the people to returne v. 25. but in the first yeare of Cyrus the Edict came forth for the returne of the people Ezr. 1. 1. then was the generall deliuerance of the people from captiuitie Ergo. 3. Paulus Burgensis vrgeth this reason that if the beginning of these weekes were suspended an hundred yeares to the raigne of Artaxerxes Longimanus or after then it would follow that Daniel was ignorant when these weekes should beginne and so consequently did not know the time of the comming of the Messiah but it is not like that so great a Prophet hauing reuealed vnto him the time of the comming of the Messiah should be ignorant of it Pererius to this maketh a double answer 1. that though Daniel haue a vision in generall of the Messiahs comming yet he might be ignorant of the very time as it was reuealed to Daniel that one should rise vp to afflict the people of God most grieuously 2300. daies chap. 8. yet he knew not the particular time 2. It is like that it was reuealed to Daniel when these 70. weekes should beginne though it is not expressed in Scripture Contra. 1. There is not the like reason to know the particular time of Christs comming and of Antichrist there was more necessitie for the comfort of Gods people of the one then of the other neither was the time foretold of Antiochus comming as here of Christs but onely how long his tyrannie should continue when he was come 2. Such vnwritten directions not expressed in Scripture it is dangerous to imagine it is true that Daniel knew the beginning of these weekes and had thereto direction and that here expressed in Scripture other direction he had none and not hauing other direction then here he should haue continued ignorant of his owne prophesie if he had not seene the accomplishment of it himselfe 4. An other argument may be taken from the continuance of the Persian Monarchie the most agree that the kingdome of the Macedonians continued 300. yeares from the beginning of Alexanders raigne and that thence to the passion of Christ the Romanes gouerned 60. yeares so African Lyr. Iunius counteth but 362. yeares in all there remaineth then to make vp the summe of 490. an 130. yeares for the Persian Monarchie and not aboue the reason is this because Nehemiah saw both the beginning and the ende of the Persian Monarchie that he saw the ende Iosephus Scalliger thus prooueth 1. because Nehemiah in his storie maketh mention of the last Darius whome Alexander ouercame c. 12. 22. And that it was the last Darius is euident because Iaddua the high Priest is there mentioned who met Alexander 2. Nehemiah was hindred in repairing the walls of the citie by one Samballat c. 4. this Samballat afterward ayded Alexander at the siege of Gaza with a band of souldiers and died before Alexander had taken Gaza so that Nehemiah and Samballat were both of the same
1. during the siege they were so oppressed with famine that women were constrained to deuoure their owne children they did eat the verie leather of their shooes and targets they died in such heapes within the citie of the plague famine and by ciuill discord that the streetes and channels lay full of dead bodies and were trampled vpon as mire in the streetes in so much that beeing wearie of burying them they threwe their bodies from the wall into the trenches which when Titus beheld full of dead bodies he stretched his hands to heauen as testifying his innocencie that it was not his doing 2. the number of the Iewes were great which were slaine by the enemies in Caesarea there were slaine 20. thousand in Scythopolis 13. thousand in Prolemais 5000. in Alexandria 50. thousand in Damascus 10. thousand this was somewhat before the beginning of that warre Then afterward the warre beeing begunne there were slaine in Galile 18. thousand in Aphek 150000. in Samaria 11. thousand and 600. in Iotapata 4000. in Taricha 6600. in Giscalis 2000. ex Oecolamp the whole summe of those which died in the siege by the famine pestilence and sword came to 11. hundred thousand as Iosephus writeth lib. 7. de bello Iudaic. c. 16. 17. 3. Neither was here an ende of their miserie They which remained the better sort of them were reserued for tryumpht they which were aboue 17. yeare old were sent into Egypt to be employed in certaine workes and some were cast vnto the wilde beasts they which were vnder 17. yeares were sold to be slaues the whole number of the captiues is noted by Iosephus to haue beene 97. thousand Quest. 80. That all this miserie came vpon the Iewes for putting to death the Messiah 1. The Iewes will by no meanes acknowledge that they haue and yet doe suffer these things for the 〈◊〉 of the Messiah but first they answer that these afflictions are layd vpon them to prâ—oue their patience and that they thereby should be tried as gold in the fire But to this we answer 1. that they by these afflictions are nothing amended but waxe worse their impietie profanenesse blasphemie is notoriously knowne to all the world 2. though God lay temporall chastisements vpon men to trie their patience yet to that ende none are depriued of spirituall blessings as they are of the gift of prophesie of miracles of the publike worship of God according to his lawe 3. beside the Lord hath promised them ample and great blessings so long as they walke in obedience of his law as is extant Leuit. 26. and Deuter. 28. so that they should make God a liar if these things were not befallen them for their sinnes 2. The Iewes haue an other answer that they are not punished for the death of Christ but for their other sinnes But the greatest sinnes for the which the Iewes were punished in time past were their Idolatrie and killing of their Prophets which sinnes they are not now gultie of for they haue no Prophets to kill and Idolaters they are not as Hierome saith vnto them Certe non colis idola seruiens Persis Romanis c. Deos ignoras alâ—â—nos truely thou doest not worship idols though thou art in captiuitie vnder the Persians and Romans yet thou art ignorant of strange Gods c. If then God had compassion vpon them when they went into captiuitie for those sinnes certainly this long captiuitie is now fallen vpon them for some greater sinne then any of the other And what can that be els then the putting to death of the Blessed Messiah And so Hierome concludeth memento vociâ— parentum tuorum c. remmember the voice of thy parents his blood be vpon vs and our children c. All this therefore is happened vpon them for killing the heire of the vineyard whereas they did but offer violence to the seruants before 3. Now as it is euident that the Iewes are punished for the death and murther of the Messiah so as their offence was hainous the punishment is also great which is inflicted vpon them which is twofold either corporall or spirituall the corporall is threefold in the losse of their dignitie they beeing depriued of their gouernement and policie in the perpetuall desolation of their citie and their ignominious exile and dispersion thorough the world their spirituall punishment is twofold the blinding of their minde and vnderstanding and the hardening of their heart as the Prophet Isay saith c. 6. 10. make the heart of this people fat and their eares heauie aud shut their eies least they see with their eyes c. and vnderstand with their heart c. Quest. 81. He shall confirme the couenant with many for one weeke how this one weeke is to be vnderstood 1. Cyrillus Hierosol cateches 12. beginning the 69. weekes at Darius and ending them at the birth of Christ omitteth the 70. weeke altogether But that must needs be acknowledged to haue beene a great ouersight in Cyril seeing that the most speciall things to be performed by the Messiah was done in the 70. and last weeke 2. Hyppolitus ending the 69. weekes in the natiuitie of Christ deferreth the 70. and last to the ende of the world vnto the preaching of Henoch and Elias But beside that it was the errour of those times that Henoch and Elias should come in their owne persons and preach toward the ende of the world seeing our Sauiour expoundeth that prophesie of the comming of Elias of Iohn Baptist Matth. 11. who came in the spirit of Elias this last weeke must not be seuered so farre from the 69. weekes but as the 62. followed immediately the first 7. so after the 7. weekes and the 62. weekes which make 69. must followe the 70. and last weeke 3. Eusebius as Hierome reporteth his opinion in his commentarie vpon this place ending the 69. weekes at the baptisme of Christ taketh the 70. and last weeke for 70. yeares and so extendeth it vnto the time of Traian the Emperour for so long the preaching of the Apostles continued Iohn the Euangelist suruiuing all the Apostles vntill then But seeing Eusebius taketh the 69. propheticall weekes but for 7. yeares a peice he hath no reason to make the last weeke tenne times so much as any of the other neither is a weeke of yeares in any place so taken in Scripture 4. Oecolampadius taketh this 70. and last weeke yet more largely for he beginneth it at Pompeys time when the state of the Iewish commonwealth beganne to decline and continueth it vnto the death of Christ which he reckoneth to be some 98. yeares and endeth the week in the raigne of the Emperour Hadrian which is aboue 98. yeares more in which time all these things happened here spoken of and then was the finall desolation of the citie so he taketh the 70. and last weeke not for any certaine number of yeares but for the plenitude and fulnesse of time But seeing the rest of the weekes
doe signifie a certaine and definite time and they are onely taken for weekes of yeares so must the 70. and last weeke be vnderstood also and considering that this last weeke is deuided into two halfe weekes the latter expressed the other vnderstood therein must be contained a definite and certaine number for the parts beeing finite and certaine so must the whole be likewise 5. Osiander taketh this last weeke to beginne after Christs resurrection in which space of seuen yeares many by the preaching of the Gospel were receiued and admitted to the newe couenant But seeing the Angel saith that 70. weekes are determined and cut out to finish wickednesse and to seale vp sinnes which things are performed in the death of Christ there also must the weekes ende 6. Many beginne this last weeke at the baptisme of Christ and ende it 3. yeares and an halfe after as Melancthon Iunius edition 1. Pintus with others But seeing it is said he shall confirme the couenant for one weeke he that is the Messiah the couenant must be confirmed before the Messiah be slaine for otherwise how should it appeare that this couenant was confirmed by the Messiah if it be not done in his time that is in the dayes of his flesh he then must confirme it either before or at his death priusquam tollitur è medio before he be taken out of the way Vatab. for otherwise it should not be conspicuous and apparant to be the Messiahs worke 7. Some doe referre this last weeke vnto the last seuen yeares which went immediately before the destruction of the citie Iun. Polan M. Liuely But it is sufficiently shewed before that these 70. weekes must expire in the death of the Messiah and are not to be extended so farre see quest 49. 8. The best interpretation then is this that this last weeke must beginne 7. yeares before the death of Christ the first halfe yeare went before his baptisme as a preparation thereunto then in the latter halfe weeke these things were performed as the next words shewe H. Br. Concent the whole week is named because these things were done in the last week but not in all the weeke onely in the latter halfe thereof beginning at Christs baptisme So Hugo expoundeth it quia non in principio hebdomadis hae mirabilia coeperunt ideo determinat quando haec inchoata sunt c. because these things were not done in the beginning of the weeke therefore he determineth when they should beginne namely in the latter halfe weeke which beganne in the 15. yeare of Tiberius when Christ was baptised Quest. 82. What is vnderstood by the couenant 1. R. Selomâ— by the couenant vnderstandeth the truce for 7. yeares which the Romanes made with the Iewes at the time of the besieging of the citie But Lyranus doth refell this conceit by these two reasons 1. because Iosephus maketh no mention of any such league or truce neither in his bookes of the antiquities of the Iewes nor of the Iewâ—â— warres 2. And if there had beene any such truce it should haue beene made with all the Iewes not with some onely as it is here said he shall confirme this couenant with many 2. Some referring this last weeke vnto the destruction of Ierusalem by this couenant doe vnderstand that speciall fauour which the Lord shewed and the fatherly care which he had of his Church in Ierusalem who were admonished by a reuelation to depart the citie before the siege beganne so Iun. Polan But here rather we are to vnderstand the euerlasting couenant of grace which Christ hath confirmed with his blood then any such temporall fauour 3. M. Calvin seemeth specially to vnderstand this couenant of the vocation and calling of the Gentiles which was fulfilled after his resurrection but this couenant as hath beene said alreadie was confirmed by Christ at and before his death not after Then indeede was this couenant by the preaching of the Apostles published and divulged but there is difference between the ratification of a couenant and the publication thereof as there is between the confirmation of a will and the execution 4. Therefore by the couenant here is vnderstood the couenant of grace made in Christ for remission of sinnes vnto all that beleeue Osiander the new Euangelicall lawe preached by Christ and confirmed in his death Vatablus Pintus such as the Prophet Ieremie speaketh of c. 31. 33. this shall be the couenant which I will make with the house of Israel After those dayes saith the Lord I will put my lawe in their inward parts c. I will forgiue their sinnes and remember their iniquities no more c. Quest. 83. How this couenant was ratified and confirmed Some doe expound these words multis with many of the diuerse wayes and meanes whereby this couenant was ratified Perer. but the word larabbini to many is beter vnderstood of the persons with whom or for whom this couenant shall be ratified as the prâ—position lamed sheweth yet true it is that this couenant was ratified and confirmed many wayes 1. First it was ratified by many glorious testimonies of our Blessed Sauiour 1. of the Angels Luk. 2. 2. of the wisemen that came from the East and worshipped Matth. 2. 3. of the holy men and women then liuing at the time of Christs birth as of Zacharie Elizabeth Simâ—on Anna Luk. 1. 2. 4. of Iohn Baptist who gaue witnesse to Christ. 5. of God the father from heauen Math. 3. 6. of Moses and Elias which appeared in the mount where Christ was transfigured Matth. 17. 7. of the Pharisies themselues as Nicodemus said we knowe thou art a teacher come from God Iohn 3. 8. yea of the deuils themselues who beeing cast out of men cried out and confessed that he was Christ the Sonne of God 2. The second kind of confirmation was by the prophecies of the old Testament concerning the Messiah which were all fulfilled in Christ as the historie of 〈◊〉 Gospell sheweth 3. The third ratification was by Christs wonderfull and most glorious miracles 4. by his holy life and conuersation 5. by the predictions of our Lord himselfe which are noted to be seuen 1. of the ruine and destruction of the citie Luk. 19. 43. 2. of the miracles which should be wrought by his disciples Mark 14. 17. 3. of the great persecutions which his disciples should suffer for his name Iohn 16. 2. 4. of the preaching of the Gospell thorough the world Act. 1. 8. 5. of the propagating of his Church ouer the world Ioh. 10. 16. 6. of the continuance of the same Church as hauing a most sure foundation beeing builded vpon the rocke Matth. 16. 18. 7. of his owne death his resurrection Mat. 16. 21. and the sending of the Holy Ghost Act. 1. Perer. 6. But Lyranus also mentioneth sixe wayes whereby Christ confirmed this couenant praedicando miracula faciendo c. by preaching doing of miracles in dying rising againe ascending and sending the Holy Ghost
dicit se à Sufis redijsse sed surrexisse he saide not he did returne from Susa but onely rose vp and returned to his busines c. so that their opinion seemeth to be that Daniel was in deede now at Susa But it is shewed before that he was at Susa onely in vision qu. 4. 3. It remaineth then that this king was Belshazar as is euident v. 1. by whome it seemeth he was emploied though not so much nor in so great affaires as he was vnder the former kings Osiand but what manner of emploiment it was it is not expressed neither can certenly be gathered Iun. Daniel then hauing noted before that this was done vnder Belshazars raigne v. 1. returned vnto his busines which is an euident argument that he was then in Belshazars Court or at hand not at Susa because he presently rose vp hauing recouered himselfe to doe the kings busines Calvin 38. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 27. none vnderstoode or perceiued it 1. Some read and there was none to interpret it so Lyran. Hug. Pintus following the vulgar Latine which they vnderstand thus that is none interpreted it as the Angel Hugo or none could interpret it in particular concerning the kings names but onely in generall Lyran But the word here vsed mebin signifieth not interpreting but perceiuing and vnderstanding neither could Daniel say none could interpret it seeing the Angel had giuen the interpretation of it before 2. Some read none vnderstood it The Hebrewes thinke that Daniel himselfe vnderstood it not but that can not be seeing the Angel was bidden to cause him to vnderstand it v. 16. 3. Some thinke that none of those to whome Daniel reuealed the dreame could vnderstand it Oecolampad but Daniel did not impart it to so many to trie who vnderstood it and who vnderstood it not for he was commanded before to seale it vp to hide and conceale it and lay it vp in his heart 4. The words are then better translated none perceiued it that he had beene sicke for griefe because of the heauie vision he dissembled his affection and neither in word nor so much as in countenance bewraied that he had seene a vision according as he had beene before charged to conceale and keepe the vision to himselfe Iun. Polan 39. Quest. The historie of Antiochus Epiphanes raigne abridged for the better vnderstanding of this vision 1. After that Antiochus the great father vnto Antiochus Epiphanes had beene vanquished by Scipio he was constrained to deliuer ouer vnto the Romanes his sonne Antiochus to be an hostage where he continued 14. yeares and then hearing of his fathers death watched his time and fled secretly from Rome and tooke vpon him the kingdome of Syria making a way thereunto by procuring the death of Seleucus his elder brother and disinheriting Demetrius his sonne 2. Then Antiochus after he was setled in the kingdome inuaded Egypt vnder this colour to be tutor vnto the young king Ptolome Philometor his sister Cleopatra her sonne he put many to the sword and subdued many cities And in his returne beeing sauoured by diuers seditious persons in Ierusalem as by Iason who had bought the priesthood of him for money and wicked Menelaus who got the Priesthood for himselfe promising more money and put Iason by 2. Macchab. 4. by this meanes he entred into the citie robbed and spoiled the Temple and put many to the sword this was in the 143. yeare of the kingdome of the Greekes in the 6. yeare of his raigne 3. Then about two yeare after he made a second expedition into Egypt where he was commanded to depart by Popilius the Embassadour of the Romanes who making a circle in the sand with his rod before Antiochus vrged him to make his present answer before he went thence 4. In his second returne he entred Ierusalem againe and made hauocke of the citie defiled the Temple and set vp therein the abomination of desolation the idol of Iuppiter Olympus this was in the 145. yeare in the 8. yeare of his raigne 1. Macchab. 1. 57. 5. Then Mattathias beeing mooued in zeale stood vp to resist the Tyrant and Iudas his sonne with his brethren after him and at the length they preuailed and 3. yeares after they cleansed the Sanctuarie and restored the sacrifices and this was in the 148. yeare 1. Macch. 4. 52. in the 11. yeare of Antiochus raigne 6. After this this wicked Tyrant went into Persia thinking to robbe the rich Temple at Persepolis where hauing the repulse and hearing at the same time how his captaines Timotheus and Nicanor were discomfited with their armies in Iudea partly of griefe and chiefly beeing smitten of God with an incurable and stinking disease he died in the 149. yeare and the 12. of his raigne see the storie 2. Macchab. 9. 4. Places of doctrine 1. Doctr. Of the office of a Prince v. 5. An horne appeared betweene his eyes In that Alexander is resembled to an horne betweene the eyes many excellent properties required in a Prince are thereby signified 1. the king is as an horne vnto the kingdome the glorie and strength thereof to defend them and to push at their enemies as the horne is the defense of the beast and that whereby others are offended 2. as the horne did rise vp betweene the eyes so the Prince must be circumspect and aduised and do all things with counsell as it in the Prov. c. 24. 6. with counsell thou stalt enterprise warre 3. as the horne is most conspicuous of all other parts so the vertue and courage of the king should appeare and be manifest to all Polan 2. Doctr. That all things in the world are ruled and guided by the diuine prouidence v. 9. It waxed great toward the South c. In that Antiochus acts are set downe in order both his outrage against men and his blasphemie against God the treading down of the Sanctuarie and of the people of God Hence Iosephus collecteth well that these things were not done by chance as a shippe fleeting vpon the seas without a gouernor or a chariot running without a driuer nam si haec sponte gererentur non secundum illius prophesiam emnia provenire conspiceremus for if all these things fell out of themselues we should not see them so fitly to come to passe according vnto his prophesie Ioseph lib. 10. Antiquit. c. 14. 3. Doctr. The Scriptures are the rule of truth v. 12. It shall cast downe the truth c. That is the bookes of the Law which were the rule of faith hence then it followeth that the Scriptures containe the holy doctrine of truth which is not to be learned els where then from the Scriptures So that they which are enemies to the Scriptures doe set themselues against the truth as wicked Iehoiakim when he caused Ieremies prophecie to be cut with a penknife and cast into the fire therein professing himselfe an enemie to God and his truth and therefore this iudgement
But they did much seruile worke vpon this day as in carrying the crosse pitching of it into the ground raising of it vp nayling Christ vnto it And indeede they themselues also resolued not to put Christ to death vpon the feast day Mark 14. 2. Ioseph Scaliger here answereth that the day wherein Christ suffered was the first day of vnleauened bread but not of the paschal solemnitie But this distinction is contrarie to the place before alleadged out of Exodus where the 15. day which was the first of vnleauened bread as likewise the seauenth and last are named to be daies of solemne assemblies wherein no seruile worke should be done sauing about that which they did eate 3. The day wherein Christ suffered is called the preparation of the Passeouer Ioh. 19. 14. it was not then the day of the Passeouer it selfe Ioseph Scaliger answereth that the preparation was not the whole day but onely after the ninth houre as he alleadgeth out of a certaine Edict of Augustus But 1. it appeareth that the preparation was the whole day at the least from the sixt houre as in the same place the Euangelist saith it was the preparation of the Passeouer and about the sixt houre 2. If then it were the preparation of the Passeouer then was not that day the first of the Passeouer 4. Paulus Burgens somewhat to helpe out this tradition of the Iewes his countreymen who deferred the Pasch if it fell out vpon the 6. day of the weeke to auoid the concurrence of two festiuall daies saith there was a double account of the 14. day of the Moone vna vera legitima secundum veram computationem Christi c. one was the true and lawfull day according to the true computation of Christ who knew all the mysteries of the law the other was legitima secundum communem assuetam computationem aliorum lawfull also according to the common and accustomed computation of others c. M. Lydyat also sheweth that the difference betweene the obseruation of the Pasch betweene our blessed Sauiour and the Iewes did arise hereupon because Christ reckoned the daies according to the computation of the naturall years but the Iewes followed the Syro-Grecian account found out by Callippus beginning the moneths not as the Hebrewes at the new Moone but as the Grecians beganne their moneths so that the Iewes began their moneth Nisan as the Grecians did their moneth Xanthicus which that yere beganne one day after the new Moone Lyd. de emend temp p. 179. Both these might very well concurre together that the Iewes did keepe another day of the Passeouer then Christ and his disciples both vpon a blind tradition to auoide the concurrence of two Sabbaths and because they followed a strange computation But it is euident hereby that they did not eate the Passeouer the same day with Christ and that they did breake the law of Moses in receiuing a forren computation of their moneths which was not lawfull howsoeuer Burgensis in fauour of his countreymen excuse it by the vsuall custome 74. Quest. Who are meant by the people of the Prince to come v. 26. There are diuerse expositions of these words 1. Some doe put the people in the accusatiue case he shall destroy the citie and Sanctuarie the people of the Prince to come 2. Some doe make it the nominatiue the people of the Prince to come shall destroy the citie and of either of these interpretations there are diuerse kinds Of the first 1. Some read thus he shall destroy the citie with the captaine to come Sept. but the word with is not in the originall 2. Iunius thus interpreteth he that is the Messiah the Prince shall destroy the people of the Prince his owne people which shall come that is which shall be then So also M. Br. he shall destroy the people of the Prince in the next generation But 1. it should seeme not to be so proper a speach he that is the Messiah the Prince should destroy the people of the Prince that is his owne people 2. and in the original there is no coniunction to couple them together the words standing thus and the citie and the Sanctuarie shall destroy the people c. but in this sense a coniunction must be supplied and the people c. 3. and though the word nagid prince were before ioyned with Messiah yet here beeing put alone it is not necessarie so to vnderstand it of the Messiah 4. neither were the Iewes then the people of the Messiah whom they had reiected and crucified 2. Of the second sort are these interpretations 1. Polanus giueth this sense the people of the Prince to come that is the Gentiles who should become the people of Christ beeing conuerted to the Gospell shall destroy the citie But the Romanes were not at that time when they sacked Ierusalem conuerted to the faith of Christ and so not his people 2. M. Liuely by this word to come vnderstandeth the strangers and commers which are opposite to inhabitants as the word is vsed Gen. 42. 5. the sonnes of Iacob came to buy food among those that came so his meaning is that the citie and Sanctuarie should be surprised by strangers and commers but the word haba to come seemeth rather to be referred vnto the time following then to the condition of the people though it be true that Ierusalem was spoiled by forreners and strangers 3. Some reade the principall people of the Prince or captaine to come Vatab. and he thinketh the destruction of the citie to be imputed vnto the people rather then their captaine because Titus would haue defended the Sanctuarie from the spoile of the souldiers but the word is nagid which signifieth a Prince not principall and the other obseruation seemeth to be somewhat too neere and curious 4. Oecolampadius by this captaine vnderstandeth Pompey the great who tooke Ierusalem and slew 12000. Iewes and afterward Crassus robbed the Temple and then Herod and Sosius made hauocke of the citie But this captaine with his people were to come after the Messiah was slaine which was spoken of immediately before 5. Wherefore by the Prince and people to come are signified Vespasian and Titus his sonne with the Romane armie which should besiege the citie and destroy both it and the Temple as Bulling Calv. Osiander doe well vnderstand it so also Lyranus and this is agreeable to that prediction of our Blessed Sauiour Luk. 19. 43. The dayes shall come vpon thee when thine enemies shal cast a trench about thee c. and shall make thee euen with the ground c. here the destruction of the citie is ascribed to the enemies not to the Messiah their Prince 6. Hugo thinketh it may be applyed also to that destruction of the citie which was after this by the Emperour Elius Adrianus But our Sauiour appointeth the time when all this should be fulfilled Matth. 24. 34. This generation shall not passe till all these things be done
day Philip was called and Nathaniel Ioh. 1. then the 3. day after was the mariage in Cana of Galile Ioh. 2. 1. and then it is saide v. 13. that the Iewes Passeouer was at hand But this opinion can not hold 1. Christ after he was baptised presently was tempted in the wildernesse as S. Marke saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 immediatly the spirit driueth him into the wildernesse Mark 1. 12. And S. Luke thus writeth c. 4. 1. Iesus beeing full of the holy Ghost returned frō Iordan and was led by the spirit into the wildernes the first thing then that fell out after Christs baptisme was his tēptation which continued 40. daies how then could that miracle be 3. daies after Christs baptisme 2. Therfore it is to be vnderstood that it was the 3. day either after he came into Galile or rather the 3. day after he had that conference with Philip Nathaniel 4. Wherefore the best resolution is that Christ was baptized about the beginning of September when he beganne to be 30. yeare old and the reason hereof is grounded vpon Daniels halfe weeke for whether we beginne the 70. and last weeke from the baptisme of Christ or the latter halfe weeke for there are of both opinions as is shewed before but the latter is more probable we must to make vp this halfe weeke haue 6. moneths from the season wherein Christ was baptized to the time of the Passeouer 73. Quest. Vpon what day of the weeke Christ suffered and whether vpon a festiuall day To know vpon what day of the weeke Christ suffered we must finde out when he did eate his Passeouer 1. Epiphanius thinketh that he did eate it vpon the third day of the weeke at euen when the fourth day begunne with the Iewes who reckon their ciuill day from the euening But this can not be for then if Christ are his Passeouer either vpon the 3. or 4. day he must haue suffered the 5. which was the day following and then he must haue risen againe iust vpon the Iewes Sabbath not on the morrow after the Sabbath as the historie of the Gospel sheweth 2. Ios. Scaliger thinketh that Christ did eate the Passeouer in the eue of the 6. day and the day following which was part of the 6. day he suffered But this cannot be for the Passeouer was to be killed vpon the 14. day of the Moone betweene the two euenings which was as Scaliger well obserueth out of Iosephus from the time of the euening sacrifice which was about the ninth houre to the going downe of the Sunne which was the space of 3. houres but the 15. day beganne not till after Sunne-set therefore that space betweene the two euenings was the ende of the 14. day which was at this time the fift day of the weeke not the beginning of the 15. day which was the sixt of the weeke Now further Iosephus Scaliger holdeth that Christ and the Iewes did eate their Passeouer both at the same instant vpon the 14. day at euen according to the law and that the next day he suffered which was the first day of vnleauened bread And for the better maintenance of this assertion he presseth these arguments 1. Otherwise the Iewes should haue aduantage against vs who obiect that Christ suffered not vpon any festiuall day wherein they kept the Passeouer and so the type and the substance agreed not together 2. the Grecians to vphold their opinion that the Eucharist must be ministred with leauened bread because Christ gaue vnto his disciples leauened bread do also affirme that Christ did eate the Passeouer one day sooner then the Iewes did eate it 3. he vrgeth that place of S. Mark 14. 12. the first day of vnleauened bread when they sacrificed the Passeouer his disciples said vnto him hence he inferreth that at the same time the Passeouer was generally eaten when Christ also did eate it 1. Ans. In this question Bellarmine with other Romanists concurre with Ios. Scalig. but Bellarmine is answered els where and therefore I will onely examine Scaligers arguments 1. If the Iewes vpon a blind tradition deferred the Pasch to auoid the concurrence of two Sabbaths which should haue bin this yeare wherein Christ suffered if the first solemne day of the Pasch had bin kept according to the law vpon the 15. day for their ordinarie Sabbath followed the next yet Christ kept it as the law prescribed so suffered that day wherein the Pasch should haue bin solemnized the typical lamb the true lambe this notwithstanding agreed together because Christ was sacrificed at that time when the first day of the Passeouer should haue bin kept by the law though the Iewes by a corrupt custome vsage kept it not 2. The Grecians may ground an error vpon a true position it followeth not because Christ preuented the common eating of the Passeouer that therefore he eate the Passeouer with leauened bread for that had bin against the law Exod. 12. 8. for although leauened bread were not yet put out of the Iewes houses yet Christ sending his disciples before might prouide vnleauened bread for his paschal supper and as the Grecians hereupon ground their opinion that the Eucharist is onely to be ministred with leauened bread so the Romanists on the otherside doe as stiffely maintaine their superstition that vnleauened bread onely must be vsed holding that Christ at the same time did eate the Passeouer with the rest of the Iewes 3. S. Marke respecteth the right time appointed by the law for the Passeouer not the corrupt vsage which the Iewes had taken vp so then that day was the first of vnleauened bread at euen by right of the institution though it were not so in practise among the Iewes and therefore S. Luke saith then came the day of vnleauened bread wherein the Passeouer ought to be sacrificed But now the contrarie is euident out of the Gospel that the Iewes receiued not the Passeouer generally vntill the eue after Christ was crucified 1. It is said they themselues came not into the common hall least they should be defiled but that they might eate the Passeouer They did not then eate the Passeouer till the euening after Christs passion Iosephus Scaliger answereth that the sacrifices which were offered in the feast of the Passeouer were called the Passeouer as well as the Paschal lambe alleadging that place Deut. 16. 2. Thou shalt offer the Passeouer to the Lord thy God of sheepe and bullocks c. But here the phrase is to sacrifice the Passeouer which was as well referred to the offering of the other sacrifices as the paschal lambe Contr. Yet to eate the Passeouer is not otherwise vsed in the Gospel then of the eating of the Paschal lambe 2. If the Iewes had eaten the Paschal lambe the same night with Christ then the next day should haue beene a solemne festiuall day wherein they should haue done no seruile worke as is appointed Exod. 12. 16.