Methodius Eusebius and the falshood thereof is conuinced by this that the Septuagint who liued almost an 100. yeares before that Antiochus did translate this booke into Greeke and Iosephus in his 11. booke Antiquitat Iuda reporteth how Iaddus the high Priest shewed vnto Alexander the great this prophesie of Daniel which foretold of a king that should destroy the Persian Monarchie in confidence whereof Alexander proceeded to that battell and this was 60. yeares before Antiochus 2. The Hebrewes thinke with whom Isidore consenteth that this booke of Daniel of Ezekiel and of the 12. Prophets were written by the wise men of the great Synagogue who were in the time of Ezra 3. But that this booke was written by the Prophet Daniel who was so famous among the Kings of Chaldea and of Persia beside the title of the booke which is called in the Hebrewe sepher Daniel the booke of Daniel our blessed Sauiour doth witnesse the same in the Gospell When yee shall see the abhomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the Prophet c. Matth. 24. 15. Perer. Osiand Quest. 2. Of the signification of the name Daniel 1. The name Daniel signifieth the iudgements of God or God is my iudge which name was giuen him by the singular prouidence of God for both per eum annntiata sunt iudicia Dei by him the iudgements of God were denounced and declared and God was present with him as his defender and iudge against his aduersaries Bullin 2. Lyranus then is deceiued who thinketh that in this name there is relation to that iudgement which Daniel awarded against the two adulterous Elders which wrongfully accused Susanna for that storie was not of Dauiels writing neither is found in the originall as afterward shall more fully be declared 3. There was another Daniel Dauids second sonne by Abigail who also is called Chileah but he was long before those times 2. Sam. 3. 3. 1. Chron. 3. 1. Quest. 3. Of the kindred of Daniel 1. Hierome in his preface to Daniel writeth that the Septuagint in the beginning of the historie of Susanna which they make the 14. chapter of this booke doe affirme that Daniel was of the tribe of Leui whereupon Bellarmine thinketh that there were two Daniels one of the tribe of Iudah who writ the prophesie the other of the tribe of Leui. But herein Perfrius of his owne sect and societie contradicteth him shewing that neither the Synagogue of the Iewes then nor the Church of Christ now euer acknowledged any more then one Daniel to be a writer of Scripture 2. Dionysius Carthusianus thus remooueth the doubt that Daniel was by his fathers side of Leui by his mothers of Iudah so also Isidore thinketh that Daniel was both of the kindred of the Priests and the kings because it was vsuall for those tribes to match together in Mariage Pererius also reiecteth this as an humane coniecture without any ground of the Scripture Praefat. in Daniel 3. His opinion then is that Daniel was of the kings stocke and that in him and the rest was fulfilled the prophesie of Isaiah to Hezekiah that his sonnes that is his posteritie should be carried captiue into Babylon Of the same opinion that he was ex genere regio of the kings stocke are Bullinger Osiander with others Iosephus also saith that he was of the kinsmen of Zedekiah king of Iudah But this is no necessarie argument for that prophesie might be accomplished in either of the kings stocke as well as in Daniel And Iosephus may be deceiued in this as in the like conceit that Daniel was a gelded man and made an Eunuch so thinketh also Origen their coniecture is because Asâ—penaez to whose care and charge Daniel was committed is said to be the chiefe Sarisim of the Eunuchs but this is no sure argument for Pharaoh Genes 37. is called by that name who had both wife and children Caluin 4. Wherefore concerning Daniels kindred somewhat is certaine that he was of the tribe of Iudah which is euidently expressed c. 1. v. 6. Polan some things are vncertaine as 1. Whether he were of the kings seede for they were of the kings seede and of the Princes v. 3. therefore not all of the kings seede Iun. 2. It is vncertaine likewise that Daniels fathers name should be Zabaa as Epiphanius 3. Or that Bethoron the vpper which first belonged to Ephraim and afterward to the Leuites was the countrie of Daniel as Dorotheus and Epiphanius Quest. 4. Why Daniels kindred is not particularly expressed in the text 1. Some thinke the reason is because this is an historicall rather then a Propheticall booke but this is no good answer for so the booke also of Nehemiah is historicall and yet his kindred is expressed the words of Nehemiah the sonne of Hachaliah 2. Some make this the cause Daniel his kindred was well knowne and therefore it needed not to be expressed So was Isaiahs and Ieremiahs and their kindred well knowne and yet it is set downe in the beginning of their prophesie 3. Neither was this the reason why Daniel inserteth not his name because among the Chaldes he was called by another name Belthazar for c. 10. 2. he saith I Daniel was in heauinesse 4. Pererius saith causam satis idoneam probabilem c. I can finde no meete or probable cause hereof why Daniels genealogie is not expressed 5. Vnlesse this reason may be yeelded that those Prophets haue their kindred expressed which were specially sent from the Lord vpon some message and embassage to his people as Isaiah Ieremiah with the rest not they which onely had visions without any such speciall commission which obseruation notwithstanding doth not alwaies hold for Salomon had no such propheticall commission and yet he is described by his parentage Prov. 1. 1. Salomon the sonne of Dauid Quest. 5. When Daniel beganne to prophesie and at what age 1. Pererius thinketh that Daniel was some 10. yeare old when he went into captiuitie in the third yeare of king Iehoiakim beeing borne as he supposeth about the 25. yeare of Iosias raigne but this cannot be so that Daniel was then so young for 5. yeares after this he expounded Nebuchadnezzars dreame which was the 2. yeare after they stood before the king c. 2. 1. their three yeeres of education beeing expired c. 1. 5. And vpon that occasion Daniel began to be famous for his wisedome celebrated by the Prophet Ezekiel c. 28. 3. thou art wiser then Daniel And before that the same Prophet maketh mention of Daniel for his pietie ioyning him with Noah and Iob of whom the Lord saith that they should onely saue their owne soules they shall neither deliuer sonne nor daughter c. 14. 20. it seemeth then that Daniel was of yeares to haue sonnes and daughters Daniel then within fiue yeares of his captiuitie growing into such fame for his wisedome could not be so very a child as Epiphanius maketh him and
God and so it is said here that Daniel beleeued in his God inchoata obedientia our inchoate obedience which is accepted with God because we are iustified by faith our righteousnes whereby we are iust before men both these are also here expressed in Daniel my iustice was found out before God and vnto thee O king haue I done no hurt To conclude then this point a mans particular iustice innocencie is rather an antecedent of his deliuerance then a cause And in some sort it may be said to be a cause also yet not of it selfe but as it concurreth with faith for the which the Lord respecteth vs and our obedience though imperfect in Christ Iun. in comment 11. Controv. That a generall faith called fides implicita an implied faith is not sufficient v. 23. Because he beleeued in God not as the Latine hath he beleeued God for in the text there is the preposition beth And hereby is signified not a generall apprehension onely that God was true of his promises and that he was the onely true God creator of heauen and earth as the Romanists doe affirme faith to be nothing else but generally to beleeue what soeuer is contained in the word of God to be true Bellar. lib. 1. de iustifi c. 4. But Daniel here so beleeued in God that he committed himselfe with firme trust and assurance vnto him in eius gratiam recubuit he relyed wholly vpon his grace Calvin And so the Apostle describeth faith Heb. 11. 6. He that commeth vnto God must beleeue that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him this faith onely apprehendeth not God in generall that he is but is ioyned with a particular assurance that he will reward his faithfull seruants and bring them vnto life And so Pintus one of their owne writers very well resolueth vpon this place vt mea fert opinio credere hoc loco est actus fidei charitate formatae plenae fiducia in Deum as mine opinion is to beleeue in this place is an act of faith formed that is expressed by charitie full of trust and confidence in God 6. Morall obseruations 1. Observat. Of Gods prouidence that watcheth ouer his seruants Generally in this chapter in that God deliuered Daniel his faithfull seruant from the rage of the lyons we see how Gods fatherly care watcheth and awaketh towards his seruants so Noah was saued from the waters Lot from the flames of Sodome Ieremie in the destruction of Ierusalem We reade that when the citie of Syracusâ— was taken by M. Marcellus which 〈…〉 that great Mathematician had defended a good while by his art and skill of whom Marcellus gaue charge that he should be spared yet he was slaine by a souldier as he was drawing of his lines because he would not straitway followe him to their Generall saying he would dispatch that he had in hand first But God hath greater care of his and continually protecteth them Bulling 2. Observat. Of the monstrous sinne of enuie v. 4. They sought occasion against Daniel Enuious men are alwayes in excubijs they are set in their watch obseruing and marking other mens doings to see if they can finde any matter against them Polan 2. they are enuious at other mens vertue as here they cannot endure Daniels pietie and sinceritie like as the henne scraping in the dunghill contemneth a pearle and preferreth a barley curnell and as the Sunne beames are offensiue to those that are bleare eyed so is vertue a griefe to the enuious Pintus 3. The enuious person propriae vtilitati est addictus is addict to his owne profit neglecting the common good as here these men seeke to supplant Daniel who was so necessarie for the commonwealth 4. And beside enuie bringeth 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 most cruellâ— against Daniels life Calvin â— 5. The remedie against enuie is 〈…〉 our selues with innocenâ—ie and integritie as Daniel did that the 〈◊〉 find 〈…〉 S. Peter saith when they speake euill of vs as of euill doers they may be ashamed which blame our good conuersation in Christ 1. Pet. 3. 16. 3. Observ. We must not giue ouer our profession notwithstanding any danger obiected v. 10. Daniel though he knewe of this bloodie decree will not intermit calling vpon God so etiamsi centum mortes nobis occurrant though an hundred deaths be set before vs we should not fall away from the true worship of God Caluin as S. Pauls excellent resolution was Act. 2. 13. Iam readiâ— not onely to be bound but to die at Ierâ—salem for the name of the Lord Iesus 4. Observ. Of continuing in prayer v. 10. As Daniel prayed thrice a day so thereby we are taught to perseuere in prayer according to S. Pauls rule Rom. 12. 12. 1. Thess. 5. 17. for prayer is not auayleable vnlesse it be seruent Iam. 5. 16. and feruent it cannot be if we giue ouer and faint in our prayers and continue not 5. Observ. Of the terror of conscience v. 18. The king remained fasting The Kings conscience was perplexed for this iniustice shewed toward Daniel he careth neither for meate delight nor sleepe he had none in earth whom he needed to feare but his conscience accuseth him before the great Iudge that shall call euen kings to account As it is written of Theodoricus king of Italie after he had caused Bâ—etius and Symmachus to be vniustly beheaded how within a fewe dayes after a fishes head beeing brought before him he imagined he saw Symmachus head and thereupon was striken with horror of conscience and not long after died let vs then labour for a good conscience which is as a continuall feast And here shall be an ende of this first Booke which is as the first course and seruice in this feast Praised be God THE SECOND BOOKE OF THIS COMMENTARIE VPON THE DIVINE PROPHESIE OF DANIEL containing the second part thereof consisting of the Prophesies and visions set forth in the sixe last Chapters Wherein that mysticall and Propheticall vision of the seauentie weekes in the 9. Chapter is handled at large with the diuerse Expositions thereof and the approbation of the best Printed by CANTRELL LEGGE Printer to the Vniuersitie of Cambridge 1610 TO THE MOST EXCELLENT VERTVOVS AND Right noble Prince HENRIE by the grace of God Prince of Wales and heire apparant to the most famous Kingdomes of England Scotland and Ireland his gracious Lord. RIght Noble Prince it may seeme strange to some that I offer vnto your princely viewe in these your Highnesse young and flourishing yeares a Commentarie vpon the most difficult and obscure booke of the old Testament But I trust your Highnesse shall not thinke it vnseasonable to be acquainted with the mysteries of holy Scripture in this your princely youth As Iosias that godly king of Iudah at the sixteenth yeare of his age did set his heart to seeke the Lord and read vnto his people out of the booke of God So did Honorius
Romane Empire this fourth beast and though the Imperiall authoritie did set forth and maintaine the gospel of Christ there is great difference betweene terrene dominion and the spirituall kingdome of Christ. 3. out Blessed Sauiour was equall to his father as God and as the true Messiah was to determine and abolish the legall ceremonies The Iewes therefore thus obiecting doe but bewray their own ignorance concerning the true Messiah 8. It remaineth then that this little horne was historically Antiochus Epiphanes who was the teâ—th king of Syria from Seleucus Nicanor and yet typically also Antichrist as bath beene shewed in the former questions and to him best agree all properties of the little horne as shall be shewed in the questions next ensuing Thus Polychronius interpreted this place whose opinion Hierome misliketh lunius thus expoundeth and Polanus following him Quest. 28. Who those three kings should be signified by the three hornes plucked away Some doe take this number of three indefinitely for no certaine number some do strictly vnderstand three as they are named and each of these opinions hath diuerse varieties and differences 1. They which take it indefinitely 1. Some by three kings vnderstand many R. Leui of many kings subdued by the Romane Empire R. Saadia of the Turkish dominion Oecolampadius of both and the wearing of the Popes triple crowne signifieth his dominion ouer three that is diuerse kings But where diuerse numbers are named and there is a diuision of number as here of tenne and three there certaine numbers are vnderstood otherwise if the number of ten should be taken indefinitely and so the number of three more should not be signified by tenne then by three no certaine number beeing contained in either 2. Calvin giueth this exposition This litttle horne tooke away three hornes that is a great part of the regall power and authoritie which he thinketh was done when Augustus Caesar tooke from the Senate the authoritie of naming Proconsuls and Gouernours for the Prouinces But whereas the Angel by the three hornes vnderstandeth three kings this is no proper sense to vnderstand by these three kings the authoritie of naming the Proconsuls which were many and this power was not extinguished though it were taken from the Senate it remained still in the Emperor but these three hornes shall be quite pluckt away before this little horne 3. They which take this number for three precisely 1. Some which doe vnderstand it of the Turke name three kingdomes which he hath surprised but therein they agree not Melancthon setteth downe Egypt Syria and Cilicia Osiander and Pappus Asia Grecia and Egypt Vatablus nameth the Empire of Constantinople and the kingdome of Egypt for two the third is not yet subdued to the Turke which he nameth not But the Turke hath many more then three kingdomes vnder him 4. They which imagine a certaine Antichrist to come in the ende of the world vnderstand these three kings of Egypt Africa Aethiopia whom when Antichrist hath subdued the other seuen shall yeeld themselues so Hierome whom Lyranus gloss ordinar Hugo Pintus followe But this conceit of this supposed Antichrist is confuted before quest 27. 5. and it is said that this horne shall pull away onely 3. hornes not that he shall subdue all the tenne 5. Bullinger making the Pope that Romane Antichrist to be this little horne by the three kings would haue signified Leo the 3. the Emperour of Greece whome Gregorie the 2. excommunicated for condemning of images and tooke from him the Exarchateship of Rauenna and Childerichus king of Fraunce was deposed by Pope Zacharie and Pope Leo the 3. obtained of Charles the Exarchateship and gouernement of Italie the Longobards beeing ouercome and their king Desiderius slaine But this cannot be the meaning for these reasons 1. this little horne signifieth one king specially then it is not properly referred to many Popes one succeeding another 2. the Popes deposed and did excommunicate many more kings and Emperours beside these 3. and these 3. hornes must be plucked away before the other to make a way for the little horne not after this horne is exalted 6. Palychronius who by this little horne rightly expoundeth Antiochus Epiphanes yet is deceiued in taking the Persians Aegyptians and Iewes for these three hornes ex Oeco for the Egyptians had an horne by themselues and the Iewes could not be an horne of this fourth beast for they were pushed at by the beast they had no hornes to push others withall 7. Porphyrius likewise taking this little horne to be Antiochus Epiphaâ—es yet erreth herein these three kings he taketh to be Ptolome Euergetes Ptolome Philomâ—tor and Artaxias king of Armenia whom Antiochus subdued for although Antiochus raigned at the same time with Philometor and ouercame him wherein Hierome is deceiued who thinketh that Philometor was dead before Antiochus was borne for they raigned 11. yeares together one in Syria the other in Egypt Perer. yet Ptolome Euergetes the Elder was 40. yeares before Antiochus and Euergetes the younger was twentie yeares after him therefore neither of them could be any of the kings sâ—bdued by Antiochus And though he ouercame Artaxias king of Armenia yet he tooke not from him his kingdome 8. Iunius thinketh that these were the three kings whom Antiochus subdued and destroyed Ptolome Philopator whom he expelled out of Syria ioyning with Antiochus the great his father and Seleucus his brother then he deposed Seleucus and killed Demetrius his sonne as he returned from Rome But in this last is Iunius deceiued for Demetrius the sonne raigned after Antiochus Epiphanes therefore he was not killed by him not deposed Neither could this Demetrius beeing an hostage at Rome procure while Epiphanes liued to be king of Syria but after his death he was receiued by the Syrians and first hauing killed Lysias tutor of Antiochus Eupator the sonne of Epiphanes and then Eupator himselfe he got the kingdome Thus Ioseph lib. 12. Antiquit. c. 15. Livius lib. 46. Appian and Demetrius is none of the tenne hornes quest 26. therefore he could be none of the 3. hornes which were of the tenne some other agree with Iunius that these three forenamed were the three kings but Demetrius they thinke was not killed but onely deposed and kept from the kingdome H. Br. 9. Therefore these three rather were the kings Ptolome Philopator expelled by Antiochus Epiphanes Antiochus the great his father whom he procured to be slaine in a certaine sedition when his father went about to spoile the Temple of Iuppiter Dodoneus the third was his Elder brother Seleucus Philopator whose death he compassed likewise Polan and Iunius leaueth it as indifferent whether Antiâ—chus the great or Demetrius be held to be the third king Quest. 29. Of other propâ—rties of this little horne 1. It is called little 1. which some applie to the Turke in respect of his small and obscure beginnings for Mahomet was of obscure and base parentage Pappus Osiander 2. Some
his raigne of whom Acheus that went with Seleucus beeing his kinsman was presently reuenged and put them to the sword Polybius lib. 4. all this agreeth well with this prophecie sauing that Polybius writeth that Acheus went in this battell with Seleucus and that Antiochus the great liued as yet a priuate life not medling at all lib. 5. But it is euident by this prophesie that both the sonnes of Callinicus ioyned together Now then Seleucus beeing dead Antiochus Megas taketh vpon him the kingdome being then as Polybius writeth not aboue 15. yeare old two of his expeditions are here described the one in passing thorâ—gh in recouering Syria and other parts of his owne countrey the other in assaulting Ptolome at home euen at his owne fortresse and munition cities in the borders of Egypt In the first expedition Antiochus had two great lettes in his way which he ouercame first two brethren Molan and Alexander contemning Antiochus youth would haue vsurped all the countrey beyond Taurus them first he ouercame then he had to deale with Ptolomes captaines which held Syria for him but here Theodotus helped him who reuolted from Philopator both taking aduantage of his voluptuous and slouthfull life and for that he had sustained some disgrace beeing called to Alexandria where he was in daunger of his life This Theodotus vpon these occasions betraied Syria into Antiochus hands And vpon this aduantage he still proceeded and recouered many cities and countreys as Polybius sheweth at large lib. 5. Then sent Ptolome an embassage vnto Antiochus somewhat to stay him vntill he might make himselfe strong and Antiochus admitted some parle and treatise of peace But there could be no agreement for Ptolome challenged those countreys as belonging vnto him by right of inheritance Antiochus layd claime vnto them by a former composition made by Cassander Seleucus Ptolome when they ouercame Antigonus that Syria and Palestina should belong vnto Seleucus Thus they breaking off without any conclusion of peace Antiochus goeth forward and had diuerse conflicts with Nicolaus Philopators captaine both by Sea and land and still preuailing he commeth euen vnto the munition townes in the borders of Egypt and pitcheth at Raphia which was 4. dayes iourney from Pelusium Hierom. Bulling Oecolamp Perer Iun Polan 2. Now followeth the second part of the description how Philopator beeing thus prouoked euen at his owne doores did come against Antiochus with a great armie and encountred with him at Raphia and preuailed as is shewed here v. 11. more particularly thus is this storie reported by Polybius and Iustine 1. Ptolome while the treatise of peace was in hand hired souldiers out of Grecia and gathered together a great armie of 70. thousand footemen and 5000. horsemen and 73. elephants Antiochus also came against him with an other great armie of 62. thousand footemen 6000. horsemen elephants 102. 2. These armies meeting at Raphia after certaine dayes ioyned battell the fight was at the first doubtfull for the right wing of Antiochus had the better but the left wing the worse But at last the victorie fell out vnto Ptolome but not without great slaughter of his mercenary men 3. In the 3. booke of the Macchabes in the beginning an other circumstance is added which furthered the fight on Ptolomes side how Arsinoe Ptolomes sister went vp and downe the campe as they were in fight calling vpon the souldiers and encouraging them promising to each man two pound of gold if they got the victorie But whether this were so or not Ptolome obtained the victorie and of Antiochus side there were 10. thousand footemen slaine and 300. horsemen 4000. taken prisoners and 3. elephants were killed in the fight and two afterward died of the wounds which they had in the battell thus according to the text the multitude was giuen into his hands 3. The euents which followed this victorie are rehearsed to be three 1. the insolenciâ— both of Ptolomes armie called here the multitude for he had as great an armie as Antiochus and of Ptolome himselfe who thinking it sufficient that he had gotten the victorie was content giuing himselfe to case and pleasure to accept of conditions of peace which Antiochus entreated of him whereas as Iustine writeth spoliavisset regno Antiochum si fortunam virtute iuvisset he had spoiled Antiochus of his kingdome if by his owne valour he had helped his good fortunes 2. An other euent was he shall cast downe housands which Hierome vnderstandeth of his former victorie but it may better be referred to his cruell outrage practised vpon the Iewes for comming to Ierusalem he pressed to goe into the most holy place but was gainesayed by the high Priest yet he forcing to enter was striken of God and carried away halfe dead whereupon he afterward returning to Alexandria gaue forth verie cruell edicts against the Iewes commanding many to be killed others to be fettred and imprisoned and some to be trampled vpon vnder the camels feete 3. Macchab. c. 7. Bulling Melancth Polan And hereof Iosephus maketh mention that betweene Antiochus Megas and Philopator Iudea was as ship tossed to and fro of the waues and went to wracke on both sides lib. 12. c. 3. 3. The last euent is he shal not preuaile which was diuers waies effected 1. for he neither preuailed against Antiochus who escaped his hands and held his kingdome still Hierome 2. And notwithstanding his rage against the people of God the Lord defended them 3. After this he gaue himselfe to all beastly pleasure for he killed his wife and sister Euridice he kept both a male concubine Agathocles and Agathoclea his sister Iustin. lib. 30. 4. And within fewe yeares he himselfe died Melancthon Quest. 25. Of the first expedition of Antiochus the great against Epiphanes king of Egypt v. 13. 14. Now followe diuerse other expeditions and attempts of this Antiochus against the king of Egypt vnto v. 18. with his ende v. 19. In this first is set forth his preparation v. 13. then his successe v. 14. In his preparation there are three things expressed the number of his armie the time after certaine yeares and his great riches for Philopator beeing now dead and Epiphanes his sonne left but young whose tuition together with the gouernement of the kingdome was committed to Agathocles an infamous person Philopators minion by which occasion many fell away from the king of Egypt Antiochus took this to be a fit opportunity to recouer his former estate both in the nonage of the young king who was but 4. yeare old when his father died and because the Egyptians were at variance among themselues for they rose vp against Agathocles and killed him and the strumpets they hanged vp and then sent embassadors to Rome that they would take vpon them the protection of the young king and his kingdome to whose trust Philopator dying had commended his sonne The Romanes twice sent embassadours to Antiochus who had inuaded diuerse cities in Syria belonging to the king of Egypt
Isidorus the one calling him infantem an infant the other puerum a boy when he went into captiuitie he was rather 17. or 18. yeare olde as Osiander coniectureth The ground of Pererius opinion is because Daniel in the storie of Susanna is called a young child when he deliuered her from her false accusers which he thinketh to haue fallen out in the beginning of Daniels captiuitie in the 12. yeare of his age but that is a weake ground which is taken from an Apocryphall storie 2. Some thinke that Daniel began to prophesie one yeare after Ezechiel who prophesied the yeare of the world 3359. and Daniel ann 3360. Polanus but that is not like for Daniel prophecied in the 5. yeare of his captiuitie when he interpreted the kings dreame which was in the 8. yeare of Iehoiakims raigne for in the third yeare he went into captiuitie but Ezekiel began to prophesie in the 5. yeare of Iehoiakims or Ieremias captiuity Ezek. 1. 3. which was 8. yeeres after the 5. yeare of Daniels captiuitie And how could Ezekiel in his prophesie commend the wisedome of Daniel if before that time he had not shewed it in the interpretation of dreames Wherefore it is more probable that Daniel began his prophesie before Ezekiel yet not so long before as Theoderet thinketh that is 12. yeeres for so long it was from the 3. yeere of Iehoiakim who raigned 11. yeares when Daniel was carried away to the 5. yeare of Iechonias captiuitie But we must not beginne Daniels prophesie so soone which was in the 5. yeere of his captiuitie after the three yeeres of his education and two yeares more of his seruice and ministring before the king though the historie of Daniel take beginning from the 3. yeare of Iehoiakim when Ierusalem was besieged Daniel then beginning to prophesie in the interpretation of dreames in the 5. yeare of his captiuitie which was the 8. yeere of Iehoiakim began some 6. or 7. yeeres before Ezekiel to shewe his propheticall gift Quest. 6. Of the time when Daniel had his seuerall visions 1. Pererius thinketh that Daniel expounded the Kings first dreame c. 2. when he was 35. yeare old but that can in no wise agree with his former opinion concerning Daniels age that he was but tenne yeare old when he went first into captiuitie for this dreame was expounded in the 5. yeare of Daniels captiuitie so that though we hold him to be toward 20. when he was caried away he could not then be altogether 30. yeares of age when he opened the meaning of the Kings first dreame Pappus also is deceiued who thinketh that this very yeare Ezechiel commended Daniel for his iustice and pietie c. 14. for this commendation of Daniel by the Prophet Ezechiel was at the least in the 6. yeare of Iechonias captiuitie Ezech. 8. 1. which was the 14. yeare of Daniels beeing in Babel for he going thither in the 3. yeare of Iehoiakim who raigned 11. yeares was there eight yeares of Iehoiakims raigne and then followed the 6. yeares of Iechonias captiuitie but the occasion of Pappus error is for that he maketh the third yeare of Iehoiakim which he counteth from the time when he became tributarie to the King of Babel which was in his 8. yeare in deede the eleuenth yeare of his raigne which shall be shewed afterward to be otherwise in the 1. v. of the 1. chapter 2. But Pappus collecteth well that 5. yeares after this the same yeare wherein Ierusalem was taken that Daniel was celebrated by Ezechiel for his singular wisdome c. 28. 3. which was in the 11. yeare of Iechonias captiuitie Ezech. 26. 1. and the last yeare of Zedekiah his raigne which was in the yeare of the world 3365. 3. When Nebuchadnezzer set vp the golden image c. 3. it is vncertaine the time beeing not expressed but it is like it was after the destruction of Ierusalem and other nations when Nebuchadnezzer was now become great and puffed vp with his victories 4. Pappus thinketh that 10. yeares after in the yeare 3375. Nebuchadnezzer had his second dreame of the great tree c. 4. but that cannot be for this dreame the King had after he had conquered the nations and subdued Egypt which was the last and this was after the 27. yeare of the captiuitie of Iechonia Ezech. 30. 1. but the 3375. was but the 21. yeare of his captiuitie 10. yeare after the taking of Ierusalem in the 11. yeare of Zedekiah Therefore I thinke rather with Iunius that this second dreame of the King was some 10. yeares before the ende of Nebuchadnezzers raigne about the 27. of Iechoniah his captiuitie in the 37. yeare of whose captiuitie Evilmerodach began to raigne after Nebuchadnezzer 2. king 22. 27. and it was in the 35. yeare of Nebuchadnezzers raigne and the yeare of the world 3382. 5. Then follows in order within one twelue moneth after how the King was taken from among men and liued among beasts 7. yeares after which time beeing restored he raigned not 7. yeares from yeares 83. to 90. as Pappus but onely two yeares Iun. ibid. 6. The visions which Daniel had in the 7. and 8. chapters which were in the 1. and 3. yeare of Belthashar were shewed him when Daniel was 80. yeare old as Pererius thinketh but he was then at the least 90. yeares of age for he had beene in captiuitie 75. yeares from the beginning of Nebuchadnezzers raigne which concurred with part of the 3. and 4. yeare of Iehoiakims raigne Ierem. 25. 1. who raigned 45. yeares and Evilmerodach his sonne 30. Bulling chron and Daniel is supposed to haue beene 17. or 18. yeare old when he first was caried vnto Babel 7. Pererius taketh it that Daniel expounded the writing vpon the wall to king Balthazar when he was an 100. yeare old but that cannot agree with his former computation seeing he holdeth that he was but 80. yeare old when he saw these visions in the 1. and 3. yeare of Balthazar for he raigned in all but 3. yeares though indeede Daniel was then toward an 100. yeare old Againe Pappus is deceiued who maketh 10. yeares space betweene the time of these visions c. 7. and 8. and the vision of the handwriting vpon the wall which was as he setteth it downe ann 3434. the other vision beeing ann 1423. as he casteth it for Balthazar had but three yeares in all as it may thus be gathered The captiuitie continued 70. yeares which must begin from Iechoniah his captiuitie in the 37. yeare whereof began Evilmerodach to raigne 30. yeares and after him Belthazar 3. yeares which in all make 70. yeares 8. The next yeare following which was the first of Darius Daniel was aduanced to be one of the 3. chiefe Rulers c. 6. and the same yeare he had that prophesie reuealed of the 70. weekes c. 10. 1. Perer. Papp About this time was Daniel toward an 100. yeare old and this was in the yeare 3425. Bullinger not ann 3435. Pappus 9. The next
yeare after this was Daniel cast into the Lyons denne as is declared c. 6. 10. The visions in the 11. chap. Daniel had in the first yeare of Darius the visions in the 10. chap. in the 3. yeare of Cyrus which Pappus reduceth to the yeare 3438. but it was the yeare 3427. Bullinger Quest. 7. Of the whole time of Daniels age and time of prophesying 1. Isidorus giueth vnto Daniel an 110. yeares and thinketh he liued vnto the raigne of Darius Hystaspes but this assertion ouerthroweth it selfe for from the third yeare of Iehoiakim when Daniel went into captiuitie vntill the raigne of Darius Hystaspes are counted an 128. yeares vnto the which the age of Daniel beeing added which Pererius holdeth to haue beene but tenne all his yeares will make an 138. Perer. praefat 2. Pappus counteth from Daniels first captiuitie ann 3354. vnto the 3. yeare of Cyrus which he maketh ann 1438. 92 yeares but he is much deceiued for they can come but to 82. yeares for the 3. yeare of Iehoiakim was 8. yeares before Iechonias captiuitie from the which the 70. yeares must be numbred which ended the first yeare of Cyrus then 2. yeare more of Cyrus raigne must be put too which in all make but 82. 3. Therefore Osianders reckoning hath the best ground who iudgeth that Daniel liued an 100. yeares he was 18. when he went into captiuitie in the third yeare of Iehoiakim from whence to the 3. yeare of Cyrus are yeares 82. which beeing added to the former number make iust an 100. yeares Quest. 8. Why Daniel is not mentioned to haue returned with the rest out of captiuitie Iosephus writeth lib. 10. Antiquit. that Daniel built at Ecbatane in media a goodly tower which remained vnto his time so fresh and beautifull as if it had been but lately builded which the Kings of Persia made such account of as that they made it the place of their sepulture and committed the keeping thereof to one of the Iewish Priests but Daniel himselfe was buried at Babylon whereupon this question is mooued seeing Daniel liued vnto the third yeare of Cyrus raigne after the Edict was sent forth for the restitution and returne of the Iewes why that he returned not with the rest To the which it may be answered 1. That Daniel beeing now striken in yeares an 100. yeare old was vnfit in respect of his great age to take so long a iourney 2. Or rather that he remained to be the protector or defender of the Iewes which were left behind in Babylon as many there staied still 3. But of all other it is most like that he was thought a necessarie man to be imployed about the king for the good of his Nation and to helpe forward their cause as Theodoret thinketh that Cyrus was taught of Daniel that prophesie of Isai c. 45. wherein Cyrus is brought in by name that he should procure the deliuerance of the Lords people Quest. 9. Of the times wherein Daniel liued compared with fâ—rrâ—n Curonicles and of the memorable things which happened therein 1. The third yeare of Iehoiakim where Daniel began his captiuitie Pererius thinketh to fall out iust in the 32. Olympiad and the 105. yeare from the building of Rome and the 3. yeare of Cyrus raigne vnto the which Daniel attained he maketh to concurre with the 3. yeare of the 55. Olympiad and from the building of Rome 200. Bullinger accounteth it otherwise the first time which was the 3. yeare of Iehoiakim he maketh answerable to the 3. yeare of the 38. Olympiad and the 125. yeare from the building of Rome the 3. of Cyrus he setteth against the 59. Olympiad and the 209. yeare from the founding of Rome therefore of these things there is no great certentie 2. The memorable things which happened in the time of Daniels captiuitie which Pererius maketh to containe 90. yeares but in iust account they make but 82. yeares as is before shewed were these for within this compasse of time happened three captiuities of the Iewes vnder Iehoiakim Iechonia and Zedekiah with their deliuerance and returne into their countrie three great Prophets were amongst the Iewes Ieremiah Ezekiel Daniel Among the Romanes were kings Ancus Martius Tarquinius Priscus Seruius Tullus among the Grecians flourished the 7. wise men At this time was Craesus king of Lydia among the Chaldeans Nebuchadnezzar of the Medes Cyaxares and Cyrus founded the Empire of the Persians the kingdomes of the Iewes Chaldeans Medes were dissipate and three famous cities Ierusalem Nineueh Babylon destroyed Perer. Quest. 10. Of the excellencie vse and vtilitie of this booke of Daniel 1. This booke is commended by the worthines of the author the Prophet Daniel a man beloued of God to whom he reuealed the mysteries and secrets of his will whom the Prophet for his pietie and vprightnesse ioyneth with Noah and Iob Ezech. 14. 14. and commendeth for his wisdome Ezech. 28. 3. 2. Beside the excellencie of the matter doth set forth the price of the worke 1. First concerning ciuill matters it treateth of the change and alteration of states and kingdomes 2. For Diuine it hath the most cleare prophesies in all the olde Testament of the time of the Messiahs comming 3. Therein are set forth examples of excellent vertues of abstinencie in Daniel of constancie in the three children which were put into the fierie ouen of pietie in Daniels thrice praying in a day vnto his God 4. Therein are contained the heauenly doctrines of the blessed Trinitie of the resurrection of the bodie c. 12. of redemption and remission of sinnes purchased by Christ death c. 9. 5. Many admirable and miraculous things are here set forth as the walking of the three children vntouched in the fierie ouen of Daniels beeing in the Lions denne of the transplantation of Nebuchadnezzer from beeing a king to liue amongst bruite beasts 6. yea therein are conteined all wayes of Prophesying which are either by dreame or vision sensible apparitions or illumination of the mind all which wayes and meanes the Lord vsed to reueale and declare his will to his seruant the Prophet Quest. 11. Of the authoritie of the prophesie of Daniel 1. The Iewes doe derogate much from the authoritie of this booke not counting it among the Propheticall writings of the which there are three opinions 1. Some thinke that the Iewes doe not reiect the prophesie of Daniel but onely count it among the bookes called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 holy writings for they diuide the olde Testament into the lawe contained in the fiue bookes of Moses and the Prophets which are eight Iosua the Iudges Samuel the Kings Isaiah Ieremie Ezekiel the twelue Prophets and into the holy writings as they call them whereof there are nine Iob Dauid the Prouerbs Ecclesiastes the Canticles the Chronicles Daniel Ezra Ester So Pererius praefat Likewise Hugo Cardinal who maketh two kind of Prophets some that had onely gratiam prophecialem the gift and grace of prophesie others which beside the
resurrection of the Lord or the Lord taking reuenge came Nebuchadnezzer king of Babel not into Ierusalem L. for at the first comming he entred not into the citie and besieged it 2. v. And the Lord gaue into his hand not in his hand L. into his power V. Iehoiakim king of Iudah and part of the vessells of the house of God which he carried that is the vessels not the persons as Iun. Polan for he spake onely of Iehoiakim before into the land of Shinar into the house of his God not the house Polan for the whole land was not the house of his god I. his gods V. and he brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god his gods V. the treasurie G. 3. v. And the king had said to Ashpenaz the master of the Eunuches the master of the pallace V. of the Courtiers for so saris signifieth as Potiphar is so called Gen. 37. 36. who had a wife but properly it signifieth an Eunuch so called of keeping the chamber of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a chamber and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to keepe Elias Levita noteth that onely the ministers or Courtiers of the Kings of Egypt Babylon Medes and Persians were so called that he should carie away I. P. rather then bring G. or bring in L. V. for the same word is vsed in the same sense to carie away v. 2. and this charge was giuen at the taking of Ierusalem some of the children of Israel and of the kings seede and of the Princes of the tyrants L. but that word though sometime it were taken in the better part is now out of vse the word is partemim which Kimhi taketh for the princes about Euphrates but Mercerus thinketh rather thereby to be signified the chiefe princes and gouernours of the Prouinces 4. v. Children in whome there was not any blemish and well fauoured heb good to the sight and instructed in all wisdome and skilfull in knowledge and endued with much vnderstanding and in whome there was facultie that they might stand in the kings palace I. P. better then which were able to stand in the kings palace for the distinction comming betweene doth diuide the sentence and that they might teach them the learning heb letters I. P. L. and tongue of the Chaldeans 5. v. And the King appointed them prouision for euery day heb the thing of the day in his day of a portion of the Kings meate and of the wine which he dranke heb of his drinks and so to nourish them three yeares that at the ende thereof they might stand before the King v. 6. Now there was among these of the children of Iudah Daniel Hananiah Mishael and Hazariah v. 7. Vpon whome the master of the Eunuches imposed other names for he imposed vpon Daniel he called Daniel G. but the word shum in the originall signifieth to put on or impose the name Belteshazzer and on Hananiah the name Shadrach and on Mishael the name Meshach and on Hazariah the name Abednego v. 8. But Daniel had purposed in his heart heb put it in his heart that he would not defile himselfe be defiled L. V. but the word is in hithpael and hath a compound signification with the portion of the Kings meate not with the Kings table L. and with the wine which he dranke heb of his drinks therefore he required of the chiefe of the Eunuches not the chiefe of the Eunuches G. for then the Hebrew preposition should be omitted that he might not defile himselfe v. 9. Now God had brought heb gitten Daniel into fauour and tender loue heb rachamim with the chiefe of the Eunuches or prince of the Eunuches I. master of the palace V. v. 10. And the chiefe of the Eunuches said vnto Daniel I feare my Lord the King who hath appointed your meate and your drinke for wherefore who if L. V. G. but asher is here put for a causall for and lammah signifieth not if but wherefore should he see your faces worse liking leaner L. but the word properly signifieth sadder heauier because they which are leane are sadde and heauie then the children which are of your sort G. your companions L. equals heb which are according to your revolution that is of like time and standing and are appointed likewise three yeares for their education and so ye should make me loose my head G. condemne mine head L. make me subiect vnto a capitall sentence V. make me guiltie of my head I. heb endebted for my head vnto the King 11. Then said Daniel to the butler I. Pol. not to Melzar L. V. A. G. for it is was a propername as appeareth by the article ha set before it hamelzar whom the chiefe of the Eunuchs had set ouer Daniel Hananiah Mishael and Hazariah 12. Trie I beseech thee thy seruants tenue daies and let them giue vnto vs of pulse that we may eate and water that we may drinke 13. Then let our countenances be looked on before thee and the countenances of the children that eate of the portion of the kings meate and as thou seest deale with thy seruants 14. So he hearkned vnto them in this thing and tried them tenne daies 15. And at the ende of tenne daies their countenance appeared fairer and they were better liking more corpulent L. heb fatter in flesh then all the children which did eate of the portion of the kings meate 16. Then the butler not Melzar see before v. 11. tooke away the portion of their meate heb was taking away and the wine that they should drinke and gaue them pulse heb seede 17. And vnto these fowre children children L. fowre is omitted God gaue knowledge and vnderstanding in all learning sepher in bookes or letters and wisdome also he gaue Daniel vnderstanding heb made Daniel to vnderstand in all visions and dreames 18. Now when the daies were expired heb in the ende of the daies which the king appointed heb said to bring them in the chiefe of the Eunuches brought them in before Nebuchadnezzar 19. And the king communed with them and there was not found of them all like vnto Daniel Hananiah Mishael and Hazariah therefore stood they before the king 20. And in euery matter of wisdome and vnderstanding which the king enquired of them he found them by tenne parts tenne fold L. tenne times G. better heb aboue or superiour then the Magicians and Astrologers that were in all his kingdome 21. And Daniel was vnto the first yeare of king Cyrus 3. The questions and doubts discussed 1. Quest. v. 1. Of the third yeare of Iehoiakim which is called the fourth Ier. 25. 1. how these places are reconciled 1. Polanus saith that the prophet Ieremie there speaketh not of the captiuitie of Iehoiakim as here Daniel doth but onely of a certaine prophesie deliuered by Ieremie in the fourth yeare so that he thinketh the third yeare here named and the fourth yeare there mentioned not to concure together But that the same time and
yeare in both places is signified it is euident because the fourth yeare of Iehoiakim is said there to be the first yeare of Nebuchadnezzars raigne Ier. 25. 1. And the last yeare of Iehoiakim which was the 11. is elswhere found to be the 7. of Nebuchadnezzar Ierem. 52. 28. and in the 8. yeare of the king of Babels raigne 2. King 24. 12. that is in the end of the one beginning of an other so that if the seuenth or eight yeare of Nebuchadnezzar fall into the 11. yeare of Iehoiakim then the first yeare must concurre with the others third and fourth 2. Calvin thinketh to dissolue this knot by the distinction of Nebuchadnezzer the father and Nebuchadnezzer the sonne that in one place the one is spoken of and the other in the other but the question is not concerning the yeare of Nebuchadnexzars raigne but the yeare of Iehoiakims raigne wherein Ierusalem should be besieged so that the doubt remaineth still 3. Therefore the best solution is that the first yeare of Nebuchadnezzar did concurre with the ende of the third and the beginning of the fourth yeare of Iehoiakim Vatab. Iun. Genevens factum est inter annum tertium â—t quartum it came to passe betweene the third and fourth yeare c. Pintus who thinketh that after the same manner the Euangelists may be reconciled Marke who saith that Christ was crucified about the third houre and Iohn who writeth that he was crucified at the fixt houre because Christ was crucified Intervallo illo in that space which was betweene the third and sixt houre but though this solution be not so fit for that place which otherwise may be reconciled yet it may serue verie conueniently here But Caluin taketh hereunto this exception that Nebuchadnezzars first yeare cannot concurre with Iehoiakims third and fourth because Daniel three yeares after was brought before Nebuchadnezzar in the second yeare of his raigne Dan. 2. 1. Answ. That is not to be referred to the yeare of the kings raigne but rather to the time of Daniels ministrie and employment with the king that in the second yeare of his seruice he expounded the kings dreame Polanus obiecteth thus that this confusion of yeares that the ende of one should be the beginning of another is obserued in the raigne of diuers kings the one succeeding another but here the historie of one king onely is set downe But this comparing of yeares is more vsuall in setting together the raignes of diuers kings at the same time then of diuers kings one suceeding another as is most euident in the comparing of the yeares of the raigne of the kings of Iudah and Israel together throughout the bookes of the kings here then the yeares of one and the same king are not compared together but the years of Nebuchadnezzar and Iehoiakims raigne Quest. 2. How this third yeare of Iehoiakims raigne is to be counted 1. Iosephus thinketh that it was the 8. yeare of his raigne so also the author of the Ecclesiasticall hystorie following Iosephus when Nebuchadnezzar came and besieged Ierusalem and of the same opinion are Lyranus Hugo Cardinal Dyonis Carthusian Bullinger Polanus Pappus that the third yeare must be counted not from the beginning of Iehoiakims raigne but from the time that he was made tributarie to Nebuchadnezzar which was in the 8. yeare of Iehoiakims raigne and from that time he serued Nebuchadnezzar 3. yeares so that the third yeare from the imposition of tribute concurreth with the 11. yeare of Iehoiakims raigne Polanus who thus reasoneth for his opinion 1. The third yeare of Iehoiakim here spoken of was the seuenth yeare of Nebuchadnezzar Ierem. 52. 28. when 3023. Iewes were carried into captiuitie but the third yeare of Iehoiakims raigne was but the first of Nebuchadnezzars 2. If this were the third yeare of Iehoiakims raigne and consequently the first of Nebuchadnezzars then it would follow that Zedekiah was taken in the 21. yeare of Nebuchadnezzar which was in the 18. yeare Ierem. 52. 29. Contra. 1. He is deceiued in thinking that the captiuitie there spoken of Ier. 52. 28. in the seauenth of Nebuchadnezzar was that first captiuitie when Daniel was carried away for there were two assaults and inuasions of the land in the raigne of Iehoiakim one in the third and fourth yeare of Iehoiakim and the first of Nebuchadnezzar an other in the 11. yeare which was the 7. of Nebuchadnezzar whereof Ieremie speaketh 2. The collection and inference of 21. yeares hath no consequence for from Iehoiakims 3. yeare who raigned in all but 11. yeares to the last of Zedekiah who also raigned 11. yeares which make in all but 22. yeares three beeing deducted there are but 19. yeares 2. Wherefore the truer opinion is that this yeare here mentioned must be vnderstood to be the 3. yeare of Iehoiakims raigne and not from the time of the tribute imposed 1. Pererius saith it is violenta dura interpretatio a forced and hard interpretation the third yeare beeing simply named to vnderstand it otherwise then of the third yeare of his raigne 2. Iunius yeeldeth this reason because Ierem. 25. 1. the fourth yeare of Iehoiakims raigne inchoate or begunne concurreth with the first of Nebuchadnezzar then it must of necessitie follow that Nebuchadnezzars seauenth must fall into Iehoiakims eleuenth yeare adde hereunto an eleuen yeares of Zedekiahs raigne and so it will fall out that Zedekiah was taken in the 18. yeare of Nebuchadnezzer as is set downe by the Prophet Ieremie chap. 52. 29. Melancthon herein consenteth that Nebuchadnezzar came against Ierusalem in the third yeare of Iehoiakims raigne and imposed tribute vpon him and carried away some pray and after he had serued him 3. yeares and he then would haue cast off the king of Babels yoke then the seauenth yeare after which was in the 11. yeare of Iehoiakims raigne Nebuchadnezzar came vp and carried away Iehoiakim and his sonne Iechonias raigned in his stead Quest. 3. Of Iehoiakim and Iehoiachin what difference betweene them 1. Iosias had 4. sonnes the first was Iochanan called also Iehoachaz the second Iehoiakim or Eliakim who is here mentioned the third Matthanias called also Zedekiah the fourth Shallum 1. Chron. 3. 15. this Iehoiakim is also called Shallum Ierem. 22. 11. so Epiphanius testifieth tom 1. sect 8. that he was called Sellus 2. Iehoiakim written with koph and mem was the name of the father Iehoiachin written with caph and nun was the name of the sonne Pintus and before him Hierom in 1. Matth. 3. Rupertus then is deceiued who confoundeth these two and maketh but one Ioachim in whose third yeare Nebuchadnezzar came vp and besieged Ierusalem and carried Ioachim captiue whereas it was Iehoiakim the father in whose third yeare Nebuchadnezzar came vp and Iehoiachin or Iechoniah his sonne who was carried captiue to Babylon 4. But whereas Matth. 1. 11. there is mention made onely of Iechoniah Iosias begate Iechoniah and his brethren c. and againe vers
12. Iechonias begate Salathiel Pererius obserueth out of Epiphanius and Beza also is of the same opinion that in the first place Iechonias is taken for Iehoiakim the father in the latter for the sonne for otherwise there are not 42. but onely 41. generations there rehearsed Quest. 4. Why the King of Babel had such an enuie against Iehoiakim 1. First Nebuchadnezzar came against him because he was made king by Pharaoh Necho king of Egypt with whom Nebuchadnezzar had warre and subdued his countrie and thereupon Iehoiakim became tributarie to the king of Babel 2. But Nebuchadnezzars hatred was more increased afterward when as after three yeares Iehoiakim rebelled against him and would haue cast off his yoke then the king of Babel came vp the second time and carried Iehoiakim away captiue who after he was dead was cast out and lay vnburied according to Ieremie his prophesie c. 22. 19. 3. But the greatest cause of all was the purpose of God to punish the wickednesse of the king and his people for he killed the Prophet Viiah Ierem. 26. cut Ieremie his prophesie with a knife and cast it into the fire Ierem. 36. beside there were found in his bodie when he was dead markes of idolatrie as Lyranus following the Hebrewe noteth vpon that place 2. Chron. 36. 8. Concerning the rest of the acts of Iehoiakim and his abhominations which he did and that which was found vpon him c. God therefore for his crueltie impietie idolatrie brought this iudgement vpon him Pere Quest. 5. Of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babel and how many there were of that name 1. Pintus thinketh that Nebuchadnezzar was a generall name to the kings of Babylon as the kings of Egypt were called by the name of Pharaoh and the kings of the Philistins of Abimelek And he further is of opinion that this Nebuchadnezzar had a sonne of the same name and that neither of them are the same with that Nebuchadnezzar mentioned in the storie of Iudith who sent Holofernes against the Iewes for that was after the returne of the Iewes out of captiuitie as appeareth Iudith 5. beside he thinketh that neither Nebuchadnezzar the father nor the sonne was that Nebuchadnezzar which destroyed Tyrus according to the prophesie of Ezechiel 26. 7. which he taketh to be Cyrus or Alexander But Pintus is in many things here deceiued 1. It is not to be shewed out of the sacred historie of Scripture that all the kings of Babylon were called by the name of Nebuchadnezzar but the contrarie rather appeareth for this kings sonnes name was Evilmerodach 2. King 25. 27. and his sonne Balthazar Dan. 5. 2. And this Nebuchadnezzar was the sonne not the father and the second was called great Nebuchadnezzar for his great exploits and many victories for next vnto this succeeded Evilmerodach So throughout the whole prophesie of Daniel we must vnderstand the second Nebuchadnezzar Iun. 3. We easily agree that neither of these could be that Nebuchadnezzar mentioned in the booke of Iudith for who that was it is vncertaine and there is small certaintie of any thing in the booke beside for Pintus will haue that storie referred to the times after the captiuitie Pererius thinketh it was done before the captiuitie in the time of Manasses but neither of these can stand not the first for we reade of no Nebuchadnezzar after the captiuitie when the kingdome was translated from the Chaldeans to the Persians nor the second for that storie of Iudith maketh mention of the casting downe of the Temple cap. 5. 18. which had not yet beene done in the dayes of Manasseh 4. This Nebuchadnezzar was the same which besieged Tyrus which he besieged 13. yeares as witnesseth Iosephus lib. 10. c. 11. he could not be Cyrus or Alexander for he is called the king of Babel Ezek. 26. 7. 2. Pererius acknowledgeth that there were two Nebuchadnezzars the one here spoken of and in the Prophets the other whereof mention is made in the booke of Iudith whom he taketh to haue beene before this and he misliketh their opinion who take this Nebuchadnezzar some for Cyrus some for Cambises some for Artaxerxes or Darius Ochus the last king but one of the Persians for neither was the Temple yet built againe vnder the raigne of Cyrus and Cambises as is mentioned Iudith 5. and Artaxerxes was 200. yeares after the returne of the Iewes from captiuitie whereas the storie of Iudith seemeth to haue fallen out immediately after Iudith 5. 19. Pere Contra. 1. It appeareth what small certaintie there is of the Apocryphall booke of Iudith seeing it cannot be agreed vpon who that king Nebuchadnezzar was 2. He could not be the Elder Nebuchadnezzar for in his time the temple was not destroyed but in his sonnes but before the time of Iudith it had beene destroyed Iudith 5. 18. 3. Wherefore their opinion is to be preferred that make two Nebuchadnezzars the father and the sonne who was called Nebuchadnezzar the great Iun. Caluin Bullinger Polanus so also Iosephus who giueth vnto the raigne of the Elder 23. yeares and to the other 43. This Nebuchadnezzar seemeth to be the same whom Ptolome calleth Nabopolassar in the 19. yeare of whose raigne he saith the captiuitie of Babylon beganne Polan Quest. 6. Of the acts and exploits of Nebuchadnezzar 1. Iosephus out of Berosus who wrote of the Chalde affaires reporteth of Nebuchadnezzar the second that beeing sent by his father the Elder Nebuchadnezzar against the king of Egypt who reuolted from him and in the meane time hearing of his fathers death returned to Babylon and tooke the gouernement vpon him where he did many princely and sumptuous workes he beautified the temple of Belus repaired the edifices of the city enlarged the riuer compassed the citie with a treble wall built a goodly palace in the space of 25. dayes which seemeth incredible and built high rocks and mountaines vpon vaults of stone and vpon them planted orchards as hanging aloft because his wife being brought vp in Medea desired to see some resemblance of her countrie for the like acts he referreth vs to the histories of Megasthenes the Indian historiographer and Diocles who wrote of the Persian histories and Philostratus of the Pheniceans who witnesseth that Nebuchadnezzar besieged Tyrus 13. yeares which beganne in the 7. yeare of his raigne as Pererius noteth 2. His acts set downe in the Scriptures were these in the third yeare of Iehoiakim he besiedged Ierusalem and carried the spoyle of the citie into Babylon in the 11. yeare he came againe and tooke the citie and carried many into captiuitie and slue Iehoiakim who wanted the honour of buriall then he set in his place his sonne Iehoaichin whom after 3. moneths he remooued and appointed Zedekiah in his place in whose 11. yeare which was the 18. of Nebuchadnezzar he tooke Zedekiah and put out his eies and the 19. yeare he burnt the citie and Temple and carried away the people captiue these things are thus testified 2.
translatour readeth 2. Chron. 36. 6. vinctum in catenis duxit in Babylonem and beeing bound in chaines he caried him to Babylon but the true reading is he bound him in chaines to carie him to Babylon Iun. Vatab. Gen. 2. Hugo Card to iustifie the Latine translation thinketh that he was caried to Babylon and brought backe againe to Ierusalem and there killed and his bodie cast without the walls vnburied which was after at the request of the citizens suffered to be buried But this had beene an idle and superfluous course to carie him to Babel and recarie him And beside it is against the text that he was buried at all Ierem. 22. 19. He shall be buried as an asse is buried euen drawne and cast forth without the gates of Ierusalem and c. 36. 30. His dead bodie shall be cast out in the day to the heate and in the night to the frost 3. Lyranus and Caietane thinke that Nabuchadnezzar caused Iehoiakim to be bound hauing a purpose to carrie him to Babylon but afterward he changed his minde and onely imposed a tribute vpon him but no such thing can be gathered in the text that the King altered his minde for that matter or laid any imposition vpon him 4. Iosephus thinketh that Nabuchadnezzar commanded Iehoiakim to be killed at Ierusalem and his bodie to be cast out of the gates but the phrase vsed 2. king 24. 6. Iehoiakim slept with his fathers seemeth to import not a violent but a naturall death And if he were killed at Ierusalem he needed not to haue beene bound in chaines to be carried into captiuitie 5. Wherefore the more probable opinion is that at this expedition Iehoiakim onely became tributarie to the king of Babel 2. king 24. 1. but he died afterward in the way as he was going into captiuitie the second time that Nebuchadnezzar came vp against him which was in his 11. yeare before he was past the borders of Iudea and it may seeme not farre from Ierusalem and so he may be saide to be cast out of the gates that is the borders and confines thereof Iun. Polan Quest. 12. VVhether Daniel at this time went into captiuitie with Iehoiakim 1. Lyranus and Dionys. Carth. doe referre the captiuitie of Daniel to the 11. yeare of Iehoiakims raigne but the text here is contrarie which maketh mention onely of the third yeare of Iehoiakim when Daniel went into captiuitie and other children of the Princes of Iudah 2. Hierome thinketh that Daniel and Ezekiel were caried away captiue together with Ieconias who raigned but 3. moneths after his father Iehoiakim but this text euidently sheweth that Daniel was caried to Babylon the 3. yeare of Iehoiakims raigne which was 8. yeare before the captiuitie of Ieconias 3. But Iosephus is in a greater error who thinketh that Daniel was taken captiue together with king Zedekiah for this was 18. yeares after Daniel went into captiuitie the 3. yeare of Iehoiakim the next yeare was the first of Nabuchadnezzar Ierem. 25. 1. But Zedekiah was caried away in the 18. yeare of Zedekiah Ierem. 52. 29. Peter Quest. 13. VVhy it pleased God that Daniel and others that feared God should be taken captiues Though God sometime thinke good to exempt and deliuer the righteous from temporall calamities as Noah from the flood Lot out of the flames of Sodome the Israelites from the plagues of Egypt yet sometimes it pleaseth him that such temporall chastisements should fall vpon the righteous as this captiuitie vpon Daniel for these causes 1. The generall reasons may be yeelded to be these 1. God getteth himselfe hereby greater glorie in the deliuerance of his seruants as he did when the 3. children were cast into the fire and Daniel into the Lyons denne and yet they escaped the rage of the one and Daniel the crueltie of the other 2. Hereby also the patience of the godly is tried and exercised and others by their godly example are encouraged Pin. 2. The speciall reasons why Daniel went into captiuitie were 1. that he might be as a guide and comfort to the people to keepe them in the feare of God 2. that by this meanes Daniel might become more famous and be aduanced for the good of his Church 3. that by his meanes these idolatrous Kings and people might come to some knowledge of God Pererius Quest. 14. Of the meaning of these words ver 2. Which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god 1. Iunius vnderstandeth this clause of Iehoiakim and the rest which were carried captiue into Babylon into the land of Shinar and the vessels were brought into his gods treasurie so also Polanus But this exposition seemeth not so fit 1. it is not like that the men were carried into the house of their God but rather the vessells Caluin Polanus thinketh that the land of Shinar is called the house of his God But beside that this were an improper speach to call the whole region an house which is otherwhere named the land of Shinar Gen. 11. 2. this house is expounded to be the temple 2. Chron. 36. 7. Nebuchadnezzar carried of the vessells of the house of the Lord to Babel and put them in his temple at Babel 2. Here onely Iehoiakim is mentioned to be giuen into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar but the Hebrew affix is in the plural number and therefore is better referred to the vessels which also is the neerer antecedent 3. Neither was Iehoiakim carried at this time into captiuitie nor brought at all to Babel as is shewed before Quest. 11. 2. Therefore both these clauses are better referred to the vessels that he first brought them into the house of his god and then laid them vp in his gods treasurie not conuerting them vnto any ciuill vse Osian Pintus Some thinke the last clause is added because the treasurie was a speciall place in the temple where such things were laid vp first then he brought them to his owne palace and then to the treasurie of the temple of his God which was also in his house Vatabl. Quest. 15. Of the land of Shinar or Shingar 1. This land of Shinar or Shingar was the lower part of Mesopotamia which contained Chaldea and Babylon lying vnder the mount Sangara whereof there was a towne so called the Hebrewe letter aijn is pronounced often as the Greeke g as in these words Gomorrha Gaza which begin with that letter and are pronounced with a double aspiration as Hhamarrha Hhaza Iun. Polan 2. This was the land wherein the towes of Babel was built Gen. 11. 2. whereof the whole region was called Babylonia whereas then 2. Chron. 36. 7. he is said to haue carried the vessels to Babel there is no contradiction for they were both names of the same countrie Polan Quest. 16. Of the gods and idols of the Chaldes Ver. 2. To the house of his God The Chaldeans had fiue idols 3. gods and two goddesses 1. their first god was
language and therfore vsed of the learned Genevens Dan. 2. 6. But I rather thinke with Tremellius and Polanus that howsoeuer in times past there was small difference for that part of this booke which is written in the Chalde tongue from the 4. v. of the 2. chapter to the ende of the seauenth is called also the Aramites or Syrians language c. 2. 4. yet now they doe manifestly differ the ancient Chalde speach and the common Syrian language 7. Now the Chalde tongue is either that purer kind of speaking and writing which is vsed here in Daniel from 2. c. v. 4. to the ende of the seauenth and Ezra c. 4. vnto the seauenth which was then commonly vsed in Babylon or els it was more impure such as the three Targums are written in namely of Onkelus Ionathas and the Hierosolymitan as also the two Talmuds the one of Babylon the other of Ierusalem ex Polan Quest. 26. v. 4. Of the necessarie institution of schooles and the manner and order thereof v. 4. Teach the learning and language of the Chaldeans 1. Hence appeareth that the institution of schooles wherein youth should be brought vp in good letters was very auncient for here in Babylon such as were afterward to be employed in the state had their education in learning So among the Egyptians they had the like vse where Moses was taught the learning of the Egyptians Among the Israelites 48. cities were appointed for the Leuites which were as the common Schooles and Vniuersities for the whole kingdom Samuel and Elizeus had their Schooles and Colledges of Prophets Among the Grecians Athens was famous for the studie of Arts and in Egypt Alexandria yea the rude Indians had their Gymnosophistes and the Romans had their Colledges of Augures 2. Beside hence it is gathered that the chiefe care of the promoting of learning belongeth to the King as here Nebuchadnezer giueth it in charge 3. And because kings beeing occupied with other affaires cannot themselues attend that busines they are to set ouer such places good ouerseers as here the King committeth the care of this busines to Ashpenaz 4. And as here choice is made of the best wits and such as were not deformed to be brought vp in learning so such should now be preferred to places of learning as are like to profit well in that profession and not euery spittle and dulhead to be obtruded and thrust into such places by fauour to make a scholler of beeing fit for no other employment 5. These vpon whome this learned education is bestowed were the sonnes of Nobles whereas in many places noble men thinke it a disgrace to be learned whereas there cannot be a greater ornament vnto true nobilitie then learning 6. Here also it is shewed what they should learne to be instructed in the knowledge of the tongues whereby a way is made for other learning 7. And they must not be alwaies learning a time is prefixed here of three yeares to take triall how they profit they which are put to learning must not be non proficientes but after some time make some proofe how they profit 8. The king also prouideth suâ—ficient maintenance for them a competent diet not superfluous but in times past Abbeyes had too much and now Schooles of learning haue too little Bulling Quest. 27. Why other names were giuen them 1. Quia nomina Iudaea oderant fugerant because the Chaldeans did hate and shunne Hebrew and Iewish names Iun so also Hugo Card indigne ferebat quod vocarentur nominibus Iudaeae the king could not endure that they should be called with the names of Iudea to the same purpose Lyranus nomina Hebraica erant Babyloniis abominabilia the Hebrew names were abominable to the Babylonians 2. In changing of their names the conquerer shewed his power ouer them and that by this mutation of their names they might know themselues to be seruants for it is a signe of superioritie to impose names as Adam gaue names vnto the creatures he also gaue a name vnto his wife so conquerors vsed to giue names to them whome they subdued As Pharaoh king of Egypt would haue Eliakim king of Iudah called Iehoiakim and Nebuchadnezzar called Mattaniah the last king of the Iewes Zedekiah Polan Among the Romanes they which were adopted and receiued into the number of the citizens did change their names for a remembrance and memoriall of that benefit and seruants likewise when they were manumitted did take vnto them the names of noble and free men Alexander 3. But there was a further reason in it vt deleret rex memoriam propriae gentis that by this meanes the king might blotte out the memorie of their owne nation and kindred 4. And beside the names were abolished which had any mention of God as El. Iah as one of these was in all their names Daniel Hananiah Mishael Azariah and in the newe names giuen vnto them there were quasi trophaea deorum suorum as monuments of their gods So by this meanes they thought to extinguish all memorie of their religion Iun. Polan Quest. 28. Of the signification of their names both the newe and the olde 1. Daniel signifieth the iudgement of God or whom the Lord iudgeth Hananiah is named of grace and fauour Mishael some interpret asked of God Pap. Osiander but the better deriuation is which is of God Iun. Azariah helped of God 2. Their newe names are thus interpreted Belteshazar some would haue signifie scrutator the saurâ— a searcher of treasure Pintus some custos insignis thesauri a keeper of a notable treasure Bulling some take it to signifie diuine treasure Osiand or the keeper of Bel their idol Pap. But the true sense is one laying vp or keeping the treasurie of Bell for the word is compounded of Bel and teshah to lay vp and atzar treasure Iun. Polan this name was giuen by Ashpenaz to Daniel but at the kings appointment and therefore it is said that the king named him Belthazar cap. 5. 12. Shadrach some expound a legate or embassadour Osiand some delicate Bullin Pap. some a delicate field Pintus but the true notation is this 1. the inspiration of rach that is the sunne for shadah signifieth to inspire and rach a king which name they giue vnto the Sunne Meshach some interpret prolonging Pintus some industrious Pappus some pretious Bullinger Osiander But it is compounded of Meh which and shach the name of Venus their festiuall goddes Meshach that is who is of the goddes shacah the festiuall goddesse for the Babylonians vsed vpon the 16. day of the moneth Loy to celebrate the feast of their goddes shacha for 5. dayes together during which time one of the seruants was Lord and ruler of the familie apparelled in a princely robe called Segane the Hebrewes call it Saga Iun. ex Athenaeolib 14. dipnosophrast Abednego some interpret servus lucis seruant of the light Pap. some servus illustris a famous seruant Osiander some the seruant of
seasons when he should inspire men 3. There are then naturall dreames which may be obserued for a mans health by such Physitians doe iudge of the distemper of the humours and of inclination to diseases there are also other humane dreames wherein mens infirmities doe shew themselues and so thereby perceiuing what vices they are subiect vnto they may be admonished to amend them such dreames may lawfully be obserued which tende either to the health of the bodie or the soule But diuine dreames are most worthie of obseruation of all other whereby the Lord doth often signifie his will concerning things to come which kind of dreames cannot be interpreted but by the same spirit wherby they are sent as Daniel saith to the King The secret which the king hath demanded can neither the wise the Astrologians the Inchanters and Soothsayers declare vnto the King but there is a God in heauen which reuealeth secrets c. 2. 27 28. Quest. 51. Whether in diuine dreames there is a free vse of reason and the will and the same acceptable to God 1. Pererius thinketh that in such dreames and visions there is soluta vis rationis but not perfectus liberi arbitrij vsus a free vse of reason but not the perfect vse of freewill for to that there is required the libertie of all the senses and powers that then homo should be Dominus sui Lord of himselfe 2. Contra. 1. In that sense man hath no perfect vse of free will neither waking nor sleeping to be as Lord of himselfe to euill mans will is free but he cannot bonum agere nisi à bono agatur doe any good vnlesse he be drawne thereunto of God which is good 2. but the vse of the reason and will is otherwise as free in such visions and dreames as when men are waking for the soule and vnderstanding sleepeth not neither is bound in sleepe but the sense onely And this notably appeareth by that heauenly dreame and vision which Salomon had 1. King 3. 5. wherein both God first bid Salomon aske what he would and he asked wisedome and God approoued this his petition and actually gaue him his request and all this was done while he was asleepe Salomon could not haue made such request of God nor the Lord accepted it if it had beene a fansie and imagination onely in his sleepe But to this diuers answeres are made 1. Pererius saith that Salomon had before made that petition vnto God for wisedome which his petition the Lord approoued in his sleepe not because it was made then but before But no such thing in extant in the text of any former petition the first motion and occasion was giuen by the Lord himselfe who said to Salomon in his dreame Aske what I shall giue thee and thereupon he made his request for wisedome 2. Tostatus hath an other answer which Pererius rather approoueth then the former that whatsoeuer is said there to be done non revera sed per imaginariam tantum dormientis visionem esse factum was not verily done but in the imaginarie vision of Salomon beeing asleepe But this cannot be admitted imaginarie petitions are not accepted of God and they onely haue imaginarie effects but here Salomon was verily endued with wisedome euen in his sleepe for presently after he waked he perceiued that it was a diuine dreame and felt himselfe encreased with that excellent gift of wisedome which immediately after he put in execution 3. Therefore it may safely be held that this was more then a simple dreame for dreames are but representations of things past present or to come but here there was an actuall collation of that which was shewed in the dreame It was therefore both a dreame and a vision concurring with the dreame a dreame it was because it fell out in sleepe but in this dreame Salomons soule had free conference with God in which respect it may be said to be a vision Quest. 52. vers 21. How Daniel is said to haue beene vnto the 1. yeare of king Cyrus 1. Some thinke that this is to be vnderstood of the time of Daniels prophecying Theoderet so also Caluin among the Assyrians and Chaldeans agnitus erat pro summo propheta he was taken for a great prophet but this cannot be the meaning for he had some propheticall visions in the 3. yeare of Cyrus cap. 10. 1. 2. Much lesse can it be referred to the time of Daniels life as Pellican seemeth to thinke for he liued to the 3. yeare of Cyrus how long after it is vncertaine vpon which reason Hierome resolueth non vitae illius tempus accipiendum est the time of his life cannot be here taken 3. Osiander thinketh that hereby is signified that â—e liued and continued so long that he saw to his great ioy the returne of his people out of captiuitie which was in the 1. yeare of Cyrus This indeede is most true but in this place mention beeing made of Daniels standing before the king that is his ministring in the Court there is more vnderstood then simply his continuing and remaining vntill that time 4. Vatablus giueth this exposition that so long he was minister in aula regis a principall officer in the kings Court but so was he afterward also a chiefe gouernour vnder Cyrus c. 6. 5. Lyranus thinketh that hereby is signified the honour and glorie of Daniel in regno Chaldaeorum Persarum in the kingdome both of the Chaldeans and Persians but the words vnto the first yeare of Cyrus are exclusiuely rather then inclusiuely to be taken as though that time determined the space here set 6. Therefore the purpose and intent of these words is not to shewe the tearme when Daniels prophesie or state in honour ended but to signifie that during all the time of the Chaldean Monarchy he continued in great honour and reputation in Babylon and Chaldea postea à Dario in Medos translatus est afterward he was translated by Darius vnto the Medes Hierome Iun. Polan and among them also he was in great honour But from the time that he first stood before Nebuchadnezzar and serued him he was in estimation all that kings dayes and in the raigne of Evilmerodach his sonne and of Balthazar 's his sonne though it may seeme that he was not altogether so much set by in Balthazar time as before Osiand 4. Places of doctrine 1. Doct. vers 2. The translating of kingdomes subduing of cities is ordered and disposed by God Vers. 2. And the Lord gaue Iehâ—iakim c. into his hand c. which sheweth that all things are ruled and gouerned by Gods prouidence that kings and princes states cities and common wealths are in Gods hand to alter and turne them as it seemeth best to himselfe whereof we may make a double vse for as it is to our comfort that we are in Gods hand and vnder his protection so in that he deliuereth the impenitent into the hands of Tyrants by them to be corrected and chastised
will not be honoured with euill gotten goods Nebuchadnezzer haâ—ing taken the vessels of the Temple doth offer them in the house of God thus honouring his idol with vniust spoiles but our God will not so be serued the wise man saith Honour the Lord with thy riches that is thine owne and not an others They which offer vnto God or giue vnto the poore of that which is gotten by extortion are herein like vnto Nebuchadnezzer and they be compared vnto the Eagle which liueth of the pray of other birds and that which shee leaueth doth distribute among the rest Pintus The law of Moses forbiddeth that any should bring the price of a whore into Gods house Deut. 23. 18. nothing is acceptable vnto God which is gotten by vnlawfull and dishonest means 5. Observ. v. 8. Against the riotous liuing and excessiue expenses of students Vers. 8. Daniel had determined not to defile himselfe with the kings meatâ— c. This great abstinence in Daniel and the rest who were sequestred and set apart for the studie of wisedome Bull. well applyeth against the euill vse of students in these dayes which are not mediocri mensa honesta veste contenti content with moderate fare and modest garments but doe exceede both wayes Many which liue of exhibition and vpon the foundation of liberall patrons doe frequent tavernes and ruffle in their silkes to the great offence and scandale of that kind of Vniuersitie life and to the hinderance of much beneuolence which otherwise would be bestowed that way 6. Obserua vers 18. That time is to be redeemed Vers. 18. When the time was expired that the king had appointed to bring them in c. The time appointed for the instruction of Daniel and his fellowes was 3. yeares this time beeing expired then the king calleth them to account to see how they had profited which example is worthie to be followed by those who are set ouer Colledges of students to see that they mispend not their time in vaine but goe forward in their studies Bullinger As there is nothing more precious then time so the losse of nothing is more to be lamented therefore the preacher would haue a young man remember his Creator in the dayes of his youth before the euill dayes come c. Eccles. 12. 1. CHAP. II. 1. The argument and Methode THis chapter consisteth of 3. parts 1. of Nebuchadnezzars dreame with the inquisition after the meaning thereof to vers 14. 2. the interpretation giuen by Daniel vers 46. 3. the effects that followed 1. Nebuchadnezzars dreame is described by the circumstance of time and the effects it troubled his spirit vers 1. The inquisition followeth consisting of the calling and conuention of the wisemen v. 2. 2. The conference betweene them and the king which is threefold In the first the king simply propoundeth his motion to haue his dreame expounded vers 3. and the Chaldeans promise to declare it so they knewe it ver 4. In the second the king requireth of them two things to tell him his dreame which he had forgotten and to declare the meaning both threatening punishment ver 5. and promising reward ver 6. and the Chaldeans answer as before ver 6. In the third the king vrgeth them sore that if they did not as he requireth he would hold them to be imposters and deceiuers and punish them ver 8. 9. The Chadeans excuse themselues 1. by the impossibilitie of the thing 2. by the example of other kings 3. by the difficultie that none could doe such a thing but the Gods ver 11. 3. Then followeth the euent they are commanded to be slaine ver 12. 2. In the second part there is 1. the preparation to the interpretation ver 14. then the interpretation it selfe to ver 46. 1. In the preparation 1. is set forth the occasion Daniel is sought for with his fellowes to be killed ver 13. whereupon followeth his perswasion with Arioch ver 16. his motion to the king ver 17. 2. then the meanes are expressed which he vsed first prayer with the effect thereof ver 18 19. then a thanksgiuing vnto God both generall to ver 23. then particular ver 23. 2. The interpretation followeth where 1. the opportunitie is shewed how he is brought in vnto the king by Arioch ver 24. 25. 2. the preamble to the interpretation consisting of the kings demaund ver 26. and Daniels answer in these 4. parts concerning the Astrologians that they could doe nothing ver 27. touching God that he onely reuealed secrets ver 28. concerning the king how he was affected when he dreamed ver 29. touching himselfe that he imputeth it not to his owne wisedome ver 30. 3. The interpretation consisteth of the simple narration of the dreâ—me which consisted of two parts the vision of the image to ver 34. and of the stone which dashed it in pieces ver 34 35. 2. of the exposition first of the image and the parts thereof to ver 44. then of the stone vers 44. 45. 3. The effects are three 1. the reuerencing of Daniel ver 46. 2. his confession of God ver 47. 3. the rewarding of Daniel with gifts and honours ver 48. and the aduancing of his fellowes at his request vers 49. The diuerse readings v. 1. In the second yeare in the raigne of Nebuchadnezzer I. Pol. not of the raigne of Nebuchadnezzer L. V. G. for the distinction comming betweene seuereth these two clauses Nebuchadnezzer dreamed dreames wherewith his spirit was troubled troubled it selfe Chald. and his sleepe was vpon him G. I. Pol. better then left him V. or was broken vpon him Pag. or fled from him L. the word is haiah was and the preposition ghal doth not signifie from the meaning is while he was in a deepe sleepe or slumber 2. Then the King commanded to call the Magicians and the Astrologians and Sorcerers and the Chaldeans to shew the King his dreames so they came and stood before the King 3. And the king said vnto them I haue dreamed a dreame and my spirit was troubled Chald. troubled it selfe to know the dreame 4. Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in the Aramites language O King liue for euer tell thy seruants the dreame and we will shew the interpretation 5. The King answered and said to the Chaldeans The thing is gone from me if ye will not make me vnderstand the dreame and the interpretation thereof not the coniecture thereof L. ye shall be rent in pieces ye shall perish L. ye shall be made pieces Chald. and your houses shall be made a iakes G. dunghill Chald. I. not your houses shall be confiscate L. 6. But if ye declare the dreame and the interpretation thereof ye shall receiue of me gifts and rewards and great honour therefore shew me the dreame and the interpretation of it 7. They answered againe the second time Chald. and said Let the king tell the dreame to his seruants and we will declare the
and hath made thee ruler ouer in C. them all thou art this head of gold 39. And after thee shall rise an other kingdome inferiour to thee of siluer L. G. but this is inserted by way of exposition and an other third kingdome shall be of brasse which shal beare rule ouer all the earth 40. And the fourth kingdome shall be strong as yron for as yron breaketh in peices and subdueth all things and as yron which bruiseth as yron bruiseth L. V. G. B. here the relatiue which is omitted all these things so shall it breake in peices and bruise 41. Where as thou sawest the feete and toes part of potters clay and part of yron the kingdome shall be deuided but there shall be in it of the strength I. V. G. of the planting L. A. of yron for so much as thou sawest yron mixed with clay and earth 42. And as the toes of the feete were part of yron and part of clay so shall the kingdome be partly strong and partly broken 43. And whereas thou sawest yron mixed with clay and earth they shall mingle themselues with the seede of men but they shall not ioyne one with an other this with that C. as yron cannot be mixed with clay 44. And in the dayes of these kings not kingdomes L. shall the God of heauen raise vp a kingdome which shall neuer be destroyed and this kingdome shall not be left giuen ouer B. G. deliuered ouer L. to an other people but it shall breake and destroy all these kingdomes and it shall stand for euer 45. Whereas thou sawest that a stone was cut out of the mountaine which was not with hands I. without handes caeter see before vers 34. and that it broke in peices the yron the brasse the clay the siluer and the gold so the great God hath made knowne to the King what shall be hereafter and the dreame is true and the interpretation thereof faithfull V. L. I. sure B. G. 46. Then king Nebuchadnezzar fell vpon his face and bowed himselfe G. B. worshipped L. V. I. vnto Daniel and charged oblations V. sacrifices L. meate offrings G. rewards B. gifts I. the word is mincah which signifieth gifts and oblations offred and sweet odors to be offered to be ordained B. vnto him 47. Also the king answered vnto Daniel and said Of a truth it is that I know of a truth G. of a truth your God c. L. B. but here the word translated that is omitted your God is the God of gods and the Lord of kings reuealing secrets seeing thou wast able to reueale this secret 48. So the king made Daniel a great man magnified him C. I. and gaue him great gifts very many and made him gouernour ouer the whole prouince of Babel and chiefe of the rulers aboue all the wisemen of Babel 49. Then Daniel requested of the king and he set ouer the businesse I. L. P. the charge B. G. V. of the prouince of Babel Shadrach Meshach and Abednego But Daniel was ruler in the kings gate I. sat in the kings gate B. G. was in the kings gate L. was in the court V. 1. The questions discussed Quest. 1. vers 1. How the second yeare is to be counted wherein Nebuchadnezzar had this dreame 1. Theodoret thinketh that it was the second yeare from the beginning of his raigne but that cannot be for Nebuchadnezzars raigne beganne in part of the 3. and 4. yeare of Iehoiakim cap. 1. 1. and Ierem. 25. 1. and 3. yeares after that were appointed for Daniels education c. 1. 5. while those 3. yeares were expired there was no proofe or triall had of Daniels wisedome therefore it can not be that the storie in the first chapter is set downe by way of recapitulation as Theodoret thinketh for till the three yeares were past they were not brought before the king 2. Some thinke that this was the second yeare of Nebuchadnezzars raigne by himselfe alone who also raigned after a sort with his father who also was called by the same name Caluin Geneuens But this cannot stand because the first yeare of Nebuchadnezzar his sole raigne was in the 3. and 4. raigne of Iehoiakim Ierem. 25. 1. after which three yeares must be counted for Daniels education this then could not be the second yeare of his raigne alone 3. Some vnderstand here two Nebuchadnezzars the father mentioned before cap. 1. 1. and his sonne brother to Euilmerodach who beeing the younger was preferred before the other and the Elder because of his wickednesse was put by the gouernment ex Lyran. so also Emmanuel Sa. But this Nebuchadnezzar could not be sonne to Nebuchadnezzar the great and brother to Euilmerodach for the Lord had giuen the kingdomes of the earth but vnto Nebuchadnezzar and his sonne that is Euilmerodach and his sonnes sonne which was Balthazar the sonne of Euilmerodach but if there were a Nebuchadnezzar brother to Euilmerodach then should there be three beside Nebuchadnezzar the great and not two onely as Ieremie saith there were indeede two Nebuchadnezzars one called Nebuchadnezzar priseus the auntient the other Nebuchadnezzar magnus the great who beganne his raigne the same yeare Daniel went into captiuitie in the 3. and 4. yeare of Iehoiakim 4. The vsuall interpretation is that it must be vnderstood of the second yeare of Nebuchadnezzars absolute Monarchie after the subduing of Egypt so Iosephus lib. 10. cap. 11. of the same opinion is Hierome and of the later writers Lyranus Hugo Cardi who thinketh it was the 26. yeare of his whole raigne and the second of his Monarchie Peter also Pintus Bullinger Pellican are of the same opinion But this cannot stand for Nebuchadnezzar conquered Tyrus before he subdued Egypt for Egypt is giuen him for his wages for his seruice against Tyrus Ierem. 24. 18. 19. but Daniel was famous for his wisedome which was not knowne till he had expounded Nebuchadnezzars dreame before Tyrus was destroyed for he is celebrated for his pietie and therein ioyned with Noah and Iob Esek 14. and for his wisdome Esek 28. 3. And then immeadiately in that chapter followeth the prophesie of the destruction of Tyrus 5. Wherefore this second yeare must be counted from the time when Daniel first stood before the king in the second yeare then of his seruice and ministrie Nebuchadnezzar had this dreame but where it is added in the raigne of Nebuchadnezzer these words are not to be ioyned with the former in the second yeare as appeareth by the Hebrew distinction rebiah set ouer the word shetaim second this then happened in the raigne of Nebuchadnezzar which is mentioned by way of distinction because in the last words of the former chapter it is said that Daniel was to the first yeare of King Cyrus least any should thinke that this was done in the second yeare of Cyrus direct mention is made of the raigne of Nebuchadnezzar Inn. Polan Pappus Quest. 2. What Nebuchadnezzar this was and whence he was so called 1. Some
thinke as is touched in the former question that this was the sonne of Nebuchadnezzar the great brother to Euilmerodach but it is before shewed that there were but two kings of this name Nebuchadnezzar called priscus the auncient and Nebuchadnezzar called magnus the great of these two Iosephus maketh mention the first raigned 21. yeares the second 43. yeares after his computation then after him succeeded not an other Nebuchadnezzar which Pintus thinketh but without any ground to haue beene a generall name to all the kings of Chaldea as Caesar was to the Romane Emperours but his sonne Euilmerodach whom Iosephus calleth Abilamarodachus This Nebuchadnezzar then here mentioned was he which was surnamed the great 2. Some thinke that there was a third Nebuchadnezzar held to be the sonne of Cyrus in whose time fell out the historie of Holofernes and Iudith Lyran. but it is euident in Scripture that no kings of the Persians but onely of the Chaldeans were called by that name 3. Concerning the notation of Nebuchadnezzars name Lyranus hath this narration that he ws so called of this euent beeing a child he was cast out and suckled by a shee-goat vnder a tree in the which sate an owle which a certaine leper passing by wondred at to see an owle set there in the day and by that occasion looking about he espied the child which he caused to be nursed and brought vp So of these three is the name compounded of Nabu which in that language signifieth an owle and chodo a goate and nosor a leper But this seemeth to be a fabulous narration for whereas Nebuchadnezzar the great is imagined to haue beene so called vpon this occasion that is not like because his father was called by that name before him Quest. 3. vers 1. Why he is said to haue dreamed dreames 1. Though he dreamed here but once and in respect of the time had but one dreame yet it is called in the plurall cholmoth dreames not somnium a dreame as the Latine translatour interpreteth because many matters were contained in this dreame it was somnium multiplex one dreame yet consisting of many parts Inn. Polan 2. As also because in that one image which he sawe there were diuers mettals which were types and representations of diuers Monarchies one succeeding another Pappus so that this dreame was diuers both in respect of the matter and obiect thereof and the diuers interpretation and signification of the same 4. Quest. What manner of dreame this was which Nebuchadnezzar had 1. Dreames are either naturall which the mind causeth of it selfe but vpon some occasion or beginning either externall or internall or they are somnia immissa dreams which the minde of it selfe procureth not but are sent and wrought vpon it by some other power and they are of two sorts either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sent of God or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sent of euill spirits 2. Divine dreames are such as God offreth to the minde and sometime such dreames are shewed to the faithfull as to Iaacob Ioseph Daniel sometime to those which were not of the people of God as to Abimelech Gen. 20. Laban Gen. 31. Pharaoh Gen. 41. 3. Diuine dreames are all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is containing some diuination of things hid and secret and afterward to come to passe and they are of two sorts nuda 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 naked visions simply and plainely expressing the meaning scope and purpose of the dreame as that was which was shewed to Ioseph concerning Marie how he should dispose of her Matth. 1. or els they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mysticall dreames folded vp in types and figures which cannot be vnderstood without some signification such was Pharaohs dreames of the 7. fat and leane kine and of the 7. full and 7. thinne and lanke cares Gen. 41. 4. This dreame which Nebuchadnezzar had was both a diuine dreame and of this last sort obscure and darke which could not be vnderstood without an interpreter for though Nebuchadnezzars thoughts who was desirous to knowe what should come to passe after him ministred some occasion yet the cause of this dreame they were not but Gods hand was in it as both may appeare by the effect which it wrought his spirit was sore troubled vers 1. As Abimelech also was in a great feare after he had the vision in his sleepe Gen. 20. and Pharaoh was perplexed after his dreame Gen. 41. Polan As also Daniel himselfe telleth the king afterward vers 28. that God himselfe shewed the king what should be in the latter dayes Pap. Quest. 5. Why it pleased God to send this dreame vpon Nebuchadnezzar 1. The Lord did it for Nebuchadnezzars sake that thereby he might be humbled and acknowledge the true God of Israel and thereupon be fauourable to his people whom he held in captiuitie 2. It was done also in respect of Daniel that by this meanes he might be had in reputation and so be exalted for the comfort of the Lords people as Ioseph for the same cause was aduanced in Egypt to be a softer father to his brethren 3. The vse hereof also is generall concerning the whole Church of God that as these fower great Monarchies were dissolued by the power of Christ whose kingdome onely is inuincible so God will destroy the mightie kingdomes and potentates of the earth who shall band themselues against Christ and his Church 4. Gods glorie also herein is set forth to whom belongeth all power and who knoweth all secrets Pap. So also Hugo Cardi. vt Daniele interpretante glorificetur Deus c. that by Daniels interpretation God might receiue glorie and the captiue people comfort 5. Lyranus addeth an other reason specialis Dei prouidentia circa principes magnos c. the speciall prouidence of God is ouer great Princes because the common wealth dependeth of them and therefore the Lord doth often reueale vnto them things to come as vnto Pharaoh the famine which should followe Quest. 6. vers 1. Of the meaning of these words and his sleepe was vpon him 1. The Latine interpreter readeth his dreame fledde from him which reading followe Lyran. Hu. Car. Pere Pin. Pap. Pel. but the word shenah here vsed signifieth sleepe not a dreame and the preposition ghall is not from but vpon or in Lyranus hereupon taketh occasion to shewe the cause of the obliuion and forgetfulnesse of dreames for obliuion commeth of the commotion and stirring of humours which is the cause that children and olde men are so forgetfull terror autem facit magnam humorum commotionem and terror maketh a great commotion and stirring of humors which inuaded Nebuchadenezzar here But this annoâ—ation hath no good ground here because as is before shewed the text spenketh not of the passing away of his dreame but of his sleepe being still vpon him 2. Some reade his sleepe was interrupted or broken off Pagnin or destistuit ipsum his sleepe left him Vatab. Bullinger for so
all by his wisdome and they beeing auncient thought scorne that such a young man should be ioyned vnto them Perer. 3. The king also might spare Daniel as hauing yet had no great triall of his faithfulnes and therefore he would not at the first commit his secrets to a stranger Calvin 4. Peretius thinketh that Nebuchadnezzer might haue forgotten him in the space of 22. yeares for so long it was since Daniel first stood before the king But that cannot be for this yeare wherein Nebuchadnezzer dreamed was but the second yeare from the beginning of Daniels ministie and seruice in the Court as is before shewed Quest. 1. vpon this chapter 5. But herein chiefly we are to acknowledge Gods prouidence who so disposed that Daniel should not be admitted neither before nor together with the Chaldeans If he had beene called first the Magicians might haue saide that they could haue interpreted the dreame if they had beene called If he had come with them and expounded the dreame the Chaldeans would haue ascribed it to their owne skill and so the ignorance and follie of them should not haue so manifestly appeared Polan 6. And further God to this ende would not haue Daniel present with the rest to signifie that he would not haue the professors of the truth matched or mingled with the assemblies of lyers and hypocrites Polan 9. Quest. v. 4. Of the Aramites language whether it differ from the Hebrew and be all one with the Chalde v. 14. Then spake the Chaldeans to the King in the Aramites language 1. Hierome by this argument confuteth the opinion of Philo who taketh the Hebrew and Chalde language for all one because Daniel then needed not to haue learned the Chaldean tongue c. 1. 5. And further that they differed it is manifest by that speech of Eliakim to Rabshakeh Speake to thy sâ—ruants in the Aramites language for we vnderstand it and talke not with vs in the Iewes tongue So the Lord threatneth by his Prophet that he will bring a nation vpon them whose language they vnderstand not meaning the Chaldeans 2. Now although the ancient and pure Hebrew tongue differ much from the Chalde yet after the captiuitie the vsuall language of the Iewes did borrow much of the Chalde tongue by reason of their long captiuitie among them and was compounded partly of the Chalde partly of the Hebrew from their returne from Babylon vntill the daies of out blessed Sauiours beeing in the flesh Perer. 3. But concerning the Syrian tongue some take it and the Chalde for all one Osiand some thinke that they differed onely as the tongue of the learned and vnlearned Lyran. that the Syriake was held to be the more eloquent tongue Genevens some thinke the Chaldean and Babylonian tongue was when called the Syrian or Aramites language because Chaldea was counted part of Syria Iun. And it seemeth that in times past there was small difference betweene them though now the ancient Chalde tongue wherein part of Ezra and Daniel is written be farre diuers both in character and sound from the Syrian tongue wherein the learned Iewes write and speake at this day see more hereof Quest. 25. c. 1. 10. Quest. Why the Chaldeans speake in the Aramites language From the beginning of this booke vnto the 4. v. of this chapter all is written in the Hebrew words and characters from this place to the ende of the 7. chap. the Prophet vseth Chalde words but Hebrew charactrs and then the rest of the booke followeth in the Hebrew tongue and writing as before now the reasons why these Chaldeans vse the Aramites language were these 1. These wise men were of diuers countries and so of diuers languages therefore they spake in the Syrian or Chalde tongue which was knowne and vnderstood of all Perer. 2. Some thinke they vsed it as the more eloquent tongue Genevens 3. Or because it was the language which the king vsed Perer. 4. Or rather the Syrian was the Babylonian tongue which in that respect was fittest for them to vse 5. And the Lord hereby so disposed that the knowledge of these things should be manifest vnto the Chaldeans that euen they might be conuinced of the truth out of their owne acts and records which also was the cause for the more credit of this historie among the Chaldeans that Daniel setteth it downe in the very same language wherein it was acted Polan 11. Quest. v. 8. Why the King saith They would gaine or redeeme time 1. It is the third interrogation or question which the king propoundeth vnto them the first was cum simplici denuntiatione v. 3. withâ—â— simple prolation and propounding of his dreame the second v. 5. cum forti comminatione praemij promissione with a vehernent commination and threatning with promise also of reward the third v. 9. cum falsi suspicione with a suspition of falshood c. You haue prepared lying and corrupt words 2. By gaining or redeeming of time is vnderstood occasionem quaerere evadendi pericula to seeke occasion to escape the daunger as the Apostle saith Eph. 5. 16. Redeeming the time for the daies are euill as trauellers that fall into foule weather doe watch their times and opportunities how to escape it and so to goe on in their iourney Pintus some vnderstand by time spatium vita the tearme of their life which they desired to be prolonged Gloss. Lyran. but it is more fitly referred to the interpretation of the dreame which they would haue shifted off and so quarebant dilationem temporis they sought to prolong the time that some other thing falling betweene the king might forget to vrge that matter Osiand sic daretur effugiendi ecoasio and so they might haue occasion to escape and auoid the daunger 3. But the kings coniecture is not good that they which doe not presently make answer to the king doe it to gaine time and so to delude the king for there may be diuers and different causes of suspending ones answer as cuÌ„ officium piâ—tatis charitatis vetat when as the office of pietie or charitie enioyneth silence as the Martyrs which were vrged to bewray their fellowes would not make direct answer Iun. lection in Daniel 4. But the kings other argument is good which he vrgeth against these wisemen and Chaldeans v. 9. Tell me the dreame that I may know if you can declare me the interpretation thereof The argument is this framed They which can giue the interpretation of a dreame can finde out the dreame it selfe for the one is of a diuine instinct as well as the other And to God nothing is hid he can as well tell what the dreame was as open the meaning of it But ye cannot tell me my dreame therefore neither can you interpret it though you knew it you are then but impostors and deceiuers Polan But Osiander collecteth otherwise non reste argumentabatur rex c. the king reasoned not well as though it were
rocke was Christ that is signified Christ. 3. There is a metaphor in the word head which signifieth the antiquitie and prioritie of that kingdome and the knowledge and wisdome of that nation 4. An other figure there is in that he is likened to gold which betokeneth their riches prosperitie and flourishing estate 41. Quest. Of the largenesse of the Empire and dominion of Nabuchadnezzer v. 38. In all places where the children of men dwell the beasts of the field and the foules of heauen c. hath he giuen into thine hand 1. The Scripture doth euidently testifie what large dominions the king of Babel had Ierem. 27. 6. I haue giuen all these lands into the hand of Nabuchadnezzer king of Babel my seruant and the beasts of the field haue I also giuen him to serue him and all nations shall serue him c. And the Prophet Abacuck saith of the Chaldeans They shall gather the captiuitie as the sand and they shall mocke the kings and the Princes shall be a scorne vnto them c. c. 1. 9 10. 2. Forren writers also haue ginen the like testimonie of the greatnes of the Babylonian Empire Berosus who wrote of the Chaldean affaires preferreth him before all kings that were before him Megasthenes lib. 4. de reb Indicis witnesseth that Nabuchadnezzer beside the Prouinces of the East subdued Egypt Africa Spaine and maketh him in courage and magnanimitie superiour to Hercules so likewise Strabo lib. 15. Geograph writeth that this Nabuchadnezzer was the mightiest of all other kings and held of the Chaldeans to haue exceeded Hercules Tertullian saith that his dominion extended from India to Ethiopia 3. But whereas it is said that God had made him ruler in all places this is not so to be taken strictly according to the letter for neither Nabuchadnezzer or any other Monarch euer had the dominion and rule of the whole world as witnesseth the altar of Alexander the pillars of Hercules and Ctesiphon the boundes of the Romane Empire toward the East 1. Some therefore thinke that this is spoken in respect of the opinion of the Chaldeans who held him to be an absolute Monarch ouer all the world 2. or that all according to the Scripture is taken for the most or many as Gen. 22. 18. the Lord saith that all nations should be blessed in Abraham that is many as c. 17. 5. the Lord saith A father of many nations haue I made thee Perer. But this example is vnfitly alleadged for in the one place the Lord speaketh of Abrahams carnall generation in the other of the spirituall benediction which in Christ should come indeede vpon all nations 3. some take it therefore for an hyperbolicall speech Pintus 4. Hugo thus expoundeth it he is said to rule ouer all quia nihil ei resistebat because no countrey resisted him 5. Lyranus taketh all places for all kind of places as the cities where men dwelt the fields where beasts ranged and the woods where the foules made their aboad and therefore both men beasts and foules are said to be giuen into his hand 6. Some admit here a synecdoche that part is taken for the whole all for a great part Lyranus also 7. But this vniuersall particle all must be restrained vnto all the regions next adioyning as it is taken Gen. 41. 57. All countries came to Egypt to buiâ— corne of Ioseph that is all the countries neare vnto them And so here all the regions in those East parts were subdued vnder the kingdome of Nabuchadnezzer 42. Quest. Whether Nabuchadnezzers dominion were at that time the greatest in the world It will be here obiected that the Empire of the Medes was at this time very mightie as Herodotus lib. 1. maketh mention of the greatnes of Cyaxares king of the Medes who ruled ouer all Asia and subdued the Assyrians the Babylonians onely excepted And it is euident by Herodotus Chronologie that Cyaxares raigned about this time for from the beginning of his raigne vnto the first of Cyrus he counteth 75. yeares 40. yeares vnder the raigne of Cyaxares and 35. vnder Astyages so if the Babylonian captiuitie tooke beginning from the 19. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer as Pererius reckoneth Cyaxares began his raigne in the 14. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer but if the 70. yeares captiuitie be counted from the carrying away of Iechonias captiue which is the more probable which was in the 8. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer 2. king 24. 12. then Cyaxares beganne his raigne 5. yeares before about the 3. yeare of Nabuchadnezzers raigne they raigned then much about the same time Nabuchadnezzer in Babylon and Cyaxares among the Medes 2. Pererius giueth this solution that the kingdome of the Medes was much wasted by the other Nabuchadnezzer father vnto this king who warred against Arphaxad king of the Medes and tooke the chiefe citie thereof Ecbatane as is set forth in the storie of Iudith and beside by the incursion and inuasion of the Scythians those parts of Asia were kept vnder the space of 28. yeares so that all that time Cyaxares was of no great power which was during the raigne of Nabuchadnezzer then after his death the Scythians beeing destroied and expelled Cyaxares kingdome flourished for the space of 12. yeares 3. Contra. 1. The historie of Iudith could not fall out in the raigne of the Elder Nabuchadnezzar for at that time the Apocryphal storie saith that the Temple had not beene cast downe Iudith 5. 18. but the Temple was not destroied till the 19. yeare of this Nabuchadnezzer which was about 12. yeares after he had this dreame which was in the 5. yeare of his raigne as is before shewed Qu. 1. 2. Cyaxares could not suruiue Nabuchadnezzer so long but it seemeth rather that Nabuchadnezzer suruiued him for Nabuchadnezzer raigned 45. yeares 8. yeares before Iecouias captiuitie 2. king 24. 12. and 37. yeares after 2. king 25. 27. Cyaxares raigned 40. yeares and beganne in the 3. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer as is prooued before then his raigne must determine in the 43. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer therefore neither of these answers are sufficient 4. The best solution then is this 1. that Cyaxares might be a king of power in the remote parts of Asia beyond the Medes toward the Indians Eastward and yet Nabuchadnezzer about Babylon and those countries extending North and South as in Egypt Tyrus and in the regions of Asia minor might be of the greatest command 2. If otherwise Herodotus affirme more credit is to be giuen to the sacred storie then to his vncertaine report 43. Quest. v. 39. Of the second Monarchie described by the armes and breast of siluer what it was 1. The Rabbins because they would auoid this so manifest a prophesie of the comming of Christ doe ioyne two Monarchies together of the Persians and Grecians Calvin so confounding the histories whereas they were two kingdomes one succeeding an other but here Daniel pointeth out but one kingdome After thee shall rise an other kingdome c. 2.
Theodoret by the right arme vnderstandeth Cyrus kinred of the fathers side of the Persians and by the left his kinred on the mothers side of the Medes 3. Pererius thinketh that the Persian Monarchie is described by two armes because the Chaldean state was subdued by Darius the Mede Cyrus vncle and by Cyrus the Persian 4. But by the two armes rather are vnderstood the two nations of the Medes and Persians which were first two kingdomes the Medes vnder Darius and the Persians vnder Cyrus but after Darius death they were ioyned in one as the two armes did meete together in the breast Lyran. so also Iun. Pintus 44. Quest. v. 39. Why the Persian Monarchie is said to be inferiour to the Babylonian The Persian Monarchie was not inferiour in glorie power or dominion for Assuerus king of Persia raigned from India vnto Ethiopia ouer an 127. Prouinces Est. 1. 1. And Xenophon also testifieth that the Persian Monarchie was so large that it had for the bounds on the East the redde Sea on the West Cyprus and Egypt on the North Pontus Euxinus on the South Ethiopia And seeing Cyrus ioyned the Empire of Babylon to his owne dominions it could not chuse but be greater 1. Some thinke therefore that it is said to be inferiour in respect of the continuance for the Persian Monarchie exceeded not aboue 240. yeares whereas the Chaldean and Assyrian Monarchie from Ninus continued a 1500. yeares Perer. But Daniel ascendeth not so high in this comparison he saith it shall be inferiour to thee that is to thy kingdome as it now standeth 2. Pererius hath an other answer that the Persian Monarchie is said to be inferiour in respect of the present time not as it should be afterward but it is euident that Daniel speaketh of it as it should be then when it should rise vp after the other that it should then be inferiour 3. Calvine vnderstandeth it of the generall corruption of manners which waxe worse that mundi conditio deterior esset c. that the state of the world should be worse vnder the second Monarchie but these Monarchies are compared one with an other that as siluer is worse then gold so the second Monarchie should be inferiour to the other 4. Polanus thinketh that it is said to be inferiour because the Babylonian regiment plus habuit regiae tranquillitatis had more princely rest and tranquillitie but the Persian state was full of trouble for presently after the death of Cyrus his sonnes Cambises and Tanaâ—zares contented for the kingdome and after Cambises the Magi vsurped the kingdome and after them Darius Hystaspis was chosen king by the neying of his horse 5. But I thinke rather with Iunius that it is called inferiour and siluer-like in respect of the others golden state because their gouernment was more tolerable and equall toward the people of God 45. Quest. Whether the Monarchie of the Chaldeans or of the Persians was more cruell toward the Iewes 1. Though Cyrus first gaue libertie to the people to returne and afterward Artaxerxes gaue licence to Ezra and Nehemiah to build the Temple yet other kings of Persia hindred the building of the Temple as Cambises and Ahassuerus who by the fraudulent and malitious deuice of Haman would vtterly haue destroied the people of the Iewes So that this comparison is not in respect of some one or two particular persons of their kings but of the disposition of the whole state which was harder toward the people of God then was the first Monarchie of the Babylonians 2. For Nabuchadnezzer though vnder him the people of God was afflicted and endured much yet he shewed them some clemencie and fauour As first when he besieged Ierusalem in the 3. yeare of Iehoiakim he made not hauocke of all but carried away part onely of the vessels of the Temple and a few of the noble mens children And after that for the space of 19. yeares he suffered the kings of Iudah to haue their kingdome till he was prouoked by the vnfaithfulnes of Zedekiah to take reuenge and yet when he had set the citie and Temple on fire he suffered the people to inhabite the countrey still to plant vineyards and till the ground and he set ouer them Gedaliah a good man one of their owne countrey So that in respect of these heroicall and princely parts in Nabuchadnezzer the Persian Monarchs were but as siluer and farre inferiour vnto him Osiand 46. Quest. Why the Persian Monarchie is compared to siluer 1. Pererius thinketh this resemblance to be made propter immensam Persici imperij opulentiam for the great wealth and riches of the Persian Empire for Cyrus ouercame Craesus the rich king of Lydia of whome that prouerb was taken vp ditior Craeso richer then Craesus Plinie writeth that Cyrus when he ouercame Asia got 34. thousand pound waite of gold beside golden vessels and wedges of gold and 500. thousand talents of siluer which may amount of our money to 300. millions beside he tooke craterem Semiramidis the great bowle or standing piece of Semiramis which waighed 15. Egyptian talents and an Egyptian talent is 80. pound And what the wealth and magnificence of the Persian Monarchs was that sumptuous feast sheweth which Assuerus made to his Princes Est. 1. and the great expedition of Xerxes in that huge armie which he prepared against Greece This is agreeable to that prophesie of Isai long before of Cyrus The Lord saith I will giue thee the ireasures of darknes and the things hid in secret places Athenaeus also writing of the great wealth of Darius the last king of Persia telleth how that the Persian kings were growne to such delicacie and excessiue riches that in the vpper ende of the kings bedchamber in a little closet there was alwaies in store 5. thousand talents of gold which maketh 3. hundreth times an hundreth thousand crownes and this closet ws called the kings bolster or pillow and at the beds feete there was an other closet wherein there were laid vp 3. hundreth talents of siluer beside in the bedchamber there was an ouerspreading vine made of gold beset with pretious stones the bunches of grapes were also made of most costly pretious stones Q. Curtius writeth that the treasure which Alexander tooke from Darius was an 159. thousand talents Strabo nameth an 180. thousand talents which maketh of Italian money a thousand and eight hundreth thousand crownes 2. Lyranus thinketh this Monarchie is compared to siluer quia multum vacabant sapientia eloquentiae c. because they gaue themselues much to the studie of learning and eloquence which is signified by the brightnes and cleare sound of siluer 3. But the reason rather of this comparison is because this Monarchie had lesse maiestie then the first and was not so equall and fauourable toward the people of God Polan 47. Quest. Why the third Monarchie is likened to the bellie and the thigh and vnto brasse 1. This Monarchie must
in two respects 1. because they both issued out of the kingdome of Alexander which after his death was diuided as also because one of these two kindomes was of greater strength and had the chiefe superioritie which was the kingdome of the North. 2. it is euident in the text that diuerse states and regiments are comprehended in this fourth Monarchie for it is said ver 43. in the plurall number they shall mingle themselues with the scede of men and they are said to be Kings ver 44. in the dayes of these kings c. 3. Obiect Alexanders kingdome was diuided into 4. parts as is before shewed but here by the two legges two kingdomes onely are signified Answ. 1. Though Alexanders kingdome were diuided among his foure chiefe captaines Cassander Antigonus Seleucus Ptolome yet soone after Seleucus vanquished and killed Antigonus and Cassander of Macedonia was not of like power vnto the rest 2. wherefore these two kingdomes are onely spoken of as the mightiest and because they two onely had to doe with the people of God oppressing them continually and keeping them vnder 4. Obiect The Empire of the Romanes is held of all to be the fourth Monarchie of the world and the most flourishing This image therefore representing the foure great Monarchies of the world is to be extended to the Romane state Answ. It is not denied but that the Romane dominion maketh the fourth generall Monarchie of the world yet this remaineth to be prooued that in this vision the generall state and condition of the world is described the argument therefore followeth not Foure principall kingdomes and Monarchies are set fourth in this vision therefore the Romane is one of them for onely these kingdomes are here described which then had to deale with the people of God and which did beare sway vntill the comming of Christ and then determined Iun. annotat But seeing we are fallen to make mention of these 4. generall Monarchies it shall not be amisse briefly to shewe the beginning and continuance of them Quest 51. Of the beginning and continuance of the foure generall Monarchies of the world 1. The Babylonian Empire which is made one with the Assyrian tooke beginning from Ninus of whom the citie Niniue is thought to haue beene so called and it continued aboue a 1000. yeares yet it neuer flourished more then vnder Nebuchadnezzar the great who subdued vnto his kingdome all Syria Phoenice Iudea Idumea Egypt Lybia with other countries And this his large dominion began in the first yeare of his raigne when he besieged Ierusalem but it was not at the height till the 23. yeare of his raigne in the 38. Olympiad and so it held 60. yeares vnto the raigne of Cyrus which was in the 55. Olymp. The Persian Monarchie beginning in Cyrus flourished about 230. yeares as Pere 228. as Bullinger and was dissolued by Alexander in the 112. Olympiad 3. The Grecian Empire was first founded by Alexander who held the same 6. yeares then it was diuided into foure kingdomes which were soone turned to three the Syrian kingdome whereunto was annexed also all Asia Minor which Seleucus possessed continued in that house vnto Olympiad 175. and afterward was held by Tygranes king of Armenia 12. yeares and then in the 179. Olympiad was by Pompey subdued to the Romane Empire The second kingdome which was of Macedonia in the 150. Olympiad was made subiect to Rome with Perseus the last king thereof The third kingdome of Egypt held out vnto the 187. Olympiad and then Antonie who had married Cleopatra Queene of Egypt was ouercome of Augustus Caesar. 4. The Romane kingdome simply beganne from the building of Rome in the 7. Olym. but it was not an absolute Monarchie vntill the 44. Olympi after the ende of the second Punike warre for then all Italy Spaine Sardinia Sicilia and Carthage were brought vnder the Romane obedience And their dominion was much enlarged in the 147. Olympi when Antiochus the great was vanqâ—ished by the Romanes but most of all in 179. Olympiad when Pompey subdued the East countries So that Asia the lesse which was before the bounds of the Romane Empire was then but counted in the middes In this glorie it continued the space of 500. yeares from the second Punike warre till it was taken of the Gothes vnto which time froÌ„ the first building of the citie were a 1164. yeares or thereabout Varrâ— writeth lib. 18. Antiquat that Vectius the Augur by those 12. vulturs which Romulus coniectured by when he built Rome did forespeake that Rome should continue so many hundred yeares but this may worthily be held to be a fable ex Pere Quest. 52. vers 43. Of the meaning of these words they shall mingle themselues with the seede of men 1. Vatablus vnderstandeth it of the diuerse nations and people which should be admitted into the commonwealth and were donati ciuitate priuiledged with the immunities of citizens but the phrase of mingling themselues with the seede of men signifieth more 2. Osiander thus expoundeth it that the princes of the Romane state iuncturi essent affinitates cum Regibus should ioyne in affinitie with other kings but the text sheweth that the kings of this fourth Monarchie should be ioyned in mariage among themselues 3. Pappus with others interpret it of the affinitie betweene Caesar and Pompey who maried Iulia Caesars daughter and when she was dead he would haue giuen him in mariage Octauia his sisters daughter and desired also to haue maried Pompeys daughter so Augustus gaue vnto Antonie his sister Octauia But Caluin calleth this frigidum a weake conceit to ayme at some speciall mariages he thinketh it was the continuall practise of that state to combine and linke themselues together by mutuall mariages But this matrimoniall coniunction here spoken of is between diuerse kings not in the same slate and common-wealth 4. Some vnderstand it of the societie and league betweene the Romanes and Macchabees which first beganne vnder Iudas Macchabeus but the phrase as is before shewed doth signifie a league and coniunction by mariage 5. Some referre it to herod who beeing a stranger would haue maried one of the Macchabees daughter that his sonne might peaceably enioy the kingdome but the maide killed her selfe for griefe and he is said to haue abused her beeing dead ex Lyran. But the kingdome of the Iewes was no part of this fourth Monarchie 6. The true meaning then is that these two kingdomes signified by the two legs that is the kings of the South and North should linke together in mariage as is shewed before Quest. 46. argum 4. Quest. 53. vers 44. What manner of kingdome the Propâ—et speaketh of which God shall set vp 1. Porphyrius and the Hebrewes doe interpret this of the kingdome of the Iewes which in the ende of the world shall as they dreame be most mightie and subdue all other kingdomes it seemeth also that Iosephus had some such conceit for when he commeth to make mention
lesse for that were to take God out of the world as either he were carelesse thereof or impotent as not beeing able to guide it but leaueth it to chaunce But the Prophet sheweth that all creatures doe waite and depend vpon God Psal. 104. 27. 7. Doct. Of the mutable state of kingdomes Vers. 22. He taketh away kings he setteth vp kings c. The state then and condition of kings though it seeme to be least subiect to change of all other callings vnto men yet God the king of kings can turne and winde them at his pleasure the preacher saith that out of prison one commeth to raigne when he that is borne in his kingdome is made poore Thus Balthazar Cyrus Alexander Caesar Pompey soone lost both their kingdomes and liues Pere And as these auncient kings and kingdomes were soone ouerturned so it is still Anno 1523. Christierne king of Denmarke with Isabel his wife sister to Charles the fift was driuen out of his kingdome and realme and died in prison when he had liued 27. yeares in captiuitie Anno 1567. Iohn Duke of Saxonie was depriued of his dukedome and carried captiue to Maximilian the Emperour Anno 1568. Ericus king of Suetia the sonne of Gostavus was deposed from his kingdome and died in prison And as God pulleth downe kings so he setteth other vp Matthias Hunniades was taken out of prison to be a king So was Elizabeth our Late renouned Soueraigne succeeding her sister Marie Anno 1577. Ioannes king of Suecia was from the prison aduanced to be king Polan 8. Doct. A good King hath many carefull thoughts of his kingdome and commonwealth Vers. 29. O King when thou wast in thy bedde thoughts came into thy minde This great king euen in the night thought of his kingdome what should befall it after his dayes euen the care thereof made him he could not sleepe Bulling he was not addicted altogether to his ease and pleasure as Balthazar who the same night that the citie was taken gaue himselfe to eating and drinking Dan. 5. Like vnto this Nabuchadnezzar was the great king of Persia Assuerus who when he could not sleepe caused the Chronicles to be read vnto him Ester 6. 1. 9. Doct. Of the kingdome of Christ as he is God and as he is Mediatour God and man v. 44. The God of heauen shall set vp a kingdome The kingdome of Christ is either his naturall kingdome which he had from all beginning togither with the Father and the holy Ghost which is called the vniuersall kingdome whereby he ruleth in heauen and earth which kingdome as he assumed not so he shall neuer lay it downe There is also regnum donativum the kingdome which is giuen to him of his Father as he is Mediatour God and man whereof he speaketh Matth. 28. 18. All power is giuen vnto me is heauen and earth this is that speciall and particular kingdome which he exerciseth more specially in his Church in protecting and defending the same against all the enemies and aduersaries thereof This kingdome giuen vnto Christ is likewise considered two waies it is either the kingdome of grace whereby he guideth his Church in this world directing them vnto euerlasting saluation or the kingdome of glorie in the next life when he hath brought his Church and companie of the Elect vnto euerlasting saluation in heauen there to raigne for euer Polan 10. Doct. Daniels prophesie of Christs euerlasting kingdom containeth the whole summe of the Gospel v. 44. A kingdome which shall neuer be destroied c. This euerlasting kingdome of Christ resting not in his person alone but beeing communicated to all his members comprehendeth the whole summe of Euangelicall doctrine for the Elect cannot raigne for euer with Christ but death must first be destroyed and sinne the cause thereof the bodies also of the Saints must rise againe from death so then in this prophesie of Christs euer-during kingdome is included the faith of remission of sinnes of the conquest of death and of the resurrection Bulling Melancth 11. Doct. Of the certentie of our saluation v. 44. And it shall stand for euer As Christs kingdome is sure and cannot be shaken in himselfe so neither can it haue any alteration or change in his members Christus tam in se quam in suis membris citra vllum mutationis periculum dominatur Christ as well in himselfe as in his members doth rule without any feare or daunger of change Calv. for he hath made vs partakers of his kingdome by faith by which we stand for he by his grace is able to make vs stand of our selues by nature we are changeable euery moment but by the power and grace of God our state in Christ is certen and vnchangeable as S. Peter saith We are kept by the power of God through faith vnto saluation which is prepared to be shewed in the last time 1. Pet. 1. 5. 12. Doct. Religion ouerthroweth not the policie and forme of Commonwealths v. 48. He made him gouernour ouer the whole prouince of Babel Daniel beeing made a chiefe gouernour in Chaldea did no doubt iudge the people according to the lawes of the countrey which differed much from the politicall state of the Israelites by the which it is euident that necessarily euery countrey is not now tied to the iudicials and policie of Moses neither is religion an enemie to the forme of gouernment in Commonwealths beeing grounded vpon equitie Papp for the Apostle saith The powers that be are ordained of God Rom. 13. 1. wheresoeuer and howsoeuer the administration and gouernment beeing iust and equall 5. Places of controuersie 1. Controv. That the Scriptures should be extant in the vulgar and knowne tongue v. 4. Then spake the Chaldeans to the King in the Aramites language This tongue not much differing then from the Chalde was the knowne and vsuall language wherein they spake that they might be vnderstood of all Afterward the Greeke tongue was generally vsed and therefore Ptolome caused the Scriptures to be translated into the Greeke tongue and the Apostles writ the new Testament in the same language This euidently sheweth that the Scriptures should be set forth to the people of God in such a tongue as they know and vnderstand and hereupon Iustinian appointed that Bishops and other Ministers should vse such a tongue in the administration of baptisme and of the Lords Supper which was knowne and vnderstood of all The Romanists then are too blame which cause the Scriptures to be read publikely in an vnknowne tongue and though vpon better aduisement they haue thought good to set forth a vulgar translation of the Bible yet they allow not priuately euery one to vse it 2. Controv. That prayer must onely be made vnto God v. 18. That they should beseech the God of heauen God onely then must be praied vnto who is called the God of heauen because he is the creator thereof that is the seate and habitation of his glorie from thence he seeth
made an ende of his conquests then it is probable he set vp this image by way of tryumph and Azarias in his prayer though that part be Apocryphall yet it may haue some probabilitie for matter of storie maketh mention that they had neither prince nor sacrifice or burnt offring which sheweth that this fell not out before the destruction of Ierusalem likewise Theodoret who saith that this fell out paruo tempore a small time after the first dreame which was in the second yeare is contrarie to himselfe for betweene the second and 18. yeare there are 16. yeares which is no small time 3. Pererius also is deceiued who thinketh that this was done after the 25. yeare of Nebuchadnezzars raigne for the second yeare of his Monarchie he reckoneth to fall out in the 25. yeare of his raigne but this is before confuted quest 1. c. 2. where it is further shewed that this second yeare which is to be vnderstood of Daniels seruice and ministerie was in the 5. yeare of Nebuchadnezzars raigne 4. Pellican saith this storie happened 16. yeares after the dreame but that is vncertaine 5. Wherefore here somewhat is certaine that this storie came after the interpretation of the kings dreame set forth in the 2. chap. because ver 12. mention is made of the aduancement of Daniels three fellowes which was immediately after Daniel had interpreted the kings dreame cap. 2. 49. somewhat is probable that it was after the sacking and taking of Ierusalem as is said before Pap. for many of the Iewes were now in captiuitie ver 8. something is vncertaine how long this historie followed after the interpretation of Daniels dreame Quest. 2. To whom Nebuchadnezzar errected this image 1. Lyranus thinketh that Nebuchadnezzar set vp this image for himselfe requiring diuine honour to be giuen vnto it as Caligula caused his image to be carried about the Romane Empire to be adored so thinketh Hugo Cardinal Pere Pin. Pelli But it is not like that he which had so humbled himselfe before vnto Daniel could be so lifted vp in pride to make himselfe a god 2. Neither is it like that Nebuchadnezzar set vp this image of a good intention to the honour of the true God as Bulling Osiand for then he would not so cruelly haue persecuted the seruants and true worshippers of God 3. Therefore as Caluin writeth videtur hanc statuam consecrasse alicui deorum It seemeth he consecrated this image to some of his gods as to Bel or some other as it appeareth both by the kings speach ver 14. will ye not serue my god and by their words that refused to worship the image we will not serue â—hy gods Pap. Quest. 3. To what ende this image was set vp 1. Some thinke that by setting vp this image Nebuchadnezzar would retaine a memorie of that image which he sawe in his dreame thinking thereby to please God Pap. But then he would not haue made such a cruell edict against the seruants of that great God 2. Againe it may be thought that he did it to haue an vniformitie in religion through all his dominions which consisted of diuerse nations but then he would haue commanded the like image to be set vp in euery prouince 3. Caluine thinketh he did it to this ende to settle the superstitious worship of idolatrie least the Iewes might haue sought some innouation in religion 4. But it is most probable that Nebuchadnezzar did it by the aduise of his nobles and princes of enuie against the Iewes especially those which were aduanced to place of gouernement that they might thereby entrappe them which may appeare so to be by these reasons 1. by the like practise against Daniel cap. 6. 2. by the generall accusation of the Iewes ver 8. 3. to what ende els tended the cruell edict of the king but to be executed vpon the Iewes whom they imagined would be offenders Inn. Polan 5. Theodoret thinketh that he made this image all of gold to disgrace and discountenance the image which he sawe in his dreame the head whereof was onely of gold But that dreame stroke him with such a terror as that it is not like he would contemne it 6. He might also in making such a huge and costly image intend therein to set forth the magnificence and riches of his kingdome Pere Quest. 4. How it came to passe that Daniel â—indred not the kings purpose in setting vp this image 1. Some thinke that Daniel beeing present tacuit videns se nihil proficere did hoid his peace seeing that he could preuaile nothing but that the king was resolute in his purpose Lyran. But Daniel had sinned if he had beene silent be should haue vsed the meanes and left the successe vnto God 2. Osiander thinketh that Daniel vsed what perswasion he could but seeing he was not heard he withdrew himselfe But if Daniel had been present at all it would haue beene suspicious if he had now hid himselfe 3. Pappus is of opinion that Daniel was employed in some remote place of the prouince at this time But though Daniel were now absent he could not be ignorant of the kings purpose before this great image was not made in a short time 4. Wherefore it is not to be doubted but that Daniel did discharge the office of a faithfull seruant vnto God and counseller to the king before this and did vse all meanes to stay this vngodly enterprise so farre as he might goe without exasperating of the king too much which would haue kindled his anger against the whole nation Therefore Daniel not preuailing gaue way vnto the time expecting some other meanes how it should please the Lord to conuert the king Quest. 5. Of the place where this image was set vp Vers. 1. In the plaine of Dura 1. Symmachus calleth the place Soraum the Septuagint as Heirome saith interpreted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he translateth viuarium a place enclosed to keepe beasts in but these are farre wide it is a proper name called Dura 2. The interlinearie gloss and historia scholastica take it for the name of the floode which compasseth that plaine or field where the Gyants after the flood first builded Babel 3. Some thinke it was the towne Doraba situate vpon the riuer Euphrates in Babylonia 4. But it seemeth rather to be that place which Ptolome calleth Deera situate between Chaltopis and Cissia in the region Susiane Ptolome lib. 6. Geograph cap. 3. Iun. Polan 5. It is like it was set in a plaine where no hils were that it might not be ouertipped by them Pin. Quest. 6. Of the greatnesse of this image compared with others and in it selfe 1. Some greater images haue beene made in the world as the image of the Sunne at Rhodes called colossus solis was 70. cubites high which was 12. yeares in making and cost 300. talents 56. yeares after it was made it was cast downe by an earthquake and then the hugenes thereof appeared few men could fadome
my maiestie 31. While the word was in the kings mouth the word beeing yet in the kings mouth C. V. A. I. a voice came downe from heauen saying To thee be it spoken they speake C. O king Nabuchadnezzer thy kingdome is departed from thee 32. And they shall driue thee from men and thy dwelling shall be with the beast of the field they shall make thee to eare grasse they shall cause thee to tast grasse C. like the oxen and seuen times shall passe ouer thee vntill thou knowest that the most high beareth rule ouer the kingdome of men and giueth it to whomsoeuer he will 33. The very same houre was this word this thing G. this matter B. fulfilled vpon Nabuchadnezzer and he was driuen from men and did eate grasse as the oxen and his bodie was wet with the dew of heauen till his haires were growne as eagles feathers and his nailes as birds clawes 34. And at the ende of these dayes I Nebuchadnezzar lift vp mine eyes to heauen and mine vnderstanding or mind V. I. returned vnto me was restored vnto me L. B. G. and I blessed the most high and I praised and glorified him that liueth for euer because his power whose power B. G. is an euerlâ—sting power and kingdome is from generation to generation 35. And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing and according to his will he worketh in the armie of heauen and in the inhabitants of the earth and there is not any that can stay resist L. B. his hand or say vnto him What doest thou 36. At the same time did mine vnderstanding returne vnto me and I returned to the glorie of my kingdome my glorie and my beautie was restored returned C. vnto me and my counsellors and my princes sought vnto me and I was established in my kingdome and my glorie was augemented toward me 37. Now therefore I Nebuchadnezzar praise and extoll and magnifie the king of heauen because all his workes are truth and his wayes iudgement and those that walke in pride he is able to abase 3. The questions discussed Quest. 1. Of the kings epistle the summe and parts thereof This epistle of the king consisteth of the exordium or beginning in three verses which some make part of the third chapter whose opinion is refuted before quest 40. 3. chap. and the narration in this whole chapter The exordium or beginning which is the generall inscription containeth 1. the salutation 2. the generall argument of the whole epistle 1. the salutation sheweth 1. the author and writer Nebuchadnezzar 2. the persons to whom he writeth to all nations and languages vnder his kingdome 3. the salutation it selfe peace be multiplied 2. In the argument three things are declared 1. what he will set forth the signes and wonders of God which are amplified by two adiuncts of the greatnesse and strength 2. what mooued him to declare them because they were shewed toward him he had particular experience of them 3. to what ende to make knowne the power of Gods euerlasting kingdome Quest. 2. At what time Nebuchadnezzar wrote this epistle 1. It is euident by the salutation of the epistle wherein the king wisheth peace vnto all nations that as Oecolampad noteth quietus erat in regno militiae finem fecerat he was now quiet in his kingdome and had made an ende of warre c. it is cleare then that this epistle was written after he made an end of conquering subduing the nations round about 2. Further the conquest of Egypt fell out after the 25. yeare of Ieconias captiuitie Ezec. 29. 17. which was 10. yeare before the ende of Nebuchadnezzars raigne for in the 37. yeare of Iechonias captiuitie began Euilmerodach the sonne of Nebuchadnezzar to raigne 3. This fearefull and strange accident then of Nebuchadnezzars transmutation his deiecting from his throne and restoring againe might fall out some 9. or 10. yeares before the ende of his raigne Perer and this epistle might be written two yeares before his death Iun. for one yeare after this dreame ver 26. he was driuen from among men and liued 7. yeares among the beasts Quest. 3. How Nebuchadnezzar could write vnto all the people in the world 1. Caluin thinketh that here the king superbe locutus est spake proudly as making himselfe Lord of the whole earth as the Romanes because they had a large dominion called Rome Dominam totius orbis the Ladie of the whole world so also Polan But that Nebuchadnezzar did not this of any ostentation may appeare both by the ende of his writing which was to set forth the power of Gods kingdome and by his stile he contenteth himselfe with one title calling himselfe king whereas the Emperours of Rome vsed many swelling titles of their conquests as Parthicus Persicus Germanicus c. of Parthia Persia Germania and such like Bulling 2. The same author maketh this the reason because now this epistle beeing preserued vnto our times as the rest of the Scriptures by the spirit of God is indeed written and made knowne to all people but this seemeth not to be the literall and historicall meaning 3. Pappus saith he writte to all people and languages not onely to those which were subiect vnto him but he was desirous to make knowne the workes of God to all people in the world So also Oecolampad vnder these nations comprehendeth the South and West parts of the world as Mauritania Spaine for he was known in those parts as Strabo writeth lib. 15. non enim praecipit sed hortatur for he in this epistle coÌ„mandeth not but onely exhorteth But it is euident by the forme of the decree which he made before concerning euerie people nation and language where he onely meaneth such nations as were subiect vnto him for his lawe could not bind those which were not subiect that the inscription of this epistle must be taken in the same sense 4. Wherefore as R. Saadiah well expoundeth he vnderstandeth here onely his owne kingdomes as of Persia Assyria Egypt which are said to be the whole earth because he was monarcha orientis the Monarch of the East parts Lyra which was the most famous and flourishing part of the earth the principall part then is taken for the whole Geneuens Quest. 4. Of the signes and wonders which Nebuchadnezzer declareth 1. Some seeme to confound these two signes and wonders making them all one as Oeco Osian 2. some make this distinction those are signes qua fieri videntur contra naturam c. which seeme to be done against nature wonders and miracles are those workes which are admiratione digna worthie of admiration Hugo but this is no difference at all for whatsoeuer is done aboue or against nature is worthie of admiration 3. They are thus rather to be distinguished the same things in diuerse respectes are both signes and wonders signes because many things are thereby signified and miracles or wonders because they are done aboue and beyond nature Iâ—n
great tree with many spreading boughes one of them beeing cut off with this posie vno avulso non deficit alter one beeing pulled away the other faileth not but here all the boughes and branches are pulled away at once Pintus 2. If it had beene told him that he should onely loose his regall dignitie and liue as a common person it had not beene so grieuous but now when he heareth that he should be throwne downe from such an high estate into such an ignominious life as to be matched with beasts it must needes trouble him Caluin Quest. 24. 22. How Nebuchadnezzar was driuen from men and dwelt with the beasts 1. Theodoret sheweth how this came to passe for both because he was rabie correptus taken with furie and so might haue done much hurt if he had still conuersed among men as also for that he was hated of all for his former tyrannie and crueltie they expelled and draue him away from the companie of men 2. And beeing thus driuen out among beasts and lying in the wet and cold his garments rotted and his haire grewe hard like eagles quilles and his nailes waxed long like vnto birds clawes he was neglected of all euen of his wife and children and kindred Gods iustice so prouiding that as he had shewed himselfe in his tyrannicall and cruell gouernement as a beast toward others so ferina vitae damnatus est he was condemned to a beastly life in whom may be verified that saying in the Psal. 49. 12. Man shall not continue in honour but is like vnto the beasts that perish Quest. 25. How Nebuchadnezzar did eate grasse like an oxe It may seeme strange that a king beeing so delicate a person should fall to eat grasse like an oxe which seeming vnto some to be verie vnlikely and improbable they therefore would turne this histore into an allegorie but this doubt may diuerse wayes be answered 1. First it is no vnnaturall thing for men to liue of grasse and herbes as Plinie writeth of a certaine people of the Ethiopians which liue of rawe Locustes some onely of herbes and rootes others doe eate of any thing that commeth to hand and therefore are called pamphagi eaâ—nals which eate of any thing As also Ecclesiasticall histories make mention of diuers Heremites which liued onely of rootes and such other wild fruite of the earth 2. And further the imagination of his minde which was now become phrantike and bruitish might bring him to eate such meates which otherwise he in his right mind would haue abhorred as Hierome saith multa sunt furentibus facilia qua sunt sanis intolerabilia many things are easie vnto madde men which are intolerable to them of right minde and as Theodoret obserueth we see by experience that furious and mad men doe put into their mouthes and teare with their teeth whatsoeuer commeth to hand 3. Beside â—he temperament and constitution of his bodie was altered and changed by the distemperature of his mind and so it might be made fit and applyable vnto such bruite beasts 4. But most of all Gods power here was secret in preseruing the life of Nebuchadnezzar by such meates that he might be an example to all ages of Gods iustice and that thereby his pride might thoroughly be tamed Quest. 26. How the kingdome of Babylon was gouerned in the time of Nebuchadnezzars absence 1. Some thinke that it might be gouerned by Euilmerodach his sonne who afterward succeeded which is not vnlike Perer. But whereas Lyranus addeth that Nebuchadnezzar at his returne put his sonne in prison where Iechonias was for his misgouernement while his father was thus humbled and thereupon Euilmerodach when he came to raigne aduanced Iechonias and tooke him out of prison 2. king 24. 27. it hath no probabilitie 2. Or the nobles might take vpon them the gouernement of the kingdome in the meane time seeing they knewe by Daniel that the king was to be restored to his kingdome and Iosephus addeth further nemine audente toto septennio inuadere dominium none durst inuade the kingdome all those seauen yeares and because Nebuchadnezzar had been a valiant king and much enlarged his hingdome this might be a reason that they expected his returne with patience Lyran. which made them to be the more willing to receiue him againe and to seeke vnto him because God had so ordained Quest. 27. ver 22. What is vnderstood by seauen times 1. Some thinke that by 7. times no certaine but an indiffinite time is vnderstood ex Bulling but that is not so for it is said ver 31. that in the end of these dayes c. there were then certaine dayes appointed 2. R. Leui and Aben Ezra leaue it vncertaine and indifferent whether we vnderstand here moneths or yeares or the parts of the yeere but it is certaine that in a prophesie some one speciall thing is signified 3. Theodoret enclineth to thinke that hereby the halfe yeares must be counted for the times as the Persians generally diuide the yeare into two parts Summer and Winter and so these 7. times should make three yeares and an halfe But no where in the Scripture is a time taken for halfe a yeare 4. Bullinger by these 4. times vnderstandeth the 4. times of the yeare the Spring Summer the Autumne Winter and so these 7. yeares should come out in a yeare and three quarters but we refuse this sense also for the former reason time is not so taken in Scripture 5. Wherefore the receiued interpretation is best by seauen times to vnderstand 7. yeares so Iosephus Iun. Osiand Oecolampad Caluin Perer. Vatab. Lyranus giueth this reason because cap. 12. ver 7. a time two times and an halfe are so taken for three years and an halfe which make 1290. dayes as it is expounded v. 12. Iunius giueth instance in a more direct place cap. 11. 13. in the ende haghittim shanim of the times of yeares Pererius further yeeldeth this reason quia omnis nota temporis varietas c. because euery notable varietie and change of time is contayned in the compasse of a yeare as Sommer Winter heate cold c. 6. Hence also is manifest the error of Dorotheus in Synops. and Epiphanius in vitâ— Danielis whom the author of the scholasticall historie followeth that 7. yeares were determined but at the prayer of Daniel they were changed into 7. moneths for the contrarie is euident v. 31. that Nebuchadnezzar did not come to himselfe till the full time was expired In the ende of these dayes I Nebuchadnezzar lift vp mine eies to heauen c. And so Daniel had prophesied before ver 22. seuen times shall passe ouer thee till thou knowe that the most high beareth rule ouer the kingdomes of men Quest. 28. Of Nebuchadnezzars transmutation but first in generall of the diuerse kinds of transmutations 1. Their is one kind of transmutation which is a fabulous and poeticall fiction rather then any true alteration and change such as is the
iudicaretur defuisse praesidium that the one had Gods helpe to change him the other wanted it and so was hardened But if any thinke further that this is vniust that God should assist one and not an other the Apostle answereth The Lord hath mercie on whome he will and whome he will he hardeneth Rom. 9. And so he concludeth omnia illa adiuvante Domino perfici vel deserente permitti nolente vero Domino nihil prorsus admitti c. that all these things are perfited and brought to passe God so helping or permitted God so forsaking them but nothing is committed God beeing not willing 46. Quest. Why Nabuchadnezzer beeing thus conuerted the Iewes kept in captiuitie were not deliuered nor Iehoiachin released out of prison 1. Though Nabuchadnezzer beeing thus brought to acknowledge God did incline also to sauour his people which in all likelihood was the more encreased by Daniels meanes who was greatly honoured of the king yet the people remained in captiuitie still either because Nabuchadnezzer liued not long after this and so could not perfit his fauour toward them or rather this was the cause Daniel knew by the prophecie of Ieremie that 70. yeares were determined for the captiuitie of the people and therefore expected the ende and expiration of that time and therefore before would not attempt any thing 2. But an other reason is to be yeelded for Iehoiakims imprisonment that either Nabuchadnezzer intended before his death to set him at libertie and therefore his sonne did it to fulfill his fathers minde as soone as he came to the kingdome or els it pleased God by this long time of restraint to punish the sinnes of Iehoiakim who beeing but 18. yeare old followed his fathers sleppes and did euill in the sight of the Lord and therefore he raigned but three moneths 2. king 24. 9. but continued in prison 37. yeares 2. king 25. 27. 4. The places of doctrine 1. Doctr. That the ende of ciuill gouernment is the peace and prosperitie of the subiects v. 2. which is the 31. of the former chapter according to the vsuall diuision Peace be multiplied vnto you Nabuchadnezzer a wise and politike King sendeth this salutation to his subiects shewing thereby that a good Prince is not onely to wish but to procure the peace of his subiects therefore the Apostle would haue prayer made especially for kings that vnder them we may liue a godly and peaceable life 1. Tim. 2. 1. This Tullie well perceiued thus writing vt gubernatori cursus secundus Medico salus Imperatori victoria c. as the pilot of a shippe propoundeth to himselfe the prosperous course of the shippe the physitian the health of his patient the captaine victorie so the good gouernour seeketh the welfare and happie life of his citizens lib. 5. de repub 2. Doctr. That we are to pray euen for Tyrants and cruell gouernours v. 16. The dreame be to them that hate thee In that Daniel prayeth for Nabuchadnezzer and wisheth that this calamitie might fall vpon his enemies and that he might escape it it sheweth that the subiects are to pray euen for the prosperitie of euill gouerners for euen vnder them they receiue some benefit a badde gouernment is better then no gouernment So the Prophet Ieremie biddeth the Iewes pray for the prosperitie of the citie whether they were carried captiue for in the peace thereof shall ye haue peace Ierem. 29. 7. And S. Paul exhorteth that supplications and prayers should be made for kings who then were Tyrants and persecuters of Gods Church 3. Doct. Of the office and parts of a good Magistrate v. 19. Nabuchadnezzer is compared to a goodly faire spreading tree by the which similitude are set forth many excellent parts that should be found in a Prince 1. As the tree spreadeth her boughes abroad and who so will commeth vnder the shadow of them so a Prince should giue accesse to all his louing subiects freely to come vnto him not to shut himselfe vp from them 2. The beautie of the tree and comely grace setteth forth the maiestie and authoritie of the Prince which ought to be reuerenced of all 3. It is full of fruit so the King should yeeld releefe vnto his subiects be bountifull and beneficiall not gathering or taking from the subiects where the necessitie of the gouernment requireth not 4. The shadow of the tree signifieth defence from wrong that vnder the gouernment of the Prince subiects may finde comfort and releefe 5. The birds dwell in the branches and the beasts couch vnder the shadow so the king should to all his subiects high and low extend his fauour according vnto euery ones qualitie and degree ex Polan 4. Doctr. God tempereth and moderateth his iudgements with mercie v. 22. Seuen times shall passe ouer thee till thou know c. God might in his iustice haue suffered Nabuchadnezzer all his life long for his exceeding great pride to liue among the bruit beasts but he doth onely limit him a certaine time so long till he was brought to acknowledge God So that God remembreth mercie in the midst of his iudgements according to that saying Psal. 30. 5. Weeping may abide at euening but ioy commeth in the morning Bulling And the Apostle saith God is faithfull and will not suffer you to be tempted aboue that you are able but will euen giue the issue with the tentation that ye may be able to heare it As here Nabuchadnezzer had a gratious issue of his tentation 5. Doctr. Of the necessitie of good Counsellers v. 24. Let my counsell be acceptable vnto thee Happie was this king which had so faithfull a Counseller at hand to aduise him But miserable is the state of such Princes who are beset with bad counsellers as Rehoboam was who followed the headie and rash counsell of the young men such a wicked counseller was Haman to Assuerus and Achitophel to Absolom Therefore Homâ—dius a wise Senatour of Rome as Fulgosus writeth lib. 7. was wont to say that he had rather haue an euill Prince with good counsellers about him then a good Prince with euill If he be an enemie to the Commonwealth who clippeth the kings coine he is much more which by euill counsell corrupteth the minde of the Prince Pintus 6. Doctr. What manner of almes are acceptable vnto God v. 24. Breake off thy sinnes by righteousnes c. Simply to giue almes it is not pleasing vnto God for the Pharisies gaue almes but it did nothing auaile them because they did it of a vaine ostentation they which giue almes and yet liue in sinne as though they would buie out their licentious life by their sinne doe therein deceiue themselues the Apostle saith Without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11. 6. almes then not proceeding of faith can not be accepted Augustine therefore saith well Qui vult ordinate eleemosynas dare debet à seipso incipere c. he that will giue almes orderly must beginne
he put downe 20. But when his heart was lifted vp and his minde spirit C. hardened in pride he was deposed caused to descend C. from his kingly throne and they tooke his glorie from him 21. And he was driuen from the sonnes of men and his heart became as a beasts was put vnto the beasts C. and his dwelling was with the wild asses they fedde him with grasse like oxen and his bodie was wer with the dewe of heauen till he knewe that the most high God bare rule ouer the kingdome of men and he appointeth ouer it whomsouer he pleaseth 22. And thou his sonne O Belshatzar hast not humbled thine heart though thou knewest all this 23. But hast lift thy selfe vp against the Lord of heauen and they haue brought the vessels of his house before thee and thou and thy princes thy wiues and thy concubines haue drunke wine in them and thou hast praised the gods of siluer and gold and brasse yron woode and stone which neither see neither heare nor vnderstand 24. Then was the part palme B. G. knuckles B. ioynts V. L. see before v. 5. of an hand sent from his presence and so this writing was written C. hath written this writing G. B. 25. And this is the writing that is written mene mene tekel vpharsin 26. And this is the interpretation of the words of the things B. G. Mene God hath numbred out thy kingdome and hath finished it 27. Tekel thou art weighed in the balance and art found wanting too light G. 28. Peres diuided I. and so he interpreteth the other words before but first the words are set downe as they were written and then the interpretation thy kingdome is deuided and giuen vnto the Medes and Persians 29. Then Belshatzar gaue charge said C. and they cloathed Daniel with purple and put a chaine of gold about his neck and made proclamation concerning him that he should be the third ruler in the kingdome 30. The same night was Belshatzar the king of the Chaldeans slaine 31. And Darius Dariaves C. the Mede tooke the kingdome beeing threescore and two yeare old 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Why this chapter is transposed and not set downe according to the order of time 1. It is euident by the last verse of this chapter that this historie fell out in the last yeare of Balthazar 's raigne for at this time Babylon was taken but the prophesies and visions contained cap. 7. 8. were shewed vnto Daniel before the one in the first yeare c. 7. 8. the other in the third cap. 8. 1. 2. The reason hereof is this because Daniel would set downe together all the matters of fact and historie vnto the 7. chapter and then followe the propheticall visions together which onely were reuealed to Daniel from cap. 7. to the ende beside this chapter hath a very fit coherence with the former for as there it is shewed how Nebuchahnezzar was punished for his pride so the like is set forth here in the fall of Balthazar 3. It is like that many other memorable acts fell out in the raigne of Nebuchadnezzar his sonne Euilmerodach and this Balthazar but Daniel onely toucheth such things quorum vtilis futura erat posteris memoria the memorie and knowledge whereof might be profitable to posteritie as were these miraculous workes of God which were shewed vpon these kings Theodoret. Quest. 2. Of the kings of Chaldea which succeeded after Nebuchadnezzar 1. Iosephus setteth them downe in this order after Nebuchadnezzar he nameth his sonne Abilomarodachus then Niglisar his sonne and Labosardachus his sonne the father of Balthazar the same order followeth Eusebius differing somewhat in names he calleth these four Amilmathapacus Egressaâ—ius Labosardochus Balthazar so also Hierome and Lyran. 2. Metasthenes as Pintus alleadgeth him saith that Euilmerodach had three sonnes which succeeded one another the first Niglazar or Regassar who raigned 2. yeares then Lab-assar-dach who raigned 3. yeares and the third was Balthazar 3. But all these are deceiued for it is euident out of the Sâ—â—â—pture Ierem. 27. v. 5 6 7. that after Nebuchadnezzar succeeded onely his sonne and his sonnes sonne there were not then 4. descents but onely three from Nebuchadnezzar who was the grandfather not the greatgrandfather of Balâ—hazar for after Nebuchadnezzar succeeded Euilmerodach 2. king 25. 27. and after him his sonne Balthazar thus Hugo Vatab. Inn. Oecolamp Calvin 4. But hereupon riseth this difference that this Ncega-letzer or Niglazar did depose Euilmerodach his kinsman who together with his sonne Balthazar liued in exile among the Medes and in the meane time Neegaletzer or Niglazar possessed the kingdome and so indeede there were fower in all but one of them was an vsurper Polan see more hereof afterward quest 20. Quest. 3. Of the diuerse names of this Balthazar 1. He is here called Belshatzar which signifieth a searcher of treasure of belash scrutatus est he searched and atzar treasure he is called of Metasthenes Balt assar and in the vulgar Latine Balsasar of the Septuag Baltasar 2. He was also called Nabobonidus or Naboan with Iosephus or Nebonidachus in Eusebius or as others Nebonidus which signifieth a prince expelled 3. Herodotus calleth him Labynetus or Labunitâ—s the sonne of Nitocris whom he maketh more famous then Semiramis but here Herodotus falleth into great error making these two famous Queenes but fiue ages or generations one before another whereas from Semiramis to Nitocris there were runne a 1500. yeares Peter 4. Pererius thinketh that this Balthazar was called Merodach because Ieremie saith cap. 50. 2. Bel is confounded Merodach is broken downe where Merodach which signifieth sceptrifer a scepter bearer is there vnderstood rather of their idol Bel as appeareth by the phrase is broken downe which title also they gaue vnto their kings Iun. annot some thinke that Euilmerodach was so called as to say prince of Merodaciâ— the name of a region of Babylon which Ptolomie calleth Amordacia Polan Quest. 4. In what yeare of Balthazar 's raigne this historie fell out 1. Pererius thinketh it was in the 17. yeare of his raigne Hugo Cardinal in the 18. yeare Metasthenes giueth vnto Balthazar 's raigne 5. yeares Calvin saith he raigned 8. yeares and this happened in the last yeare of his raigne 2. But it was rather in the third and last yeare of his raigne as Oecolamp Bulling for if so many as 17. or 18. yeares be allowed vnto Balthazar 's raigne there will be more then 70. yeares of captiuitie which now were expired at the taking of Babylon and Cyrus entrance for 37. yeares were gone of the captiuitie before Euilmerodach beganne to raigne 2. king 25. 27. then Euilmerodach raigned as some account 30. yeares Bulling others giue him but 23. Oecolampad Calvin they that giue the least reckon 18. yeares Iosephus there could not then be yet 18. yeares remayning And that it was in the third yeare rather then in the 5. or 8. this may be
a probable reason because there is mention in Daniel of noe more then the 3. yeare of Balthazar c. 8. 1. Quest. 5. Of the greatnesse of Balthazar 's feast Vers. 1. He made a great feast We reade of other feasts as great as this as that which Ptolome the last king of that name the father of Cleopatra made vnto Pompey who envited a thousand of his captaines to a feast setting before euerie one of them a cuppe of gold to drinke in and changing the dishes with the messes But Alexanders feast also exceeded this who at the solemnizing of his mariage bid 10. thousand ghâ—stes giuing vnto euery one of them a golden cuppe And Assuerus feast went beyond these who had at one feast all the princes and captaines of his kingdome and prouinces which were an 127. Esther 1. 1. But of all other that was the greatest feast which Plinâ—e writeth to haue bin made by Pythius who entertained all Xerxes huge armie which consisted of 700. thousand and 88. thousand men and promised them pay for fiue moneths 2. Yet this was a great feast wherein were present a thousand of Balthazar 's nobles and if there were so many of his princes the rest of the companie and followers farre exceeded Hugo thinketh that there were many more for here a certaine number is taken for an vncertaine but this was a sufficient companie for a Princes feast And it fell so out by Gods prouidence that all these should be here assembled together that they might all tast of the same calamitie as Ieremie prophesieth c. 50. 35. A sword is vpon the Chaldeans saith the Lord and vpon the inhabitants of Babel and vpon her princes and wise men Polan Quest. 6. Of the manner and order of this feast 1. The Latine interpreter readeth and euerie one dranke according to his age which is two wayes vnderstood either that they sate downe according to their age or that they did drinke in measure euerie one according to his strength sic Lyranus Perer. Hugo Pintus But beside that to sit according to their age is not to drinke according to their age and it is not like that there was any order or measure obserued in drinking in this riotus feast there is no such thing in the originall but thus are the words truely interpreted he drank wine before a thousand so also the Septuag 2. Which words some of the Rabbines doe so vnderstand as though the king did striue with these thousand of his princes who should drinke most Osiand Some thinke thereby is noted his vnshamefastnesse that whereas he vsed at other times to be drunke in secret now he is drunken before a thousand witnesses But although hereby is noted his intemperancie that before his nobles tooke such fill of drinke encouraging them to doe the like by his euill example yet here is an allusion to the fashion of that countrey the princes vsed to take their meate alone but now to giue the better welcome he doth not onely drinke before them in the same place yet at another table as Vatablus but he enteraineth them as his ghests eating and drinking together Quest. 7. Of the occasion of this feast 1. Hierome from certaine Hebrewes reporteth that Balthazar hauing heard that the Iewes were to be held in captiuitie 70. yeares which time now by his account was expired doth make a feast as insulting against the Lords people as though all were fables that no such thing was to be expected But Hierome counteth this as a fable for those 70. yeares were not yet expired 2. Some thinke that the Chaldeans had chased away the Persians and Medes from the citie and thereupon the feast was made Some that Cyrus and Darius beeing ouercome did â—â—mage to the king were at this feast while in the meane time their army diuided the riuer into diuerse channels and so made it paessable and by this means took the citie for if this had beene so after Daniel had expounded the writing vpon the wall and had said thy kingdome is diuided and giuen vnto the Medes and Persians ver 28. if Cyrus and Darius had beene present they would haue made them sure enough 3. Some coniecture that the Persians might seeme to giue way for a time in policie to make the Babylonians more secure and that they thereupon for ioy made this feast But they which write of these warres report that Cyrus of a long time had now besieged the citie 4. The occasion then of this feast was indeede an annuall solemnitie which they kept yearely about the 16. day of the moneth which the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Loon which continued fiue dayes together wherein the seruants beare sway in euerie familie and for that time their masters were subiect vnto them and they vsed to choose one out of their companie apparelled like the king whom they called in the Chalde language Segane which signifieth a Prince Iun. Cyrus as Xenophon writeth tooke his opportunitie by reason of this feast to assault the citie more strongly Now the Babylonians were secure both beeing confident in the strength and defence of the citie which was compassed both with high walls and with the great riuer Euphrates as also they had prouision laid vp in the citie as both Xenophon and Herodotus write for 20. yeares and more And this made them so secure Quest. 8. VVho commanded the vessels of the temple to be brought and how V. 2. Balthazzar while he tasted the wine 1. The word is beteghem in the tast which word also signifieth counsell aduise and thereupon Ab. Ezra thus interpreteth it in consilio vini he commanded as the wine aduised him vino dictante the wine thus decreed but this interpretation as Caluin noteth is too curious 2. Iunius readeth ad gustandum vinum he sent for the vessels to tast wine in them But it seemeth they had well drunke wine before ver 1. and this was a fruite of their excesse and drunkennesse 3. The word chamra which here signifieth wine some would deriue of the Hebrew word chamar that signifieth an asse and vnderstand hereby that some Agaso some base fellowe that kept or draue asses was set vp in this feast to be their king and that at his bidding all things were done they suppose him to haue beene such an one as is vsed to be called the Lord of misrule but that Chamra is here taken for wine is euident ver 1. the king drunke wine 4. wherefore the vsuall reading is best the king in the tasting of wine c. that is when his heart was merrie and ouercome with wine as R. Dauid and R. Leui reade he was temulentus now drunke with wine Quest. 9. Of Balthazar 's profaning of the holy vessels Balthazar offendeth diuerse wayes 1. In his presumption he aduentureth to doe that which neither Nebuchadnezzar nor Euilmerodach his grandfather or father before him attempted for none of them are read to haue brought forth these sacred vessels
as famous as Semiramis so also Polanus 3. But Iosephus opinion which Hierome followeth and Lyranus thinke that this Queene was grandmother to Balthazar and wife sometime to Nabuchadnezzer whereof these two reasons may be yeilded 1. one which Theodoret alleadgeth verisimile est eam seniâ— confectam c. it is like that shee beeing stricken in yeares did not giue her selfe to drinking and dauncing and such other sports c. this coniecture sheweth it to be more probable that shee was his grandmother then mother for his mother could not be so old he hauing raigned but 3. yeares beeing the eldest sonne and heire to the kingdome 2. the other reason Lyranus vrgeth which Pintus also approoueth because shee speaketh of things done in Nabuchadnezzers daies which sheweth mulierem fuisse iam vetulam that shee was now a very old woman Calvin 21. Quest. In what sense Nabuchadnezzer is called Balthazar 's father 1. Some thinke that Nabuchadnezzer was his great grandfather and that Balthazar was not the third but the fourth from him so Iosephus whome Hierome and Beda follow see before qu. 2. But this can not be so because Ierem. 27. v. 5 6. the Lord promiseth the kingdome to Nabuchadnezzer and to his sonne and to his sonnes sonne and staieth there 2. An other opinion was of Alexander Polyhistor and Alpheus with others whome Iosephus mentioneth lib. 1. cont Appion that foure raigned after Nabuchadnezzer 1. Euilmerodach 2. Niglasar his sisters husband who killed him 3. Labosardach his sonne who was deposed for his misgouernment and slaine and then Balthazar was chosen by common consent But by this account Balthazar should not be at all of Nabuchadnezzers stocke and line contrarie to the Scripture which calleth him his sonne 3. The author of the Scholasticall historie saith that there were two Nabuchadnezzers the father and the sonne and that Euilmerodach was brother to the second and raigned after him who had three sonnes which succeeded one an other in the kingdome after him Niglazar Labosardach and Balthazar so he maketh Nabuchadnezzer the great grandfather of this Balthazar and Balthazar to raigne in the fift place But it is euident in storie that Euilmerodach succeeded next to Nabuchadnezzer his father not to his brother of that name for Nabuchadnezzer is held to haue raigned 43. yeares at the least as Iosephus but he raigned rather 45. in the 8. yeare of his raigne Iechonias was carried captiue in the 37. yeare of whose captiuitie which was the 45. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer Euilmerodach began to raigne 2. king 25. 27. Pererius misliketh this opinion because he maketh two Nabuchadnezzers whereas sacrd profana historia vnum tantum agnoscit both the sacred and prophane histories saith he acknowledgeth but one Nabuchadnezzer king of Chaldea c. wherein I wonder at his forgetfulnes beeing otherwise a most diligent writer seeing Iosephus euidently maketh two Nabuchadnezzers the father to whome he ascribeth 21. yeares and his sonne to whome he giueth 43. yeares lib. 10. antiq c. 11. 4. The fourth opinion is of Theodoret in this chapter and Severus Sulpitius lib. 2. sacr histor that Nabuchadnezzer had two sonnes Euilmerodach the elder and Balthazar the younger who raigned successiuely one after an other and so they thinke that Balthazar was in deede the sonne of Nabuchadnezzer But this can not be so for seeing this Balthazar was the last of the Chaldean kings and Ieremie prophesied that the kingdome should be giuen to Nabuchadnezzer and to his sonne and to his sonnes sonne now this prophesie should not be fulfilled if the kingdome did onely remaine to him and to his sonnes 5. Not farre differing from this opinion is that which is found in the booke of Baruch c. 1. 11. Pray for Nabuchadnezzar and for the life of Balthazar his sonne where the author of that booke seemeth to make Balthazar the eldest sonne of Nabuchadnezzer as next heire to the kingdome Pererius would thus helpe the matter that either Nabuchadnezzer had an other sonne called Balthazar who should haue beene king if he had liued or that Euilmerodach was also so called thus also Emmanuel Sa. But neither of these assertions can be proued out of the Canonicall Scriptures which euidently testifie that Euilmerodach was the sonne of Nabuchadnezzer and not Balthazar 2. king 25. 27. and Ierem. 52. 31. 6. Pintus hath an other conceit that Euilmerodach might be called Nabuchadnezzer which was a generall name to all the Chaldean kings as the Emperours were called Caesars of the first Emperour and thus he saith Balthazar was Nabuchadnezzers that is Euilmerodachs sonne but no where in Scripture doth it appeare that Nabuchadnezzer was a generall name to the kings of Chaldea neither that Euilmerodach or Balthazar are so called 3. Pererius opinion is that Balthazar was the nephew not properly the sonne of Nabuchadnezzer yet he raigned not in the third place but in the fift there came betweene two other named by forren writers Niglasar and Labosardach the first was Euilmerodachs sisters husband who slue Euilmerodach and so raigned and Labosardach his sonne after him who was deposed and slaine for his crueltie and then Balthazar who fled vnto the Medes was restored vnto the kingdome so Ioseph lib. 1. cont Appion Now Pererius reason is this why some other raigned betweene because otherwise the tearme of 70. yeares captiuitie can not be made vp for the captiuitie began in the 19. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer when Ierusalem was taken there remained 25. yeares of his raigne who raigned in all 43. Euilmerodach 18. yeares and Balthazar 17. all these yeares make but 60. there wanted yet 10. yeares which must be made vp by the raigne of others comming betweene Contra. 1. Though Pererius opinion be admitted as probable that some vsurpers came betweene Euilmerodach and Balthazar yet the reason which he vrgeth is not sufficient for the 70. yeares captiuitie doe take beginning rather from the 8. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer when Iechonias went into captiuitie 2. king 24. 12. for from that time the Prophets doe begin the account of the 70. yeares Ezek. 1. 1. and c. 24. 1. and in other places of that Prophesie And Nabuchadnezzer raigned 45. yeares 8. yeares before the captiuitie began 2. king 24. 12. and 37. yeares of the captiuitie 2. king 25. 27. so that the ten yeares which are wanting may thus be filled vp 8. Pererius thinketh that the strange names of Niglazar and Labosardach mentioned by Iosephus were the same with Euilmerodach and Balthazar called by other names in 2. cap. Daniel But Iosephus and other writers whome he followeth as Berosus Alexander Polyhistor with others make these diuers kings from the rest for Iosephus nameth Abilomarodach beside who in Scripture is called Euilmerodach 9. The truth then is this that Euilmerodach as Pererius reporteth out of some writers was slaine by Niglazar or Neegal-etzer his sisters husband or as Iunius out of others he was expulsed out of his kingdome and he with Balthazar his sonne liued in exile
such like 2. by their impotencie they could neither see heare nor vnderstand 4. he gaue not glorie vnto God which is aggrauated by two benefits the giuing him of his life and breath and in protecting him in whose hand is thy breath and all thy wayes c. 3. Then followeth the interpretation of the dreame v. 25. to 29. Quest. 26. Of Daniels abrupt beginning in his speach to the king v. 17. Keepe thy rewards to thy selfe The reasons why Daniel vseth no insinuaâ—ion or salutation to the king were these 1. In respect of his age and grauitie such a simple and plaine beginning became him for he was 90. yeare old if we suppose him to be 20. when he first went into captiuitie 2. it best beseemed him in respect of his office beeing a Prophet and now consulted with concerning the will and counsell of God to shewe his contempt of the kings gifts Iun. 3. hoc ipsâ— monstrauit abiectum c. in that he saluteth him not as a king giuing him his titles he therein sheweth that he was now reiected of God no longer to be king Oecolampad 4. voluit asperius loqui cum impiâ— desperatâ— he would speake the more roughly with a wicked and desperate man of whom there was small hope and therefore he doth rippe vp his sinne and searcheth it to the depth Calvin Quest. 27. Why Daniel reiecteth the kings rewards 1. That was not onely the reason in respect of his office because he was a Prophet least he might seeme to haue made merchandize of his propheticall gift as Polan and to fulfill that saying in the gospel ye haue freely receiued freely giue Lyran. Pellican for then he should not by this reason haue receiued any gifts of Nebuchadnezzar 2. Neither was this the cause tristia nuntiantem indecens erat dona aeciperâ— it was not fit for one telling hard newes to receiue gifts gloss ordinar for then neither should Daniel haue receiued any reward of king Nebuchadnezzar after he had expounded the dreame of theimage which foreshewed the ende and dissolution of Nebuchadnezzars kingdome 3. And to say that Daniel affected no such honours because he was now old is an insufficient reason for neither had he at any time before any desire to those places but onely for the good of the Lâ—rds people 4. But the speciall reasons are these two noluit ab homine impiâ— c. he would not receiue any gifts of a wicked man Osiand as Abraham refused to take any thing of the king of Sodome and the Prophet Elisha of Naaman who was a stranger As also tempus subiectionis mox finiendum erat the time of subiection vnto this king and of his gouernment was at an ende Caluin and therefore he refused these honours at his hand who was as no king but reiected of God Quest. 28. Why Daniel receiued the like rewards from Nebuchadnezzar and refuseth them from Balthazar 1. The reason of this difference is because Daniel knewe that Nebuchadnezzar was established in the kingdome which the Lord had giueâ— to him and to his sonne and therefore he made no refusall of the honours which were offred vnto him because thereby he might stand the Church of God in great stead But the case was now otherwise for he knewe that Balthazar 's kingdome was at an ende and these honours vnder him he could not long hold and the Monarchie of the Chaldeans beeing at an ende he could not thereby aduantage the people of God Polan 2. Because also their was greater obstinacie and stubbornenesse in Balthazar then there was in Nebuchadnezzar ideo oftendit se minus ei deferre quam avo and therefore he sheweth that he doth not so much respect and honour him as his grandfather Calvin Quest. 29. Why then Daniel after his refusall accepted afterward of these rewards v. 29. This shewed no inconstancie at all in Daniel to suffer that to be done vnto him which before he in words refused 1. It is like that they were verie vrgent and instant vpon him to accept of the kings offers 2. Chrysostome giueth this reason that if he had beene stiffe in refusing still it would haue beene thought quod ipse de responso suo addubit asset that he himselfe had doubted of the truth of his answer and therefore to take away that suspition he vpon that instance accepteth of the rewards so also Occolampad Bulling 3. An other reason was qui mundi diuitias contempserat ne regem ipsum contemnere videretur least he which had despised the riches of the world should haue seemed to haue set the king himselfe at naught he accepteth of the kings offers Pintus 4. If he had still obstinately refused he might haue beene brought in suspicionem proditionis into suspicion of treason Calvin as though he had conspired with the Medes and Persians against the king if he had refused Balthazar 's rewards and offers 5. signum fuisset timiditatis it had beene also a signe of fearefulnesse that by this meanes he might haue lien hid still and so escaped the danger beeing called to no publike place he therefore in accepting of these honours ostendit se imperterritum sheweth himselfe without feare Caluin Quest. 30. Whether in these words he put to death whom he would v. 19. Nebuchadnezzars tyrannicall gouernement be expressed 1. Neither is this a description of Nebuchadnezzars tyrannie and cruell gouernement as though he put to death the innocent and spoyled men of their goods without iust cause or equitie for that this is not meant of the abuse of his power the next v. following sheweth But when his heart was puft vp this power then might be in Nebuchadnezzar and his heart not yet lifted vp 2. Neither yet doe I thinke with Bullinger that it is like that Nebuchadnezzar non iniuste suum administrauit regnum did not vniustly administer his kingdome for the contrarie appeareth c. 2. in that he commanded the Chaldeans to be slaine without cause for that they could not tell the king his dreame which he had forgotten and c. 3. he commaunded the three seruants of God to be cast into the fierie fornace for refusing to worship the idol which he had set vp 3. Nor yet can it be prooued by this place that princes haue authoritie to take away their subiects liues and goods at their pleasure for euen kings themselues must remember serationem summo regi reddituros that they also shall giue account vnto the the great king Calvin 4. But the Prophet simply speaketh de regia potestate of the kingly power Calv. neither touching the abuse or right vse thereof But sheweth to what eminent authoritie God had exalted him that he might exalt and cast downe whom he list to shewe that God had giuen him this great honour and power for the which he was feared of all This amplitude and greatnesse of his authoritie is set forth by two effects 1. the one is in his subiects they feared and stood in awe
in the citie 4. If these vestures had beene any speciall ornaments of the idolatrous priests and Soothsayers as some thinke it is like that Daniel so holy a man would haue vtterly reiected them Polan see before quest 29. Quest. 40. Why Daniel exhorted not Balthazar to repentance as he had done Nebuchadnâ—zzar before 1. One reason hereof may be yeelded to be this the same which Theodâ—râ—t â—lleadgeth why it pleased the Lord to chastice Nebuchadnezzar for a time to humble him and afterward raise him vp againe but Balthazar is cut off altogether because Balthazar was more indurate and hardened in his sinne seeing he had Nebuchadnezzâ—â— example before him and yet would not be warned And so the Prophet obiâ—cting here vnto Balthazar his fathers example which he made no vse of saw that there was small hope of his repentance 2. And further Daniel did see by the spirit of prophesie hanc sententiam non fuisse comâ—natoriam sed plane absolutam that this sentence pronounced against Balthazar was not by way of commination which vseth to be conditionall vpon mens repentance as was the threatning of Ionas against Ninive but it was peremptorie and absolute and as Bal. hazat was confirmed and setled in his sinne so this sentence was irreuocable Perer. 41. Quest. v. 30. Whether Balthazar were slaine at this time 1. It is the opinion of some that Balthazar was not slaine at all when the citie was taken but that Balthazar called in forren histories Nabonidus when the citie was besieged by Cyrus did yeeld himselfe and so he not onely obtained his life but had a place of habitation assigned him in Carmania where he died thus seeme to write Alexander Polyhistor Megasthenes Alpheus as they are cited by Ioseph l. 1. cont Appion But it is vntrue that Balthazar 's life was spared for the Scripture here euidently saith that he was slaine this fauour indeede Cyrus shewed to his grandfather Astyages whome he deposed from his gouernment beeing a tyrant as Herodotus and Iustinus write it is not like that he would vse such clemencie toward his mortall enemie at the least if there had beene any such thing which would haue tended much to the praise and honour of Cyrus Xenophon who is very large and lauish in setting forth the praise of Cyrus in all likelihood would not haue omitted it 2. Wherefore the truth is according to the Scripture here that Balthazar was at this time slaine and thereunto agreeth Xenophon that the king of Babylon himselfe was put to the sword when the citie was taken lib. 7. de Cyri institut 42. Quest. Whether Balthazar were slaine the same night and the citie taken 1. Some seeme to be of opinion that this murther was committed vpon Balthazar a long time before the taking of the citie by the Medes and Persians about 17. yeare before whom they say was slaine by the Babylonians and one of the conspirators called Darius the Median was chosen king in his place and that this was done many yeares before Cyrus inuaded Babylon This conceit they would ground vpon the report of Berosus and Megasthenes But they doe greatly mistake one thing for an other for he which was so deposed by the Babylonians was Labosordach the sonne of Niglasar or Neege-lasar who had before expelled Euilmerodach called Labinitus by Herodotus together with his sonne Balthazar called also Labinitus the second which name signifieth a Prince expulsed and because he fled vnto the Medes he was called Medus a Median this was not Darius then of the Medes which was set vp by the Babylonians but Balthazar called Labinitus of the Medes because he liued an exile there Iun. in commentar see before qu. 21. 9. 2. Iosephus saith non multum abijt temporis much time passed not after Daniel had expounded this vision when both the King and the citie was taken by Cyrus If Iosephus vnderstand not many houres after he agreeth with the Scripture but if he meane many daies or moneths he is deceiued 3. Zonâ—ras affirmeth this to haue beene the opinion of diuers that Balthazar was slaine the same night but he seemeth not to be of that opinion which seemeth strange that he beeing a Christian writer should speake so doubtfully of a thing so euident in the sacred storie 4. All these things are euident out of Scripture 1. that Babylon after 70. yeares of the Iewes captiuitie should be surprised and taken Ierem. 25. 12. 2. that the king himselfe should be slaine at the taking of the citie as Isa. 14. 4. The oppressor shall cease v. 22. I will cut off in Babel the name and the remnant the sonne and the â—ephew for Balthazar was nephew to Nabuchadnezer 3. It should be done on a sudden Isa. 47. 11. Destruction shall come vpon thee suddenly or thou beware 4. and in the night Isa. 21. 4. The night of my pleasures hath he turned into feare 5. and in the time of their feast therefore he is called the king of Sheshach of the feast of their goddesse Shacah Ier. 25. 26. Quest. 43. Whether Balthazar was taken in Babylon 1. The Authors before rehearsed which thinke that Balthazar was not slaine but yeelded himselfe to Cyrus and so was sauâ—d aliue doe adde further that when the King heard that Cyrus was comming with a great armie to besiege Babylon he fled to a citie called Borsippa and thither Cyrus pursued him and besieged him there who seeing that he could not hold out yeelded himselfe vnto Cyrus clemencie 2. But Xenophons opinion lib. 7. is more probable that the king was taken at Babylon which is also most consonant to Scripture for though it be not directly expressed that he was slaine in Babylon yet it followeth by necessary collection that that was the place where Balthazar was both depriued of his life and kingdome 1. There was the kings palace c. 4. 27. where the Chaldean kings vsually did reside 2. there was the temple of Bel where the vessels of Gods house were laid vp c. 1. 2. from whence they were brought vnto this riotous feast but they could not haue beene fetch from Babylon to an other place seeing the citie was now besieged by Cyrus 3. and for the same reason so many nobles could not haue beene gathered together 4. nor yet the wise men of Babel assembled 5. neither is it like that Balthazar beeing in such feare would in that obscure place haue made such a feast whereas in Babylon he trusted to the defence of the citie 44. Quest. By what meanes Babylon was taken 1. Some thinke that Cyrus and Darius did homage vnto king Balthazar and he thereupon made this feast whereat they were present who when they heard the prophesie of Daniel and seeing the king and his nobles drunke with wine tooke their opportunitie and so set vpon them and killed them ex Hugon But it is not like that the king would haue beene so secure if his enemies had beene in his hand but that he would haue made
them but their captiuitie began vnder Nabuchadnezer from the beginning then of his raigne to the ende of the Chaldean Monarchie there must be 70. yeares at the least 2. Some make but iust 70. yeares as Sulpit. lib. 2. sacr histor so also H. B. in the Concent of Scripture Nabuchadnezers 45. Euilmerodachs 22. and Balthazar 's 3. doe fill vp the number of 70. yeares But the captiuitie began not before the 8. yeare of Nabuchadnezers raigne when Iechonia was carried away captiue 2. king 24. 12. from whence the Prophet Ezekiel counteth the yeares of captiuitie Ezck. 1. 2. c. 8. 1. and in diuers other places 3. Of the third sort which extend the terme beyond 70. yeares first Iosephus counteth an 118. yeares to Nabuchadnezer he giueth 43. yeares to Euilmerodach 18. to Niglasar 40. to Balthazar 17. yet Beda and Rupertus thinke that the place in Iosephus is corrupted and Pererius also because Iosephus in an other place lib. 11. from the 18. yeare of Nabuchadnezer to the destruction of Babylon reckoneth iust 70. yeares Paulus Orosius affirming that Babylon was taken by Cyrus at the same time when the kings were expelled out of Rome which was in the 67. Olympiade extendeth the Chaldean Monarchie 60. yeares beyond the due time for Cyrus is held to haue begun to raigne in the 58. Olympiade Pererius holdeth that the Chaldean Monarchie endured 88. yeares which he sheweth thus the captiuitie of the Iewes began in the 18. yeare of Nabuchadnezer when Ierusalem was taken which continued 70. yeares vnto this summe must be added 18. yeares which were runne before of Nabuchadnezers raigne But herein is Pererius error he beginneth the captiuitie in the 18. yeare whereas it must take beginning onely from the 8. yeare of his raigne as is euident 2. king 24. 12. and shall afterward more fully be shewed 4. Therefore the true account is this the 70. yeares captiuitie beganne when Ieconia was caried into captiuitie for so the Prophet Ezekiel vseth to recken as c. 1. 2. he maketh mention of the 5. yeare c. 8. 1. of the sixt yeare c. 29. 1. of the 10. yeare c. 31. 1. of the 11. yeare c. 32. 1. of the 12. yeare c. 29. 17. of the 27. yeare all which yeares are accounted from the captiuitie of Iechonia as is euident c. 1. 2. which was in the 8. yeare of the raigne of Nabuchadnezer 2. king 24. 12. for then must begin the account of 70. yeares vnto which must be added 8. yeares of Nabuchadnezers raigne which were expired before so the whole time of the Babylonian Monarchie from the beginning of Nabuchadnezers raigne was not precisely 70. yeares as Polan p. 398. but 78. yeares Bulling 51. Quest. Of the yeares of the raigne of the seuerall kings of Babylon Concerning the number of the kings themselues how many raigned after Nabuchadnezer is shewed before Quest. 21. about the yeares of their raigne there is great diuersitie of opinion 1. Sulpitius giueth vnto Balthazar 14. yeares Eusebius to Enilmerodach and Balthazar together alloweth but 12. yeares to Nabuchadnezzer but 36. Berosus with other auncient writers cited by Iosephus lib. 1. cont Appion doe giue vnto Nabuchadnezzer 43. yeares 20. yeares to Euilmerodach 4. yeares to Niglasar 17. yeares to Balthazar Iosephus counteth 18. years for Euilmerodach 40. for Niglasar 9. moneths for Labosardach and 17. years for Balthazar lib. 10. antiq c. 12. Pererius doth giue 43. yeares to Nabuchadnezzer to Euilmerodach and Niglasar between them 27. years to Balthazar 17. yeares But all these doe manifestly erre in these two things first they giue but 43. yeares to Nabuchadnezzer whereas he raigned 45. yeares 8. yeares before Ieconiah his captiuitie 2. king 24. 12. and 37. yeares after 2. king 25. 27. And they suppose Balthazar to raigne 17. yeares whereas Daniel maketh mention onely of the third yeare of his raigne c. 8. 1. 2. The more common opinion is that Nabuchadnezzer raigned 45. yeares Euilmerodach 22. as H. B. in his Concent or 23. as Oecolampad and Balthazar three But these are decciued in beginning the captiuitie from the third yeare of Iehoiakim when Ierusalem was first taken in the first yeare of Nabuchadnezzers raigne whereas it must be accounted from Iechoniahs captiuitie as is shewed in the former question 3. Therefore I thinke Bullingers account is rather to be followed to begin the 70. yeares from Iechoniahs captiuitie as Iunius also doth comment in 9. Daniel and then allowing vnto Nabuchadnezzer 45. yeares Euilmerodach must haue 30. and Balthazar three which make in all 78. yeares the whole time of the continuance of the Babylonian Monarchie from which summe 8. beeing deducted for so many yeares raigned Nabuchadnezzer before he tooke Iechoniah prisoner there will remaine iust 70. yeares the time of the captiuity 4. The places of doctrine 1. Doctr. That Gods iudgements worke diuersly v. 6. Then the kings countenance was changed Generally the denuntiation or demonstration of Gods iudgements doe awaken and rouse vp the secure and sleepie conscience But it hath a diuers operation in the Elect and in the wicked and reprobate In the Elect the hearing of Gods iudgements doth sometime bring them to repentance for their sinne as it did Dauid or doth stirre them vp to be more zealous in performing their dutie as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 5. 11. Knowing the terrour of the Lord we perswade men that is seeing euery one shall receiue the things done in his bodie as he saith in the former verse that euery one should haue a care faithfully to performe his dutie In the reprobate either they are not mooued at all at Gods iudgements as Pharaoh at the first was not humbled at all or els there is wrought in them a shew of repentance for a time as in Ahab or they may be terrified with the feare of Gods iudgements without any remorse at all as is here seene in Balthazar 2. Doctr. Of the momentanie pleasures of the world v. 6. And his thoughts troubled him Balthazar in the middes of his feast when his heart was disposed to be merrie is stricken into his dumps according to that saying of Amos c. 8. 10. I will turne your feasts into mourning and all your songs into lamentation for like as the weather changeth it is sometime faire sometime foule and as at the sea wheÌ„ it is calme suddenly riseth a storme and tempest such are all terrene and earthly ioyes Onely our peace and ioy in Christ is perpetuall as our blessed Sauiour himselfe saith Ioh. 16. 22. Your ioy shall no man take from you like as a streame which continually runneth such are spirituall ioyes flowing vnto euerlasting life but the ioy of the world is like vnto sudden raine which hastily runneth downe and is speedily gone 3. Doctr. Man of himselfe can not vnderstand or perceiue heauenly things v. 8. Then came all the kings wise men but they could neither read the writing c. As these Châ—ldeans presuming vpon their owne skill could neither read
vaine is the defense of the Papists which alleadge that they doe not worship the image but as it hath relation to him that is represented thereby Poaln See further of this controversie Synops. Centur. 2. p. 402. 2. Controv. Whether images in Churches may be retained though they be not worshipped Like as they onely doe not worship God which doe pray vnto him and fall downe before him but they also which doe fight for him So they are not onely worshippers of images which doe bowe vnto them but they also which doe maintaine them and striue still to haue them retained In this place they are not said to worship the gods of siluer and gold but to praise them So they are praisers of images which thinke they may be retained as ornaments in their Churches for the verie making of such images for any religious vse is accursed before God and abominable and therefore defileth Gods house it can be no ornament vnto it As Deut. 27. 15. Cursed is the man that shall make any carued or molten image which is an abhomination to the Lord c. God did not onely forbid the Israelites to make them any such images but he commanded them to breake downe and deface the images of the Cananites Deut. 7. 5. they might with as good pretense haue kept them for ornaments as the Lutherans doe popish images in their Churches But as Augustine saith Deus istarum omnium superstitionum euersionem iussit permissit exhibuit God hath commanded permitted exhibited vnto Christians the subuersion and ouerthrowe of all such superstitions 3. Contro That no Protestants but Papists are the profaâ—ers of holy things v. 23. They haue brought the vessels of his house before thee Pererius taketh here occasion p. 399. to enueigh against protestants whom he falsly and contumeliously calleth heretikes quires sacras Iudiâ—rio contemptui habeant c. which doe contemne and make a mocke of holy things which they take away from sacred places and persons and put them to impure and wicked vses Contra. 1. We denie that Church vessels and implements taken from idolaters are sacred things they were neuer consecrate vnto God but to superstitious vses and therefore it can be no sacriledge to conuert such things to ciuill vses 2. If any haue abused such things notwithstanding to riot and excesse they are not to be excused 3. But the Papists are the profaners of holy things indeed they profane the Scriptures not suffering them to be read to the peoples vnderstanding and the Sacraments in polluting them with their owne inuentions they baptise bels and make an idol of bread in the Eucharist 4. the Church maintenance by tithes they first tooke away from the Churches and translated them to their Abbeys where their fatte bellied Monkes wasted and consumed them in riot as all the world knoweth 4. Controv. That there are no certaine periods of kingdomes Pappus here noteth that concerning the periods of kingdomes they are for the most part quingentorum annorum of fiue hundreth yeares or halfe so much as the Assyrian Empire continued 520. yeares from the going out of Israel are counted 480. yeares and thence to the captiuitie of Babylon 430. yeares from thence to the comming of Christ 490. yeares the kingdome of Athens from Cecrope to Codrus continued 490. yeares and so long the commonwealth of the Lacedemonians from Lycurgus to the ende and subuersion thereof Some kingdomes continued but halfe the time of this periode as the kingdome of Israel in Samaria 262. yeares the Persian Monarchie 230. the kings among the Romanes raigned 245. yeares Contra. 1. First they can define no certaine periode of kingdomes some will haue 500. yeares the periode some 700. some an 120. yeares and here before diuerse examples are alledged of vnlike continuance 2. The examples are impertinent the Assyrian Empire is held to haue continued aboue a 1000. yeares the state of the Iudges exceeded not 300. yeares the 490. yeares till the comming of the Messiah take not beginning from the captiuitie but from the reedifying of Ierusalem after the captiuitie as is euident Dan. 9. and in that time there were great alterations in the commonwealth of the Iewes 3. But many contrarie examples may be produced the Romane state after the kings were expelled vnder Consuls and Dictators eudured aboue 600. yeares The dominion of the Turkes hath borne sway a 1000. yeares the kingdome of France hath continued a 1200. yeares the state of Venice 800. And for short continuance the Monarchie of the Athenians exceeded not 50. yeares nor the Chalde Empire many aboue 70. This therefore is a vaine obseruation of any such certaine and definite periode of kingdomes 4. Further in that this Chaldean Monarchie was dissolued because of their iniquitie two other errors are met withall 1. of them which thinke that the alteration and change of kingdomes is ruled by the constellations and aspects of planets the Chaldeans were very expert in such contemplations who could foresee no such thing that their Monarchie was so neere vnto an ende 2. they are also here confuted which thinke there is a fatall destinie of kingdomes that by an ineuitable necessitie which dependeth vpon the connexion and concurrence of certaine secundarie causes commonwealths come vnto their fatall ende We see in this place that no such second causes here concurred but it was Gods decree and the writing of his owne hand which dissolued the Babylonian state for the iniquitie thereof 6. Morall obseruations 1. Observ. Of the dangerous sinne of drunkennesse v. 2. Whiles Balthazar tasted the wine c. The king beeing intoxicate here with wine casteth off all care of God and man he falleth to profanenesse and blasphemie such are the fruites of drunkennesse It made Noah discouer his nakednesse Lot to commit incest it caused Benhadad with his 30. kings to be ouercome of a fewe 1. king 20. And Simon the Macchabe beeing filled with good cheare was slaine at a banket Alexander the great killed more of his friends when he was drunke then he did enemies in battell Pythagoras therefore well said ebrietatem brenem esse in saniam that drunkennesse is a short kind of madnesse And Anacharsis his saying was primum poculum vini esse sanitatis alterum voluptatis tertium contumeliae the first cuppe of wine was for health the next for pleasure the third was raging and contumelious c. the Apostle therefore exhorteth be not drunke with wine wherein is excesse Ephes. 5. 18. yea he sheweth that drunkards shall not inherite the kingdome of God 2. Cor. 6. 10. what madnesse then is it for so short and a beastly pleasure to loose Gods inheritance at the least to put it in hazard 2. Observ. Against carnall securitie This Balthazar being so neere vnto his destruction gaue himselfe to banqueting and feasting to drinke and to be drunken So the wicked and vngodly many times are most secure when their iudgement is at hand according to that saying in the Prouerbs 16.
is thought to haue raigned but a short time after not aboue a yeare or two but Cyrus was neither so old held not then to be aboue 40. and he raigned diuers yeares after 3. And c. 6. 28. Darius and Cyrus are named as two diuers persons 5. It was the opinion of some as Hierome writeth vpon the 5. chap. of Daniel that this Darius was the same who in Herodotus is called Astyages of which opinion Eusebius seemeth to be who maketh Astyages the last king of the Medes And this seemeth to be fauoured by the Apocryphal storie of Susanna v. 65. that when Astyages was put or laid vnto his auncestors Cyrus of Persia tooke his kingdome But this opinion may thus be refelled 1. because none of the forren writers doe make any mention that Astyages had any warre with the Chaldeans or that he tooke Babylon 2. And this Apocryphal storie may be doubted of for according to Xenophon Cyaxares raigned after Astyages and as Herodotus writeth Cyrus expelled Astyages out of his kingdome and sent him to Carmania and so tooke vpon him the kingdome while he liued the storie of Susanna agreeth with neither of these reports 6. The most generall receiued opinion is that this Darius called Cyaxares was as Xenophon writeth the sonne of Astyages and vncle by the mothers side to Cyrus which Cyaxares was king of the Medes after Astyages this opinion followeth Iosephus Hierome Lyranus Pintus Oecolampad Osiander with others But this is obiected against this opinion that Astyages had no sonne but a daughter Mandane the mother of Cyrus whome Astyages commanded to be slaine because the Astrologers told him that he should haue dominion ouer all Asia And this is affirmed by diuers authors that Astyages had no sonne as Valerius Maxim lib. 1. cap. de somnijs Herodot lib. 1. Severus Sulpitius lib. 2. sacr histor And therefore Iunius vnderstandeth Xenophon to speake not of Astyages naturall but of his adopted sonne 7. Iosephus Scaliger in the 8. booke of that exquisite worke which he hath written de emendat tempor is of this opinion that be which is called Balthazar is the same who is named of other writers Labosardach the sonne of Niâ—octis Nabuchadnezzers daughter who was slaine by the Babylonians and then this Darius the Mede the same who is called Nabonidus was by a common consent chosen king in his place who when he had raigned 17. yeares in Babylon was ouercome by Cyrus and the citie taken Iunius also in his annotation vpon this verse saith that this Darius the Mede is the same who is called by the historians Labonidus or Labynitus Contra. 1. If Labosardach and Balthazar were the same beeing the sonne of Nabuchadnezzers daughter then was not the prophecie fulfilled that the kingdome should be giuen to Nabuchadnezzers sonne and his sonnes sonne for it was to his daughters sonne 2. when Balthazar was slaine Darius tooke the kingdom by force it is not like they would haue chosen him beeing a stranger vnto it 3. after Balthazar was slain the kingdom was deuided betweene the Medes and Persians it did not then quietly descend vnto the Medes 4. The Prophet Isai saith c. 13. 17. Behold I will stirre vp the Medes against thee the Medes then assaulted Babylon and tooke it by violence a Mede came not vnto it by election 5. This Darius was king of the Medes and Persians as it appeareth in the 6. chapter how could that be if he raigned in Babylon and was ouercome by the power of the Medes and Persians 6. Concerning Iunius opinion I preferre his iudgement in his commentarie vpon v. 11. 12. c. 5. that Balthazar is the same whome Herodotus called Labunitus or Nebonidus which signifieth a Prince expulsed because he with his father were both expelled by Niglazar Then Darius the Mede could not be that Nabonidus or Labynitus as he hath in his annotation 8. This then is the most probable opinion that this Darius called also Cyaxares was not the sonne but the brother of Astyages and great vncle to Cyrus the sonne of Cambyses and Mandane Astyages daughter this then was their genealogie Assuerus or Cyaxares the Elder had two sonnes Astyages and Cyaxares the younger the same is this Darius who is said to be sonne of Assuerus c. 9. 1. not of Astyages Xenophon calleth Cyaxares Astyages sonne because he adopted him to succeede in the kingdome to preuent Cyrus Iun. Polan The author of the scholasticall historie much disagreeth not who saith that Cyaxares was not the sonne but the kinsman of Astyages whome he adopted to be his heire This Darius was also father in law to Cyrus to whome together with his daughter he resigned the kingdome of Media Iun. 2. Quest. Of the diuers names which Darius had 1. Pererius obserueth that he was called by 4. names by Daniel he is named Darius by the Septuag as Hierome saith he was called Artaxerxes by Xenophon Cyaxares and in the storie of Susanna he is the same there called Astyages the three first names may be acknowledged to be giuen vnto him but Astyages he is not called either by Herodotus or Xenophon it is rather an error in that Apocryphal storie 2. The names Cyaxares and Assuerus are in effect all one for Chu in the Persian language signifieth a Prince and so doth achash whence is deriued the word achashverosh or Assuerus which the Greekes pronounce Axares or Oxuares Cyaxares then signifieth a prince of princes or a chiefe prince 3. He is called Darius the Mede by way of distinction from Darius the Persian Ezr. c. 4. 5. who was the third that raigned after Cyrus 3. Quest. How Darius tooke vpon him the kingdome of Babylon 1. Xenophon writeth that Darius was the chiefe author of the warre against Babylon and therein vsed the helpe of Cyrus who beeing sent with the greatest part of the armie to the siege Darius himselfe staied in Media to whome Cyrus came afterward when he had setled the Babylonian affaires to whome Darius offered the kingdome of Media together with his daughter and Cyrus againe gaue vnto Darius the gouernment of Babylon with the goodly palace and other edifices there this report followeth Iunius in his commentarie But it is not like that Darius was now absent seeing it is saide that immediately after Balthazar was slaine Darius tooke vpon him the kingdome 2. R. Levi thinketh that Darius was present and that he afterward continued in Babylon and raigned not a full yeare there and then Cyrus succeeded him 3. But Iosephus whose opinion is more probable thinketh that Darius certaine moneths after the taking of Babylon returned into Media and caried Daniel with him where in Eâ—batane Daniel builded a goodly tower for the sepulture of the kings which remained vnto Iosephus time and then seemed as if it had beene newly built And he left Cyrus behind him to set the Babylonian affaires in order this Bullinger thinketh more probable and Oecolampadius seemeth to encline to the same opinion
for Daniel when he was cast into the lyons den was then among the Medes and Persians as may be gathered c. 6. 12. The thing is true according to the law of the Medes and Persians 4. Now it beeing agreed that both Darius and Cyrus were both at this siege and taking of Babylon some thinke that Cyrus had the dominion sed pro sua modestia cessit titulo regni but in his modestie gaue vnto Darius the title of the kingdome beeing his vncle and father in law Oecolampad Lyranus thinketh that Cyrus compounded with Darius vpon this condition it a vt post eum regnaret so that he might raigne after him But seeing Cyrus when he had expulsed Astyages king of the Medes established Cyaxares his vncle in the kingdom for his life time Iun. ex Xenoph. who now held the same and was taken for the king of Medâ—s Cyrus was contented that Darius as in the right of his kingdome who also was the chiefe author of this warre should haue the honour of this victorie and the dominion of Babylon and thus thinketh Hierome that not onely ordo aetatis propinquitatis sed regni seruatus est that not the order of age or affinitie but of the kingdome was kept herein because then the kingdome of the Medes was greater then the kingdome of the Persians And this best agreeth vnto the Prophets who make the Medes the chiefe enemies and assaulters of Babylon Isa. 13. 17. and Ierem. 51. 11. Iosephus also maketh Darius the chiefe man in the siege and sacking of Babel he did take it adiutus à Cyro cognato beeing assisted by Cyrus his kinsman 5. And herein more credit may be giuen to Iosephus in the histories which concerne his owne nation then vnto Herodotus or Xenophon vnto whome these two exceptions may be taken 1. Herodotus is thought to haue many fabulous reports and therefore is commonly called pater mendaciorum the father of lies and Xenophon in the praise of Cyrus is found somewhat to exceede 2. These two historians in diuers points are one contrarie to the other Herodotus maketh Astyages the last king of the Medes Xenophon nameth Cyaxares king after him the first saith Astyages had no sonne but a daughter the other saith Cyaxares was his sonne the first writeth that Cyrus expelled Astyages out of his kingdome the other that he died and left it to his sonne Herodotus saith that Cyrus was borne of obscure parentage that he was miserably slaine by Thomyris Queene of the Messagetes that he raigned 29. yeares Xenophon saith that Cyrus was nobly borne of a Prince of Persia that he died peaceably at home and raigned but seauen yeares 6. The resolution then of this question is that neither this Darius was chosen king by the Babylonians as Ioseph Scaliger whose opinion is rehearsed before nor yet was he altogether rex beneficiarius a king by courtesie as Iun. but as king of the Medes which kingdome indeede he held by Cyrus fauour he ouercame Babylon and translated the kingdome from the Chaldeans to the Medes and Persians 4. Quest. When Darius tooke vpon him the kingdome of the Chaldeans 1. Iunius in his commentarie vpon the â— ch v. 29. seemeth to be of opinion that Cyrus first spent a whole yeare in the setling of the Babylonian affaires and after a yeare resigned the title of that kingdome to Darius so the first yeare of Darius raigne was the second of Cyrus which may be the cause why mention is made onely of the first and third yeare of Cyrus and not of the second So his opinion is that Darius and Cyrus first yeare concurred not together but that Darius first yeare was Cyrus second But this seemeth to contradict the text c. 6. 28. where Darius raigne is set before Cyrus it is vnlike that Darius raigne then began after Cyrus 2. Some are of opinion that Darius the Mede raigned diuers yeares in Babylon before Cyrus tooke the citie of which iudgement is Iosephus Scaliger as we haue seene before qu. 1. 8. But this can not be for as soone as the Babylonian Monarchie was dissolued it was diuided presently betweene the Medes and Persians the Medes did not possesse it before 3. R. Levi thinketh that Darius raigned the first yeare immediatly after the taking of Babylon but he raigned not the whole yeare Cyrus succeeded the same yeare which opinion Oecolampadius fauoureth because if Cyrus raigned not the first yeare then the manumission and deliuerance of the Iewes should haue beene deferred after the 70. yeares were expired 4. But the more probable opinion is that Darius and Cyrus raigne concurred together and that the first yeare of the Persian Monarchie is indifferently ascribed to Cyrus and Darius for it is euident that immediatly after the dissolution of the Babylonian state Cyrus raigned and it is called the first yeare of his raigne as c. 1. 21. Daniel was vnto the first yeare of Cyrus that is he continued in Babylon till that state was altered and the kingdome was translated to Cyrus Beside the 70. yeares of captiuitie and the Babylonian Monarchie ended together then immediatly after the 70. yeares expired Cyrus in his first yeare maketh an Edict for the returne of the Iewes Ezr. 1. 1. Now that this was the first yeare also of Darius is as euident c. 9. 1 2. in the first yeare of Darius Daniel vnderstood that the 70. yeares were accomplished but if Darius first had not beene likewise Cyrus first the yeares were accomplished before So they both raigned together as Calvin faith they did regnare in commune raigne in common because the Medes and Persians are ioyned together c. 6. 8. and the Edict for the returne of the Iewes was made by them both as Iun. noteth 2. Chron. 36. 23. and therefore Ezr. 6. 14. it is called the commandement of Cyrus and Darius 5. Quest. Of the officers which Darius appointed and the reason thereof 1. Darius appointed an 120. gouernours according to the number of the Prouinces which were numbred afterward to an 127. Esth. 1. 1. Some thinke that the odde number of seauen is here omitted to make the number euen Genevens annot Esth. 1. 1. But it is more like that either more Prouinces were added afterward to the Persian Monarchie or els all the 127. were diuided among these 120. gouernours All these might be diuided into three parts each of them containing 40. gouernours And ouer all these were three other chiefe ouerseers set to take account of them to euery one there might be assigned 40. Bullinger Iosephus is deceiued who trebleth this number and saith that Darius appointed 360. gouernours whome Freculphus in his Chronicle followeth tom 1. lib. 3. c. 18. 1. The reasons why Darius made choice of these gouernours were these 1. Because Darius was old 62. yeares of age and therefore he did appoint them to be his assistants in the kingdome Iun. 2. Because all things in the Commonwealth must be done in order intellexit
of most cruell death to be cast into the lyons denne inioyning so vnreasonable a thing 10. Quest. Of the immutable decrees of the Medes and Persians v. 8. 1. It seemeth that the decrees of the Persian kings were inuiolably kept whether they were iust or vniust as the sudden and rash sentence which Assuerus gaue against his wife Vashti could not be reuoked and the bloodie decree which Haman procured for the extirpation of the Iewes was not reuersed but a coÌ„trarie decree was made that the Iewes should stand vpon their owne defence and kill those which went about to destroy them 2. The Persians had great respect vnto the truth Agathias in his historie of the manners of the Persians writeth that they make two gods as the Manichees one the author of goodnes and truth whome they call Ormisdatis whose bodie they say is like vnto the light and his soule to the truth and their other god the author of euill they call Arimanes Pet. Crinitus l. 1. de honest disciplin writeth that the Persian kings sonne was committed to foure masters whereof the second did alwaies admonish him that he should loue and keepe the truth throughout his whole life 11. Quest. Why Daniel did not stay the kings decree by his contrarie aduise v. 10. Now when Daniel vnderstood 1. It is like that Daniel was not present when the rulers thus mooued the king but they had excluded him and not made him priuie vnto their deuise for otherwise such was the pietie of Daniel and his zeale toward God that he would not by his silence haue suffered his glorie to be empayred Calvin he vnderstood then the decree after it was proclaimed and published 2. They then which vpon the supposed conniuence and silence of Daniel doe thinke it enough if counsellers and men of state beeing present when wicked decrees are enacted doe withhold their consent are in errour for this were by their timiditie and fearefulnes to betray the truth Against such the wise man speaketh Prou. 24. 11 12. Deliuer those that are drawne to death and wilt thou not preserue them that are led to be slaine if thou say Behold we knew not of it he that pondereth the hearts doth not he vnderstand 12. Quest. Of Daniels custome of praying with the circumstances thereof 1. The occasion is expressed that when he heard of this decree he betooke himselfe vnto prayer which the children of God most of all vse in the time of distresse 2. The place is expressed he went to his owne house not vnto any of their idolatrous temples his owne house was his Temple And he praied in an vpper roome not to be more secret as Pintus collecteth but rather that he might be seene that he continued constant in his religion Pâ—lan Iun. 3. The place is described by the adiunct the opening of the windowes that he might freely and openly shew himselfe a worshipper of God 4. The site and position of the opening of the windows was toward Ierusalem whether he hoped to returne 5. The circumstance of the time is added he prayed three times a day in the morning before he went to his busines at noone when he came home to eate meate and at night when he had finished his busines these three times he made choice of as freest from worldly employments that he might not be interrupted in his prayer 6. His gesture is expressed he kneeled downe vpon his knees 7. The argument and matter of his inuocation prayer in the petition of things necessarie and praise in giuing thanks vnto God 8. His constancie is shewed as he had done aforetime 13. Quest. How Daniels custome in opening the windowes when he prayed agreeth with our Sauiours precept Matth. 6. to shut the doores of the chamber in prayer 1. Our blessed Sauiour must not be vnderstood in that place to speake simply and absolutely as though it were not lawfull but to pray priuately in the chamber the doores beeing shut for then it should not be lawfull to pray publikely or in the hearing of others but that precept is vttered as we say secundum quid in a certaine respect and by way of comparison that it were better secessum quaererâ— to seeke a secret place to pray in then to presse into the sight of men to shewe our deuotion 2. The ende must be considered which our Sauiour there aymeth that which is to take heede of vaine glorie in our prayer which ende is here obserued by Daniel who in opening his windowes did not seeke the praise of men sed se palam Dei cultorem commonstrabat but onely shewed himselfe openly a worshipper of God Bulling Quest. 14. Why Daniel opened the windowe of his chamber toward Ierusalem Daniel turneth not himselfe toward Ierusalem as hauing any confidence in the place or as though God were present more in one place then in another but for these reasons 1. because they had a promise that when they were taken prisoners and carried captiue into a strange land if they prayed toward the Temple they should be heard Lyran. Iun. And whereas they were commanded Deut. 12. to goe vnto the place which the Lord should choose from hence it is gathered si non possent ad locum illum venire saltem contra locum ipsum adorarent if they could not come vnto that place yet they should worship toward it 2. Iustabat nunc annus septuagesimus c. now the 70. yeare was at hand when the deliuerance of the people was expected therfore he prayed so much the more earnestly Pel. and toward Ierusalem quam optabat reparari which he desired to be repayred his desire appeareth in his gesture Oecolamp 3. By this meanes he shewed his faith and hope se acquiescere in haeriditate promissa that he rested in the promised inheritance Calvin that the people should returne thither againe as Iacoband Ioseph beleeued that they should be redeemed out of Egypt 4. By this Ceremonie in looking toward the temple where it was onely lawfull for them to offer sacrifice was signified the redemption by Christ and that it is not lawfull ad alium mediatorem respicere in precibus praeter Christum to looke vnto an other Mediator in our prayers beside Christ Bulling 5. And hereby he shewed se non obliuisci populi sui c. that he forgat not his people countrey and religion though he himselfe enioyed great honour Polan like as Moses forsooke Pharaohs Court and chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God 6. Conspectus ille fuit instar flabelli c. that prospect toward Ierusalem was a meanes the more to enflame Daniels desire to the peoples deliuerance for the which he prayed this he did to helpe his owne infirmitie not that God by opening the windowes that way heard the sooner Calvin 7. Aud herein Daniel had the example of other holy men as Dauid saith Psal. 5. 8. I will bow my selfe or worship toward thy holy temple Polan 8. And
rage against kings against God against his people and how long v. 25. Then the iudgement is set forth by the two effects thereof the destruction of all other kingdomes and the aduancing of the kingdome of Christ v. 26 27. The conclusion followeth which sheweth the effect of this vision in Daniel by these three operations 1. his perplexed cogitations 2. the change of his countenance 3. his deepe meditation I kept it in mine heart 2. The text with the diuerse readings 1 In the first one C. yeare of Belshatzar king of Babel Daniel saw a dreame and visions of his head were G. B. vpon his bed then he wrote the dreame and declared the summe the head C. of the matter 2 Daniel spake and said L. det I saw in my vision by night and behold the foure winds of heauen stroue did fight C. vpon or in I. the great Sea 3 And foure great beasts came vp from the Sea diuers one from an other this from that C. 4 The first was as a Lyon lyonesse L. cor and had eagles wings I beheld till the wings thereof were pluckt off and it was lifted vp from the earth V. A. B. G. better then taken away from the earth L. S. for the Chaldean Monarchie hereby expressed was not vtterly dissolued or by the which wings it was lifted from the earth I. Pol. for the decaying state of this Monarchie is signified and the meaning is that whereas it had before eagles wings and did soaâ—e aloft it could now scarce heaue or carrie it selfe from the ground and set caused to stand C. vpon his feete as a man and a mans heart was giuen him 5 And behold an other beast the second was like vnto a beare and it stood vpon one side it stood on part L. det it erected one dominion I. B. but the other reading is the better see qâ— 14. following and he had three ribbes three orders L. three morfels V. in his mouth betweene his teeth and they said thus vnto him Arise and deuoure much flesh 6 After this I beheld I was seeing C. and lo there was an other like a leopard and it had foure wings of a foule vpon his backe vpon him L. and dominion was giuen him 7 After this I saw in the visions of the night by night B. G. and behold the fourth beast was fearefull and terrible and exceeding maruelously B. very G. too strong L. strong and it had great yron teeth it deuoured and brake in pieces and stamped the residue vnder his feete and it was diuers from vnlike to L. B. G. but the preposition min signifieth from the beasts that were before it and it had tenâ—e hornes 8 I considered the hornes and behold the last horne beeing little I. an other little horne caeter but achari signifieth the last as well as an other did come vp among them and three of the first hornes were pluckt away before it and behold eyes as the eyes of a man were in this horne and a mouth speaking presumptuous things great things C. 9 I beheld till the thrones were set vp taken away I. V. but the words following which describe Gods glorious sitting in his throne doe confirme rather the first reading and the Ancient of daies did sit whose garment was white as snow and the haire of his head like pure wooll his throne was like the flame of fire and the wheeles thereof that is of his throne for so the vse was for Princes thrones to be set vpon wheeles as burning fire 10 A streame of fire issued and came forth from before him thousand thousands ministred vnto him and ten thousand times tenne thousand not tenne thousand thousand B. G. or tenne thousand times an hundred thousand L. S. the word is rhibo which signifieth tenne thousand in the which sense rebobah is taken Levit. 26. 8. stood before him the iudgement was set and the bookes opened 11 Then I beheld from the time that the voice of presumptuous words begunne I. V. from the voice of presumptuous words C. because of the voice of presumptuous words caeter but the preposition min signifieth from which the horne spake I beheld vntill not because L. the beast was slaine and his bodie destroied and giuen to be brent in the fire B. vnto the burning of the fire C. 12 And of the rest of the beasts there dominion was taken away they had taken away C. but their liues were prolonged a length or space in life was giuen them for a time and season a time and time L. A. but there are two diuers words vsed in the originall 13 I beheld in the visions of the night and behold with the in the. V. B. G. but the preposition signifieth with cloudes of heauen one like the Sonne of man comming and he approched vnto the Auncient of daies and they presented him before him 14 And dominion was giuen him I. V. S. he gaue him dominion L. B. G. but the verbe is of the passiue signification and honour and a kingdome that all people nations and languages should serue him his dominion is an euerlasting dominion which shall not faile passe away C. shall not be taken away L. B. G. and his kingdome is that which shall not be destroied corrupted C. 15 My spirit was troubled pierced C. yea I Daniel in the middes of my bodie V. I Daniel was troubled in spirit in the middes B. G. L. and the visions of my head made me afraid 16 I came then vnto one of the standers by and asked him the truth of all this so he told me and shewed me made me to vnderstand C. the interpretation of these things 17 These great beasts which are foure are foure kings not kingdomes L. S. yet that is the meaning which shall arise out of the earth 18 And they shall take the kingdome of the most high Saints not the most high Saints shall take the kingdome L. V. and it is better read the most high Saints V. I. then Saints of the most high L. B. G. for the word high is in the originall in the plurall number and they that is the Saints see qu. 48. shall possesse the kingdome for euer yea for euer and euer 19 After this I desired or wished I. to know the truth concerning the fourth beast which was so diuers from vnlike to B. G. all these exceeding fearefull whose teeth were of yron and his nayles of brasse he deuoured and brake in pieces and stamped the residue vnder his feete 20 Also concerning the tenne hornes which were in his head and of the last Iun. the other caeter see before v. 8. which came vp and three hornes fell before it of this horne I say which had eyes and a mouth speaking presumptuous things whose looke was more stout great C. then his fellowes 21 I beheld and the same horne made battell with against L. B. G. the Saints and preuailed against them 22 Vntill the Auncient of daies came and iudgement was
giuen vnto the most high Saints Saints of the most high L. S. see before v. 18. and the time approched that the Saints possessed the kingdome 23 Thus also he said The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdome in the earth which shall be diuers from vnlike to B. G. greater then L. S. all the kingdomes and shall deuoure the whole earth and shall tread it downe and breake it in pieces 24 And tenne hornes out of this kingdome that is tenne kings shall arise and the last I. Br. an other L. S. V. see before v. 8. shall rise vp after them and he shall be diuers from the former not greater L. or shall ouer come all the euill that were before him S. and he shall subdue three kings 25 And he shall speake words against the most high better then on the side or behalfe of the most high A. or of diuine things V. the word letzad here signifieth against and shall consume not deceiue S. the Saints of the most high and he shall thinke that he may change times and the law lawes L. S. and they shall be deliuered into his hand V. L. by his hand I. vntill a time and times and the deuiding of time a long time or a short V. the halfe of time L. a part of time I. pelag signifieth a part or diuision 26 But the iudgement shall sit and they shall take away his dominion in consuming and destroying it I. to consume and destroy it B. G. vnto the ende 27 And the kingdome and dominion and the greatnes of the kingdomes not kingdome L. B. G. for the word is in the plural nor of the kings S. shall be giuen to the people of the high Saints A. V. B. the people of the Saints of the most high L. the most holy people of the most high G. but the word galonin is in the plurall and answereth to Saints whose kingdom is an euerlasting kingdome and all powers shall serue and obey it B. him G. that is the people before spoken of 28 Hetherto the ende of these words of this matter hetherto V. or this is the ende of the matter G. euen me Daniel many cogitations troubled V. troubled me C. Ã pleonasmâ—s better then as for me Daniel many cogitatious troubled me Pol. or I Daniel had many cogitations which troubled B. G. for here many words are inserted not in the originall and my countenance changed in me but I kept the words the matter G. in mine heart 3. The questions and doubts discussed 1. Quest. Of the order obserued by Daniel in the setting downe of these visions This vision contained in this chapter beeing shewed vnto Daniel in the first yeare of Balthazar who was the last king of the Chaldeans and before Darius vnder whome that miracle fell out in Daniels deliuerance from the lyons c. 6. is a manifest argument that the former storie is transposed this vision in time comming before it yet in order beeing placed after it the reasons hereof are these 1. Theodoret saith that in the former sixe chapters historico more prophetiam conscripsit he writ the prophecie after an historicall manner shewing what things happened vnder Nebuchadnezzer Balthazar Darius but in the sixe chapters following he setteth downe those predictions quasâ— per diuinam reuelationem doctus est which he was taught by diuine reuelation 2. Hierome doth adde further that in the former chapters Daniel historically setteth downe quid mirabilium signorum acciderit c. what memorable signes happened vnder these kings but in the rest of this booke he declareth such visions quarum solus propheta conscius est which the Prophet onely was priuie vnto himselfe 3. Hugo giueth this reason the things before historically rehearsed tempore suo impleta sunt were such as were fulfilled in Daniels time but these here following were visiones futurorum visions of things to come to passe afterward 4. Further in the former histories God had appointed Daniel interpretem magistrum profanis regibus an interpreter and teacher vnto the profane kings nunc praefecit Ecclesiae doctorem now he set him vp as an instructer of his Church Calvin 5. The former histories and miracles shewed the calling of Daniel and the confirmation thereof by signes and miracles in these chapters Daniel exerciseth his vocation and function in his propheticall visions Iun. 6. Lyranus beside the reason before touched that the former visions were partly historicall partly propheticall and therefore were set downe together but these visions are mere propheticae merely propheticall assigneth also this reason that the former visions belong vnto the first comming of Christ and therefore are set together these following concerne his second comming but this is not so for c. 9. there is a manifest prophecie of the first comming of the Messiah and the very time is described and though mention be made by the way as it were of the resurrection and the finall iudgement c. 12. yet the visions are principally intended to foretell such things as should befall the Church of the Iewes before the first comming of the Messiah 2. Quest. Of the visions which follow in generall 1. Bullinger reduceth all the visions following vnto fowre making the visions in the 3. last chapters but one for it is a continuance of the same prophecie wherein the condition of the Church is described vnder the state of the Persians and Grecians especially vnder Antiochus Epiphanes c. 11. 2. Lyranus maketh fiue visions of them thus distinguishing them the first c. 7. significat vltimae tribulationis totalem processum signifieth the totall proceeding in the last tribulation of that Church the second c. 8. which treateth of the combate between the Persians and Grecians designat â—iusdem tribulationis principalem conflictum doth designe the principall conflict of that tribulation the third c. 9. which prophecieth of the comming of the Messiah and so designat eiusdem tribulationis solatium it sheweth the comfort in the same tribulation the fourth vision is of the man which appeared prophecying of the deliuerance of the people designat eiusdem tribulationis terminum and sheweth the ende of that tribulation c. 10. the fift is of the victorie of Christ vnder the signe and figure of the king of the South and the king of the North designat eiusdem tribulationis triumphum it setteth forth the triumph ouer that tribulation c. 11. But as is shewed before the same vision is contained and continued c. 10 11 12. 3. This vision in this chapter is generall of the state of the foure Monarchies which afterward are particularly described like as Cosmographers in the description of the world doe first set forth a generall mappe of the whole world and then particular tables of seuerall countries the same order Daniel obserueth in these visions in the 7. chapter he is informed concerning the generall condition and state of the foure kingdomes then in the 8. followeth a particular narration of the Persian and
Grecian Monarchie and in the 11. chap. a more large description of particular accidents vnder the diuided kingdomes of the Grecians one of the South the other of the North. Bulling 4. The summe then of these visions following is this 1. The state of the Church of the Iewes is described how they shall suffer much affliction vnder the fowre Monarchies but especially vnder the fourth 2. But the affliction shall be but for a time it shall ende at the comming of the Messiah who shall of many be refused and put to death whereupon shall follow the destruction of Ierusalem and dissolution of the Leuiticall stateâ— 3. And then Christ at his second comming shall perfect all the dead shall rise some vnto life some vnto euerlasting condemnation 3. Quest. Of visions in generall 1. Two waies did the Lord reueale himselfe vnto his seruants either by oracle and liuely voice as he spake to Moses face to face Numb 12. 6. or by vision wherein certaine representations and similitudes of things were exhibited for the more liuely demonstration of that thing which was reuealed in which visions sometime the truth it selfe of things to come was simply manifested without any other shadow as Ezek. 40. sometime vnder the similitude of beasts and other things demonstration was made as here c. 7 8. 2. Visions were shewed either vnto men waking or sleeping and beeing waking they either saw them with their eyes as Abraham was bid to behold the starres for so should his â—eede be in multitude Gen. 15. 5. or in the minde as in a traunce such was the vision of the 〈◊〉 cornerd sheete which Peter sawe Act. 10. â— And visions also were declared vnto men by dreame when they were a sleepe in the 〈◊〉 as vnto Iacob was shewed while he slept that vision of the ladder Gen. 28. 〈◊〉 This vision which Daniel sawe was of both kinds it was both a dreame and a vision 〈◊〉 shewed vnto Daniel partly in his sleepe and partly beeing awake God did giue a bâ—essing vnto Daniels religious care to knowe the vision visione redintegrans id ipsum quod 〈◊〉 per somnum exhibuerat renewing the same thing by vision which he had exhibited before by dreame Inn. Quest. 4. Of the time when this vision was reâ—â—aled vnto Daniel V. 1. In the first yearâ— of Belshazzar c. 1. â—ererius saith that this first yeare of Belshazzar whom he supposeth to haue raigned 17. yeares was 18. yeares before the deliuerance of Israel out of captiuitie which was the 54. yeare of their captiuitie and from the building of Rome the 176â— yeare when â—â—quinius Priscus was king of the Romanes But Peâ—â—â—ius in this reckoning committeth diuerse errours 1. Belshazzar raigned not 17. yeares but three yeares onely as hath beene shewed before cap. 5. quest 51. 2. the 54. yeare of the captiuitie was indeede the 18. yeare before their deliuerance but the first yeare of Belshazzar was in the 68. yeare of their captiuitie 3. yeare before they were deliuered 3. the 54. yeare of the captiuitie did concurre with the 190. yeare after the building of Rome in the raigne of Seruius Tullius not of Tarquinius Priscus as Bullinger well collecteth in his tables 2. Pelanus also is deceiued which thinketh that this vision in the first yeare of Belshazar was 17. yeares before the ende of the captiuitie for so long he thinketh Belshazar to â—â—ue raigned which was in the 34â—9 yeare from the beginning of the world and 552. before the comming of Christ But three yeares onely must be allowed vnto Belshazar Berosus giueth vnto him but 5. yeares as Mâ—tâ—sheâ—es reporteth him in his booke de iudicio temporum and the 17. yeare before the captiuitie ended was according to Bullingerâ— account in the yeare of the world 3408. H. Br. in his account much varieth for the yeare of the world making the first yeare of Belshazar to fall into the yeare 3407. In these accounts there is great vncertaintie euery one following his owne coniecture 3. Herein therefore I approoue rather Bullingers iudgement that this first yeare of Belshazar was onely three yeares before the 70. yeares ended for Daniel maketh mention onely of the third yeare of Belshazar c. 8. 1. and now the time of their deliuerance approached and was neere at hand Oecolamp Quest. 5. Why the vision of the fowre Monarchies is againe reuealed vnto Daniel beeing shewed before to Nebuchadnezzar cap. 2. 1. The vision which Nebuchadnezzar saw was more obscure aspiciunt quidem aliquid impij sed in caligine vt nihil distinguant the wicked indeede see somewhat but darkely they cannot distinctly perceiue any thing This vision which Daniel hath of the same thing is more distinct and manifest Calvin 2. An other reason of this repetition is for more certaintie as Pharaoh had two dreames signifying the same thing vt firmitatis indicium sit râ—petitiâ— illa that the repeating thereof might be a token of the firmenesse and certaintie Pap. â—ine noua repetitione non tam attenti essent Iudaei c. without a renewing of that vision the Iewes would not haue beene so attent vnto the prophesies Calvin 3. Beside it was requisite that Belshazar and his people the times beeing now much declined should be admonished as Nebuchadnezzar was and therefore this vision is onely written in the Chalde that they might be without excuse the rest of the visions following are not imparted vnto them because the Chaldes went on in their impietie and shewed themselues obstinate Iun. in comment 4. And in respect of the people of God it was necessarie that the same vision in substance should be reuealed now vpon the point of their deliuerance that they should not promise vnto themselues a quiet state no not after they were come oâ—t of captiuitie but should knowe that still they must be exercised vnder affliction Calvin Genevens Quest. 6. What manner of vision this was which Daniel here had and how it was reuealed 1. This propheticall vision was two wayes shewed vnto Daniel first by a dreame which was sent of God and then this vision was reuealed vnto him againe beeing awake he sawe it in his minde Polanus and therefore he calleth them the visions of his head composita sobria mente ab ipso visa they were seene and perceiued of the Prophet with a sober and well aduised minde Bulling therefore he saith I sawe a dreame he porceiued and vnderstood Nebuchadnezzar had a dreame but he vnderstood it not Calvin 2. This dreame came in the night which signifieth as Pellican quod annuntiantur grauia that many heauie things are declared for the night is taken in Scripture for tribulation But this rather was the meetest time for such visions when the mind was freest from all other incumbrances and when the externall senses are quiet facilius recipitur cognitto supernaturalium the knowledge of supernaturall things is more easily receiued Lyran. 3. This vision Daniel committeth to writing some thinke eum repente exilijsse
vnderstand it Calvin Quest. 11. Of the first beast representing the Chaldean Monarchie Concerning this Monarchie two things are declared 1. The flourishing state 2. and then the declining thereof For their prosperous state they are compared vnto the lyon and the eagle 1. The vulgar Latine readeth a lionesse whereupon Hierome noteth two properties in the Chaldean Monarchie ingentem ferociam libidinem their fiercenes and intemperate lust for the lionesse is more fierce then the lyon and verie insatiable and intemperate not onely coupling with the Lyon but with the Hyena and the Pardus whereof commeth that mixt kind of the Leopard but the word here vsed arieh signifieth a lyon not a lionesse therefore that note hath no ground which the ordinar gloss borroweth out of Hierome that for crueltie this Monarchie is compared to a lyonesse rather then to a lyon 2. There are diuers names giuen vnto lions according to their age ghur is a lyons whelpe chephir a young lyon ghur shacal a middle lyon laish an olde lyon labi a decrepite lyon 3. The Chaldeans are resembled to a lyon as Theodoret thinketh because it was both the most auncient and first of all and it continued longest almost a 1300. yeares as Diodorus and Ctesias Gâ—idius write but rather this comparison is made to shewe both the magnanimitie and courage of them as likewise withall their crueltie and rage In the image c. 2. the Chaldean state is compared vnto gold and here to a lyon which is the most excellent and heroicall beast thus also the Prophets resemble the Chaldeans to a lyon Isa. 5. 29. Ierem. 4. v. 7. 4. By the Eagles wings is signified the great celeritie and swiftnesse of the Chaldeans in their conquests and victories so also doe the other Prophets liken the Chaldeans to a swift Eagle Ierem. 48. v. 40. Esech 17. v. 3. by the two wings are vnderstood the Babylonian and Assyrian state which now were both ioyned together by the which this Monarchie was carried aloft aboue all others Melanct. Osiand Then followeth a description of their declining estate in these foure degrees 1. the wings are pulled away their dexteritie and courage is taken from them tâ—e Chaldeans gaue themselues to idlenesse and pleasure likewise the Persians pulled their wings when they stripped them at once of all their dignitie and gouernement 2. then it was reared from the earth whereas they did flie aloft before now it can scarce lift vp the head from the ground the Latine readeth it was taken from the earth but the Chaldean state remayned still after their wings were pulled it was not vtterly dissolued 3. then he was set vpon his feete as a man they could no longer flie with Eagles wings but stood vpon the ground as other ordinarie and priuate men 4. and a mans heart was giuen him they became timorous and fearefull in so much that when the citie was besiedged the Babylonians durst not looke out at their gates Iun. comment the Babylonians were tributarie to the Persians and were their seruants to till their ground and saluted them as their masters when they met them they also maintained Cyrus garrison in Babylon and so they which were lords before became as ordinarie priuate men Polan ex Xenophon Aben Ezra and Hyppolitus doe expound this of Nebuchadnezzar Lyranus also and the ordinar gloss do not mislike that interpretation which Hugo Car. and Osiander also follow how his wings were clipped and his pride abated when he became as a bruit beast depriued of his reason and vnderstanding and when he was restored to his vnderstanding he was as set vpon his feete and had a mans heart giuen him againe whereas he had a beasts heart before till 7. yeares were past But because this is a description of the whole state and Monarchie and Nebuchadnezzar was at this time dead the former interpretation is better Quest. 12. Where the Chaldean Monarchie here described must take beginning 1. Some thinke that the Assyrian Monarchie beganne in Nimrod and so continued as Diodorus Siculus thinketh a 1300. yeares vnto Sardanapalus who was the last king of the Assyrians and against whom conspired Arbaces a Mede and Phul Belochus the gouernour of Babylon at such time as Iotham raigned in Iudea and Pekah in Israel But exception may be made hereunto 1. although Nimrod were mightie in his time and raigned in Babel yet not long after in Abrahams time Chedorlaomer king of Elam or Persia was greater then Amraphel king of Shinar or Babylon for Sodome and Gomorrha were subiects to the king of Elam 2. Herodotus counteth but 520. yeeres for the whole time of the Assyrian Monarchie vnto Sardanapalus Pap. But whether the Assyrian Monarchie continued so long or not we are not here to fetch the beginning thereof so farre for the application of this vision for it is euident that Daniel hath speciall reference to the state of that Monarchie then present 2. Eusebius thinketh that these Monarchies are here vnderstood vnto the which the Iewes were subiect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the times of this Prophet And this seemeth the most probable that this vision should beginne from the raigne of Nebuchadnezzar for so in the vision of the image c. 2. Nebuchadnezzar is expounded by Daniel to be the head of gold the first Monarchie 3. Pappus beginneth the Assyrian and Chaldean Monarchie from the time of Sardanapalus after whom the kingdome was deuided Arbacâ—s had Media and Persia and Phul Beloch Chaldea and Assyria 1. The first king then of the Chaldeans and Assyrians after the diuision of the Empire was this Phul who is supposed to haue raigned 48. yeares to him Menahem king of Israel paied a 1000. talents of siluer which was imposed vpon him 2. king 15. 19. 2. Next vnto him was Tiglath Peleser who ouercame Pekah king of Israel and carried captiue all the land of Nepthali on this side Iordan and all the countrey beyond into Asshur 2. king 15. 29. he helped Ahaz king of Iudah against Pekah king of Israel and Rezin king of Aram 2. king 16. 7. he is said to haue raigned 23. yeares 3. Then succeeded Saâ—manazar who ouercame Hoshea king of Israel and tooke Samaria and carried away the people captiue 2. king 17. 3. 6. he raigned 11. yeares 4. Senacherib followed who besieged Ierusalem in the time of Hezekiah and lost of his armie in one night by the stroke of an Angel an 185000. men to him are giuen but 7. yeares 5. Senacherib beeing slaine by his sonnes Asarchaddon his sonne succeeded 2. king 19. 37. who raigned 10. yeares 6. About this time it seemeth that the Chaldeans ouercame the Assyrians and Berodach Baladan that sent presents to Hezekiah to congratulate for his recouerie 2. king 20. 12. had the whole Empire who is held to haue raigned 40. yeares 7. Next to him was Ben Merodah who raigned 21. yeares 8. Nabuchadnezzer the Elder followed who ouercame Egypt whome Iosephus affirmeth to haue raigned but 21.
yeares but it is gathered that he raigned 35. yeares Bulling Papp 9. After him was Nabuchadnezzer the Great who raigned 45. yeares he carried away Iechoniah prisoner in the 8. yeare of his raigne and â—fterward tooke Ierusalem and put out Zedekiahs eyes and bound him in chaines 11. After him raigned Euilmerodach his sonne who tooke Iechoniah out of prison in the 37. yeare of his captiuitie and imprisonment 2. king 25. 27. 12. The last of this race was Belshazzar in the third yeare of whose raigne was Babylon taken by Darius and Cyrus Thus Bullinger and Pappus set downe the succession of the kings of Assyria and Babylon 4. But the Chaldean Monarchie in this vision reacheth not so high as either to the diuision of the Empire after Sardanapalus or the alteration of the kingdome vnder Berodach Baladan Daniel onely describeth the state of the Monarchie in his time beginning at Nabuchadnezzer the great as he expounded the like vision of the image c. 2. resembling Nabuchadnezzer to the head of gold 13. Quest. Of the second beast and why the Persian Monarchie is compared to a beare 1. Lyranus thinketh they are so resembled because the beare is lesse cruell and so the Persians were more equall toward the people of God but in this sense this vision should differ from the other c. 2. where the armes and breasts which signifie the Persian Monarchie appeared to be of siluer as inferiour to the first which was of gold 2. In diuers other respects then the Persian state is resembled to a beare as in their obscure beginning the Persians were at the first a nation of no fame or renowne like as the beare is at the first but a rude lumpe of flesh without any fashion which the damme by continuall licking bringeth to fashion Perer. Pintus 3. Beside the beare is most patient of labour and hunger all winter long they liue without food beeing nourished onely by sleepe as Plinie writeth of them lib. 8. c. 36. So the Persians 〈◊〉 a most frugall nation for the most part they liued onely of bread and they dwelt among the mountaines as wild beares seeking their food Perer. Hug. Card. 4. The beare is of a weake sight and of a tender head but of a vast and vnhansome bodie whereby is signified that the Persians did fight rather with their vast and huge numbers then with martiall stratagemes and policie Perer. as Cyrus was ouercome of the Massagetes and his head was cut off by Thomyris hauing 200. thousand men in his armie Pisistratus beeing expelled Athens for his tyrannie was sent against Grecia by Darius with an armie of an 100. thousand footmen and 10. thousand horsemen and was ouercome by Miltiades the Athenian captaine in the fields of Marathon onely hauing a 11. thousand men Xerxes with 10. hundred thousand men inuaded Greece and was ouercome by Sea of Themistocles and by land of Leonidas and Pausanias with a small number and he himselfe constrained to flee away in a small boate Leonidas at Thermopylae with 3000. men kept the streights against all the Persian armie and with 300. men set vpon their hoast of 500. thousand and slue of them 20. thousand where he himselfe also and all his companie was slaine 5. They were like vnto beares ob barbariem because of their barbarousnes Calvin they were a sauage and barbarous people brought vp in the mountaines like as the beare is to the sight a more vncomely and vnpleasant beaâ—t then a lyon 6. But herein the fittest resemblance is the beare is typus barbaricae ferinae crudelitatis a type of babarous and beastly crueltie Iun. Theodoret hath speciall reference here vnto the cruell torments which the Persians vsed in fleaing of men and pulling off their skinnes and hewing them into peices But generally rather is described the sauage and cruell nature of that nation as it followeth in the rest of the vision by the ribbes betweene the teeth and their deuouring of much flesh Quest. 14. Why the beare is said to stand vpon the one side 1. The vulgar Latine readeth in parte stetit it stood vp on a part but the true reading is it stood vpon one side which the Hebrewes expound that this Monachie was not so cruell against the Iewes as the other for diuerse of the Persian kings were beneficiall toward the people of God 2. Hierome giueth this sense they first rose vp on a part that is surprised the Chaldean kingdome that they might more easily subdue the rest 3. Theodoret referreth it to that part of the kingdome which the Persians held still vnder the Romane Monarchie though the dominion of Egypt and Asia minor and Syria were taken from them but in this vision the Persian Monarchie is described how it was in the time of the priâ—e and glorie thereof before it was dissolued by Alexander 4. Calvin and the Geneuens following him doe vnderstand it of the meane beginning of the Persians respicit obscura initia regni illius it respecteth the obscure beginning of that kingdome 5. Vatablus vnderstandeth it of the taking of Babylon that the Persians leaned on one side they onely set themselues against the Babylonians they spared the Iewes so also Pintus 6. But the best interpretation is it stood vpon one side ex duobus lateribus id est distinctis regnis vnum effectum est of the two sides that is two distinct kingdomes there was one side that is one kingdome made for the Medes and Persians ioyned together Iun. in commentar so also Bulling Iunius in his annotat followeth an other reading retayning the same sense dominatum vnum erexit he erected one dominion that is subdued all other nations and made but one dominion of them all so also Polanus the word satar with a pricke on the left side ouer shin signifieth a side also so D. Kimchi readeth but with a pricke on the right side shatar it signifieth rule and dominion the first reading seemeth to be the fitter because of the preposition lamed set before lishtar on the side which is omitted in the other reading 7. Oecolampadius thus interpreteth he stood vpon one side that is there was a place found for the Persians to be numbred among the cruel beasts but this sense is not so proper 15. Quest. Of the three ribbes in his mouth what they signifie 1. R. Saadia vnderstandeth three kings which succeeded Cyrus but Hierome refuseth this interpretation because there were more then three kings of Persia Osiander also expoundeth by these three long teeth three great kings of Persia Cyrus Darius Xerxes but it appeareth not seeing there were 10. kings of Persia or according to Hierome 14. kings why these three should be vnderstood beside therest Melancthon vnderstandeth other three Cyrus Darius Artaxerxes 2. Hugo interpreteth these three teeth which the Latine translateth three orders to be those three chiefe officers which were set ouer all the kingdome as we read cap. 6. 2. so also Apollinarius but these chiefe
Bulling so also Pintus Sa Oecolamp Perer. But all these are deceiued 1. in taking this number of tenne for a number indefinite for seeing this number is diuided as after mention is made of three kings which shall be pulled away a certaine and finite number must be signified and if tenne did not betoken a certain number the time should not be known when the little horne the last of the ten should be expected 2. The kings doe not signifie kingdomes but so many kings out of one kingdome as it is expounded v. 24. the tenne hornes out of this kingdome are tenne kings that shall rise they must rise out of one kingdome 3. neither can these tenne kingdomes which they vnderstand be raised after the dissolution of the Empire for the beast is not destroyed that is the kingdome dissolued vntill the little horne came vp v. 11. 2. Of the second sort also there are diuerse opinions 1. Some by tenne hornes vnderstand so many kings which in the end of the world shall diuide the Romane Empire among them and then shall the eleuenth horne rise vp which they suppose to be Antichrist of this opinion is Hierome whom Lyranus followeth Hugo gloss ordinar interlin But as Oecolamp noteth we finde this to be otherwise for one part of the Romane Empire onely which is in Europe we see to be diuided into tenne kingdomes as Portugall Spaine England Fraunce Denmarke Suecia Polonia Bohemia Hungaria Naples the other parts of the Empire were deuided into more kingdomes 2. Some vnderstand the 10. Prouinces which were subiect to the Romane Emperour gouerned by Consuls as Strabo lib. 17. reckoneth tenne of them But the Proconsuls and Deputies were not kings and though they were as kings they had their seueral prouinces as their kingdomes but these kings must come out of one kingdome 3. Some doe here number tenne seuerall kingdomes into the which the Romane Empire was diuided as some doe reckon these Italie Spaine Fraunce Germanie Illyricum Grecia Africa Egypt Asia Syria Melancthon Some doe for Illyricum put England numbring the rest which are before rehearsed Osiand Some doe name the tenne kingdomes in Europe before specified ex Pap. But it is euident that more then ten kingdomes are risen out of the Romane Empire seeing so many are found onely in Europe 4. Some then leauing this conceit of the Romane Empire doe finde these tenne hornes that is so many kings in diuerse kingdomes putting together Macedonia Egypt Syria this was the opinion of Porphyrie rehearsed and refuted by Hierome for these kings must rise out of the same kingdome as these tenne hornes came out of one and the same beast 5. Wherefore these tenne hornes were indeede tenne kings of Syria which the Seleuciaâ—s held one succeeding another and these they were 1. Seleucus Nâ—canior 2. Anâ—iochus Soter who was in loue with Stratonica his fathers wife whom he enioyed by the meanes of Erasistratus his Physitian and raigned his father yet beeing aliue 3. Antiochus called Theos God of the Milesians for deliuering them from the tyrannie of Timarchus him his wife Laodice the daughter of Ptolâ—me Philadelphus poisoned 4. Seleucus Callmicus whom Ptolome Euergetes expelled his kingdome 5. Pâ—olome Euergetes 6. Seleucus Ceraunus Ptolome Euergetes being expelled 7. Antiochus the great the brother of Ceraunus who had warre with the Romanes and draue them out of Asia 8. Ptolome Philopator who inuaded Syria Antiochus the great beeing otherwise occupied and busied and held the kingdome a while 9. Then Philopator beeing expelled by Antiochus and his sons Seleucus Philopator succeeded 10. And Seleucus beeing slaiâ—e then Antiochus Epiphanes the younger brother inuaded the kingdome who was the little horne here spoken of and did rage most cruelly against the people of God Iun. ann there were after him other of the Seleucians that held the kingdome of Syria but they had not that power ouer Iudea which the other had for Antiochus Eupator and after him Demetrius the sonne of Seleucus attempted in vaine to subdue Iudea vnto their kingdome Polan 6. But here is some defference betweene Iunius and Polanus account of these tenne kings Iunius maketh Ptolome Euergetes the fift who expelled Seleucus Callâ—nichus and Seleuchus Ceraunus the sonne of Callinicus the sixt But Polanus omitting Ptolome Euergetes maketh Ceraunus the sonne of Callinicus the fift and the sonne of Ceraunus the sâ—xt who beeing but a child and not able to gouerne the kingdome after he had raigned two yeares was poisoined But I rather followe Iunius for these reasons 1. seeing Polanus confesseth that Euergetes expelled Callinicus and held the kingdome he is as well to be counted among these tenne kings as afterward Ptolome Philopator who inuaded the kingdome vnder Antiochus the great 2. Seleucus Ceraunus raigned himselfe but three yeares and next vnto him succeeded Antiochus the great no mention is made in some Chronicles of Ceraunus sonne comming betweene Bullinger 7. But against this interpretation of the tenne kings of Syria thus it will be obiected 1. Lyranus saith that these kings must not be vnderstood per successionem vnius post alterum by the succession of one after another but they were all at one time as the Angell expoundeth afterward Contra. 1. The contrarie appeareth by the Angels exposition that these kings shall one succeed another as v. 24. the Angel saith tenne hornes out of this kingdome are tenne kings that shall rise now in one kingdome there cannot be tenne kings at once euerie king hath his kingdome 2. as the three kings which shall be subdued are vnderstood successiuely so are the tenne but these followed one an other by succession as Andreas whose opinion Hugo reporteth thus expoundeth alios duos sibi succedentes similiter occidet he shal likewise kill two other kings succeeding one another 2. Pererius obiecteth that in the Syrian kingdome there were but eight kings in all vnto Antiochus Epiphanes Contra. There were but eight of that line but two kings of Egypt Ptolome Euergetes Ptolome Philopator which held the kingdom by conquest are to be numbred among them 3. This fourth kingdome shall be more fierce and mightier then any before it but the kingdome of Syria was not mightier then Alexanders Perer. Contra. It is not said simply to be mightier or stronger but in respect of the Iewes whom they carried a more strong and terrible hand ouer then did Alexander who fauoured them 4. It may be obiected that this fourth beast shall deuoure the whole earth and shall tread it downe and breake it in peices v. 23. but the kingdome of Syria did not subdue the whole earth Contra. By the whole earth is here vnderstood the whole land of Iudea as is expounded v. 25. he shall consume the Saints of the most high and so thinketh R. Saadia that the whole earth is taken here for Iudea which was brought into such subiection vnto the kings of Syria that Memnon in his Chronicle lib. 13. 14. calleth Antiochus warring with
the ende In the first we are to consider 1. the circumstances of the vision both the time when this vision was shewed the person to whome and the place where v. 1. 2. 2. the substance of the vision to v. 15. which consisteth of three parts set forth vnder the resemblance of a ramme a goate and a little horne which grew out of one of the foure hornes of the goate 1. The ramme is described by his beginning his progresse his ende In the beginning these things are expressed 1. the place where this ramme appeared by a riuer 2. the parts it had two hornes which are set forth 1. simply by the adiunct of their height 2. comparatiuely with relation one to the other the one was highest and last in time v. 3. In the progresse it is shewed how he preuailed both by the place he pushed into all quarters and by the effects none could withstand him v. 4. The ende of this beast is shewed in the description of the goate following 2. The goate is described 1. generally by the place he came from the West the effects he went ouer the earth the qualitie he went swiftly not touching the ground 2. particularly by the horne which is set forth 1. by the beginning it came vp betweene the eyes 2. the progresse and successe in running vpon the ramme and ouercomming him trampling vpon him v. 7 8. 3. the ende this horne was suddenly broken and foure came vp in the stead thereof v. 8. 3. The little horne is described by the effects which are three 1. his attempts against the nations in the world v. 9. 2. against the Church called the host of heauen v. 10. 3. against God himselfe where 1. the effects are rehearsed to be three against the sacrifice the Sanctuarie v. 11. the truth v. 12. 2. the time is declared how long which is expressed by way of question where is shewed who asked of whome and what v. 12. and answer v. 14. Then followeth the second part containing the exposition of this vision where are set forth 1. the preparation v. 15. to 18. 2. the exposition it selfe to v. 26. 3. the effects which it wrought v. 27. 1. In the preparation are to be considered 1. the persons expounding the principall one like a man the lesse principall Gabriel to whome the other spake that he should expound the vision 2. the person to whome the vision is shewed how he was affected with feare v. 17. and how he was comforted both by the voice and by the gesture of the Angel that touched him 2. The exposition is generall v. 19. then particular 1. of the ramme v. 20. 2. of the goat 21. with the foure hornes 22. 3. of the little horne 1. his beginning v. 23. his progresse preuailing and prospering set forth by the effects see the particulars qu. 32. his ende he shall be broken downe without hand v. 25. 3. Then followeth the effect Daniels feare v. 27. after the Angel had summed and ratified the vision v. 26. 2. The text with the diuerse readings 1. In the third yeare of the raigne of Belshatzer the king there appeared a vision vnto me euen me Daniel after that which appeared vnto me in the beginning B. at the first G. 2 I saw in a vision or I looked to the vision I. and so it was that as I saw it I was at Shushan in the palace in the towne or castle L. V. S. in the chiefe citie A. the first rather which is in the Prouince not the citie L. of Elam and me thought I saw H. in the vision that I was by the riuer not gate L. S. vbal signifieth a riuer of Vlai not of the court S. 3 Then I lift vp mine eyes and beheld one ramme standing before the riuer before Vbal. S. but it is no proper name which had two hornes hornes L. S. but it is in the dual number and these two hornes were high but one was higher then an other the second H. and the highest came vp Last 4 I saw the ramme pushing against the West the sea H. S. and against the North and against the South so that no beasts might stand before him withstand him I. nor any could deliuer out of his hand not nor could deliuer out of his hand G. B. L. as referring it to the former clause that the beast could not deliuer out of his hand for the word deliuering matzil is in the singular but he did as him lifted according to his will H. and became great 5 And as I considered behold an hee goat B. a kid of the goates H. that is a young lustie goate came from the West ouer the whole earth and touched not the ground and no man touched him in the earth I. but the first is better to shew the celeritie of this praunsing and conquering goate and this goate had a notable horne I. L. an horne that appeared B. G. an horne of vision H. betweene his eyes 6 And he came vnto the ramme that had the two hornes whome I had seene standing by the riuer not before the gate L. or before Vbal. S. and ranne vnto him in his fierce rage rage with might H. 7 And I saw him come neare vnto the ramme and beeing mooued moouing himselfe H. against him he smote the ramme and brake his two hornes and there was no power in the ramme to stand against him but he cast him downe to the ground and trampled on him and there was none that could deliuer the ramme out of his power hand H. 8 Therefore the goat kid of the goates H. waxed exceeding great and when he was at the strongest his great horne was broken there grew vp for it foure notable ones B. that appeared G. toward the foure winds of heauen 9 And out of one of them came forth a little not a strong S. horne which waxed very great toward the South and toward the East and toward the pleasant land against the strength L. tebi signifieth delectable pleasant and thereby is meant Iudea 10 And it extolled it selfe I. L. S. grew vp B. G. extended it selfe V. against the hoast of heauen and cast downe to the earth some of the hoast and of the starres and trampled on them 11 And it extolled it selfe or magnified euen vnto the prince against the prince G. of the host for from him from whome B. G. was taken away the daily sacrifice and the place of the Sanctuarie was cast downe 12 And the host was deliuered vp to sinne against the daily sacrifice I. V. better then power was giuen vnto it ouer the daily sacrifice for the iniquitie L. or a time shall be giuen him ouer the daily sacrifice for iniquitie G. and so Mercer in c. 7. Iob. v. 1. but the word tzaba must be here taken as in the former verse to signifie an armie the host of the Lords people see further hereof qu. 21. following and it shall cast downe the truth to the ground thus shall it
are so resembled ob sagacitatem acumen ingenij for their subtiltie and sharpenesse of wit as the goat is noted to haue a sharpe and piercing eye 2. Some thinke that the Grecians are here taxed for their wanton games and playes to the which they were giuen as the goat is knowne by his skipping and leaping Melanct. Bulling 3. Polanus thinketh because Daniel sawe a kid of the goates as the words are that is a young sucking kid that the weakenesse of the Macedonian strength is thereby signified which was farre inferiour to the power of the Persians 4. Iunius and Pintus thinke Alexanders youth to be thereby insinuated who was not aboue 20. yeare old when he tooke in hand these warres 5. Iunius further noteth hereby the education of Alexander in all liberall artes because he is resembled to a sucking kid But the personall qualities and properties of Alexander are set forth in the horne the goat signifieth the kingdome it selfe of Grecia 6. Some doe by this resemblance note the intemperancie of the Grecians whereof this was an euident argument that a certaine coÌ„mon strumpet among the Greekes hauing set vp a building for a publike and common vse one added this title ex intemperancia Graecorum by the intemperancie of the Greekes Osiand And as this was the fault of the whole nation so the like vice raigned in their kings Philip was slaine for his Veneriâ— and Alexander died of a surfet or as some thinke was poisoned at a banket Melancthon Lyranus further addeth this storie that there was a virgin sent to Alexander which had beene nourished with poison to the intent that Alexander comming vnto her might be poisoned but Aristotle perceiuing it by her gesture and the casting of her eyes gaue Alexander warning thereof he alleadgeth for this storie the booke of the secrets of â—ecrets but it seemeth to be of no great credit 7. But the best coniecture why this similitude is vsed is that of Theodoret quia ariete velocior est hircus because the goat is nimbler then the ramme so also Calvin and this reason is warranted by the text he touched not the ground which signifieth the great celeritie which Alexander and the Grecians vsed as though he touched not the ground as he went as the goat skippeth and bounseth as he goeth for so Alexander made such hast as that he seemed to runne or rather flie ouer the world in the space of sixe yeares ouerrunning the most famous kingdomes He beeing asked how he obtained such great victories made answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he deferred no opportunitie And when he was to encounter with Darius armie at Granicum Parmenio perswaded him to stay till the next day but he presently passing ouer the riuer set vpon the Persians with happie successe Quest. 14. Of Alexander the great signified by the horne betweene the eyes his birth education exploits death and ende 1. Alexander was borne not as Solinus in the 385. yeare after the building of Rome which falleth into the 103. Olympiad nor as Orosius in the 402. yeare of the building of Rome which was after the 107. Olympiad But Eusebius better casteth the time who placeth Alexanders death at 33. yeares of his age in the first yeare of the 114. Olympiad so that his birth falleth out in the 1. or 2. yeare of the 106. Olympiad so also Perer. Bullinger in his tables of chronologie the same day that he was borne the Temple of Diana at Ephesus was set one fire which the Magicians interpreted to signifie that one was then borne which should set fire on all Asia 2. Alexander at 15. yeares of age was committed by his father to Aristotles tuition and instruction with whom he spent 5. yeares in the learning of artes and other knowledge meete for a king Iustin. lib. 12. 3. At 20. yeares not 24. as Orosius Alexander beganne his raigne the first yeare he subdued Thracia Grecia and other countreys adioyning the second yeare he ouercame Darius at Granicum and so possessed Asia the 3. yeare he vanquished the Persians againe in the streights of Cilicia in the 4. yeare he went into Phenicia Egypt Iudaea aâ—d came to Ierusalem where he met Iaddua the high priest and adored him and was encouraged by a vision to goe against the Persians in the 5. or rather the 6. yeare he finally vanquished Darius and all the power of the Persians the 6. yeeres following he subdued many nations euen vnto the riuer Ganges and the Indian Ocean 4. Concerning the time and yeares of his raigne they were neither as Eusebius sixe or as Diodorus seauen or as Arrianus eight or as Liuius thirteene as Tertullian tenne or as Strabo an eleauen Iustinus giueth vnto him 14. yeares Clemens Alexandrinus 18. yeares lib. 1. stromat But he raigned 12. yeares and odde moneths as Theodoret so also Bulling Perer. and so is it testified 1. Macchab. 1. 6. that Alexander raigned 12. yeares 5. He died at Babylon some write of a surfet some of poison in the yeare of his age 32. as Hierome not 34. as Iustinus or 33. as Rupertus he liued 32. yeares and raigned 12. yeares and odde moneths Quest. 15. Of the victorie of Alexander against Darius described by the goats ouercomming of the ramme 1. Alexander encountred Darius forces in three great battels first at Granicum where with 32000. footemen and 4050. horsemen he ouercame 600000. Persians After that Alexander discomfited Darius host at Issum in Cilicia consisting of 300000. footemen and an 100000. horsmen in which battel there were slain 80000. footemen 10000. horsmen and 40. thousand taken prisoners among the which were Darius wife his sister and daughters The third last battel was at Alexanders returne out of Egypt where he built the famous citie Alexandria when at Arbela Darius met him with 400000. footemen and an 100000. horsemen where the power of Persia was fully ouerthrowne and Darius was slaine by Bessus one of his owne captaines whom Alexander for that fact commanded to be rent asunder beeing tied to the toppes of trees Orosius lib. 3. c. 16. 17. 2. So Alexander broke the two hornes of the ramme that is ouercame the power of the Medes and Persians first at Issum he subdued the Persian forces then in the last battle he conquered the Medes with other Northerne nations as the Caspians Iberians Albanians whom Darius had hired to assist him in this battel Iun. Analys 3. Whereas it is said there was none to deliuer the ramme out of the power of the goat thereby is shewed that there was no meanes by force or other to helpe Darius for in these 3. battels Darius brought not lesse then 15. hundred thousand against Alexander and yet it auayled him nothing Darius also attempted Alexander with promise of great gifts and of part of the kingdome and the mariage of his daughter But Alexander would accept of no conditions vnlesse Darius would haue resigned vnto him the whole kingdome he answered him that the
counteth an 180. yeares from the beginning of the kingdome of the Greekes vnto Antiochus whereas it is euident 1. Mac. 1. 21. that Antiochus came against Ierusalem in the 143. yeare Oecol and beside whereas it is said in the text vnto the euening and morning it is euident that neither moneths or yeares are here to be vnderstood but so many naturall dayes Cal. Theodoret by the euening vnderstandeth the beginning of their calamitie by the morning the ende thereof but the phrase of Scripture sheweth that thereby the naturall day is comprehended which consisteth of the day and night As Gen. 1. throughout the chapter the euening morning were the first day and the second day so the rest 3. It remaineth then that by these 2300. dayes so many daies precisely must be vnderstood which make 6. yeares 3. moneths 20. dayes counting 365. dayes to a yeare Bulling 4. Some doe here reade onely a 1300. dayes Osian So also reade Montanus and Pagnin but the Hebrewe word alephaijm beeing put in the duall number signifieth two thousand Vatab. Iun. Polan Oecolamp Quest. 25. When this tearme of 2300. beganne and ended 1. Melancthon beginneth this tearme in the yeare of the kingdome of the Greekes an 145. and endeth it in the yeare 151. when Nicanor and his armie were destroyed and the whole land recouered but seeing euident mention is made that Antiochus began to afflict Ierusalem in the 143. yeare 1. Mac. 1. 21. this teame must not take beginning after that and seeing also that all this desolation is prophesied to happen vnder Antiochus Epiphanes who was this little horne this tearme must not be extended after the death of Antiochus who died in the 149. yeare 1. Mac. 6. 16. 2. Some do begin this tearme in the 143. yeare when Antiochus went proudly into the Sanctuarie and tooke away the golden altar 1. Mac. 1. 23. And so this tearme of 6. yeares shall determine in the 148. yeare when Iudas Macchabeus recouered the citie purged the Temple then the 3. moneths and odde dayes are counted ouer and about to finish the purging sanctifying of the Temple Bull Pererius extendeth them to the death of Antiochus which was in the 149. yeare But this account cannot stand for from the beginning of the 143. yeare to the purging of the Sanctuarie by Iudas which was in the ninth moneth Chisleu the 25. day in the 148. yeare is not 6. yeares there wanteth 3. moneths and 5. dayes 3. Calvin will haue the sixe yeares to ende in the moneth Chisleu in which moneth the temple was polluted but 3. moneths after the moneth Chisle◠the sixe yeares beeing expired it was cleansed in the moneth Adar and he noteth for this 1. Macchab. 4. 36. But there is no such thing obserued cōcerning any particular time the contrarie is euident in the 52. v. following that in the moneth Chisleu not Adar the temple was cleansed in the 148. yeare as three yeares before it had beene defiled in the same moneth in the 15. of Chisleu 4. Iunius whom Polanus followeth beginneth this time in the 142. yeare the sixt moneth and 6. day and so the full summe of 6. yeares 3. moneths and 20. dayes will come out in the 148. yeare in the ninth moneth the 25. day He beginneth the reckoning of this desolation of Ierusalem when Menclaus with other wicked men first obtained licence of the king to followe the ordinances of the heathen 1. Mac. 1. 14. and 2. Mac. 4. 25. And this seemeth to be the best account for though it cannot be precisely gathered out of the storie of the Macchabees when this tearme of a 2300. yeares beganne it must haue a perfect ende at the cleansing of the Sanctuarie which was in the 148. yeare on the 25. day of the ninth moneth Chisleu Pererius answereth that it is not necessarie to vnderstand that this cleansing of the Sanctuarie should be in the verie ende sed prope finem but toward the ende But the contrarie is euident out of the text that after the 2300. dayes then shall the Sanctuarie be cleansed But they which beginne the sixe yeares in the 143. yeare cannot ende this tearme at such time as the Sanctuarie was cleansed but extend it further 5. Some as Pererius noteth to make this tearme ende iust at the cleansing of the Sanctuarie doe read a 2200. dayes but this is an euident controlling of the text which speaketh of a 2300. dayes 6. Pappus indifferently summeth these dayes either from the first spoyling of the citie in the 143. yeare and so they shall ende in Antiochus death or from the setting vp of the abhomination of desolation in the 145. yeare in the moneth Chisleu 1. Macchab. 1. 57. and then they shall ende in the ouerthrowe and subuersion of Nicanor and his host which was two yeares after Antiochus death But this beeing a prophetical prediction must haue a certaine and definite accomplishment it cannot indifferently be taken two wayes I preferre therefore the fourth interpretation as the best 7. Now whereas c. 7. 25. there are assigned a time two times and a part that is 3. yeares and 10. dayes for the desolation of the Sanctuarie but here the summe of 2300. dayes maketh sixe yeares 3. moneths 20. dayes This must be vnderstood of all the time from the first defection or falling away of the people by the procurement of wicked Menelaus which was in the 42. yeare as is before shewed and then followeth Antiochus first comming to Ierusalem when he layd wast the citie and spoyled the people in the 143. yeare but the 3. yeares must beginne from the second comming of Antiochus in the 145. yeare when he set vp the abomination of desolation And therefore here menion is not made onely of the iniquitie of desolation and treading downe of the Sanctuarie but of the armie also that is the Lords people and the citie Polan 8. Herein also appeareth Gods mercie who now afflicteth his people in measure he fulfilleth not all out seuen yeares in the desolation of the citie and temple whereas before he punished them with a captiuitie of seuentie yeares Oecolampad Quest. 26. When the kingdome of the Greekes so often mentioned in the booke of the Macchabees tooke beginning 1. Lyranus is of opinion that the raigne of the Greekes should begin from the death of Alexander comment in 1. lib. Macchab. c. 1. But this cannot be for after Alexanders death for the space of 13. or 14. yeares there was no certaine succession of the kingdom Alexanders captaines one warring against another till those fowre kingdomes of Macedonia Asia Egypt Syria were setled 2. Ioannes Annius is yet more bold and controlleth those numbers set downe in the storie of the Macchabees that whereas Antiochus is said to beginne his raigne in the 137. yeare of the kingdome of the Greeks he saith it was the 153. yeare from the death of Alexander from whence the kingdome of the Greekes must be counted in
his opinion And he further affirmeth that those numbers in those bookes of the Macchabees were not inserted by the author of that storie but by Iosephus But though the booke of the Macchabees is not receiued as Canonicall for any matter of faith or doctrine yet it may be esteemed of for matter of storie and therefore it is great bouldnes therein to contradict the same And he in this his censure giueth vnto Antiochus 16. yeares whereas he is held to haue raigned but 12. yeare he began to raigne in the yeare 137. and died in the 149. yeare 1. Mac. 6. 16. 3. Therefore these yeares of the kingdome of the Greekes must beginne from the raigne of Seleucus in Syria not from the death of Alexander as may thus be gathered 1. whereas Antiochus polluted the Sanctuarie in the 145. yeare if this time were taken from Alexanders death it should be the 157. or 159. yeare for so long it was after Alexanders death 2. Beside Iosephus lib. 12. antiquit cap. 7. saith that this 145. yeare did concurre with the 153. Olympiads then cannot this account begin from the death of Alexander which was in the first yeare of the 114. Olympiad from thence to the 153. Olympiad are 39. Olympiads which make an 156. yeares whereas it was but the 145. yeare from the beginning of the raigne of the Seleucians Quest. 27. Why the kingdome of the Greekes is counted from the raigne of the Seleucians 1. Though Alexander were the first king of the Greekes and founder of that Empire v. 21. yet his raigne is not counted because the kingdome descended not to his posteritie as the kingdome of the Seleucians did for there were many descents in the same familie vntill the kingdome was dissolued by the Romanes 2. And whereas it may be obiected that there was a descent and succession in the other kingdomes but especially of the Ptolomees in Egypt whose race continued longer then the Seleucians in Syria yet these haue the name of the kingdome because the were mightier then the rest and they had chiefely to doe with the people of God whom the hystorie of the Macchabees specially concerneth 3. Further whereas the kingdome of the Seleucians was not in any part of Greece but in Syria and Chaldea yet it is called the kingdome of the Grecians because the Seleucians had their beginning from thence and vsed the language customes superstitions of the Greekes Perer. Quest. 28. Of the man Gabriel 1. Some doe take this to be an excellent name common to all Angels it signifieth the strength or power of God but it is euident Luk. 1. 19. where this Angel Gabriel was sent to the vigin Marie that it was the proper name of an Angel Iun. commentar 2. But Gregorie well noteth that Angels are not called by names in respect of themselues as though they could not be discerned but by their seuerall names in that celestiall citie where they enioy the vision of God sed cum ad nos aliquid ministraturi veniunt c. but when they come vnto vs to minister they doe take their names of their ministerie and office c. as here this Angel is called Gabriel the strength of God because he was employed in the defense of the Church against the enemies thereof 3. But this further must be considered that this Angel is not so called ab essentiali potentia dei from the essentiall power of God but of that power which was giuen him to execute the Lords commandement Iun. 4. And this is the onely name giuen vnto Angels in Scripture for the name Michael which signifieth one as God is ascribed vnto Christ who is equall vnto God As for the other names Raphael Ieremiel Sammael they are but the deuised tearmes of men inserted in the Apochryphall bookes but not to be found in the Canonicall Scriptures Polan Iun. Quest. 29. v. 16. Vpon these words make this man to vnderstand the vision whether Angels can giue vs vnderstanding 1. The Angels of themselues haue no power to infuse vnderstanding into the minde of man but he onely which hath created the heart of man can giue vnto it vnderstanding And the Angels themselues cannot vnderstand the secrets and mysteries of God vnlesse it be giuen vnto them as here the Angel called an holy one enquired of Palmoni which is Christ the meaning of this vision v. 13. 2. yet when it pleaseth God to vse the ministerie of Angels they may helpe to make a way for our better vnderstanding as he which openeth the windowe may be said to giue light vnto the house yet it is the sunne properly that giueth light So the Sonne of righteousnesse illuminateth our hearts the Angels may helpe to prepare the way Polan 3. But in this place the Angel doth not by any secret infusion open Daniels vnderstanding but by a manifest and cleare interpretation of the vision and so the Lord vseth the ministrie of men in the preaching of the gospel to open the hearts of the hearers Quest. 30. v. 29. How Alexander is said to be the first king of Grecia 1. Though there were other kings of Macedonia which is a part of Greece before Alexander as Philip with others yet Alexander here compared to an horne for strength is said to be the first king namely of the Monarchie Osiand the first king of the Grecians that ouercame the Medes and Persians Polan 2. And here it must be obserued that the two first kingdomes are likened vnto beasts the rest vnto the hornes of beasts because they did issue out of the other as the hornes came out of the beast 3. And by the hornes we must vnderstand the kings together with their kingdomes Osiand 4. Lyranus giueth this reason why Alexander is called the first because before him the kings were nullius momenti of no account or fame He was the first notable king But he is so called not onely in respect of his name or fame but of his power and conquest as is before touched Quest. 31. Of the time when Antiochus Epiphanes should rise vp in the latter ende of their kingdome 1. Some doe thus expound the word beacharith procedente tempore during the time of these kingdomes Iun. annot Polan but the same word v. 19. they interpret extremitatem the extremitie of wrath or the last wrath therefore it is not fit in this place to giue it an other interpretation 2. Some reade in the ende of their kingdome Genevens that is toward the ende of the kingdome of the Macedonians or Greekes Vatab. So also readeth the Latine post regnum illorum after their kingdome But this cannot be vnderstood of the ende of the kingdome of the Grecians or Seleucians for when Anciochus Epiphanes rose vp there were more which succeeded in that familie after him then went before him for in all there were 18. kings of Seleucus posteritie in the which number Antiochus Epiphanes was the 8. king of that familie so that tenne succeeded him Antioch us
Eupator Demetrius Soter Alexander Epiphanes Demetrius Nicanor Antiochus Sedetes Antiochus Gryphus Antiochus Cyzicenus Seleucus the sonne of Gryphus Antiochus Pius whom Tigranes expelled Antiochus Asiaticus whom Pompey depriued And further whereas the kingdome of the Seleucians continued 270. yeares as Appianus and Antiochus beganne to raigne in the 137. yeare and died in the 149. yeare 1. Macchab. 6. 16. there remained yet after Antiochus death an 120. yeares of the raigne of the Seleucians Antiochus Epiphanes then could not come in the ende of that kingdome 3. Lyranus making Antiochus a type of Antichrist vnderstandeth the finall end and dissolution of the Greeke Empire when the fourth Monarchie of the Romanes beganne for the kingdome of Antichrist quodam modo pertinet ad regnum Romanum belongeth after a sort to the kingdome of the Romanes But seeing it is confessed of all that historically this vision and prophesie was first fulfilled in Antiochus Epiphanes though typically it be referred vnto Antichrist then first this must historically be applyed to the time of the rising vp of Antiochus 4. Bullinger here vnderstandeth the ende of the Macedonian kingdome for so Antiochus Epiphanes beganne to raigne in the 4. yeare of Perses the last king who raigned a 11. yeares in the last whereof he was ouercome and taken by P. Aemilius and Macedonia was brought to be a Prouince But this interpretation agreeth not with the text which saith that in the ende of their kingdome c. a king of fierce countenance shall stand vp it is euident then that he meaneth that kingdome out of which this fierce king should come which was the kingdome of the Seleucians 5. Calvin thus interpreteth in the ende of their kingdome that is vbi ad summum peruenerint when they are come to the height and begin to decline for after Antiochus Epiphanes the glorie and power of that kingdome begunne to decay But that is not said properly to be the end of a kingdome when the power thereof is somewhat altered onely the regall authoritie still remayning 6. Therefore the best reading is posteris temporibus in the latter times of this kingdom so is the word acharith taken Gen. 49. 1. c. 2. 28. see before c. 2. quest 31. cum regna illa aliquantum temporis constiterint when those kingdomes haue continued some while and the better part of the time of their continuance was past for Antiochus came in the 137. yeare which was toward both the latter and the decaying times of that kingdome for there remayned an 120. yeares of that kingdome not so much time as was alreadie fulfilled Iun. commentar Quest. 32. The description of Antiochus and of his doings He is described 1. by the time of his rising vp 2 his qualities 3. condition and state 4. his acts and exploits 5. by his ende 1. The time is expressed when the iniquities or defection or falling away is perfited which some vnderstand generally when the iniquities of the people were encreased Lyran. Hugo then God would raise vp one to punish them Some referre it to the professed enemies of the Church of God when they should be multiplied But there is speciall reference had to the generall defection and falling away from religion vnto gentilisme as is declared 1. Macchab. 1. v. 12. v. 43. and c. 2. v. 15. And the ringleaders of this apostasie were Iason who bought the high Priests place of Antiochus for money and Menelaus who by the like briberie obtayned it Iason beeing expelled which wicked men procured the Greeke playes to be set vp in Ierusalem and sent money to Tyrus for a sacrifice to Hercules and followed the abhominable fashion of the heathen as it is more at large shewed 2. Macchab. 4. 2. He is set forth by his adiuncts 1. he shall be of an hard countenance that is of an impudent face a shamelesse man 2. he shall vnderstand darke sentences which some expound thus he shall cause by his doings this darke vision to be vnderstood as beeing fulfilled in him Hugo But hereby rather is signified his craft and cunning he should be most subtile and politike to contriue his purpose 3. His state is set forth his power shall be mightie but not in his strength which some expound 1. his strength shall not be like Alexanders Genevens 2. or astutior erit quam potentior he shall be more craftie then powerfull grassabitur per fraudes he shall proceede by craft not by strength Calvin so also Iun. annot 3. Hugo following the interlin gloss giueth this sense not in his owne strength but of Gods for he could not so haue prospered vnlesse Gods will had beene so for the punishment of his people 4. not in his owne strength sed Satanae virtute but by the power of Satan gloss ordinar ex Gregor 5. But the meaning rather is this he seduced others quorum viribus abuteretur whose power he should abuse to helpe himselfe for both he was helped by the treacherie of the high Priests Iason and Menelaus Bulling and he had also the helpe of forren kings Eumenes and Attalus as Appian in Syriacis Polan 4. His acts and exploits are of two sorts either against men or against God himselfe Against men 1. he shall destroy wonderfully which Hugo referreth to Antiochus obscure beginning that he suddenly should rise to so great power Oecolampadins vnderstandeth it of his wonderfull crueltie who in three dayes slue 80. thousand in Ierusalem 40. thousand were put in bands and as many sold But it may more fitly be vnderstood of his deceit and craft whereby he wonderfully prospered for he procured the death of his father Antiochus and then of his elder brother Seleucus and then defeated also Seleucus sonne of the kingdom 2. he shall destroy the mightie and holy people Gregorie vnderstandeth here mente inuictos those which were strong and inuincible in minde whom he corporally ouercame as the mother with the seuen children and other of the Saints Lyran. Hugo vnderstandeth the Iewes which were strong and mightie auxilio dei by the strength of God before this sheweth rather that he should not onely prosper against the people of God but subdue other strong nations also as the Egyptians with other people Calv. Polan 3. A third effect is that he should so by his policie and craft preuaile winning some by flatterie and bribes others by fraud and deceit that he should thereby wax wonderfull insolent and proud aboue measure in so much as that he should thinke to command the floods and to weigh the mountaines in a ballance 4. He shall in peace destroy many 1. some reade in copia rerum in the abundance of things which Hugo vnderstandeth of his gifts Lyran of his power giuen him of God 2. but the word shalvah signifieth peace Calvin expoundeth that he shall per quietem quasi per ludum by peace and at his ease and as in sport without any difficultie preuayle some giue this sense that he shall set vpon men
the manner thereof it should be made desolate for euer v. 26 27. 2. The text with the diuerse readings v. 1. In the first one H. yeare of Darius Dariavesh H. the sonne of Ahashuerosh Achasverosh H. of the seede of the Medes wherein which V. L. B. Gahefirst rather it is better referred to the yeare wherein he was 〈◊〉 king then to the person that was made he was made king ruled L. S. but the word is in the passiue ouer the Realme of the Chaldeans 2 In the first yeare of his raigne I Daniel vnderstood by bookes the number of the yeares whereof the word of the Lord came was H. vnto Ieremiah the Prophet to accomplish the desolation of Ierusalem seuentie yeares 3 I turned my face gaue my face H. vnto the Lord Iehouah H. and so throughout for the most part where Lord is translated God to seeke him by praier in seeking praier S. and supplication with fasting sackeloath and 〈…〉 4 And I praied vnto the Lord my God and made my confession confessed H. saying Oh B. G. or I pray thee A. I. V. Lord God great and fearefull which keepeth mercie toward them which loue him I. A. B. which loue thee L. S. V. G. 〈◊〉 the pronoune affix is here of the third person and toward them which keepe his commandements 5 We haue sinned and committed iniquitie and haue done wickedly yea we haue rebelled and haue departed from thy preceptâ— and from thy iudgements 6 For we would not 〈…〉 vnto obey L. V. S. thy seruants the Prophets which spake in thy name to our Princes and our fathers and to all the people of the land 7 To thee O Lord belongeth righteousnes and to vs confusion of face open shame B. G. as it is this day as is come to passe B. or appeareth this day G. to euery man of Iudah and to the inhabitants of Ierusalem yea vnto all Israel neere or farre off throughout all the countries whither thou hast driuen them because of their trespasses which they haue trespassed agaiâ—st thee 8 O Lord vnto vs appertaineth shame or confusion of face to our Kings to our Princes and to our fathers because we haue sinned not they haue sinned L. the verbe is put in the first person against thee 9 Vnto the Lord our God pertaineth compassion and forgiuenes because albeit G. V. although B. but the word is chi because we haue rebelled against him and therefore they looked onely for mercie from the Lord hauing no power in themselues 10 For we haue not hearkned vnto the voice of the Lord our God to walke in his lawes law L. which he set before vs gaue before our face H. by the hand that is the ministerie G. of his seruants the Prophets 11 Yea all Israel haue transgressed thy law in turning backe and not hearkning to thy voice therefore the curse is powred vpon vs and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the seruant of God because we haue sinned against him 12 And he hath confirmed his words euery one of his words I. which he spake against vs and our Iudges that iudged vs by bringing vpon vs a great plague euill H. for vnder the whole heauen was not done the like as is now come to passe done H. in Ierusalem 13 As it is written in the law of Moses all this euill is come vpon vs yet made we not our prayers before entreated the face of H. the Lord our God that we might turne vs from our iniquities and vnderstand thy in or toward thy truth 14 Therfore the Lord hath made readie the plague watched ouer the euill H. brought it vpon vs for righteous is the Lord our God in all the works which he doth for we would not hearken to his voice 15 And now O Lord our God which hast brought thy people out of the land of Egypt with a mightie hand and hast gotten thee renowne G. a name H. as appeareth this day which remaineth this day V. B. we haue sinned we haue done wickedly 16 O Lord according to all not in all L. S. the word is cecol not becol thy righteousnes I beseech thee let thine anger and thy wrath be turned away from thy citie Ierusalem thy holy mountaine the mountaine of thy holines H. for because of our sinnes and the iniquities of our fathers Ierusalem and thy people are a reproach to all that are round about vs to all our circuits H. 17 Now therefore O Lord our God heare hearken vnto H. the praier of thy seruant and his supplications and cause thy face to shine vpon thy Sanctuarie that lieth wast for the Lords sake not for thy sake L. S. for the word adonai is expressed 18 O my God encline thine eare and heare and behold our desolations and the citie G. or of the citie V. I. whereupon thy name is called whereon thy name is called vpon it H. for not for our righteousnes doe we prostrate our praiers L. present our prayers B. G. pray falling downe I. powre out our prayers V. cause our praiers to fall H. before thee but for thy great tender mercies 19 O Lord heare O Lord forgiue O Lord attend and doe it deserre not for thine owne sake for thy selfe H. O my God for thy name is called vpon thy citie and vpon thy people that is they are called by thy name V. I. 20 And while I was speaking and praying and confessing my sinne and the sinne of my people Israel and did prostrate cause to fall H. as before v. 18. my supplications before the Lord my God for the holy Mountaine mountaine of the holines H. of my God 21 Yea while I was speaking in my praier the man Gabriel whome I had seene in the vision at the first in the morning H. came flying beeing bid or made to flie H. for the word is in hophal earnestly with wearines H. or swiftly V. and touched me about the time of the euening oblation 22 And he informed me and talked with me and said O Daniel I am now come forth to giue thee vnderstanding and knowledge to make thee perceiue vnderstanding H. 23 At the beginning of thy supplications the commandement the word H. came forth and I am come to shew it thee L. B. G. ad for thou art much desired that is accepted of God I. greatly beloued B. G. a man of desires L. S. chamudoth desires H. D. Kimhi readeth hamiddoth a man of vertues and he is called a man of desires not actiuely because he much desired the deliuerance of the people but passiuely because he was a man according to Gods desire that is beloued and accepted of him so Vatab. a man desirous of things to be wished for vnderstanding it also actiuely of Daniels desire therefore vnderstand the matter and consider the vision 24 Seuentie weekes are cut out it is cut out H. impersonally are determined V. B. G. are abbreuiated or shortened L. but chatac signifieth to cut out vpon or
raigned in Media but that can not be for this Darius was also the king of the Medes and Persians as is euident c. 6. 5. Iosephus Scalliger giueth vnto Darius 17. yeares making him the last king of the Chaldeans after whome Cyrus succeeded lib. 6. de emendat tempor 6. Iunius opinion seemeth to be commentar in 5. c. v. 29. that the first yeare of Darius was the second of Cyrus 7. Pererius affirmeth that Darius raigned but one yeare and that Cyrus succeeded him in the same yeare beeing the 70. yeare of the Iewes captiuitie 8. But the truer opinion is that Cyrus and Darius raigned ioyntly together as thinketh Calvin and that the first of Darius was the first also of Cyrus for in the first of Cyrus the word of God spoken by Ieremie concerning the 70. yeares captiuitie was finished 2. Chro. 36. 22. And so likewise it appeareth in this place that in the first yeare of Darius that time of 70. yeares was expired the first then of Cyrus and Darius concurred together for the rest it is like that Darius raigned not long but beeing 62. yeare old when he tooke the kingdom vpon him he might die the same yeare which was also Cyrus first see more hereof c. 6. qu. 3. 9. And whereas it is saide in one yeare of Darius which Pererius gesseth to be so called because he raigned but one yeare the reason rather is this that the word aâ—hath which signifieth one is according to the phrase of the Hebrew taken for the first as Gen. 1. the morning and euening were one day that is the first and Mark 16. it is said that our Lord rose in one of the Sabbaths that is in the first day of the weeke Polan Pintus 3. Quest. Whether in the first yeare of Darius the Chaldean Monarchie was dissolued and the 70. yeares captiuitie ended against the opinion of Iosephus Scalling lib. 6. Iosephus Scalliger a man of excellent learning who for his singular labours in that learned and exquisite worke which he hath written of the emendation of the times hath highly deserued of all men yet is in diuers points ouerseene and especially in this matter concerning the ende of the Chaldean Monarchie and of the Iewish captiuitie for lib. 6. of that worke he hath these positions 1. He affirmeth that the Chaldean state was not dissolued in the 70. yeare of the captiuitie but rather in the 60. yeare for from the 8. yeare of Ieconias captiuitie vnto the ende of the Chaldean gouernment are found saith he by Iosephus computation who therein followeth Berosus about 60. yeares 36. yeares remained after the 8. yeare of Nabuchadnezzers raigne when the captiuitie beganne who raigned in all 43. yeares after Nabuchadnezzer Euilmerodach 2. yeares then Niglasar 4. yeares Labosardach 9. moneths and Nabonidus whome Cyrus ouercame 17. yeares 2. He thinketh that Cyrus did not take Babylon in the first yeare of his raigne but many yeares after when he had vanquished Cresus the rich king of Lydia two yeares after that as Herodotus writeth he ouercame the Chaldeans But Cresus was ouercome as Eusebius doth cast the time in the 4. yeare of the 57. Olympiad whereas Cyrus began to raigne in the 1. yeare of the 53. Olyampiad 3. The first yeare of Cyrus he would haue concurre with the 46. yeare of the captiuitie not with the 70. yeare for the beginning of Cyrus raigne as is before shewed was in the 1. yeare of the 55. Olympiade And Babylon was taken in the 2. yeare of the 58. Olympiade which was the 14. yeare of Cyrus and the 60. yeare of the captiuitie 4. A fourth assertion is that the captiuitie ended in the last yeare of Cyrus about the 2. yeare of the 62. Olympiad when as Cyrus had now subdued many countries which could not be in the beginning of his raigne for thus Cyrus saith in his Edict for the returne of the Iewes All the kingdoms of the earth hath the Lord God of heauen giuen vnto me And whereas it is there called the 1. yeare of Cyrus that is not to be vnderstood of his raigne but of the captiuitie for so the Iewes began their account of yeares from that time Contra. 1. The first position is contrarie to that prophesie of Ieremie c. 35. 12. When the 70. yeares are accomplished I will visit the king of Babel c. then the 70. and last yeare of the captiuitie and the dissolution of the Babylonian state must fall out together as for that computation of Berosus of the yeares of the Babylonian kings it is vncerten neither doth Iosephus alwaies follow it who els where ioyneth the last yeare of the captiuitie with the first yeare of Cyrus 2. Herodotus is deceiued much in his historie in the order of time and in the computation of yeares as is euident in this one instance Nitocris the mother of Balshazar whome he calleth Labynitus the last king of Babylon he maketh but fiue generations or descents from Semiramis which exceedeth not an 165. yeares counting a generation at 33. yeares or at the most 500. yeares if we giue an 100. yeares to a generation whereas the most writers are of opinion as Hierome Eusebius Orosius Augustine with others that there were at the least a 1000. yeares betweene them 3. The two last assertions may euidently be conuinced by the Scripture which expressely setteth downe that the returne of the Iewes and so the ende of their captiuitie was in the first yeare of Cyrus which must be vnderstood of his raigne ouer Chaldea for he had raigned before in Persia and Darius in Media he might say all kingdomes were giuen him because he had ouercome the large Empire of Babylon The Iewes indeede accounted their owne yeares from such notable deliuerances as from their going out of Egypt from their returne out of Chaldea but there is no reason so to account the yeares of the raigne of forren kings neither can any such president be shewed in Scripture 4. Quest. Of the 70. yeares of captiuitie in what sense they are called seuen generations Baruch 6. 2. Whereas the Prophet Ieremie defineth and setteth downe the tearme of the Babylonian captiuitie to be 70. yeares c. 25. v. 11 12. c. 29. v. 10. it seemeth strange that Baruch c. 6. 2. should say that they should remaine in Babylon seuen generations to this obiection diuers answers are made by the Romanists who hold the epistle of Baruch to be Canonicall 1. The word generation is taken diuersly sometimes for 7. yeares as when the Physiâ—ians prescribe that a child should not be let blood till he hath accomplished two generations that is 14. yeares Eusebius taketh a generation for 20. yeares Herodotus sometime for the space of 2â— yeares sometime for 33. yeares Diodorus for 30. yeares in which sense Hâ—mer saith Nestor liued three ages that is 90. yeares Dyonisius Halycarnass by a generation vnderstandeth an 100. yeares and so it is taken in Scripture Gen. 15. 13. 16. foure generations are
expounded to be foure hundred yeares Beside these diuers acceptions of the word generation Carthusianus taketh it for the age of a man apt for generation which is at 14. yeares whereof fiue doe make 70. yeares the first and last are reckoned exclusive exclusiuely as the like instance he giueth in the Euangelists where Mathew saith Christ was transfigured after sixe daies c. 17. Luke saith after eight exclusiuely But this is a very forced exposition for to what ende should seuen generations be named if they were onely fiue neither can it be shewed out of the Scriptures that a generation is taken for 14. yeareâ— 2. The same Carthusian hath an other exposition that the number of seuen is taken for perfection and so by 7. generations he meaneth the perfect periode of a mans life which is seauentie yeares as it is defined Psal. 90. But this rather should haue beene named one generation then seuen for one mans life maketh but one generation 3. Pererius hath diuerse answers by seuen generations he vnderstandeth many but the captiuitie lasted not many generations seeing Daniel sawe the beginning and ende thereof 4. By a generation he vnderstandeth the tearme of 15. yeares because at that age men are apt for generation then 5. of these generations were complete and two of them the first and last were but begunne onely 5. Or Ieremie speaketh of the captiuitie which beganne with Iechonias Baruch of that which tooke beginning vnder Zedekiah or Ieremie defineth the time of that captiuitie which ended in the first yeare of Cyrus Baruch of that which held vnto the seuenth yeare of Artaxerxes when diuerse of the Iewes returned with Zorobabel But if they will haue Baruch a Prophet he must not crosse Ieremies prophesie to beginne the time determined of 70. yeares captiuitie sooner or to ende it later 6. The onely solution is that this epistle of Baruch is Apochryphall and this is an euident argument thereof because he calleth this tearme of 70. yeares 7. generations which hath no warrant out of Scripture and therein disagrâ—eth from the Prophet Ieremie Quest. 5. When the 70. yeares of captiuitie mentioned v. 2. tooke their beginning 1. The opinion of some was which Eusebius remembreth in his chronicle concealing the authors of that opinion that the 70. yeares of captiuitie beganne in the 13. yeare of Iosias But this cannot be so 1. Ieremiah beganne then indeede to foretell them of the euils which should happen vnto them but 23. yeares after he prophesied of the 70. yeares captiuitie Ierem. 25. 8. 2. And so long as Ioâ—ias liued the Lord promised him 2. king 2â— that his eyes should not see the euils which the Lord had threatened to bring vpon that place 2. Whereas there were three seuerall captiuities the first in the first yeare of Nebuchadnezzar in the third yeare of the raigne of Iehoiachim when Daniel went into captiuitie Dan. 1. 1. the second in the 7. and 8. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer when Ieconias with others was carried away captiue 2. king 24. 12. the third in the 11. yeare of Zedekiah and in the 18. yeare of Nebuchadnezzar when the citie and temple were destroyed 2. king 24. Ierem. 51. 29. Some doe beginne these 70. yeares from the first captiuitie of which opinion are Seuerus Sulpitius lib. 2. sarc histor Lyran Vatablus in 9. Daniel whereunto consenteth also H. B. in his concent But here cannot begin that famous captiuitie because the land could not be captiued seeing the king Iehoiachim himselfe went not into captiuitie 3. The most generall opinion is that the beginning of the captiuitie of 70. yeares must be referred vnto the third captiuitie vnder Zedekiah of this opinion are many auncient graue authors Iosephus lib. 11. antiquit Clemens lib. 1. stromat Iulius Africanus lib. 5. Annal. Eâ—sebius in chron Lactantius lib. 4. institut c. 5. Hierome in 4. c. Ezekiel with diuerse others Pererius adioyneth this reason because these 70. yeares are said here to be the yeares of the desolation of Ierusalem but the citie was not brought to desolation vntill the captiuitie of Zedekiah But this reason concludeth not for although then there was greater desolation brought vpon the citie yet before when as the king and all the principall men and artificers were carried away the citie beganne to be desolate And altogether it was not desolate no not in the last captiuitie for 5. yeare after in the 23. yeare of Nebuchadnezzar there were 745. persons caried away captiue by Nebuzaradan Ierem. 52. 30. 4. Wherefore the more certaine opinion is that the 70. yeares beganne with Iechonias captiuitie which may be confirmed by these reasons 1. Ieremie cap. 29. v. 10. writeth vnto those which were in captiuitie with Iechoniah that after 70. yeares the Lord would visit them 2. direct mention is made of the captiuitie of Iechoniah Esther 2. 6. when Morâ—ee as went into captiuitie 3. Iechonia and the rest yeelded themselues vnto the king of â—haldes and obeyed the counsell of Ieremie which Zedekiah refused and therefore the first are compared to a basket of good figges the other to a basket of rotten figges they which remained with Zedekiah went into Egypt the first captiuity then rather is to be counted because the counsell of God therein was followed 4. Ezekiel in diuerse places counteth the yeares from the captiuitie of Iechonias as the fift c. 1. 3. the sixt yeare c. 8. 1. the seuenth c. 20. 1. the tenth yeare c. 37. 1. the eleuenth yeare c. 31. 1. All which yeares are reckoned from the time when Iechonias went into captiuitie 5. beside the captiuitie of Iechonias was most famous both in respect of the persons that went into captiuitie and their number for the king himselfe his mother Princes and seruants were carried away And the captiues were to the number of tenne thousand 2. king 24. 14. But in the captiuitie vnder Zedekiah Ieremie speaketh but of 832. persons taken captiue cap. 52. 29. therefore from the captiuitie of Iechonias as the most famous is the account of the yeares to beginne Quest. 6. When the 70 yeares of captiuitie ended 1. Some make two reckonings of these 70. yeares one of the captiuitie of the Iewes which beganne with Iechonias captiuitie and ended in the first yeare of Cyrus the other 70. were begunne 19. yeare after with the captiuitie of Zedekiah and are extended 19. yeare after to the second yeare of Darius Hystaspis 3. yeares of Cyrus raigne 14. of Cambyses and 2. of Darius make 19. yeares Pellican Oecolampad following Theodoret. Contra. 1. But the Scripture in no place maketh mention of twice 70. yeares there is but one and the same prophesie of Ieremie concerning the 70. yeares captiuitie which can be but once fulfilled for otherwise we should make these propheticall predictions vncertaine 2. beside the yeares of the Persian kings are not certaine some vnto the 2. yeare of Darius Hystaspis make not so many yeares Iunius giueth vnto Cyrus and Cambyses together but 9. yeares to the Magi
one yeare and then succeeded Darius these make but 12. yeares with the second of Darius Some make account of more yeares as Bullinger giueth vnto Cyrus 16. yeares to Cambyses 8. yeares some allot vnto Cyrus 30. yeares vnto Cambyses 9. yeares Liuely in his Persian Monarchie Pererius counteth 40. yeares from the 1. of Cyrus to the second of Darius there beeing then such vncertaintie of these yeares it is hard to interpret a prophesie vpon so weake and vncertaine ground 2. An other opinion is that these 70. yeares must ende simply in the second yeare of Darius Hystaspis 1. because these 70. yeares are called the yeares of the desolation of the Temple now the Temple remained desolate vntill the 2. yeare of Darius Hystaspis 2. Zacharie beginning his prophesie in the 2. yeare of Darius thus saith c. 1. 12. thou hast beene displeased with vs now these threescore and tenne yeares 3. Mardocheus who liued in the time of king Assuerus who is thought to be Artaxerxes Mnemon who succeeded an 150. yeares after the 1. yeare of Cyrus should then be aboue an 130. yeare olde if the 70. yeares ended in the first of Cyrus of this opinion are Clemens Alexand. lib. 1. stromat Euseb. in Chroni Isidor lib. 5. Etymolog Contra. 1. These arguments conclude not 1. though the temple was not reedified till the raigne of Darius yet because the people had libertie to returne and to repaire both the Temple and citie in the first of Cyrus the captiuitie and desolation ended then But if they wil extend the time of desolation so long till both the Temple and citie were fully repaired then that time must hold out yet longer for the citie was not fully repaired vntill the 20. yeare of Artaxerxes whom Pererius taketh for Artaxerxes Longimanus Iunius for Artaxerxes Mnemon when Nehemias by the kings grauntreturned to repaire the citie and build the walls 2. The Prophet Zacharie affirmeth not the 70. yeares then first to be expired but his meaning is that they had endured the 70. yeares captiuitie which were prophesied of and yet they sawe not the full restitution of their citie and countrey 3. To the third argument Pererius answereth that whereas the words in the text stand thus there was in the citie of Shushan a certaine Iewe whose name was Mordecai the sonne of Iair the sonne of Shemei the sonne of Kish a man of Iemini which had beene carried away from Ierusalem with the captiuitie that was carried away with Iechoniah these words which had beene carried away he would haue referred not to Mordecai but to Kish that he was carried away captiue so also Iunius But Pererius answer is taken away by that text of the Apochryphall Esther which is canonicall Scripture with them where c. 11. v. 3. it is said that Mordechai erat de numero eorum captiuorum c. was of the number of those captines whom Nebuchadnezzar translated with Iechoniah Iunius may be refelled by his own chronicle for vnto the raigne of Assuerus whom he taketh to be Xerxes he numbreth but 46. yeares from Cyrus first Cyrus and Cambyses raigned 9. yeares the Magi one yeare Darius Hystaspis 36. yeares vnto this adde 70. yeares of the captiuitie all make not full an 120. yeares it is not like that in this tearme there were so many descents and generations namely these sowre of Kish Shemei Iair Mordecai therefore the best answer here is that so many yeares must not be giuen vnto the Persian kings Mordecai beeing one of those which were carried into captiuitie Ezra 2. 1 2. might be then an auncient man but nothing neere of such yeares as is supposed 4. But this opinion may be refelled by the former argument that from the last captiuitie vnto the 2. of Darius when the Temple was reedified must needes be aboue 70. yeares seeing the most doe hold at the least 40. yeares betweene the 1. of Cyrus and the second of Darius and betweene the last captiuitie of Zedekiah in the 18. yeare of Nebuchadnezzar and the 1. of Cyrus were more then 30. yeares for that captiuitie was in the 18. yeare of Nebuchadnezzar Ierem. 52. 29. who raigned in all 45. yeares there remayned then 27. yeares of his raigne Balthazar had 3. yeares then came betweene them Euilmerodach who as Iosephus writeth raigned 18. yeares lib. 10. antiquit c. 12. 3. It remayneth then that the 70. yeares of captiuitie must haue their determination in the first yeare of Cyrus as is euident 2. Chron. 36. 22. then was the word and prophesie of Ieremie finished And this is agreeable to the prophesie of I say he saith of Cyrus c. he shall performe all my desire saying to Ierusalem thou shalt be built and to the Temple thy foundations shall be surcly layd I say 44. 28. Quest. 7. Of Daniels prayer v. 4. to v. 20. Daniels prayer consisteth 1. of the inuocation it selfe where God is described by his epithetes and titles great and fearefull and his effects the keeping of his couenant toward them that loue him 2. then followeth the prayer it selfe which hath two parts as Daniel himselfe deuideth it a confession to v. 15. and deprecation from thence to v 20. In the confession 1. Daniel maketh an ample and large confession of his and the peoples sinnes and vnrighteousnesse to v. 7. 2. of the iustice and righteousnesse of God in punishing their sinnes yet in mercie to v. 15. In the confession of their sinnes are set forth 1. the manner which is amplified by fowre degrees they haue sinned committed iniquitie done wickedly yea rebeiled they haue sinned not of ignorance and infirmitie but wittingly and obstinately 2. the matter in leauing Gods commandements and not giuing care to his Prophets v. 6. The confession is either generall to v. 10. or particular to v. 15. In the generall 1. be confesseth Gods iustice in bringing vpon them shame which is amplified by a threefold enumeration of the people by their countrey the inhabitants of Iudah and Ierusalem yea all Israel by their place and situation neere and farre off thorough all countreys by their degrees and callings euen vpon their kings and Princes v. 8. 2. he confesseth Gods mercie v. 9. In the particular confession is set forth Gods iustice in punishing their sinne where 1. their sinne is amplified 2. the punishment In the amplification of their sinne namely their disobedience three circumstances are expressed whose voice they disobeyed the Lords by whose ministrie by the Prophets and who were disobedient euen all Israel Concerning the punishment three things are declared 1. the prediction of it in the commination set forth in Moses lawe v. 11. 2. the fulfilling and accomplishment of it v. 12. 3. the qualitie and condition of it the greatest plague vnder the whole heauen was fallen vpon them And this last part of the greatnesse of the iudgement is amplified 1. by the certaintie of the prediction 2. by their sinne of securitie in not beeing humbled by prayer vnto
meaning for it cannot be shewed that during the space of those 70. weekeâ— which make 490. yeares or for almost two thousand yeare since any day fell out shorter then the ordinarie course of the naturall day 2. Augustine in the former place reporteth an other opinion of some who thought that the time appointed for the comming of the Messiah which God had purposed to haue prolonged was at the instant prayers of the Prophets and other of the elect shortened and sooner accomplished like as Augustine thinketh that the time of 120. yeares set for the repentance of the old world was cut short by 20. yeares But this interpretation cannot stand 1. God by this meanes if he had shortened the time which he had appointed should be mutable and changeable 2. they must shew out of Scripture that there was a longer time appointed for the comming of the Messiah which the Lord abridged 3. the time limited for the repentance of the old world was not shortened but whereas first mention is made of Noahs age of 500. yeares Gen. 5. 32. and then the time of 120. yeares is prescribed c. 6. 3. and yet Noah was but 600. yeare old when he entred into the arke Gen. 7. 6. it must be acknowledged that the limitation of that time is somewhat transposed and that in order of time it was reuealed to Noah before he was 500. yeare old but it is deferred to the 6. chapter least the historie of the generation of the fathers should haue beene interrupted See more hereof Hexapl. in Genes chap. 6. quest 6. 3. A third opinion there is which is ascribed to Iulius Africanus Theodoret Albertus Beda Rupertus Carthusianus Hug. Card. that here must be vnderstood the yeares of the moone which containe but 354. dayes eleuen dayes lesse then the yeare of the Sunne which consisteth of 365. dayes so that 70. weekes of such yeares of the Moone that is 490. yeares are but equiualent to 475. yeares of the Sunne Rupert euerie weeke of the yeares of the Sunne exceeding a weeke of the yeares of the Moone by 77. dayes But Lyranus well refuteth this opinion by these two reasons 1. because the Hebrewes vsed not to count by the yeares of the Moone but by the full and iust yeares of the Sunne otherwise where the Scripture setteth down the summes of yeares as 430. of the soiourning of Israel in Egypt and Canaan Exod. 12. 480. from the departure of Israel out of Egypt to the building of the Temple 1. King 6. 1. there should be no certaintie in these computations but if the account should be made by the course of the Moone there should be fewer yeares in these summes then they are reckoned for 2. Againe whereas the Israelites kept their Passeouer on the 14. day of the first Moone if they should haue obserued the yeare of the moone they should euerie yeare keepe the Passeouer an 11. dayes sooner then other and so in processe of time they should haue obserued that feast euerie moneth thorough the yeare 4. A fourth exposition is that abbreuiaâ—e hebdomadas to abbreuiate or shorten the weekes is all one as paucas constiture to appoint but fewe weekes this time was but short in respect of other prophesies made concerning the Messiah as that to Adam Gen. 3. and to Abraham Gen. 22. that in his seede all nations should be blessed these prophesies were to be fulfilled many yeares after but now there remayned but a fewe weekes for the accomplishment of this In this sense the dayes are said to be shortened for the elects sake Matth. 24. 22. that is they should continue but a short time those dayes of affliction Pererius But we refuse this exposition also because it is grounded vpon a corrupt translation of the word chatach which signifieth not to abbreuiate but to cut out and so consequently to determine 5. Barbinel a cauilling Rabbine by the word chatach which signifieth to cut would haue signified the cutting afflictions which the people of God should endure all this time but all this tearme was not a time of affliction to the people of God they had many prosperous dayes and had some breathing time after their returne out of captiuitie 6. The word chatach then is well interpreted here determined or prefixed certainely appointed and decreed with God praefinitae defined Vatab. decisae cut out Pagnin Mon. Iun. Polan and this further is well obserued by some that here a verbe of the singular number is ioyned to a word of the plurall 70. weekes is determined to shewe that euerie one of these weekes from the first to the last shall be particularly and precisely complete Liuely Quest. 18. Why this tearme of 490. yeares is expressed by weeks 1. The seuenth number was of great obseruation among the Iewes the seuenth day the seuenth yeare the seuenth seuenth yeare which was the Iubile in the 49. yeare were all times of holy rest therefore to signifie the great yeare of rest and Iubile at the comming of the Messiah when there should be a generall remission of the sinnes of the world this time is reckoned by weekes and by seuen times tenne weekes of yeares which make 10. Iubilies for tenne times 49. yeares make iust 490. yeares Polan 2. An other reason is this volebat conferre septuaginta hebdoâ—â—adas annorum cum septuaginta annis the Angel would compare the seuentie weekes of yeares with the 70. yeares of captiuitie shewing that for 70. yeares of captiuitie they should enioy seuen times 70. yeares of deliuerance the Prophet then confert Dei gratiam cum iudicio doth compare the grace and mercie of God with his iudgment Calvin 3. But in that the Angel speaketh simply of 70. weekes not adding of dayes or yeares therein is obserued the propheticall manner of speach which is for the most part obscure and darke as treating of mysticall and hid matters whereas in historicall narrations an other kind of plaine and open speach and phrase is vsed Quest. 19. Why the Angel saith vpon thy people and vpon thine holy citie 1. Hierome whom the gloss followeth and Hugo Card. thus interpret he calleth them the people of Daniel not his people because they were euill as though God had reiected them but this cannot be for it beeing called an holy citie must needes be Gods citie 2. Tertullian lib. cont Iudaeos and Theodoret vpon this place doe thinke that they are called Daniels and not the Lords people because of that great sinne which they should commit in putting the Messiah to death but in this sense neither would Daniel acknowlege them to be his people 3. Therefore they are rather called Daniels people sanguine affectu they were his people both in the kindred of flesh and in affection Pintus they were his countrey-men and beside he was carefull for them Calv. Osiand 4. Now whereas it is said vpon thy people some vnderstand for the destruction and finall ouerthrowe of the people and citie Iun. annot so also Hugo
of Zedekiahs raigne for then the word they say came forth by Ieremie namely the prophecie and promise of their deliuerance after 70. yeares which was in the 4. yeare of Zedekiah which they thus gather Ierem. 29. 10. this prophesie of 70. yeares captiuitie is declared which was in the 4. yeare of Zedekiah c. 28. 1. of this opinion are Lyranus Paulus Burgens vpon this place Vatablus in his annotations and Petrus Galatinus lib. 4. de arc anis fidei c. 15. 3. R. Salamon beginneth to reckon these weekes from the destruction of the Temple as Lyranus reporteth and confuteth his opinion 2. Of the second sort are these 1. Some will haue them beginne in the first yeare of Darius at the time when this word came vnto Daniel so Tertullian lib. aduers. Iudaeos and Pintus 2. some from the time that Cyrus set forth his edict for the peoples returne as Clemens Alexandrin 1. lib. stromat of this opinion are Calvin Melancthon lunius in the first edition in his annotations vpon this place H. Br. vpon Daniel And it shall appeare of all the rest to be the more probable 3. Concerning those which set the beginning of these weekes after the raigne of Cyrus whereas there were three other edicts beside that of Cyrus which gaue libertie to build the Temple and citie which are mentioned Ezra 6. 1. Ezra 7. and Nehem. 2. hereupon some thinke that these 70. weekes must be reckoned from the 2. yeare of Darius Hystaspis the 3. king of Persia so Eusebius lib. 8. de demonstr Evang. Cyrillus cateches 12. Driedo lib. 3. de sacr Scriptur c. 5. par 4. Iansenius c. 122. concord Euang. 2. Some take the 20. yeare of this Darius Pellican 3. Some count from Xerxes the 4. king of Persia whom Iosephus thinketh to haue sent Ezra in the 7. yeare of his raigne ex Bulling 4. Some take the seuenth yeare of Artaxerxes Longimanus the fift king which opinion Pererius ascribeth to Theodoret so also Bullinger holdeth and Pap. 5. Some appoint the 20. yeare of Artaxerxes Longimanus when Nehemiah was sent with a newe commission Nehem. 2. so Chrysostome Beda Africanus Hugo Pererius Osiander whereas this was Artaxerxes Mncmon the seuenth king not Longimanus the fift king of Persia that sent Nehemiah 6. Some doe beginne the account the second yeare of Darius Nothus so called because he was a bastard the sixt king of Persia so Iunius in his commentarie vpon Daniel Ios. Scallig l. 6. de emend temp Polan Edw. Liuely in his Persian Monarchie 7. Lastly Apollinaris long after these counteth the beginning of the 70. weekes from the time of Christs birth and natiuitie So in all there are in effect tenne seuerall opinions about the beginning these weeks As touching the ende and determination of these yeares there are likewise diuerse opinions 1. Some thinke that 69. of these weekes expired at such time as Pompey tooke Ierusalem and entred into the Temple slaying such as sacrificed presuming euen to the most holy place and ende the last weeke in Traian the Emperour vntill which time the preaching of the Apostles continued Iohn surviuing euen vnto the raigne of the Emperour Traian Eusebius 2. Some beginning these weekes in the 6. yeare of Darius Hystaspis doe ende them at such time as Herod vsurped the kingdome Oecolamp consenting with Eusebius 3. Some doe determine these yeares in the natiuitie and birth of Christ of this opinion Hierome reporteth Origen to haue beene lib. 10. stromat so also Ioannes Driedo Iansenius Melancthon 4. Many drawe these yeares in the passion of Christ as Burgensis Vatablus Petrus Galatinus beginne these yeares in the fourth yeare of Zedekiah and ende them in the passion of Christ so Beda Africanus beginning at the 20. of Artaxerxes ende at the passion of Christ. 5. Some ende them in the 4. yeare after the passion of Christ as Lyranus who reckoneth them from the 20. yeare of king Artaxerxes vnto the 4. yeare supposing the Messiah to haue suffred in the middes of the last propheticall weeke so also Ioannes Lucidus Pintus 6. Some referre the ende of these weekes to the destruction on of Ierusalem by Titus as Tertullian Chrsyostome Clemens Alexandrin and of the newe writers Iunius Scalliger Polanus Liuely 7. Some determine them after the passion of Christ extending them to the finall destruction of the citie vnder Adrian the Emperour as some of the Hebrewes 8. Some will haue these weekes reach vnto the ende of the world to the comming of Antichrist as Apollinaris who beginneth them at the natiuitie of Christ and continueth them to the ende of the world Thus are interpreters diuersely carried in the interpretation of these propheticall weekes which afterward shall in their order be examined Hereupon the Iewes as namely cauilling Barbinel to annihilate this prophesie obiect the difference and dissention of the Christians about the meaning thereof But it may be answeared 1. that the diuersitie of opinions among interpreters doth not evacuate or extenuate the authoritie of Scripture Calvin 2. Though in the particular account of time there be some disagreement yet herein most Christian interpreters agree that all these yeares expired either in the birth or passion of Christ or in the destruction of Ierusalem So that which account soeuer be receiued two maine points are prooued against the Iewes one that the Messiah is come the other that he came not as a glorious or victorious temporall Prince as the Iewes imagine but he was slaine by them and put to death Pappus 3. This obiection may be retorted vpon themselues for euen there is great dissention among their owne Rabbines Ab. Ezra holdeth there were but sowre kings of Persia R. Moses saith there were fiue R. Saadâ—ah three onely So they also differ about their yeares Ab. Ezra holdeth the Persian Monarchie to haue continued 61. yeares Abraham Dauison but 51. the most of the Hebrewes giue but 50. yeares to the Persian Monarchie Ed. Liuely p. 34. And in many other points are the Rabbines diuided in opinion so that herein they may forbeare to obiect vnto the Christians their dissension 4. And thus may the obiection of the Gentiles be answered which take exception to the Christians because of their dissension and difference in this and other points as Iosephus giueth instance of the dissensions of the heathen historians among themselues In quot locis Hellanicus de genealogijs temporibus ab Acusilao discrepat c. in how many places doth Hellanicus differ from Acusilaus concerning genealogies and times and in how many doth Acusilaus correct Hesiodus Ephorus in many things findeth Hellanicus to be deceiued and Timeus Ephorus and Timeus those that followed him and all Herodotus thus Ioseph contra Appion Quest. 35. What Chronologie and computation of time is to be followed in the account of the 70. weekes which make 490. yeares 1. First the computation which the Hebrewes follow is verie imperfect and vncertaine and worthie of small credit concerning the
Persian Monarchie for they make but fowre kings of Persia Cyrus Cambyses Assuerus Darius and generally hold that the Persian Monarchie continued not aboue 50. yeares whereas beside these there is euident mention made of Artaxerxes or Artashasht and of the 32. yeare of his raigne Nehem. 5. 14. But to remooue this doubt Ab. Ezra will haue Assuerus and Artaxerxes to be all one yet R. Moses maketh them two sundrie kings and so thinketh that there were fiue in all so well the Rabbines agree together 2. There is an other chronicle which Annius Viterbiens hath set forth vnder the names of the auncient writers Berosus Manethon Metasthones Philo who numbreth but 8. kings of the Persians and giueth vnto that whole Empire 191. yeares But as in other things that Chronologie is found to be false and imperfect as Pererius hath shewed at large in his 11. booke vpon Daniel as namely in this that he maketh Philo in a certaine booke called the Breuiarie to affirme that the posteritie of Salomon ended in Achazia and that Ioas which succeeded was not the sonne of Achazia but descended of Nathan whereas it is directly set downe 1. Chron. 3. 11. that Ioas was the sonne of Achazia beside this and other such slippes this apparant error is committed in the Persian Monarchie that reckoning but 8. kings he omitteth three which were most famous among them namely Cambyses Darius Hystaspis and Xerxes whom to denie to haue beene kings of Persia were all one as to say that Augustus and Tiberius were not Emperours of Rome 3. There is an other way to make this account by setting downe the yeares of the seuerall kings of Persia and so of the Grecians but there is also small certaintie of this for that the seuerall yeares of diuerse kings in three Monarchies cannot certainely be gathered because of the change and alteration of the state and kingdome and many times there was an interregnum or intermission of the gouernement and some kings raigned onely certaine moneths so that the time of one king ranne within the account of an others raigne 4. Beside the Hebrewes haue an other kind of reckoning by the yeares of their high Priests which succeeded one another vnto the time of Herod vnder whom Christ was borne which account seemeth Montanus to followe in his apparatus in the treatise called Daniel the whole summe there gathered from the first of Cyrus to the birth of Christ is 433. yeares or thereabout But this account must needes be more vncertaine then the former by the yeares of the kings especially in those tumultuous and troublesome times after the Macchabees when the high priesthood was bought and sold. 5. We come now vnto the Romane cōputation which was accounted these two waies by the yeares from the first building of Rome afterward by their Consulls But seeing Rome was of no great reputation while the Persian and Grecian Monarchie stood neither of these accounts can giue any certaine direction concerning the affaires of those kingdomes And thus much Plutarke confesseth in the life of Camillus hauing declared the receiued opinion that Rome was taken by the French about the 360. yeare of the city if it seeme credible saith he that an exact account of these times had beene so long preserued seeing that euen the confusion of that time hath brought some doubt and controuersie to the latter And he giueth this reason of his doubt because the common opinion was that the taking of the citie was in the 365. yeare of Rome and the first of the 98. Olympiad but whereas the fame of that warre was spread abroad in Greece and came to the hearing of Aristotle and Heraclides Ponticus who liued in the time of Philip king of Macedon who raigned about the 105. Olympiad this warre falleth out 27. yeares after the vsuall reckoning M. Liuely to salue the credit of the Latine computation saith that there were two battels made by the French and it was the latter of them the report whereof came to Aristotles hearing But it is like that Plutarke would not haue omitted this matter to haue made sound the Romane Chronologie and it was not a battell with the French but the taking of the citie by them the fame whereof was bruited abroad Beside an other instance may be giuen of the vncertaintie of the Romane Chronologie Plutarke referreth the beginning of the Peloponne siake warre in Greece to the 300 yeare of the building of Rome 3. booke c. 1. whereas Aulus Gellius l. 71. c. 21. bringeth it to the 329. yeare M. Liuely here answeareth that vigesimum nonum twentie nine by the slippe of the writers penne is put for decimum nonum ninteene p. 105. whereas beside that there is small affinitie betweene these two words vigesimum and decimum that one lightly by the writer could not be taken for an other yet this beeing admitted there remaineth still the oddes of 19. or 20. yeares which is a great difference in the storie of times As great vncertaintie there is in reckoning by the yeares of the Consuls as Senerus Sulpitius lib. 2. sacr histor saith that Christ was borne when Sabinus and Ruffinus were Consuls Cassiodorus when Cneus Lentulus and Marcus Messala were colleagues in the Consulshippe Epiphanius heares 51. when Augustus was the 13. time Consul and Marcus Plautius Sylvanus So Augustine thinketh that Christ died that yeare when C. Rubellius and C. Fusius were Consuls lib. 18. de ciuitat Dei c. 54. but Onuphryus assigneth the yeare when Servius Sulpitius Galba and Lucius Cornelius Sulla were in office so also M. Liuely but both are deceiued for the first were Consuls in the 15. yeare of Tiberius the other in the 19. yeares whereas Christ suffred in the 18. yeare of Tiberius And further there is great vncertaintie thoroughout the Romane Chronologie of the Consuls that in the space of 700. yeares there is hardly one yeare to be found wherein the historians agree who should be Consuls Liuius Cassiodorus Sulpitius Dio Diodorus Siculus the Capitoline tables that were digged vp out of the ground vnder Paulus the 3. ann 46. composed as it is thought by Verrius Flaccus doe all differ one from another concerning the names of the yearely Consuls as is extant in the Romane Chronologie collected out of diuers authors by Ioachimus Grellius ioyned vnto Livies historie 6. There remaineth then the Greeke reckonings by their Olympiads which were certen games of running wrestling leaping celebrated euerie 4. yeare about Iuly in Greece in a certaine place called Olympia so called because there Hercules first instituted these solemne games to the honour of Iuppiter Olympius which beeing discontinued a long time were after renewed by Iuphitus king of that countrey about 705. yeares before the birth of Christ and so continued a 1000. yeares after This account by the Olympiads is resolued vpon to be the best by Pererius M. Linely Bullinger and others whereof now followeth more in the next question Quest. 36.
Whether the account of the Olympiake yeares be a certaine direction for the vnderstanding of Daniels weekes 1. Here are three opinions to be discussed 1. Some as the Hebrewes doe vtterly reiect the Greekes Olympiads making no account of them 2. Some doe make them the onely helpe and key to vnlocke the shut vp and hid meaning of Daniels weekes Liuely p. 36. So Bullinger certissimae sunt omnium supputationes quae fiunt per Olympiades the supputations made by the Olympiades are of all other most certaine c. and Pererius calleth it chronologiam omnium certissimam the chronologie of all other most certaine 3. But the meane opinion betweene these is the best that there is small certaintie in the Olympiades concerning the Persian Monarchie though for the Greeke affaires that computation may safely be receiued and this is the iudgement of M. Calvin hoc non potest certo trahi ad imperium Persarum this computation by the Olympike yeares howsoeuer it may serue for the Grecians yet it cannot be applyed to the Persian Empire to know therby at what time the kings of Persia beganne and ended their raigne c. So the Olympike reckoning in part is to be receiued in part it is so small certaintie 1. Conceruing the first of these opinions that no respect is at all to be had to the Olympiake yeares which is the fansie of the Hebrewes it is vtterly to be misliked for after the ende of the propheticall writings the Scriptures beeing altogether silent what direction will they haue especially for forren histories Oecolampadius here resolueth well that after the citie Ierusalem was repaired iam desicientibus Prophetis cum Malachia Ezra 〈◊〉 Prophets then ending with Malachie and Ezra there is no credit to be giuen vnto the Hebrewes in the supputation of their yeares 2. Neither is the second opinion generally to be receiued that the computation of this time is altogether to be directed and in a manner ouerruled by the Olympiake reckoning Here first the arguments shall be examined which are brought for the certaine authoritie of the Olympiads and then some contrarie reasons shall be produced to shewe the inualiditie of them 1. As touching the names and number of the Persian kings that the certaintie thereof may be gathered from the Greeks it is thus argued because many excellent writers and learned men Philosophers and Historiographers liued vnder the kings of Persia and knew their affaires as the seuen wisemen of Greece Thales Solon Chilon Pittacus Bias Cleobulus Periander liued in the time of Cyrus Pythagoras Zenophanes Anaximander Heraclitus with others flourished vnder Cambyses and Darius Socrates Thucidides Euripides vnder Artaxerxes Beside the courts of the Persian kings were frequented by many noble Grecians as by Hippias Demaratus Miltiades and therefore the names and number of the Persian kings was well knowne to them of Greece thus M. Liuely from pag. 43. to pag. 46. But this is no sufficient argument for the matter in question 1. It followeth not though these learned Philosophers and historians liued in the time of the Persian kings and some of them frequented their Courts that therefore they had a certaine knowledge of them all These kings of Persia with whom the Grecians had to doe were knowne vnto them but neither all of them nor yet to all those forenamed Philosophers and writers were they exactly knowne 2. An euident instance hereof may be giuen in Xenophon who writeth that Cyrus died in his bed and made a wise exhortation to his children whereas it is generally receiued that he was slaine by Tomyris as Iustine writeth 3. And though the name and number of the Persian kings had beene knowne to the Grecians yet the yeares of their raigne they much regarded not because they beeing a vaine-glorious nation followed their owne Olympike reckoning 2. Now for the truth and certaintie of the Olympiads one demonstration is taken from the time when Cyrus beganne his raigne which was in the 55. Olympiad from whence to the 114. Olympiad when Alexander died are counted 236. yeares whereof 6. yeares must be allowed to the Empire of Alexander after he ouercame Darius so M. Liuely pag. 48. and Pererius lib. 11. quest 2. But this demonstration may be thus excepted against 1. Clemens Alexand. placeth the destruction of the temple which was in the 19. yeare of Nebuchadnezzar in the last yeare of the 47. Olympiad lib. 1. stromat the 55. Olympiad followeth iust 30. yeares after if then Cyrus beganne to raigne how shall the 70. yeares of the Babylonian captiuitie be made vp which beganne in the 8. yeare of Nebuchadnezzar with the captiuitie of Iechoniah or if we beginne the captiuitie in the 4. yeare when Nebuchadnezzar tooke Ierusalem in the raigne of Iehoiachim 2. king 24. 2. there will not arise by this account 50. yeares in all for the captuitie 2. Pererius beginneth the first Olympiad in the 8. yeare of the raigne of Ahaz and yet some beginne the Olympiads in the 2. yeare of Iotham who raigned 16. yeares that is 23. yeares before that Bullinger then cannot Cyrus raigne be referred to the 55. Olympiad for the distance betwene the 1. and 55. Olympiad maketh 216. yeares but there onely were expired 205. yeares as it may be thus gathered from the 8. yeare of Ahaz vnto the 11. yeare of Iehoiachim when Iechonias captiuitie began are an 135. yeares and from thence to Cyrus 70. yeares which make 205. yeares then must the beginning of Cyrus raigne be pulled backe an 11. yeares from the 55. Olympiad to the 2. of the 52. Olympiad 3. An other demonstration is taken from comparing the Olympike yeares with the building of Rome M. Liuely out of Dyonisius Halycarnasseus his 5. booke alleadgeth that the 31. yeare of Darius Hystaspis concurred with the 72. Olympiad and 262. yeare of Rome This account is iust if we begin the Olympiads in the second yeare of Iotham for Rome is held to haue beene builded in the first of the 7. Olympiad which was in the tenth yeare of Achaz but Pererius bringeth the 7. Olympiad to the sixteenth yeare of Hezekiah 23. years after so that by his reckoning the 31. of Darius shall fall out 23. yeares later about the 4. yeare of the 77. Olympiad And further how well the Greeke Olympiads and the yeares of the bonding of Rome agree together appeareth by the dissension of writers in what Olympiad Rome should first be founded Timeus Siculus thinketh that Rome was built at the same time that Carthage was in Africa by the Tyrians which was 38. yeare before the first Olympiad Titus Liuius Clemens Alexandrinus and Solinus set the building of Rome in the 4. yeare of the 6. Olympiad Pomponius Atticus Cicero Plinie with others in the 3. yeare of the same Olympiad Dyonisius Halycarnass Eratosthenes Theophilus Antiochenus in the 1. yeare of the 7. Olympiad Polybius Diod. Siculus in the 2. yeare of the 7. Olympiad Q. Fabius an ancient writer of the Romane
affaires in the 1. yeare of the 8. Olympiad L. Cincius in the 4. yeare of the 12. Olympiad The oddes betweene the first account and the last is aboue 80. yeares for 12. Olympiads make 48. yeares and some thinke that Rome was founded 38. yeares before the first Olympiad some not before the 4. yeare of the 12. Olympiad 4. But yet a more euident proofe is taken from the course of the Sunne which was eclipsed in the 7. yeare of Cambyses which was in the second yeare of the 64. Olympiad there was an other eclipse which happened an eleuen dayes before Alexanders last battel with Darius in the sixt yeare of his raigne betweene these two eclipses there are found by exact calculation an 192. yeares which with Cyrus 30. and Cambyses 7. yeares make 229. which was the full time of the Persian Monarchie And hereupon he concludeth thus thus the glorious seruant of the world the Sunne c. euen this Chronologer I say of all other without exception most true and sure witnesseth for Herodotus Thucydides c. Contra. 1. Indeede if all these supposalls were true that these two eclipses happened in those yeares to the which they are assigned and that such distance were found betweene them and Cyrus with Cambyses raigned so long the conclusion for that continuance of the Persian Monarchie were verie strong but all these are vncertaine first that Cambyses and Cyrus raigned so long 37. yeares betweene them Iunius giueth vnto them together but 9. yeares Bullinger 14. yeares secondly whether such an eclipse fell out in the raigne of Cambyses and not rather afore may be likewise doubted thirdly whether that distance were not rather taken betweene two other eclipses then these it likewise may be a question he speaketh of an other eclypse which was an 141. yeares after that supposed to be in Cambyses time which Diodorus Siculus placeth in the 2. of the 99. Olympiad 2. But although the Sunne be most sure in his course there is a Sunne which is more true and stedfast euen the Sunne-light of the truth which shineth in the Scriptures and in this prophesie of Daniel which calculateth but 490. yeares from the word going forth which was the commandement of Cyrus vnto the Messiah which time cannot be iustly gathered if 200. yeares or aboue be giuen to the Persians Now on the contrarie side this may be obiected against the certaintie of the Olympiads 1. Seeing it is confessed that the Olympike games were first erected by Hercules and then discontinued a long time vntill Iphitus who renewed them is it not as likely that they might be interrupted afterward as before and the rather because of the great warres which the Grecians had with the Persians and the Peloponnesiake ciuill warre which continued 27. yeares among themselues in which troublesome times it may be supposed they had no great leasure or desire to solemnize their Olympike games all Grecia beeing in an vproare 2. Plutark in the life of Numa maketh some doubt of the Olympike reckonings in regard of the beginning thereof beeing committed to writing verie late by Hippias of Elis to this it is answered that although Hippias should beginne the Olympiads somewhat too late as put the case that he make that the 40. Olympiad which was but the thirtieth yet the distances of time betweene the Olympiads shall not misse one lotte so Temporanus and M. Liuely pag. 89. But howsoeuer the distances and spaces of time may be kept yet there must needes be a manifest error in the computation if those things be referred to a later time which were formerly done As the question beeing of the beginning of the Persian Monarchie if it be set at the 55. Olympiad when it beganne much sooner a great error will fall out in historie and one error admitted in chronicle will breed many 3. It is vncertaine when the Olympiades beganne Bullinger holdeth they beganne in the 2. yeare of Iotham and M. Liuely seemeth to be of the same opinion who maketh the 31. yeare of Darius Hystaspis and the 72. Olympiad to concurre together which cannot be vnlesse he beginne the Olympiads in the 2. of Iotham as is euidently scene in Bullingers first and third Chronicle table Eusebius beginneth the Olympiads in the 49. yeare of Azaria Glareanus in the 50. Lucidus in the 46. yeare Paulus Phrygio in the 12. of Iotham Bibliander in the 13. Functius in the 2. of Iotham so also Africanus which seemeth the most probable But Pererius setteth the beginning of the Olympiades 23. yeares after in the 8. yeare of Achaz as is shewed before 4. If forren writers be compared together great difference will be found in the account of yeares by the Olympiads as this one instance here may suffice concerning the time wherein Pythagoras liued Dyonisius saith he taught in Italie about the 50. Olympiad Diogenes Laertius writeth that he flourished in the 60. Olympiad here is a distance of 40. yeares Solinus bringeth him to the time of the first Consuls which was about the 68. Olympiad but Plinie putteth him backe an 100. yeares from the time assigned by Solinus the like difference in other matters may appeare by diligent search in forren historians in the reckoning of the Olympike yeares The like difference is found among the Christians in the Olympike reckoning Cyrillus chateches 12. placeth Christs birth in the 186. Olympiad Ioseph Scallig and M. Liuely in the 3. yeare of the 194. Olympiad Pererius and the most beside in the 4. yeare of the 194. Olympiad 5. But the chiefe obiection of all is that the Olympian account agreeth not with the Scripture for if Nehemiah saw both the beginning of the Persian Monarchie as is euident Ezra 2. 2. he was one of those which returned from the captiuitie according to the edict of Cyrus and liued to see the ende of that Monarchie as he maketh mention of Darius the last king of Persia vnder whom Iaddua was high Priest who met Alexander who is also named in the same place Nehem. 12. 22. then could not the Persian Monarchie continue 230. yeares as is gathered by the Olympike computation for then Nehemiah who may be supposed to haue beene 20. yeare old when he returned from Chaldea should be 250 yeare old which age was not incident into those times But this shall be shewed more at large afterward This shall suffice concerning the Olympike supputation of yeares 3. Now the third opinion remaineth propounded in the begnning of this question that the Olympike computation may be admitted concerning the affaires of the Greekes and the continuance of their Monarchie as of the Kings of Syria and Egypt but they can giue no certaine direction concerning the kings of Persia the yeares of their raigne and continuance of their Empire To know then the certaintie hereof first we must haue recourse vnto the sacred historie forren historians are so to be followed as that no contradiction be admitted to the Scriptures then where the Scripture
leaueth vs forren witnesses are to be receiued Now seeing it is collected that the raigne of the Grecians from Alexander vnto Cleopatra Q. of Egypt continued about 300. yeares and from thence to the death of Christ the Romanes ruled 60. yeares H. Br. â—roleg in Daniel there can remaine but an 130. yeares for the Monarchie of the Persians to make vp the summe of Daniels 70. weekes that is 490. yeares So then thus farre we are directed by the holy storie as is shewed before by the age and life of Nehemias who sawe the beginning and ende of the Persian Monarchie that it could not continue 200. yeares or aboue the rest must be supplied out of the Greeke and Latine historians Here then two erroneous opinions are to be touched the one of Varro who vntill the beginning of the Olympiads holdeth no certainty of time to be gathered for he distinguisheth the age of the world into these 3. times before the flood which he saith is altogether vnknowne after the â—â—ood vnto the Olympike yeares which time he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fabulous and full of tales the third from the beginning of the Olympiads which time he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 historicall as certaine and true whereas the contrarie is euident that the historie of time from the beginning of the world vntill somewhat after the Olympiads is most certaine out of the propheticall writings but there is no certaintie of the times following because the propheticall writings were ceased The other opinion is of Paulus Burgans who thus aduiseth de quibus non habetur historia sacrae Scripturae recurratur ad historiaâ— authenticaâ— specialitâ—r Hebraeorum whereof there is no historie of the sacred Scripture we must haue recourse to the authenticall histories specially of the Hebrewes But Burgens beeing a conuerned Iew himselfe doth ascribe too much to the historicall accounts of his nation whereas after their Prophets ceased there â—re no more vncerten false and fabulous Chronicles then those of the Hebrewes are As appeareth by that one instance of the number of the Persian kings whome they generally hâ—ld to haue beene but foure This then remaineth as the best resolution concerning this matter what Chronologie is to be followed in the computation of Daniels weekes that it is safest to take direction of the Scriptures so farre as they proceede in the historie of the Persians and then to vse the helpe of the Olympiads and other forren histories for the rest of the yeares And yet further to shew what small certentie is to be found in the historicall accounts of the Gentiles concerning the Persiah Monarchie it shall not be amisse before we come to examine the true reckoning of Daniels weekes briefly to shew the great diuersitie of writers both of the number and yeares of the Persian kings 37. Quest. Of the names and number of the Persian kings 1. Hierome whome the Latine historians and interpreters follow numbreth 14. kings of the Persians as they are set downe in order before qu. 17. vpon the 7. chap. so also Pererius followeth the same account and Oecolampad in which number are comprehended Smerdes that succeeded Cambyses and Artabanus who killed Xerxes both beeing vsurpers and Xerxes the second who raigned 2. moneths and Sogdianus 7. moneths betweene Artaxerxes Longimanus and Darius Nothus These partly because they were vsurpers partly for their short raigne are not to be counted among the Persian kings for the historie of time 2. As the Latines exceede in number so the Hebrewes come as farre short Some of them doe make onely three kings of Persia Cyrus Assuerus Darius and whereas mention is made beside Ezâ— 4. 7. of Artaxerxes and then of an other Artashasht or Artaxerxes Ezâ— 7. 1. they say that the first Artaxerxes was the same with Assuerus and the second with Darius So R. Saadâ—a and R. Davison Some of them number foure kings Cyrus Assuerus Artaxerxes Darius Ab. Ezra Some count fiue as R. Moses But all these are euidently conuinced of vntruth by the historie of Ezra and Nehemia as may thus appeare First it is cleare that Xerxes was the fourth king of Persia mentioned Dan. 11. 2. who should be richer then the rest Then after this Xerxes the fourth king succeeded Artaxerxes surnamed Longimanus because he had one hand longer then an other then followed Darius surnamed Nothus because he was the base sonne of Longimanus after him raigned an other Artaxerxes who was surnamed Mnemon of his singular memorie there is mention made yet further of an other Darius who was the last king of the Persians Nehem. 12. 22. Thus it is euident that there were more kings of Persia then the Hebrewes imagine as may be gathered out of the Scripture 3. Some name but 8. kings of Persia in all As 1. Cyrus 2. Artaxerxes Assuerus 3. Darius with the long hand 4. Darius Nothus 5. Artaxerxes Mnemon 6. Artaxerxes Ochus 7. Arses 8. Darius so Annius Viteâ—biens But in this account are omitted two famous kings of the Persians Darius Hystaspis and Xerxes his sonne 4. Some make but nine which they thus number Cyrus Cambyses Darius Hystaspis Xerxes Artaxerxes Longimaâ—â—us Darius Nothus Artaxerxes Mnemon Ochus Darius Codomannus Ioseph Scalliger But here is omitted Arses the last king but one who succeeded Ochus 5. Some doe set downe tenne kings of the Persians namely all these before rehearsed so Bulling but the leaueth out Sâ—erdes the vsurper who succeeded Cambyses and raigned not one yeare but onely certaine moneths 6. Beroaldus whom H. Br. followeth reckoneth 11. kings of Persia agreeing in the number but he misseth in the order for thus he placeth them Cyrus Assuerus Artaxerxes Darius Assyrius Artaxerxes pins then Xerxes the fift then the other sixe in order But in this account he maketh Xerxes the rich king of Persia the fift king who in Daniel is the fourth c. 11. 2. and he supposeth him to haue beene the sonne of Artaxerxes pins who was indeede the sonne of Darius 7. Iuniâ—s setteth downe the Persian kings in this order 1. Cyrus 2. Cambyses his son 3. Smerdes who vsurped the kingdome a yeare 4. Darius Hystaspis 5. Xerxes 6. Artaxerxes Longhand 7. Darius the bastard 8. Artaxerxes Mnemon 9. Darius Ochus 10. Arses 11. Dariiâ—s Codomannus whome Alexander ouercame Iun. But if Smerdes be counted for one then Xerxes should be the fift not the fourth king as Dan. 11. 2. Thus much for the vncertentie of the names and number of the Persian Kings 38. Quest. Of the vncertentie of the yeares of the Persian Monarchie and of the Persian kings 1. Concerning the continuance of the Persian Monarchie the Hebrewes generally giue vnto it not aboue 50. yeares Tertullian an 107. yeares Isidor lib. 5. etymolog an 180. Annius Lucidus Driedo an 190. Dyonisius Halycar lib. de Rom. Antiquit. 200. yeares and somewhat aboue Clemens Alex. lib. 1. stromat 215. Severus Sulpit. lib. 2. sacr histor 250. Lyranus 230. so also M. Lively Pererius 232.
Iunius in his last edition 201. but in the first he reckoneth for the whole time of the Persian Monarchie but an 129. yeares Beroaldus whom H. Br. followeth an 130. which seemeth to be the best computation for the reason before alleadged namely Nehemiahs age 2. Now there is as great diuersitie in the seuerall raignes of the kings Cyrus some thinke to haue raigned 30. yeares as Cicero lib. 1. de diuinatio Clemens lib. 1. stromat Iustine Eusebius Sulpitius giueth vnto him 31. Herodotus 29. Annius Driedo and Lucidus 22. yeares after Darius the Mede Xenophon yeeldeth him but 7. yeares Bullinger 16. the Hebrewes generally but three namely in the Persian Monarchie he might raigne before divers yeares in the kingdome of Persia M. Lydyat aloweth to Cyrus 30. yeare ouer Persia and 7. ouer the whole Monarchie Cambyses raigned 8. yeares as some thinke Herodotus Eusebius Bullinger as some but 6. yeares Iosephus lib. 11. antiquit as some 9. yeares Sulpitius as others 19. yeares Clemens Alexandrin Iunius giueth vnto Cyrus and Cambyses together but 9. yeares in his annotations both in his first and last edition M. Lydyat 17. yeares Smerdes who vsurped the kingdome fayning himselfe to be the brother of Cambyses raigned but 7. moneths as Herodotus so also Lydyat 10 moneths as Theodoret a whole yeare as Iosephus Iunius Darius the sonne of Hystaspis raigned 19. yeares as Tertullian 30. yeares as Orosius 31. M. Lydyat 46. yeares as Clemens Alexandrin 36. yeares as Herodotus lib. 2. Sulpitius lib. 2. Eusebius 12. yeares according to Ab. Ezra Iunius in his first edition giueth him twentie yeares 36. in his last Xerxes is supposed to haue raigned 20. yeares as Oecolampad Lydyat 21. as Diodorus Sulpitius Orosius 26. as Clemens Alexandrin lib. 1. stromat 22. yeares Iun. edition 3. Artaxerxes Longimanus raigned 37. Melancthon ex Metasthene Iun. edition 1. 40. Pererius agreeing with the most historians 44. as Bullinger 46. as M. Lydyat 40. yeares Iun. edition 3â— Darius Nothus raigned 8. yeares as Clemens Alexand. and H. Br. proleg in Daâ—iel 60. yeares as Phylostratus lib. 1. de vit Apollon 19. yeares according to Eusebius Beda Bullinger M. Lydyat with others 18. yeares Iun. edit 1. 19. yeares Iun. edit 3. Artaxerxes Mnemon raigned 40. Perer. Oecolampad 43. as M. Lively M. Lydyat out of Diodorus Siculus 62. yeares as Plutarke 36. as Bullinger 35. as Melancthon out of Metasth 10. yeares Iun. edit 1. 3. yeares edit 3. Ochus raigned 3. yeares as H. Br. in proleg in Dan. 23. yeares according to Tertullian and Diodorus Siculus and Iun. edit 3. 22. edit 1. and M. Lydyat 24. yeares as Sulpit. 26. yeares as Eusebius Beda Melancthon Bulling Arses or Arsanes the sonne of Ochus raigned 1. yeare according to Tertullian 3. yeares as Sulpit. Diodor. so also Iun. edit 1. and 3. and M. Lydyat 4. yeares as Euseb. Beda Darius the last raigned 3. yeares as Clemens 4. yeares as Sulpit. 5. yeares as Iun. edit 3. 6. yeares as Euseb. Beda 21. yeares as Tertullian Now then if we lay the yeares of these Persian kings together first the smallest numbers of their raigne then the greatest it will appeare what great oddes there is in the account According to some According to others Cyrus raigned yeares 3 Cyrus raigned yeares 30 Cambyses 6 Cambyses 8 Darius Hystaspis 30 Darius Hystaspis 46 Xerxes 20 Xerxes 26 Artaxerxes Longhand 37 Artaxerxes Longhand 46 Darius Nothus 8 Darius Nothus 60 Artaxerxes Mnemon 36 Artaxerxes Mnemon 62 Ochus 3 Ochus 26 Arses 1 Arses 4 Darius Codoman 3 Darius Codoman 21 the summe is 147. yeares the summe is 329. yeares So then the difference betweene these two accounts is of an 182. yeares By this it is euident that there is small certentie to be had from forren stories concerning the Persian Monarchie either for the names number or yeares of their kings whereupon Burgensis thus concludeth Historiae illorum temporum praecipâ—e regum Persarum Medorum sunt plenae diversitatibus contradictionibus c. The histories of those times specially of the Medes and Persians are full of diuersities and contradictions in so much that they onely doe not varie in the continuance of some kings but some histories also name some kings that other histories make no mention of To this purpose Paul Burgens addit 3. in 9. Daniel Now will we proceede to examine the seuerall opinions before set downe qu. 34. 39. Quest. That Daniels weekes doe signifie a certen definite number of yeares This may be prooued by sundrie reasons against their opinion who doe thinke that in this number of Daniels weekes there is not signified a precise tearme of yeares but generally all that time which should follow vnto the comming of the Messiah But that a certen and definite number of yeares is signified and intended by these 70. weekes it may thus be shewed 1. That number of yeares whose beginning and ende is expressed must needes be a definite and certen number beeing so bounded and limited but the beginning and ende of this tearme is described they take beginning at the going forth of the word and they ende at the Messiah 2. The manner of phrase declareth as much 70. weekes are cut out or determined the Lord had as it were cut out seuered and appointed this time for the comming of the Messiah to performe these things here prophesied 3. That number is definite and certen which is diuided into parts but so is this whole number of 70. weekes it is diuided into three parts into 7. weekes 62. weekes and one weeke 4. This number of 70. weekes answereth vnto the tearme of 70. yeares beeing that number multiplied 7. times therefore as the one is certen so is the other 5. Further that time which we are bid to obserue and marke and to attend such things as fall out therein must be a certen and definite time for how els should it be obserued and marked but such was this time here designed by Daniel and the euents which followed it as our Sauiour saith Mar. 24. 15. When ye shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the Prophet standing in the holy place let him which readeth consider it But how could the euent of this prophesie be obserued and considered if some certen direction were not giuen by the time to finde it out 40. Quest. That Origens account can not stand beginning the 70. weekes at Adam and ending them in the destruction of Ierusalem 1. Origen to make this account good taketh euery weeke for 70. yeares to euery day of the propheâ—icall weeke allowing tenne yeares but no where in the Scripture is a weeke so taken but either for a weeke of daies or for a weeke of yeares 2. This whole summe according to his account taking euery weeke for 70. yeares will amount to 4900. yeares but the whole time from the first to the second Adam is not much aboue 4000. yeares not yet so much in some account so that this
time according to Origens supputation will exceede the time of the Messiah almost 900. yeares 3. It is euident that these 70. weekes must beginne at such time as the word went forth to build againe Ierusalem and the Temple they must not then take beginning so long before 4. Neither are they to be extended vnto the destriction of Ierusalem as shall be shewed when we come to examine the seuerall opinions for the ende of these 70. weekes 41. Quest. That the 70. weekes must not beginne before the peoples returne out of captiuitie 1. Hippolytus as Hierome setteth downe his opinion in his Commentarie vpon this place beginneth the 70. weekes fiftie yeares before the dissoluing of the captiuitie and endeth them in Christs natiuitie but this opinion can not stand for 1. the Angel sheweth that these weekes must then beginne when the people returned out of captiuitie 2. from thence vnto the Messiah are 490. yeares but if we should beginne fiftie yeares before the number will arise to 540. yeares By the same reason may be confuted the opinion of Lyranus Burgens Galatinus who beginne the 70. weekes at the 4. of Zedekiah because then they say the promise was made from the Lord by Ieremie for the returne of the people as is shewed before quest 34. for 1. by this reckoning there will be 70. yeares within fowre all the time of the captiuitie added to Daniels propheticall weekes 2. if they will fetch the beginning from that word and promise why may they not as well beginne an eleuen yeares before when Ieremie in the 4. yeare of Iehoiakim shewed them of the captiuitie of 70. yeares Ierem. 25. 1. 11 or yet they may beginne further off from that promise made concerning Cyrus Isa. 45. that he should cause Ierusalem to be builded againe from which time to the ende of Daniels weekes are aboue 700. yeares Likewise R. Salamons opinion is confuted by the same reasons who beginneth the 70. weekes from the first destruction of the Temple in the 19. yeare of Nebuchadnezzer and endeth them at the destruction of the citie for 1. so there will be found aboue 50. yeares more then the 70. weekes from the destruction of the Temple vnto the going forth of the commandement to build againe Ierusalem 2. seeing the Angel pitcheth the beginning at the going forth of the word to bring againe the people and to build againe Ierusalem it is absurd to set the beginning when the people were carried into captiuitie and the citie and Temple destroied 42. Quest. That the 70. weekes doe not beginne in the raignes of the other kings of Persia after Cyrus 1. From the second or 20. yeare of Darius Hystaspis the 70. weekes cannot beginne 1. for we doe not read of any decree made by that Darius for the reedifying of the Temple and citie it is Darius Longimanus in whose 2. yeare the worke of the house of God went forward who is mentioned Ezr. 4. 24. As it may be thus gathered there are named in that chapter v. 6 7. two kings of the Persians after Cyrus Assuerus and Artashasht then after them followed Darius But Darius the sonne of Hystaspis was the third king of Persia. 2. In Darius decree mentioned Ezr. 6. there is no speach of building the citie but of the Temple onely here the Angel speaketh of the going forth of the word to build Ierusalem Perer 2. Neither can the computation beginne from Xerxes the 4. king of Persia by whom Iosephus thinketh first Ezra to haue beene sent and afterward Nehemiah who is called Artaxerxes Ezra 7. and Nehem. 2. for Xerxes is held by the most to haue raigned but 20. yeares onely Clemens affoardeth him 26. yeares but mention is made of the 32. yeare of this Artaxerxes Nehem. 5. 14. 3. Neither can their computation stand which beginne at the 7. yeare of Artaxerxes Longimanus when Ezra was sent with the kings letters to Ierusalem for Sulpitius well obserueth Ezram nihil super reficienda vrbe fecisse comperio c. I doe not finde that Ezra did any thing in repayring of the citie his greatest care seemeth to haue bin to reforme the corrupt manners of the people c. And whereas the king doth furnish him with siluer and gold that was rather employed for the sacrifices and seruice of the Temple then for the building thereof Bullinger setteth downe diuerse reasons to confirme his opinion as 1. he prooueth that Ezra was sent to Ierusalem by Artaxerxes 2. that Nehemiah liuing vnto Alexanders time as appeareth by the names of Iaddua and Samballat who liued in Alexanders raigne was sent by this Artaxerxes not by Darius Hystaspis for then he should exceede an 194. yeares 3. the commission giuen vnto Ezra c. 7. 23. thou Ezra c. set iudges and arbiters which may iudge the people c. agreeth with the Angels speach here the going out of the word c. 4. the time agreeth from the 7. of Artaxeres to the death of Christ are found iust 490. yeares Contra. 1. The first is graunted beeing euident out of the Scripture but that is nothing to the purpose 2. It is also confessed that this was Artaxerxes Longimanus not Darius Hystaspis that reason then is impertinent 3. Ezra his commission sheweth that he was to reforme the manners of the people and to set them in order not to build the citie or Temple and therefore it was not the going forth of the word here spoken of which was to build Ierusalem 4. It can not be shewed that this agreeth with the iust computation of the 490. yeares for therein lieth the question 4. Pererius with others as namely M. Lydyat lib. de emendat temp ann mund 3553. would haue the 70. weekes beginne from the 20. yeare of Artaxerxes Longimanus by whome Nehemiah was sent to repaire the citie Nehem. 2. 8. which agreeth to the going forth of the word here spoken of to build Ierusalem And for the which enterprise Nehemiah is commended Ecclus. 49. Contra. 1. Nehemiah did not first build the citie and lay the foundations of the walls which was done long before in the raigne of an other Artaxerxes Ezr. 4. 12. which is held to be Cambyses he onely viewed and repaired the breaches of the citie Nehem. 2. 15. there is mention made both of gates and walls before his comming 2. The Temple was builded and finished before the 20. yeare of Longimaniu namely in the sixt yeare of his raigâ—â— but it is not like that the building of the Temple beeing the most speciall thing which the people of God longed after should be excluded out of the compasse of the 70. weekes 5. Their opinion also may be refelled who count the beginning of these 70. weekes from the 2. yeare of Darius Nothus when by the commandement of the king the building of the house went forward and was finished in the sixt yeare Ezr. 6. 15. from thence to the destruction of Ierusalem are found iust 490. yeares the particulars
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
time 3. Nehemiah maketh mention c. 13. 28. of one of the sonnes of Ioiada the high Priest who was the sonne in law of Samballat the Horonite whome Nehemiah chased away this as Iosephus sheweth lib. 11. was Manasses the brother of Iaddua the high Priest who married Nicaso the daughter of Samballat 4. Nehemiah also maketh mention of the last Darius called Codomannus Nehem. 12. Now that Nehemiah also saw the beginning is euident Ezr. 2. 2. where Nehemiah is named among those which returned out of captiuitie according to the edict of Cyrus Two answers are here made 1. that it might be an other Nehemiah beside him who was sent to repaire Ierusalem in the 20. yeare of king Artaxerxes 2. the historie may be transposed for Nehemiah went not vp then but 64. yeares after Genevens annotat Ezra 2. 2. 3. And it is further answered that the Samballat mentioned by Nehemiah c. 12. might be an other of that name or Iosephus might mistake the time wherein Samballat liued and whereas Nehemiah speaketh of Iaddua he onely sheweth that at that time when he writ that booke Iaddua was borne heire to the Priesthood to this purpose M. Lydyat in his booke de emendat tempor ann 3485. set forth this yeare 609. Contra. 1. To imagine two Nehemiahs as they likewise say that Mordecai there named was an other beside Mordecai in the dayes of Esther vnlesse some Scripture might be shewed for it is all one as if they should make two of Moses Dauids Salomons or Zorobabels name 2. whereas the words stand thus these are they c. which came with Zerubbabel Ieshuaeh Nehemiah Ezr. 2. 2. what a disorder were this in the storie these beeing named together to put off Nehemiahs comming so many yeares after And beside this doubt is remooued Nehem. 7. 5. where Nehemiah saith I found a booke of the genealogie of them which came vp at the first and found it written there c. they which came vp with Zerubbabel Ieshuah Nehemiah all these were captaines and chiefe men with whome the people returned at the first Nehemiah then was one of the captaines that went vp first out of the captiuitie 3. To the other answers it may be also thus replied that Samballat mentioned by Nehemiah is the same that assisted Alexander for he is said to haue had one of Ioiada his sonnes which was Manasses the brother of Iaddua to his sonne in law Nehem. 13. 28. And Iosephus is not deceiued in casting Samballat into this time for Nehemiah doth the same neither was Iaddua at this time onely borne for he is counted among the high Priests and if Manasses his younger brother at this time were married then Iaddua could not be so young as onely to be then borne Thus then Nehemiah beeing found to haue liued from the beginning of the Persian Monarchie to the ende may be supposed to haue beene about an 150. yeares of age or somewhat more he may be thought to haue beene 20. or 25. at the returne out of captiuitie and liued after an 130. the whole time of the Persian Monarchie which Nehemiahs age will not suffer to be extended much further And it neede not seeme straunge that Nehemiah might be an 150. yeare old for many yeares after this in the time of Claudius Cesar one T. Fullonius of Bononia was found to be an 150. yeare old and many other are recorded by Plinie in his 7. booke c. 48 49 50. which in diuers countries liued betweene an 100. and 150. yeares 5. This also is an other manifest proofe that the Persian Monarchie could not exceede much an 130. yeares because in the 6. yeare of Darius when the house of God was finished there were some then aliue which had seene the former house as the Prophet Hagge saith Who is he among you that saw this house in her first glorie and how doe you see it now is it not in your eyes in comparison of it as nothing If now there were an 106. yeares runne since Cyrus first as Iunius in his annotations vpon that place in the last edition obserueth they must haue beene aboue an 180. yeares old which then liuing had seene the first Temple Iosephus Scalliger taketh these words spoken by way of wishing in this sense O that any were aliue which had seene the former Temple he would take this as nothing to that But the Prophet speaketh vnto them in the second person is it not in your eyes that is yours which did know the other Temple and so Lyranus well expoundeth Therefore from Cyrus vnto this second of Darius might be some 40. yeares and odde and so some at the age of an 130. or thereabout might haue knowne the first Temple standing and after this there might remaine some 80. yeares of the Persian Monarchie 6. And this further may be an other euident argument that the Persian Monarchie continued not aboue an 130. yeares or thereabout because Nehem. 12. 26. there are nine seuerall men expressed by name which liued in the daies of Ioiakim sonne of Ieshuah who was high Priest in theâ— returne from Babylon and continued vnto the end of Nehemiah now Ioiakim succeeded his father Ieshuah in the Priesthood in the 45. yeare after their returne as Bullinger noteth in his tables 2. tabul 2. These were the chiefe of the Leuites all this while they could not be vnder 25. yeares olde in Ioiakims time for before the Leuites ministred not now if the Persian Monarchie continued 200. yeares or aboue they must be supposed to be very neare 200. yeares old Thus it hath beene sufficiently prooued I trust that it is most agreeable to Scripture to begin Daniel 〈…〉 from the edict of Cyrus wherein we haue the consent of Tertullian Origen Clem. Alexand. among the auncient writers and of Melancth Calv. Beroald Pint. H. Tâ—â— of the new â—â—the difference onely betweene them is in that some begin from Darius some from Cyrus Piâ—â—us from the time of the reuealing of this vision which he vnderstandeth to be the going forth of the word But the oddes is not great onely in a yeare or two in the most in their opinion which make the raigne of Darius the Mede and Cyrus diuers But if it 〈…〉 that they raigned ioyntly together as is prooued before 2. qu. vpon this chapter 〈◊〉 there is no 〈◊〉 But against this computation of the 70. weekes from the first of Cyrus it will be obiected thus 1. that edict because it was void and tooke no place for the worke was hindred all the daies of Cyrus Ezr 4. 3. notwithstanding his former edict is not to be accounted for the beginning of these weekes 2. Cyrus edict was onely to build the Lord an house Ezr. 1. 2. but this word the going out whereof the Angel speaketh of was to build Ierusalem thus obiecteth Pererius against the opinion of Clemens Alexandr so also M. Lydyat reasoneth in ann 3553. 3. Lyranus alleadgeth this reason against it out of Africanus
that if the account beginne from Cyrus there will be found an 100. yeares more then the 70. weekes to the passion of Christ which he counteth thus The Persian Monarchie continued 230. yeares the kingdome of the Macodonians or Grecians 300. thâ—nce to the death of Christ the Romanes ruled 60. yeares all make 590. yeares Contra. 1. Though Cyrus decree did not at the first take place altogether yet because they by vertue of that decree laid the foundation of the Temple in the 2. yeare Ezr. 2. 10. though the worke were interrupted from thence the reckoning must beginne and the rather for that this decree of Cyrus was the ground of Darius edict renewed afterward Ezr. 6. yea the Angel foresheweth here as much in diuiding 7. weekes from the rest that the building of the citie and Temple should be interrupted 49. yeares and should be finished in a troublesome time v. 25. 2. Though Cyrus edict specially intended the building of the Lords house yet they had libertie giuen them there withall to reedifie the walls and citie as is euident Ezr. 4. 12. for otherwise the prophesie of Isai concerning Cyrus had not beene fulfilled c. 54. 28. He saith to Cyrus thou art my shepheard and he shall performe all my desire saying also to Ierusalem thou shalt be built and to the Temple thy foundations shall be surely laid 3. That the Persian Monarchie continued not 230. yeares is prooued before so that this obiection is soone answered And if Lyranus thinketh that from Cyrus to Christs passion 590. yeares expired how then can he make his own account afterward good counting from the 4. of Zedekiah 52. yeares before Cyrus as he casteth it to the passion of Christ but 490. yeares in all Thus the beginning of Daniels 70. weekes beeing knowne it remaineth that we come to examine the diuers opinions for the ende and determining of them as they are before propounded qu. 34. But first because we will at once make an ende of the questions doubts of the Persian Monarchie three other matters shall here be briefly touched 1. vnder which of the Persian kings Mordecai liued 2. what king it was by whome the Edict was renewed to build the Temple 3. which Artaxerxes it was by whome in the 20. of his yeare Nehemiah was sent 44. Quest. Vnder which of the Persian kings Mordecai liued and of his age 1. Some take the great king Assuerus who married Esther to be Cambyses the sonne of Cyrus as Paul Burgens calleth this Assuerus filium Cyri maritum Esther both the sonne of Cyrus and the husband of Ester addit 3. in 9. c. Dan. But this cannot be for Cambyses is held by most Chronologerâ— to haue raigned but 7. yeares the Hebrewes giue vnto him but 6. yeares but this Assuerus married not Esther till the 7. yeare of his raigne toward the ende thereof in the 10. moneth Estb. 2. 17. and c. 3. 12. mention is made of his 12. yeare 2. Some take this Assuerus the husband of Esther to be Darius Hystaspic the 3. king of Persia so Iun. in his annotat Esth. 1. 1. in the first edition and Esther called Adassa he thinketh to be Aâ—ossa Darius wife mentioned by Herodot lib. 3. Of the same opinion seemeth Lyranus to be that the next king vnto Camâ—yses was this Assuerus But Darius Hystaspicis succeeded Câ—â—byses so also Genevens 3. Ioseph lib. 11. thinketh that this Assuerus was Artaxerxes Longimanus surnamed the long-hand the 5. king of Persia But Eusebius in his Chronicle â—â—felleth him by this argument that seeing Ezra liued in the daies of this Artaxerxes it is like he would haue made some honourable mention of Esther and Mordecai Herein though Eusebius doe truly contradict Iosephus yet his reason is not so forcible for seeing there is a speciall historie written of Esther and Mordecai their acts which booke is like to haue beene made by Ezra or some other of the Prophets then liuing it was not needefull in the other bookes of Ezra and Nehemiah to make mention of them seeing in those bookes they meddle not with the Persian affaires but with such things as happened about the building of the citie and Temple at Ierusalem But this reason rather may be vrged that Artaxerxes 〈◊〉 who is that Darius called also Artashasht who gaue licence to build the Temple which was finished in his 6. yeare and in his 7. sent Ezra and in his 20. Nehemiah with new commissions to repaire the citie it is not like that he would be so mooued and incensed against the Iewes to roote them out as Assuerus was 4. A fourth opinion there is that this Assuerus was Artaxerxes Mnemon which succeeded Darius Nothus the 7. king of Persia which is the opinion of Exsebius Isidore Beda Sulpitius to whome subscribeth Pererius But these two obiections may be made against this opinion 1. that if Esther had beene the Queene in Nehemiahs time it is like he would haue vsed her mediation to the king or Mordecaies and not haue pressed himselfe vpon the king 2. whereas Mordecai is said to haue beene one of those which was carried away in the captiuitie of Iechoniah Esth. 2. 6. from which captiuitie vnto the raigne of Artaxerxes Muemon are accounted by the most Chronologers 250. yeares as Pererius confesseth then could it not be that Artaxerxes vnder whome Esther and Mordecai liued Hereunto Pererius answereth that whereas the words stand thus Mordecai which was the sonne of Iair the sonne of Shemei the sonne of Kish a man of Iemini which had beene carried away c. with the captiuitie of Iechoniah c. he would haue the relatiue which referred to the nearest antecedent Iemini whome he supposeth to haue beene then carried into captiuitie But herein Pererius is greatly ouerseene for Iemini is here taken for the tribe Beniamin as Kish the father of Saul is said to be of Iemini 1. Sam. 9. 1. and Shemei is called the sonne of Iemini 2. Sam. 16. 11. Then this Iemini could not possibly goe into captiuitie with Iechoniah Therefore other answer better that it is referred to Kish that he went into captiuitie so Burgens and Iunius in his last edition Ioseph Scal. l. 6. de emendat tempor But hereunto Thoring maketh a double answer 1. They must shew vs an other Kish out of Scripture beside the father of Saul which if they can not doe eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur it may as easily be reiected as it is prooued yet this may be admitted that this was an other Kish beside that auncient Kish the father of Saul as this Shemei was diuers from him that railed vpon Dauid 2. He hath then a better answer that if they will count so many generations namely these foure of Mordecai Iair Shemei Kish from the captiuitie of Iechoniaâ— they will make Mordecai either scarse yet borne or a very young man who was now auncient and nourished Esther as his daughter he was as a father vnto
her for in true account there were not aboue an 150. yeares runne since the captiuitie of Iechoniah to the raigne of this Artaxerxes and if foure generations of men were then worne out Mordecai must be held a very young man or not so graue a personage as the storie maketh him 5. An other opinion is that Mordecai liued vnder Xerxes the fourth king of Persia who is also called Assuerus which is the opinion of Iosephus Scalliger lib. 6. de emendat tempor likewise Thom. Lydiat lib. de emendat tempor in ann 3514. and of Iunius edition 3. the reasons thereof are these 1. The name Achashverosh which Scalliger pronounceth Oxyares commeth neere the name Xerxes which is after the Greeke pronuntiation the other is the Hebrew name 2. the name of Queene Esther hath great affinitie with Amestris as Herodotus or Amystris as Ctesias the wife of Xerxes 3. Assuerus is set forth by the largenes of his kingdome and the greatnes of his riches Esth. 1. and Xerxes was the rich king of Persia the fourth from Cyrus inclusiuely that is including Cyrus Dan. 11. 2. 4. Assuerus was the next king before the first Artaxerxes whome Darius Nothus succeeded Ezr. c. 4. v. 7. and 24. But Xerxes was the next predecessour to Artashasht or Artaxerxes who was called Longimanus who was Xerxes sonne But against this last assertion that this Assuerus was Xerxes it will be thus obiected 1. that Xerxes is held of the most not to haue raigned aboue 20. or 22. yeares at the most and he was married to Esther but in the 7. yeare and in the 8. might Darius his sonne be borne who was not aboue 13. yeares olde when his father died yet in the second yeare of his raigne he had children Ezr. 6. 10. where the Iewes are bid to pray for the kings life and his sonnes Burgensis here answereth that it is spoken by way of supposition si filios habuisset if he had had sonnes But Thoring in his replie to Burgensis additions doth here finde fault with him for it was neuer heard of that prayer should be made pro non existentibus in rerum natura for them which had yet no beeing or existence in nature But they which hold Xerxes to be this Assuerus will answer that Darius mentioned Ezr. 6. 10. was Darious Nothus not this Artaxerxes Longimanus now this is after prooued to be otherwise because to the building of the Temple from the going forth of the word are but 7. weekes that is 49. yeares but there were in their owne reckoning an 100. yeares from Cyrus to Darius Nothus see hereof further qu. 58. following 6. Bullinger thinketh this Assuerus to be Cyaxares the father of Darius the Mede who with Cyrus surprised Babylon Dan. 9. 1. But this cannot be 1. in Esthers time the Monarchie of the Persians and Medes was ioyned together Esth. 1. 3. 2. Assuerus chiefe seare was at Susis ibid. but Ecbatane was the chiefe citie of Media 3. while the Monarchie of Babel stood the Iewes were held in captiuitie vnder the Babylonians not vnder the Medes 7. Wherefore it is most probable that this Assuerus was Darius Hystaspis which is the second opinion before rehearsed for it is shewed before that he was neither Cambyses nor Longimanus Mnemon or Xerxes who is he then more like to be then this Darius the arguments brought for Xerxes may be answered by applying them to Darius 1. the name Assuerus might be a common name to them both and it seemeth that by Assuerus is meant Darius the next to Cambyses who is that Artashasht named Ezr. 4. 6. 2. Darius was also of great riches and power 3. his Queenes name Atossa commeth nearer Hadassa the other name of Esther then Amestris to Esther 4. that Artashasht mentioned Ezr. 4. 7. was not Longimanus Xerxes sonne but Cambyses rather It beeing thus shewed that Mordecai liued in Darius time the third king of Persia neither could his age be so great as Lyranus at the first seemed to thinke that is 259. or as Annius Viterbiens 198. nor yet so small as Lyranus in his second computation counteth giuing vnto Mordecai but 93. yeares But his age might be an 110. or thereabout whereof 70. yeares were spent in the captiuitie and about 30. yeare from Cyrus first H. Br. in prolegom and he might be 10. yeare old when he went into captiuitie 45. Quest. Which of the Persian kings it was that renewed the decree for the reedifying of the Temple 1. The most receiued opinion is that it was Darius the sonne of Hystaspis the third king of Persia who renewed the edict for the building of the Temple in whose sixt yeare it was finished Ezr. 6. 15. of this opinion is Iosephus with whome Pererius consenteth so also M. Calvin and M. Lydyat de emendat tempor ann 3485. their speciall reason is taken from that place Ioh. 2. where the Iewes affirme that the Temple was 46. yeares building which time Pererius reckoneth thus Cyrus raigned 30. yeares Cambyses 8. and in the sixt yeare of Darius the Sanctuarie was finished but 3. yeares after in the ninth the outward Court and all was made an end of as Iosephus writeth lib. 11. antiq so from the 2. of Cyrus when they beganne to lay the foundation vnto the sixt of Darius are 46. yeares Contra. 1. But seeing Ezra saith that the house was finished in the sixt yeare Iosephus conceit is not to be admitted who in this matter is contrarie to himselfe lib. 1. cont Appion where he saith that the Temple was reedified in the second yeare of his raigne Then must Pererius hold him to the sixt yeare as Theodoret also and Iansenius doe there ende the 46. yeares which the Iewes speake of whome Pererius for that misliketh but vnto this 6. yeare by his owne computation are but 43. yeares 2. M. Calvin will haue these 46. yeares and the 7. weekes which here are seuered from the rest v. 25. to agree together and to make the number euen 49. yeares he alloweth three yeares for the first laying of the foundation and herein he is so confident that he thus writeth quisquis hic tergiversari velit noâ—ne prodet suam impudentiam he that will here winde away the matter beeing so euident shall but bewray his impudencie But if from Cyrus 2. to the 6. of Darius Hystaspis are in the largest reckoning but 43. or 44. yeares where will those three other yeares be found out ouer and aboue to make vp the 49. yeare Touching the agreement betweene Daniels 7. weekes and these 46. yeares more shall be saide qu. 59. following But M. Lydyat though he agree with them that the Temple was reedified in the 2. of Darius Hystaspis yet he dissenteth in the casting of the time for he counteth but 12. yeares from Cyrus to the 2. of Darius all which time the worke of the Temple was intermitted but this hath no agreement at all with Daniels 70. weekes seuered from
the rest because of the intermission of the worke of the Temple 2. Iunius in his first edition annot in Ezr. 4. 24. was of opinion that this Darius that sent Ezra was Artaxerxes Longimanus sonne of Darius Hystaspis by â—â—sther so also Melancthon And this is most like for if the building of the Temple be driuen further off then vnto this kings daies Daniels 7. weekes set apart for the building of the Temple will no waies agree see more qu. 59. following 3. Iunius in his last edition thinketh otherwise that it was Darius Nothus in whose sixt yeare the house of God was finished which Iosephus Scalliger would prooue by this argument because this Darius hath an Artaxerxes next before him Ezr. 4. 7. and an other next after him Ezr. 7. 1. and so hath no other Darius among the kings of Persia But the first Artashasht was Gambyses who was not the next before Longimanus and the other Artashassht is the same with Darius called also Artaxerxas Longimanus as is further shewed qu. 59. following 46. Quest. What Artaxerxes it was in whose senenth yeare Ezra was sent and in his 20. Nehemiah 1. Iosrphus thinketh lib. 11. Antiquit that this was Xerxes by whome Ezra first and afterward Nehemiah was sent but this can not be for Xerxes is not held to haue raigned aboue 20. or 32. yeares now mention is made of the 32. yeare of this Artaxerxes Ezr. 5. 14. Beside Iosephus manifestly erreth in two other points 1. he saith that Nehemiah was sent in the 25. yeare of this Artaxerxes whereas it is euident that it was the 20. yeare Nehem. 2. 1. 2. he saith the walls were finished in two yeares and 3. moneths whereas they were repaired in the space of 52. daies Ezr. 6. 15. 2. Pererius therein consenting with some auncient writers holdeth this to be Artaxerxes Longimanus the sonne of Xerxes wherein he thinketh right sauing that this can not agree with his former opinion that it was Darius Hystaspis in whose sixt yeare the Temple was built which Darius in truth was Artaxerxes Longimanus as is further declared qu. 58. following M. Lydyat also thinketh well that this was Artaxerxes Longimanus by whome Ezra and Nehemiah were sent in ann 3553. but from hence he doth not well beginne Daniels 70. weekes as is shewed before qu. 42. 3. Some thinke that this was Artaxerxes Muemon which gaue libertie vnto Ezra and Nehemiah to returne to Ierusalem and repaire the citie because no other Artaxerxes but he of the kings of Persia immediatly succee dâ—da Darius Ioseph Scallâ—g Iun. The Artâ—shasht mentioned Ezr. 7. 1. who sent Ezra and afterward Nehemiah succeeded not Darius but was that Darius in whose 6. yeare the Temple was builtâ— See qu. 58. following 47. Quest. That Daniels 70. weekes were determined neither before Christs passionâ— nor at the destruction of the citie 1. Euseb. lib. 8. de demonstr Euangel in his first account beginneth the 70. weekes in the first of Cyrus and endeth 69. of them about Hyrcanus time when Pompey the great tooke Ierusalem and defiled the Temple 2. In an other account he beginneth the 69. weekes in the 6. of Darius when the Temple was reedified and maketh them to ende at Herod the last weeke he beginneth at Christs haptisme 60. yeares after and endeth it 3. yeares and an halfe after his passion Both these accounts of Eusebius Oâ—calâ—mpadius indifferently followeth But neither of these râ—ckonings can stand 1. because Daniel saith that after 7. weekes and 62. weekes the Messiah shall be slaine that is in the 70. weeke next after but in the first account the Messiah was slaine aboue 90. yeares in the second aboue 60. after the expiring of the 69. weekes 2. the 70. and last weeke must immediatly follow the other because they are made one whole number of 70. weekes vers 24. though afterward they be diuided 3. Some ende these 70. weekes at the natiuitie of Christ as Origen beginning them in Darius raigne others beginne at the instautation of the Temple vnder Darius and end the 69. weekes at the birth of Christ counting vntill then 483. yeares Tertullian But both these opinionâ— are contrarie to the text which ende these 69. weekes at the passion and death of Christ not at his birth after 62. weekes the Messiah shall be slaine beside as the first account commeth short aboue 30. yeares of the 490. so the other ouerreacheth aboue 60. yeares as shall be showed in the particular account 4. Some ende these weekes at the baptisme of Christ Melancth but the text will not heare it for before these weekes are expired or togither with the expiration of them shall the Messiah be slaine 5. As these ende Daniels weekes somewhat too soone so some extend them somewhat too farre as to the destruction of Ierusalem by Titus and Vespasian wherein not withstanding they do much differ Tertullian beginneth the account at Darius the Mede and endeth at the subuersion of Ierusalem so also Clem. Alex. beginning at Cyrus Chrysostome there ending beginneth at the 20. yeare of Darius Longimanus Some beginne form the 2. yeare of Darius Nothus and ende at the destruction of the citie by the Romanes Iun. Bulling Polan M. Lively But the first beginning right ouershoote the 70. weekes almost 40. yeares from the passion of Christ to the taking of the citie by the Romanes The other neither beginne right seeing it is prooued before that the beginning of the weeks must be from the first going forth of the word vnder Cyrus qu. 43. neither doe they ende well for immediatly after the 69. weekes the Messiah must be slaine in the last weeke then can it not be extended 40. yeares after Christs death to the destruction of the citie these words after 69. weekes the Messiah shall be slaine are otherwise expounded by Iunius and Polanus which shall be further examimed when we come vnto the handling of that verse Now the reasons that these weekes must be extended to the finall destruction of Ierusalem are these 1. The Angel saith Seuentie weekes are determined ouer the people and ouer the holy citie that is within which time there shall be a destruction of both Iun. anâ—otat 2. Our blessed Sauiour doth apply this prophesie of Daniel vnto the desolation and destruction of Ierusalem Matth. 24. 15. Polan 3. Daniel first maketh mention of the destruction of the citie and Sanctuarie and then speaketh of the confirming of the couenant in one weeke and of the ceasing of the sacrifices in the middes of the weeke which if it be vnderstood of Christs death it were a preposterous order that after the destruction of the citie which happened 40. yeares after he should returne to speake of the Messiahs death M. Lively Persian Monarch p. 225. 4. To what purpose should mention be made here of the destruction of Ierusalem if it be not within the compasse of these weekes Ans. 1. The Angel expoundeth himselfe afterward how these words are to
to the course of the Sunne otherwise by this reason the 70. yeares of the captiuitie must likewise be cutt short see before quest 17. 2. in great numbers sometime odde yeaes are omitted but so it is not here because these seuentie weekes are said to be cut our that is precisely they shall fall out to be so many weekes of yeares 3. That distinction hath no place here for seeing the account is made by weekes if any part thereof should be reckoned inclusiuely or exclusiuely it must be done by weekes of yeares not by single yeares as M. Liuely well obserueth pag. 187. 2. It remaineth then that these yeares must take their ende precisely at the time of the death and passion of Christ as Iulius Africanus Beda Ruperius Bullinger H. Br. doe determine them and then whereas it is said in the middes or halfe weeke the sacrifice shall cease the sense is that Christ by the sacrifice of himselfe in the latter halfe of the weeke shall abolish all other sacrifices in right and whereas it is said he shall confirme the couenant in one weeke the meaning is not that all the last weeke this couenant should be in confirming but the couenant shall be confirmed first by the preaching and then by the death of Christ in the last weeke which was done in the last middle or halfe part thereof Bulling Now for this precise determining of these weekes in the verie passion of the Messiah the reasons are these 1. The last weeke endeth at the confirmation of the couenant or Testament as the Prophet saith he shall confirme the couenant with many in one weeke the weeke then must end with that confirmation for not the beginning but the ende is counted for the weeke But the Testament was ratified by the death of Christ Hebr. 9. 17. the Testament is confirmed when men be dead therefore this last weeke endeth in Christs death Bulling 2. The death of Christ was to fall out in a yeare of Iubile that the bodie may answer vnto the figure therefore it is called the acceptable yeare of the Lord Isay. 6102. the great yeare of remission of sinnes and of the redemption of prisoners and captiues And so the yeare wherein Christ died was a Iubile yeare beeing the 28. Iubile by iust computation from the 8. yeare of Iosuah when the first Iubile was kept for so many Iubilies fall but in 1400. yeares It is most probable then that Daniels 70. weekes should ende with the last Iubile H. Br. in 9. Daniel 3. M. Liuely though he ende not the 70. weekes in the passion of the Messiah yet he holdeth so many weekes preeisely gathering so much by the Hobrewe phrase Sexentie weekes is cut out where a verbe of the singular number beeing put to a word of the plurall sheweth that euerie one of the weekes particularly from the first to the last shall be precisely and absolutely complete Persian Mon. pag. 159. 4. If any of these weekes should be extended beyond Christs death it is more like they should reach to the destruction and desolation of the diâ—ie which is by name expressed for there is no other cause to extend them further the preaching of the Gospell continued longer then three yeare and a halfe after Christ therefore in that regard the halfe weeke is not to be extended beyond Christs death 5. Burgens alleadgeth this reason to shewe that the last ende of these weekes must concurre with the passion of Christ nam deletie iniquitatis consummatio praevaricationis c. the taking away of iniquitie and the finishing of transgression which are propounded by the Angel in his first speach are the proper effects of Christs passion c. vpon this reason Burgens is so confident that he concludeth the ende then of these weekes est nobis notus de fide is knowne vnto vs as of faith that is certainely Thus then the argument may be framed the finishing of iniquitie and taking away of sinne were accomplished in the passion of Christ but seuentie weekes are determined for the finishing of iniquitie therefore 70. weekes are determined at the passion of Christ. 6. Melâ—ncthon addeth further that the 70. weekes must not extend beyond Christs passion because the Iewes reiecting of him were no longer his people neither tooke he protection of them Thus hauing the beginning of these 70. weekes at Cyrus and the ende at the passion of Christ it remaineth then to be shewed how by a iust computation these 70. weekes may be brought from Cyrus vnto Christ. Quest. 50. Of the iust and exact computation of yeares from Cyrus first vnto the passion of Christ. 1. Tertullian beginning in the first of Darius counteth but 490. yeares to the destruction of Ierusalem the 62. weekes and an halfe he would haue ended at Christs natiuitie which make 437. yeares and from thence to the destruction of Ierusalem he reckoneth 7. weekes and an halfe more that is 53. yeares But Tertullian committeth diuerse errors in this account 1. he maketh but 5. kings of Persia. 2. he giueth but an 106. yeares to the whole Monarchie of the Persians 31 he fayleth in the particular account of the yeares of the kings of Persia he alloweth vnto Darius the Mede 19. yeares whereas he raigned but one and to the last Darius 22. yeares who raigned but sixe in all and to Alexander be giueth 12. yeares after who liued but sixe yeares after Darius ouerthowe 4. he counteth but 53. yeares from Christs natiuitie to the destruction of Ierusalem which in true account were 70. yeares at the least for Christ was borne in the 4. yeare of the 194. Olympiad and the citie was taken by Titus in the 4. yeare of the 212. Olympiad 2. Lyranus beginning his account the 5. yeare of Zedekiah when as Ieremiah promised deliuerance after 70. yeares reckoneth from that yeare to the destruction of Ierusalem 6. yeares from thence the Hebrewes to the first of Cyrus count 52. yeares then to Cyrus and Cambyses he giueth 9. yeares to Assuerus and Darius in whole 6. yeare the Temple was built 45. yeares betweene them all these yeares make beeing put together 112. yeares then the second Temple is held by the Hebrewes to haue stood vnto the second destruction by Titus 420. yeares all make 532. from whence 42. yeares beeing diducted which come betweene the blessed passion of our Lord and the destruction of Ierusalem there will remaine iust 490. yeares Paulus Burgens agreeing with Raimundus beginning and ending as Lyranus doth yet proceedeth an other way from the 4. of Zedekiah which was in the 12. yeare of Nebuchadnezzar who raigned in all 45. yeares there remained of his raigne 34. yeares and of Evilmerodachs 32. and 3. yeares of Balthazar 's raigne all these make 60. yeares then Darius raigned two Cyrus 30. Assuerus 14. Darius his sonne had raigned 6. when the Temple was finished these yeares make 52. and the second Temple stood 420. yeares as is the generall opinion of the Hebrewes
these yeares ioyned together make 532. from whence must be diducted 42. yeares from the passion of Christ to the destruction of the citie But beside the disagreement in these two accounts betweene the number of yeares before Cyrus and the number of the yeares of the kings of Persia which breedeth a great vncertaintie these manifest errors are committed 1. whereas the captiuitie ending in Cyrus first had continued 70. years this terme cannot stand with either of the former accounts for if the beginning of the captiuitie be set in the 8. yeare of Nebuchadnezzars raigue when Iechoniah went into captiuitie where it ought to beginne there will want by Lyranus account who reckoneth but 58. yeares from the 5. of Zedekiah which was 4. yeares after Iechoniahs captiuitie 8. yeares by Burgensis who counteth from thence 60. yeares there will want sixe of 70. yeares 2. They both betweene Cambyses and Darius set one Assuerus whereas the first Darius the sonne of Hystaspis immediately succeeded Cambyses 3. whereas they make Darius the first sonne of Assuerus the truth is that Darius the first was that Assuerus himselfe as is before shewed quest 44. 4. whereas they make Darius vnder whom the Temple was finished but the fourth king of Persia as Cyrus Cambyses Assuerus and then Darius it is euident that the 4. king of Persia was the rich king of Persia which was Xerxes Dan. 11. 3. 3. Pintus who beginneth the 70. weekes right at Cyrus first and endeth them well in the passion of our Sauiour doth make the 70. weekes and the tearme of yeares to agree by two seuerall accounts One way he casteth vp his reckoning thus the Perfians raigned 191. yeares the Greekes to the beginning of Iulius Caesars Empire 220. yeares from thence to the passion of Christ are 76. yeares and 3. yeares and an halfe after Christs death doe the 70. weekes ende all these yeares make iust 490. and an halfe which is omitted But these exceptions may be taken to this reckoning 1. that the Persian Monarchie could not possibly continue an 191. yeares as is prooued before quest 43. 2. the Greeke Empire continued 300. yeares as Lyranus and H. Br. and most consent so also Iunius in his annotations and Polanus as it shall further appeare in the 54. quest following 4. Pintus hath beside this an other reckoning from the going forth of the word vnto the finishing of the Temple which beganne two yeares after the returne of the people and it was 46. yeares in building are 48. yeares and the Temple stood 480. yeares from the second building thereof to the second destruction the whole summe is 528. from which summe must be diducted 38. yeares and an halfe from the ende of the 70. weeke which was three yeares and an halfe after the passion of Christ vnto the destruction of the citie and there will remaine 490. yeares But thus this account also may be accepted against 1. he sheweth not how from Cyrus first vnto the finishing of the Temple there were but 48. yeares the 7. weekes mentioned v. 25. make 49. yeares which were expired at the finishing of the Temple in the sixt of Darius seequeth 58. following 2. The second Temple might stand so long though the Hebrewes generally held that it continued but 420. yeares but the 70. weekes ending in Christs passion as is shewed before there must be diducted 40. as some thinke 42. yeares which came betweene the passion of Christ and the destruction of the citie so that this account of Pintus commeth short in the first part one yeare and in the second two for he reckoneth but 48. yeares to the finishing of the Temple whereas 49. euen 7. propheticall weekes were expired then and he alloweth but 38. yeares in the last number which should be 40. or 42. yeares 5. But the account of R. Salomon is much more short who reckoneth but 490. yeares from the destruction of the first temple by Nebuchadnezzar to the destruction of the second by Titus whereof to Cyrus first he counteth 52. yeares Not much differing is the account of other Hebrewes who from Cyrus first vnto the destruction of Ierusalem make reckoning but of 430. yeares allowing to the Persian Monarchie but 50. yeares to the raigne of the Greekes an 175. to the Macchabees 103. to the Herodians an 103. as Montanus setteth it downe in his apparat in Daniel But here are manifest errors in this account 1. they beginne the 70. weekes 52. yeare before the Angel deliuered this prophesie 2. they giue vnto the Persian Monarchie but 50. yeares whereas so many yeares saue one were expired at the finishing of the Temple and after that Nehemiah maketh mention of 32. yeares of the raigne of Artaxerxes c. 5. 14. 3. from the ende of the Persian Monarchie to the destruction of Ierusalem are yeares 400. which are thus gathered 300. yeares of the kingdome of the Greekes 60. yeares of the Romane Empire to the death of Christ and about 40. thence to the ouerthrow of the citie 6. This then is resolued vpon as the best account the Persian Monarchie continued from the first of Cyrus 130. yeares the Macedonians raigned 300. the Romanes vnto the death of Christ 60. But for the more euident proofe and demonstration hereof it shall not be amisse to set downe the particular account of the yeares of the Persian and Grecian Monarchie to fulfill this number of yeares Quest. 51. Of the yeares of the Persian kings in particular to make vp the said summe of an 130. yeares and first of the yeares to the finishing of the Temple For the more euident manifestation hereof we will diuide the Persian Monarchie into two parts the time before the reedifying of the Temple and the time that followed thence to the ende of the Persian Monarchie for the first It is euident in that the Angel diuideth 7. weekes from the 62. weekes that 7. weeks making 49. yeares are set apart for that time while the worke of building the Temple and citie was interrupted vnto the 6. of Darius when the Temple was finished But in the casting of these yeares there is some difference 1. Lyranus giueth vnto Cyrus and Cambyses 9. yeares to Assuerus 40. and then followeth Darius in whose sixt the Temple was finished Here the time somewhat agreeth but then one king is here committed for Artaxerxes Longimanus who was also Darius was the fift king of Persia. 2. Burgensis thus accounteth out of Raimundus Darius the Mede raigned 2. yeares Cyrus 30. Cambyses his sonne called also Assuerus 14. yeares and then Darius 6. yeares which make 52. yeares in whose 2. the Temple beganne to be built and so we haue 48. yeares to the beginning of the reedifying of the Temple But here one king is likewise omitted as before for Darius in whose 6. yeare the Temple was finished called also Artaxerxes Longimanus was not the fourth but the fift king of Persia againe if Assuerus the husband of Esther raigned but 14. yeares
who in the 7. yeare married Esther c. 2. 16. how could Darius supposed to be her sonne by Assuerus in the 2. of his raigne haue wife and children as Ezra 6. 10. the Iewes are willed to pray for the kings life and his sonnes 3. Bullinger counteth but 30. yeares from Cyrus first vnto the 6. of Darius but herein is his error he taketh this Darius for Darius the sonne of Hystaspis the third king of Persia whereas this Darius was the fift 4. Iunius likewise affirmeth that the Temple beganne to be built 30. yeares before the 2. of Darius annotat in 2. Hag. edition 1. But there could not be so fewe yeares to Darius Longimanus and Iunius to make his account good omitteth Xerxes who is famously knowne to haue beene king of Persia. 5. The same Iunius in his annotations vpon the same place in his last edition counteth 106. yeares froÌ„ Cyrus to the 3. of Darius Nothus but that cannot be for seeing some were aliue then which had seene the first Temple Hagg. 2. 4. they must then be at the least an 180. yeare old 106. from Cyrus and 70. yeare befor from the beginning of the captiuitie in the 8. yeare of Nebuchadnezzars raigne in whose 19. yeare the Temple was destroyed the summe will be 176 yeares and they could not be of fewer yeares then 10. or 12. to remember any thing of the first Temple But this was too great an age for those times 6. Some giuing but an 130. yeares in all to the Persian Monarchie doe count 30. yeares from Cyrus first vnto Xerxes warre against the Grecians which was sixe yeares after Darius death and from thence Artaxerxes Longimanus began to raigne 42. yeares partly alone partly together with his father before and afterward followed Darius Nothus whom some call Darius Ochus H. Br. proleg in Dantel but by this reckoning there will not be 49. yeares to the 6. of Darius who was Artaxerxes Longimanus 7. Beroaldus finding so great vncertaintie in the yeares of the Persian kings thinketh that though the particular yeares cannot be set downe yet the whole time of the Persian Monarchie could not exceede an 130. yeares 8. But though I consent therein to Beroaldus for the exact scanning of the particular yeares yet some coniecturall gesse may be made of the yeares of some of the Persian kings put together as it is agreed vpon by the most that Cyrus and Cambyses raigned together 9. yeares then Darius Hystaspis and Xerxes might haue the first 14. the other 20. which with Darius sixe and Cyrus and Cambyses nine make 49. yeares but how these yeares should be exactly diuided among these 3. kings it cannot be certainely set downe because the sonne raigned with the father and as Xerxes raigne ranne within his fathers so Artaxerxes his sonne raigned also in his fathers time this shall be further shewed in the question following Quest. 52. Xerxes raigne was intermingled with his fathers in the beginning and with his sonnes in the ende 1. Some doe giue vnto Xerxes no seuerall raigne at all but giue vnto his father Darius onely 20. yeares because they hold that in his fathers life time he warred with Greece for 7. yeares together and then flying away cowardly was afterward slaine by Artabanus Darius yet beeing aliue so Iun. following Beroaldus annotat in Ezra 4. v. 5. edition 1. But it is cleare that those warres against Grecia were after Darius death 6. yeares as H. Br. in his proleg in Daniel and M. Liuely prooueth that Darius was dead before by the poet Aeschylâ—â— liuing in those times who in his tragedie called Persa raifeth Darius long before dead out of his graue to tell newes 2. Some giue vnto Darius 36. yeares and to Xerxes 22. Iunius in his summe of yeares set before Ezra in the Last edition But seeing that Darius liued in all but 43. yeares as H. Br. sheweth out of Ctesias and he was at mans estate when he was elected king beeing before one of the seuen gouernours he could not any thing neere raigne so long 3. Some will admit no intercliange or mingling together of the father and sonnes raigne and stand vpon it that it cannot be shewed in all the Persian Monarchie that the father and the sonne raigned together M. Liâ—â—ly Persian Monarchie pag. 195. Answ. The contrarie may be prooued both out of sacred and prophane histories 1. In the raigne of the kings of Iudah it is found to be an vsuall thing for the sonnes to beginne their raigne while their fathers yet liued as Iehâ—râ—m was viceroy in Iehosaphats time 4. yeares for Iehosaphat raigned 25. yeares 1. king 22. 42. now in the 18. yeare of Iehosaphat beganne Iehorâ—â— king of Isrâ—â—l to raigne 12. yeares 2. king 3. 1. And in the 5. yeare of this Iaram which was the 2â— yeare of Iehosahat began Iehoram of Iudah to raigne 8. yeares 2. king 8. 16. when as there remained yeâ— 4. yeares of his fathers raigne So Ahaz was viceroy vnder Iotham his father 2. or 3. yeares for Iotham beganne to raigne in the 2. of Pekah king of Isâ—aeâ— and raigned 16. yeares 2. king 15. 32. And in the 17. of Pekah beganne Ahaz to raigne 2. king 16. 1. the like instance may be giuen of other kings of Iudah and Israel And the like custome might be among the kings of Persia as Iunius thinketh that Artaxerxes Mnemon raigned in his father Darius time annot in Ezr. 6. 14. 2. For forreâ— stories Temporariuâ— and Mercator doe alleadge out of Plutarke in the life of Themistocles that he beeing bâ—â—ished Greece fledde vnto Artaxerxes sonne of Xerxes his father yet liuings as Thâ—cidides testifieth and Charon Lampsacenus Aeâ—â—lius Probus iâ— in the same minde and Philostratus lib. 1. de vit Apollon c. 19. And that Xerxes was then liuing as is further shewed because they set the beginning of Artaxerxes raigne in the first yeare of the 79. Olympiad But Themistocles died in the 1. yeare of the 77. Olympiad as Diodorus Sicuâ—us lib. 11. and Euseb. in Chron. But 1. M. Liuely answereth that Xerxes hauing three sonnes Darius Hystaspis and Artaxerxes would haue nominated in al likelihood the eldest of these heire apparant before the other and Iustine saith that when Xerxes died Artaxerxes was admodum puer a verie child 2. diuerse graue authors as Cleitarehus Heraclides Diodorus Siculus doe write that Themistocle fledde vnto Xerxes not vnto Artaxerxes to this purpose M. Linely pag. 195. M. Lydyat is also of the same minde that Artaxerxes raigned alone at this time de emendat pag. 73. 3. Pererius further answereth that if Artaxerxes had beene ioyned with his father in his kingdome Artabanus who first killed Xerxes and afterward set vpon Darius his eldest sonne would rather haue shot at Artaxerxes who was appointed to the kingdome whom it is not like his father would haue preferred before his eldest sonne Contra. 1. If Artaxerxes were the youngest either the other two might be first
dead or not of so good parts as the yongest was who might therefore be nominated to the kingdome as Xerxes was made heire apparant to his father Darius his elder brother Artabazanes beeing omitted as M. Lydyat acknowledgeth pag. 67. 2. Though these authors so write yet Aeâ—â—lius Probus preferreth the restimonie of Thucidides as liuing neerest to those times and so best to be credited that Themistocles fledde to Artaxerxes 3. Artabanus might haue opportunitie to kill Xerxes fleeing from the Grecians as Bessus killed Darius Codomannus fleeing away from Alexander and Darius beeing one of the kings sonnes he might kill likewise the occasion so seruing whereas Artaxerxes beeing possessed of the kingdome was better defended against him and afterward was reuenged vpon him for his fathers death 4. But none of these answeres doe take away the former obiection that Artaxerxes raigned 8. yeares at the least before his fathers death aâ—iâ— gathered by the Olympiade reckoning 4. It remaineth then that Xerxes is the latter part of his raigne ioyned his sonne Artaxerxes with him as he raigned together with his father Darius and therefore he is named next after Cyrus Ezra 4. 7. As there Cyrus raigne is named onely for his and Cambyses so Assuerus raigne who is thought to be Darius Hystaspis standeth there for the ioynt raigne of Darius and Xerxes By reason then of this intermingling of yeares the foresaid yeares cannot be particularly assigned to the former kings Quest. 53. Of the particular yearâ—â— of the second part of the Persian Monaâ—â—hi◠〈◊〉 the finishing of the Temple to the ende thereof 1. Iunius in his first edition summeth these yeares to 90. or thereabout giuing vnto Longimanus 37. in whose 6. the Temple was finished to Darius Nothus 18. to Mâ—emon 10. to Ochus 22. to Arsen 3. and Darius the 〈◊〉 raigned 6. yeares wherein he misseth not greatly the generall somme of the Persian yeares but he counteth onely 36. to the finishing of the Temple in Longimanus 6. yeare and 90. afterward whereas so few as 30. yeares cannot be giuen to the fowre former kings Cyrus Cambyses Darius the sonne of Hystaspis and Xerxes which raigâ—ed before Longimanus 2. Oecolampadous counteth an 160. yeares after the reedifying of the Temple to the ende of the Persian Monarâ—hie which he collectâ—â— thâ—s Darius in his account raigned 4. yeares after the temple and citie repaired Xerxes 〈◊〉 Artehanus 7. moneths Aâ—taxerxes Longhand 40. yeares Xerxes the 〈◊〉 moneths Segdiaâ—us 8. moneths Darius Nothus 19. yeares 〈◊〉 40. yeares 〈◊〉 26. Arseo 4. Darius the last 6. But here beside that he counteth three among the Persian kings 〈◊〉 Xgrxes the 2. Segdiâ—â—s whose yeares of raigne are not reckoned but the best historians as is shewed before quest 37. he erreth in referring the reedifying of the Temple to Darius Hystaspis raigne the third king of Persia whereas there are reckoned in Ezra after Cyrus Assâ—â—â—us Artaxerxes and then Darius vnder whom the Temple was builded Ezra 4. 7. and 24. 3. Tertulliaâ— first setteth downe Darius to haue 〈◊〉 19. yeares then Aâ—taxerxes 41. after him Ochus 24. then Argus one and the last Darius 21. So he seemeth in all to account but an 106. yeares for the persian Monarchie whereof 49. beeing expired at the reedifying of the Temple there will remaine but 57. to the ende of that Monarchie But herein is Teriullian deceiued in making but fiue kings of Persia in all 4. Iunius in his third edition in his annotations vpon this place summeth the yeares from the 2. of Nothus to the ende of the Persian Monarchie to 93. for Nothus he counteth 19. yeares in all and from his second 18. for Mnemon 43. Ochus 23. Arses 3. Darius the last 6. so also Polanus which yeares beeing added to the 106. which he thinketh were expired from Cyrus first at the 2. of Nothus make 200. saue one But the age of Nehemiah who saw the beginning and ende of that Monarchie will not permit that so many yeares be allowed vnto it 5. Pintus giuing vnto the Persian Monarchie 191. yeares and counting 48. vnto the sinishing of the Temple must leaue an 143. yeares or thereabout for the time of that Monarchie after the finishing of the Temple But vpon the former reason of Nehemiahs age this can not be admitted 6. Pererius from the 1. of Cyrus to the 2. of Nothus counteth an 140. yeares and from thence to the ende of that Monarchie some 94. yeares M. Lively also agreeth with him in the same account Pers. Monarch p. 53. they differ but in 2. yeares Pererius allotteth to the Persian Monorchie 232. yeares lib. 13. in Dan. M. Lively 230. But it is sufficiently shewed before that the Persian Monarchie could not continue so long qu. 43. 7. But Montanus counting by the high Priests goeth beyond them in all in his reckoning for the latter part of the Persian Monarchie for he giueth vnto Eliashib 41. yeares in whose 14. yeare he saith Nenemiah returned to the king of Persia after the citie was repaired which was in 32. yeare of Mnemons raigne Nehem. 5. 14. there remaine then of Eliashibs yeares 27. then Ioiada succeeded 25. yeares Iohanan 24. yeares Iaddua to the time of Alexander 27. thus there shall be an 103. yeares from the 32. yeare of Mnemon to the ende of the Persian Monarchie vnto the which adde the 32. yeares of Mnemon and 7. yeares of Darius there will arise an 142. yeares from the finishing of the Temple to the ende of the Persian Monarchie which Nehemiahs age will by no meanes endure 8. This then is the best resolution that although in such great varietie and difference the particular yeares can not well be assigned vnto the seuerall kings of Persia which succeeded after the finishing of the Temple yet the whole summe is must not extende beyond 80. or 81. or thereabout so that thus the whole summe is made vp 49. yeares are counted from Cyrus 1. to the 6. of Darius when the Temple was finished and thence to the ende of the Persian Monarchie if 81. yeares more be added we shall haue the whole summe of an 130. yeares this account followeth Beroaldus Iunius in his annotations edit 1. H. Broughton in his proleg in Dan. who last named doth thus parcell out the yeares from Cyrus to Xerxes 6. when he warred against Grecia he giueth 30. yeares to Artaxerxes with his father and alone 42. to Ochus called also Darius Nothus alone 8. with his father 16. to Mnemon 42. to Ochus 3. to Darius the last 5. or 6. the whole summe is an 130. 54. Quest. Of the iust computation of the yeares of the Grecian Monarchie Hauing the certentie of the yeares of the Persian Monarchie in generall the next part of the 490. yeares decyphered in the 70. weekes consisteth in the due examination of the yeares of the kingdome of the Grecians where there are fiue seuerall accounts 1. by the raigne of the kings of Syria 2. by the yeares
of the high Priests 3. by the yeares of the captaines and Princes of the Iewes 4. by the yeares of the kings of Egypt 5. by the Olympiades 1. By the Syrian kings the account is vncerten there are numbred of them in all from Seleucus Nicanor the first king and founder of the familie of the Seleucians to Seleucus the sonne of Gryphus 19. kings their particular names with the yeares of their raigne it is not needefull here to set downe we shall haue further occasion to deale with them in particular in the 11. chapter But the reason why the account taken by them is not certen is this because the kingdome of Syria beganne 15. yeares after Alexanders death and after the kingdome of Egypt and it ended aboue 50. yeares before the kingdome of the Herodians began in Iudea about which time the raigne of Cleopaora the last Queene and Regent of Egypt expired 2. Likewise there is small certentie in the account taken by the yeares of the high Priests Montanus setteth them downe in this order vnto the time of Herod High Priests yeares Onias after Iaddua 27 Simon Iustus 13 Eleazar 20 Manasses 27 Simon Iustus 28 Onias Simons sonne 39 Iason 3 Menelaus 12 Ionathas 18 Simon 8 Ioannes Hircanus 31 Aristobulus 1 Iannes Alexander 27 Alexandra the widow of Alexander high Priest 9 Hircanus her son 3. moneths Aristobulus Hircanus brother 3 Hircanus restored 22 Antigonus 5 The whole summe ariseth to 293. yeares or thereabout in which account we want 7. yeares of the full number which is allowed to the Greeke Monarchie which is 300. yeares and beside there is some variance in the particular account for vnto Eleazar the third in the foresaid number Philo giueth but 20. yeares Eusebius 23. to Onias Bullinger appointeth but 25. yeares Montanus 27. And the like difference may be found in the rest as Oecolampad giueth but 26. to Ioannes Hircanus Montanus and Bullinger allow him 31. to Aristobulus and Hircanus he giueth 34. yeares the other two count but 26. betweene them So then this reckoning by the yeares of the high Priests is vncerten and the rather because the times were corrupt and confused they were made high Priests for money and sometime one was vp and an other downe 3. The third kind of reckoning is by the yeares of the Princes and captains ioyned with the yeares of the kings of Syria Oecolampad thus setteth downe the yeares of the kings of Syria vnto the time of the Macchabees and then the yeares of the Macchabees in this order The kings of Syria The Macchabees Alexander raigned yeares 5 Iudas Macchabeus gouerned yeares 3 Seleucus Nicanâ—r 44 Antiochus Sother 19 Ionathas 19 Antiochus Theos 15 Simon 8 Seleucus Callinicus 20 Ioannes Hircanus 26 Seleucus Ceraunius 3 Aristobulus 1 Antiochus Megas 36 Ianneus Alexander 27 Seleucus Philopater 12 Alexandra 9 Antiochus Epiphanes 11 Aristobulus and Hircanus 34 the summe is an 165 the summe is an 127 Both these summes put together make 292. there wanteth 6. to make vp 300. yeares And beside there is great variance and difference about the summe of these yeares Montanus setteth downe an other account of the Hebrewes who allow vnto the kingdome of the Grecians 175. yeares before the time of the Macchabees to whose gouernment they assigne but an 103. yeares which make in all but 278. here want 22. yeares of 300. Melancthon much differeth not from the last account he giueth vnto Alexander 7. yeares to the Seleucians vnto Iudas Macchabeus 146. to the Macchabees from Iudas vnto Herod 127. the whole summe is 280. there yet are wanting 20. yeares The former of these numbers agreeth with the account of yeares in the booke of the Macchabees where it is said that Antiochus died in the 149. yeare 1. Macchab. 6. 16. and three yeare before that Iudas Macchabeus beganne to oppose himselfe against the tyrannie of Autiochus Epimanes Hitherto then we can haue no certentie for the iust number of these yeares 4. The fourth way is to proceede by the account of the yeares of the Ptolomes of Egypt for Ptolomeus Lagi beganne his gouernment immediatly after Alexanders death and Cleopatra the daughter of Ptolome Auletes raigned in Egypt to the beginning of Herods raigne in Iewrie and somewhat after their yeares are set downe thus according to the computation of Clemens Alexandrinus which M. Br. followeth Alexander 6 Ptolomeus Lagi 40 Pto. Philadelph 37 Pto Eâ—ergetes 25 Pto. Philopater 17 Pto. Epiphanes 24 Ptolom Philometer 35 Physcon 29 Lathurus 36 Aulâ—tes 29 Cleopatra 22 the whole summe is 300. And in this account likewise there is great vncertentie Tertullian 1. lib. contr Iudaeos setteth downe the kings with their yeares of raigne thus Alexander 12 Sother in Alexandria raigned 35 Philadelphus 38 Euergetes 25 Philopator 17 Epiphanes 24 An other Euergetes 37 An other Sother 38 Ptolome 37 Cleopatra 22 the summe is 285. This summe commeth short of 300 by 15. and beside here are 12. yeares giuen vnto Alexanders raigne after Darius whereas he raigned but 6. or at the most 7. after the finall ouerthrow of the Persians he raigned in all 12. yeares but after Darius was vanquished 6. onely or 7. which Tertullian counteth 12. yeares And further whereas Clemens Alexandrinus reckoneth for the Grecian Monarchie three hundreth yeares some doe exceede that number as Epiphanius addeth 12. yeares more some come short as Suidas in Adam counteth lesse by 30. yeares 5. The last way then to know the iust number of yeares for the kingdome of the Greeks is by the Olympiads which is a sure reckoning as is before declared qu. 35. for the Greeke affaires Alexander died in the 1. yeare of the 114. Olympiad as Arrianus and most Chronologers doe hold and our blessed Sauiour suffered in the 1. of the 203. Olympiad Ioseph Scallig the yeares betweene these two Olympike yeares amount to 356. and with Alexanders 6. yeares 362. Iun. annotat from whence 62. must be abaâ—ed from the ende of Cleopatraes raigne vnto the passion of our blessed Sauiour so there will remaine iust 300. yeares within two for the Greeke Monarchie Polanus much differeth not counting by the yeares of the building of Rome Alexander died in the 430. yeare of the age of Rome and Ierusalem was destroyed in the 822. yeare then diducting 38. yeares from thence backward to the passion of Christ which Bullinger maketh 40. placing the destruction of Ierusalem 2. yeares later in the 824. yeare of Rome and 60. or 61. to the ende of Cleopatraes gouernment and there will by this account also remaine 300. yeares for the kingdome of the Grecians So then we haue toward the number of 490. yeares first from Cyrus 1. to the ende of the Persian Monarchie an 130. yeares and then 300. yeares for the gouernment of the Grecians there remaine 60. yeares from the ende of Cleopatra her raigne in the 4. yeare of Herod in whose 30. Christ was borne vnto the passion of Christ in the 34. of his age but
in a new law and abolish the old But the Messiah was not to come in those 7. weekes but after 62. weekes more 6. So then in that the 7. weekes are diuided from the rest it doth not so much shew what notable accidents should fall out therein as it doth prescribe the very number of yeares after the which from the going out of the word the Temple and citie should againe be repaired and reedified which accordingly came so to passe as shall be shewed afterward 57. Quest. Whether these 7. weekes must be counted before the 62. weekes or after It beeing then agreed vpon that there was some speciall cause in seuering these 7. weekes from the rest yet there is some question whâ—n these 7. weekes should beginne before or after the 62. weekes 1. Tertullian putteth them after for the 62. weekes he extendeth from Darius to the birth of Christ and then 7. weekes and an halfe that is 53. yeares he counteth from thence to the destruction of Ierusalem But from Christs birth who suffered in the 34. yeare of his age to the destruction of the citie some 40. yeares after was aboue seuen weekes they make 10. weekes 70. yeares at the least 2. Some Hebrewes whose opinion Hierome rehearseth in his commentarie vpon this place doe ende the 62. yeares at the taking of the citie by Titus and from thence to the finall destruction by Adrian the Emperour they count 8. weekes more which maketh 56. yeares But beside that there are found from Darius to Adrian the Emperour aboue 600. yeares whereas 72. weekes make but 490. yeares the 7. weekes must be counted to the Messiah as is euident v. 25. not after 3. Theodoret bringeth the 69. weekes to Hyrcanus death and from thence to the baptisme of Christ he counteth 7. weekes that is 49. yeares But he is much deceiued in his account for from Hyrcanus death to the baptisme of our Sauiour are about 60. yeares for after Hyrcanus in the 32. yeare of Herod or thereabout was Christ borne who was baptized in the 30. yeare of his age 4. Now that these 7. weekes are to be counted before the 62. weekes not to be cast after them 1. the order of the words declare there shall be seuen weekes to the Messiah and 62. weekes 2. and beside it is said that not after 69. weekes but after 62. weekes Messiah shall be slaine so that vnlesse the 62. weekes be put to the 7. weekes the yeares will not bring vs to the Messiah 3. the accidents that fell out after that time the building of the citie and the wall which were done after the tearme of these 7. weekes which things accordingly came to passe will bring backe these 7. weekes into the first place 4. And beside the Angel directly beginneth the 7. weekes from the going forth of the word v. 25. 58. Quest. When this tearme of 7. weekes that is 49. yeares beganne and when it ended 1. R. Salomon whome Lyranus seemeth herein to incline vnto beginneth these seuen weekes from the destruction of the first Temple by Nabuchadnezzer and endeth them at Cyrus which time by his account maketh 52. yeares But in this number of 52. yeares there are 3. yeares aboue 7. prophetical weekes that is 49. yeares which the Rabbin is constrained to make his account euen to put off to the beginning of the 62. weekes but then is not the Angels diuision iust and true that cutteth off onely 7. weekes from the rest and beside these 7. weekes must beginne from the going forth of the word for the people to returne they take not then beginning so long before 2. M. Calvin beginneth these yeares in the first of Cyrus and endeth them in the sixt yeare of Darius the sonne of Hystaspis the 3. king of Persia but this can not be for they that giue the most yeares vnto Cyrus and Cambyses allow but vnto the one 30. to the other 7. excepting onely Luther who following Euseb. l. de demonstr Euang. giueth to each of them 20. yeares then adde the 6. yeares of Darius they will make but 43. how then can the seuen weekes here be fulfilled Beside that Darius in whose sixt the Temple was reedified called Darius of Persia was not Darius Hystaspis the 3. king of Persia but before this Darius three other kings are named Cyrus Assuerus Artashasht Ezr. 4. 6 7. 3. Oecolampadius proceedeth an other way for thus he casteth vp the reckoning he alloweth vnto Cyrus 9. yeares and to Cambyses 8. or to Cyrus 14. and to Cambyses 3. and then he putteth hereunto 20. of Darius when Nehemiah was sent to Ierusalem in whose 32. yeare the building of the citie was finished But in this account diuers errours are committed 1. in giuing 17. yeares to Cyrus and Cambyses therein he differeth from other Chronologers the Hebrewes giue vnto them both 9. yeares ioyntly the most 37. yeares Bullinger to Cyrus 16. to Cambyses 8. If it shall be free for men to allot vnto the raigne of kings more or fewer yeares at their pleasure wheresoeuer they beginne their account they may make it agree 2. Darius in whose time the Temple was built was not Darius the sonne of Hystaspis who immediatly succeeded Cambyses for before this Darius are named three other kings as is shewed before out of Ezr. 4. 6 7. but Darius Hystaspis was the third king of Persia. 4. Bullinger will haue these 7. weekes beginne in the 7. yeare of Artaxerxes Longimanus when Ezra was sent with a new commission to Ierusalem Ezr. 7. from thence counting 49. yeares we shall come to the 11. yeare of Darius Nothus counting as he doth to Longimanus raigne 44. yeares and in this time was the citie repaired by Nehemiah but with much trouble But this account also faileth 1. The Temple was after many yeares intermission built and finished before Ezra was sent in the 6. yeare of Darius Ezr. 6. 15. which intermission is signified in the diuiding of these 7. weekes from the rest as shall afterward appeare qu. 59. 2. He beginneth the 7. weekes where they should ende namely at the finishing of the Temple as shall be shewed afterward 5. They likewise which beginne these 7. weekes at the 20. yeare of Artaxerxes Longimanus as Pererius with diuers others can shew no reason why these 7. weekes should be cut off from the rest sauing that because in this time Nehemiah was sent and in the ende of this tearme in the raigne of Artaxerxes Mnemon he thinketh the historie of Esther and Mordecai fell out But Pererius is much deceiued 1. he beginneth the 7. weekes after the time wherein they should ende namely at the finishing of the Temple as followeth to be shewed 2. And it is before prooued that Mordecai liued not vnder Artaxerxes Mnemon but vnder Darius Hystaspis who is called Assuerus as is shewed before qu. 44. 3. But though they seeme to alleadge some reason for the beginning of these 7. weekes in the 20. of Artaxerxes there
can be no probable cause shewed of the ending of these weekes which by Pererius account will bring vs to the 10. yeare of Artaxerxes Mnemons raigne whome he supposeth to be Esters Assuerus for in that storie there is no speciall note made of the 10. yeare but of the 3. yeare wherein he made a feast to his nobles Esth. 1. 3. of the 7. yeare when he married Esther c. 2. 16. and of the 12. yeare when Haman procured the decree against the Iewes c. 3. 7. 6. Some beginne these 7. weekes at the 20. yeare of Artaxerxes Longimanus and ende them at the 2. of Artaxerxes Memor M. Lydyat pag. 78. But beside the difference in this computation betweene him and Pererius who bringeth the 7. weekes from the 20. of Longimanus to the 10. of Memor or Mnemon no reason can be assigned of the breaking off and diuiding those 7. weekes from the other he saith that other cities of Iudea beganne then to be builded but with much trouble but Daniel maketh mention onely of building Ierusalem in this place 7. Iosephus Scalliger lib. 6. de emendat tempor M. Iunius M. Liuely in his Persian Monarchie and Polanus beginne these 7. weekes in the 2. yeare of Darius Nothus and ende them in the 32. of Artaxerxes Mnemon when Nehemiah returned after he had finished the building of the citie vnto the king of Persia Nehem. 5. 14. there remained 17. yeares after Darius second whom they held to haue raigned 19. yeares which make the summe of 49. yeares in which space of time both the Temple and citie were builded But against this opinion it may thus be obiected 1. the 7. weekes and the 70. weekes haue the same beginning from the going forth of the word which is before prooued at large to haue beene in the first of Cyrus quest 43. 2. they beginne these weekes where they should ende for these 7. weekes were the time of the intermission and breaking off of their worke in building the citie and Temple the Angel sheweth how long that worke should be interrupted after the which they should beginne to build 8. M. Iunius then in his former edition beginneth these weekes in the first of Cyrus and endeth them in the 20. yeare of Longimanus when Nehemiah had his commission giuen him so also H. Br. in his commentarie But from Cyrus 1. to the sending of Nehemiah in the 20. Artaxerxes Longimanus must needes be aboue 49. yeares in account for the foure former kings of Persia Cyrus Cambyses Darius the sonne of Hystaspis and Xerxes had more then 30. yeares among them 9. Wherefore the best reckoning of these 7. weekes is this to beginne them with M. Calvin Oecolampad M. Br. in Cyrus first and to ende them in the 6. of Darius Longimanus when the Temple was finished and in the 7. yeare was Ezra sent and in the 20. by the same king Nehemiah my reasons are these 1. from the first going forth of the word which was in Cyrus time must these 7. weekes take beginning which make 49. yeares the time is too short to end them in the raigne of Darius Hystaspis which was within 49. yeares and too long to extend them to Darius Nothus who was the sixt king of Persia which was about 70. yeares from Cyrus first therefore one must be taken betweene them and that was Darius Artaxerxes called Longimanus who was next before Nothus Longimanus is held by the most to haue raigned 40. yeares which yeares added to the raigne of 4. kings before Cyrus Cambyses Darius Xerxes will make too many for the account of 49. yeares to the 2. of Nothus 2. The Temple was 46. yeare in building as the Iewes say Iohn 2. which yeares must be accounted from the 3. of Cyrus when the building beganne to be hindred for the which cause Daniel was in heauines 3. weekes of dayes Dan. 10. 3. so we shall haue the summe of 46. yeares from Cyrus 3. and of 49. from Cyrus 1. to the finishing of the Temple But it will be obiected that it was Darius Nothus in whose 6. the Temple was built because he had an Artaxerxes going before him Ezra 4. 7. and an other after him Ezr. 6. 14. and 7. 1. and so he was in the middes betweene two Artaxerxes Longimanus and Mnemon and that must needes be Nothus Ioseph Scalliger lib. 6. de emendat temp Answ. That Artashasht mentioned Ezra 4. 7. who sent a rescript to hinder the building of the citie and Temple was not Artaxerxes Longimanus but Cambyses who was a chiefe hinderer of the building of the Lords house 1. Longimanus is held of all to haue beene a friend vnto the Iewes 2. In the accusation sent to Artashasht they say that the Iewes did build and lay the foundation of the walles Ezr. 4. 12. they speake as of a thing then in doing which could not be so many yeares more then 40 after in Longimanus time for the worke was intermitted vnto the time of Darius Ezra 4. 5. this complaint then was made to Artashasht prince vnder Cyrus namely Cambyses his sonne who had the administration of the kingdome his father beeing occupied in forren warres abroad so Iun. edition 3. Vatab. H. Br. Though Assuerus be mentioned before v. 6. which was Darius Hystaspis how in the beginning of his raigne an accusation was made against them that prooueth not the Artashasht following to be Longimanus but the storie returneth to shewe the originall of that accusation which formerly had beene made 3. That place Ezr. 6. 14. prooueth not an other Artashasht to haue succeeded Darius there are diners opinions 1. Some thinke that Artaxerxes Mnemon caused such things to be finished which belonged to the ornament of the Temple which was made an ende of in his fathers time ex Vatabl. but here the finishing of the Temple is ascribed to Darius and Artashasht together not to one after an other 2. Iunius thinketh that Artashasht raigned together with his father but it is not like that in the second yeare of Darius when the worke beganne that Darius sonne was so old as to take the administration of the kingdome vpon him 3. Some by Darius vnderstand Darius the Mede who ioyntly with Cyrus gaue that commandement at the first and by Artashasht they vnderstand Longimanus Iun. annot edit 1. 4. Some thus read Darius that is Artashasht Vatab. and M. Br. nameth him Darius Artashasht which seemeth to haue beene a common appellation to most of the Persian kings Iun. Genevens annotat in Ezra 7. 1. I preferre this latter for in the first commandement which was giuen vnto the Iewes to returne onely mention is made of Cyrus 2. Chron. 36. 32. Ezra 1. 1. Darius then called king of Persia which was Longimanus Ezra 4. 24. the same is Artashasht called here king of Persia and Ezra 6. 22. king of Ashur and Nehem. 13. 6. king of Babel a part of the kingdome beeing by the figure Synecdoche
taken for the whole for all was vnder the gouernement of the kings of Persia. 4. Some thinke that the first Artashasht or Artaxerxes mentioned Ezra 4. 7. was Smerdes which vsurped the kingdome after Cambyses for 7. moneths and the other Artaxerxes spoken of Ezra 6. 14. and 7. 1. was Artaxerxes Longimanus and Darius there mentioned was Darius Hystaspis called the king of Ashur Ezra 6. 22. because he snbdued Babylon and Assyria so M. Lydyat de emendat tempor pag. 64 65. 73. But 1. it is not like that Smerdes beeing king not aboue 7. moneths and not throughly setled could be such an hinderer of the building of Ierusalem or that in so short a time there could be such entercourse by letters to and fro from the king of Persia to Ierusalem beeing farre distant euen 4. moneths iourney Ezra 7. 9. the other Artaxerxes was indeed Longimanus as is before shewed and the same was the Darius also there mentioned Ezra 6. 14. for how could the temple be said to be finished by the commandement of Artashasht who yet raigned not but is mentioned by anticipation as be thinketh and as Darius is here called king of Ashur fo is Artashasht called king of Babel Nehem. 13. 6. they were both the same as is before shewed a part of the kingdome is taken for the whole 59. Quest. Whether that place Ioh. 2. 20. that the Temple was 46. yeares in building haue any agreement with these 7. weekes 1. Oecolampadius vtterly reiecteth that saying of the Iewes nobis illud dictum Iudaorum quod per inuidiam loquebantur non est tantae authoritatis c. to vs that saying of the Iewes is not of so great authoritie that we should set it against so euident places of the Scripture Likewise Bullinger thinketh that the Iewes might ouerlash in this speach as they did when they said to Christ Thou art not yet fiftie yeare old Ioh. 8. 57. and yet he neuer saw fourtie But although where the Iewes speake vpon their blind traditions contrarie to Scripture they are not to be regarded yet when we see the receiued opinion to concurre with Scripture and the euent to be answerable thereunto it is not to be reiected as here the 46. yeares by them mentioned beeing counted from Cyrus third when the worke ceased doe agree with this prophesie of 7. weekes that is 49. yeares from Cyrus first 2. Iosephus Scalliger likewise reiecteth this testimonie of the Iewes lib. 6. de emendat tempor vpon this reason because these 7. weekes are appointed for the building of the citie and streete and not of the Temple But by the one the other must be vnderstood the building of Ierusalem includeth also the building of the Temple for otherwise no mention is made at all here of the building of the Temple which notwithstanding was principally intended both in the prophesie of Isay concerning Cyrus c. 44. 28. and in the fulfilling thereof Ezra 1. 1. 3. Pintus applyeth that tearme of 46. yeares to the building of the Temple but he doth not make it agree with these 7. moneths for he reckoneth but 48. yeares in all to the finishing of the Temple which beganne two yeares after the going forth of the word so that from the beginning of the building were 46. yeares but from the going forth of the word 48. Contra. But neither were two yeares expired from the going forth of the word vnto the beginning of the Temple but onely one yeare complete and somewhat more for they beganne to set forward the worke in the 2. yeare the second moneth Ezra 3. 8. And thus the prophesie of 7. weekes from the going forth of the word should not be fulfilled 4. Some thinke that the Iewes put diuerse timeâ— together of the second building of the Temple in their teturne from captiuitie and of the third by Herod so that they adde 20. yeares which Herod spent in enlarging the edifices about the Temple Oecolamp But the Iewes speake onely of the time spent in the building of the second Temple for Salomons Temple was finished in 7. yeares 1. king 6. and Herods worke about the Temple in 10. yeares as Iosephus witnesseth lib. 15. antiquit 5. Pererius thinketh the Iewes computation to be true which he beginneth in the 2. yeare of Cyrus when they laid the foundation of the Temple and endeth in the 9. of Darius Hystaspis when all the worke the outward Court and all were finished and thus he casteth the summe from Cyrus 2. there remaine 29. yeares of Cyrus raigne Cambyses and the Magi raigned 8. and Darius 9. But the 7. weekes he beginneth from the 20. yeare of Longimanus Contra. 1. Beside that Cyrus and Cambyses raigned not so long ouer the Persian Monarchie Cyrus is held to haue raigned in all 30. but ouer the whole Monarchie after the ouerthrowe of Babel but three 2. an other errour is that Pererius taketh the ninth yeare of Darius following therein Iosephus whereas Ezra 6. 14. the Temple was finished in the 6. yeare of Darius 3. neither was this Darius Hystaspis but Darius Longimanus vnder whom the Temple was finished as before is shewed quest 45. 4. the seuen weekes must beginne from the 1. of Cyrus not from the 20. of Longimanus as is also before prooued quest 43. and quest 58. 6. M. Calvin whom the Genevens followe in their annotation here doe giue vnto the building of the Temple 46. yeare and to the laying of the foundation 3. yeares which make 49. in all but this account cannot stand neither for the 7. weekes must beginne from the going forth of the word which was in the 1. of Cyrus the foundation of the Temple was laid in the 2. yeare then cannot the 7. weekes and these 49. yeares wherein the Temple was built ende together not beginning together 7. Some thinke that the Iewes speake not of the Temple built by Zorobabel but of Herods Temple which he beganne to enlarge in the 18. yeare of his raigne which was 46. yeares before and was not yet finished M. Lydyat de emendat tempor p. 174. 8. But the more receiued and probable opinion is that the Iewes speake of the Temple built after their returne out of captiuitie and finished not then in building and thus the 7. weekes and the 46. yeares are made to agree together the 7. weekes which make 49. yeares beginne at Cyrus 1. and the 46. yeares must be counted from the third of Cyrus when the worke of the house was hindered and so the 7. weekes and the 46. yeares shall ende together at the finishing of the Temple in Darius 6. yeare H. Br. in his Concent Quest. 60. Vnto Messiah the Prince shall be seuen weekes ver 25. Who is here vnderstood by the Messiah 1. R. Selamâ— who beginneth the 7. weekes at the destruction of the first Temple will haue this Messiah or anointed to be Cyrus as he is called Isay. 45. 1. Thus saith the Lord to Cyrus his anointed and from the desolation of
the Temple vnto Cyrus he counteth 52. yeares Paulus Burgensis thus confuteth this assertion because none are simply in Scripture calleth annointed but those which were annointed either with materiall oyle as the kings and Priests or with spirituall as the Prophets but Cyrus was neither of these wayes annointed And whereas this place is vrged of Cyrus he saith it is not to be vnderstood of Cyrus but of the Messiah this answer of Burgens is verie weake for in that the Prophet saith Cyrus his annointed what is more euident then that he speaketh of Cyrus beeing expressed by name Pererius answer also is vnsufficient that Cyrus was long before the beginning of these weekes whereas it hath beene alreadie shewed that the weekes beganne in Cyrus time 1. Thus therefore is this opinion rather refelled 1. because he himselfe counteth 52. weekes vnto Cyrus which make aboue 7. weekes of yeares Burgens 2. Afterward by Messiah that should be slaine he vnderstandeth Agrippa king of the Iewes and so he changeth the person taking the Messiah for two diuerse persons whereas it is euident that the Prophet speaketh of one and the same Messiah Lyran. 3. he is called Messiah the gouernour or principall for so the word nagid signifieth but none is called the principall Messiah but onely Christ of whom the Prophet speaketh Isay. 55. 4. I haue giuen him for a witnesse to the people for a Prince c. the word is nagid Burgens 2. Some by the Messiah vnderstand Nehemiah as Ab. Ezra some Zorobabel some Iehoshua the high Priest as R. Levi Ben Gersoâ— But these were in the beginning of the 7. weekes at the returne of the captiuitie Ezrâ— 2. 2. it cannot be therefore said that there should be 7. weekes vnto them And againe the office of this Messiah was to finish sinne and reconcile iniquitie which none of these could doe 3. Some by Messiah taking the singular for the plurall doe vnderstand the annointed gouernours whom Eusebius taketh to be the Macchabees who were both Priests and kings but vnto the beginning of the raigne of the Maccabees were aboue 7. weekes from the beginning of the 70. weekes wheresoeuer they beginne them for the regiment of the Macchabees beganne aboue an hundred yeares after the ende of the Persian Monarchie 4. M. Liuely therefore in his Persian Monarchie p. 205. taketh the word Messiah somewhat more largely for the chiefe rulers and kings of the Iewes commonwealth vnto the beginning of whose setled estate are counted 7. weekes for from the 2. of Darius Nothus when the Temple beganne to be reedified of whose raigne there remained 17. yeares to the 32. of Arrashasht are iust 49. yeares in whose 32. yeare the citie beeing builded and set forme of gouernement established Nehemiah returned vnto the king Nehem. 13. 6. of this his opinion he yeeldeth two speciall reasons 1. from the Hebrewe point athnah after 7. weekes which beeing a perfect distinction doth suspend it from the sentence following so that he would haue these 7. weekes to the Messiah taken by themselues and not to be ioyned with the 62. weekes following 2. these two things beganne together the citie builded and the annointed gouernour thereof as Samballat in a letter to Nehemiah ioyneth them both together Nehem. 6. 6. thou and the Iewes thinke to rebell for the which cause thou buildest ihe wall and thou wilt be the king thereof to this purpose M. Liuely p. 209. Answ. 1. Oecolampadius to that obiection of the points maketh this answer we had rather followe in this place the Greekes and Latines quam Iudaeos pro sua libidine punctum constituentes then the Iewes setting the points according to their pleasure but this is a dangerous answer for if we make question of the Hebrewe pricks and points we shall haue no certaintie of the Scripture therefore I rather answer with Polanus that although the perfect distinction athnah be there set yet the rest must be ioyned in sense as the Angel at the first maketh but one whole number of 70. weekes 2. It followeth not because when the citie was builded the setled gouernement began that therefore the gouernours were this Messiah And if Nehemiah were the first gouernoâ—r as it cannot be denied after the building of the citie to the beginning of his gouernement there were not 7. weekes of yeares seeing he was sent in the 20. of Artaxerxes and there continued to the 32. yeare when according to his account the 49. yeares expired 5. Wherefore the best and most receiued interpretation is that by Messiah here we are to vnderstand our Blessed Sauiour Christ Iesus as it may thus appeare 1. one and the same Messiah is spoken of through this prophesie but the Messiah which should be slaine and confirme the couenant for one weeke was Christ therefore this Messiah here spoken of was Christ. 2. the weekes before spoken of to finish sinne and reconcile iniquitie could onely be performed by Christ. 6. Some doe vnderstand by Messiah Christ and make this the sense that 7. weekes that is 49. yeares he should be their gouernour and afterward cast them off But it is euident that the Lord did not onely during those 7. weeks take vpon him the protection of that people but many yeares after also 7. Some obiect that in that Messiah is called here a captaine or gouernour if it were meant of Christ it would extenuate his dignitie M. Calvin answereth that therein the dignitie and excellencie of Christ is set forth who was a captaine ouer all other kings and Princes and this title is giuen also to kings and to the chiefe earthly states as Dauid is called the captaine of the people 2. Sam. 3. 2. and Hezekiah 2. king 20. 5. Pererius addeth further that this title nagid captaine Prince is particularly giuen vnto Christ as Isay. 55. 4. I haue giuen him for a prince or captaine for he was our captaine 1. to lead vs by his holy example of life 2. in teaching the way vnto saluation 3. in gathering together his church and conducting them to eternall life Perer. lib. 10. quest 17. Quest. 61. v. 25. The streetes shall be built againe in a troublesome time how this was fullfilled 1. Some doe referre this troublesome time to the 62. weeke immediately before spoken of which containeth 434. yeares to be counted vnto the Messiah from the ende of the 7. weekes and then the meaning is this that during all the continuance of that time the commonwealth of the Iewes should haue much â—â—â—uble so Iun. Polan and M. Liuely out of Saadiah giueth this sense pag. 172. that Ierusalem beeing builded shall continue 434. yeares before the desolation but in that mention is made of building the streetes againe that is the citie the words seeme to haue speciall reference to these troublesome times in the first 7. weekes wherein the worke of the Temple and citie were intermitted 2. Some by the streightnes of time vnderstand the short time wherein the citie was builded
Olympiad Bulling Perer. and their reason is this because they hold Christ to haue died in the 33. yeare of his age in the 4. yeare of the 202. Olympiad by which account his birth will fall out in the 4. of the 194. Olympiad Here Cyril Hycrosol is found to be in a great error who affirmeth catech 12. that Christ was borne in the 4. yeare of the 186. Olympiad which was aboue 30. yeares before so that by this reckoning Christ in the 15. yeare of Tiberius when he was baptized should be aboue 60. yeares old 66. Quest. Of the computation of yeares from the creation to the the natiuitie of our blessed Sauiour 3. We will come now to the Iewes computation which is either by the casting of the yeare of the world or by the yeares of their kings and gouernours other waies they haue to recken by but these are most pertinent to this busines in hand 1. Pererius counteth from the beginning of the world to the birth of Christ 4022. yeares which summe he thus collecteth by parcels From the creation to the flood were yeares a 1656. as may be gathered Gen. 5. by the age of the fathers then he reckoneth from the flood to the birth of Abraham counting 30. yeares for Cainan 322. from the birth of Abraham vnto the Promise 75. Gen. 12. from the Promise to the giuing of the Law 430. Gal. 3. frō thence to the building of Salomons Temple 480. 1. king 6. 1. then to the beginning of the Olympiads in the 8. yeare of Ahaz 283. and from the 1. Olympiad to the 4. yeare of the 194. Olympiad wherein Christ was borne 776. yeares all these summes laid together from the beginning of the world to the birth of Christ he summeth to 4022. yeares in all But Pererius diuersly faileth in this his reckoning 1. for in the second summe from the flood to Abrahams birth he committeth two great errors for 1. he counteth 30. yeares for Caynan which is not in the originall but onely in the Septuagint 2. and beside he reckoneth but 292. yeares supposing Abraham to haue beene borne in the 70. yeare of his fathers age whereas he was borne in the 130. yeare for he was but 75. yeare old when his father was 205. so that from the flood to Abrahams birth were 352. yeares he then with forged Cainans 30. making but 322. yeares wanteth yet 30. more of the iust reckoning 3. further he setteth the beginning of the Olympiads in the 8. yeare of Ahaz whereas it is more probable they beganne 23. yeares before in the 2. yeare of Iotham here then he commeth 23. yeares too late 4. and in his last summe of 776. he ouerreacheth aboue an 100. yeares for from Ahaz 8. yeare to the 11. of Iehoiakim when the captiuitie beganne are but an 134. yeares as may be gathered by the seuerall yeares of the raignes of the kings of Iudah from thence to Cyrus 70. from Cyrus first to the passion of Christ 490. from which summe must be diducted 33. years from the passion of Christ to his birth the whole summe is but 661. 2. Let vs then further see how these yeares from the beginning of the world vnto the birth of Christ are otherwise summed The chronologie and computation of yeares added in the ende of the Genevean translation counteth from Adam to Christs incarnation 4017. yeares which they gather thus From the creation to the flood 1656. from the flood to Abrahams departing from Chalde 423. from Abrahams departing thence to the departing of Israel out of Egypt 430. from thence to the building of the Temple 480. from thence to the captiuitie of Babylon in the 11. yeare of Zedekiah 441. then to the building againe of Ierusalem 143. from thence to Christs death 478. The whole summe is 4051. from whence 33. yeares and an halfe beeing diducted there will remaine 4017. yeares and an halfe But this account may be thus excepted against 1. they count from the 4. yeare of Salomon when the Temple beganne to be built to the 11. yeare of Zedekiah 441. yeares wheras from the 1. of Salomon to the last of Zedekiah by Iunius computation there are but 412. yeares or thereabout by some others not aboue 430. Oecolampad H. Br. Concent 2. they count form the first destruction of Ierusalem to the passion of Christ 621. yeares whereas there are at the most but thence to Cyrus first 59. which with the 11. yeares from Ieconias captiuitie make vp the 70. yeares and 490. which put together make 549. So that they doe exceed in these two last summes almost 90. yeares but they differ more in the whole summe from the creation to the natiuitie as shall be shewed in the true computation 3. But they are farre wide which doe recken from Adam vnto the birth of our Sauiour 5199. yeares which summe they doe gather by these particulars From the creation to the giuing of the Law they account 3689. yeares from thence to the natiuitie of Christ 1510. which make the said summe of 5199. wherein this is a great ouersight committed for from the creation of the world to the giuing of the Law there are not aboue 2500. and odde yeares which are counted thus from the creation to the death of Ioseph are 2368. yeares from thence to Moses birth 60. yeares who was 80. yeares old at their departure out of Egypt when the Law was giuen all make but 2508. yeares which summe wanteth of the foresaid number of 3689. a 1181. yeares 4. There is an other account made by the yeares contained in the seuerall historicall bookes of Scripture as Iunius hath summed them thus Genesis containeth the historie of 2368. yeares Exodus 142 The other bookes of the Pentateuch to the death of Moses 40 Ioshuah 17 Iudges 299 The 1. of Samuel 80 The 2. of Samuel 40 The 1. of Kings 118 The 2. of Kings to the destruction of Ierusalem in the 11 of Zedekiah 294 Thence to Cyrus 1. 59 To the building of the Temple 106 Thence to the destruction of Ierusalem 490 The whole summe of these yeares put together amounteth to 4053. from which summe if 73. years be diducted from the birth of Christ to the destruction of the citie 33. to his passion and 40. thence to the ende of the citie there will remaine from the creation of the world to the natiuitie of our Sauiour 3980. yeares In which summe two things may be excepted against 1. in the yeares ending in the 11. of Zedekiah which are cast to 3398. there want iust 22. yeares for the 11. of Zedekiah was in the yeare of the world 3420. and the cause of the fayling is this Iunius giueth but vnto Amaziah 17. yeares and then immediatly to Vzziah or Azariah 52. for he thinketh that whereas the storie saith that Amaziah raigned 29. yeares the last 12. he spent in a priuate life and so those yeares are counted to his sonnes raigne thus Iun. annot 2. king 14. 2. 21. But it is
more agreeable to the text that Amaziah raigned 29. yeares and then his sonne succeeded not immediatly as Oecolampad setteth him but there was an interregnum or intermission of the raigne for eleuen yeares the kingdome beeing gouerned by the States as it may thus be gathered Amaziah liued 15. yeares after the death of Ioash king of Israel in whose 15. yeare beganne Ieroboam the sonne of Ioash to raigne ouer Israel 2. king 14. 17. 23. so then of Amaziahs 29. yeare there remained yet 15. then in the 15. yeare of Ieroboam Amaziahs raigne endeth afterward in the 27. yeare of Ieroboam beganne Vzziah to raigne then must needes the kingdome lie void eleuen yeares from the 15. of Ieroboam to the 27. H. Br. Concent Genevens And it can not stand that Vzziah raigned together with his father for he was but 16. yeare olde when he beganne to raigne which was in the 27. of Ieroboam 2. king 15. 1 2. whereas his father died in the 15. yeare of Ieroboam when Vzziah was by this account but 4. yere old And it is noted in direct words that as soone as Azariah was made king in his fathers stead he built Elath after his father had slept with his fathers 2. king 14. 21 22. So it is euident that Iunius making Vzziah to beginne to raigne immediatly after the 17. yeare of Amaziah commeth short of the iust summe 22. or 23. yeares for he leaueth out 12. yeares of Amaziahs raigne and omitteth the time of the vacancie which was eleuen yeares more 2. In that Iunius counteth an 106. yeares from Cyrus 1. to the 2. of Darius when the Temple beganne to be reedified and so extendeth the Persian Monarchie 199. yeares therein he exceedeth by 69. yeares the yeares of the Persian Monarchie which were an 130. as is before shewed qu. 43. So that I rather approouâ— Iunius iudgement in his first edition not allowing aboue an 130. yeares to the Persian Monarchie 5. Oecolampad thus casteth the yeares from the creation of the world vnto the Messiah from the creation to the flood 1656 from thence to the departing of the Israelites out of Egypt â—13 from the departure vnto the destruction of the first Temple in the 11. yere of Zedekiah 910 from the destruction to the building againe of the Temple and citie 94 from the Temple and citie reedified in the 32. of Darius vnto Alexander 160 from Alexander to the Macch. 165 from the Macchabees to Herod 127 froÌ„ the beginning of the raigne of the Herods to the ende thereof at the finall destruction of Ierusalem 103 But in this account there are diuers errors committed for in the summe of yeares vnto the first destruction of the Temple which are summed to 3379. or thereabout which in true account rise to 3420. yeares he commeth short 41. yeares which error falleth out by this occasion 1. he misseth of 60. yeares in the summe from the flood to Abraham placing him to be borne in the 70. yeare of Terah whereas he was borne in the 130. yeare of his father as is shewed further els where 2. from the death of Iacob to the departure of Israel out of Egypt he counteth 230. yeares which exceede not an 194. yeares for when Iacob died at 147. Ioseph was 56. beeing 39. at Iacobs 130. yeare so Ioseph liuing an 110. yeares suruiued his father 54. from Iosephs death to Moses birth are counted 60. yeares and in Moses 80. yeare departed Israel these three summes 54. 60. 80. make 194. here then Oecolampadius counting 230. yeares exceedeth the iust number by 36. yet he faileth in the whole summe 41. yeares or thereabout for the iust summe of yeares from the creation to the departure of Israel out of Egypt commeth to 2510. yeares Iun. H. Br. but his two summes of a 1656. and 813. laid together make but 2469. 3. In the yeares of the Kings next vnto Amaziahs 29. yeares he placeth Vzziahs 52. yeares whereas there came betweene an interregnum or vacancie of the kingdome for the space of an 11. yeares as is shewed before but this number of a 11. yeares he taketh vp in adding so many in the seuerall raignes of the kings as in giuing 8. yeares to Ioram who raigned alone but foure one to Ahaziah whose time is not counted 7. to Athaliah who raigned but 6. and so he recompenseth by an other supplie in the addition of these and other yeares to seuerall kings the want of the said number of a 11. yeares so that here he agreeth in the whole summe of the yeares of the kings which was from the beginning of Salomons raigne vnto the 11. yeare of Zedekiah 430. In the next summe from the 11. of Zedekiah vnto the destruction of Ierusalem which maketh 649. these errors arâ— found 1. He counteth but 70. yeares from the first destruction of the Temple vnto the reedifying thereof in the 2. of Darius whereas in the least reckoning there remained 50. yeares of the captiuitie from the destruction of the Temple to the first of Cyrus and from thence 7. weekes that is 49. yeares more to the building and finishing of the Temple as is shewed before qu. 58. 2. He giueth vnto the Persian Monarchie 160. yeares after the 32. of Darius Hystaspis whome he thinketh to haue raigned 36. yeares and to Cyrus and Cambyses he giueth betweene them 17. yeares so he extendeth the whole Persian Monarchie to 214. yeares which must be cut short to an 130. as is likewise declared before qu. 43. 3. He numbreth but 292. yeares for the kingdome of the Grecians and Macchabees which made 300 qu. 54. so that here he wanteth 8. yeares 4. This whole last summe of 649. yeares 73. beeing abated from the last destruction of the citie to the birth of Christ maketh 576. which ioyned to the foâ—mer number of 3379. maketh 3955. whereas the iust summe to Christ birth from the creation is 3927. or rather 3935. or thereabout so that here is an ouerplus of 20. yeares in the whole summe or there about 6. Bullingers account is this he setteth â—he 11. of Zedekiah in the yeare of the world 3365. the ende of the Persian Monarchie in the yeare 3640. the ende of the kingdome of the Macedonians which was in the 22. of Cleopatra in the yeare 3940. and the birth of our blessed Sauiour in the yeare 3970. 1. But in the first summe of 3365. he commeth short by 55. yeares the iust number beeing in Zedekiahs 11. yeare â—420 which oddes is like to arise because Bullinger following the common account setteth Abrahams birth in the 70. yeare of Terah which was in the 130. yeare and there faileth of 60. yeares â— the 5. odde yeares he might make vp in adding to the yeares of the raigne of the kings 2. In the next summe of 3640. he exceedeth giuing vnto the Persian Monarchie 215. yeares which he beginneth at Cyrus in the yeare of the world 3425. whereas the whole exceedeth not 130. yeares 3. In the
next summe he accounteth right numbring 300. yeares from Alexanders first vnto the last of Cleopatra 4. But in the last summe placing Christs birth in the yeare 1970. he exceedeth about 35. yeares it was by iust account 3927. or rather 3935. yeares as now shall be made to appeare 7. Thus then may the yeare of the world be found out wherein our blessed Sauiour was borne first we take the number before set downe by Iun. artic 4. vnto the destruction of Ierusalem in the 11. of Zedekiah which is iust by true account found to be 3398. yeares sauing that there wanteth 22. to be added which Iunius cutteth off from the raigne of Amaziah to whome he giueth but 17. yeares whereas he raigned 29. and from the time of vacancie of the kingdome which was 11. yeares as is there shewed adde these 22. yeares to the former summe and we shall haue iust 3420. yeares from the creation to the desolation of Ierusalem in the 11. of Zedekiah from hence to the death of our blessed Sauiour there are two accounts Some counting the beginning of the captiuitie in the 1. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer and the 4. of Iehoiakim when Daniel was carried away captiue and Ierusalem was destroied in the 19. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer doe make reckoning but of 50. yeares more to Cyrus 1. and thence to Christs death 490. yeares so that the yeare of the world by this account was 3960. at the holy passion of Christ and 33. yeares beeing abated for the age of Christ his natiuitie shall be in the yeare of the world 3927. or thereabout H. Br. in his Concent But because the better opinion is and more probable to beginne the 70. years in the captiuitie of Iechoniah in the 8. yeare of Nabuchadnezzer from whence Ieremie beginneth it c. 29. 10. as Iosephus Scaliger sheweth lib. 6. de emendat tempor we must adde 8. yeares more to the foresaid number because we beginne the captiuitie later and so these 8. yeares beeing added we haue the 3935. yeare of the world for the birth of our blessed Sauiour But it will be obiected that whereas the yeare wherein our blessed Sauiour suffered is held to haue beene a yeare of Iubile the 28. Iubile beeing cast vp to fall in the yeare of the world 3960. his birth beeing placed in the yeare 3927. we shall by adding of 8. yeares more misse of a yeare of Iubile in the yeare of Christs passion We answer that they which cast the 28. Iubile to be in the yeare 3960. beginne the first Iubile in the 8. yeare of Ioshuahs gouernment H. Br. which may better take beginning 8. yeares after in the 16. of Ioshuah when he gathered all Israel to Sechem and made a couenant with them for then the people had rest from their enemies Iosh. 24. 1. 8. M. Lydyat placeth the birth of Christ in the yeare of the world 4007. and so exceedeth the former reckoning by 72. yeares the reason of which difference is because he giueth 204 yeares to the Persian Monarchie beginning the same in the yeare 3471. and ending in the yeare 3675. whereas it is prooued before that the Persian Monarchie could not exceede an 130. yeares or thereabout qu. 43. 67. In what yeare of the raigne of Herod our blessed Sauiour was borne An other account of yeares which the Iewes make is by the yeares of the raigne of their kings now then because Herod a stronger had obtained from the Romanes the kingdome of the Iewes it most be examined in what yeare of Herods raigne our blessed Sauiour was borne And here three things must be enquired when Herod beganne his raigne how many yeares he raigned and in which of them the natiuitie of our Sauiour was 1. Iosephus thinketh that Herod was creâ—â—â—ed king by the Romanes in the 184. Olympiade Cn. Domitius Calvinus and C. Asinâ—â—â— Pollio beeing Consuls and that 3. yeares after he tooke Ierusalem and slew Antigonus and so â—â—â—oyed the kingdome peaceably from his first creation are counted 37. yeares but from the death of Antigonus onely 34. Thus Ioseph lib. antiqu 14. 17. But this opinion of Iosephus can not stand 1. for if Herod beganne to raigne in the 184. Olympiad he must die in the 193. Olympiad which was 37. yeares after and then should Christ be borne 7. or 8. yeares after the raigne of Herod namely in the 4. yeare of the 194. Olympiad which is contrarie to the historie of the Gospel Matth. 2. for Herod died after Christ was borne and fled into Egypt 2. Iosephus againe is contrarie to himselfe for lib. 16. antiquit cap. 9. he placeth the 28. yeare of Herod in the 192. Olympiad but if Herod beganne his raigne in the 184. Olympiad his 28. yeare will fall out not in the 192. but in the beginning of the 191. Olympiad 3. Dio lib. 48. and Onuphrius in chron doe place the Consulship of Cn. Calvinus and Asiaius Pollio in the 2. yeare of the 185. Olympiad which was the 714. yeare of the building of Rome 2. Onuphrius in chronic assigneth the beginning of Herods raigne to the 3. yeare of Augustus Caesar Beda lib. de 6. aetatibus to the 11 yeare But Eusebius more truely in the 10. yeare of Augustus Caesar so also Bullinger 3. It is agreed with most historians that Herod raigned 37. yeares complete onely Beda appointeth vnto him 36. yeares 4. But there is great difference about the yeare of Herod wherein Christ should be borne Beda nameth the 31. yeare lib. de 6. aetatib Eusebius the 32. Bullinger Epiphanius heres 51. and Sulpitius lib. 2. the 33. so also M. Lydyat pag. 135. Onuphrius the 36. Suâ—lyga and Keplerus about the 35. Perorius in this vncertaintie leaueth the matter in doubt not resoluing in what yeare of Herod Christ was borne 5. Iosephus Scaliger is confident that Christ was borne in the 37. yeare of Herod which he would prooue thus 1. the beginning of Herods raigne was in the next yeare after the Consulship of Calvinus and Pollio which was in the 714. yeare of the citie as Dio and Onuphrius cast it this was in the 15. yeare of Augustus which was the 715. yeare of Rome from hence to the 42. yeare of Augustus are 37. yeares then by this reckoning the 37. of Herod and the 31. of Augustus and the 3. yeare of the 194. Olympiad shall concurre together 2. Christ was then newely borne when the wisemen came to worship for as yet the time of purification was not come according to the law for to what ende els should Marie stay in Bethlehem the starre appeared before the conception of Christ 1. yeare before Christs birth and they so cast their iourney as that they came presently after the birth of Christ Now Christ immediately after his mother was purified was carried into Egypt and after a while Herod died and then he returned out of Egypt to this purpose Ioseph Scalig. lib. 6. de emendat tempor Contra. 1. There were two beginnings of
in respect whereof this beginning is 2. An other opinion is that Christ when he was baptized was onely entred into his 30. yeare about some 13. dayes so Pererius vrging the strict words of Luke that Christ began then to be about 30. yeare old and maketh Ireneus with others to fauour this opinion the first thus writeth lib. 2. aduers. haeres c. 39. Ad baptismum venit c. he came to baptisme not hauing yet fulfilled 30. yeares but beginning to be about 30. yeare old as S. Luke signifieth Pererius iudgement here is agreeable to the words of the text sauing that he holdeth Christ to haue beene borne in December whereas there must be 3. yeares and an halfe betweene Chists baptisme and his passion as is shewed afterward 3. A third opinion is of Epiphanius haeres 50. that Christ was 30. yeares old within two moneths whom he holdeth to haue beene borne vpon the sixt day of Ianuarie and to haue beene baptized in his 30. yeare two moneths before the ende thereof about the sixt of Nouember But the word beginning which S. Luke vseth sheweth that he was toward the beginning rather then the ende of his 30. yeare 4. Wherefore it is more probable that Christ was baptized in the beginning not in the ende of his 30. yeare in the sixt moneth Tisri whereof this reason may be yeelded out of Daniel because Christs death ended halfe of a weeke wherein the couenant was confirmed which beganne at his preaching immediately after his baptisme H. Br. Concent And if the 70. weekes must ende iust at the death of Christ as is prooued before quest 49. and Christ beginning to preach immediately after his baptisme preached 3. yeares and an halfe it must followe that he was baptized in the beginning of his 30. yeare And in this sense Christ is said in proper speaking to be thirtie yeare old when he was but entring into his thirtie yeare see more hereof quest 71. and 72. following 5. M. Lydyat thinketh that Christ dimidia ex parte exegerat annum aetatis tricesimum had passed the halfe of his 30. yeare when he was baptised and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beginning he referreth to his preaching not to his age But I encline rather to the former opinion 1. for there is no mention made at all of Christs preaching in respect whereof he should be said to beginne the words doe thus stand in the text and Iesus himselfe was as it were of thirtie yeares beginning c. 2. neither did Christ immediately after his baptisme beginne to preach he was first tempted 40. dayes in the wildernes next after his baptisme as S. Luke sheweth in the next chapter 3. and if Christ were baptised in the middest of his 30. yeare and after that liued 3. yeares and an halfe beeing put to death in the spring it will followe that he was also borne about that time of the yeare which is also M. Lydyats opinion which is verie improbable as shall be shewed afterward quest 71. following 6. But M. Lydyat hath yet a more strange opinion he thinketh that Iohn Baptist began to preach 4. yeares before Christ was baptised in the 15. yeare of Tiberius raigne and that Christ was baptised in the beginning of the 19. yeare of Tiberius and suffred in the 22. yeare his chiefe reasons are these 1. There are 30. yeares at what age Christ was baptised from the 41. of Augustus wherein Christ was borne to the 19. of Tiberius 2. The Temple was in building 46. yeares Ioh. 2. which beganne to be built in the 18. yeare of Herod whence vnto the 15. yeare he would say 19. yeare of Tiberius are 47. yeares 3. Iohn was not imprisoned and put to death before the 20. and 21. of Tiberius for presently after Iohns beheading followed the battell betweene Herod and Aretas king of Arabia for repudiating his daughter and marying Herodias his brothers wife which was in the beginning of Vitellius gouernement which was in the 21. yeare of Tiberius as Cornel. Tacitus testifieth lib. 6. Annal. 4. The yeare wherein Christ beganne to preach was a sabbaticall yeare as appeareth Luk. 4. but there was no sabbaticall yeare after the 15. yeare of Tiberius till the 20. To this purpose M. Lydyat lib. de emendat tempor from p. 169. to p. 176. Contra. Though I will not of purpose oppose my selfe to so excellent a Chronologer who hath taken great paines in this kind of studie which I professe not yet because that his opinion is singular I hope I may without offence examine his reasons to giue him occasion further to consider of them least the common aduersarie might take aduantage thereby 1. The 30. yeares of Christs age were expired in the 15. yeare of Tiberius from the 41. of Augustus wherein Christ is held to haue beene borne and M. Lydyat maketh mention of one Petavius a learned Chronologer of Paris who prooueth that Christ must be borne 30. yeares before the 15. yeare Tiberius p. 153. 2. That place in Ioh. c. 2. must be vnderstood of the building of Zorobabels Temple not of Herods as hath beene shewed before quest 58. 3. Iohns troubles beganne before the 20. yeare of Tiberius for when Herod tooke his brother Philips wife Herodias his brother was then liuing at what time Iohn reprooued him but Philip died in the 20. yeare of Tiberius Ioseph lib. 18. c. 6. and the warre vpon that occasion might followe some yeare after 4. That yeare wherein Christ preached was not a sabbaticall yeare Christ prepareth them by his preaching against the acceptable yeare which was that wherein he suffred which was both a sabbaticall and Iubile yeare for the Iubile beeing a type of Christ in whom we should enioy the true Iubile in the remission of sinnes the figure and shadowe and the bodie must agree together 5. But that Christ was baptized in the 15. yeare of Tiberius S. Luke putteth it out of doubt c. 3. 1. M. Lydyat answereth that the Euangelist assigneth that yeare for the beginning of Iohns preaching not for Christs baptisme for Iohn must haue a longer time giuen him then so to prepare the way for Christs to preach and baptize p. 171. But as Iohn Baptists birth was but 6. moneths before Christs so the like time might suffice for his fore-running in preaching the Euangelists set downe the baptisme of our Blessed Sauiour as following immediately vpon the preaching of Iohn yea S. Iohn saith that the next day after his solemne baptizing he saw Iesus comming vnto him Iohn 1. 29. Quest. 69. How many yeares Christ liued on earth and in what yeare of his life Christ was put to death 1. Some were of opinion that Christ liued 46. yeares at the least that the bodie may answer to the shadowe the substance to the figure because the materiall Temple which was a figure of the true Temple Christ Iesus is said to haue beene 46. yeare in building Ireneus thinketh that Christ liued 50. yeares because
but the destruction by Adrianus was well nigh an 100. yeares after Christ spake those words 60. yeares after the first ruine of the citie by Titus it was therefore without the compasse of that generation Quest. 75. How long after the Messiah was slaine this destruction happened by Titus 1. Barbinel that ignorant and rayling Rabbine as M. Calvin reporteth his opinion saith there passed 200. yeares betweene the death of Christ and the destruction of Ierusalem by the Romanes But herein he sheweth his blind folly for vnto the second destruction by Adrian there were not from Christs death aboue an 104. yeares which happened in the 18. yeare of the raigne of the Emperour Adrian the first destruction was according to the saying of our Sauiour within the memorie of that generation then liuing 2. Lyranus and Paulus Burgens thinke that the citie was taken by the Romanes about 42. yeares after the death of Christ but it cannot be so much as shall afterward be shewed by the computation of the yeares of the Emperours Pintus also concurreth with Lyranus counting 38. yeares and an halfe from the ende of the halfe of the 70. weeke that is 3. yeares and an halfe which he reckoneth after Christs passion to the destruction of Ierusalem 3. But Iunius commeth more yeares too short then these doe ouershoote he maketh it but 36. yeares from the passion of Christ to the destruction of the citie annotat in 9. Dan. 4. Iosephus Scaliger holding that Christ suffered in the 35. yeare of his age whereas he commonly is held to haue suffered in the 33. yeare bringeth Christs passion nearer by two yeares to the destruction of the citie then the ordinarie account is and so he must make the time 38. yeares or thereabout from the death of Christ to the ruine of the citie 5. M. Lydyat bringeth Christs passion within 34. yeares of the finall ouerthrow and destruction of the citie by the Romanes for he setteth Christs passion in the yeare of the world 4040. or in the 22. yeare of Tiberius and the destruction of the citie in the 4074. yeare the reason of which alteration is for that he maketh the passion of Christ to haue beene 4. yeares later then vsuall namely in the 22. yeare of Tiberius whereas our blessed Sauiour is commonly held to haue suffered in the 18. yeare of Tiberius see this opinion examined before qu. 69. 6. But the iust time was 40. yeares as may be shewed by a threefold computation 1. by the distance of the Olympiads 2. by the yeares of the Emperours 3. by the yeares of the kings of Iudea the Herodians 1. Christ is held to haue suffered in the 4. yeare of the 202. Olympiad and the destruction of the citie fell into the 4. yeare of the 212. Olympiad which distance maketh iust 40. yeares Perer. Bulling 2. The yeares of the Emperours are thus counted Tiberius raigned in all 23. Christ then suffering in his 18. yeare there remained 5. yeares more then Caligula raigned 4. Claudius 14. Nero 14. Galba Otho Vitellius 1. Vespasian 2. these summes make 40. years Bulling But the precise and exact reckoning is this as Eusebius in his Chronicle setteth them downe All these yeares with the moneths and daies beeing summed together 18. years beeing diducted of Tiberius raigne will make 40. yeares and summe odde daies  yeares moneths daies Tiberius raigned 22 11 14 Caligula 3 10 18 Claudius 13 8 20 Nero 14   Galba  7 2 Otho  3 2 Vitellius  8 5 Vespasian 2   3. The third reckoning is by the yeares of the Herodians whose whole time from the beginning of the raigne of Herod the great to the ende of their gouernment at the destruction of Ierusalem was 103. yeares which is summed thus Herod the great raigned 37. yeares Archelaus 9. Herod the Tetrarch 24. Herod Agrippa 7. Agrippa the sonne of Agrippa 26. Oecolampad Now of this account 63. yeares must be cut off for the raigne of Herod in whose 30. complete and 31. begunne Christ was borne as is shewed before qu. 67. and for the yeares of our blessed Sauiours life who died in his 33. yeare and the remainder is 40. 7. Iulius Africanus exceedeth the rest in counting 43. yeares from the death of Christ which he placeth in the 15. yeare of Tiberius to the ruine of the citie but herein was his error he held that Christ died in his 30. or 31. yeare 76. Quest. Why mention is made of the destruction of Ierusalem here seeing it is without the compasse of the 70. weekes 1. One reason hereof is because Daniel was desirous to vnderstand what should befall his citie in time to come the Angel doth satisfie his full desire and as he had told him of the reedifying of the Temple and citie so he also foretelleth of the finall ende and dissolution of both 2. An other cause is that after the Angel had shewed him that the Messiah should be slaine then further that it might appeare what an hainous sinne this was the destruction of the citie is sore shewed to follow as a iust punishment for so great a wickednes Perer. so also Lyranus quia hoc factum fuit in poenam mortis Christi because this was done for a punishment because of the death of Christ it is immediatly mentioned though it fell not out within the 70. weekes Here then are two reasons shewed of the destruction of the citie the slaying of the Messiah and the vtter reiecting of him Polan 3. A third reason why mention is here made of this desolation is to make the Iewes inexcusable that seeing they haue found all this to be true by their wofull experience here foreshewed by the Angel that their citie is destroied vnto this day because of their treacherie against the Messiah their obstinate blindnes therein might appeare that yet continue enemies vnto the blessed Messiah and his holy Gospel Perer. 77. Quest. Of the meaning of those words v. 26. the ende thereof shall be with a flood and vnto the ende of the battell it shall be destroied c. 1. By this similitude of inundation three things are signified that it shall be casus repentinus ineluctabilis vniuersalis a sudden casualtie ineuitable and generall Iun. in comment like as a flood sweepeth all away before it and spareth nothing so none should be spared in this destruction 2. Thereby also is signified the perfect desolâ—tion that should be brought vpon the citie like as the ouerflowing of waters pulleth vp trees by the rootes and ouerthroweth the very foundations of houses so in this desolation the citie should be made euen with the ground and one stone should not be left vpon an other as our Sauiour foretold them Luk. 19. 44. Bullinger 3. Further like as in inundations and ouerflowings the waters still encrease and swell more and more so hereby is signified that calamitates magis magis increscebant their calamities should more and more encrease for
highly in Gods fauour yet he was lead into captiuitie and there continued 70. yeares let not men therefore be dismaied though they continue long in affliction yea the Lord consecrated the Prince of our saluation through affliction Hebr. 2. 10. yea his whole life was nothing els but a tragicall storie of crosses and tribulations the members must not thinke much to take part with the head neither is the disciple better then the master CHAP. X. 1. The Argument and Method IN these three last chapters the 10 11 12. the fourth and last vision which Daniel had is set forth whereof there are three parts 1. the preparation to the vision contained in the 10. chapter 2. the propheticall vision it selfe in the 11. chapter 3. the consolation ministred vnto Daniel after the prediction of such heauie things In the preparation or preamble to the vision in the 11. chap. there are these fowre parts 1. the summe of the vision in generall to v. 5. 2. a description of the glorious person that appeared to v. 7. 3. the effect that followed Daniel and his companions feare v. 7. to the 10. 4. the erection and animating of Daniel by the Angel v. 10. to the 21. 1. In the generall summe 1. the time is expressed 2. the person to whome the vision was reuealed to Daniel 3. the manner of the vision for the certentie it was true for the continuance long for the clearenes he vnderstood it 4. then the disposition of Daniel is shewed how he was affected when this vision came he was in heauines the effects whereof were he eate no pleasant bread v. 3. 2. In this description 1. the circumstances are set forth the time and place v. 4. 2. the glorious person described by his forme he was as a man by his rayment v. 5. by his parts and voice v. 6. 3. The feare of Daniel and his companions is diuersly set forth they fled away and hid themselues v. 7. Daniel staied by it though his strength was much abated v. 8. and the cause of this great feare is shewed the hearing of the voice like thunder v. 9. 4. The erecting and animating of Daniel is set forth in fowre degrees 1. the first degree is in setting Daniel vpon his knees and the palmes of his hands which was caused partly by an hand that touched him v. 10. partly by words v. 11. 2. In the second degree he standeth but trembling the comfort is ministred by the speaking of the Angel where he sheweth 1. when he was first sent forth v. 12. 2. what was the cause of his stay v. 13. 3. to what ende he came v. 14. 3. In the third degree is shewed 1. the Prophets infirmitie he set his face toward the ground but held his tongue v. 15. 2. the consolation an hand touched his lippes 3. the effects he speaketh shewing his feare v. 16. and the cause thereof v. 17. 4. In the fourth and last degree 1. the Prophets infirmitie is expressed his great feare v. 17. 2. the erection of him partly by gesture an hand toucheth him v. 18. partly by speach 3. the effects Daniel speaketh boldly to the Angel 4. the Angel declareth three things 1. of his fighting with the Prince of Persia. 2. of the comming of the Prince of Grecia 3. of the assistance and helpe of Michael the Prince of Gods people 2. The text with the diuers readings v. 1. In the third yeare of the raigne L. ad Cyrus Choresh H. which in the Persian language signifieth Lord and therefore they call the sonne choresh his name before was Spaco as Herodotus which in the Medes language signifieth a dogge king of Persia a thing a word H. was reuealed vnto Daniel who was called by his name Belteshatzar and the word was true proper Br. truth in the word H. but the time appointed was long great H. the strength or force was great L. V. S. tzaba signifieth both but the first rather here and he vnderstood the words word H. and had vnderstanding in the vision he vnderstood both the words of the vision because they were plaine and the matter of the vision 2 At the same time in those daies H. I Daniel was in heauines for three weeks of daies 3 I ate no pleasant bread or meate I. bread of desires H. neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth neither did I anoint my selfe at all in anointing anointed me H. till three weeks of daies were fulfilled 4 And in the foure and twentieth day of the first moneth I was by the banke side B. G. hand H. of the great riuer euen Hiddekel that is Tigris L. V. in Dekel S. cor 5 And I lift vp mine eyes and looked and behold a man clothed in linen end his loynes were girded about with gold of Vphaz not fine gold L. V. it is the name of the place from whence they had fine gold Ier. 10. 9. 6 His bodie was like Tharsis H. S. the chrysolite L. G. the turkeis B. the hiacinth V. berill I. see more qu. 14. and his face as the sight of lightning and his eyes as lamps of fire and his armes and feete were like the colour shining V. shew L. eye H. of polished brasse and the voice of his words as the voice of a multitude 7 And I Daniel alone saw the vision and the men that were with me saw not the vision but a great feare fell vpon them so that they fledde away to be hidde and hidde themselues B. G. 8 Therefore I was left alone and saw this great vision and there remained no strength in me and my comelines my forme L. glorie S. colour B. strength G. was turned into corruption was corrupted and deformed V. and I reteined no power 9 Yet I heard the voice sound I. of his words and when I heard the voice of his words I slumbred fell a sleepe G. was astonished B. but the word signifieth to slumber on my face and my face was turned toward the ground 10 And behold an hand touched me which set me vp mooued or strengthened me H. vpon my knees and vpon the palmes of my hands 11 And he said vnto me O Daniel a man much desired a man of desires H. see c. 9. 23. vnderstand the words that I speake vnto thee and stand in thy place station H. for vnto thee am I now sent and when he had said this word vnto me I stood trembling 12 Then he saide vnto me Feare not Daniel for from the first day that thou didst set giue H. thine heart to vnderstand and to afflict chasten B. humble G. thy selfe before thy God thy words were heard and I am come for thy words 13 But the Prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me stood before I. rather against me one and twentie daies but lo Michael the first one V. L. cum caeter but achad signifieth the first Gen. 1. 5. as well as one of the chiefe Princes came to helpe me and I remained there by the
kings not king L. S. of Persia. 14 Now I am come to shew thee what shall befall thy people in the latter or ensuing I. not last L. daies for yet the vision is for many daies not of these daies I. daies put absolutely without any other addition signifie many 15 And when he spake these words vnto me I set my face toward the ground and held my tongue 16 And behold as the similitude of man of the sonnes of men H. touched vpon H. my lips then opened I my mouth and spake and said to him that stood before me O my Lord by the vision my sorrowes are returned I. G. not my ioynts are turned out of their place L. V. B. or my inward parts are turned S. the word tzir signifieth sorrow anguish and I haue reteined no strength 17 For how can the seruant of that my Lord talke with that my Lord A. P. better then how can this seruant of my Lord talke with that my Lord. I. or how can the seruant of this my Lord talke with this my Lord. V. Pol. or how can the seruant of this my Lord talke with my Lord beeing such an one B. G. the demonstrative zeh that or yonder is in both places ioyned with adonai Lord see more qu. 17. following for as for me there remained no strength to me neither is there breath L. S. B. G. spirit V. the soule I. A. the first rather left in me 18 Then there came againe added H. and touched me as the appearance of a man and strengthened me 19 And said O man much desired peace be vnto thee be strong and be of good courage be strong be strong H. and when he had spoken vnto me I was strengthened and said Let my Lord speake for thou hast strengthened me 20 Then said he Knowest thou wherefore I am come vnto thee for now I will returne to fight against the Prince of Persia and as soone as I goe forth am going forth H. the Prince of Grecia shall come commeth H. not is come L. S. 22 But I will shew thee that which is expressed decreed G. appointed S. in the Scripture of truth and there is none that holdeth confirmeth himselfe H. with me in these things but Michael your Prince 3. The questions and doubts discussed 1. Quest. Of the excellencie of this vision reuealed in this Chapter and the two next vnto Daniel This vision which Lyranus counteth the ninth from the beginning of this booke c. 2. but indeede it is but the fourth vision which Daniel properly had beginning at the 7. chapter It is a most worthie and excellent vision in diuers respects 1. because of the preparation Daniel fasted and humbled himselfe 3. weekes of daies before this vision was shewed vnto him 2. The reuealer of this vision was the chiefe of the Angels euen Christ himselfe as is further shewed qu. 12. following who appeared not in the ordinarie shape of a man but in a glorious manner his bodie was as the Chrysolite and his face like lightning c. v. 6. Perer. 3. Whereas other visions were darke and obscure this vision is plaine and manifest and therefore it is said the word is true or proper not figuratiue H. B. 4. This vision is continued and contained in these three last chapters which was all one vision so were not any of the other so long continued and produced Iun. Polan 5. It is saide the time was long when these things should be fulfilled many yeares after some read and the power and force is great for the word is tzaba which signifieth an armie and so some of the Rabbins vnderstand here an armie of Angels which appeared to Daniel but the first seemeth to be the better sense Iun. Polan Some thinke that this was a long prophesie the accomplishment whereof is extended vnto the ende of the world Bulling Perer. But though in the last chapter mention be made by occasion of the resurrection yet this prophesie was properly fulfilled before the times of the Messiah though typically it may be applied to the times succeeding as concerning the perfection of Antichrist prefigured by Antiochus and other accidents which did befall the Church of Christ. 2. Quest. How the third yeare of Cyrus is here to be vnderstood 1. Some Greeke copies here for the third yeare doe read the first yeare of Cyrus the occasion of which error Theodoret thinketh to be this because it is said c. 1. 21. that Daniel was vnto the first yeare of Cyrus which doubt Theodoret thus taketh away because in the originall it is saide vnto one yeare of Cyrus not to the first But it is euident that in the Hebrew phrase one is taken for the first the solution then is this that Daniel continued in authoritie with the Babylonian kings and ministred vnto them as long as that Monarchie continued and then he serued Cyrus and Darius Lyran. Perer. Polan 2. This third yeeare of Cyrus some vnderstand to be the 4. yeare from the solution of the captiuitie first Darius raigned one yeare and died in the beginning of the next and then Cyrus succeeded But Cyrus and Darius raigned together because it is said c. 1. 21. that Dael was vnto the first of Cyrus which was in the first of Darius also for otherwise he should be omitted with whom Daniel was in great grace 3. The better opinion is that Cyrus in the verie first yeare when Babylon was taken gaue the Iewes libertie to returne in the second yeare they beganne to build and were the same yeare hindred and in the beginning of the third yeare this vision was reuealed vnto Daniel 4. This was the third and last yeare of Cyrus raigne ouer the Persian Monarchie who raigned 30. yeares in all and in the 28. yeare of his raigne ouer Persia he tooke Babylon Polan Pellican he did not raigne 30. after the taking of Babylon as M. Liuely Pererius with others thinke Quest. 3. Of Daniels vnderstanding of this vision Here is to be considered a threefold distinction of those which haue visions 1. Some haue visions but they vnderstand them not such were Pharaoh Nebuchadnezzar and Balthazar and of these Gregorie saith cum aliquid ostenditur intellectus non tribuitur prophetia minime est when any thing is shewed and vnderstanding not giuen it is no prophesie neither are they Prophets to whom such things are shewed c. And Augustine saith magis Ioseph Propheta fuit qui intellexit c. Ioseph was rather a Prophet who vnderstood the dreame then Pharaoh which had it and vnderstood not 2. Some there are which may vnderstand in some sort and haue the gift of prophesying and yet not be in the state of grace such an one was Balaam who vttered most cleare prophesies of things to come And that the gift of prophesie may be separated from the grace of God and charitie the Apostle sheweth 1. Cor. 13. 2. If I had the gift of prophesie c. and had no
the South to v. 18. or against other nations v. 18. The kings of the South against whom Antiochus dealeth with his brother Ceraunus was first Ptolome Philopator who ouercommeth Antiochus Megas v. 10. 11. 12. see quest 24. Then Ptolome Epiphanes against whom Antiochus maketh three seuerall expeditions the first v. 13. 14. see quest 25. the second v. 15. see quest 26. the third v. 16. 17. which endeth with an intendement of mariage but with euill successe Then Antiochus goeth against other forren nations but is discomfited by the Romanes returneth with shame and dieth v. 18. 19. see quest 28. 29. The rest of the chapter is spent in setâ—ing forth the exploits of Antiochus Megas his sonnes first of Seleucus Philopator v. 20. see qu. 30. then of Antiochus Epiphanes whose historie is set forth at large In Antiochus Epiphanes historie 1. his manner of entring into the kingdome is described see the particulars qu. 32. 2. his exploits to v. 44. 3. his end v. 44 45. His acts and exploits are 1. against Egypt where three expeditions and voyages of his are set forth The first v. 22 23 24. see qu. 33. the second v. 25. to v. 28. see qu. 34. the third with his repulse v. 30. qu. 35. 2. Against the people of God where it is shewed 1. what meanes he shall vse against them v. 32 33. see qu. 40. 2. what they shall suffer v. 33. and how they shall be comforted v. 34 35. see qu. 41 42. 3. What Antiochus himselfe shall doe where 1. his acts concerning religion are described in abrogating of all religion both true v. 34. and false v. 37. qu. 43 44. and bringing in a new god v. 38. qu. 46. 2. his ciuill and politike acts v. 39. qu. 47. 3. His exploits are against Egypt Iudea and other countries v. 40 to 44. see the particulars qu. 48. Lastly the death and destruction of Antiochus is set forth with the signes precedent and manner thereof see qu. 50. 2. The text with the diuers readings v. 1 And I in the first yeare from the first yeare V. of Darius the Mede euen I stood stand V. to encourage and strengthen him 2 And now I will shew thee the truth there shall stand vp yet three Kings in Persia and the fourth shall be farre richer enriched with riches H. then they all and when he is growne mightie in wealth hath strengthened him in his riches H. he shall stirre vp all against the kingdome of Grecia Iavan H. 3 But a mightie king shall stand vp and shall rule with great dominion and doe according to his pleasure 4 And when he shall stand vp his kingdome shall be broken and shall be diuided toward the foure winds of heauen and not to his posteritie nor according to his dominion which he ruled for his kingdome shall be plucked vp and be for other beside those 5 And the king of the South shall be mightie and one of his Princes and shall preuaile against him and beare rule his dominion shall be a great dominion 6. And in the ende of the yeares they shall be ioyned together for the kings daughter of the South shall come vnto the king of the North to make an indifferent peace to make an agreement B. C. friendship L. league S. to make equitie H. that is peace with equall conditions but she not he B. shall not reteine the power of the arme shall effect nothing V. neither shall be continue nor his arme not his seede L. S. zeroagh signifieth an arme but she shall be deliuered vp and they that brought her and he that is borne of her her young man L. S. not he that begate her V.B.G. for this agreeth not with the storie see qu. 21. following the word ioledah signifieth a birth or generation 7 But out of a sprigge budde G.B. of her rootes shall one stand in his stead shall succeed in the kingdome V. the sense not the words his plant L. his base A. or foote Polan rather in his stead B.G.I. which shall come with an armie to the armie A. and shall enter into the fottresse province L. of the king of the North and shall doe with them as he list B.G. doe so that I. abuse them L. doe great matters V. and shall preuaile 8 And he shall also carrie into captiuitie captiues L.B.G. into Egypt their gods with their Princes A.V.I. not with their molten images L.B.G.S. the word is nasich with iod a Prince but nesech is a molten image and with their pretious vessels of siluer and of gold and he shall continue more yeares then the king of the North. shall preuaile against L. but here the word shanim yeares is not translated 9 So the king of the South shall come into his kingdome not into the kingdome of the king of the South V. S. and shall returne into his owne land 10 Then shall his sonnes be stirred vp mooue battell I. Br. Pol. but then an other word is ioyned with garah as lamilcamah to battell v. 25. and shall assemble a mightie great armie a companie of many armies H. and one shall come and ouerflow and passe through then shal he returne mooue battell be stirred L.V. euen vnto the fortres at the fortres B.G. 11 Then the king of the South shall be angrie and shall come forth and fight with against L. I. but ghim signifieth more properly with him euen with the king of the North for he shall set forth cause to stand vp H. a great multitude and the multitude shall be giuen into his hand 12 Then the multitude shall be lifted vp not he shall take the multitude L. or the multitude shall be taken away I. the word nissa may be either in niphal or piel and so may be translated actiuely or passiuely but the first rather because it followeth and he shall lift vp his heart for he shall cast downe thousands but he shall not still preuaile 13 For the king of the North shall returne and shall set forth a greater multitude then the former and shall come forth after certaine yeares in the ende of the time of those yeares H. with a mightie armie and much riches 14 And at the same time shall many stand vp against the king of the South and the seditious children the violent V. pestilent S. offenders L. rebellious G. the word is pharatze breakers violaters that is of the peace such as the factious and seditious are shall exalt themselues be lifted vp H. better then be taken away I. Pol. as before v. 12. to establish the vision but they shall fall 15 So the king of the North shall come and cast vp a mount cast forth with slings Pol. the first rather for the word shaphach to poure out or sâ—ed forth is more fiâ—ly vsed of the casting vp of earth then of casting out of a sling and the other word sallelah is taken for a mount rather then a sling as Iunius there readeth 2. king 19. 32. and take
Grecians in commentar 5. But the most speciall reason is the Angel onely nameth those kings by whom the Iewes were held in captiuitie and such as hindered the worke of the Temple and as Oecolampad out of Eudoxius their gouernements are spoken of in which there was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hinderance of the worke and staying of the building of the Temple which the Prophet tooke greatest care and thought for to the same purpose M. Calvin by standing vnderstandeth those kings which stood against the people of God 6. Adde hereunto that the Prophet maketh a cursary mention of them to insinuate in what short time these foure kings should runne out the race of their kingdome for first Cyrus in whose third the Temple was hindered raigned not long after some thinke that Cyrus going against a people of the Indians called Derbices which vsed to deuoure their parents when they were old thinking it a more honourable ende for them then to be eaten of wormes fell from his horse and then was wounded in the thigh by a dart cast at him by an Indian and so died Polan ex Cresia but the more receiued opinion is out of Herodotus that he was slaine of Queene Tomyris and his head beeing cut off was cast into a bowle of blood yet Xeâ—ophon writeth that Cyrus beeing aged died in his bed giuing fatherly and graue exhortations to his sonnes After him Cambyses hauing raigned not much aboue 6. yeares was wounded by his owne sword and so died Darius Hystaspis beeing 20. yeares old when Cyrus went against Queene Tomyris and liuing but 43. yeares in all enioyed not his kingdome 36. yeares as most thinke nor yet halfe so much Xerxes time could not be long H. Br. giueth but 31. yeares to the Persian Monarchie vnto the second of Darius Longimanus and maketh the 49. yeares for the reedifying of the Temple to coucurre with the 20. of Darius Longimanus whom he supposeth raigning at home while his father Xerxes was occupied in the Greeke warres beeing but then a young man to haue giuen libertie in his 2. yeare for the reedifying of the Temple but if 30. yeares be onely allowed for the raigne of Cyrus Cambyses Darius and Xerxes Darius Longimanus cannot be thought to be then of yeares to haue sonnes as he had Ezra 6. 10. But allowe 49. yeares vnto the 2. of Darius as is further prooued c. 9. quest 58. this was but a short time for the raigne of fowre such potent kings 7. This also beeing ioyned to the former may make the former reasons more full why the Angel endeth it at Xerxes and so passeth vnto Alexanders time because then the quarrell begunne betweene the Persians and the Grecians which was neuer laid downe till the Grecians had ouerthrowne the Persian Monarchie And so Alexander in an epistle to Darius Codomannus as Arrianus writeth lib. 2. pretendeth this as the cause of his warre against the Persians Maitores vestri Mecedoniam ingressi c. Your Auncestors invaded Macedonia and all Grecia beside and offred them many wrongs whereas they had receiued none wherefore I beeing created Emperour of the Grecians beeing willing to reuenge their wrongs am come ouer into Asia beeing prouoked by you Quest. 9. A briefe description of the rising and fall of Alexanders kingdome v. 3. 4. The Angel briefely toucheth both the rising vp and the fall of Alexanders kingdome 1. the rising of his kingdome is described by two adiuncts 1. he shall be mightie for with 30. thousand footemen and 5. thousand horsemen he tooke vpon him to conquer the whole world 2. and it is said he shall stand vp whereby is noted the suddennesse of his rising and the singular dexteritie that was in him to atchieue that which he intended and purposed the effects are likewise two 1. he shall rule with great dominion his Empire was large for beside other countreys which he subdued he possessed all the great Monarchie of Persia 2. he shall doc according to his pleasure he shall be prosperous in all his enterprises and preuaile in his warres according to his owne desires 2. The fall and ruine of his kingdome is likewise described first in generall then in particular 1. In generall both by the circumstance of time when he shall stand vp that is after he hath stood a short time for not aboue seuen yeares had Alexander raigned when his kingdome together with his life was dissolued Iun. commentar and euen when his kingdome was come to the height and he expected embassadours at Babylon from al the world he died at Babylon As also the manner is shewed by a Metaphor it shall be broken like as when a brittle thing is broken into many peices and shiuers 2. In particular two things are expressed the subiect of this kingdome and the qualitie and condition of it 1. the subiect is declared affirmatiuely it shall be diuided into the 4. winds that is to fowre kings and chiefe gouernours negatiuely not to any of his posteritie which is amplified by a Metaphoricall speach it shall be pulled vp as a thing by the rootes in respect of his owne succession and others shall be planted in their stead in the place of his successors for so is the meaning of those words to others beside those that is it shall be giuen vnto those fowre successor of Alexander beside his owne heires 2. For the qualitie of these kingdomes they shall not be like in power vnto Alexanders as it is said not according to his dominion Quest. 10. Of Alexanders birth and education acts and life ende and death abriged 1. For the first Philip king of Macedonia was father to Alexander and his mothers name was Olympias he was borne about the 2. yeare of the 106. Olympiad the same day wherein he was borne the great Temple of Diana at Ephesus was set on fire which the Magicians interpreted to signifie that one was then borne who should set all Asia on fire at 15. yeares of age he was committed to Aristotle to be instructed and in his youth was of such magnanimitie that when his father had conquered any citie he would say that his father would leaue nothing for him to winne 2. At 20. yeares of age he sit vpon the conquest of all the world in his acts and life three things are memorable his vertues his monuments and exploits his notable vices 1. his vertues may be thus diuided into his morall and militarie vertues As his morall were these his continencie before he tasted of the pleasures of Asia he preserued the chastitie of Darius beautifull wife and daughters and would not so much as see them his clemencie and humanitie was great euen towad his enemies but his liberalitie exceeded all the rest he gaue 23. thousand talents among his souldiers see more of his vertues c. 2. quest 48. His militarie vertues were excellent 1. his courage that with 30. thousand footemen and 5. thousand horsemen durst aduenture to bid battell to the whole
sometime the kings of Syria but in the last sociall warre against Antigonus it was agreed that the most part of Iudea should belong vnto the Seleucians as Antiochus the great alleadgeth in an embassage sent vnto Ptolome Philopator king of Egypt Polyb. lib. 5. Therefore mention is made onely of these two kings because they onely had to doe with the people of God and as Hierome saith scripturae propositum est non externam absque Iudais historiam texere it is the intent and purpose of the Scripture not to follow a forren historie without respect vnto the Iewes And Iosephus hereof thus writeth Antiocho magno in Asia regnante c. While Antiochus the great raigned in Asia Iudea was continually troubled and Coelesyria for while he had warre with Ptolomeus Philopator and his sonne Epiphanes whether he did ouercome or were ouercome they went to wracke euen like vnto a shippe driuen to and fro of the windes inter prosperam adversam Antiochi fortunam iactat a est Iudea was tossed vp and downe betweene the prosperous and aduerse fortune of Antiochus Ioseph lib. 12. antiquit c. 3. 16. Quest. Of the Kings of Egypt and Syria of whome Daniel prophesieth in this Chapter The kings of Egypt which succeeded one another after the diuision of Alexanders kingdome into foure parts were these 1. Ptolomeus the sonne of Lagus called Ptolomeus Soter which signifieth a sauiour because he rescued diuers kings that fledde vnto him for succour as Seleucus and Pirrhus king of Epyrus but he contrarie to his name made hauocke of Syria and Iudea 2. Ptolomeus Philadelphus so called either because he married his owne sister or by the contrarie because he killed two of his brothers Iun. in commentar 3. Ptolome Euergetes a benefactour he was a great fauourer and patron of learning as his father was the Egyptians called him a benefactour because he brought home the images from Babylon which Cambyses had carried away 4. Ptolomeus Philopator so called by the contrarie for he killed his father mother and brother 5. Ptolomeus surnamed Epiphanes that is the famous or renowned 6. Ptolomeus Philometor which signifieth a louer of his mother or beloued of his mother by the contrarie for his mother hated him 7. Ptolomeus Physcon so called of his great bellie 8. Ptolome Lathurus so named because beeing exiled by his mother he secretly practised to returne againe 9. Ptolome Auletes so surnamed the piper because he would publikely in his princely habit contend with fidlers and pipers to exceede them in fidling and piping 10. He left behind him his sonne Ptolome Dyonisius and Cleopatra this Dyonisius caused Pompey to be killed that fledde thither for succour beeing ouercome of Cesar who because he afterward practised against Iulius Cesar was by him commanded to be slaine and the kingdome was giuen to Cleopatra his sister who afterward married to Antonius ex Melancth Bulling And these were the Egyptian kings vntill the Romanes reduced it into a Prouince after the death of Antonius and Cleopatra These also were the kings of Syria called the kings of the North. 1. The founder and beginner of this kingdome was Seleucus surnamed Nicanor 2. Next vnto him was Antiochus surnamed Soter a sauiour 3. Then Antiochus called Theos which signifieth God because he required diuine hoâ—â—â—â— to be giuen vnto him Bulling or as Pausanias he was saluted by that title of the Mileâ—ians for expelling their tyrants 4. Seleucus Callinicus which signifieth an excellent warriet the sonne of Antiochus Theos by Laodice his brother Antiochus Hierax so tearmed for his rapacitie raigned together with him in an other part of the kingdome 5. Seleucus Ceraunus that is a flashing or lightning was the next but he raigned not long therefore by some he is omitted as Hugo Card. Melancth 6. Antiochus surnamed Megas the great succeeded his brother Ceraunus 7. Then Seleucus Philopator so called because his father loued him raigned but not long 8. Antiochus Epiphanes the famous by the contrarie for he was of a base nature and despised v. 2. or rather as some call him Epimanes the madde or furious Antiochus succeeded Philopator Thus farre the prophecie of Daniel is extended to the 8. king of Syria which was Epiphanes and to the 6. of Egypt Ptolome Philometor At these the prophesie staieth because the principall intendement of this prophesie is to foreshew the troubles which the people of God should endure vnder Antiochus Epiphanes and this prophesie there ending signifieth that the comming of the Messiah was not farre off and beside after this time when such â—auocke was made of the people of God by Antiochus the kings of Syria as a iust recompence for their crueltie against Gods people did one cut an others throat and so the kingdome by ciuill dissention was rent a sunder vntill it came vnto the Romanes These then were the kings that succeeded Epiphanes 9. Antiochus Eupator Epiphanes sonne whome Demetrius his vncles sonne killeth 10. Demetrius succeedeth whome one Alexander faining to be Epiphanes sonne killeth and vsurpeth the kingdome by Ptolome Philometors meanes 11. Demetrius Nicanor sonne of the other Demetrius killeth Alexander 12. Antiochus Sedetes expelleth Demetrius his brother 13. Tryphon killeth Sedetes and is king 14. Antiochus the brother of Demetrius called Eusebes for his pietie because hauing besieged Ierusalem in the feast of the Tabernacles for reuerence of their feast he did forbeare them and sent them sacrifices to offer he killeth Tryphon and he himselfe is slaine in a batâ—ell by Arsaces king of the Parthians 15. Demetrius Nicanor is restored againe to his kingdom 16. One Alexander vsurpeth the kingdome who is ouercome by Antiochus Gryphus 17. Antiochus called Gryphus of his Eagles or hooked nose was the sonne of Demetrius betweene him and Antiochus Cyzicenus so named of the place where he was brought vp the sonne of Sedetes was great warre 18. Seleucus the sonne of Gryphus prosecuteth his fathers quarrell he killeth Cyzicenus Thus the familie of the Seleucians by mutuall discord was at the length extinquished and then Tygranes king of Armenia taking aduantage of this ciuill dissention vsurped the kingdome and held it certaine yeares vntill he was subdued by Pompey Melancth Bulling 17. Quest. Of the first Ptolome called here the king of the South 1. This Ptolome was held to be the sonne of Lagus but in truth he was the sonne of Philippus king of Macedon who married his mother beeing great with child vnto Lagus 2. Alexander for his singular valour exalted him Iustin. for when Alexander was in daunger at Oxydrace he onely of all his friends rescued him 3. He was the chiefe author of diuiding the Empire and tooke vpon him the gouernment of Egypt slaying Cleomenes the gouernour thereof and he ouercame Perdiccas that came against him with an armie 4. After the death of Perdiccas he recouered Phoenicia Syria and Cyprus to his kingdome and by his sonne Megas obtained Cyrene Pausan. in Attic. 5. He restored Pirrhus king of Epyrus to
his kingdome and Seleucus expelled by Antigonus fleeing vnto him for succour Hierome 6. But he was cruell to the Iewes inuading them vpon the Sabbath day when they suspected nothing and carried many of them away captiue but afterward he became more indifferent toward them giuing them the like priuiledge in Alexandria as the Macedoniaâ—s had Ioseph lib. 12. antiquit 7. He raigned well nie fourtie yeares after Alexanders death and died in the 124. Olympiad as Polybius writeth in the same yeare that Lysimachus Seleucus and Ptolome Ceraunus likewise ended their daies 8. He left behind him Philadelpus Ceraunus and other children beside Pausan. And this was the king of the South that is of Egypt which was South to Iudea which the text saith v. 5. shall be mightie 18. Quest. v. 5. One of his Princes shall preuaile who is meant hereby 1. Hierome whom Lyranus Hugo Card. Pintus follow vnderstand this to be Ptolome Philadelphus who succeeded Ptolome Lagi and grew to be mightier then he he had 200. thousand footmen and 20. thousand horsemen 15. hundred shippes of warre and a 1000. shippes for burthen so Hierome 2. Iunius in his commentarie and in his annotations is of the same opinion that the pronoune his hath reference to the king of the South before named and by Princes vnderstandeth sonnes as Dauids sonnes are said to be his chiefe Princes 2. Sam. 8. And they are called Princes rather then sonnes because they were not the legitimate sonnes of Ptolome And beside this philadelphus after the manner of the Persians married his owne sister Arsinoe so that the children which he had by her were rather called his Princes then sonnes Iun. in commentar But the words of the text following he shall preuaile aboue him or as some read against him G. B. will not beare this sense for these words doe implie a contention which should be the greater but this was not betweene the father and the sonne rather Ptolome the father made his sonne great beeing his younger sonne he appointed him to be heire of the kingdome and as Iustine saith resigned vnto him the kingdome beeing yet aliue thinking it to be a greater honour to be a kings father then the king neither can it be shewed that this Ptolome more enlarged the kingdome then his father had done 3. Therefore by one of his Princes is rather to be vnderstood one of his that is Alexanders Princes and that was Seleucus Nicanor who was king of Babylon and Syria which was North to Iudea so Melanct. Vatabl. Calvin Osiand Bulling Genevens B. Polanus 1. This Seleucus was of such strength that when a wilde bull as Alexander was sacrificing brake loose he held him by the hornes alone and staied him whereupon he gaue the hornes in his armes which doth fitly answer vnto the description of the fourth beast with tenne hornes c. 7. 8. which signified the kingdome of the Seleucians Appian in Syriac it is said that Seleucus and his posteritie had naturally the signe of an anchor in their thigh Melanct. 2. This Seleucus ouercame Antigonus though he were before by him expelled out of Babylon and he diuided his kingdome likewise he caused his sonne Demetrius to yeeld himselfe vnto him he also slue valourous Lysimachus who in Alexanders time being cast vnto a lyon slue him 3. He much enlarged his kingdome he raigned ouer Babylon and Media Mesopotamia Armenia Cappadocia and ouer the Persians Parthians Arabians Bactrians Hyrcanians and possessed all from the borders of Phrygia euen vnto the riuer Indus and passing ouer that riuer he likewise warred with Sandracotus king of the Indians neuer any possessed more countries in Asia then this Seleucus onely Alexander excepted Polan 4. He builded many goodly cities sixteene of them he called after his fathers name Antiochia sixe by his mothers name Laodicea nine after his owne name Seleucia three by his wiues name Apamea and one Stratonica by his other wiues name the most famous of these cities which afterward continued were two called by the name Seleucia one by the Mediterranean sea the other by the riuer Tygris Laodicea in Phoenicia Antiochia vnder Libanus and Apamea in Syria Many other cities he called by Greeke or Macedonian names as Berrhea Edessa Perinthus Maronea Callipolis Achaia Pella Amphipolis Arethusa Cholcis Larissa Apollonia In Parthia Sotera Calliope Hecatompolis Achaia in India Alexandropolis in Scythia Alexandrescota So that Seleucus dominion was mightier and larger then the kings of the South H. Br. in Daniel 5. This Seleucus was somewhat equall and fauourable toward the Iewes he did enfranchise them in all his cities which he builded in Asia and Syria with the same priuiledges which the Macedonians had Ioseph lib. 12. c. 3. which he did to make them his friends against Ptolome Soter 6. But at length he was circumvented and slaine by Ptolome Ceraunus brother to Ptolome Philadelphus Melancthon 19. Quest. That this kingdome of the North is the same which Ezekiel calleth Gog and Magog That Ezekiel c. 38. and Daniel here agree in their description of the same kingdome may appeare by these reasons 1. because the kingdome of Gog is also there called the kingdome of the North Ezek. 38. 15. Come from thy place out of the North parts thou and much people with thee and here also he is called the king of the North. 2. The nations which doe accompanie Gog as Magog Meshech Gomer Togarmah Pharas Put the â—â—ebrews themselues vnderstaÌ„d to be the nations inhabiting Cappadocia Galatia Iberia Armenia all which were vnder the command and obedience of the king of the North. 3. The building of cities thoroughout those countries and the calling of them by the names of the Seleucians and their kinted are euident arguments of the foueraigntie which they had ouer those nations so that we neede seeke no further for that great Gog whome Ezekiel speaketh of 4. And further as Ezekiel prophesieth c. 38. 23. that after the ouerthrow of Gog the Lord would be magnified and sanctified among many nations which was performed by the comming of the Messias so it came to passe for not long after the destruction of this kingdom of the North and the ende of that familie of the Seleucians Christ came into the world And this is the common opinion of the Hebrewes as Ab. Ezra and Kimhi testifie that after the ouerthrow of Gog Messiah should â—aigne 5. Wherefore seeing this Prophesie is fulfilled alreadie they are deceiued which deferre the fulfilling of Ezekiels prophesie vntill the ende of the world wherein they giue great aduantage vnto the Iewes who thinke that their Messiah when he commeth shall vanquish the power of Gog and Magog H. Br. in Daniel 20. Quest. Of the first variance betweene the king of the South and the king of the North and of their ioyning together againe v. 6. In the ende of the yeares they shall be ioyned together againe 1. It is euident then that first the league made betweene the first kings of the
make but 70. persons to descend into Egypt with Iaakob to answer vnto the 70. languages which they thinke to haue beene spread ouer the earth Gen. 10. Hierome thinketh that the speciall principles of our faith they either omitted in their translation or interpreted after an other manner to the intent to conceale the secrets of their faith 2. Ireneus Iustinus Chrysostome Hilarie Augustine doe ascribe verie much vnto this translation and thinke that the interpreters were put into so many seuerall celles and yet agreed together except only in some certaine places But Hierome praefat in pentateâ—â— thinketh that to be a fable of their 70. celles at Alexandria 3. But there is great vncertaintie beside 1. Hierome writeth that it is the generall opinion of the Iewes that the Septuag onely translated the 5. bookes of Moses in 5. cap. Ezech. 2. And there were diuerse copies of the Septuagint Alexandria and all Egypt followed Hesychius copie Constantinople and all vnto Antioch vsed Lucianus edition And the middle Prouinces betweene them preferred the translation amended by Origen and set forth by Pamphilus Hierome praefat in Paralip 4. And beside the translation of the Septuag whereof there were so many editions there were other translations of the Scriptures into the Greeke tongue as by Aquila Symmachus Theodotian wherefore in so great varietie and vncertaintie of translations the most sure way is to haue recourse vnto the originall as Hierome and Augustine doe well aduise ex Bulling Quest. 23. Who was the bud of her rootes v. 7. and of his exploits 1. Theodoret giueth this interpretation here these warres here prophecied of he vnderstandeth of the warres betweene Ptolomeus Philopator and Antiochus the great by one of his captaines before spoken of v. 6. he would haue vnderstood Scopas generall of Philopators armie who wunne diuerse places out of Antiochus iurisdiction and ioyned them to his kingdome After this Ptolome gaue his daughter in mariage vnto Antiochus but she was returned home againe yet there came a bud of her she had a sonne that became an enemie vnto her father Contra. This exposition cannot stand 1. the warres betweene Antiochus the great and Philopator are afterward spoken of in this chapter 2. It is vnlike that one of his captaines should be said to be greater then the king himselfe seeing all his endeauour was to aduance the honour and dominion of the king 3. neither did the king of Egypt giue his daughter to Antiochus the great but he gaue his daughter Cleopatra in mariage to Ptolome Epiphanes 4. beside this bud here spoken of inuadeth the kingdome of the North whereas Theodoret vnderstandeth this bud to rise vp an enemie to the king of the South 2. This then is the true interpretation 1. This bud of her that is Berenices rootes was Ptolome surnamed Euergetes her naturall and Germane brother who rose vp to reuenge his sisters death 2. He came with an armie and invaded Syria and wunne the strong holds many cities abhorring the cruell fact and parricide of Callinicus reuolted and submitted themselues to Ptolome who tooke possession of the countrey and caused himselfe to be crowned king 3. but hearing of some commotion in Egypt he returned and carried away with him many nobles captiues and a verie great spoile beside 40. thousand talents of gold and many pretious vessels and 2500. images of their gods and among them those which Cambyses before had carried out of Egypt whereupon the superstitious Egyptians called him Euergetes benefactor Hierome 3. After Ptolome was returned Seleucus prepared a great nauie which was ouerwhelmed in the Sea and he himselfe hardly escaped with a fewe of his companie hauing nothing left of all that great preparation in so much that his case was pitied of those which before had reuolted from him Then he craued aid of Antiochus Hierax his brother which Ptolome perceiuing made peace with Seleucus for 10. yeares Oecol Melanct. ex Iustin. 4. Hierax seeing this then turneth his force against his brother Seleucus which warre tended to the ruine and destruction of them both for Hierax was slaine of certaine robbers and theeues and Seleucus died of a fall from his horse 5. All this beeing thus reported by forren writers Iustin. lib. 27. Polybius lib. 5. agreeth with this prophesie of Daniel both of the preparation and expedition of Ptolome Euergetes against Callinicus v. 7. his successe in carrying away much spoile and captiues v. 8. and his returne into his countrey v. 9. 6. But where it is said v. 8. he shall continue more yeares then the king of the North some referre it to the time of their raigne Calvin saith whom the Genevens followe that Euergetes raigned 46. yeares Oecolamp 26. whereas Callinicus raigned but 20. yeares but it is better vnderstood that Euergetes continued diuerse yeares in this victorious estate hauing the chiefe dominion in Syria Iun. Polan for this best agreeth with the former words wherein his victorie and prosperous successe is described And Polybius writeth that Euergegetes and Callinicus died much about the same time lib. 5. 7. Iâ— his returne which is mentioned v. 9. Iosephus writeth that Euergetes comming to Ierusalem did offer sacrifices vnto God for his great victorie and bestowed great gifts vpon the Temple lib. post aduers. Appion yet afterward he demaunded the ordinarie tribute 20. talents of siluer which was detained by the couetousnesse of Onias the high Priest Euergetes sent vnto him threatening that if the tribute were not paid he would diuide their countrey among his souldiers Then Iosephus Onias sisters sonne went in the name of the Iewes in embassage vnto Ptolome and pacified him and grewe in great fauour with him Ioseph lib. 12. antiquit c. 3. Quest. 24. Of the third battell betweene the king of the South and the king of the North v. 10. 11. 12. This battell is described in three parts 1. the preparation made by the king of the North and their diuerse attempts v. 10. 2. the resistance made by the king of the South with his good successe v. 11. 3. the euents that followed vpon this victorie v. 12. 1. The attempts made are either ioyntly by the two sonnes of Seleucus Callinicus namely Seleucus Ceraunus and Antiochus surnamed Megas the great in these words his sonnes shall be stirred vp and shall assemble a mightie great armie or seuerally by Antiochus Megas onely in the latter part of the verse First Ceraunus and Megas ioyning together partly to reuenge their father Callinicus and their grandmother Laodices death partly in hope to recouer Syria out of Ptolome Philopators hand who succeeded Euergetes whom some thinke he killed and therefore was called Philopator that is a louer of his father by the contrarie they first set vpon Ptolomies captaines which held Syria for Philopator But Cerannus passing ouer the mount Taurus to goe against Attalus who possessed the countrey beyond Taurus was slaine by the treason of Apaturius and Nicanor in the 2. or 3. yeare of
open force to inuade Egypt and the king of Egypt called here the king of the South prepareth to meete him with a great armie likewise this was the preparation But the successe was this the king of Egypt was not able to stand he is ouercome with his armie and the meanes which Antiochus vfed was this he corrupted Ptolomes captaines and counsellers with gifts who betraied Ptolomes armie euen his owne feed men and courtiers that liued vpon him should deceiue him v. 26. 2. The euent was this that after Philometor was ouercome he should make some peace with Antiochus but it was a fraudulent peace where 1. their intent and purpose is expressed both the kings hearts shall be to doe mischiefe 2. their dissimulation they shall speake deceitfully at the same table for Philometor feasted Antiochus and gaue him great gifts 3. but the issue was this nothing was effected or concluded by this peace for the time appointed of God was not yet v. 27. 3. The sequele was this 1. Antiochus returneth into his countrey with great substance partly by the gift of Ptolome partly by spoiling with his armie 2. In his returne he set his heart against the holy Couenant that is the people of God for he entred into Ierusalem beeing receiued by wicked Iason and robbed and spoiled the Temple though as yet he set not vp the abomination of desolation as is further shewed 1. Macchab. 1. 18. and 2. Macch. 4. 24. Some vnderstand this battell to haue beene fought vnder Euleus and Leneus Ptolomes captaines at which time Antiochus entred into Egypt robbing and spoiling and came to Memphis Iun. annotat 1. 2. edit Oecolampad Bulling But this can not be 1. this was Antiochus second voyage into Egypt 2. Macch. 5. 1. but that battell vnder those captaines was fought in his first voyage 2. at this time Ptolomes captaines were corrupted which could not be the foresaid Euleus and Leneus for they were slaine in battell 3. hitherto Antiochus had dealt by cunning and fraud but now he went about by force to raigne ouer Egypt 1. Macchab. 1. 17. which he did not attempt at the first for he had sent in peaceable manner before Apollonius to the coronation of Philometor 2. Macchab. 4. 22. 4. the kings now practised deceit one against an other it seemeth then that Philometor was of yeares of discretion but when Euleus and Leneus were slaine he was vnder their tuition this Hierome foreseeing that Philometor beeing a child could not practise any deceit or mischiefe against Antiochus thereupon saith that some will haue it vnderstood of Antichrist who should first ouercome the king of Egypt But Philometor was not now a very child in Antiochus second expedition he was somewhat growne in yeares Osiand for this happened in the sixt yeare of Antiochus raigne who beganne to raigne in the 137. yeare of the raigne of the Greekes and this was in the 143. yeare 1. Macchab. 1. 11. 21. Wherefore I rather follow Iunius interpretation in his commentarie with Polanus who referre the battell of Euleus and Leneus to the first voyage of Antiochus into Egypt 35. Quest. Of the third expedition of Antiochus Epiphanes against Egypt v. 29 30 31. Three things are here declared 1. his attempt he shall come againe against the king of the South and the time is set downe at the time appointed which was about two yeares after as may be gathered 1. Macchab. 1. 30. Bulling then entring into Egypt and hauing taken Memphis Philometor fled to his younger brother Physcon to Alexandria and thither Antiochus followed and besieged the citie Ioseph l. 12. c. 6. 2. Then the successe is shewed not to be like vnto the former it should not be as at the first and as at the last for so are the words not the last shall not be as at the first Geneuens for two expeditions or voiages are mentioned before then the reason is shewed of this crosse successe he shall be staied by the Romanes which arriued there in shippes of Cilicia called the shippes of Chittim for Ptolome had sent vnto the Romanes for aid who sent Popilius or as some call him Pompilius who in their name should charge Antiochus to depart who arriuing at Alexandria found Antiochus vpon the shore who first would haue saluted Popilius with a kisse being of his old acquaintance in Rome would with flattering words haue put off that matter for which Popilius came and haue craued some time to consider of it But the couragious Romane bid him leaue off his trifling and vpon the sand did with his rod make a circle before Antiochus requiring his present answear before he went from that place who though much against his will there yeelded himselfe to obey his embassage and therefore it is said in the text he shall be sorie and returne thus Hierom. out of Iustin. lib. 34. the same is reported by Florus in epitom lib. 45. 3. The euent was this that this cruell Tyrant beeing disappointed of his hope in Egypt shall freat against the holy couenant for in his returne he entred into Ierusalem beeing receiued in peaceable manner at the first but afterward he made hauocke of the citie put them to the sword caused the daily sacrifice to cease and set vp the abhomination of desolation a filthie idol in the Temple and burnt the bookes of the lawe as is declared 1. Mac. 1. 57. 58. And the meanes is shewed also how he compassed this his wicked purpose he had inelligence by those which did forsake the holy coueuant he was brought in by the wicked counsell and practise first of Iason then of Menelaus 2. Macchab. 4. Iunius Polanus Oecolampadius Quest. 36. Of the meaning of the word Chittim v. 30. 1. Here are two words vsed tziim and Chittim which some Hebrewes vnderstand to be the Italians and Romanes Hierome but the first word signifieth shippes it commeth of tzi which properly betokeneth a bird and so consequently a shippe which beeing vnder saile is like a bird that flieth 2. Iosephus whom Theodoret followeth and Vatablus vnderstand the shippes of Chittim to be shippes of the Isle Cyprus where was a towne called Citium where Zeno the Stoike was borne But the word Chittim is more generall then to be taken for one small Island and Cyprus was vnder the command of Alexandria which nowe Antiochus besieged and therefore the shippes of Cyprus could not repell Antiochus 3. Some take Chittim directly for the Romanes as Hierome so also the Chalde paraphrast and the Tharg Hierosol so interpreteth that place of the Italians and Romanes Numb 24. 24. the shippes shall come from the coasts of Chittim and subdue Ashur and shall subdue Heber But originally Chittim are not the Italians or Romanes for Chittim was one of the sonnes of Iavan the father of the Grecians as likewise were Elisha the founder of the Aeliseans or Aeolians and Dodanim of the Dodoneans and Tharshish of the Cilicians where Tarsus was all these were
their flesh was boyled in hoate caldrons The like report Iosephus maketh of that cruell persecution verberati diuersis cruciatibus fatigati c. they beeing scourged and wearied with diuerse torments yet beeing aliue were hanged vp vpon pearches the children which were circumcised were strangled and hung about their parents neckes lib. 12. antiquit c. 6. 7. And of these persecutions seemeth the Apostle to speake Heb. 11. 35. 37. they were racked c. they were stoned they were hewed asunder they were tempted or they were burned as Iunius and Polanus thinke it should be reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rather then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were slaine with the sword c. Quest. 42. Of the consolation of the afflicted Church of the Iewes v. 34. 35. v. 34. They shall be holpen with a little helpe The Lord forgetteth not his Church in their affliction but sendeth them a breathing time and some helpe to comfort them in the middes of their trouble This consolation here propounded consisteth of three parts 1. it is described by the adiunct the small helpe that shall be raised vnto them 2. by the ende wherefore God suffreth them to be afflicted namely to purge and trie them 3. by the circumstance of the time which shall not continue but so long onely as God hath appointed Concerning the first for the other two parts are plaine enough 1. the Hebrewes vnderstand this small helpe of some Emperours which fauoured the Iewes such were Seuerus and Antoninus 2. Some referre it vnto the time of Iulian who gaue the Iewes libertie to build the temple againe but he did it fainedly for he intended thereby onely the aduancement of idolatrie and the defacing of Christian religion 3. Oecolampadius interpreteth this little helpe of the fauour shewed by some Emperours vnto the Christians as Marcus Aurelius protected them and by those that should cleaue vnto them fainedly he vnderstandeth the heretikes as Cherinthus Menander the Ebonites with other who ioyned with the Christians yet were great enemies vnto the truth of Christian religion But all these opinions may be confuted by one and the same argument because here is a continuance of the same historie from v. 30. he which was repelled by the shippes of Chittim which were the Romanes is the same which persecuteth the Church here the Romanes are not these persecutors but they somewhat bridled and stayed the persecutor 4. Some further applie this to the last times of persecution vnder Antichrist that then the Saints shall resist him but by small helpe Hierome Indeede typically this Scripture may be so applyed but historically it was performed in the time of Antiochus as Pererius obserueth 5. Wherefore here there is euident relation vnto the Macchabees vnto Mattathias and his sonnes who beeing but an handfull and a small companie in respect of Antiochus and his armie yet God so prospered this small helpe that the tyrannie of Antiochus was somewhat stayed for the time and in the ende of the appointed time after three yeares and certaine dayes from the abolishing of the daily sacrifice which beganne the 15. day of Casleu in the 145. yeare 1. Mac. 1. 57. the Temple was cleansed on the 25. of the same moneth in the 148. yeare 1. Macchab 4. 52. Now while this small helpe prospered some as the text saith did but cleaue fainedly vnto them there were diuerse that as long as they preuailed which stood for the lawe would seeme to ioyne with them but if their busiâ—esse went not forward then they were as readie to take part against them and such we shall finde to haue beene amâ—â—g the Iewes in the time of the Macchabees as that storie maketh mention that were but false brethren Bulling Polan Quest. 43. Of Antiochus pride and the exalting of himselfe against God v. 36. And the king shall doe what him list c. In this second persecution which Antiochus mooued against the Iewes which consisteth of three parts first it hath beene shewed what ministers and instruments he should vse secondly what the faithfull should endure and suffer now followeth the third part what Antiochus himselfe should doe And his acts are either concerning religion in abrogating all religion both true and false v. 36. 37. and in establishing a newe religion of his owne v. 38. or such as concerne ciuill and politike matters vers 39. But interpreters doe much differ in the exposition of this Scripture of whom it should be vnderstood 1. The Hebrewes take this king to be Constantine the great of whom Ab. Ezra is not ashamed to tell these lies that there were but 318. which receiued the Christian religion which afterward he coÌ„pelled all Princes and people to embrace But all this is false he thinketh there were no more Christians but onely those 318. Bishops which were assembled in the Nicen Councel neither did Constantine coÌ„pell any to receiue the Christian faith but forbad the worship of Idols and protected the Christian religion but he was so farre from lifting himselfe vp against God that euerie where he commanded Churches to be erected to the honour of Christ in whose name he ouercame his enemies Some of the Iewes vnderstand this king to be Vespasian some an Emperour that should rise vp after Iulian who seemed to fauour them so well they agree together 2. Oecolampadius and Melancthon will haue this king to be the Pope and Turke who both are blasphemous against God but the Prophet speaketh but of one king neither is it like that the Angell breaking off at the persecution vnder Antiochus would immediately ioyne the historie of such things as should come to passe aboue a thousand yeare after for so many yeares and more came betweene Antiochus persecution and the beginning of the Monarchie of the Turke and of the tyrannie of the Pope 3. M. Calvin thinketh this place not to be vnderstood of any one king but of a continued gouernement which he referreth to the Monarchie of the Romanes not beginning at Iulius Caesar but at such time as they beganne to oppresse Iudea as first Pompey tooke the citie though he spared the Temple after him Crassus spoiled and robbed the Temple whose insatiable couetousnesse was such in those countries that he was hated of all in so much that when he was slaine they filled his skull full of gold and carried it vp and downe in derision The Romanes exalted themselues against God for they tooke vpon them to determine who should be counted Gods and Cicero in his oration pro Flacco speaketh basely of the God of the Iewes not holding him worthie to be compared with Bacchus or Venus and that Iudea beeing so often ouercome was hated of all the gods Tâ—us M. Calv. But although diuerse of these things here prophecied of may by way of analogie be applyed to the Romanes whose pride was into lerable and their superstitious religion a verie prophanesse yet they cannot well be vnderstood here seeing at that time there was no king
among the Romanes but here the Angel directly speaketh of a king and the inuading of the citie by Pompey was an 100. yeare and more after this which distance of time the continuance and coherence of this storie will not admit 4. Lyranius with other writers of that side Pererius with the rest and before him Hugo Card. doe vnderstand this prophesie directly of that Antichrist whom they suppose shall come in the end of the world and raigne but 3. yeares and an halfe and so Hugo a little before expounded that little helpe of Henoch and Elias which shall stand vp against Antichrist And to this purpose Pererius alleadgeth out of Hyppolitus how Antichrist shall send his mandates through the world to call together people and nations to come to worshippe him who shall cause to be proclaimed in their hearing quis Deus magnus praeter me quis potentiae meae resistet who iâ— so great a God as I who is able to resist my power c. But that this deuise of some singular man which shall stand vp in the ende of the world to be Antichrist is but a meere fiction is afterward more at large declared among the controuersies handled out of this chapter And beside it is not like that the Angel would ioyne together two stories so farre asunder 5. Some other writers doe so vnderstand this of the verie Antichrist the Pope as that they apply it not to Antiochus at all but thinke that Antichrist is properly described from hence to the ende of the prophesie of Daniel Osiander Pappus But it is one thing historically to interpret a prophesie an other typically to apply it 6. Now then that all these things were historically performed by Antiochus and are in the intendement of the prophesie specially meant of him thus it may be shewed 1. The time when all these things should be fulfilled is expressed c. 12. 11. the dayes are summed to a 1290. dayes that is 3. yeares 7. moneths and about 13. dayes therefore this prophesie could not be put off so long 2. The word hamelech this king hath reference to the former historie and the article ha is a note of demonstration pointing out the king before spoken of 3. All the other expositions bring vs to a time farre distant and remoote from the former historie of Antiochus but these things here described followe as the next in the consequent of time 4. Beside the Angel in this propheticall narration satisfieth Daniels desire which was to knowe what should befall his people but these things as the other expound them do nothing concerne the Iewes neither came they so much as into Daniels thought to enquire 5. The sequele of the storie answeareth to the prophesie for Antiochus did all this he aduanced himselfe aboue God and spake blasphemous things against him in defiling his Temple abrogating the sacrifices burning the bookes of the lawe he wrote also his letters that they should forbid the offrings and sacrifices and defile the Sabbaths and feasts and pollute the Sanctuarie and the holy men and to set vp altars and groues and chappels of idols and to offer vp swines flesh and strange beasts 1. Mac. 1. v. 47. to 51. and v. 57. 58. Thus ti is euident that Antiochus magnified himselfe against God see further Appendix following exercis 2. argum 3. Quest. 44. Antiochus impietie and inhumanitie further described out of the 37. v. Some take not this to be vnderstood at all of Antiochus but doe otherwise apply it the Hebrewes of Constantine and of some other Emperours Calvin of the politike state of the Romanes before the comming of Christ Melancthon Oecolampad of the Turke and the Pope some of the Pope onely Bulling Osiand some of Antiochus onely Porphyrius Pellican whose opinions are discussed in the former question But most of these will not haue Antiochus here vnderstood 1. because we doe not finde that Antiochus neglected the worship of all gods especially the god of his fathers Calvin for he set vp the idols of the Gentiles Lyran. 2. and whereas it is said he shall not regard the desires of women it is euident that Antiochus was giuen ouer vnto all carnall lust and licentious life thus obiecteth Pererius that these things can not quadrare in Antiochuâ— agree vnto Antiochus who was famous for his beastly and filthie lust and he set vp temples to Iuppiter Olympius and Iuppiter Hospitalis which were his fathers the Grecians gods to these obiections answer shall be made afterward now we will examine the seueral opinions 1. Ab. Ezra thinketh this prophesie to haue bin fulfilled in Constantine the great wheâ— he embraced the Christian faith and abrogated Gentilisme and Pagan idolatrie But Danieâ— saith not he shall abrogate or denie the gods of his fathers but he shall not regard them 2. Some applie this vnto the Turke who honoureth Mahomet before Christ the auncient God of Christians and preferreth Mahomets lawes before Christs Melancth Oecolamp But as Calvin well noteth voluit Deus sustinere animos suorum vsque ad Christi exhibitionem God in this prophesie doth intend onely the releefe and comfort of his till Christ should be exhibited 3. The same reason may serue against their opinion which thinke the Atheisme irreligion and new worship brought in by the Popes to be here described as Illyricus lib. advers primat Pap. Osiander Bulling Graser exercit 3. p. 185. all these shew how the Pope hath left the auncient faith and true worship of Iesus in setting vp other Mediatours and bringing in traditions making them equall if not superiour to the lawes of Iesus Christ so that in effect he worshippeth Christ but in name and shew onely All this may fitly be applied vnder the type of Antiochus to the Romane Antichrist but there is difference betweene the historicall and typicall sense 4. The Romanists as Pererius Vatablus doe here dreame of their imagined Antichrist that shall come before the ende of the world and grow into such pride that he shall cause himselfe onely to be worshipped as God But this their fantasticall conceit is reiected before qu. 43. 4. and shall be at large confuted among the controversies 5. Calvin vnderstandeth the Romane state who daily inuented new gods but in effect cared for none but at this time there was no king or Emperour of the Romanes as the Angel here speaketh directly of a king hamelech the article set before the word sheweth that one particular king is meant 6. Wherefore this was historically fulfilled in Antiochus 1. not in that he profaned the Temple and the God of the Iewes whome Antiochus the great his father honoured and gaue vnto the Temple great immunities Ioseph lib. 12. c. 3. for the God of the Iewes was not the God of his fathers that were idolaters 2. nor in compelling the Iewes not to set by the honour of their fathers 2. Maâ—chab 4. 15. for this must be his owne act 3. nor in setting vp the gods of the Grecians as
shall ayde and assist him as the Lybians and Aethiopians which shall helpe him to take the spoile of Egypt here then are in all these fowre particular members 1. of the battell betweene the king of the South and the North. 2. of the pleasant land 3. of Edom Moab and Ammon which escaped 4. of Lybia and Aethiopia that helped of all these how they should be taken there are diuers opinions 1. Some doe vnderstand all this of the Antichrist who as they imagine shall come in the end of the world 1. he shal be that king of the North who shal first subdue Egypt 2. and theÌ„ he shal inuade Iudea called the pleasant or glorious laÌ„d because of the miracles which were wrought there 3. Moab Ammon Edom shall escape because diuerse in that great persecution of Antichrist shall saue themselues there in the mountaines for these were hilly countreys 4. he shall take also Lybia and Aethiopia which shall first of all be subiect vnto him Hierome Lyran Perer. But this exposition of such a singular Antichrist hath beene refused before vpon these two reasons 1. because the Angel prophesieth onely of such things as should befall the people of the Iewes for whom Daniel was so soliicitous and carefull 2. that there shall be no such singular Antichrist whom they suppose to be one particular person is shewed afterward controv 2. 2. M. Calvin giueth this interpretation 1. that the king of the South and the North shall encounter with the Romanes for so Mithridates and Tigranes in the North had long warre with the Romanes and Cleopatra with Antonie in Egypt fought a great battell with Augustus 2. the Romanes shall preuaile and inuade Iudea also 3. But the hillie countreys of Moab Edom Ammon shall escape them or they shall not greatly regard them 4. the Romanes also shall conquer the Lybians and Aethiopians But this exposition cannot stand 1. because the kings of the North and South doe not ioyne together but it is said the king of the North shall come against him that is against the king of the South 2. here is no mention made of any third king or power beside the king of the North and South and he that is the king of the North is said to doe all that followeth in the next verses v. 41. he shall enter into the pleasant land v. 42. he shall stretch forth his hands that is the king of the North shall doe all this 3. Bullinger thus interpreteth 1. by the king of the North and South he vnderstandeth the Turkes and Saracenes which should come from the North and South with huge armies of footemen and horses and strong shippes 2. They shall inuade the pleasant land and many shall falk which he referreth to the holy warres decreed against the Turke by Gregor 2. in the Councell of Claromont which was the occasion of the ruine and ouerthrowe of many 3. Edom Moab and Ammon that is the people inhabiting those countreys shall ioyne themselues vnto the Turkes and Saracenes and so be free 4. The Lybians also and Aethiopians shall be confederate with the Turkes who shall ouercome Egypt and expell the Sultane thereof which was brought to passe by Selymus the great Truke But these exceptions likewise may be here taken 1. that this prophesie beginning with Antiochus is not like to end with the Turke and so the space of a thousand yeares comming betweene should be left vntouched 2. the kings of the North and South are not here confederates but they one fight with an other 3. the names of Moab Edom Ammon and their generation were extinguished before the Turkes Monarchie beganne this prophesie then cannot be extended so farre but must be restrained to those times while these names and nations continued 4. Osiander and Pappus 1. by the king of the North vnderstand the Romane Antichrist by the king of the South Christ for as from the North they say commeth all euill so from the South that which is good and thus the king of the South that is Christ hath raised vp from time to time diuerse of his saithfull seruants which haue opposed themselues to Antichrist 2. by the pleasant land is vnderstood the Church which Antichrist shall continually afflict 3. Edom signifieth redde Moab the father Ammon my people and these three sorts shall be free from the corruptions of Antichrist the martyrs that are made redde with their blood they which depend onely vpon the mercies of God the father and the first of Ammon that is infants which are as the first fruites of the people of God 4. And though the Popes authoritie be not receiued in Lybia Aegypt Aethiopia yet he challengeth iurisdiction ouer them all c. But this exposition also faileth 1. the king of the North and South are literally to be taken as before in the rest of this chapter and who seeth not how improperly Christ is said to be king of the South if the Pope of Rome be the king of the North Christ borne in Ierusalem which is not South but East to Rome is vnfitly called king of the South And seeing he is king of all the world his kingdome must not be restrained to the South 2. by the pleasant land Iudea is vnderstood here as also before v. 16. 3. as Egypt and other countreys are here vnderstood literally for the nations so called so likewise must Edom Moab and Ammon be taken 4. Lybia and Aethiopia which neuer yet receiued the Pope are verie improperly said to be in subiection to him 5. It remaineth then that all this was historically fulfilled in Antiochus 1. the occasion of his comming agaiâ—st Egypt was this Philometor king of Egypt had an other brother called Physcon who sought to expell Philometor out of his kingdome with Physcon Antiochus taketh part and prepareth an armie to come and helpe him which Philometor vnderstanding here called the king of the South went against him and this is the battell here spoken of betweene the king of the South and of the North But the king of the North preuailed whose armie is compared to a whirlewind and to an ouerflowing water but the other is said onely to push at him This historie is touched by Florus in the Epitome of Livie lib. 46. and by Iustine also and Zonaras tom annal 2. 2. As Antiochus returned from the spoile of Egypt he tooke Iudaea and other countreys in the way and spoiled them also 3. But he spared the Edomites Moabites and Ammonites because they tooke his part against them and much molested the Iewes and therefore Iudas Macchabeus did fight against the children of Esau and Timotheus the captaine of the Ammonites besieged their cities and put them to the sword 2. Macchab. 5. Ioseph lib. 12. antiqu c. 11. 4. The Lybians also and Ethiopians which before were on Philometors side beeing allured by his faire promises ioyned with Antiochus and therefore it is said they were at his footesteppes or pases that is they followed
him as their captaine see further in the appendix Exercis 8. argum 2. answer 9. But thus it is argued against this exposition 1. Porphyrie who literally vnderstandeth this prophesie of Antiochus saith that these things happened in his 11. yeare whereas in the beginning of that yeare he died farre from home in Persia Perer. 2. After the Romanes by their Embassadour Popilius had discharged Antiochus out of Egypt he neuer returned thither againe Perer. 3. Antiochus neuer subdued the countreys of Lybia and Aethiopia as here it is said of this king Hierome 4. Neither had Antiochus all countreys in subiection vnto him onely these three excepted of Edom Moab Ammon Answ. 1. Though these things were not done in the 11. yeare of Antiochus as Porphyrius thinketh who was therein deceiued yet this letteth not but that this prophesie was fulfilled in Antiochus these things might fall out two yeares after he had set vp idolatrie and some two yeares or thereabout before his death Iun. annot 2. Though Antiochus did forbeare to invade Egypt after that discharge by way of hostilitie and conquest yet he might and did affoard his helping hand to one of the brothers against the other which might be taken for no breach of his promise made vnto the Romanes to depart out of Egypt 3. Neither doth the text say that he subdued Lybia and Aethiopia but as Hierome saith he passed thorough or by them and Hierome himselfe giueth this satisfaction that when Egypt was taken the countreys next adioyning conturbatae sunt were troubled But the word is bemitzghadaiv in his pases or footings that is Lybia and Aethiopia followed his footsteppes they obeyed him as their captaine 4. Neither are all the countreys of the world here spoken of for neuer any Conqueror subdued the whole world neither euer shall but the countrey adioyning to Egypt and Palestina felt Antiochus hand the meaning is that onely these three countreys in those parts and in that tract and circuit escaped his hands namely Edom Moab Ammon Quest. 49. Of the Lybians and Aethiopians where they inhabited v. 43. Because mention is here made of the Lybians and Aethiopians which should take part with Antiochus against the king of Egypt it shall not be amisse briefely to describe what nations these were 1. For the Lybians they were people that inhabited Africa but the countrey called Lybia was either taken for the larger countrey of Africa or for that part onely which was next vnto Egypt called Cyrenaica as Act. 2. 10. it is said by way of distinction the parts of Lybia which is beside Cyrene And that larger countrey and the remoter parts of Lybia are called in Scripture Phut as Nahum 3. 9. the Phutei and Lybians are named together they were so called of Phut one of the sonnes of Cham Genes 10. 6. in which countrey there was a riuer called Phut The Lybians then here spoken of were those people of the nearer Lybia to Egypt 2. Cush here is taken for Aethiopia so called of Cush the sonne of Cham but there were two countreys called by that name Cush or Aethiopia one was Arabia in Asia and therefore Zipporah Moses wife is called a Cushite or Aethiopesse Numb 12. of this Aethiopia was Zerah king that came against Asa with such an huge armie 2. Chron. 14. 9. the king of the other Aethiopia which was in Africa beyond Egypt he is not like to be because of the great distance of the place and there was no cause of hostilitie betweene them the Aethiopians here spoken of were of that larger countrey adioyning vpon Egypt see further Hexapl. in Genes c. 10. quest 9. 3. But Pintus by occasion of this word Cush which signifieth a Niger or blacke Moore will haue it taken not only for one that is blacke in the colour and complexion of his bodie but blacke also in manners and conditions according to that saying of the Poet Herace hic niger est hunc tu Romane canâ—eto c. this is a blacke fellowe thou Romane take heede of him This his opinion he would warrant by the title of the 7. Psalme Shigaion of Dauid which he sang c. concerning the words of Cush the sonne of Iemini which he taketh to be vnderstood of Saul the king who is called Cush because of his euill and cruell conditions Now for the meaning of this place there are diuerse opinions 1. Some thinke that this is vnderstood of Chushai Dauids friend who opposed himselfe to the counsell of Achitophel of this opinion are Basil Chrysostome Theodoret Euthymius with others but this cannot be so 1. His name is Cushat with other letters and prickes this is Cush 2. that Cushai was an Archite that is of Beniamin 3. he was Dauids friend but this was Dauids enemie of whom he complaineth in this Psalme 2. An other opinion is that this Cush was Saul because he was of Iemini that is of the tribe of Beniamin Thus expoundeth Ionathas the Chalde paraphrast as though Cush should be here taken for Cis the father of Saul of the same opinion that Saul is here vnderstood are Hierome whom followe herein Raynerus Isidor Brixianus Iansenius Vatablus Pintus with others But this we refuse also for when the word is taken for a Cushite or Aethiopian it is Cushi not Cush for so the Hebrewes ende their gentile names in I so Cushi signifieth a Cushite or Aethiopian Ierem. 13. 23. 3. Some doe here referre vs to Shemei that cursed Dauid 2. Sam. 16. Genevens as though he should be called by another name beside Shemei but there beeing no such thing mentioned in Scripture I leaue it as a bare coniecture 4. Wherefore it is more like that this Cush was some other of Sauls followers that gaue in false information of him vnto Saul as Dauid complaineth of such vnto Saul himselfe 1. Sam. 24. 10. wherefore giuest thou an care to mens words that say Behold Dauid seeketh euill against thee Iun. Quest. 50. Of the end of Antiochus and such things as immediatly went before In this last part of this propheticall narration there are first shewed the signes and forerunners of this cruell Tyrants ende and sudden destruction secondly his ende and ruine it selfe there ate three signes which went before as ominous accidents 1. the rumors which he heard from the East and the North. 2. his indignation and furie thereuppon 3. the planting of his tabernacle in the holy mount 4. then followeth his finall ruine 1. What these rumors should be there are diuerse opinions 1. Hierome vnderstandeth it of the fame and rumor of warres which should be raised by the faithfull and Chrstian people against Antichrist in the ende of the world But such an Antichrist to be one particular person to come in the ende of the world hath no ground in Scripture neither is the accomplishment hereof to be deferred so long vnto the ende of the world 2. M. Calvin still continueth his interpretation of the Romane state these
Antichrist shall in deede sit in the true Church of God for he shall be an enemie to the Church of Christ but he shall sit in the visible Church so reputed and he shall style and title himselfe by the Church As he taketh vpon him to be Head of the Church and to be Christs Vicar in earth Melancth Papp Fulke annotat 2. Thess. 2. v. 4. He sitteth also in the temple of mens consciences taking vpon him to haue power to forgiue sinnes and to make lawes to binde the conscience Bulling 4. Some that hold the Turke to be Antichrist may by the Temple vnderstand those places where sometime was the Church of God but the Apostle speaketh of the Temple that shall then be so reputed and taken at the time of Antichrists sitting therein 17. Controv. Of the prosperitie and outward successe of Antichrist As it is here said of Antiochus that he shall doe what him list and againe that he shall prosper so the Romane Antichrist hath both so taught that he is to doe what he list and he hath practised and prospered accordingly For the first Nicolaus the Pope thus writeth to Michael the Emperor à seculari potestate nec ligari posse nec solvi Pontificum c. that the chiefe Bishop can neither be loosed nor bound of the secular power and then he inferreth how that Constantine the Emperor called the Pope God and so concludeth nec posse Deum ab homme iudicari manifestum est it is manifest that God is not to be iudged of man c. And these are their positions in their Canons that the Pope is without law and that he is to be iudged of none and if all the world should determine any thing against the Pope yet the sentence rather of the Pope must stand and seeing he hath all fulnesse of power no man is to say vnto him why doe you so for his will standeth for reason distinct 19. 17. quaest 4. nemini And as this is their doctrine that the Pope may doe what he list and no man is to checke or controll him so he hath mightily prospered in his wicked proceedings as Antiochus did for Emperors Kings and Princes haue furthered his enterprises learned men haue and doe desend his errors All kingdomes almost in the Christian world Vniuersities schollers haue applauded him So many Monasteries in diuers countries with their Monks and Fryers depended of him This is the prosperitie and externall happie successe which the Romanists doe boast of and Bellarmine among the rest maketh it a speciall note to know the true Church by but as Antiochus prosperous successe against Christs Church was no signe of Gods fauour toward him no more is it in the kingdome of Antichrist But I will here stay a while a little further yet to sift and examine this point 18. Controv. That externall happines is not a sure note of the Church Bellarmine making externall felicitie a note of the Church giueth these instances of the good successe of the Romanists in their battells 1. In the time of Innocentius the 3. the Catholikes in France with an armie of 8000. conquered an 100. thousand of the Albigenses Aemil. lib. 6. hist. Francor 2. Anno 1531. the Helvetian Papists had fiue conflicts with the Helvetian Protestants and still had the better 3. Charles the 5. ann 1547. obtained a miraculous victorie against the Protestant Princes in Germanie 4. In France and the low countries the Papists haue had many victories not without miracle and the Protestants seldome had the better 1. Ans. These instances produced by Bellarmine are false as shall now appeare in the particular examination of them 1. Mathias Parisiens reporteth farre otherwise of that battell writing that Lewes the French king died in the siege of Avenion and that his sonne hauing the leading of a great armie against the Albigenses was ouercome ab exiguis copijs of a few small bands And this is like to be the truer report for it seemeth not probable that the persecuted Church of the Albigenses could set forth such an huge armie 2. The Popish Helvetians had not so many battells with the Protestants there was but one battell and a skirmish the Popish sort had the better hauing the aduantage of the higher ground neither was it such a great victorie for they were glad to aske peace and to compound the matter vpon equall conditions 3. It was no miracle for Charles the 5. to preuaile in that battell setting vpon Duke Fredericke on a sudden and some of his confederates hauing forsaken him neither did the Emperor long enioy that victorie for he was not long after by Mauritius who ayded him against Duke Frederike chased out of Germanie for the wrongs offered vnto Philip the Lantgraue and neuer after that returned he into Germanie againe 4. Of the successe of the battells in France and low Germanie they haue no cause to brag Henrie the 4. â—ow king of France and Navarre when he professed and maintained the Gospel was alwaies superiour in battell and how the warres haue prospered on the Protestants sides in the low countries no man is ignorant So that if the goodnes of the cause is to be esteemed by the good successe if they had no other arguments to defend themselues this might plead for them that God hath aboue these 30. yeares vpheld that small countrey miraculously against all the power of Spaine But they haue diuers reasons besides which may iustifie their warres against the king of Spaine 1. The breaking of their priuiledges by the Duke of Albanie 2. the vnreasonable exacting of tribute vpon things which were sold 3. the vniust execution of diuers both noble and others 4. the setting of garrisons of strangers in their cities 5. the building of castles and sconces 6. the constituting of Iudges of the Spanyards and not of their owne countrey 7. the generall restraining of their libertie Polan p. 1070. 8. beside the bringing in among them of a strange religion 2. Now that outward prosperitie is not a signe of Gods fauour or a marke whereby to discerne the Church it is euident by the example of Antiochus here who mightily prospered in his wicked attempts against the people of God So also Nebuchadnezzer preuailed against Ierusalem and destroied the very Temple All the tribes of Israel beeing assembled together against the children of Beniamin hauing the better cause yet were twice ouercome Iudg. 20. God then in suffering his Church to be for a time afflicted and oppressed doth not thereby testifie his fauour toward their oppressors but doth rather shew his wrath against his owne people for their sinnes which was the cause that Antiochus prospered whome the Lord vsed as his scourge as it is here saide till wrath be accomplished that is Gods wrath kindled against his people And the same is one of the reasons why the Lord shall suffer Antichrist to rage in the world whereof more shall be here inserted in the next
God Mauzzim that is of munitions namely the idol of Iupiter Olympius into the Temple and guarded him about with munitions and garisons such an idol as his fathers neuer knewe so likewise the Romane Antichrist hath brought in a newe kind of images into the Church as one of them obtained of Phocas the Emperour the Church of Gentile idols called Paentheon in Rome and set vp the images of Saints in stead thereof likewise they doe make the virgin Marie their Ladie and goddesse making her their Mediatrix and offring vp prayers consecrating Churches vnto her And thus they haue framed vnto themselues a newe goddesse whom their fathers knewe not But the most famous idol of all is their newe deuise of transubstantiation and of their breaden god and their idolatrous sacrifice of the Masse wherein they commit many profanations 1. They giue vnto euerie Priest power to make the bodie of Christ and therein thinke them more worthie then the Virgin Marie for she was conceiued but once with the holy flesh of Christ but they doe make it daily 2. they detract from the vertue efficacie of Christs alsufficient sacrifice vpon the crosse in adding as a supplement thereof their daily vnbloodie sacrifice as they call it of the Masse 3. they ascribe vnto the Masse such vertue as that thereby they thinke the soules to be deliuered out of purgatorie 4. they hold that the Masse is auaileable ex opere operato by the verie externall worke without the good intention faith or preparation in them to whom it is applye 5. They carrie their impanate god about in procession requiring adoration with knocking kneeling lifting vp the hands to be yeelded vnto it 6. And they make their Masse a generall remedie not onely against all spirituall but temporall euills and calamities and a meane to obtaine both spirituall and temporall blessings as health of bodie good successe in any businesse victorie in warre good speed in mariage matters in battell in nauigation and such like whence they haue deuised so many kinds of votiue Masses as they are called as for peace for raine for faire weather for women in trauaile for those which are vpon their iourney against the pestilence lightening and such like All which are newe brought in deuises neuer knowne in the former ages of the Church and this may well be called their newe come God Mauzzim which signifieth munitions for the idolatrous seruice of the Masse is the chiefe pillar of Popish superstition their munition and fortresse Pappus 25. Controv. Of the theatricall and pompous seruice with siluer and gold which Antichrist hath found out for his newe idol As Antiochus spared no cost to set forth his newe idol he bestowed vpon it siluer and gold and precious things and as Marcellus among the Romanes robbed all other Temples to set forth and beautifie the idol-Temples at Rome So the Romane Antichrist with all externall pompe outward glorie and glittering shewe of siluer and gold doth adorne and beautifie this his new coined seruice And how all their religion consisteth in nothing els but in an outward shew and vaine-glorious pompe it is euident in these three things in their persons Churches and solemnities First for their persons they count them good Catholikes that obserue their outward rites and ceremonies though they haue no good motion and instinct at all as if they be in their baptisme exorcised anealed afterward confirmed with chrisme and keepe fasting daies be sprinkled with holy water and ashes creepe to the crosse be confessed at Easter kisse the pax goe in pilgrimage offer to their idols and when they die be anealed and carried to the graue with tapers and dirges they thinke they haue performed all offices of Christianitie Concerning their Churches there is no preaching or very seldome and that to small edifying no singing of Psalmes or praying with vnderstanding but all things are set forth to the eare in singing and sound of instruments and to the eye in adorning their images with siluer and gold and such like And touching their solemnities all their seruice is nothing else but a meere stage-play from one ende of the yeare to the other At the natiuitie of Christ an infant made of wood wrapped vp in swathing cloutes is carried vp and downe by boyes and girles In the festiuall of the three kings which they say came to worship Christ three apparelled like kings doe goe from doore to doore singing and begging with a star made of paper In the day of the purification candles are carried about and ashes are sprinkled on ashwednesday In lent certaine persons disguised goe vp and downe the streets whipping themselues the images in the Churches are cloathed in blacke as though they mourned the altars are couered On Palme Sunday an asse is led about and palmes carried before on the day of resurrection after midnight the Priest taketh the image of the crucifix out of the sepulchre and goeth about knocking at the Church doores and crying be yee lift vp ye euerlasting doores and the king of glorie shall come in and then the question is asked who is the king of glorie and the Priest maketh answer the Lord strong and mightie in battell he is the king of glorie and so they blaspemously ascribe that vnto an image which is due onely vnto Christ. Before the ascension day they haue solemne processions and then all the images of the Saints are brought forth and carried in shew on the ascension day one is drawen vp in a wooden tutret to the toppe of the Church and as if he represented Christ he crieth out I ascend vnto my father and your father and when he is at the toppe he throweth downe certaine consecrated hosts and while they are gathering them vp belowe water is powred downe whereupon there is raised a great laughter in the Church On the day of Pentecost the image of a doue is let downe from the top of the Church together with fire and a noise like thunder with this voice Receiue ye the holy Ghost On corpus Christi day the host is carried about in solemne procession with instruments of musicke and loue songs such as minstrels vse to sing at feasts to make ghests mertie And after this manner is the Popish seruice deuised to attend vpon their impanate God ex Polano But Bellarmine laboureth likewise to free the Pope of these imputations that this prophesie of the newe God Mauzzim cannot in any sense agree vnto him 1. First he reasoneth thus this Mauzzim is either Antichrist himselfe or the deuill whom he worshippeth he shall command himselfe to be worshipped and be a great sorceter and Magician but the Pope is none of these Answer 1. We will yeeld vnto him the proposition though indeed this place hath no such sense either to vnderstand Antichrist himselfe or the deuill by the God Mauzzim as is shewed before quest 46. 2. But both the parts of the assumption are true of the Pope for he
30. Controv. Of the fearefull ende of diuerse Popes As Antiochus came vnto a terrible ende he was eaten of wormes and his flesh fell away from him that he could not endure his owne stinke so herein he was a figure and type of diuerse Popes of Rome who came to an vntimely death Sabinianus who first brought in the canonical houres and the vse of tapers in the Church was frighted by a vision wherein Gregorie the 1. appeared vnto him whose books of meere enuie he thought to haue burned and smote him vpon the terror whereof he not long after died Fascicul tempor Boniface the 3. after he had obtained of that parricide and murtherer the Emperour Phocas that the Church of Rome should haue the principalitie before other Churches came home and ended his dayes in sorrowe and griefe hauing not enioyed his papacie aboue a yeare and 5. moneths Leo the 3. was taken by the citizens of Rome and imprisoned and making an escape went by stealth into Fraunce where he ended his dayes miserably hauing not beene Bishop full 20. moneths Pope Lando was suffocated by Iohn the 11. by thrusting a pillowe into his mouth Sylvester the 2. that obtained his papacie by the deuill when he had solemnized Masse in a chappell called Ierusalem which signe the deuill had giuen him that he should not die till he came to Ierusalem died presently and his bodie was cut into gobbets least the deuill should haue carried it away Naucler Iohn the 13. that had committed incest with two of his sisters was slaine in adulterie Iohn the 15. had his eyes put out by Boniface the 7. and was famished to death in the castle of S. Angel the same Boniface the 7. died suddenly a very short time after and his body was drawne with a rope by the feet through the streets of Rome the historie called fascicul tempor giueth this note here of the Popes note saith he that the Bishops of Rome are killed as in the Primitiue Church but they were no martyrs par poena sed dispar causa the punishment was like but the cause vnlike Benedict the 5. fledde to Hamburge and was there strangled in prison Benedict the 6. was taken by the citizens and strangled in the castle of S. Angel Gregorie the 7. by poison and other meanes made an hand of 6. Popes one after another to make a way for himselfe to the Popedome And he himselfe who so persecuted the Emperour Henrie the 4. was taken by Cynthius a citizen of Rome and imprisoned and afterward was besieged by the Emperor and at the last escaped into a poore village in Apulia where he died miserably Victor the 3. was poisoned in a chalice by a subdeacon and thereof died Paschal the second after he had stirred vp Henrie the 5. against his father was taken by the same Henrie and cast into bonds and so died in prison Adrian the 4. was choaked of a little flie and so ended his life Boniface the 8. who had beene a terror vnto Princes died madde in prison and bonds of whom it is said that he entred like a foxe reigned like a wolfe and died like a dogge Clement the 5. was poisoned Paulus the 2. who as Platina writeth exceeded Heliogabalus in riot and filthie pleasure through gluttonie and leacherie fel into an apoplexie Sixtus the 4. died of verie griefe that his warres were ended Alexander the 6. died of the same poison which his sonne Caesar Borgias had prouided for Adrianus Cardinall of Corneta Paulus the 3. that spent his time in filthie pleasure after he had heard of the death of his sonne Pertus Aloisius died in a peuish rage and crying out in despaire peccatum meum contra me semper my sinne is alway against me so gaue vp the ghost Iulius the 3. that belli-god died of a surfet and not without suspition of poison Pius the 5. that had like a wolfe sucked the blood of many of Christs lambes fell thorough griefe into a consumption and sucked asses milke but it helped him not Sixtus the 5. who so pursued and baited with his bulls Henrie the 4. now king of France died of poison whereas the king yet liueth and prospereth After him followed Vrbane the 7. Gregor the 14. and Innocentius the 9. who died all in a verie short time one after an other ex Polan Thus Antiochus miserable ende was a right figure and patterne of the like ende of the like Romane tyrants And as Antiochus tyrannie ended with him so at the length the kingdome of Antichrist shall be extinguished as it is prophesied Apocal. 14. 8. It is fallen it is fallen Babylon that great citie for she made all nations to drinke of the wine of the wrath of her fornications c. Thus haue I by Gods grace shewed how diuerse wayes Antiochus was a type and figure of the Romane Antichrist and so much of the controversies out of this chapter 6. Morall obseruations 1. Observ. The Angels assist Princes in the defence of the Church v. 1. I stood to encourage him that is the Angel assisted Darius in his godly purpose in sending the people of God out of captiuitie If the Angels assist infidels when they fauour the Church much more faithfull Princes for the speciall office of the Angels is to be empolyed for their sakes which shall be heires of saluation Heb. 1. 14. 2. Observ. Ambition and couetousnesse the causes of the ruine of kingdomes v. 2. By his riches he shall stirre vp all against the Realme of Grecia Xerxes who by oppression grewe rich and by his riches waxed proud and thorough pride mooued vnnecessarie warre warring against the Grecians with 800. thousand men was the occasion of the ruine and fall of the kingdome of the Persians for these warres continued still and though sometimes intermitted yet were not fully ended vntill Alexanders time who tooke occasion by those warres to goe against the Persians 3. Observ. God resisteth and punisheth the proud v. 4. And when he shall stand vp his kingdome shall be broken c. Alexander beeing lifted vp in minde for his great successe made himselfe equall vnto God when he heard that the Arabians worshipped two gods the heauens which did beare the Sunne and Dyonisius because he went with an armie against the Indians thought himselfe worthie to be the third god and sometime he would come forth like Iupiter sometime like Diana for this his pride and vnthankfulnes to God he continued not long beeing cut off in the 32. yeare of his age and all his posteritie and kinred his mother sister sonnes and wiues within a short time after his death were all slaine this is the ende of proud persons So it befell vnto proud Pharaoh king of Egygt who was drowned in the redde Sea and vnto Herod that was deuoured of wormes Act. 12. 4. Observ. Incestuous marriages vnhappie v. 6. The kings daughter of the South shall come to the kings daughter of the North. Ptolomeus Philadelphus gaue
mandates I will obserue with all my power and procure to be obserued of others they which are rebells as all schismatikes and heretikes vnto our Lord or his said successors I will to my power persecute and impugne Beeing called to a synode vnlesse I be hindered by some cononicall let I will be present the Apostles threshhold that is palace or Church the Court beeing at Rome if I be on this side the mountaines once euery yeare if beyond euerie third yeare will I visit by my selfe or my messenger vnlesse I be freed by the Apostolike licence the possessions belonging to my table I will not giue nor lay to pawne nor let out to fee farme though it be with the consent of the Chapter of my Church without the priuitie of the Bishop of Rome As God shall helpe me and his holy Gospels c. In which oath this is worthie to be obserued that the Popes Bishops are not bound by any promise or otherwise to preach the Gospell of Christ to feede his flocke to reade and studie the Scriptures but onely to be true vnto the Pope and to maintaine the rights and priuiledges of that Sea And thus it is euident how the Pope of Rome doth distribute the honours of the earth vnto his flatterers by a certaine compact and couenant Graserus p. 293. 294. Answ. 1. All this we graunt to be most true that is here alleadged and more too that the Pope doth not onely exact an oath of obedience of his Prelates but he doth euen sell them their prelacies Cardinalships Bishoprickes Abbacies and other preferments for momoney as is at large shewed c. 11. contr 26. 2. Yet notwithstanding this was historically performed by Antiochus who expelled the auncient inhabitants of Iudea and Ierusalem out of their possessions and parted their lands among strangers 1. Macchab. 3. 36. the Priesthood also was sold to Iason first and then to Menelaus for money 2. Macchab. 4. see c. 11. quest 47. in the ende The sixt Exercise Wherein is expounded the 40. vers which Graserus also contendeth to be vnderstood of the Romane Antichrist and not at all of Antiochus by these reasons Argum. 1. At the ende of the time shall the king of the South push at him c. Whereas Iunius vnderstandeth this literally of the king of Egypt Philometor who withstood Antiochus by force comming to aide his brother Physcon against him Graserus thus obiecteth 1. If Daniel here had meant by the kings of the North and South the kings of Syria and Egypt he would haue so expressed them by those names as the other Prophets doe and not by so generall tearmes p. 304. 2. This Iunius supposeth to haue beene done in the last yeare but one of Antiochus raigne but then he wanting money tooke his iourney into Persia there to gather tribute 1. Macchab. 3. 39. how then was he able to furnish himselfe with such great power to goe against Egypt 3. And seeing he had beene discharged out of Egypt before by the Romanes Popilius beeing sent vnto him it is not like that he durst attempt and aduenture to goe into Egypt againe 4. If Antiochus had lately made such a conquest in Egypt it is not like when newes was brought him in Persia how the Iewes had preuailed against his captaines that he would haue taken it so to the heart he might easily haue recouered that losse p. 307. 5. In the last yeare but one of his raigne Antiochus went into Persia which is quite opposite to Egypt neither did he send his captaines thither for he left Lysias with halfe of his armie to inuade Iudea neither did he giue him charge concerning Egypt p. 308. 6. And the king of the North here doth not offer battell to the king of the South but onely defendeth himselfe 7. Iustinus lib. 34. saith that after Antiochus was discharged out of Egypt by the Romanes reuersum in regnum ibi decessisse relicto filio impubere he returned into his kingdome and there died leauing his young sonne behind him after that discharge then he returned not into Egypt p. 309. 8. We reade but of two expeditions of Antiochus into Egypt in the second whereof he was sent out of Egypt by Popilius in the Romanes name he made not a third expedition pag. 303. Answ. 1. As though throughout this 11. chapter the kings of Syria and Egypt are not continually expressed by the names of the king of the North and the king of the South 2. The iourney which Antiochus tooke into Persia was after his returne out of Egypt from the which though he brought great riches and spoiles yet his treasure was wasted by his exceeding liberalitie toward his souldiers which farre passed other kings that had beene before him for he gaue vnto his souldiers a yeares pay aforehand 1. Macchab. 4. 28. 30. 3. It is not like he would after that discharge by the Romanes inuade Egypt by way of hostilitie and conquest yet as a friend to one of the brethren to aid him against the wrongs of his brother he might although he were discharged enter into Egypt or he might notwithstanding this discharge yet after practise againe against Egypt 4. It was so much the more grieuous to Antiochus to be foyled of the Iewes hauing ouercome the power of Egypt And Gods hand beeing then vpon Antiochus he was striken with such a feare that he knewe not how to bestirre himselfe but partly of greife of minde and partly tormented by the stroke of Gods hand he vpon that occasion ended his dayes 5. Neither doe we say that Antiochus made this conquest of Egypt at that time when he went into Persia but he had spoiled Egypt before and therefore he needed not giue any charge to his captaines concerning Egypt but onely concerning the Iewes 6. While Antiochus was preparing to come and helpe Physcon against Philometor then Philometor hearing thereof did also prouide to resist him which here is called pushing at him and then Antiochus came vpon him like a whirlewind so both may be true that first Antiochus made his preparation but before he gaue the onset the king of the South first prouoked him to battell 7. Iustins report is in some things imperfect that Antiochus died presently after he was charged by the Romanes to depart out of Egypt for after that he went into Persia 1. Macchab. 3. 31. Iustinus as well may faile also in the rest that Antiochus returned no more into Egypt after this discharge by the Romanes for Florus in his epitome of Liuies historie lib. 46. after that Antiochus had beene thus discharged by Popilius out of Egypt whereof he maketh mention in his 45. booke writeth that the embassadors of the king of Bythinia called Prusias complained of king Eumenes eum conspirasse cum Anitocho contra populum Romanum that he had conspired with Antiochus against the people of Rome it seemeth then that after this discharge Antiochus practised secretly against the Romanes 8. Antiochus made
as the Seleucians and Ptolomes had their originall from Alexanders Monarchie and the Turkish Empire is in the East not Southward from Rome who also are held to haue had their beginning from the Scythians who are a Northerne people 2. Concerning the phrase it is not so correspondent nor fitting vnto his kings of the South and North. 1. seeing throughout the whole chapter hitherto the kings of the South and North are vnderstood to be the kings of Syria and Egypt there is no reason to take them otherwise here especially seeing euident mention is made of Egypt v. 42. 43. 2. the king of the North here is described to come vpon the king of the South as a whirlewinde and to passe through his land and to carrie away much siluer and gold This more fitly agreeth vnto the Turke then the Pope for he hath rather fallen as a whirlewinde vpon Christendome whereas the Pope hath but pushed at him and attempted rather then preuailed against him Arg. 3. The circumstance also of the time here noted agreeth with the reuelation of the Romane Antichrist at the time appointed shall Antichrist come or as Iunius translateth about the ende of time which Graserus misliketh 1. This time the Ebionites therein consenting with Aben Ezra assigne vnto the raigne of Constantine when he building newe Rome in the East left old Rome vnto Sylvester then Bishop of Rome But this is their vaine conceit for Constantine had no such intendment to resigne the citie of Rome vnto the then Bishop there which afterward he bequeathed with the Empire of the West vnto his sonne Constance neither if Constantine had beene so minded was Syluester then Bishop there capable of so great a gift the most part of the citie beeing yet Pagans and Infidels As for that donation of Constantine it is found to be but a forged thing and of small credit and it is like as if one should imagine that the Duke of Venice should giue the citie of Venice to the Parish Priest of Saint Markes Graser pag. 326. to pag. 328. 2. But thus rather this time appointed may be scanned that as Antiochus rainged 12. yeares though not complete the sixe first yeares whereof Antiochus making a way vnto his tyrannie yet did not shewe himselfe such an aduersarie to the Church of God as afterward In the last sixe yeares he raged against the people of God spoiled their Temple and made hauocke of the Saints from which time namely the sixt yeare of his raigne which was in the 143. yeare of the kingdome of the Greekes the storie of the Macchabees taketh beginning 1. Macchab. 1. 21. So vnto these 12. yeares of Antiochus raigne who herein was a type of Antichrist doe answer the 12. ages wherein Antichrist shall raigne the first sixe ages doe ende at Gregorie the 7. if we beginne to count in the sixt age after the birth of Christ vntill this time the rest of the Popes made a way for Antichrist but then he shewed himselfe in his colours when as Gregorie the 7. excluded the Emperour from intermedling with the election of the Bishop of Rome and first prohibited the mariage of Ministers of this Antichristian practise of this Gregorie the 7. thus complained an 170. yeares after the Archbishop of Salisburge in the Councell of Ratisbone as Auentinus reporteth lib. 7. Annal. Hildebrandus primus sub specie religionis Antichristi fundamenta iecit c. Hildebrand first vnder colour of religion layd the foundation of Antichrist c. and then he proceedeth to shewe how he excluded the Emperor from their Pontificiall Councels and thus in the ende concludeth credite experto c. beleeue one that hath tried they will not giue ouer till hauing brought the Emperor to order pastoribus veris qui pascant oppressis c. the true Pastors beeing suppressed which should feed the dogges beeing taken away that should barke they make hauocke of all from this Gregorie then begunne the last six ages which answer vnto the last sixe yeares of Antiochus Graser p. 329. to p. 333. Ans. 1. Whereas Graserus misliketh Iunius translation at the ende of time whereas he saith he translateth the same phrase v. 35. and c. 12. 4. at the time appointed as Graserus would haue it taken here there is great difference betweene ghad gheeth ketz vnto the time of the ende that is the appointed time which phrase is vsed in the two places giuen in instance and these words begheth ketz in the time of the ende and v. 35. that phrase is expounded by an other word lamoghed vnto the time appointed If this then were to happen in the ende of time it agreeth not with Graserus coniâ—ctures for Gregorie the 7. came not in the ende of time there beeing toward 600. yeares passed since The Ebionites fansie together with some of the Rabbins we doe with Graserus reiect vpon those reasons alleadged and other weightie arguments beside that might be produced 2. In that he maketh Antiochus a type and figure of Antichrist it is as much as we desire to be graunted whence it will follow that Antiochus is here vnderstood which is before denied by Graserus for how els could Antiochus typically decypher Antichrist if he were not comprehended in this prophesie But seeing there is no mention made in this prophesie of the yeares of Antiochus raigne therein he can be no type of Antichrist And for euery yeare to vnderstand an hundred is not the vse of Scripture neither doth the casting of the yeares agree with Graserus coniecture for since Gregorie the 7. who attained to the Popedome about ann 1070. or there about there are expired about 530. yeares so that by this reckoning there should remaine but 70. yeares of Antichrists dominion which were too great boldnes for any to affirme Argum. 4. Graserus proceedeth further thus 1. this preparation with charrets horsemen and shippes made by the king of the North against the king of the South he vnderstandeth of the holy warres as they were called which were decreed by Vrbanus the 2. in the Councell of Claromont in France for the recouerie of the holy land against the Saracens which was tenne yeares after Gregorie the 7. which Pope Vrbanus beeing the author of those cruell and bloodie warres was tâ—ereupon called Turbanus because he thereby procured so much woe and trouble vnto Christendome pag. 334. 335. 2. Of Antiochus expedition against Egypt and the holy land this prophesie can not be vnderstood for he needed not to haue inuaded Egypt by shippe which is in the same continent with Syria neither could he by shippe assault Iudea ab omni maris imperio separatam beeing separated and diuided from all command by the Sea pag. 342. 343. whereas euery part of this propheticall description agreeth with those former warres attempted by the Christians against the Saracens for they were transported thither in shippes and first inuaded Syria and beeing thence expelled they praied vpon Egypt p. 344. 345. Ans. 1. Typically
them but betweene them and seeing here there is euident description of a place the words are to be taken literally not in allegoricall sense as Nahum 3. 9. art thou better then No full of people which lay vpon the waters whose ditch was the Sea c. 2. True it is that the Church of God is in diuerse prophesies resembled to a mountaine by allusion vnto the mountaine whereupon the Temple was built but to appropriate this to any particular place as namely to the citie of Trent in that sense is not safe for so the title of the true Church of Christ should be giuen to that Antichristian assemblie This may more fitly be applied vnto that Laterane Councel vnder Leo the 10. which was held at Rome which is situate indeede betweene two Seas Tyrrhenum and Adriaticum 3. If the Prophet had in direct tearmes expressed the Seas by their names it had beene an historie rather then a prophesie and it is euident that in Scripture that salt lake is called by the name of the Sea as Numb 34. v. 6. the Mediterranean is called the great Sea and the other the salt Sea v. 3. wherefore seeing we can find this prophesie to haue beene literally and historically fulfilled when Antiochus captaines pitched in Emâ—aus in the beginning of the mountaines as hath beene shewed at large cap. 11. quest 50. it is in vaine to runne to allegories Argum. 3. The words following also he shall come to his endâ— and none shall helpe him Graserus proceedeth to applie vnto the Romane Antichrist and sheweth the fatall end of his Antichristian kingdome to be at hand which 1. he doth gather by two arguments the great insolencie of the Papall Sea for pride goeth before a fall and the most desperate means which the Romanists vse to maintaine their kingdome their sophisticate doctrine and their perfidious and treacherous practises which beeing the chiefe meanes which are left vnto them it is euident that their disease is dangerous and deadly the meanes beeing so desperate pag. 462. 2. And further it is said none shall helpe him herein Antiochus in his miserable end was a type of the ruine of Antichrist who was striken with such a loathsome disease that his own friends did forsake him and could minister no helpe vnto him Such was the fal of Babylon as the Prophet describeth it Ierem. 51. 8. howle for Babel bring balme for her soreâ—f she may be healed So the sickenesse of Antichrist when God striketh him shall be incurable and remedilesse By two speciall meanes is Antichrists kingdome vpheld by the Iesuites corrupt seducing and by the seâ—ular arme afflicting the Church especially by the Spaniards But neither of these can restore vnto Antichrist the former glorie of his kingdome The first may be likened vnto the Assâ—ssines among the Turkes whose founder was one Alohadinus who inuented this deuise to encrease his sect he caused to be planted in a most fruitful valley pleasant orchards and gardens which all kind of carnall delight varietie of delicate ments with beautifull damsels to attend vpon them This beeing done this Alohadinus fained himselfe to be Mahomets companion and to haue receiued power of him to conferre Paradise vpon whom he would Hereupon he would make choice of the best witted and most goodly young men whom he with a certaine drinke would cause to be cast asleepe and then conuay them to that valley where awaking they should enioy al terrene pleasure then he would cast them into a sleepe againe and conuey them thence so they made report that they had beene in Paradise and by this deuise he drewe vnto him 60000. to be of his sect the like sleights doe the Iesuites vse to promise heauen and releasing out of purgatotie to those that will set afoote their wicked deuises But they notwithstanding labour in vaine So likewise the secular powers haue laboured to aduance the papall kingdome as Henrie the 3. in Fraunce the king of Spaine in the lowe countreys which warres the Prince of Parma confessed had cost the king of Spaine vnto the yeare 1585. sixe hundred tunne of gold The like attempt he made against England in the yeare 88. which he assaulted with that great nauie and armie the maintenance whereof stood him in 30000. ducates euerie day yet they â—aue missed of their purpose Thus Christ the king of his Church sheweth his power in abating the pride of Antichrist but he at once thinketh it not good to dissolue his kingdome to trie the fidelitie of his seruants and to take away securitie to this purpose Graserus p. 465. to p. 467. Answ. All this we willingly confesse may typically be applyed and that verie fiâ—ly to the Romane Antichrist so that the historicall ground be first layd in Antiochus which Graserus seemeth to acknowledge whose singular industry and iudicious application of this prophesie deserueth much commendation though he faile in the historicall sense And this shall suffice briefely to haue beene touched out of Graserus God be praised A Table of the questions THe prophesie of Daniel explaned Generall obseruations vpon the whole booke Of the diuers languages vsed in this booke and why Daniel writeth a great part therof in the Chalde tongue 1. qu. Of the author of this propheticall booke of Daniel 2. qu. Of the signification of the name Daniel 3. qu. Of the kinred of Daniel 4. qu. Why Daniels kinred is not particularly expressed in the text 5. qu. When Daniel began to prophesie and at what age 6. qu. Of the time when Daniel had his seuerall visions 7. qu. Of the whole time of Daniels age and time of prophesying 8. qu. Why Daniel is not mentioned to haue returned with the rest out of captiuitie 9. qu. Of the times wherein Daniel liued compared with forren Chronicles and of the memorable things which happened therein 10. qu. Of the excellencie vse and vtilitie of this booke of Daniel 11. qu. Of the authoritie of the prophesie of Daniel 12. qu. Of the obscuritie of this prophesie Questions vpon the first Chapter of Daniel 1. qu. Of the third yeare of Iehoiakim which is called the fourth Ierem. 25. 1. how these places are reconciled 2. qu. How this third yeare of Iehoiakims raigne is to be counted 3. qu. Of Iehoiakim and Iehoachaz what difference betweene them 4. qu. Why the king of Babel had such an enuie against Iehoiakim 5. qu. Of Nabuchadnezzer the king of Babel and how many there were of that name 6. qu. Of the acts exploits of Nabuchadnezzer 7. qu. Of the time of Nabuchadnezzers raigne 8. qu. Of the citie of Babylon 9. qu. Of the citie Ierusalem 10. qu. v. 2. What this phrase meaneth to be giuen into ones hand 11. qu. How Iehoiakim was giuen into Nabuchadnezzers â—and whether he carried him to Babylon 12. qu. Whether Daniel at this time went into captiuitie with Iehoiakim 13. qu. Why it pleased God that Daniel and others that feared God should be taken captiues 14. qu.
The meaning of those words which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god 15. qu. Of the land of Shinar or Shingar 16. qu. Of the god and idols of the Chaldes 17. qu. v. 2. What is to be commended what discommended in Nabuchadnezzer in carying part of the vessels of the Temple 18. qu. Why it pleased God to suffer that the vessels of the Temple should be carried away 19. qu. Of Ashpenaz the master of the Eunuches his name and office 20. qu. Whether Daniel may be prooued froÌ„ hence to haue beene an Eunuch in the first sense 21. qu. Who are vnderstoode here by the Princes 22. qu. Why the children of the Princes and nobles were taken captiues 23. qu. How the Lord performed his promise to Dauid that his kingdome should be established for euer 2. Sam. 16. seeing lehoiakim was giuen into Nabuchadnezzers hand 24. qu. Whether it were lawfull for Daniel to be taught the learning of the Chaldeans 25. qu. Of the Chalde language and the difference betweene it and the Hebrew 26. qu. Of the necessarie institution of schooles and the manner and order thereof 27. qu. Why other names were giuen them 28. qu. Of the signification of their names both the new and the old 29. qu. v. 8. Why Daniel refused to eate of the kings meate and of the diuers kinds of abstinence 30. qu. The causes which mooued Daniel to forbeare the kings meate 31. qu. v. 8. How Daniel should haue beene defiled with the kings meate 32. qu. whether Daniel euer after abstained from the kings meate 32. qu. v. 9. What fauour it was which Daniel found with the chiefe of the Eunuches not obeying his request 33. qu. Of Daniels request to the butler 34. qu. Whether Daniel tempted not God in setting a certaine number of daies 35. qu. Why Daniel did chuse rather to eate of pulse then of the kings meate 36. qu. vers 15. Whether the beautie and strength in Daniel and the rest feeding on this course foode were a naturall worke 37. qu. v. 17. Of the knowledge and vnderstanding which God gaue vnto Daniel and the other three whether it were naturall or supernaturall 38. qu. Whether Daniel and the rest learned the curious arts of the Chaldeans 39. qu. Whether it be lawfull to vse the arts and inuentions of the heathen 40. qu. Of the dreames and visions which Daniel had vnderstanding of 41. qu. Whether this gift of vnderstanding visions and dreames were in Daniel as an habit permanent and remaining alwaies in him 42. qu. Of the diuers kinds of dreames 43. qu. Whether there be any diuine dreames 44. qu. Whether there be any truth or certentie in dreames 45. qu. Of the causes of true dreames 46. qu. How diabolicall and diuine dreames may be discerned 47. qu. Why it pleased God by visions and dreames to instruct his seruants 48. qu. Why visions and dreames are often shewed vnto simple and vnlearned men 49. qu. Why dreames are not alwaies cleare and manifest but darkely and obscurely propounded 50. qu. what dreames may be obserued and by whome 51. qu. Whether in diuine dreames there is a free vse of reason and the will and the same acceptable to God 52. qu. v. 21. How Daniel is saide to haue beene vnto the first yeare of king Cyrus Questions vpon the second chapter of Daniel 1. qu. v. 1. How the second yeare is to be counted wherein Nabuchadnezzer had this dreame 2. qu. What Nabuchadnezzer this was and whence he was so called 3. qu. v. 1. Why he is said to haue dreamed dreames 4. qu. What manner of dreame this was which Nabuchadnezzer had 5. qu. Why it pleased God to send this dreame vpon Nabuchadnezzer 6. qu. v. 1. Of the meaning of those words And his sleepe was vpon him 7. qu. Of the foure kind of wise men whome the king sendeth for 8. qu. Why Daniel was not called and sent for among the rest of the Chaldeans 9. qu. v. 4. Of the Aramites language whether it differ from the Hebrew and be all one with the Chalde 10. qu. Why the Chaldeans spake in the Aramites language 11. qu. v. 8. Why the king saith they would gaine or redeeme time 12. qu. v. 10. Of the Chaldeans answer vnto the king 13. qu. Of the impostures and falshoods in the answer of the Chaldeans 14. qu. what the Chaldeans meane in these words Except the gods whose dwelling is not in the flesh 15. qu. v. 12. Of the kings rash sentence in commanding all the wise men of Babylon to be slaine 16. qu. v. 13. whether the wise men indeede were slaine 17. qu. what office Arioâ—h had to whome Daniel maketh this motion v. 14. 18. qu. v. 15. How Daniel was ignorant of the kings decree against the Soothsaiers 19. qu. v. 19. How this secret was reuealed vnto Daniel in the night 20. qu. Of the forme and order of Daniels thanksgiuing 21. qu. v. 19. How Daniel is said to haue blessed the God of heauen 22. qu. vers 21. How the Lord is said to change times and seasons 23. qu. v. 22. what secret things the Lord is said to discouer 24. qu. v. 22. How light is said to dwell with God wheras it is said Psal. 18. 11. he made darkenes his secret place 25. qu. v. 24. whether Daniel did well in staying the execution of the kings sentence vpon the wise men 26. qu. v. 25. whether Arioch lied vnto the king in saying I haue found a man 27. qu. v. 25. why Arioch named Daniel to be one of the captiues rather then of the wise men 28. qu. v. 26. How the king is said to answer no question being demanded 29. qu. v. 27. why Daniel denieth that any of the wise men could expound this dreame 30. qu. v. 28. whether God onely be the reuealer of secrets and things to come 31. qu. v. 28. What Daniel meaneth by the latter daies 32. qu. v. 29. whether Nebuchadnezers thoughts were the cause of his dreame 33. qu. v. 29. why it pleased God to impart vnto Nebuchadnezer this dreame 34. qu. v. 30. This secret is not shewed me for my wisdome whether Daniel by any naturall wisdome could haue obtained the knowledge of this dreame 35. qu. v. 30. why Nebuchadnezer could not vnderstand the dreame which he saw 36. qu. v. 30. Of the two ends why it pleased God to reueale vnto the king his dreame 37. qu. v. 31. of the vision which the king saw in his dreame the manner parts therof 38. qu. of the diuers kinds of signes of things to come and of which kind this image was 39. qu. what kingdoms of the earth are not comprehended in this vision 40. qu. v. 8. why the Chaldean Monarchie is compared to the head of gold 41. qu. Of the largenes of the Empire and dominion of Nebuchadnezer 42. qu. whether Nebuchadnezers dominion were at that time the greatest in the world 43. qu. v. 39. Of the second Monarchy described by
Of the meaning of those words According to the request of the holy ones 19. qu. of the meaning of those words v. 14. appointeth ouer it the most abiect of men 20. qu. Why Daniel held his peace for the space of an houre 21. q. v. 16. In what sense Daniel wisheth this dreame to the kings enemies 22. qu. That a tyrannical gouernment is better then an Anarchie or no gouernment 23. qu. v. 20. What is meant by hewing down the tree 24. qu. v. 22. How Nebuchadnezzer was driuen from among men dwelt with beasts 25. qu. How Nebuchadnezzer did eat grasse like an oxe 26. qu. How the kingdom of Babylon was gouerned in Nebuchadnezzers absence 27. qu. v. 22. what is vnderstood by 7. times 28. qu. Of Nebuchadnezers transmutation but first in generall of the diuers kinds of transmutations 29. qu. what manner of change Nebuchadnezers was 30. qu. How Nebuchadnezzers bodie was changed 31. qu. v. 24. How Daniel gaue counsel to the king to preuent this iudgement seeing it was determined 32. qu. whether Daniel did counsell the king to redeeme his sinnes by almes deedes 33. qu. whether Daniel spake doubtfully saying v. 24. It may be thy prosperitie may be prolonged 34. qu. whether Nebuchadnezer did follow Daniels counsell 35. qu. Of the greatnes of the citie of BabyloÌ„ 36. qu. whether Nebuchadnezer were the builder of Babel 37. qu. Of Nebuchadnezers pride in saying which I haue built for the house of c. 38. qu. what manner of voice it was which came downe from heauen 39. qu. The summe of the sentence denounced against Nebuâ—hadnezer 40. qu. v. 30. of the execution of the sentence vpon Nebuchadnezer he did eat grasse c. 41. qu. v. 31. After the end of what daies Nebuchadnezer was restored 42. qu. of the restitution of Nebuchadnezer 43. qu. That God onely is without check and not to be controlled in his works 44. qu. whether Nebuchadnezer were saued 45. qu. why Nebucdadnezer was saued and not Pharaoh both being in the same cause 46. qu. why Nebuchadnezer being thus conuerted the Iewes kept in captiuitie were not deliuered nor Iehoâ—akim released out of prison Questions vpon the fift chapter of Daniel 1. qu. Why this chapter is transposed and noâ— set downe according to the order of time 2. qu. Of the kings of Chalde which succeeded after Nebuchadnezer 3. qu. Of the diuers names of this Balthazar 4. qu. In what yeare of Balthazar 's raigne this historie fell out 5. qu. of the greatnes of Balthazar 's feast 6. qu. of the maner and order of this feast 7. qu. of the occasion of this feast 8. qu. who commanded the vessells of the Temple to be brought and how 9. qu. Of Balthazar 's prophaning of the holy vessels 10. qu. Whether Nebuchadnezer did not likewise prophane the vessels in laying them vp in his idols temple 11. qu. Of the blind and obscene idolatrie of the Chaldeans 12. qu. How farre it is lawfull to applie some things to prophane vses 13. qu. Of the fingers which appeared on the wall how they were caused 14. qu. whether it were the likenes of an hand onely and seene of Balthazar alone 15. qu. Of the manner of the apparition of this hand 16. qu. Why the hand appeared ouer against the candle sticke 17. qu. Of Balthazar 's sudden feare and the manner thereof 18. qu. v. 7. Why Daniel is not here called among the rest 19. qu. How it came to passe that the wise men could not so much as read the writing 20. qu. What Queene it was which came in 21. qu. In what sense Nebuchadnezzar is called Balthazar 's father 22. qu. of the Queenes oration to the king 23. qu. of the excellent wisdome and other princely parts in this old Queene 24. qu. of Belshazars speech vnto Daniel 25. qu. Of Daniels answer to the king and the seuerall parts thereof 26. qu. Of Daniels abrupt beginning in his speech to the king v. 17. keepe thy rewards to thy selfe 27. qu. why Daniel reiecteth the kings rewards 28. qu. why Daniel receiueth the like rewards from Nebuchadnezer and refuseth them from Balthazar 29. qu. VVhether Daniel after his refusall accepted afterward of these rewards v. 29. 30. qu. whether in these words he put to death whom he would v. 19. Nebuchadnezzars tyrannicall gouernement be expressed 31. qu. Of the writing and interpretation thereof in generall 32. qu. Of the interpretation by writing in generall 33. qu. why the first word Mene is doubled 34. qu. Of the meaning of the word tekel 35. qu. Of the meaning of the word Pheres 36. qu. Of the tropological that is the morall application of this vision 37. qu. why Balthazar commanded Daniel to be honoured hearing so euill newes 38. qu. Of the honours here bestowed vpon Daniel 39. qu. whether Daniel did well in accepting of these honours 40. qu. why Daniel exhorted not Balthazar to repentance as he had done Nebushadnezzar before 41. qu. v. 30. whether Balthazar were slaine at that time 42. qu. whether Balthazar were slaine the same night and the citie taken 43. qu. whether Balthazar was taken in Babylon 44. qu. By what meanes Babylon was taken 45. qu. By whom Balthazar was slaine 46. qu. By whom the citie of Babylon was taken 47. qu. who was chiefe in the taking of Babylon Darius or Cyrus and why mention is made onely of Darius 48. qu. Of the cause of this Babylonian war 49. qu. whether Babylon was at this time finally destroyed according to the predictions of the Prophets 50. qu. How long the Chaldean Empire and Monarchie continued 51. qu. Of the yeares of the raigne of the seuerall kings of Babylon Questions vpon the sixt chapter of Daniel 1. qu. what Darius this was which tooke vpon him the kingdome of Babylon 2. qu. of the diuers names which Darius had 3. qu. How Darius tooke vpon him the kingdome of Babylon 4. qu. when Darius tooke vpon him the kingdome of the Chaldeans 5. qu. Of the officers which Darius appointed and the reason thereof 6. qu. Whether Darius did wisely in thinking to set Daniel beeing a stranger ouer the whole realme v. 3. 7. qu. Whether Daniel did well in taking vpon him to beare office in an idolatrous kings court 8. qu. How the rulers failed in their purpose finding no fault at all in Daniel 9. qu. Of the edict and decree made to entangle Daniel the occasion thereof and iniustice therein 10. qu. Of the immutable decrees of the Medes and Persians v. 8. 11. qu. why Daniel did not stay the kings decree by his contrarie aduise 12. qu. Of Daniels constancie of praying with the circumstances therof 13. qu. How Daniels custome in opening the windows when he praied agreeth with our Sauiours precept Matth. 6. to shut the dores of the chamber in praier 14. qu. Why Daniel opened the window of his chamber toward Ierusalem 15. qu. why Daniel praied thrice in a day 16. qu. whether Daniel did well in this
Of the meaning of these words v. 12. the armie was giuen vp with the daily sacrifice by iniquitie 22. qu. Of the meaning of the word Palmoni v. 13. 23. qu. What Angel that was vnto whom one of the Angels spake 24. qu. Of the time prescribed v. 14. of 2300 dayes how it is to be taken 25. qu. When this tearme of 2300. beganne and ended 26. qu. When the kingdome of the Greekes so often mentioned in the booke of the Macchabees tooke beginning 27. qu. Why the kingdome of the Greekes is counted from the raigne of the Seleucians 28. qu. of the name Gabriel 29. qu. v. 16. Vpon these words make this man to vnderstand the vision whether Augels can giue vs vnderstanding 30. qu. How Alexander is said to be the first king of Grecia 31. qu. of the time when Antiochus Epiphanes should rise vp in the latter ende of their kingdome v. 25. 32. qu. The description of Antiochus and of his doings 33. qu. Of some differences in the storie of the Macchabees concerning the death of Antiochus 34. qu. Of the agreement of other persecutions of the Church with this description of Antiochus 35. qu. Why it is called the vision of the euening and morning v. 26. 36. qu. Why Daniel is bidden to seale vp the vision 37. qu. What kings businesse Daniel did v. 27. 38. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 27. none vnderstood or perceiued it 39. qu. The historie of Antiochus Epiphanes raigne abridged for the better vnderstanding of this vision Questions vpon the 9. chapter of Daniel 1. qu. What Assuerus this was whose sonne Darius is said to be 2. qu. of the yeares of Darius raigne and how this vision is said to be in his first yeare 3. qu. Whether in the first yeare of Darius the Chaldean Monarchie was dissolued and the 70. yeares captiuitie ended against the opinion of Ioseph Scaliger lib. 6. 4. qu. of the 70. yeares of captiuitie in what sense they are called seuen generations Baruch 6. 2. 5. qu. When the 70. yeares of captiuitie mentioned v. 2. tooke their beginning 6. qu. when the 70. yeares of captiuitie ended 7. qu. of Daniels prayer v. 4. to v. 20. 8. qu. How Daniel prayeth for the deliuerance of the people seeing it was certainely promised after the 70. yeares 9. qu. Of the properties required in the prayers of the faithfull obserued here in Daniels prayer v. 20. 10. qu. Of the apparition of the Angel Gabriel v. 21. 11. qu. How Daniel descerâ—ed this to be a good Angel 12. qu. Whether the Angels haue bodies 13. qu. Why the Angel came about the time of the euening sacrifice v. 21. 14. qu. Why Daniel is called a man of desires v. 23. 15. qu. v. 24. Seuentie weekes are determined How Daniels prayer is heard praying for the peoples deliuerance 16. qu. v. 24. How the seuentie weekes must be vnderstood 17. qu. Why 70. weeks are said to be cut out or determined 18. qu. Why this tearme of 490. yeares is expressed by weeks 19. qu. Why the Angel saith vpon thy people and vpon thine holy citie 20. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 24. to finish or rather restraine wickednesse 21. qu. Of the sealing of sinnes 22. qu. What it is to reconcile iniquitie 23. qu. v. 24. How the Messiah brought euerlasting righteousnesse 24. qu. Why it is called euerlasting righteousnesse 25. qu. Whether as Christs satisfaction for the punishment of sinne is imputed to vs by faith so likewise his innocencie 26. qu. Whether the iustice brought in by Christ exceede the iustice of Adam 27. qu. Whether it standeth with Gods iustice to iustifie vs by anothers righteousnesse and how that may be 28. qu. How the vision and prophesie was to be sealed vp 29. qu. Of the annointing of the holy one who is signified thereby 30. qu. Why Christ is called the holy of holies 31. qu. How Christ was anointed 32. qu. When Christ was anointed 33. qu. Of the obscurenes and difficultie of this prophesie 34. qu. Of the diuerse interpretations of Daniels weekes with an answer to the cauill of the Iewes concerning the dissension of our interpreters 35. qu. What Chronologie and computation of time is to be followed in the account of the 70. weekes which make 490. yeares 36. qu. whether the account of the Olympiake yeares be a certain direction for the vnderstanding of Daniels weeks 37. qu. Of the names and number of the Persian kings 38. qu. Of the vncertainty of the yeares of the Persian Monarchie and of the Persian kings 39. qu. That Daniels weeks do signifie a certain definite number of yeares 40. qu. That Origens account cannot stand beginning the 70. weeks at Adam and ending them at the destruction of Ierusalem 41. qu. That the 70. weekes must not begin before the peoples returne out of captiuitie 42. qu. That the 70. weeks doe not beginne in the raignes of the other kings of Persia after Cyrus 43. qu. That Daniels 70. weekes must take beginning from the proclamation made by Cyrus for the returne of the people 44. qu. Vnder which of the Persian kings Mordecai liued and of his age 45. qu. which of the Persian kings it was that renewed the decree for the reedifying of the Temple 46. qu. VVhat Artaxerxes it was in whose 7. yeare Ezra was sent and in whose 20. Nehemiah 47. qu. That Daniels 70. weeks were determined neither before Christs passion nor at the destruction of the citie 48. qu. That the 70. weeks ende not after the destruction of Ierusalem 49. qu. That the 70. weeks must end at the passion of Christ. 50. qu. Of the iust and exact computation of yeares from Cyrus first vnto the passion of Christ. 51. qu. Of the yeares of the Persian kings in particular to make vp the said summe of 〈◊〉 130. yeares and first of the yeares to the finishing of the Temple 52. qu. That Xerxes raigne was intermingled with his fathers in the beginning and with his sonnes in the end 53. qu. Of the particular yeares of the second part of the Persian Monarchie from the finishing of the Teple to the end therof 54. qu. Of the iust computation of the yeares of the Grecian Monarchie 55. qu. The seuerall interpretations of Daniels 70. weekes dispersedly handled before summed together 56. qu. Why the 7. weeks are seuered from the 62. v. 25. vnto the Messiah shall be 7. weekes and 62. weekes 57. qu. Whether these 7. weekes must be â—ted before the 62. weeks or after 58. qu. When this tearme of 7. weeks that is 49. yeares beganne and when it ended 59. qu. Whether that place Iohn 2. 20. that the Temple was 46. yeares in building haue any agreement with these 7. weekes 60. qu. Vnto Messiah the Prince shall be 7. weekes v. 25. who is here vnderstood by the Messiah 61. qu. The street shall be built againe in a troublesome time how this was fulfilled 62. qu. Of the 62. weeks how they are to
King 24. 25. Ierem. 52. And of Nebuchadnezzars expedition against Cyrus Ezekiel maketh mention c. 26. to c. 30. In the 25. yeare of Nebuchadnezzars raigne he subdued Egypt and remooued all the Iewes that were thither fledde to Babylon Pererius addeth further that in the 25. yeare of his raigne he had that vision of the image c. 2. but that was rather in the 5. yeare of his raigne as is before shewed quest 6. generall After this he set vp the great golden image c. 3. and was translated from the companie of men and liued among bruite beasts for the space of seuen yeares cap. 4. then he was restored to his kingdome which he enioyed peaceably to the ende of his dayes Pere Quest. 7. Of the time of Nebuchadnezzars raigne 1. Iosephus thinketh that Nebuchadnezzar raigned 43. yeares so also Eusebius and Pererius consenteth wherein he doth not much varie from the yeares of his raigne which may be collected out of Scripture 2. Some thinke that all his raigne made vp 45. yeares Bulling rather 44. betweene both for in the 8. yeare of his raigne he tooke Iechonias prisoner in the 37. yeare of whose captiuitie Euilmerodach the sonne of Nebuchadnezzar began to raigne who lift vp the head of Iehoiachin out of prison these two numbers put together 8. and 37. make 45. and one yeare must be deducted because Nebuchadnezzar is supposed to haue died in the 36 yeare of Iechoniahs captiuitie the last yeare of his raigne and so the whole summe of yeares remaineth 44. Quest. 8. Of the citie of Babylon 1. The occasion of the first founding of this citie and of the name therof is declared Gen. 11. so called first Babel of the confusion of tongues and afterwards Babylon the countrie about Babylonia 2. Nimrod who was the first king or tyrant rather after the flood in which sense he is called a mightie hunter is held to haue beene the first founder of Babylon which was afterward enlarged by Semiramis whom Iulius Solinus and Diodorus Siculus whom Hierome followeth thinke to haue beene the first builder of Babylon but she onely enlarged it and raised vp the walls 3. In this citie and the countrie thereabout the Iewes were held in captiuitie 70. yeares which tearme beeing the stinted time of mans life Psal. 90. 10. sheweth that man during the time of his life and aboade in this world is but a captiue and stranger as Iaakob called his life a pilgrimage Gen. 47. 9. Pintus 2. Polanus thinketh there were 3. cities of this name Babylon one in Assyria whereof mention is made 2. king 17. 24. an other in Chaldea which is here called the land of Sennaar and the third in Egypt which is now called Alcayr the seate of the Sultanes of Egypt But I thinke the receiued opinion is more probable that there were onely two Babylons one in Chaldea the other in Egypt or in the confines of Arabia whereof Raphael Volateran treateth lib. 12. now called Cayro Pintus that Babel mentioned 2. King 17. 24. from whence the king of Ashur brought some to inhabite Samaria is Babylon in Chaldea which was then subiect to the king of Ashur 3. Stephanus also is deceiued who thinketh this Babylon to be the same citie which was called Seleucia built by Seleucus Nicanor which was indeede built not farre off from Babylon some 300. stadia or furlongs by which occasion Babylon became desolate and not so much frequented but they were not all one citie Polanus Quest. 9. ver 1. Of the citie Ierusalem 1. Ierusalem it was the cheife citie of Palestina first founded by Melchisedech as Iosephus thinketh who Gen. 14. is called the king of Shalem 2. It had diuers names it was first called Shalem Gen. 14. Psal. 75. 3. then Iebus of Iebusi the sonne of Canaan Iosh. 18. 28. afterward it was named Ierusalem which signifieth the vision of peace and last of all Aelia of Aelius Adrianus the Emperour who built mount Caluarie and diuers other parts of the city Volat. l. 11. 3. It was diuided into two parts the vpper citie where was mount Zion the city of Dauid and the Temple the neather or base citie which was vnder the hill Pol. 4. The citie Ierusalem is sometime taken in Scripture for the Church of God as Hebr. 12. 22. Ye are come to Mount Sinai to the citie of the liuing God to celestiall Ierusalem Pintus Quest. 10. v. 2. What this phrase meaneth To be giuen into ones hand v. 2. And the Lord gaue Iehoiakim c. into his hand c. The hand is diuersly taken in Scripture 1. As first to put the soule or life in the hand signifieth to put the life in danger Iudg. 12. 3. Iepthah saith I put my life in my hands 2. The hand signifieth a league or couenant as the giuing of the hand implieth the plighting of the troth as Esech 17. 18. He hath despised the oath and broken the couenant yet lo he had giuen his hand 3. It signifieth ministerie and seruice as Exod. 38. 21. These are the parts of the Tabernacle c. for the office of the Levites by the hand of Ithamar 4. The hand signifieth helpe and assistance as 1. Sam. 22. 17. Saul commandeth the Priests to be slaine because their hand was with David that is they were aiding and helping vnto him 5. To lift vp the hand against a place is to assault it and threaten against it as Isa. 10. 32. He shall lift vp his hand toward the mount of the daughter of Sion 6. To lift vp the hands is to pray 1. Tim. 2. 9. I will that the men pray euery where lifting vp pure hands 7. To wash the hands is to purge the heart and works from impuritie and vncleannes as Psal. 26. 6. I will wash mine hands in innocencie O Lord and compasse thine altar 8. To put the hand to the mouth signifieth to eate 1. Sam. 14. 27. as Ionathan is said to haue put his hands to his mouth when he did eate of the honie 9. To lay the hand also vpon the mouth is a figne of silence Iob. 29. 9. The Princes staied talke and laid their hand on their mouth 10. By the hands also are vnderstood the works labours of mens vocations as Eph. 4. 28. Let him that stole steale no more but rather labour and worke with his hands 11. To doe a thing with an high hand is to do it presumptuously Numb 15. 30. 12. To touch with the hand is to humble or afflict Psal. 32. 4. Thy hand is heauie vpon me day and night 13. But to giue into the hands of any is to bring vnder their power and subiection as Iudg. 7. 1. The Lord gaue them into the hands of Midian seuen yeares and so it is taken here Pintus Quest. 11. How Iehoiakim was giuen into Nebuchadnezzars hand whether he caried him to Babylon 1. Some thinke that Iehoiakim was bound in chaines and carried to Babylon as the Latine
ouer thy people and vpon thine holy citie citie of thy holines H. to restraine finish V. L. S B. G. but the word is cala with aleph which signifieth to restraine but calah with he signifieth to finish and to seale vp A. I. B. G. S. rather then to finish sinnes L. V. P. the word is chatam to seale to reconcile iniquitie not that iniquitie be taken away L. and to bring in euerlasting righteousnes and to seale vp the vision not that the vision be fulfilled L. and the Prophet I. A. not prophesie L. S. V. B. G. for nabi signifieth a Prophet not prophecie and to anoint the most Holy the holines of holines H. 25. Know therefore and vnderstand that from the going forth of the word to bring againe the people to cause to returne H. not to answer S. or restoare I. or to cause to returne and build that is to build againe L. V. for although the same word be vsed in the same sense in the ende of the verse the streete shall returne and be built that is shall againe be built yet it is there in an other forme here it is in hiphil which signifieth to cause to return and to build Ierusalem vnto Messiah Christ. L. S. the Prince shall be seuen weekes and threescore and two weekes and the streete shall be built againe and the ditch that is the compasse of the wall V. the wall S. B. G. in a troublesome time in the straitnes of time H. B. not in a short time V. or the time shall be euacuated S. 26. And after threescore and two weekes the Messiah anointed H. Christ. L. not the vnction or anointing S. shall be destroied slaine B. G. and not for himselfe Br. B. better then there shall be no iudgement that is fault worthie of iudgement in him S. or he shall haue nothing that is he shall seeme to haue no beautie G. or nothing to doe with Ierusalem I. or there shall be none to helpe him V. see qu. 64. the vulgar Latine thus he shall haue no people which should denie him and the people of the Prince that shall come shall destroy the citie and the Sanctuarie see the diuers readings qu. 74. and the ende thereof shall be with a flood and vnto the ende not after the ende L. it shall be destroied by desolations or extreame desolation is appointed L. V. 27 He shall confirme the couenant with many for one weeke and in the middes or halfe of the weeke he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease some read thus the halfe of the weeke shall cause to cease c. V. Br. and vpon the wing that is the Temple shall be the abomination of desolation L. S. better then by the ouerspreading of abomination he shall make it desolate B. G. or by the legions or armie of abominations making desolate I. or the destroier shall be vpon the wing of abominations V. see further for the best reading qu. 87. and 88. in the ende euen vntill the consummation determined precise consummation H. it shall be powred that is desolation I. continue L. vpon the desolate 3. The questions and doubts discussed 1. Quest. What Assuerus this was whose sonne Darius is said to be 1. What Darius this was is handled at large qu. 1. c. 6. he was not that Darius in whose second yeare the Temple beganne to be built whereof mention is made Hagg. 1. 1. as Porphyrie of purpose doth confound them to disturbe the propheticall historie and computation of yeares in Daniel neither was this that Darius whome Alexander ouercame but Darius before mentioned c. 6. who together with Cyrus tooke the citie of Babylon 2. This Assuerus the father of Darius was not that Assuerus the husband of Esther as Canus thinketh and Bullinger seemeth to incline to that opinion for that Assuerus is also called Artaxerxes in the booke of Esther which was the name of the Persian kings after Cyrus And that Assuerus had his palace and princely seat at Sushan which was not appointed to be the chiefe citie or seat of the kingdom vntil Cyrus as Strabo thinketh l. 15. or till Darius Hystaspis as Plin. lib. 6. c. 21. Perer. But this argument rather ouerthroweth this opinion that the captiuitie of Babylon was ended and the people returned before the raigne of that Assuerus whereas they were at this time in captiuitie still And further that Assuerus raigned from India to Ethiopia but the Chaldean Monarchie yet standing the Persian Monarchie could not be so large 3. Iosephus Hieronimus Theodoret and Lyranus Carthusian following them take this Assuerus to be Astyages whose daughter Mandane was Cyrus mother but Astyages is not found to haue had any sonnes but onely that daughter as is shewed before c. 6. qu. 1. 6. 4. Pererius thinketh that Assuerus or Achashuerus was not the proper name of any one king but it beeing deriued of Achash great and Resh an head was a common name which was giuen by the Hebrewes vnto forren Princes that were of great power And this title is found giuen vnto three kings the father of this Darius the husband of Esther and to that king which hindred the building of the Temple Ezr. 4. who is thought by the most to be Cambyses the sonne of Cyrus Contr. Pererius is here deceiued in many points 1. he taketh Assuerus to be an Hebrew name where it hath a Persian deriuation and is deriued of Achash which signifieth a Prince Polan in c. 6. v. 1. 2. it is euident that it was a peculiar name for otherwise it should haue beene common to all the Persian kings 3. the same Assuerus mentioned Ezt. 4. 6. is thought to be the same so much celebrated in the storie of Esther in both places Iunius taketh him for Xerxes 5. Wherefore the more probable opinion is that this Assuerus called by the Greeke historians Cyaxares the first was father vnto Astyages and this Darius who was called also Cyaxares the second for there is no great difference in signification betweene Cyaxares and Achassuerus the first beeing deriued of chu and achash both which words signifie a Prince and put together a Prince of Princes that is a great Prince and Achassuerus likewise is deriued of the same word Achash a Prince Ioseph Scallig lib. 6. de emendat Polan in 6. Dan. This Assuerus then was not Astyages but the father of Astyages and this Darius who was vncle to Cyrus mother and great vncle vnto Cyrus Iun. comment 2. Quest. Of the yeares of Darius raigne and how this vision is said to be in his first yeare 1. Annius whome Driedo and Lucidus follow thinke that Cyrus and Darius raigned two yeares together after the Babylonians were subdued 2. Lyranus and Vatablus in 9. â— Dan. thinke that Darius raigned two yeares before Cyrus raigne began 3. Cyrillus Hierosolymit seemeth to giue vnto him eight yeares cateches 12. 4. Severus Sulpitius thinketh that Darius raigned 18. yeares at the same time that Astyages
sonne of Seleucus Nicanor as Iustine writeth lib. 41. By others then here are meant none els but those fowre generall captaines who diuided Alexanders kingdome among them yet it shall not be amisse here somewhat to touch the petie diuisions of the kingdome before it grew into fowre parts and of Alexanders seuerall captaines with their endes 14. Quest. Of the petie diuisions of Alexanders kingdome among his seuerall captaines before it grew into fowre and of their mutuall dissension Three things here shall be briefly touched concerning Alexanders captaines 1. of their feuerall diuisions 2. of their ciuill warres which they made one with an other 3. of their bloodie endes 1. After that Alexanders captaines had by a generall consent chosen officers for the whole kingdome Arideus was appointed Viceroy during the nonage of Alexanders children Perdiccas protectour whome Antipater afterward succeeded in that place Seleucus generall for the armie Craterus Treasurer then they sorted the seuerall Prouinces among them Ptolomeus had Egypt Laomedon Syria Philotas Cilicia Antigonus Lycia Pamphylia and Prygia the greater Cassander Caria Menander Lydia Leonatus Phrygia the lesse Eumenes Cappadoeia and Paphlagonia Phiton Media ex Curtio Lysimachus Thracia Antipater Maâ—edonia H. Br. And Iustinus maketh mention beside of others to Nicanor called Seleucus were committed the Parthians to Amyntas the Bactrians to Neoptolemus the Persians to Peucestes the Babylonians to Philippus the Hircanians And the other Prouinces remained vnder their gouernment which held them Alexander yet liuing Thus Alexanders Empire beeing distributed among so many petie gouerners 15. or 16. in all could not long so continue vnder so many masters but they presently fel at variance among themselues And in this respect Demades wittily compared Alexanders armie when he was dead to Cyclops the huge gyant when he had lost his eye for as that huge bodie wanting light to direct it hit here and there and could not guide it selfe so this vnruly companie wanting a guide dashed one vpon an other as a shippe without a pilote runneth vpon the rocks and sands 2. We are in the next place then briefly to see the ciuill dissention and warres which were mooued among these captaines 1. The first warre was begunne thorough the ambition of Perdiccas who beeing in greater authoritie then the rest intended to marrie Cleopatra Alexanders sister and so to take vpon him the gouernement which his purpose that he might the better atchieue he first enterpriseth to remooue the lettes and impediments and sendeth Eumenes against Antipater and Antigonus and he himselfe goeth against Ptolome into Egypt but he was slaine of his owne souldiers and not long after Alcetas his brother and his sister were slaine also and this was his ende who was the first beginner of sedition 2. After this a second stirre beganne betweene Eumenes and Antigonus in which battell Neoptolemus and Craterus were slaine and Eumenes was betraied by his souldiers vnto Antigonus whome he killed 3. Then Cassander after he had most treacherously extinguished Alexanders familie quarrelleth with Antigonus from whome he would haue taken certaine cities in Asia and ioyneth with Ptolome and Seleucus who feared Antigonus greatnes but Antigonus vanquisheth Cassander and maketh him to restore the cities in Asia 4. After this Antigonus setteth vpon Seleucus and Ptolome but first he was ouercome by Ptolome at Tyrus who tooke Demetrius Antigonus sonnes pauilion with all the princely furniture but restored it againe afterward Demetrius surprized Cilles one of Ptolomes captaines and 8000. men but returned them safe to Ptolome to requite his former humanitie and kindnes 5. Then followed a soare battell betweene all of the chiefe captaines remaining not farre from Ephesus on the one side were Seleucus and his sonne Antiochus Lysimachus and Ptolomes forces on the other Antigonus the night before the battel Antigonus had a vision wherein Alexander appeared saying vnto him that now he would goe vnto his enemies whereby Antigonus vnderstood that hauing beene hitherto victorious he should be ouercome now And so it fell out for as he pursued Antiochus in battell he was slaine by Seleucus horsemen beeing almost 80. yeare old his sonne fledde to Athens and renewed the warre but he was taken by Seleucus and long suruiued not his father then the rest diuided the kingdome of Antigonus among them 6. The last battell betweene Alexanders captaines was betweene Lysimachus and Seleucus This Lysimachus was a man of valour for beeing familiar with Callisthenes whome Alexander killed he was commanded to be cast vnto the lyons but he killed the lyon and so escaped for which his valour he was afterward much made of by Alexander But this Lysimachus among his vertues had enormous vices he married two sisters and had children by them both but the one killed the others child the mother for succour fledde vnto the other kings allied vnto her hereupon beganne the quarrell betweene Lysimachus and Seleucus but Lysimachus beeing ouercome was slaine Melancth ex Pausan. 3. In the last place let vs take a view of their bloodie endes Perdiccas first killed Meleager Ptolome killeth Cleomenes Perdiccas friend and Perdiccas himselfe is slaine of his owne souldiers going against Ptolome Craterus and Neoptolemus are slaine in battell Philotas killeth Phiton and he with Eumenes are slaine by Antigonus Antigonus fighting against Seleucus is killed Lysimachus by Seleucus Seleucus is slaine by Ptolome Ceraunus brother to Ptolome Philadelphus then raigning in Egypt and the same Ceraunus not long after was slaine by Brennus Demetrius Antigonus sonne rooteth out the house of Cassander and so he and his posteritie held the kingdome of Macedonia vntill the Romans possessed it And this was the ende of Alexanders captaines 15. Quest. Why the Angel prosequuteth the storie onely of the king of the South and of the North omitting the the rest Two reasons may be yeelded hereof 1. The other kingdomes the one of Asia the lesse in the North to Egypt which fell vnto Antigonus after he was slaine and vanquished by Seleucus was diuided among the other captaines and so it was extinguished and the other kingdome of Macedonia in the West was translated from Cassander and his posteritie vnto Demetrius the sonne of Antigonus neither was it in power answerable vnto the other two kingdomes of Syria and Egypt and therefore these onely are mentioned for vers 5. the Angel speaketh onely of two mightie kingdomes which should preuaile aboue the rest 2. An other reason is Iudea stood in the middes betweene these two kingdomes of Syria and Egypt by which occasion these kings waging battell one against an other Iudea beeing in the middes went to wracke betweene them Melancthon And sometime the Iewes fauoured one and sometime an other and then the aduersarie part still afflicted them and thus betweene these two kings were the Iewes molested the space of three hundred yeares Lyranus And a third cause there was of trouble vnto the Iewes sometime the Ptolomies of Egypt challenged the gouernment and soueraigntie of Iudea
he would sport himselfe with those that attended vpon him and hit stones at them in iest and thus by his flatterie and popular behauiour he insinuated himselfe and got the hearts of the people as Absalom by the like meanes stole away the hearts of the people from his father Thus Ptolome testifieth of this Antiochus lib. 1. 5. Hypomemnat 33. Quest. Of Antiochus Epiphanes his first expedition against Egypt v. 22 23 24. Secondly the entrance of Antiochus into the kingdome beeing thus described then followeth a declaration of his acts and exploits which are of three sorts 1. his practising against Egypt 2. his persecution of the people of God 3. his inuading of Egypt Iudea and other countries Three expeditions he made into Egypt the first whereof is here described In this first the meanes are shewed which he should vse partly violence partly fraud and the successe of them both His forcible and violent attempt together with the successe is expressed v. 22. his attempt is compared to an ouerflowing flood Antiochus taking aduantage of the minoritie of Ptolomeus Philometor the sonne of Epiphanes by his sister Cleopatra and hauing a desire to ioyne Egypt to his kingdome commeth with a great power with chariots horse Elephants and a nauie beside vnto Pelusium ouerflowing like a great streame his successe was this First the armes and power of the Egyptians were ouercome the chiefe captaines of Philometor Euleus and Leneus encountring with Antiochus betweene Pelusium and Casium were there vanquished and slaine Hierome out of Porphyrius following Suctorius so also Bulling Melancth Osiand Polan Iun. with others The second part of this successe was the Prince of the couenant was ouerthrowne likewise 1. which was not Ptolomeus Epiphanes as Hugo Cardin. who was now dead 2. nor yet Seleucus Philopater Antiochus brother Iun. annotat H. Br. concent for it is said before v. 21. that Antiochus named a vile person stood vp in his place his brother Seleucus was now dead 3. neither was it Iudas Macchabeus as Lyran. for as yet Antiochus had nothing to doe with him 4. nor yet Ptolome Philopator as Melancth Oecolamp Pellic. Vatab. for he was yet very young and made no couenant and beside the Prince of the couenant here spoken of was slaine which is expressed by the metaphor of breaking but Philometor suruiued and raigned long after 5. And to applie it with Hierome to Antichrist who shall faigne himselfe to be Prince of the couenant that is of the law and Testament of God is not proper for if Antiochus be a type of Antichrist then is not this Prince of the couenant which is ouercome by him Antichrist also 6. Wherefore this Prince of the couenant was Tryphon who was a chiefe man in compounding and making a league with Antiochus after the former ouerthrow that he should haue the tutelage of the young king of Egypt Philometor his nephew this Tryphon the chiefe contriuer of this couenant Antiochus causeth to be taken away that he might worke his pleasure without any let Then followeth his second practise by fraud with the successe first Antiochus hauing now committed vnto him the protection of his nephew vnder this pretence entreth into Egypt but with a small companie beeing not suspected as an enemie but held as a friend and therefore it is said he shall strengthen himselfe with a small people v. 23. His successe by this his fraudulent practising was this 1. he shall enter into the quiet and plentifull Prouince for he setled himselfe in Memphis in the heart of the countrey 2. then he robbed and spoiled as neuer any of his predecessours did in Egypt before for he is not said simply to doe that which his fathers had not done but onely in respect of Egypt otherwise Seleucus Nicanor their first founder and Antiochus the great his father had in other countries done more then he Calvin therefore this is no argument for Pererius to vnderstand this of Antichrist and not of Antiochus because his predecessours had beene of greater power for as is saide it is not simply and absolutely so spoken but in comparison of Egypt onely which he robbed and spoiled as none of his fathers had done before him Hierom. ex Porphyr And these spoiles he partly carried away partly he distributed them among the Egyptians to make himselfe stronger Iun. 3. Then he cunningly cast about how to get into his hand the strong holds in Egypt and therein shewed more cunning then the wisest among the Egyptians he deceiued them with his wiles and politike deuises Hierom. ex Porphyr following Suctorius Iun. Polan But he did not long hold those places in Egypt it was but for a time as the text sheweth for Philometor afterward recouered them againe Some otherwise vnderstand this whole description that the league spoken of was made with Seleucus Philopator who vpon agreement with Antiochus then hostage at Rome sent thither his owne sonne Demetrius to be in his stead and so Antiochus returning first practised by the meanes of Heliodorus to take away his brother Seleucus called here the Prince of the couenant Iun. in annotat And this plentifull Prouince which he inuaded some vnderstand to be Syria Iun. Oecolampad some Phoenice where the rich citie Tyrus was which Antiochus spoiled Melancthon But this exposition can not stand 1. Seleucus Philopator was dead before these things were done and Antiochus tose vp in his stead these things followed then after Seleucus death And before the Prince of the couenant is taken away it is said the armes were broken which were the captaines with their power but Antiochus had no open warre with his brother Seleucus he was dead before his returne 2. This pleasant Prouince was not Syria but Egypt 1. for it is saide that he did that which none of his fathers before him now both Seleucus Nicanor and Antiochus the great had done greater exploits in Syria and Phenice then this Antiochus but none of them had spoiled Egypt like vnto him 2. he held these strong places onely for a while but the strong cities of Syria Phenicia he held and possessed as his own as of right belonging vnto to him he soone lost the strong cities and holds in Egypt which Philometor recouered againe therefore this expedition vpon the former reasons is better vnderstood to haue beene made against Egypt then Syria 34. Quest. Of the second expedition of Antiochus Epiphanes against Egypt v. 25 26 27 28. In this second expedition three things are declared 1. the attempt which these kings made one against the other with the successe v. 25. and the meanes thereof v. 26. 2. the euent which happened hereupon v. 27. a dissembled peace 3. the consequents and such matters as followed v. 28. 1. The king of the North Antiochus seeing he could preuaile no longer by his fraud and deceit who hitherto vnder colour of his protectourship robbed and spoiled Egypt Philometor beeing now somewhat more growne in yeares he seeketh now by