Samson and how Book 2. p. 31. Compare Book 3. p. 220. at the bottome of the page Why all men shall rise again at the last day Book 1. p. 195. Whether such as have been raised from the dead did die the second time Book 2. p. 1 to p. 12. Of holy men there is a double resurrection ib. p. 4. The raising of the dead was an act appropriated unto Christ himself no way communicated to his Apostles in his life time ib. p. 6 9 10. Who they were that rose at Christs death ib. p. 12. wherwith compare ib. chap. 8.11 12 13 14. throughout The raised Saints ascended not into heaven with Christ ib. ch 15 16 17 18. throughout Christs resurrection was typified in Elias 2. King 2.13 ib. p. 146. The figure of Rome at its first building ib. p. 24. S THe whole Scripture is but one though penned by divers Book 2. p. 38 39. The Penmen of the holy Scriptures as such could not forget ibid. p. 40 41 c. Whether how it was necessarie that the Scripture should be written for mens instruction ibid. p. 68 69 70 c. Whether the holy Penmen of the Scriptures understood all that they wrote ibid. p. 80 to p. 86. Whether they read profane Authours ibid. p. 86 to p. 90. They did cite Poets or profane Authours ibid. p. 89 to p. 93. Whether they studied the things they wrote before-hand ib. p. 92 to p. 96. There was no difference between the Penmen of the divine Writ of the Old and New Testament in the point of conceiving and writing in different languages ib. p. 96. We must have recourse unto the allusions of Scripture which are not rest on what the Apostles conceived in their mindes onely ibid. p. 97. The Pen-men of Scripture had no libertie to put in their own conceits or in writing to adde or blot out what they had done ib. p. 98 to p. 104. They had no power to clothe their inward apprehensions with words of their own ib. p. 104 105 106. The Penmen of Scripture wrote their heavenly dictates in the same language in which they conceived them ibid. p. 107 to p. 112. Whether the holy Penmen of Scripture wrote the Scripture casually ibid. p. 71 72. When the New Testament began first to be written and upon what occasion ibid. pag. 73. Whether the Penmen of Scripture were commanded to write ibid. p. 73 to page 76. Whether the Prophets Evangelists and Apostles were compelled to write ibid. 76 to p. 80. Whether Christ wrote any part of Scripture himself immediately ibid. p. 64 65 c. Why Sinne is called Originall Book 1. p. 129. Styles given to originall sinne ib. p. 36. Some sinnes are greater then other ibid. p. 62 63 64. The greatnesse of a sinne is two wayes considered ibid. p. 66. Of originall sinne as conveyed unto us from Adam ib. p. 74 to pag. 90. Originall sinne is matter of repentance ib. p. 76. How we sinned originall sinne in Adam ib. p. 78 79 80. Not by imputation onely nor onely by imitation p. 84 85. Originall sinne is propagated to mankinde ib. p. 90 91. p. 129. When originall sinne beginneth ib. p. 91 92 93. The manner how the soul is by it made sinfull ib. p. 103 to p. 109. Adams actuall sinne was private and personall ideall onely and representative therefore not imputed unto us ib. p. 88 89. p. 129. The foure principall faculties of our Souls with their severall objects Book 1. p. 56. T A Twofold kinde of Temperature the one of weight the other of justice Book 1. p. 18. Tithes are by an everlasting law due to the Priesthood of Melchisedech ibid. p. 83. Curses that follow those who sacrilegiously rob the Church of Tithes Book 2. p. 50 51. The Transfiguration of Christ with the manner of it and how it was not painfull to him B. 1. p. 29. Of the Translation of them who shall be found alive at the last day ibid. p. 30. The use of the Tree of life in Paradise unto Adam ibid. p. 20 23. Whether Adam did eat of the tree of life before he fell ibid. p. 21 22. V VIator is considered according unto a twofold estate Book 1. page 51 52. FINIS The severall places of Scripture explained in these three Books of Miscellanies The first book GEn. 3.20 pag. 40. Gen. 4.15 64 65. Exod. 13.2 140. Exod. 20.5 110 116 127 128. Job 14.4 95 96. Ps 51.5 92 93 94. Ps 91.11 25 26. Ps 109.14 121 122. Ps 131.1 161 162. Isa 53.2 18. Vers 4. 20. Jer. 25.26 153 unto 157. Matt. 15.14 174. Joh. 8.44 37. Joh. 9.2 132. Act. 23.5 168 169. 170 c. Rom. 5.12 79 80. vers 13. 186. ver 18. from page 190 to the end of the first book Rom. 11.16 106. 1. Cor. 3.1 2. 158. 1. Cor. 7.14 106. 1. Cor. 15.47 42. Ephes 4.23 24. 56. Heb. 9.27 from the 1 to the ninth The second book GEn. 22.5 p. 83. Gen. 31.53 32. John 8.56 30 31. Joh. 20.7 146 147. 1. Cor. 9.16 78. 1. Cor. 16.22 48 49 c. 2. Cor. 5.14 78. Gal. 6.11 67 68. Heb. 11.35 4. The third book EXod 34.29 p. 210. Mal. 4.5 6. 174 175 c. Matt. 17.11 177 178 c. ¶ Faults escaped in the first Book thus to be corrected Page 18 line 11 for proportion reade proportio Page 20 line margin for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Page 24 line 2 for tree life reade tree of life Page 29 line 13 for not reade no. Page line 39 for ecclipsed reade eclipsed Page 30 line margin for tran-seuntis reade trans-euntis Page 32 line margin for laborantos reade laborantes Page 44 line 20 for yae reade yea Page 57 line 20 for he did for a while reade he did fulfill for a while Page 62 line 22 for Cittien reade Citizen Page 65 line 30 for Wheter reade Whether Page line 43 for Gensis reade Genesis Page 82 line 41 for lisienesse reade likenesse Page 86 line 20 for this reade his Page 96 line margin for doctus nec doctus reade doctus nec indoctue ¶ In the second Book Page 2 line 39 for istance reade instance FINIS
may seem probable certain it is Christ wanted no comelines nor beautie though he had no womanish or effeminate shape Tom 4. Disput 1. quaest 14. punct 2. but such as was most befitting a man saith Gregorie de Valentia Thou art beautifull O my love as Tirzah comely as Jerusalem Cant. 6.4 and Thou art all fair there is no spot in thee Cant 4.7 In which regard perhaps it was that though the humors of Christs body did increase with the increase of his bodie and grew up from infancie to puerilitie from it to juvenilitie thence to virilitie yet there was so harmonious a proportion if not of weight yet of justice that we read not any one part of Christs bodie to have been out of tune excepting in his Agonie and Passion when his very bones were out of joint nor is he recorded to have been sick at any time nor so much as inclining to sicknes all his life Non suscepit infirmitates individui sed speciei He took not upon him the infirmities of particular men but of mankinde as to be weary to mourn to weep to be hungry thirstie to suffer to die As for sinne and diseases flowing from sinne he was subject to none nor to personall defects but onely to the generall defects of humane bodies Indeed it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas in Reguâ—is breviorâ—â—us quaest 177. Esai 53.4 Surely he took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses but Basil expounds it thus He bare our sicknesses not that he did transferre them upon himself but because he healed those that were sick Where he semes to remove all sicknes from Christ Besides Adam his excellent temper consider his food he had all the trees of the garden for meat except the forbidden one The healthie waters about Paradise he had for drink Wholsome things he knew from hurtfull if any hurtfull things were His giving them names doth prove that he was acquainted with their natures As for taking too much or too little it could not be whilest his soul was innocent and spotlesse For he had originall justice which in the use of lawfull meats should subject his senses and his appetite unto reason As for clothing he needed it not Innocency apparelled him till he put off the robe of righteousnes and so it should have continued Lastly as Adam in Paradise had a deep sleep which fell upon him Genes 2.21 which I confesse was extraordinarie so Augustine Aug. De Civ t. 14.16 Tertul. De Anima cap. 24. Tertullian and the School after them do yeeld that ordinarie sleep was not excluded out of Paradise but in the night he was allowed sleep So that Adam enjoying all things necessarie delightfull or convenient which concerned his bodie we may safely conclude the first reason That since neither outward force nor inward distemper could befall Adams body if he had continued in innocencie his body should never have tasted of death and so was and so should have been immortall And this will yet more plainly appeare if we will weigh the reasons following 4. Among the trees of the garden there was the tree of life which Adam had libertie freely to eat of Some think it was appointed as a means to translate Adam to immortalitie without sicknes or death Others say it would hinder the losse of naturall heat and radicall moisture whereby though yeares or age yet weaknes or de crepitnes should not come nigh him Others say that it being once tasted should bring perfect immortalitie even such immortalitie as we should have after the Resur rection See Bellarmine de Gratia primi hominis cap. 28. and Mr. Salkeld in his Treatise of Paradise where in some whole Chapters he hath laboriously collected and copiously explained the various opinions concerning the tree of life Take my gleanings after their full vintage and taste what I have gathered Though Lumbard Sent. 2. Dist 29. Lit. F. questioneth Whether Adam before his sinne did eat of the tree of life and out of Augustine concludeth there That they did eat as it was commanded that they should eat of every tree fave one yet I can no way agree with him This his errour is grounded on an other which he hath cited Distinct 9. of the same book in the letters B and C That Adam was commanded to eat of the tree of life and that he should have sinned if he had not used it For first It was not a command but a permission God gave the use of the tree no otherwise to man Genes 1.29 then to the beasts and fowls the green herbs verse 21 but this was by way of indulgence not of command Secondly Genes 2.16 Of every tree of the garden thou may'st freely eat And though it be in the Hebrew Eating thou shalt eat yet it implieth no absolute precept Thirdly Genes 3.2 the woman saith We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden she saith not We musteat or We are charged much lesse presently so soon as we see them or before we do other things Fourthly Genes 9.3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you even as the green herb have I given you all things Are we commanded to eat every beast and every herb then whosoever forbeareth any one sinneth Or was there in this a difference between the grant unto Adam and the grant unto Noah and their posterities The second errour is of Lumbard That Adam did eat of the tree of life His proof out of Augustine falleth short even as it is cited though the place is mistaken by him and the words maym'd Indeed Augustine thus * Rectè profectò intelliguntur primi homines ante malignam persuasionem abstinuisse à cibo vetito atque usi fuisse concessis ac per hoc caeteris praecipuè ligno vitae De peccat Meritis Remis 2.21 Certainly it is well thought that our first parents before that malicious persuasion did abstain from the forbidden food and used such things as were granted them and consequently the rest specially the tree of life * Note first He saith granted not commanded as Noah ate not of every thing granted to him yet Noah spent many hundred yeares more time after the Floud then Adam did in Paradise Neither can I think Adam in that estate so addicted to his belly that he in so short a time would cat of so many of all and every tree Secondly Rupertus saith The eating of the tree of life but once Rup in Genes l. 3. cap. 30. had made them live for ever Augustine moreover addeth It is no where read in Genesis Aug. Cont. Adversar Legis Prophet 1.15 that Adam in Paradise did not eat of the fruit of the tree of life of which place by and by Now as Augustine is directly against me in the second point he is as directly against them in the first point * Vtendi ad escam omni ligno quod in Paradiso erat
restriction because in it was speech of Adam by whom death came upon all without exception but in the second and opposite member All is not to be taken in the same amplitude sed juxta rem subjectam But according to the subject spoken of All that have grace and the gift of righteousnesse Omnes vivificandi All that are to be made alive saith S. Augustine All that are Christs So much in defence of those who by All understand genera singulorum but not singula generum Some of all kindes but not all of every kinde restraining and imprisoning the word yet as it were in libera custodia The free gift came upon all men to the justification of life that is it came upon all upon whom it did come freely and yet upon many which were not of Christs flock it came not at all If this seem harsh to any there is a second interpretation which came in my minde before ever I had heard or read that any other thought so and amongst a whole army of expounders I never met with any who wholly agreeth with me and never but one whose opinion in part concurreth with mine and he is Cardinall Tolet who is found fault withall covertly by Justinian the Jesuit and by the learned Estius under a generall Quidam vir doctus A certain learned man and expressely by name by Cornelius à Lapide the Jesuit whose judgement otherwise I had been ignorant of as not having Tolets labours on the Romanes The words of S. Paul Rom. 5.18 at the latter end are these By the righteousnesse of one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life So it is read according to the Vulgat in our late Translation the Bishops Bible hath it Good springeth upon all men to the righteousnesse of life but it is certainly amisse for they take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereas there is great discrepancy between them for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is generally confessed to be according to Philosophers that vertue or aggregation of vertue which is named Justice generall or according to Divinity the vertue or the habit of justice the work of grace sanctification righteousnesse or holinesse inherent Neither is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for though I would be loath to say as Beza doth on that place I do not admit saith he Nè in anis quaedam argutia tribuatur Apostolo id est Spiritui sancto that these two are all one for this reason among others Lest some vain nicety should be attributed to the Apostle that is to the holy Ghost for if I did admit them to be all one yet I would rather admire the depths of the holy Spirit which I am not able to sound then ascribe any empty or vain nicety to the perfection of divine Scripture l Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem Tert. lib. contra Hermog Whose plenitude I adore that I may use Tertullians phrase whereas Beza intimateth as if the infinite Spirit knew not to dictate what he could not understand yet will I be bold to say there is a main difference between them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commonly is rendred justificatio For grant that among Heathen writers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be now and then expressed A just cause or The ground-work or foundation of a just cause as l 1. de coelo Aristotle useth it Grant we also that in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used sometimes for the judgement of God as Rom. 1.32 and Revel 15.4 sometimes for the ordinances of God as Luke 1.6 and Heb. 9.1 and 10 verses and Rom. 2.26 yet most properly it is rendred Justificatio and by it is meant the merit of Christ and his righteousnesse imputed to us and is in Christ and not in us Beza saith right in this m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ipsam justificationis nostrae ut ità dicam materiam hîc declarat ab effecto nempe illam Christi obedientiam cujus imputatio nos juslos in ipso facit quam paulò antè vocavit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quò Deus gratis eam nobit largiatur The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justification declareth as I may say the very matter of our justification from the effect namely that obedience of Christ the imputation whereof makes us righteous in him which a little before he called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the free gift because God gives it freely to us Thus is the imputation of Christs righteousnesse and our justification all one in effect and onely divers in words to the same sense Thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used both in the 16 verse and in this present place and thus Rev. 19.8 The fine linen is the righteousnes of Saints Not of themselves not inherent for to the Church was given or granted that she should be arayed ut cooperiat se as some reade it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in fine linen pure white 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pure in it self 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 white to be seen by others And since our Saviour Revel 19.13 was clothed with a vesture dipt in bloud which Blasius Viegas saith is commonly interpreted of Christs humanitie begored with its own bloud by the Jews which suffer me to term Meritum rubrum as well as the School-men stile it Meritum udum which was pointed at Esai 63.1 Who is this that cometh from Edom with dyed garments from Bozrah and verse 2. Wherefore art thou red in thine apparell and thy garments like him that treadeth in the wine-fat which Tertullian wittily thus expounded n Spiritus propheticus veluti jam contemplans Dominum suum ad passionem venientem carne scilicet vestitum ut in ea passum cruentum habitum carnis in vestimentorum rubore designat conculcatae expressae vi passionis tanquam de foro torcularis quia exinde quasi cruentati homines de vini rubore descendunt Contra Marcionem 4.40 The spirit of the Prophet contemplating as it were his Lord going to his passion clothed with flesh as suffering in it describes by the rednesse of his garments the bloudy habit of his flesh troden and pressed by the force of his passion as by a wine-presse because men come out thence as it were all bloudy with the rednesse of the wine According to that prophesied of him rather then of Judah or of Judah as a type of him Gen. 49.11 He washed his garments in wine and his clothes in the bloud of grapes So that S. John may be thought to expound Esai and Esai to reflect on that prophesie of Jacob and all to designe out our Saviours passive obedience by which that I may so speak our sinnes are most properly washed away or not imputed Upon proportionable semblance of reason permit me to say that the pure and white linen describeth Christs active obedience his fulfilling of the Law in
was not altogether irrevocable but that the messengers who brought him to judgement were sharply blamed by their governours because they brought Antillus in stead of Nicandas Within a while after Nicandas died and Antillus recovered life and health And Plutarch in my opinion seemeth to insinuate that he was present at the recovery of him Of both these if each particular were true that they were dead and relived we may boldly averre that they died again Neither doth Plato Plutarch or Theodoret doubt of it As strange a storie though more remote from our subject you shall finde in Alexander ab Alexandro Genialium dierum 6.21 4 An other istance you shall finde in Bellarmine De arte bene moriendi lib. 2. cap. 1. taken out of Joannes Climachus in scala sua grad 6. who relates thus of a man that died twice In his first life saith he he lived most negligently but dying and his soul being perfectly separated from his bodie after one houre he returned again and he desired Climachus and the rest to depart Whereupon they walled up the cell and he lived as an Anchoret within the cell twelve yeares speaking to no man till he was ready to die again eating nothing but bread and drinking water sitting so he astonishedly revolved those things onely which he had seen in his separation with so earnest a thought that he never changed countenance but continuing in that amazement secretly wept bitterly When he was at deaths doore the second time they forced open the entrance into the cell and coming to him humbly desired him to speak some words of doctrine He answered nothing but this onely b Nemo qui revera mortis memoriam agnoverit peccare unquam poterit The serious remembrance of death will not consist with sinne The like storie you may finde in Venerable Bede All these if they lived again died again and rose not to life immortall And in this sense is that averred Wisd 2.1 Never was any man known to have returned from the grave viz. not to die again for otherwise some were known to have been raised From these I come more especially to speak of such whom the word of God reporteth to have been raised MOst gracious God who didst breathe into the face of man the breath of life and at thy pleasure drawest it forth again out of his nostrils grant that we make such use of this present life that we may see love and enjoy thee in the life eternall through Jesus Christ our onely Lord and Saviour Amen CHAP. II. 1. A division of such as have been raised They all died 2. The widow of Zarephath her sonne raised yet died again supposed to be Jonas the Prophet The Shunammites sonne raised not to an eternall but to a temporary resurrection A good and a better resurrection 3. Christ the first who rose not to die again 4. The man raised in the sepulchre of Elisha arose not to immortality 1. ANd because divers have been raised up of whom there is not the like doubt and answer in each kinde to be made I will therefore distribute them in regard of their times into three sorts Such as were raised 1. Before Christs death 2. After he was ascended 3. About the time of his death Which inverted method I purposely choose because I will reserve the hardest point to the last The first sort again is subdivided into such as were raised either before Christ was incarnated or by Christ himself They who were raised before Christ was born were three 1. The widow of Zarephath her sonne 1. King 17.22 2. The Shunammites sonne 2. King 4.35 3. A dead man who was cast into the grave of Elisha and when he touched the bones of Elisha he revived and stood upon his feet 2. King 13.21 All these three were raised up to live and lived to die again Neither did the intention of such as requested to have them raised or of such as raised them aim once that they should live immortally but live onely on earth again as other men did and then die again Neither did I ever reade any who held these to arise to immortall glory neither stands it with reason For that they were once dead and raised to life the Scripture saith and that they must either live to this time or be translated to immortall glorie in their bodies or die is as true as Scripture Now because there is no ground to say that they yet live or were translated bodily into heaven there is good ground to conclude that again they died 2. Concerning the first of these the Jews think he was Jonas the Prophet and S. Hierome in his Prologue on Jonas citeth their opinion and dislikes it not Tostatus also saith Dïvers others think so If Jonas were the widow of Zarephath her sonne we know that Jonas died afterward for the Prophets are dead Joh. 8.53 and he was one of the Prophets And concerning both the first and second instance it is thought by many good Authours that they are pointed at Heb. 11.35 The women received their dead raised to life again or the Prophets delivered to the women their dead as the Syriack reads it that is to converse with them as formerly being raised not to an eternall but a temporary resurrection and so to die again at their appointed times And to this truth the Text it self giveth in evidence for it is said in the same verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they might obtain a better resurrection Of holy men there is a double resurrection the first and the last the good and the better The resurrection mentioned in the beginning of the verse was good and with reference to the former saith Chrysostom the latter resurrection is called the better For the former was temporary the latter eternall called also The holy resurrection in our book of Common Prayer in the Epistle on the sixth Sunday after Trinity though there is no substantiall ground for the word holy either in the Latine or Greek Rom. 6.5 Of the former Aquinas in his Comment on Hebr. 11.35 saith it was rather a resuscitation then a resurrection and again c Isti sic resuscitati sunt iterum mortui Christus autem resuegens ex mortuis jam non moritur Rom. 6.9 These being raised died again but Christ rising from the dead dieth no more Rom. 6.9 3. And therefore Christs resurrection was as Aquinas saith and as it is indeed the beginning of the future resurrection Then must they needs die again who were raised before him He was the first Guide that lead the way to the eternall resurrection He abolished death and hath brought life and immortality to light 2. Tim. 1.10 Life and immortalitie to light which were before in darknesse And I think that the Apostle may well be thus paraphrased in that place to the Hebrews The women desired that their dead children might be raised again 1. King 17.18 2. King 4.22 c. and as a gift