〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is said and another thing different from that signified is called an Allegory Vers 25. Note c. Our learned Author has sufficiently indeed here shewn that the Arabians were circumcised but not in conformity to the Mosaical Law but a more antient Precept given to Abraham himself and in imitation of Ismael not of Isaac Whether they had any other Custom which might be look'd upon as an imitation of the Law of Moses I cannot tell but it is false that the Ismaelites ever bound themselves to observe the Mosaical Ceremonies as was observed by Grotius whom I wonder Dr. Hammond did not give ear to I have often observed that learned Men supply out of their own Invention what is wanting in the Testimonies of the Antients and afterwards thence draw Conclusions as grounded upon the undoubted Authority of Antient Writers which yet is certainly no good way of arguing The 24 th and two following Verses may be thus paraphrased Ver. 24. These things use to be allegorically explained by the Jews and may be interpreted so as to signify what I a little before said Sarah and Hagar are as it were the Symbols of two Covenants the latter viz. Hagar of the Covenant given from Mount Sinai the Laws of which impose nothing but Slavery upon those who seek to be justified by it 25. And Hagar is so much the more fitly said to be an emblem of the Covenant delivered from Mount Sinai because her name signifies a Rock And to that Covenant of which the Servantmaid Hagar was an Image belongs the earthly Jerusalem which is entirely taken up in the observation of servil Rites and acted by a slavish Fear 26. But Sarah the free Woman is a Symbol of the Evangelical Covenant according to the Laws of which the Citizens of the Spiritual Jerusalem live that is all we Christians The Apostle undoubtedly alludes to the name of Hagar which being written with an ח according to the usual confusion of the guttural Letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hhagar signifies a Rock among the Arabians It is probable that the Jews who were no very great Friends to the Arabians said a great many things by way of Allegory out of the History of Moses to extol their Nation and on the contrary to depress the Hagarens and that St. Paul here applies to those who were Israelites according to the Spirit what the Jews used to say in honour of their Nation as on the contrary to the carnal Jews what they often asserted to the disadvantage of the Hagarens I shall take the liberty here which I do not otherwise use to allegorize a little after the Jewish manner that we may the better see what might give the Apostle Paul an occasion to speak so as he does And first I shall perform the part of a Jewish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 darschan or Allegorical Preacher and then represent a Christian retorting the like Allegory upon the Jew THE JEWISH 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That ye may be sensible O Israelites of the great benefits which God has conferred upon you compare your Original with that of your Neighbours the Hagarens The founder of your Nation Isaac was born of a free Woman and Mistress of a Family Sarah on the contrary Ismael the Father and Founder of the Hagarens was born of a Servant Isaac was conceived by a particular efficacy of the Divine Power when Abraham was neither able to beget nor Sarah to conceive by reason of old Age on the other hand Ismael was born of Abraham and Hagar when younger according to the ordinary course of Nature Nor did the distinguishing Providence of God terminate only on Sarah and Hagar and their Sons Isaac and Ismael but drew as it were in them the figure of what has already come to pass in former Ages and shall hereafter happen to both their Progenies The Posterity of Isaac have been protected almost with perpetual Miracles and often enjoyed the sweets of Liberty and had dominion over their neighbour Nations and shall again have when that great King whom we so much expect and long for and whose Reign our antient Prophecies foretel comes to rule over us But the Hagarens like their Mother cast out and disinherited have already more than once been our Servants and shall hereafter be so being subdued by the Power and Authority of the Messias Do not in the least doubt of the truth of what I say for God has heretofore given you a pledg of future events on one hand in Sarah and Isaac and on the other in Hagar and Ismael who as I said before represented the several Conditions of their posterity THE CHRISTIAN ALLEGORIST We take you at your word O Jews that antient Events did shadow out and represent things future But as of old the Offspring of Abraham was twofold so it is now and the same which was the condition of that twofold race of Abraham is at present the lot of their Posterity Hagar and Ismael were Images of the Carnal Israelites who are the Seed of Abraham indeed according to the Flesh but because they do not imitate his Faith and Piety shall not inherit the Promises made to him upon believing They shall be cast out of his spiritual Family and be subject in a servil manner to the Covenant established on Mount Sinai in Arabia of which Hagar may the more fitly be said to be an Emblem because her name signifies a Rock and her Posterity still inhabit that Country So that the Bondwoman Hagar who was cast out together with her Son represented the state of the earthly Jerusalem which is subject to slavish Rites and Ceremonies But Sarah the Freewoman of whom Isaac was heretofore born beside the course of Nature in like manner as now Men are made Christians by an extraordinary efficacy of the Divine Power was an Image of the Evangelical Covenant and the Jerusalem which was to come that is the Christian Church As Sarah and Isaac were Free so also Christians freely obey God and are not tied to any servil Rites As Isaac only was Abraham's Heir so none but Christians shall obtain that heavenly Inheritance which Abraham by his Faith obtained If the Jews thought their reasoning against the Arabians to be cogent there was no reason why they should reject the Christian Allegory And this I doubt not made St. Paul here use an allegorical way of reasoning which he otherwise would not have done CHAP. V. Vers 6. Note b. I. SEEING our Author has thought fit to put together in this place all he had to observe about the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I shall examine all that he says for there are some things in it which I cannot assent to I grant the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may according to the Analogy of Grammar be taken as well in a Passive as an Active sense as the matter requires but I do not think it is so used in all the places here alledged In Rom. vii 5
in the least act in this case as a Tribune of the People who upon the peoples determination pronounced sentence in the name of the Commons but as the Roman Presidents used to act who gave judgment according to the advice of their Counsel I have been the larger upon this subject lest Dr. Hammond's Authority should deceive such as are not very well versed in the Roman Customs Or else to skilful Persons it had been sufficient just to admonish them of his mistake Vers 48. Note d. I have observed in my Notes on Gen. xxxi 20 that the name of Syrian carries in it something I know not what reproachful see there Levit. xxv 47 is a false quotation in our Author for Deut. xxvi 5 for in this place indeed we may find the word Aramaean used in a bad sense but in the other there is no mention made of Aramaeans Many such faults there are in Dr. Hammond's Annotations which are owing either to the carelesness of the Printers or the Author's thoughts being otherwise employed which is no strange thing and I do not reproach him with it CHAP. IX Vers 2. Note a. IT was a long while before this time that many of the Jews believed the preexistence of Souls and that they were sent down into such or such Bodies according to their several deserts as appears evidently by these words in the Book of Wisdom Chap. viii 19 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I was a witty child and had a good spirit yea rather being good I came into a body undefiled Vers 22. Note b. Of this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Seldon has treated at large Lib. 1. c. 7. de Synedriis And if we believe him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifies any assembly of people whatever publick as well as private in which it was not lawful for any that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 put out of the Synagogue familiarly to converse But they were not excluded from the publick Prayers or forbidden to be present at Sacrifices as the same Author shews who is well worth our reading and to whom I refer the Reader tho all are not of his opinion CHAP. X. Vers 35. Note b. IT must be observed that the word Law includes sometimes the Book of Psalms see Chap. xii 34 as sometimes all the Old Testament is called the Law and the Prophets tho ordinarily it is divided into three parts whereof a third makes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under which the Book of Psalms is contained CHAP. XI Vers 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. shall not die of this Disease as others do who continue under the power of Death till the general Resurrection It is a form of speech peculiar to St. John So in his 1 Epist v. 16 17. by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he means a sin that is not of such a nature as to make it probable that the Sinner will continue spiritually dead as long as he lives See the Notes upon that place Vers 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. These words have no agreement with Christ's answer unless something be understood which is not expressed and which Christ perceived to be in Martha's mind Our Author should have solv'd this difficulty in his Paraphrase which because he has not done I shall endeavour to do my self Ver. 21. And when she was come to him and had saluted him she told him that she should have been very glad if he had come some days before to Bethany because he would then have healed her Brother who had been dead now four days and so he would have been still alive 22. But now he was dead there was no hope of recovering him for tho she very well knew that God would grant Jesus whatsoever he asked of him yet she hardly believed that he would raise up a dead man at his request 23. To which Christ replied that Lazarus should be raised up again 24. But Martha saying that she did not doubt indeed but he should at the universal Resurrection 25. Jesus told her more plainly that God had endued him with a Power to bring the dead to life again especially those that had believed on him I have here expressed the whole connexion of the discourse that the sense might be the more evident But the 22 d verse might also be thus expressed That she knew indeed that all that the Lord Jesus asked of his Father would be granted him She did not dare to add that she did not believe he would presume to ask his Father to raise a man that had been dead four days to life 23. But this being in her thoughts Christ answered c. Christ answered therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to something not expressed and it is easy to understand the reason of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. that Martha broke off her discourse for fear of offending her Lord. Unless this Interpretation be admitted the 22 d verse must be placed after the 27 th and then there will be no difficulty in the series of the discourse But this would be contrary to the Authority of all the Copies Vers 39. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Author represents Martha in his Paraphrase speaking too learnedly according to the opinion of some Physicians for she never thought perhaps of the time of the revolution of the Humors And indeed as the thing it self is false so it is nothing at all to the purpose The revolution of the Blood is completed in a shorter time and the climate or season of the year is the chief thing to be considered when the discourse is concerning the putrefaction of a dead body but this is not very material Vers 48. Note b. Our learned Author had done well to produce the Testimony of some antient Writer that related what he said here concerning Armillus for the later Rabbins fancy a great many things for which they have no Tradition We read indeed in a Chaldee Paraphrase which is said to be Jonathans on Isa ii 4 that a wicked Armillus should be slain by the Messias But who shall certify us of the time when this Jonathan lived For it is childish to give credit to the boasting pretences of the Jews I am apt to think that by this word these men meant the Romans whose Empire after the destruction of Jerusalem by them they had a very great spite against and therefore gave out that it should be overthrown by the Messias Afterwards they invented some other stories about this Armillus of which see Buxtorf's Lexic Talmudicum CHAP. XII Vers 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One of the Copies of R. Stephanus has 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because the Transcriber thought that this agreed better with Christ's discourse And the Author of the Coptick Translation seems to have read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But there is no need of these Alterations for God the Father glorifies his Name when he openly acknowledges his
Son whom he sent to men in his Name see Psal cxvi 1 and afterwards Chap. xiii 31 32. of this Gospel CHAP. XIII Vers 26. Note c. THE Doctor 's conjecture is confirmed by Hesychius and Phavorinus who interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so I find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expounded by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to draw in the Lexicons out of the Scholiast on Nicander Vers 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See my Notes on Exod. iv 13 CHAP. XIV Vers 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This phrase deserved in the Paraphrase at least to be expressed in other words for a great many use it every day that do not understand it And therefore I shall here briefly explain it The Jews used to ask God particularly in their solemnest Prayers in the name of their Forefathers and especially the Patriarchs and Prophets i. e. to pray to God that he would grant them their requests because they were their Posterity and called by their Name or Abraham Isaac and Jacob's Posterity This was to call upon God in the name of the Patriarchs But Christ would have his Disciples to pray to God in his Name i. e. to desire what they would have granted to them because they were called and were the Disciples of Christ So the gathered together in the Name of Christ are Christian Assemblies in opposition to an Assembly of Jews see Mat. xviii 20 And so afterwards vers 26. of this Chapter the Holy Ghost is said to be sent in the Name of Christ i. e. as that Spirit which was to be called the Spirit of Christ and to be conferred only on Christ's Disciples A great many Passages may receive light from this Interpretation Vers 16. Note b. What our Author observes about the signification of the Greek words is very true but that Christ used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Talmudists did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 phraklita I very much doubt Perhaps he used 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mnahhman which in Syriack signifies only a Comforter and if that were out of doubt the Greek were to have no other signification put upon it It is certain that there is no Hebrew word of the same latitude with the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 CHAP. XVI Vers 7. Note a. Col. 2. Lin. 14. THERE is not the least footstep of any mention made of the Devil in this matter by Moses Our learned Author lent the Prophet before he was aware his own conjecture CHAP. XVII Vers 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Grotius conjectures that this Prayer was conceived in the view of the Temple when Christ went into the Garden of Gethsemane But if we carefully read Chap. xiii 21 it will seem rather to have been pronounced in the same Room in which the Passover was celebrated after Judas's departure and that Christ did not go with his Disciples into the Garden till he had said this Prayer because Chap. xviii begins thus When Jesus had spoken these words he went forth with his Disciples over the Brook Cedron Vers 3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These words must be rendred thus That they may know thee who art the only true God and Jesus who is the Christ that thou hast sent For the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be repeated before the word Christ 'T is as if the sense were expressed by the Infinitive Mood thus That they may know thee to be the only true God and Jesus to be the Messias whom thou hast sent as if it had been said in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christ here says that this is eternal Life not because the whole Christian Faith in its greatest extent is comprehended under these two Heads considered in themselves but because these two things are as it were the foundations of all the rest to believe him who is the Father of Jesus Christ to be the only true God and Jesus to be the Messias whom he purposed to send Without these Christianity cannot stand because all the rest of the Truths asserted in it are built upon these and these being admitted as true every one must admit the rest and regulate his Life according to them unless he be mad and resolve to be inconsistent with himself as every body easily perceives See vers 7 8 25. Vers 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tho the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies all Men in this Gospel yet in this Chapter it seems to respect principally the Jews as that word is also used elsewhere by St. John as I have observed in a Note on Chap. iv 42 That Christ chose Disciples out of all Mankind is too general a Phrase to signify his choosing some Jews Thus vers 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the World hateth them because they are not of the World by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is meant the wicked Jews who hated the Apostles because they were no longer of their number and not the Heathens to whom they were perfectly unknown Vers 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. by a Power derived from thee being present with them and acting as an Embassador in thy Name and taking upon me that Character There seems here to be understood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but do thou keep them in my absence by thy Spirit For there is nothing set to answer the words while I was with them in the World I kept them in thy Name in what comes after which yet the context requires And therefore what Christ did not express in words he made up in his thoughts as the Apostles easily understood for whose sake this Prayer was made And accordingly after Christ's Ascension the Holy Ghost came down to supply his place as Christ had promised Chap. xvi 7 13. Vers 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. I do not pray thee to take them away from this wicked Generation of Men and particularly of Jews and within a few days translate them along with me into the regions of Happiness but that thou wouldst preserve them from being corrupted by those evil Customs and Opinions with which Mankind is so universally infected By the World here we are to understand wicked Men whom the Apostles could not avoid conversing with Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Cause them to be so affected with that true Doctrin that I have taught them as to express it in their Lives And indeed whoever understands Christ's Doctrin and thinks it to be true if he suffers that thought to sink deep into his Mind will at length be sanctified by the Truth The Doctor did not understand these words as appears by his Paraphrase There is an expression much to the same purpose in Chap. viii 31 32. Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him If ye continue in my word then are ye my Disciples indeed and ye shall know the Truth and the Truth shall make you free
of a few Versions of this Passage The Vulgar has Exponebat testificans regnum Dei suadensque eis de Jesu ex lege Moysis c. What is exponebat testificans Besides de Jesu does not express the sense of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which ought to have been rendered quae pertinent ad Jesum those things which concern Jesus But yet Erasmus so translates them omitting the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as superfluous And Castellio was guilty of the same fault who otherwise uses to recede when there is no reason for it from the Phrase of the Sacred Writers for thus he renders the words quibus ille disserebat divinum regnum testificans eis de Jesu ex Mosis lege persuadere conans which is neither Latin nor expresses St. Luke's sense Beza's translation is a great deal better cum attestatione exponebat regnum Dei suadens eis quae de Jesu Christo sunt ex lege c. but he did not observe there was a transposition here nor come up to the sense of every word The not understanding of this was the occasion of the Geneva and other French Interpreters mistranslating this Passage The Geneva renders it ausquels il expliquâ—it par divers temoignages le Royaume de Dieu les induisit a croire ce qui concerne Jesus c. as if St. Luke had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Port-Royal has il leur prêchoit le Royaume de Dieu leur confirmant ce qu' il leur disoit par plusieurs témoignages c. which is taking too great a liberty whereas they should have said il leur racontoit ce qui concerne Jesus rendant temoignage au Royaume de Dieu les persuadant par la Loi c. In the first place the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not signify to interpret but to relate or declare when the Discourse is about matters of Fact such as the coming of Christ his Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven Secondly the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signify the History of Jesus by which he was understood to be the Messias Thirdly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to bear Testimony to the truth of any History as the Apostles did when they testified that Jesus was risen from the Dead and gone up to Heaven upon which account they are called his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Witnesses See Acts i. 8 22. and x. 39 41. St. Paul indeed was not capable of bearing the same Testimony to Christ as the rest of the Apostles who declared that they had seen him dead and a little after alive again and had heard and touched him c. But he was able to testify that he was still alive which he knew by what had happened to him in his way to Damascus Acts ix See also Chap. xxii 15 And thus we find the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in Chap. x. 42 of this History He commanded us to preach unto the People and to testify 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it is be which is ordained of God to be the Judg of the living and the dead viz. by giving account of what had happened to him and of his Doctrin St. Paul bore Testimony in a peculiar manner to the Kingdom of God when he declared that Christ reigned in Heaven and had been seen by himself surrounded with immortal Light and Glory Of the transposing of words there is another plain instance in Chap. i. 2 of this Book ANNOTATIONS ON THE Epistle of S. Paul the Apostle to the Romans AT the end of the Premon Tho most of what our Author says in this Premonition be true yet there are two things in him liable to reprehension and those are first that he supposes many times the Apostle to have a respect to the Gnosticks where the Heathens or Jews are thought to be spoken of by other Interpreters and that with more probability as will appear by those places and especially by Chap. i and ii The second relates to his Paraphrase which is many times intricate and obscure full of Repetitions harsh and forced and in a word not sufficiently adapted to explain the Series of St. Paul's Discourse tho as to the main he seldom misses the true scope of it But no body will ever explain an obscure Epistle without endeavouring perspicuity and brevity which two things our Author's Paraphrase is extremely defective in CHAP. I. Vers 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. This passage S. Austin de Praedest Sanct. c. 15. says may be so almost understood as the Unitarians commonly understand it Praedestinatus est ergo saith he Jesus ut qui futurus erat secundum carnem filius David esset tamen in virtute filius Dei secundum Spiritum sanctificationis quia natus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Virgine Maria. Jesus therefore was predestinated as one who was to be according to the flesh the Son of David and yet should be in Power the Son of God according to the Spirit of Sanctification because he was born of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Ghost But the following words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must have a different sense put upon them which I take to be this viz. that the Holy Ghost which Jesus had received was as it were a Voice whereby it was miraculously 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signified or declared that he should be the Son of God after his resurrection from the dead 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was the Son of God it 's true not only in decree as the Schoolmen speak but actually before his Resurrection but he was again called the Son of God in a peculiar manner after his Resurrection as appears from Acts xiii 32 33. And therefore in this respect he might be said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be ordained by the Holy Ghost to be the Son of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after his Resurrection This same Verb is used by St. Peter in Acts x. 42 in a like matter where having said that he and the rest of the Apostles had eaten and drank with Jesus after he was risen from the dead he adds And he commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that it is he which was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordained by God to be the Judg of the living and dead As by the Holy Ghost which descended upon him he was ordained or marked out by God to perform the Office of the Messias and so to rise again and upon that account to be called the Son of God besides other reasons for which he has that title by a special Right and Privilege given to him so also by his being raised from the dead he was ordained or marked out by God to be the Judg of the living and dead That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here are the same is truly observed by Grotius who yet interprets the sense of this passage somewhat confusedly Add to the
follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without offence However it is most true that the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not only signify the examining of a thing but also that which is consequent upon it the approbation of it But this may very aptly be said of the Jews compared with the Heathens because the Jews were instructed out of the Law which the Gnosticks were not but were part of them Heathens Vers 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Blind cannot discern the right way from the Path which would lead them out of the Road they desire to take and therefore they need a Guide to discern it for them And in like manner such as cannot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as to those things between which the Will of God makes a difference have need of a Teacher to shew them the difference between what is lawful and unlawful This and what follows plainly confirms the Opinion which I have preferred to Dr. Hammond's Interpretation and agrees exactly to the Jews compared with the Heathens Vers 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I do not think the Doctor has expressed the Apostle's sense here in his Paraphrase I chuse rather to understand this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of stealing the Vessels that were consecrated to Idols as if the Apostle had said Thou who pretendest to abhor Idols as most polluted things which thou wouldst not so much as touch dost nevertheless if thou hast an opportunity steal the Vessels which are consecrated to them and are as polluted as the Idols themselves In which he has a respect undoubtedly to that Law in Deut. vii 25 The graven Images of their Gods shalt thou burn with fire thou shalt not desire the Silver or Gold that is upon them c. Vers 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That is it is advantageous for a Person to profess himself a Jew and to carry about him the sacred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of that Religion in his body provided he observe its Laws and those especially which relate to a good Life and the Interest of Human Society I know Divines usually call Circumcision a Seal of the Covenant in the sense our Author uses those words But see what I have said of that matter in my Notes on Gen. xvii 10 Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If those who boast themselves to be circumcised Persons and bear the token of God's Covenant in their Bodies neglect the most holy Laws delivered to them by Moses their Circumcision can be of no use to them which is only a sign of their professing Judaism not the whole Jewish Religion Vers 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is as all Interpreters have observed the uncircumcised Circumcision was instituted as a sign of God's Covenant with which all that were marked professed their Resolution to obey the only true God Creator of Heaven and Earth But if there were any among other Nations who without that mark set upon the Jews only obey'd God in those things which they knew to be acceptable to him their Piety was as pleasing to God as that of the circumcised Jews That Sign was instituted only to put the Jews constantly in mind of their Duty and not as a thing in it self grateful to God Ibid 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is whoever observes those Laws that are of eternal Equity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherever he be and what Nation soever he be of shall be accounted by God in the number of his People as much as if he were circumcised 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Greeks properly signifies Equity or that which is alledged to shew a Cause to be just or good But in the Septuagint it is used to signify the Laws of God of what kind soever they be But in this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are those things which God may equitably require of all Nations such as Experience and right Reason dictate to be just Vers 27. Note h. I wonder learned Men did not perceive there was an Ellipsis in this Phrase and that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be understood which is expressed afterwards The meaning of S. Paul is this They that have been hitherto uncircumcised as they are born for so the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies and yet observe the Moral Laws are Jews that is in the number of God's People not indeed according to the letter of the Laws themselves but according to the mind of the Lawgiver and accordingly will shew by their Example that you are justly condemned who by the letter of the Law and Circumcision are esteemed the People of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those that are Jews by the Spirit and Righteousness shall condemn such as are Jews by the Letter and Circumcision Afterwards in Chap. iv 11 the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 has another signification to wit among the uncircumcised Nations or whilst they are uncircumcised for the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 often signifies distance of place or time See ver 29. in which this Interpretation is confirmed Of the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is opposed to the Intention or Mind of the Lawgiver I have already spoken in a Note on Mat. v. 17 Vers 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is that Circumcision is worthy of Praise which is agreeable to the spiritual Intention of God in instituting carnal Circumcision not that which according to the letter of the Law is made in the Flesh which in it self is neither good nor evil So that when the Apostle uses the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is as if he had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the spiritual Intention or Will of God as on the other hand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the letters of the Law Whence in the Writings of St. Paul the Law of Moses is often called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Letter and the Gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Spirit because this revealed the spiritual Intention of God which was concealed under the letter of the Law See 2 Cor. iii. 6 Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To wit the Jews who highly preferred a Person that was circumcised to one that was not having little or no regard to how they both lived They considered the letter of the Law and not the spirit of the Lawgiver and so neglecting Mens internal Qualifications commended chiefly their external CHAP. III. Vers 2. Note a. Col. 3. lin 16. NOthing could have been said more falsly concerning the Original of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was commonly used by the Greeks in that signification before ever the Greek Language was spoken in the Land of Canaan It was used by Herodotus and Thucydides who lived whilst the Persian Monarchy stood nor did the Septuagint for any other reason call the Pectoral 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tho improperly and barbarously than because that
Abraham that he accepted of his Piety So this word is used in 1 Cor. ix 2 where St. Paul bespeaks the Corinthians thus If I be not an Apostle unto others yet I am so to you the seal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of my Apostleship are ye in the Lord that is by you it may be known that I am an Apostle or you are a certain Evidence of my Apostleship It is a Metaphor taken from the custom of confirming things by setting a Seal to them See Note on Gen. xvii 11 Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have said on Chap. ii 27 that these words signify among the uncircumcised Gentiles or in the time of their Vncircumcision not in Vncircumcision And here it is visible that when the Apostle had a mind to express that he uses the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both in the Verse before and after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Chap. ii 26 27. signifies the uncircumcised Gentiles and therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signify among the uncircumcised Gentiles as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies through the middle of and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among all things And it may also signify the time in which any one is uncircumcised as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does in Life and the like Vers 17. Note b. St. Chrysostom's Interpretation is a mere Nicety as Beza rightly thought nothing being more common in Scripture than this Phrase before God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which has no such signification as in the place alledged by our Author out of Gen. xvii In this it signifies truly tho Men viz. the Jews falsly thought otherwise See my Notes on Gen. x. 9 CHAP. V. Vers 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which seems to be intended by these words is a power of doing Miracles conferred on the Apostles and innumerable others by Christ as the Doctor intimates in his Paraphrase For hereby the Apostles and the rest of the Christians were assured that Christ would not disappoint those who waited for the accomplishment of his promises having already so plentifully bestowed on them the promised gifts of his Spirit Vers 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is as our Author well observes in his Paraphrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beneficent or charitable which is more than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 just So in a great many places God is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies not his Goodness that is his Sanctity but his Bounty or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 towards Men See Psalm cxxxvi So Mat. xx 15 Is thine Eye evil because I am good 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is bountiful as the Parable shews So in Aelian Var. Hist Lib. 3.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Archytas was good to the Tarentines i. e. a Benefactor to them So the old Glosses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bonus benignus good gracious and Phavorinus among other things says it signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that without asking bestows good things freely CHAP. VI. Vers 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sense of this Phrase is not sufficiently expressed by our Author nor by other Interpreters The Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifies as it usually does the end of Baptism and the Apostle's meaning is no more than this we were baptized ΤΟ this end that we might be Christians So in 1 Cor. x. 2 the antient Jews are said to have been baptized 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. to that end that they might be the Disciples of Moses See Note on Mat. xxviii 19 And so in the next words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to the end we might imitate his Death viz. Christ's Vers 6. Note a. Col. 1. Lin. 34. after the words in the notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There are several things in the beginning of this Annotation I cannot assent to I. To confirm the sense our learned Author puts upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he alledges places as parallel that are not For there is a great difference between places in which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is joined with Pronouns Possessive where the discourse is about Men as my Body c. and places in which it is joined with the names of other things There is no doubt but the Phrase my Body is often all one with I my self by a Synechdoche of the part for the whole common in many Languages But when other Names are added to the word Body the Phrase is quite different because they cannot be said to consist of two parts of which one may be called the Body and give a denomination to the whole thing as to a Man Nor is there any comparison between Phrases whereof one as the Logicians speak signifies a substance as when Body is attributed to a Man and the other an accident as the body of Sin if that Phrase be to be understood of Sin it self II. I had rather in this place and such others recur to another very frequent Idiom of the Hebrew Language whereby a Noun Substantive in the Genitive Case is put for an Adjective and so by the Body of Sin understand a sinful Body or a Body obnoxious to Sin which Interpretation how agreeable it is to this place I shall afterwards shew So in Chap. vii 24 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Body obnoxious to death as I shall prove And Phil. iii. 21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is manifestly a vile Body and a glorious Body From whence saith St. Paul viz. from Heaven we look for our Lord Jesus Christ who shall change our Body of Vileness that it may be fashioned like unto the Body of his Glory III. By the Body of Sin or obnoxious to Sin here we are to understand reduplicativè as the Schoolmen speak the Body as such or the Body as a body of Sin The Apostle does not respect the Substance it self of the Body but this quality of it that it is the original incentive and instrument of Sin as he tells us in the next Chapter And it is certain sensible things do not draw us to sinful Actions any other way than by affecting our Bodies and by that means impressing our Minds And that most of the Sins we are guilty of proceed from an inordinate love of sensible things every body will readily acknowledg After therefore the Apostle had said our old Man was crucified that is we had left our old sinful Customs he very fitly adds that hereupon that deadly and destructive Power which was in our Bodies to draw us to Sin was taken away 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that the body of Sin is weakned or disabled for so I interpret the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the figure called Echasis not as a Causal So Col. ii 11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the Circumcision made without hands in the putting off the Body of the Sins of the Flesh for that Body
Life or the happiness of the next of which last it is only to be understood the Discourse being about that Inheritance whereof we are joint Heirs with Christ which respects only the other World But the Apostle goes on For the Creature lifting up as it were its head 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 waits for the Revelation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Sons of God which manifestly shews that he still speaks of the Glory which is to be revealed and which makes nothing to the distinction that was to be put between the incredulous Jews and those among them who believed and obey'd the Gospel If our Author had not been used to a most intricate Stile he would soon have perceived that he offered Violence to the Series of the Discourse II. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot be applied to such an expectation as he describes for we are properly said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when upon previous notice given of it we understand there is some great happiness to be looked for and which we impatiently expect tho perhaps we do not know perfectly what it is But the Gentiles knew nothing at all of their vocation to the true Religion upon the Gospel's being rejected by the Jews Who will believe that St. Paul in order to express the Affection of the Gentiles plunged in the greatest ignorance and wickedness and who accordingly could not be said otherwise than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be in expectation of the Gospel would make use of a word that has a singular emphasis in it It had been hardly tolerable if he had mollified it as much as possible by adding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or some such other form The phrases to seek death and to love death which signify to do those things which such as sought or loved death would do are not here to the purpose For the Heathens did not do what those ought to have done who were in a longing expectation of the Gospel The words of Jacob in Gen. xlix are otherwise to be understood as in my Notes on that passage I have shewn Nor is there any necessity of interpreting the words of Haggai of the Gentiles to whom Christ should be as yet unknown but they may be very well understood of those which after they had already embraced the Gospel should make Christ their desire that is should long to enjoy his promised Benefits and see him returning from Heaven to judg the World This is that which is the object of our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or earnest expectation III. It is very true that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Language of the Rabbins signifies men Our Author might also have added that in the same dialect the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies Heathens in opposition to Jews as his Countryman Dr. Lightfoot on Mark xvi 15 has observed The meaning of St. Paul therefore is that the Heathens who were converted to the Christian Faith did earnestly expect the time when the Sons of God were to be revealed that is as the foregoing and following context shews were to be made partakers of eternal Glory and Happiness by Christ after the universal Judgment He distinguishes afterwards himself and the believing Jews from the Heathens when he says that not only they or the Creature did expect that time but we also that have the first fruits of the Spirit i. e. we Jews who have first received the Holy Spirit from God The Gentiles at this time were no longer in expectation of what the Jews were about to do for the Gospel upon their rejection of it and continuing incredulous had been preached a good while ago to the Gentiles as is plain from the History of the Apostles and that account of times which our Author himself gives us in his Premonition to this Epistle 4. Besides I cannot imagin whence our Author inferred that the happiness of the Gentiles did depend upon the obduracy of the Jews as if upon supposition that the whole Jewish Nation or the greatest part of it had believed in Christ the Gentiles were never to have had the Christian Faith preached to them We are told indeed both by Christ and his Apostles that the Gospel was to be preached first to the Jews pursuant to God's decree but no where to them alone There was no difference to be made in this matter between the Jews and the rest of the World but only in the time of preaching the Gospel If the whole Jewish Nation had received Christ they had understood that the Gentiles were to be called to the same Faith and that they must abandon their Rites and Ceremonies and so all the Jews had become the Disciples of Christ I confess the obstinacy of the Jews was the occasion of the Apostles going to the Gentiles but what the Jews obstinacy was the occasion of Religion and Charity would have obliged the Apostles to if the Jews had all or most of them believed in Christ This we may conclude from the story of Cornelius in Acts x. to whom St. Peter was directly sent before the Apostles had departed from the Jews And this Christ expresly commanded in Mark xvi 15 and Acts i. 8 So that it hence also appears that our Author puts a wrong interpretation on this discourse of St. Paul Ibid. Note g. The Revelation of the Sons of God is manifestly the same with the Adoption spoken of in vers 23. and that being nothing else but an admission into the Kingdom of Heaven in the view of all the World the Revelation of the Sons of God must be that same Action of God whereby he will make known to all who those are that he acknowledges for his Sons The series of the discourse puts this out of all doubt The CREATURE earnestly waits for the REVELATION OF THE SONS OF GOD in hope because the Creature it self also shall be delivered from the bondage of Corruption into the glorious liberty of the Sons of God for we know that every Creature groaneth and travelleth in pain until now and NOT only they expect to wit the Revelation of the Sons of God and groan because of their present condition BUT we our selves also who have the first Fruits of the Spirit groan likewise our selves within our selves waiting for the ADOPTION of Sons viz. the Redemption of our Body The Doctor hinder'd his discerning this by mixing a great many foreign things with St. Paul's discourse of which there is not the least mark or footstep in the Apostle perhaps to have the reputation of saying something new By the Revelation or Adoption of the Sons of God is signified an act of Christ acknowledging those that are his at the day of Judgment in some such words as those Come ye blessed c. because it does not now appear who are the Sons of God by any particular and visible evidences of the divine Favour towards them above the rest of Mankind and so others deny them to be by a special
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I rather think it signifies a Man who is no more raised in his Mind to spiritual things than any other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 living Creature i. e. than Plants and Animals Perhaps Plants were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but at least Animals were stiled so in Greek at that time in imitation of the Latins so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were all one And to this the old Glosses seem to have a reference which interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by animalia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by animalis It is certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is frequently taken for that life which is common to us with Brutes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore is a Phrase used by way of contempt to signify a Person that is wholly devoted and enslaved to earthly things and entirely taken up with the concernments of this Life like a brute Creature As on the other hand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the Mind or reasonable Soul which is peculiar to Men and capable of discerning and assenting to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spiritual things The Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies here to assent in the notion it is more than once met with in Thucydides as H. Stephanus will inform us Tho there is no need of Thucydides's authority it being often so taken in the New Testament as in Mat. xi 14 where Christ speaking to the multitude concerning John the Baptist saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if ye will admit or receive it that is assent to what I say this is Elias which was to come See Mark x. 15 Luk. viii 13 and xviii 17 Acts xi 1 and xvii 11 Jam. i. 21 The sense according to this interpretation is very proper He that is not raised above an animal Life and so thinks of nothing but this World does not assent to those things which come from the Spirit of God for he looks upon them as Trifles Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The simple Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here seems to be put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to discern them viz. from such as are false So it is used in John x. 14 I know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 my Sheep and am known 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by them That is as I discern those who are so disposed as to believe in me from all others so they in like manner discern me from Impostors And I interpret this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here to discern because of what follows where on the contrary spiritual Men are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to discern for it is a clear opposition For such a Man does not distinguish or discern those things which are from the Spirit of God from Trifles When it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he cannot discern them the meaning of that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as long as he continues sensual and judges sensually viz. because being biassed by his sensual disposition he minds only present and sensible things Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is because the Doctrin of the Gospel is grounded not upon carnal reasonings which respect only present things but upon spiritual which take in the knowledg of things Future and Invisible and suppose it to be already in the Mind or in fewer words by such a disposition of Mind as whereby wise Men are not less affected with incorporeal and future Things than those which are present and sensible It is true what our Author here says in his Paraphrase but beside the scope of this place The opposition here made between Spiritual and Animal things plainly proves what I have said So in John vi 63 by the Spirit is meant such things or Doctrines as could not be understood by the use or knowledg of things sensible See afterwards Chap. iii. 1 11. and x. 3 4. CHAP. III. Vers 15. Note b. IT is truly observed by learned Men that this is a proverbial form of Speech taken from those who hastily and narrowly make their escape from a Fire which had like to consume them Such another Metaphor there is in Livy Lib. 22. cap. 35. L. Aemilium Paulum qui ex damnatione collegae sua prope ambustus evaserat ad petitionem compellit And cap. 40. the same Aemilius saith se populare incendium priore consulatu semiustum effugisse That in his former Consulship he had escaped out of a common Fire half burned But our learned Author forcedly applies all this to his Gnosticks for tho in Judaea it is possible the Gnosticks might feign themselves to be Jews to escape persecution from them because the Jews there were far more numerous than the Heathens it does not follow there was any reason to be afraid of them at Corinth or in Achaia where the Jews were much fewer in number than the Greeks and where their Complaints of the Christians were not hearkened to by the Roman Magistrates as appears from Acts xviii 12 c. And after the Jews once began for their Seditions to be suspected by the Romans as not long after it happened it had not been carnal Policy for any to join themselves to their party So that there is no room here for what the Doctor says about the compliance of the Gnosticks with the Jews If the Gnosticks had reason to fear any danger in Greece it was from the Romans but it does not appear there was any persecution raised against the Christians in those parts till a great while after the destruction of Jerusalem See Mr. Dodwell's Dissert de paucitate Martyrum among his Cyprianicae So that that day of which St. Paul speaks cannot be referred to the destruction of the Jews It is much better by Grotius understood of a long space of time which very often discovers what is true and what is false as many of the Antients have observed Consult Stobaei Excerpta de Rerum Natura Tit. 11. where there are a great many sayings to that purpose As for the Fire which St. Paul here makes mention of that is nothing but an examination of Doctrins which after some time the Christians would set themselves to and upon which all that were false would be rejected and the true retained which is called Fire by a Metaphor taken from Metals They that retained the foundation of Christianity tho they built strange Doctrins upon it would at length upon that examination of them find that they had built stubble upon Gold and when they understood that they had been in danger of casting away the foundation of Religion it self for those Errors they would presently forsake them and escape as out of the Fire not without the loss of their Reputation and Time besides what they must be reckoned to have lost in pious Actions and right Apprehensions by continuing so long in their Errors That Character of the Gnosticks which our Author would have to be contained in the following words agrees to any others that
place does not necessarily signify Devils or evil Spirits for the Heathens did not always sacrifice to evil Spirits if we consider what were their true Thoughts But the greatest part of their Idolatry consisted in this that when they ought to have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the Heathens also themselves have confessed that they did not offer sacrifice to Gods but to Demons As appears by the words of Porphyry in Lib. 2. de Abstinentia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor did those who knew the powers of the World offer bloody Sacrifices to the Gods but to Demons and this is affirmed in the Latin it is translated creditur which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Divines themselves CHAP. XI Vers 4. Note a. IF it had been the Custom in capital Punishments to cover the Heads only of Men and not of Women our Author would have rightly deduced what St. Paul here says from that practice but seeing there was no difference between Men and Women in this respect why would it have dishonoured the head of a Man to have a Veil cast over him like a condemned Person and not of a Woman I rather think therefore that the Apostle had a respect only to the Custom of the Greeks among whom it had been a disgrace for a Man to speak publickly with his Head covered and a Woman with her Head bare Our Author's distinction between the Prepositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will appear to be vain if we compare Mark xiv 3 and Mat. xxvi 7 Vers 7. Note b. Here our learned Author abuses an impropriety in the Septuagint to enlarge our Lexicons with new significations of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he does also elsewhere I. It is false that the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chabod simply taken signifies a Beam tho if it be added to the word Sun it signifies its Splendor and Beams It is false also that because the Septuagint have perhaps somewhere tho I cannot tell where improperly rendred what ought to have been translated a Beam by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a Beam To authorize that signification it was requisite they should have frequently and industriously used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to that purpose and not rashly before they were aware II. Nor is it true that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was ever rendred by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or tho 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be metaphorically called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that those words are promiscuous The Doctor should have produced but one example in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signified a Beam or Splendor Besides is this Phrase the Woman is the beam of the Man any thing plainer than this is the glory of the Man which he interprets by the former But the truth is what our Author here says is only a misinterpretation of Grotius's Note upon this place to which I refer the Reader III. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used by the Septuagint for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or that symbolical likeness of God which appeared in the Tabernacle because that used to be so called and not because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies any Similitude as well as the Hebrew word There is nothing more deceitful than such sort of reasonings as the Doctor often makes use of in order to find out the signification of words unless at the same time their Use and Analogy be regarded IV. Setting aside what is said about the Glory of God in the Pentateuch which does not at all belong to this place tho Grotius thinks otherwise the Man is called the Glory of God because whoever looks upon a Man will perceive him to be a piece of Workmanship worthy of the divine Majesty and give Glory to him upon that account And the Woman is the glory of the Man because there is some ground for the Man to glory when he considers that the Woman was formed out of his Body and created for his Help and Assistance The following Verse does shew that by being his glory the Apostle means that for which he was made and we need not go any further to understand St. Paul's Mind The sense of the whole place is that the Man indeed ought to have his Head uncovered because God made him as his other Works to be beheld and it is not for the glory of God to have that Work of his hid by a Veil but the Woman which was made for the Man ought to be veiled because she is inferior to the Man who uses her as he pleases and would have her veiled It is for the Man's glory to have his Authority appear over the Woman and as in other instances so in this particularly of having her conceal her self whenever he pleases Solomon has a saying in the xi th Chapter of Proverbs vers 16. which according to the Version of the Septuagint is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so saith Esdras Lib. 3. c. iv 7 of Women 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But of this whole reasoning and many other such it must be observed that they are not at all demonstrative because they are not grounded upon things that are unchangeable but alterable according to the Custom or Opinion of Men. It was thought by the Greeks to be a token of the Mens Authority over the Women for the Men to appear abroad with their Heads uncovered as being their own Masters and exposing themselves to every ones view and on the contrary an Argument of subjection in Women to go abroad veil'd because that signified them to be but one Man 's who had power to remove their Veil and would not have them publickly beheld But if a contrary Custom had prevailed St. Paul would have reasoned quite otherwise to perswade the Corinthians to what he endeavoured to induce them viz. to do all things decently in the Church and wherever any one prophesied I confess he grounds his Argument also upon the History of the Creation but if we consider the thing who can deny but that the Woman was created after the Image of God and for his Glory as well as the Man See Gen. ii 27 Nor indeed is this denied by St. Paul but only in a certain sense viz. as the Woman is said to have been created after the Man and to be an assistant to him And in this sense only his reasoning is valid and not by a general and if I may so speak mathematical deduction Vers 10. Note d. The Rabbi cited by Schickard was not a Talmudical Doctor but only cited a place out of the Talmud as we may see by the words that Schickard alledges Ibid. Note e. About this difficult place of Scripture I have written two years ago two Letters in answer to a Friend who desired to have my Opinion of it which I shall here propose to the Readers examination declaring my self ready to
the Corinthians See chap. v. But the Doctor thought he could never say enough about Church Censures Ibid. Note h. I. Of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phil. Jac. Maussacus has copiously and learnedly treated in a Dissert premised to Harpocration where he has at large shewn that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies not only Languages in general but strange Languages and words peculiar to certain Dialects for the interpretation of which Glossaries were composed II. Tho it is said in Acts ii 5 that there were at Jerusalem devout Men out of every Nation under Heaven who heard the Apostles speaking in their own Languages yet that expression is not to be taken in the strictest and most comprehensive sense because it is certain universal Phrases are often used for indefinite or particular ones of which see my Notes on Gen. vii 19 and Part. 2. Sect. ii cap. vi § 16. of my Ars Critica And indeed it is not at all probable that the Apostles could speak all the Languages so much as of the Asian People among which were the Scythians who inhabited a great and vast Country towards the North and the Seres and Japanners and divers Indian Nations to which they never went And therefore by all Nations and all Languages must be meant the most and most famous within the Roman Empire and in bordering parts of the World Tho I do not doubt but that if the Providence of God had called the Apostles to the most remote Countries God would have miraculously conferred on them the knowledg of their Languages But it was time enough for that when they had occasion to use them III. There are some things to be observed about the Gift of Tongues which I shall afterwards set down because our Author has past it by CHAP. XIII Vers 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Paul here seems to speak according to the opinion of the Vulgar who think that the Angels cannot communicate their Thoughts to one another without speech tho Spirits whether pure or clothed with another kind of Body may have other ways to convey their Thoughts to each other And those ways altogether as conceivable as the manner how we understand one anothers Thoughts by Speech which is not at all as I might easily shew if this were a proper place to philosophize in But I shall rather set down a passage out of Michael Psellus in his little Book de operationibus Daemonum where he describes thus the manner of their discoursing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that speaks if he be afar off is forced to speak very loud but if he be near he whispers what he has to say into the Ear of the Person he speaks to And if he could have an immediate access to the spirit of the Mind he would not need so much as to whisper but he might make himself be understood and communicate whatever he had a mind by a secret way without any noise in the same manner as they say Souls do after their separation from the Body who converse without making any sensible impression on each other And this way the Devils also discourse with us Men and wage war with us unperceived And afterwards he saith thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Demons have any peculiar Language we shall not find for instance Hebrew or Greek or Syriack or any other barbarous Tongue For what occasion have they for Speech who converse together without Speech as I before said But he goes on and saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But as among the Demons of the Nations some presided over one and some over another and had each their distinct place of Residence so they severally spake the peculiar Languages of those Nations For which reason those of them that resided in Greece gave their responses in Greek Heroick Verses and those in Chaldea were invoked in the Chaldean Language c. This as it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any examination to be admitted so nor absolutely I think to be rejected wherefore I thought fit to set it down here that the Learned might judg of it Ibid. Note a. There are several things in this Annotation which I cannot assent to and are undoubtedly false I. From the order observed in reckoning up the Consort in Psalm cl it cannot be inferred that the Cymbal was a musical Instrument of a bigger sound than those before named for who told Dr. Hammond that the Discourse ascended Does the Psalmist use to be so exact in placing his words They must have read the Psalm but very carelesly that can think so II. The Cymbal cannot be said to have been a wind Instrument It was made in the form of a Hemisphere hollow within and two Cymbals were shaken and struck one against another to make a sound If any one ask me saith Adr. Turnebus in Advers Lib. 26. c. 33. what sort of Instrument a Cymbal was I will send him to the Herb Cotyledon Pennywort whose Leaves resemble a Cymbal So saith Scribonius Largus Mentastrum vel radicem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quae herba similia folia Cymbalis habet Wild Mint or the root of the Herb Cotyledon the leaves of which are like Cymbals He might have added that this Herb was for that reason called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as appears by Dioscorides in Lib. 4. c. 92. who gives this description of it and at the same time tells us what was the form of the Cymbal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cotyledon some call it Scytalium others Cymbalium hath a Leaf like a Sawcer of a round shape and gradually concave That the manner of sounding these Instruments was by dashing or shaking them against one another appears by this Verse of Virgil Georg. Lib. 4. vers 64. where he shews the way how to call back a swarm of Bees Tinnitusque cie matris quate cymbala circum On which place Servius hath this Note by whose words it will more fully appear what was the form of the Cymbal quae viz. cymbala in ejus Matris Deûm tutela sunt quia sunt similia HEMICYCLIS coeli quibus cingitur Terra quae est mater Deorum Which are under her protection because they are like the half Circles of the Heaven by which the Earth is encompassed which is the Mother of the Gods That they were shook together we may learn also from the words of Isidore in Orig. Lib. 2. c. 21. Cymbala acetabula quaedam sunt quae percussa invicem se tangunt sonum faciunt Dicta autem Cymbala quia cum ballematica simul percutiuntur Ita enim Graeci dicunt Cymbala ballematica Cymbals are a sort of Sawcers which being struck against one another make a sound The reason why they were called Cymbals was because c. What the meaning of the word ballematica is I do not understand but the word Cymbal must be derived not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
in a rude Stile we muct not go about to anatomize every single Word or Expression in them or examin all that is said with a kind of Geometrical Exactness which the nature of an Idiotic Stile will not bear which regards things only in general and not every minute or particular circumstance nor may we deduce too rigorous Consectaries from any phrases used in these Writings which those who speak rudely never think of We must have always before our Eyes the substance of the Gospel and the main design of the Speaker and by that his expressions must be explained rather than by an over-nice and subtil scanning of every word But this is a Subject which would require a whole Volume to treat of it as it deserves in this place it may suffice to have touched briefly upon the chief heads Vers 9. Note b. It is certain that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to be burdensom esse oneri as it is render'd in the Vulgar or something like it that signifies a Man's living upon another's Charity But the only difficulty is how the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comes to have this signification The Doctor conjectures that it is to ask or importune because they that ask any thing of another cause a chilness or numness in those whom they ask But this is harsh and forced The passage which he refers to in Seneca is in Lib. 2. de Beneficiis c. 2. But Seneca does not speak of a Person of whom any thing is asked but that asks and therefore that passage is nothing to the purpose Molestum verbum est saith he onerosum demisso vultu dicendum Rogo I ask is a troublesom and burdensom word and must be spoken with a submissive look I had rather say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be burdensom because those who are benummed with a Disease are much heavier than ordinary whence by a Metaphor it was used to signify to be a burden to others through Poverty Whence St. Paul elsewhere expressing the same thing uses the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Thess ii 9 For ye remember Brethren our labour and travel for working night and day because we would not burden any of you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we preached unto you the Gospel of God See likewise 2 Thess iii. 8 This Interpretation is confirmed by the opposition which is made in this very Verse between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to keep himself from being burdensom Vers 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The false Apostles with wonderful haughtiness boasted that they were Hebrews that they were Israelites that they were the Seed of Abraham the very same thing expressed several ways for Emphasis sake which St. Paul here to shew the vanity of that empty vain-glorious boasting imitates Quanquam eadem ferè sunt unâ sententiâ cooriuntur plura tamen esse existimantur quoniam aures animum saepius feriunt Tho they are almost the same things and come all to one sense yet they are thought to be many because they strike several times upon the ears and mind saith Favorinus in Gellius Lib. 12. c. 24. where he gives us several Examples of such Repetitions out of the best Authors both Greek and Latin Vers 24. Note c. It is manifest that our Author had not look'd into the Passage which he cites out of Josephus in the Historian himself because he alledges it but by halves and translates it absurdly It is in Lib. 4. c. 8. in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For his bold and rash Accusation and Calumny let him suffer punishment receiving forty stripes save one Our Author absurdly renders the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him extend himself as if it were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which would be a corrupt reading if it were any where extant because there is nothing that can be referred to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 except 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as other Copies read it that is luat let him suffer Vers 25. Note d. Since several other hardships which St. Paul here says he had undergon as his being thrice scourged by the Jews c. are not mentioned by St. Luke I do not doubt but he has omitted also this of his having been in the Deep And hence it may be infer'd that Arguments drawn from St. Luke's silence about any thing are not very strong because he has not written an entire History of St. Paul's Actions even for the time that his History refers to Vers 32. Note e. Mr. Pocock in his Notes on Greg. Abul-Farajius his History of the People and Customs of the Arabians p. 77. acknowledges that many of the Gassanii were called Harethi or Aretae but he tells us he never observed that all the Arabian Chiefs were so stiled by them as Jos Scaliger affirmed But Scaliger does not speak of the Kings of Damascus but of the Hagarens whose strongest Fort was Petra See Lib. 2. de Emend Temp. p. 111. Ed. Roverianae CHAP. XII Vers 2. Note a. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rightly here interpreted by Grotius a Christian whom our Author ought to have followed since there are manifest Instances of this Phrase in that sense as I have shewn on Rom. xii 5 It is a thing to be wonder'd at that Dr. Hammond in his Paraphrase on Rom. xvi has not once rightly interpreted this Phrase The Examples which he here alledges are perfectly forein to his purpose and all the likeness between them is only in the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vers 7. Note b. If St. Paul had said simply that there was given to him a Messenger of Satan that thrust a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Twig in his Flesh I should easily believe that this passage were rightly understood by Dr. Hammond and other Expositors of some Persecutions which St. Paul suffered But seeing he says there was given me a Twig in the Flesh a Messenger of Satan to buffet me I rather think a molestation from some particular evil Spirit is here meant who continually afflicted him and put him to as great pain as if he had thrust a Twig into his Flesh and brought as much contempt upon him as if he had been buffeted St. Paul not being ignorant of the cause of his suffering so many Evils And because it is before said Lest the greatness of the Revelations should exalt me or lest I should be lifted up above measure by the excellency of the Revelations I am apt to think that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is an allusion to some very sharp piece of Wood not of any sort whatsoever but one which should be placed over a Man stooping ready to prick him grievously when ever he rose up Let us represent to our selves the case of Regulus whom the Carthaginians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 killed by shutting him up in a Cage that had Goads on all sides which are the words of Appian in Lib.
sequatur Vna tamen in re maxime utilis ut quotidiani semper codem modo formati sermonis fastidium levet nos a vulgari dicendi genere defendat Quo siquis parce cum res poscet utetur velut adsperso quodam condimento jucundior erit At qui nimium affectaverit ipsam illam gratiam varietatis amitâ—et c. Every figure would be an imperfection if it were not chosen but casual It is an excellency if it have something probable following it But there is one thing in which it is most useful and that is to take away that nauseousness which is bred by forming our Discourse always after the same manner and to keep us from a vulgar way of expression Which if any one sparingly use and only when the thing requires it it will give a grateful relish as it were to his Discourse But if he unnecessarily affects it he will lose all that agreableness which a Variety would otherwise cause c. Now I do not think there is any one will suppose that St. Paul purposely chose those harsh and frequent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make his Discourse less distastful to his Readers And therefore it remains that they be looked on as Defects and Imperfections which yet are no prejudice to his matter because the Gospel is a very plain and easy thing which does not need to be illustrated by any Light dâ—â—â—â—ding upon Elegancy or exactness of Expression It is well said by St. Jerom on Chap. vi of this Epistle to the Galatians vers 1. Qui putant Paulum juxta humilitatem non vere dixisse etsi imperitus Sermone non tamen scientia defendant hujus loci consequentiam Debuit quippe secundum ordinem dicere vos qui spirituales estis instruite hujusmodi in spiritu lenitatis considerantes vosmet ipsos vos tentemini non plurali inferre numerum singularem Hebraeus igitur ex Hebraeis qui esset in vernaculo sermone doctissimus profundos sensus aliena lingua exprimere non valebat nec CURABAT MAGNOPERE DE VERBIS CUM SENSUM HABERET IN TUTO They who think that St. Paul spake only out of Modesty and not the real truth when he said tho I am rude in Speech yet not in Knowledg let them defend the Connexion of this place For according to good Syntax he ought to have said Ye that are Spiritual restore such a one in the spirit of Meekness considering your sâ—lves lest you also be tempted and not have brought a Singular number upon a Plural But being a Hebrew of the Hebrews and very skilful in his own Native Dialect he could not express his profound sense in another Language and AS LONG AS THE SENSE WAS SAFE HE DID NOT MUCH CONCERN HIMSELF ABOUT WORDS II. The Passage referred to by our Author in the same St. Jerom in Comment ad Ephes iii. I have set down a little more fully in my Latin Translation than the Doctor who did not complete the sense but ended at the word adnotamus and it is thus Quotiescunque solaecismos aut tale quid adnotamus non Apostolum pulsamus ut malevoli criminantur sed magis Apostoli adsertores sumus c. Whenever we take notice of any Solaecisms or the like we do not injure the Apostle as some malicious Persons would lay to our charge but we do him so much the more Justice c. Our Author adds and so Epist cap. 1. Quaest 10. which I have omitted because to produce the testimony of St. Jerom in that manner is absurd and I could not find the passage to which he referred I don't think he look'd himself into St. Jerom when he sent us to that place For otherwise he would certainly have cited him with more care and instead of those Divines which he alledges appealed to the Testimony of St. Jerom whose Authority is much more considerable And with St. Jerom he might have joined Origen who lays down this Rule of which more at large in cap. 8. Philocaliae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we ought not to attempt the correcting of any seeming Solaecisms or verbal incoherences in Scripture where to discerning Persons the sense is well enough connected Vers 11. Note g. I. I do not think that from an ill interpretation of one place in the Old Testament we ought to deduce an unheard of sense of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if it therefore ordinarily signified the same with the Hebrew used in that place One single place in the Septuagint where they arbitrarily fix a sense upon a word which they could not properly render does not change the use of a Language as I have already elsewhere suggested For they used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not because they thought it signified just the same with the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but because it contained a sense not altogether disagreable to that place as they imagined So that I chuse here to follow the vulgar Interpretation and especially seeing it best sutes with the context viz. when Peter was come to Antioch I withstood him to the face because he was to be blamed that is because he did what he ought not to have done not because he was look'd upon by others as a Dissembler For first he did really pretend to avoid the Society of the Gentiles which he used not to do nor ought to have done And secondly others did not see him dissemble because by his example and manner of Life the Gentiles began to be perswaded that they were obliged by the Jewish Laws So that it is rightly observed by Grotius after a great many others that the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here is the same with the Verbal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 II. The Passage in Ecclesiasticus makes nothing at all to the purpose which is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shame is upon the Toief and an evil Condemnation upon the double Tongue that is they are at length condemned and suffer a shameful Punishment I do not see any necessity of interpreting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here by detection Vers 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They are said to compel not only who use Commands Threatnings or Violence but those who when they say or do any thing others dare not but follow their Example or Authority or cannot neglect any thing which they would have them do without great prejudice to their Interest or Reputation So the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken in 2 Cor. xii 11 where St. Paul says that the Corinthians had so carried themselves towards him that to keep up his Reputation he was compelled to speak somewhat more highly and honourably of himself than he would otherwise have done And to the same sense the Latin cogere is used by Cicero in the beginning of his Book de Amicitia where Laelius speaking to his Sons-in-law who had earnestly entreated him to discourse concerning Friendship says Vim hoc
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here is for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as is rightly observed by Grotius for nothing worse could have befallen a Man whom the Law cursed than Crucifixion And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in our room for as a Sacrifice is killed in our stead and suffers that Death which we deserved so Christ died in the stead of the Jews and all Mankind Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of this place I have treated at large on Deut. xxi 23 and I shall not here repeat what I have there said All that remains is to shew that St. Paul does not disagree with Moses Moses had said that he that is hanged is the curse or abomination of God that is according to the Statutes of the Law a very polluted thing But St. Paul follows the Septuagint excepting that he omits the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they have because indeed it is not necessary nay in the Greek Language might have bred a mistake For all that the Apostle means is this that Christ was dealt with by the Romans as a vile Malefactor tho he was perfectly innocent and underwent a very infamous Punishment which according to the Customs of the Jews render'd the Person so suffering a polluted thing and a greater and more disgraceful than which could not have been inflicted upon the most profligate and cursed Offender So that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the foregoing words If St. Paul had added by God tho according to the Hebrew phrase that signifies no more than what I have here said and shewn in my Notes on Deuteronomy yet those who understood only Greek might have been offended with an expression which seemed to intimate that Christ was cursed by God that is hateful to God which is so far from Truth that God was always well pleased with Christ and especially then when he beheld him on the Cross performing or having performed the highest Office of Love to Mankind and most signal instance of subjection to himself It is certainly known that the Jews who from that time did not sufficiently understand the Hebrew Language abused that phrase Nobis saith St. Jerom on this place solet a Judaeis pro infamia objici quod Salvator noster Dominus sub Dei fuerit maledicto It is a thing we Christians are often upbraided with by the Jews as a matter of disgrace that our Lord and Saviour was under the curse of God Vers 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. While Christ established a New Covenant through his Death and thereby abrogated the old one he did not only free the Jews from the Mosaical Yoke but dying also for the Gentiles he obtained from God the forgiveness of all their past Sins if they did but believe and obey for the future so that upon their Faith they are accounted just by God in the same manner as Abraham The Connexion therefore of this Verse with the foregoing is this Ver. 13. Christ has delivered the Jews from a necessity of observing the Mosaical Ceremonies and from the fear of that Curse which was threatned against those of that Nation who wilfully neglected them or thought themselves not bound to observe them having established a New Covenant between God and Men by an ignominious and cruel Death which may be called cursed according to the stile of the Law 14. And he has so freed the Jews from the Mosaical Yoke as at the same time to provide that the Gentiles upon whom it was never imposed and who by those Ceremonies were kept off from having any communion with the Jews might setting aside the observation of those Rites be adopted into Abraham's Family become partakers of the same benefits with Abraham and embracing the Gospel receive the gifts of the Holy Ghost as well as the believing Jews Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It seems at first sight that the word which here followed should have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 went before in the third Person but the reason of St. Paul's using the first is because this latter part of the Verse belongs as well to the Jews as the Gentiles with whom he therefore here joins himself and his Countrymen Vers 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is highly probable that this was a commonly received way of arguing in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 midraschim or Allegorical Interpretations of that Age. And the Jews indeed might well enough make use of it against the Arabians Edomites and Samaritans who boasted that they also were the posterity of Abraham to shew that the Promises made to Abraham and to his Seed did not belong to them But if it be considered in it self it cannot be thought of any force by those who have other Sentiments because the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 zerah is a collective name and signifies any succeeding Generations whatsoever tho of a different Race Nay as learned Men have observed the Jews never used to apply the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the plural number but to the Seeds of divers sorts of Plants But it was sufficient that this way of reasoning was thought to be conclusive by the Jews to give the Apostle ground to make use of it against them and what they were wont to say on behalf of the Israelites according to the Flesh against the Arabians Edomites and Samaritans St. Paul might properly enough alledg in honour of those who were Israelites according to the Spirit to overthrow the carnal Jews with their own Weapons I have already before observed that St. Paul disputes against the Jews upon their own Principles and there will be other examples of that in this Epistle Vers 16. Note d. Tho the word Christ elsewhere signifies the Head of the Church in conjunction with his Body or Members yet in this place I rather think it is used for his Body alone that is Christ's Disciples for there is nothing in the Covenant made with Abraham properly speaking promised to Christ but rather Christ himself was promised therein to Abraham together with all his Benefits Vers 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is God did not acquiesce in the Revelations he made to Abraham but when he saw that the Israelites transgressed all rules of Piety and Vertue he added the Mosaical Law to keep them in some measure within the bounds of their Duty till the Messias should come This is all that St. Paul here means whatever our Divine pieces up his Paraphrase with Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So undoubtedly it must be read and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as may appear from the 16 th Verse where the Promises are said to have been made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Seed not the Seed it self promised That is only a correction made by some Criticks who thought Christ to be here intended whereas St. Paul speaks about Christians of all Nations who without Circumcision after the
never by any Man excepting the Saviour of all Men Christ Jesus expressed in his Life But it will be said it may be that St. Paul has a reference to the Ceremonial part of the Law and not that which is Moral To which I answer by confessing indeed that he has a respect chiefly to the Ritual part of the Law but so as not to exclude the Moral part of it nor consequently the Moral Law it self which if compared with the Commands of Christ comprehends only the Elements of true Piety as sufficiently appears from Mat. v. and the following Chapters For many things were lawful under the Mosaical Law relating to Manners which are there forbidden by Christ What the Moral Law given by Moses commands is indeed Good and Holy and what it forbids Evil but it is not a perfect rule of Holiness that is it does not command every thing that is Holy nor forbid every thing that is evil For instance Husbands loving their Wives to such a degree as to bear with their Manners and never to put them away but in case of Adultery is a vertue not enjoined in the Mosaical Law as the contrary Inhumanity in putting them away at every turn is not therein prohibited nay is expresly permitted if they did but give them a Bill of Divorce See Mat. v. 31 32. Vers 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is the Jews or their Proselytes as is rightly observed by Grotius who upon embracing the New Covenant were no longer oblig'd by the Laws of the old to which they were before subject See my Note on Chap. iii. 13 Vers 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The words Spirit of his Son are capable of two senses both which St. Paul seems to have comprehended under this Phrase First by the Spirit of Christ may be meant the Spirit which Christ had promised to the Apostles and the rest of the Christians which he accordingly afterwards sent down upon them and by whose power they were enabled to work Miracles For on the effusion of that Spirit upon them the Jews and such as of Gentiles had embraced the Jewish Religion perceived that they were then much more bountifully dealt with than when they were under the Law and called upon God afterwards with greater assurance no longer now behaving himself as a hard Master or requiring the observation of superfluous Rites upon the severest Penalties but as a most gracious and compassionate Father Whence that Spirit is said to cry Abba Father that is to make the Jews upon their Conversion to the Christian Religion to look upon God as a Father and not as a severe Master Secondly by the Spirit of his Son may be meant such an affection of Mind towards God as was in his Son as the Spirit of Elias and the like And that Affection was produced in the minds of the Jews by the knowledg and participation of the Benefits of the Gospel Both these Spirits jointly residing in the minds of Men seem to be called by St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Spirit of Adoption in Rom. viii 16 Vers 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. St. Paul here speaks not to those who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by birth Jews and had been brought up in the knowledg of the true God but those who were made Jews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by assumption that is Proselytes to the Jewish Religion before their Conversion to Christianity And it appears that what the Apostle here says has a reference to such Persons because he afterwards demands of them how they could turn again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the weak and beggarly Elements that is to the Jewish Rites which they had before in part at least observed If Dr. Hammond had not overlook'd this which is obscurely intimated by Grotius on vers 5. he would have given a much more clear and exact Paraphrase of this and the following Verse Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is to Gods which Men had made and invented for themselves for the opposite to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is things which depend upon the decrees and institutions of Men. That this place ought to be thus understood I have shewn at large in my Ars Critica Par. 2. Sect. 1. Cap. vii Vers 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have already before said that by weak and poor Elements is meant the Jewish Law and that is clear from this and the following Verse But there are two things which I shall here a little more particularly enquire into first why the Mosaical Precepts are called weak and poor secondly how the Galatians who had worshipped false Gods are said to return to those weak Elements The Elements of any Discipline relating to good Manners and divine Worship such as is the discipline of Moses cannot be stiled weak in any other sense than as they are not effectual to reform Mens Manners or bring them to worship God in that manner as they ought to do And indeed the Rewards and Punishments of the Jewish Law which in a literal sense were only temporal could not have such an influence upon the Minds of Men as to bring them to any great degree of Vertue For tho they might restrain them from committing those Sins which would have render'd them infamous in the Eyes of others or exposed them to civil Punishments yet they could not keep them from doing a great many things contrary to true Vertue of which see Mat. v. and what is said by Grotius and Dr. Hammond on that Chapter In this sense therefore the Law was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 weak that is ineffectual and uncapable of making Men truly Pious and Vertuous See also Rom. viii 3 with the same learned Mens Notes Again any Institution may be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a metaphorical sense when it is imperfect in its kind and a great many things are wanting in it which must be made up and supplied out of another as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are Mon destitute of the necessary supports of Life and who unless relieved by the liberality of others are unable to subsist And such an Institution is the Law which unless it be perfected by the Gospel cannot bring Men to such a degree of Piety as to make them acceptable to God and worthy of eternal Life as manifestly appears both from the nature of the thing it self and a great deal said by Christ to that purpose in the fifth Chapter of St. Matthew And this may possibly be the reason why St. Paul here uses the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rather than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imperfect to intimate by a word of a special Emphasis that the Law of Moses was not only in a few things but exceeding poor and defective For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not only signify poor but poor to a degree of Beggery And therefore the Greeks distinguish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As he was making a speech to the People and saying among other things that he had been abroad many Years they cryed out Eight and this they signified also with their Hands that they might receive so many pieces of Gold Vpon which he smiled and said himself also Eight and afterwards distributed among them two hundred Drachms It had been better therefore to have instanced in some other Triumph which might easily have been done See what is said by Suetonius about the Gifts of Julius Caesar upon that occasion in Chap. xxxviii of his Life II. What our Author says here about the signification of the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he owes to Mr. Pocock whose conjecture that is in Porta Mosis Cap. ii But when that Verb signifies to give there follows a Dative case because to receive for any one is to receive that we may give it to him See Exod. xviii 12 and xxv 2 But the Hebrew here has 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Man which has made learned Men conjecture and not without reason that St. Paul read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 laadam to Man Vers 14. Note c. Seeing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifies a square Body and secondarily a Dye because of its figure and seeing Impostours made use of Dice or Lots for divination the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here would not be ill rendred sortilegium a Lottery or divination by Lots And this is what was meant by Irenaeus in the place alledged by the Doctor for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is magical divination by Lots not deceitful Artifices such as are used by Conjurers And tho the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here follows it is not therefore consequent that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the same with that but only that they were often joined together Conjectures about the meaning of words which are grounded neither upon their Etymology nor their proper signification nor use are not to be much regarded nothing being more uncertain Vers 16. Note e. I confess the Apostles words in this place are somewhat dark and intricate but yet they did not need such a laborious explication as this whereby tho the substance of the matter be made clearer yet the particulars are more obscured The Doctor who never minded propriety of words in his Stile or knew what it was to carry on one design with the same simple thred of Discourse confounds here every thing with his forced and perplexed reasonings and has no regard at all to the use of words I. His first question is altogether unnecessary and impertinent in this place for St. Paul says nothing here about the Heart nor is there any Metaphor taken from the Heart in his words So that in explaining this Verse there can be no room for any enquiry about the Heart tho the Heart be as it were the workhouse of the Blood in which the vital Moisture is temper'd and whence it is spread by a reciprocal flowing through the whole Body St. Paul has no reference at all to that but to the effluvia of the Brain from which proceed Spirits that help the motion of the Blood and moisten the whole Body and so the Body which would otherwise wither and decay is made to encrease II. The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must not be joined with those immediately going before but with the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so as to signify those Conduits or Passages by which the Body receives Spirits from the Brain thus from which Head the whole Body being fitly compacted and joined together according to the working or efficacy of the Head in proportion to every part maketh encrease of the Body i. e. is encreased by receiving Spirits from the Brain through the joints of supply or by which the Spirits are conveyed for the supply of the whole Body It 's certain the Body cannot be said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with Nerves Arteries and Veins but rather with Muscles Tendons and Bones But St. Paul says nothing of these but only that the Body being fitly compacted and joined together receiveth effluvia from its Head by Conduits belonging to the whole Body which therefore it would not receive if the Members were put out of Joint or divided from one another because those effluvia pass through the Joints or Ligaments of the Body So that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the Joints and Ligatures of the Members properly so called through which the Nerves pass which convey the Spirits proceeding from the Brain to all the parts of the Body III. The place in the Colossians is wrested by our Author while he supposes it to be clear and undoubted that St. Paul has a respect there to Veins and Arteries of which perhaps he had not the least thought He speaks thus after making mention of the Head from which all the Body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 increases with the increase of God Where by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Apostle means the Joints and Ligaments of the Body that is the Muscles Tendons and Gristles which are in those places where the Members are joined together to perform as it were two Offices first to receive the Conduits whereby the effluvia which proceed out of the Brain descend into the Body secondly to cement or knit together all the Members with one another So that the Apostles meaning is this From which Head the whole Body receives a divine Increase by the Joints and Ligaments whereby those Spirits are supplied and by which the Members are joined together as by so many strong Bands This seems to me to be clear especially seeing every one knows that no Arteries descend from the Brain but only Veins by which the Blood is carried back to the Heart and Nerves which are dispersed through the whole Body IV. I cannot tell what made our Author think that the Genitive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was in the place of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the only signification of that being that the Joints are the ways by which the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is made as the Joints of Tubes which receive Water flowing into them out of some large Fountain and convey it wheresoever they are directed are the Joints of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of that Water V. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must not be referred to the Conduits through which the effluvia that proceed out of the Head do pass which Conduits 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 operate nothing but to the Head it self from which to use the words of Virgil with a little alteration infusa per artus Vis agitat molem toto se corpore miscet So St. Paul who was none of the extreme Members in the Body or Church of Christ says that he laboured striving according to his working 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he worked in him in Coloss i. 29 See also Chap. i. 19 and iii. 7 of this Epistle VI. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a noted Hebraism in
insignificant places and for the most part foreign to the words of St. Paul in which the first thing liable to censure is that our Author here follows the old way of Philosophizing which in this particular is certainly false there being nothing in a Man but his Body and reasonable Soul which Soul is moved by Affections arising 〈◊〉 the Body without the intervention of any third Faculty as learned Men have long ago shewed even before this was published by Dr. Hammond And that Soul alone not any inferior Nature is the subject of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Free-will It is strange that wise Men in order to know what is in Man that is in themselves should go and consult Plato or Aristotle as if they were enquiring into the nature of a living Creature which they only had seen and we knew nothing of and make it their business to repeat what Men of little accuracy have said about a thing which every one may much better understand of himself II. It is false that any such thing can be deduced from the History of Man's Creation as it is set down by Moses For tho it be said that God formed Man out of the Dust of the Earth by which words is meant his Body yet he is not said to have added two other parts to him for Moses proceeds thus verbatim and breathed into his Nostrils the breath of Life and Man became a living Soul or as I have rendered it in more proper terms spiritumque vitalem in nares ejus flavit atque hâ—no animal factus est And breathed into his Nostrils a vital Spirit and Man became a living Creature Which words signify only that God put Life into Man's Body which he had fashioned out of the Dast and properly speaking contain nothing about an immortal and reasonable Soul tho there is no doubt but that God together with Life infused that also into Man's Body The distinction of the Rabbins between the breath of Life 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and a living Soul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is grounded neither upon the Phrase it self nor any Scripture example tho it is alledged on this place by Grotius However it must be acknowledged that we may consider in the nature of Man his Body and Soul as two distinct parts and then his Life not as another part or effect of some third Principle but as a certain affection of the Body and that to this St. Paul seems to have had a respect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being very frequently taken for the Life And so the Apostle will be understood to pray for the Thessalonians that God would preserve their Bodies Spirits and Lives unblameable which he calls their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or all that was in them and indeed there is nothing else to be found in Man III. I acknowledg also that the Soul in the old Testament is sometimes taken for the Will but Gen. xxiii 8 is in vain alledged to that purpose Where the Hebrew has if it be with your Soul that I should bury and not if it be your Soul as our Author has it out of the English Translation which renders only the sense not the words And the Chaldee Paraphrast does not render the word Soul by a word which signifies Will but the whole Expression if it be your Soul by this entire Phrase if there be a will in your Soul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All choice or will is in the Spirit but the Spirit is sometimes divided between carnal Affections and the Law so as on the one hand to see what it is obliged to and on the other to be held by Pleasure and the lusts of the Body For all that our Author has here heaped together I would not give one rush IV. The only difficulty is wherein consists that preservation by which God is said to keep the Spirit Life and Body blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ Those three not being of the same nature they cannot be said in the same sense to be preserved blameless The Spirit is blameless when it is not perverted by any pernicious Error or defiled with any habit of Sin The Life may be said to be blameless in a peculiar manner considered separately from the Spirit and Body when it is kept without dissembling or revolting from the Christian Religion in which respect fearful Men incurred Blame who to save their Lives either dissembled or renounced the Faith Lastly the Body is preserved blameless in a particular sense when it is not polluted by the enjoyment of any unlawful Pleasures But these all making up the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither ought nor can properly be considered separately because they are conjunctly defiled and incur blame And the reason why St. Paul mentions them severally is not because he would have them conceived as disjunct but only that he might describe the whole Man the more distinctly V. As for the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto the coming of the Lord they must be understood thus That when Christ comes ye may be judged blameless that is such as according to the tenour of the Gospel-Covenant cannot be accused before Christ So that it is as if St. Paul had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that ye may be blameless when Christ comes so as that your Spirits may neither be upbraided with dangerous Errors or vitious Habits nor this charge brought against you that you once redeemed your Lives by dissembling or Apostacy nor in fine that you polluted and profaned your Bodies with sensual Lusts Many perish by one of these three things but no Man is saved but by a conjunction of all the contrary Vertues ANNOTATIONS On the Second Epistle Of St. Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians AT the end of the Premon This Epistle is referred by Dr. Pearson to the Year of Christ LIII or the XIII th of Claudius at which time St. Paul still remained at Corinth after he had been in vain accused by the Jews at the Tribunal of Gallio Of the occasion on which it was written I shall speak on the Epistle it self CHAP. I. Vers 5. Note a. WHat the Christians said about Christ's coming to punish the Jews might possibly expose those of them that lived in Judea to the Fury of that Nation but in Greece or other remote Provinces of the Roman Empire that the Christians were persecuted particularly upon that account I do not believe so as that St. Paul could say that the Thessalonian Christians suffered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Roman Magistrates did not so much befriend the Jews especially out of Judea as to afflict the Christians because they portended that the seditious Jews would ere long be destroyed by the Romans themselves Of which we have a manifest instance in Gallio Acts xviii 12 seqq And it appears no less from profane Writers that the Jews were not at that time in favour with the Romans Tiberius compescuerat had restrained not only the
not St. Clements and abounds with falsities yet a great many have cited it as the genuin product of St. Clement and confidently transcribed Fables out of it for certain Truths Which I know not whether we ought to attribute to want of judgment or unfaithfulness yet one of them it must needs be But now after the revival not only of good Learning but also the cultivating and restoring of right Reason to give credit to such Fables is to prefer the darkness and deceits of former Ages to Light and Truth III. It is strange that Dr. Hammond was not sensible of this but no less strange that he should use the Authority of the Antients so as to trust them whenever they speak in his favour and lay a great stress upon their Testimonies when they seem to confirm his Conjectures but not regard them at all when they speak against him For if they have any Authority at all distinct from probabilities of truth taken from things themselves it is as great in one thing as another and if their Authority be none in it self let probabilities of Truth be alledged and not vain Testimonies Dr. Hammond produces a saying out of Eusebius whom he would have believed about the destruction of the Gnosticks because if that be not thought true a great many of his Interpretations must necessarily be rejected But that Eusebius was mistaken I shall shew out of Eusebius himself and the thing it self at once After he had mention'd the Heresies of Menander the Disciple of Simon and the Arch Heretick Cerinthus and the Nicolaitans in Lib. iii. Cap. 26 27 28 29. he concludes this last Chapter thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so much for those who having attempted to corrupt the truth about the forementioned times were in a moment destroyed But if we believe Eusebius himself the followers of Simon were not utterly destroyed even in the reign of Constantin that is when Eusebuis himself lived who in Lib. ii c. 13. speaking of Simon says thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From whence according to H. Valesius his Interpretation till our Age those that profess his Heresy pretending to have embraced the Christian Religion which is so famous for its Modesty and Sanctity have yet relapsed again to the superstitious worship of Daemons which they seemed to have cast off falling down before the Pictures and Images of Simon and the aforesaid Helena and not scrupling to worship them with Incense Sacrifices and Drink-offerings This shews that the Disciples of Simon did not perish with their Master nor were destroyed in a moment of time It is certain Menander Basilides and Carpocrates who were either his Disciples or Imitators did not die with him but together with their Followers flourished in the second Age as every one knows III. Which being so it is strange that Dr. Hammond should contend for the extinction of the Gnosticks at that time after which they chiefly flourished and were most known viz. after the destruction of Jerusalem Nay if any of Simon 's followers happen'd to perish with the Jews in Jerusalem or Judaea it is not probable that their obstinate adherence to the party of the Jews was the occasion of it because the Gnosticks as our Author himself often tells us made no scruple when it was for their safety to comply with the Heathens in their Worship and it was easy to conjecture that the Romans would be Conquerors So that neither History nor Probability is on our Author's side IV. I will not repeat that what he says about the Conflict which St. Peter and St. Paul had with Simon is a meer Fable but shall observe that by the Spirit of the Mouth of the Lord is meant not the Gospel but the great Ease with which Christ should destroy the obstinate Jews So Psalm x. 5 he shall blow upon all his Enemies in omnes hostes suos sufflabit that is he shall easily destroy them as Interpreters will shew So in Plautus in Milite Glorioso Act. 1. Sc. 1. v. 17. a certain Flatterer to intimate the great ease with which a Victory is obtained expresses himself thus Cujus tu legiones difflavisti spiritu Quasi ventus folia aut panniculum tectoriam So Valerius Maximus Lib. ix cap. 1. Exemp 5. inter Externa speaking of the Egyptians saith Quapropter deliciis tam enerves animi SPIRITUM exercitus nostri sustinere non potuerunt The same thing is otherwise here expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is by the mere brightness of his Coming as we say of an Army which is easily defeated that it could not so much as abide the glittering of the enemies Arms. And God is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when he gives the Victory See Grotius on this place and Dr. Hammond on Mat. xxiv It 's certain the attempts of the Magicians of which afterwards were easily defeated and the Jewish War finished by Vespasian in little more than a Years time Vers 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. These words are thought by our Author to be so clear a description of Simon that he often repeats it as the chief ground of his Interpretation of this whole place But there were also other Impostors of whom this might be said by St. Paul which are frequently mention'd in Josephus to prevent all doubt of which I shall alledg the words of that Historian who in Lib. xx c. 6. Antiq. Judaic where he relates the transactions of Felix saith thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Country was filled again with Robberies and Magicians who deceived the Multitude And not long after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some Magicians and Deceivers perswaded the People to follow them into the Desert saying that they would shew them mighty Signs and Wonders which were wrought by the Providence of God and many hearkning to their Perswasions suffered for their Folly Afterwards he mentions the Egyptian who is spoken of in the Acts. The like he says in Lib. ii de Bello Judaico c. 23. To the same purpose is what he relates in Lib. vii c. 30. about six thousand Men that were burnt in the Porch of the Temple 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The cause of these Mens destruction was a certain false Prophet who had declared that day to those who were in the City that God commanded them to go up into the Temple in order to receive signs of their safety And there was a multitude of such false Prophets as Josephus tells us in the following words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for there were many Prophets at that time suborned by the Tyrants to admonish the People to wait for the assistance of God that they might not go over to the Enemy and to confirm the hope of such as needed not to be watched and were above fear And a Man is soon perswaded to any thing in Adversity But when he that deceives promises him also deliverance from the evils he is under he that suffers
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rahah and the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signify any sort of vice and therefore it might be put by St. Luke for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intemperance because it is a more general name which comprehends under it the particular not that those words are ordinarily confounded 4 It is true that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes have those significations which Dr. Hammond attributes to them as also the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 schibheth used by Moses but they likewise signify in general any kind of depravation or change for the worse in which sense I shall take the word in Moses till it be evidently proved that a general signification in him can have no place 5 The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no more signifies Violence than any other sort of Injustice as I have shewn on Gen. vi 13 So that what our Author builds upon that signification is vain as all the rest of his Conjectures which rely upon this foundation Our learned Author often forges an Interpretation by heaping together a parcel of very slight Conjectures afterwards he raises what Superstructure he pleases upon that interpretation and then lastly speaks of the Consectaries he thence deduces as so many certain Truths But we ought not only to set bounds to our Conjectures but especially to the Consequences we deduce from them if we would not be in perpetual danger of erring That danger no body here will be in who shall suppose that the men of the old World were very wicked men there being in that no conjecture because it is affirmed by Moses in plain words but whoever shall attempt particularly to explain what Moses has said in general and give way in this matter to Conjectures will find himself in the dark And this may suffice to have been said briefly against a way of interpreting Dr. Hammond too often takes II. It had been better to observe that from the very Expression of St. Peter it may be gather'd that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to be joined with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for thus he speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to wit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we must repeat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which and by the spirits that watch he preached to whom Namely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to them who were sometime disobedient c. Vers 21. Note h. I. I think 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the true reading not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and it might easily be that some Transcribers not having another Copy to write after but setting down the words from the mouth of a Prompter might confound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used just in the same sense as if it were said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like as the Word is manifestly taken in Heb. ix 24 on which place see my Note A pattern is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the similitude which it has with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence the vulgar Interpreter translates it similis formae The other interpretations Dr. Hammond gives of this place are forced II. He says indeed truly that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes signifies contrary which might be proved from several places in Xenophon but not that which he alledges out of Hiero where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not simply contrary but dura hard 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is severe as it is rightly rendered by J. Leunclavius CHAP. IV. Vers 1. Note a. OUR Author here says that Saint Peter's phrase in vers 6. of this Chapter is hard and I do not deny it but I say also that he is a hard Interpreter if ever any one deserved that name For here as one said lapides loquitur he speaks stones not words to mollify hard phrases The whole sense of this verse depends upon a particular Elegancy arising from the ambignity of the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to suffer in the flesh or to the flesh which being used of Christ signifies that he suffered and died in his humane nature or for the sake of our humane nature i. e. of men But when we are said to die or suffer to the flesh we are understood to be no longer devoted to the flesh or to the vices of the flesh and accordingly St. Peter's meaning is this seeing I say that Christ has suffer'd to the flesh ye also who ought to imitate him as far as ye are able know that you must suffer to the flesh in a sense which is agreeable to you to wit wholly renounce it for he that has suffered to the flesh has ceased from sin Just such another sort of reasoning we have in Rom. vi 10 11. in the place parallel to this For in that he died instead of which St. Peter here says suffered he DIED UNTO SIN once but in that he liveth he liveth unto God Likewise reckon ye also your selves to be DEAD indeed UNTO SIN but alive unto God Instead of to die unto sin here is to suffer to the flesh but both these phrases have the same ambiguity in them These places should have been compared not verse 6. with this which have no affinity with one another Vers 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Grotius on this place says it is idololatriae quaedam species adesse sodalitiorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de quibus prosecta falsis Diis dantur in hac maxime re credibile est Judaeos antequam Christiani essent accommodasse se Gentium moribus a sort of Idolatry to be present at such common feasts where part of the meat is offered in sacrifice to false Gods and in this particular especially it is probable the Jews before they were Christians conformed themselves to the manners of the Heathens And I do not deny but this might be done by them but there having been among the Jews every where a great number of Proselytes of which many embraced the Christian Religion I rather think St. Peter has a respect here to these who had formerly been Idolaters Vers 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 None but Dr. Hammond could have thought that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the same as to die to the flesh who could digest any impropriety tho never so great in his own stile But it is much more natural to interpret it so that they were condemned indeed in the flesh according to men that is put to death by the judgment of men as to the body but live according to God in the Spirit that is their Souls were made partakers of eternal life by God This is the usual signification of the words which ought not to be changed without reason Vers 14. Note f. This is all forced the meaning is evidently this If ye are reproached for the name of Christ that is because ye will be called Christians happy are ye because the Spirit
the pious Discourses of the Corinthian Women 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or predictions In answer to that I acknowledg that the latter was the most common word but the former also was used as I have shewn And then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies at least for the most part the thing it self prophesied not the act of prophesying but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not only the thing declared but the Action it self or Office of declaring if we believe Eustathius on Iliad Λ. vers 140. where by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he thinks that Homer means 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in this place I did not say that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was meant the spiritual Gift of Prophecy but either Prophecy or the action it self of prophesying of what kind soever that be which the Apostle has chiefly a reference to tho because of their affinity they may be easily confounded as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken both for the thing it self preached and for the Office or Action of preaching 5. Another thing which you seem very much to stick at is that this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but once used in all the New Testament but consider first that it is very common in Homer Xenophon and other Greek Writers and therefore taken from the vulgar use And then secondly there are in St. Paul's Epistles as well as in other Authors words that are but seldom used as for instance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Chap. xiii 4 of this Epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 2 Cor. xi 9 and several others which learned Men have taken notice of 6. You add that in vers 16. the Apostle draws an Argument from the Custom of the Churches but that Custom does no more respect publick than private Assemblies for the Apostle does not say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Paul here has a respect to the Custom of the Jews which the Apostles had introduced into Churches consisting partly of Jews and partly of Greeks together with other Jewish Customs Hear what Tertullian says de Corona Chap. 4. Among the Jews it is so ordinary for the Women to have their Heads covered that they are distinguished by it from others This is what I had to reply to your objections which are so far from satisfying me that they confirm me in my conjecture If we had any Old Copy which instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I should have no manner of doubt about this place whatever others thought Vers 14. Note f. I. I have at large shewn in my Ars Critica P. 2. Sect. 1. c. vii § 6. that St. Paul's meaning in Ephes ii 3 is this that the Jews meant by the word us and not the Romans were of as lewd and wicked a Disposition as other Nations II. But in this place to the Corinthians the word Nature does not signify properly a Custom or Disposition but is opposed to Instruction It is just as if the Apostle should have said Do not you know this of your selves Do you want any one to teach it you So the Latin natura is used by Cicero in Lib. 1. Tuscul Quaest where comparing the Romans with the Greeks he saith Illa quae naturâ non litteris adsequuti sunt neque cum Graecis neque ulla cum Gente sunt conferenda As to those things which they have acquired the knowledg of by Nature not by Learning they viz. the Romans incomparably go beyond the Greeks and all other Nations The same Author in Philip. 2. thus bespeaks Antonius An verebare ne non putaremus natura te potuisse tam improbum evadere nisi accessisset etiam disciplina Were you afraid lest we should think you could not have arrived to such a pitch of wickedness by Nature unless you had also been instructed Vers 29. Note g. I. The Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Book of Joshua manifestly signifies to consecrate the Discourse being about places of Refuge which were esteemed Sacred The Septuagint unnecessarily expressed the sense rather than the proper meaning of the word for the Cities consecrated for places of Refuge were by that Consecration distinguished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from others But hence it does not follow that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies reciprocally to sanctify II. The Apostle's sense is best interpreted by those who affirm this to be an Elliptical Phrase and the meaning of it to be not discerning the Lord's Body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from other Bread or not eating the Consecrated more reverently than any common Bread In the 31st verse we have the same expression again for if we did but distinguish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our selves we should not be condemned that is if we distinguished those that were not rightly disposed or qualified from those that were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To look here for any thing else is to seek a knot in a Bulrush CHAP. XII Vers 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I do not often find fault with our Author's Paraphrase tho in a great many places the mind of the Apostles might have been more fitly expressed I am contented if he does but any how interpret the sense But his Paraphrase of this Verse is intolerable for the Heathens did not believe that their Idols spake of themselves or that their Priests answered them of their own Heads but were both moved by the Gods whose Priests and Statues they were So that the two first could not be charged upon them and all that could be objected against them was that it was not any God as they supposed that answered them by their Idols but an evil Spirit But the Apostle does not upbraid them so much as with that in this place but only that they had formerly suffered themselves by their own blindness to be led to the worship of Idols which gave no answers to them that enquired of them either by their Priests or by evil Spirits but were shamefully deceived by their crafty Priests who pretended themselves to be acted by the Spirit of the Gods or by mere human artifice imposed on the credulous so as to perswade them that Images could speak which were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And such sort of Men were very unfit to distinguish between true Inspiration and feigned which therefore the Apostle here teaches them how to do I confess Dr. Hammond had Grotius to go before him but the thing it self confutes him Vers 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This place was imitated by St. Clement in his 1 Epistle to the Corinthians Chap. 46. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Have we not one God and one Christ and one Spirit of Grace given unto us and one calling in Christ Vers 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Similitude also is used by the same St. Clement more than once in the forementioned Epistle and among other
places in Chap. 36. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The great cannot be without the small nor the small without the great there is a kind of mixture in all things and every thing has its use Let us take for instance our Body The Head without the Feet is nothing nor the Feet without the Head The smallest parts of our Bodies are necessary and useful to the whole Body but they all conspire and jointly subserve the preservation of the whole Vers 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is we were baptized that we might be called by one name of one Society the Church of Christ See my Note on Chap. x. 2 Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Having spoken before of Baptism which is performed with Water the Apostle here keeps to the same Metaphor and says that Christians had drank of the same Spirit Which is to be understood both of the Spirit of Miracles and of the Spirit of Christianity Such another Metaphor is made use of by Cebes in the beginning of his Table where he feigneth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Imposture making those who enter into Life to drink of her power Vers 28. Note d. I. Of the difference between a Teacher and a Prophet some things must be further observed which our Author having omitted has left us not a little in the dark about this matter The Prophets under the Old Testament had a twofold Office The first and highest consisted in declaring those things which they had received immediately from God or by the mediation of Angels and were such as could not have been known by Men without a Divine Revelation The other was to perswade Men to the observation of the Law already revealed by pious Exhortations Reproofs and Counsels And to this seems to belong those Schools of the Prophets so often mentioned in the Old Testament and particularly in 1 Sam. xix 20 2 Kings iv 38 Because the Worship of the only true God was to be firmly established among the Jews a generation of Men that chiefly regarded the things of this Life and defended against the encroaching Idolatry of their neighbour Nations for several Ages God saw it necessary to raise up Prophets by inspiring them in an extraordinary manner And under the New Testament likewise to establish the Authority of the Apostles God vouchsafed them and others the same extraordinary Inspiration but as the Christian Religion grew and flourished and by growing acquired Strength the gift of foretelling things to come was by degrees more sparingly conferred And because Christianity did not much regard what was to happen in this World but put Men upon the thoughts and expectations of another Life the principal Office of the New Testament Prophets lay in interpreting those things more clearly and at large which were revealed by Christ and his Apostles for the benefit of the common People In which Office there are two things to be carefully distinguished one is their preparation for the exercise of that Office in which besides natural Gifts and Knowledg acquired by Industry they were endued with the Holy Ghost which was conferred on them by the imposition of the hands of the Apostles as appears from 1 Tim. iv 14 Neglect not the Gift that is in thee which was given thee by Prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery And tho we do not know how the Holy Spirit influenced their Minds or what change it produced in them yet it appears by what is afterwards said about these Prophets by St. Paul that this was the effect of that divine Inspiration to fit them to preach the Gospel Which fitness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as St. Paul calls it was all at once conferred upon them And when they were thus made fit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this Office they executed it not by a particular sort of Inspiration by which such things were revealed to them as they knew not before or which unaccountably and extraordinarily moved them to speak but as they saw fit themselves and those things which they had received from Christ and the Apostles they interpreted after their own manner Which was the ground of those Disorders and Tumults in the Church of which St. Paul speaks in the 14 th Chapter when more Prophets than one would be heard at the same time And hence this Gift did not supersede the necessity of Study and diligent reading as appears by that advice of St. Paul to Timothy Till I come give attendance to reading to exhortation to doctrin Neglect not the Gift that is in thee c. Meditate upon these things give thy self wholly to them that thy profiting may appear to all These are they whom the Apostle calls Prophets the Teachers seem to be those who had qualified themselves for preaching the Gospel only by Study and had not received the extraordinary Gift of the Spirit The Prophets for the most part at least did not teach by Inspiration but had been fitted to teach by Inspiration but these who are here peculiarly called Teachers did not only teach without Inspiration what they had learned but had received no extraordinary preparation from God for the exercise of their Office In which particular they were inferior to the Prophets besides that these did sometimes foretel things to come Unless this Interpretation be admitted it will be hard to understand any thing that St. Paul says afterwards about Prophets II. As for these Teachers in that Age having been always Bishops or Priests of the first Rank in the Church I do not know whence that can certainly be concluded I am sure what our Author alledges to that purpose does by no means prove it nor is there any reason from the thing it self which should oblige us to be of his opinion Ibid. Note e. If the Apostles had shewn any other instances of severity beside that on Ananias in the beginning of their Ministry I do not think but St. Luke would have related them and therefore I suppose they are other Miracles intended in Acts ii 43 But why doth St. Luke say there was such a general fear upon that account To wit because that fear might as well follow upon beneficial Miracles as punishments inflicted on wicked Persons for any Miracles joined with a pious and reasonable Doctrin are capable of impressing an aw upon the Minds of Men and making them afraid to oppose the Teachers of it lest they should be found fighters against God This is a much better Interpretation than to say that the Apostles terrified Men by inflicting Diseases upon them and menacing them with Death which they very seldom did and could not have been frequently done without giving a fair occasion to the enemies of Christianity to cavil both at the Apostles conduct and it And I as little believe that this power belonged to all Governors of Churches which we read of none that used besides the Apostles and those to whom the Apostles did as it were lend it as St. Paul did to