was the Son of GOD And some French Editions do speak so in the text it self But we ought to know that Adam neither in this nor any other place of the Scripture was ever called Son of GOD much less the Son of GOD That Name doth onely appertain to the second Adam So the last French translation doth not say that Adam was the Son of GOD but that he was created by GOD In the Originall the word Son iâ— found but once and it is onely spokeâ— of Jesus Christ Observe hovv Sainâ—Luke speaks it That Jesus was the Son as it was esteemed of Joseph of Heli of Matthat c. of Zorababel c. of David c. of Abraham c. of Enos of Seth of Adam of GOD The sense is that according to the opinion of men Jesus was the Son of Joseph and that in effect he is of Heli of Matthat c. of David of Abraham c. of Seth of Adam of God And thus as many learned men have a long time observed it it â—s Jesus Christ and not Adam who is called the Son of God These words so often repeated who was the Son who was the Son which are added to every one of the persons who are named in this Genealogy in ascending from Heli to Adam These words I say which are not in the Originall have caused divers to believe that Adam is called the Son of GOD But in all the Catalogue this word the Son ought to be referred to Jesus Christ alone which vvithout the addition of these words vvould be more easy to be understood As there is no need of that which in the French Bible is inserted touching Adam to wit that he was created Of the twelfth Stone which was on the Brest of the High Priest which the French Bible doth call a Beryll and the English a Jasper Exod. 28. 20. WE know that the Hebrew Nomenclation of precious Stones as of many other things is at this day very obscure and the interpretations are very different Nevertheless I will speak one word on this place Two Reasons do induce me to believe that it was rather a Jasper that any other Stone First Because it is the very same word in the Originalâ— text for the Hebrew vvord of thaâ— Stone which is twelfth and the laâ—â— upon the Pectorall is a Jasper which vvord hath been retained in the Greeâ— tongue the most antient of thosâ— sincâ— Babel and hath passed into the Latin tongue and divers other vulgar languages signifying alwaies that which we do call a Jâ—sper To this the Translation of Jâ—â—ius doth accord who puâ—teth the Jasper the last of all in the like manner as doth the English Bible Moreover This Interpretation is more apparent by a light which results from that place Revel. 21. 19. The Heavenly Jerusalem hath also twelve precious stones on which it is founded and who do reflect upon those of the Pectorall but they are not ranked in the same order for in that Jerusalem the Jasper is the first stone which is the last in the Pectorall and this is not without a mystery that the same stone which is the last in the old Testament is the first in the new as joyning the two Testaments together and making the end of the one to be the beginning of the other so admirable a Concurrence ought not to be taken away from a passage where it is accompanied with other apparences Of certain Books written on the Revelation and beleived to be propheticall THe Interpretations of Napeir on this last Book of the Bible have been a long time admired but they have now lost their reputation for the term which they gave to divers events that are yet to come is already expired These mistakes ought to serve to disabuse the vulgar who oftentimes imagine that the conceptions of Expositors are infallible predictions So divers men do to this day extoll Brightman who hath also commented upon the Revelations as if that man had the Spirit of Prophecy Nevertheless if we shall observe the applications which he maketh especially at the beginning we shall find that he stragleth very much if we will not take fancies for Oracles Of a prejudication common to a great sort of them who do read or inteâ—pret the prophecies especially the Revelation IT is ordinary to imagine that the Prophecies speak not but of our selves onely or of our Countrey If there be any prediction not yet accomplished it seems to us that that star is directly over our heads and the influence of it onely for our Climat although it may be it concerns us not at all Such a Prophecy it may be is not to be accomplished but in Asia or America and yet we expect to see it fulfilled in our Northern Climate From hence oftentimes it comes to pass that our Interpretations hit not aright I do confess that a great part of the Revelations doth concern our Western Countries but all the prophecies of that Book ought not to be restrained or applyed to this little corner of the World As if the Holy Ghost had thought on none but on us onely Or As if God had no others that are elected in other Countries of the world Of some Interpreters who censure Saint Paul for wishing to be accursed or separated from Christ for the love to his Brethren the Israelites THe learned Marlorat in his common places and the Divines who have folowed and enlarged them writing on the word peccatum and marking forth those sins into which divers holy personages were fallen they do in that number comprehend thiâ— wish of Saint Paul and without haesitation do pronounce that in that he was not without blemish But first of all It is very dangerouâ— to condemn every action or every word which is above the common Rule for it may be authorized yea and imposed by him who is above the Law as was the Will which Abraham had to sacrifice his own Son Such Acts which otherwise would be irregular are heroicall and transcendent Secondly If we would fathom the depth hereof we would say as it is most true that the Glory of GOD ought to be more precious to us than our own salvation And from hence proceeded this wish of Saint Paul Thirdly The words which immediatly go before do sufficiently demonstrate that the Apostle spake this by the Spirit of GOD which could not erre I speak the truth in Christ I lye not my conscience bearing me witness with the Spirit That I have great sorrovv c. For I would be accursed c. Shall we say that calling the Holy Ghost for witness he immediatly afterwards did pronounce those words which are contrary to the motions and the Rules of the Holy Ghost Fourthly If in this wish Saint Paul speaks like a man that was besides himself If his words are to be reproved Is not this to derogate from the whole Epistle and to render it suspected as if it proceeded onely from man and not from
that it doth inable him to say Thou art my Father But David did never directly call him so And those words which express this preheminence do properly concern Jesus Christ in the same manner as do those in the second Psalm Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee VVherefore then do we attribute to Elihu the language vvhich none ever spake but the Son of God onely or what need vve to seek a Parallel which is to be found in no other place of the Scripture It is not necessary here to make mention of the French rythm in the 27 Psalm which saith My GOD my Father teach me thy way c. For this word Father is not in the Originall Neither will I in this place examin that in the French Catechism Sect. 38. which saith that every believer can call GOD his Father in particular It is necessary as much as can be we should keep unto the stile of the Holy Ghost Otherwise the consequences are greater then they appear to be Of a superfluous word yea a dangerous one in many places of the English Bible expressing the form of the Oaths recited in the sacred History THe Hebrews did ordinarily swear in these terms The Eternall is living such a thing is c. The Examples thereof are frequent in the old Testament The sense is The Eternal who is living is witness of that which I speak And this Epithete which they gave to God was to distinguish him from false Gods whom the Scripture calleth dead Psal. 126. 28. Now in all those places which are many in number in which these words are contained The Eternall or the Lord is living The English Translation doth prevent this oath with a word in the beginning of it saying AS the Lord is living c. The Bible of Tremelius hath also the same addition to render the Hebrew Phrase more intelligible which otherwise seemeth not to be compleat But this addition is not necessary and if it were yet a better may be found The popular ignorance or liberty when it will affirm the truth of any thing will be so hardy as to say That it is as true as there is a God Or As true as God is living A word full of exccess For there is nothing that can be so true as that GOD is All other truths are but the shadow of it It will be replyed that the difference is great between these two expressions As true as GOD is living And As GOD is living For this last doth signify nothing but a resemblance and a conformity to the truth and not an equality But First This comparison is not in the Originall and it is not necessary to say that these words God is living do signify that any thing is as true as GOD is living The sense is more full That GOD who is living doth know that such a thing is true Secondly Although in the Original these words GOD is living are not joyned with any particle to the words following and therefore did render the sense more obscure yet I had rather in this manner to content my self with them then introduce into the text an addition vvhich is disputable And so the French Translation at least that vvhich is most exact in such places doth speak word for word according to the Hebrew The vulgar opinion touching the sin against the Holy Ghost The Contents of the twelfth Chapter of St. Mathew in the French Bible IT is a common saying that the sin against the Holy Ghost is unpardonable So speak the Divines in their Sermons and their Books But this assertion expressed in such words is either defective or erroneous Defective If we presuppose that there is but one kind of sin against the Holy Ghost Erroneus if we understand that all sorts of sins against the Holy Ghost are unpardonable Both are but one Now this doth proceed from a gross misadvertisement which doth yet continue For if precisely we regard the terms of the Gospel in which our Saviour speaketh of the sin which is unpardonable we shall never find that he pronounced this vvord That a sin against the Holy Ghost shall be never pardoned But he hath said that Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall be never pardoned Or that he vvho shall speak against the Holy Ghost shall have no remission The crime then which he hath declared shall never be forgiven is not universally every sin against the Holy Ghost but onely Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost Certainly we sin divers vvays against the holy Ghost vvhether it be in resisting or whether it be in grieving the Spirit or by what kind of offence so ever it be Is there any one of us who can boast to have never committed any thing against the illumination which the Spirit of GOD hath infused into his conscience Have we never acted against the motions of the Spirit To lust against the Spirit is that also to sin unpardonably against the Spirit But where is that Christian in whom the flesh doth not lust against the Spirit Woe be unto us All if every sin committed against the Holy Ghost were excluded from pardon Is it not a sin against the Holy Spirit to make sad and to grieve the Holy Spirit Now the Israelites in the Desart did grieve him oftentimes Esay 63. 10. Shall we dare affirm that all those souls who sinned thus against the Holy Ghost are for ever shut out from obtaining mercy both in this world and the world to come To prove the contrary we shal find in the same place that the compassions of GOD were even then upon them seeing that his Spirit which they had so much provoked was still their Conductor There are then many kinds of sin against the Holy Ghost and amongst others one which shall not be pardoned that is Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost But it is either forgetfulness or too confused a speech to say without distinction or exception that the sin against the Holy Ghost shall never be forgiven The French Bible in the Argument on the twelfth of Saint Mathew saith that the Blasphemy of those who speak evill of the miracles of the Son of GOD is a sin against the Holy Ghost But these terms are ambiguous and do not express the sense of the text For Christ doth not say generally or indefinitly that the sin against the Holy Ghost shall never be remitted but it specifies and marks out that sort of sin which shall never be forgiven not any sin against the Holy Ghost but onely the sin of Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost Of the Name which many give to the mountain on which Jesus Christ was transfigured IT is said that this wonder vvas wrought on Mount Thabor And this saying is as antient as it is common The opinion indeed is not without great appearance of truth For the situation of the Mount Thabor the form the beauty and the height thereof do all seem to speak that it was the place where this
two Commandements of the Law or two Petitions of the Lords Prayer in one Section onely when every Commandement and every Petition do demand one entire action it mingles sometimes in one section divers Articles of Faith every one of which doth require a Section by its self There are also some transpositions and articles not so commodious as could be desired It would be convenient to change the form in divers respects for we ought not be so superstitious towards those who have drawn up this Caâ—echism as to take it for a perfect Draught We may retain it still but in some places reform it I do rather wish that our Churches had an Historicall Caâ—echism which by Questions and Answers might re-Present all the History of the Bible at least the generalities of it and the most illustrious particulars Some English men have travailed in it And if the work had been compleat it would produce a great benefit to the Common people But amongst so many Caâ—echisms that are written it were to be desired that we had one where the Doctrine of the Sacraments were better grounded than it hath accustomed to have been For although a Caâ—echism ought to be popular yet we should not omit that which gives intelligence of the true ground of the matter Of this I shall speak more largely in a particular treatise if GOD permit Of the Common opinion that in the death of a man the soul comes out of the mouth WHen a man dyeth It is said that he hath his soul already on the brink of his lips So speak the Divines and so Antiquity hath spoken This language proceeds from a popular opinion that when the soul dislodgeth from the body it goes out at the mouth I will not undertake to answer the curious Questions which may be moved touching the coming forth of the soul I onely affirm that this prejudging of the vulgar is not solid If the soul be universally dilated in every part of the body as many Philosophers do affirm wherefore is it locked up in a particular place at the departure If it lodgeth properly and particularly in the heart or in the Brain what need hath it to come out at an open passage seeing it is a Spirit which can pass away at the traverse of the Skull or any other Bone Now who hath told us that it comes forth rather at the mouth than at the ear or eyes which are as the windows of the soul If I were at leisure to affirm something in a point the decision whereof is neither certain nor necessary I should say that it is rather to be beleived that as the soul of the first man did enter into him by the Nostriâ—ls so it goes forth that way Gen. 2. 7. And certainly when the Scripture would express that man is alwaies neer unto Death it saith that the Spirit or the breath of him is in his nostrill as being ready there to come out Esay 2. 22. To this the words of Job have reference Job 27. 3. So long as the breath of the mighty God shall be in his nostrills which is to say when this soul it self which God hath breathed into me shall be upon the point of its departure having no more hold of it but in my nostrills onely Of the testimony which Josephus the Historian of the Jews did render of Jesus Christ THis testimony is found in the eighteenth Book of the Jewish antiquities This Author making mention there of Jesus doth doubt if it be lawfull to call him a man seeing the great miracles which he wrought He also saith that this Jesus is the Christ That at the third day after his death he shewed himself to be alive That such things and other miracles were forespoken of him by the Prophets It is a long time since the Christians employed this testimony of Josephus to convince the Jews But not to displease so many learned men antient and modern I cannot perswade my self that this Jew which gives not the least apparence to be inclined to Christianism hath written so much to the advantage of our Religion Would he so highly have published in his Book a belief of which he never made profession And he is so far from acknowledging Jesus to be the Christ to whom the Prophets did attribute the Segniory of the whole world that on the contrary he gives it to Vespasian a Pagan Prince and applyes to him the Oracle which belongs onely to the Son of God This is far off from acknowledging Jesus to be the Christ It may be objected that if these words above mentioned were not the words of Josephus it would follow that this Author made no mention of Jesus Christ in any place of his History for he speaks not of him but in this place onely which is in question Now it is not believed that having undertaken to write of the memorable things of those times he should in silence pass by the miracles performed by Jesus Christ which were known to all the world But this is not the onely Omission that is to be noted in Josephus The Massacre of the Infants at Bethlehem of which Herod was the Author was so famous that the Heathens themselves did write of it and nevertheless Josephus who hath recorded many other cruelties of this Herod doth make no mention of it And he is noâ— the onely Historian who by contrivement or otherwise hath surpassed some part of that which was most memorable in his time And shall we wonder that a Jew who never adhered to Christianism should purposely omit the miracles of Jesus Christ Was not his Resurrection contradicted by the Priests although they were convinced of the truth thereof Nevertheless I do beleive that this passage was Josephus his own but withall that some have changed some words therein and this is not the onely writing to which by the irregular zeal of some such a thing hath happened But for this in this place Saint Jerom who translated this Author into Latine and who forgot not â—o value the testimonies which the Jews and the Pagans rendred to the Christian Religion doth make Josephus to speak otherwise For he â—akes him not to say that Jesus was the Christ but that it was beleived he was the Christ Josephus then onely reciteth that it was the belief of others to wit the Christians but not his own for he was not a Christian and being not one nor making profession of Christianity much less could he say that Jesus was the Christ Now if one word in this place be changed it is not incredible but the contexture also of other terms is altered in which this Author speaks of Jesus Christ Let us not think the Christian Religion to be less assured because a Jew doth not confess Jesus to be the Christ Truth needs not the suffrage of her adversaries Nevertheless this passage of Josephus is advantagious to us in one respect The Jews maintained that the Death of Christ was not under Pilate
which contain nothing but first that requires no exercise of judgement but onely of attention A modern Writer whom I highly do esteem doth recite and follow in this passage which I have produced one of the greatest personages of Antiquity Epiphanius by name This Author affirms that untill the twentieth age after the Creation of the world there cannot any example be produced of any Son who dyed before his Father that is to say of a naturall Death This was put in because Abel might not be objected against it The order of nature was kept that he who was born first in a line descendant should also dye first this continued untill that Therah the Father of Abraham did invent Idolatry And then the first that is marked out for an example his Son Haran dyed before his Father Therah Gen. 11. 28. By a Judgement untill then unheard of GOD did punish Therah causing that his Son should dye before his Father But all this observation is null and proceeds from a great mistake For long before the days of Therah nay before the time of the Deluge we have the example of a Son who dyed before his Father and of a naturall Death It is Lamech the Son of Methuselah The proof is most evident Compare the 5. Chapter of Genesis ver. 25. with the 31. From the birth of Lamech unto the death of Methuselah were 782. years but Lamech lived but 777. He dyed therefore five years before his Father And by this account Methuselah and not Therah was the first Father by whom we find that his Son dyed before him of a naturall Death And by this the truth of this Commentary which attributes the first example of this accident to the Idolatry of Therah doth vanish into nothing many other defects may be noted in those who do recite Histories for oftentimes it seeems they slumber when they recite them The first words of the ten Commandements which the ignorance of some hath razed out and taken away from the walls of their Churches THose men who are not far from us have made it no difficulty to blot out all the first words to shew unto the eys of the people a Decalogue without a head as if they had beheaded it All these words they leave suppressed I am the Eternall thy God who have taken thee out of the land of Egypt out of the House of Bondage I know not who hath moved them to beat down the Frontispiece of the Law of GOD For first since we make a profession to retain all the words which GOD then pronounced when he published the Law as it is written that GOD spake all these words I am the Lord thy GOD c. why do not we write them all why do we raze out those which are the first Secondly These very first words are the foundation of all the Decalogue for they do mention who is this Lawgiver and do shew the right which he hath to command We cannot then omit them without taking away the fundamentall principle on which the whole Decalogue is builded Thirdly The sense of the first Commandement is not entire or compleat without these words which go before it and on which it immediatly doth depend I am the Lord thy GOD from whence it directly followeth Thou shalt have no other Gods but me These first words are the soul of this Commandement and they ought not to be disjoyned from it Fourthly It is unfit and without Judgement to begin the Decalogue without this Preface and to speak abruptly Thou shalt have no â—ther Gods For this word other doth â—resuppose that the Decalogue hath â—lready spoken of one GOD who exâ—ludes all other And therefore this ought first to be expressed without that it is to speak as men who have not so much as common sense Fiftly Besides all these defects there yet remains one more enormous which is a great soloecism in Divinity and by it an injury is done to all Christians For when GOD saith I am thy everlasting GOD he doth imply I am thy Saviour GOD never speaks in these words but unto those to whom he doth present salvation These words are Evangelicall GOD hath fastned the Gospell unto the entrance of the Law Wherefore if the Gospel did not here speak first the Law would beat us back and bear us down as persons under the malediction Those then who present us the Decalogue without these first words which do give us access and a confidence in the mercies of the Law-giveâ— knew not what they do Of certain pictures which are in some Bibles AT the entrance into the English Bible Jesus Christ with his twelve Disciples celebrating the Passeover are represented sitting at a table as we are accustomed to do when we take our Repast But we know that Jesus Christ and his Apostles sate not then in that posture and that their Table did not resemble those in which we set our viands They did not sit but did almost lye along either upon some Cushions or on the ground leaning upon their Elbows â—s it is custom in these times in the Eastern Countries The Originall â—ext saith not that they sate but doth make use of a terme which cannot properly be expressed in our vulgar â—anguages The French Bible in a more generall expression saith he â—id set himself at the table The English hath it He sate down and this word for the want of a better and one more answerable to the Greek text is tolerable in a translation But a picture which speaketh in all languages ought not to corrupt the Histories in representing them otherwise than they are The same picture doth very ill describe Saint John in the Bosom of Jesus Christ The particulars are by so much the more considerable because they concern some circumstances of the Supper of our Lord and it is of great importance that we should understand them because they do furnish us with Arguments against Altars against the elevation of the Host and the worshipping of it I will not here speak of the ignorance of Painters who representing Lazarus in the breast of Abraham do paint him as a little Infant on the Knees of that great Patriark Moreover in some Bibles of the old Impression we may see GOD represented in the form of a man producing Eve from the side of Adam We may truly paint Adam or Eve but it is impossible to paint God Those who have such pictures in their Bibles ought rather to take them out then take delight to behold them If it be unlawfull to have Images to represent God much less it is permitted to have them in the Bible which doth prohibite such portraictures Of the Name of the SON of GOD which some of our Bibles do give unto Adam Luke 3. verse the last THe English Bible saith of Adam that he was the Son of GOD the Latine translation of Beza doth noâ— give him that Name in the text but the note in the Margent doth interpret that Adam
Christ who is but onely One But Christ hath been represented both by figures of divers kinds as by the Cloud and by the Sea 1 Corinth 10. and by many figures of the same kind as by two Rocks and a great way distant from one another Exod. 17. 6. Numb. 20. 28. c. Is it because the fruit of this Tree had a singular vertue to preserve the life of Man It doth not from hence follow that there should be but one plant onely which should bear this fruit On the contrary As of all the Trees that were in the Garden this here was most necessary for man so it is to be believed that the liberality of GOD which is ordinarily abundant in things which are most necessary and which do wast away by use had given him more than onely one tree of that kind Moreover as the Tree of life was indued with singular properties so had it the vertue also as well as other plants to multiply it self But without affirming that there were many Individuals of it I onely say that the contrary opinion hath no such certainty in it that it may be received for an undoubted truth Of the Nature of the Viper marked in the table at the end of the New Testament in some Editions in French THis Index speaking of this kind of Serpent doth affirm that the young ones do eat their own mother to come out of her Belly by force It is an old opinion indeed but at this Day contradicted Two modern writers both of this Isle and both very learned amongst many other subjects in which they are of a contrary opinion have treated on this question One of them my intimate friend and a most reverend man is so amorous of antiquity that he undertakes to maintain all the Paradoxes which this opinion hath produced and although that ocular experience doth shew us that Vipers are born without giving a Death unto their mother yet he is pleased to make answers to it But without engaging my self in this difference I will onely speak one word on that which is in the Index which I have mentioned It is dangerous either in Interpretations or Annotations on the Bible to lay down that for a certain truth which is disputable especially when there is experience to the contrary Secondly To what purpose or in what regard was it spoken that the Pharises and the Sadduces whom the Scripture calls a Generation of Vipers had in their birth killed their mothers Thirdly if I were to expound such places I should search out the sense in a propriety which is constant and particular to the Viper onely amongst all the kinds of Serpents All other Serpents do proceed from their Mothers having neither their form as yet nor any faculty to stir or to move themselves For the Creature is shut up in an egge which the mother hath produced and will ask â—ome respite of time before it be â—atched But the Vipers are already in life and all formed when they come out of the Belly of their Mother When the Scripture therefore doth give this Epithete of a Generation of Vipers to certain Men It is to express that from their Birth they have already actually hurted or that their malice was already compleatly formed Of those who in the unfolding of a Text do believe that they must alwaies divide it into parts THere are some Auditors who beleive the Sermon to be without method if in the beginning thereof the Text be not divided into parts But these people are not good Logicians for there are points indivisible and which will admit of no separation As in the Tabernacle there weâ—â— moveables which were not to be taken down or which were made aâ— of one piece so there are Texts whicâ— do not suffer to be divided Divers Preachers striving to use it where it cannot be admitted have fallen into irregularities not to be perceived indeed by the common people but sounding ill in their ears who know the Laws of a true method and of that also which is popular to which it is permitted to be less exact than if the Auditors had been altogether composed of learned men Of the divers Interpretations on the twelfth Chapter of the Revelations verse the first ALthough the Interpretations which are above recited do contain nothing in them but what is pious nevertheless they seem to me to draw vvide from the mark This place represents a woman environed vvith the Sun having the Moon under her feet and a Crovvn of tvvelve Stars upon her Head This Woman is the Church or rather the Church of Israel which hath brought forth Christ unto us But what means this Sun that invirons her this Moon which is at her feet and what is the signification of these tvvelve stars Here instead of expositions an Allegory that is propheticall is interpreted by Allegories that are Arbitrary That which is most received is this The Church they say is cloathed with Celestial Glory as with the Sun She treads under her feet the inconstancy of all humane things signified by the Moon who perpetually doth change But this is not to interpret but vvithout proof to allegorize For on the contrary in the Scripture which ought to be interpreted by its self the Moon is considered as an Emblem of firmness and perpetuity As in the 9 Psalm It is promised that the throne of David shall be as the Sun and that it shall alwaies be established as the Moon Some modern writers and those very learned ones do believe that this Moon doth signify the service of the Ceremoniall Law for the greatest number of the Festivall dayes had their time vvere marked according to the course of the Moon And that in this sense it is that the Church seeth the Moon under her feet that is the Ceremoniall Law abolished And these Authors do affirm Because the Moon doth rule by Night and that the service of Idols is a work of Darkness that the Church doth tread under her foot the Moon that is to say the service of Idols But I am possessed with amazement that wise men should give us such Allegories which have no solid foundation and may be easily overthrown To speak no more this place of the Revelations doth interpret it self by another from whence it is extracted The portraict of this woman environed with the Sun is in part the Copy of that table which is to be seen in the 37 Chap. of Gen. The Sun the Moon and the eleven Stars did shew themselves to Joseph in a dream The Son was Jacob as he himself did interpret it The Moon was Leah who by the twelve Patriarchs had the place of a Mother The Stars were the Brothers of Joseph Now this place in the Revelations doth represent the Originall of Christ who according to the Flesh was descended from this Family which was composed of this Sun this Moon and these Stars If then these twelve Stars were the tvvelve Patriarchs as it is most
largely handled by divers learned and judicious Men I will speak but one word by the way The affairs of State and all other humane affairs publick or particular are considered First Or in themselves within their circuit every one according to the rules of its Art Or Secondly within that Dependence which subjects them to the Law of GOD which is the Rule of Conscience In the first the Divine meddles not at all He is a stranger in that Element In navigation the Pilot is more to be beleived then Saint Paul if this Apostle had not some extraordinary revelation But the irregularities which we may here meet with to the prejudice of GOD are under the cognizances of the Divine It belongeth to him to prevent them by his Counsels yea and to reprove them if they are broke forth into action Indeed It belongs not to him to handle the weights and the measures in a shop but if they are notoriously false ought he to hold his peace under the pretence that he ought not to meddle with another mans trade The Balance The Beams and the weights are of the Jurisdiction of GOD Proverbs 16. In this Island we complain of divers Divines of the Court who wink at certain innovations introduced under the pretence of the reason of State and authorized by the Soveraign power which then was But because these novelties passed for matter of State it would be a wrong to have blamed the silence of the Divines when they should be taxed for omitting that which they owe to GOD to their charges to the Church and to the Statâ— iâ— self Of the Angell of Satan who buffeted Saint Paul 2 Cor. 12. 7. A now interpretation of that passage MAny as Beza doth think that Saint Paul in this place doth complain that Satan kindled in him some inordinate affections But this Exposition is contradicted by many forcible reasons which have been noted hereupon Others take these words at the foot of the Letter as if in effect some evill Spirit had given buffets to Saint Paul tormenting him in his Body as sometimes he had struck Job Lastly Some understand this of some wicked man who by the instigation of Satan persecuted Saint Paul And to speak the truth it is not necessary that this Name The Angel of Satan should alwaies signify a Spirit In the twelfth of the Revelation the Angels of the Dragon in the judgement of some knowing interpreters do signify those that serve the Dragon as his Ministers And so this Angell of Satan may be some man whom Satan imployed to torment the Apostle But this Exposition hath need of a prop to sustain it and this is it which hath obliged me to bring unto it this note that followeth The language of the new Testament is composed of an infiniteness of phrases which do reflect either on the matter of the old Testament or on divers other subjects Now the passages which contain such allusions ought to be interpreted by them otherwise we shall draw wide or if we â—it the mark it will be by accident I find then in the old Testament a History which is almost in all things the same with this which St. Paul speaks of himself in the 1. of Kings the 22. A Prophet saw GOD sitting in his Throne and all the Army of Heaven about him on the right hand and on the left He heard GOD proposing an affair And the Angels as in Councel diversly debating of it He heard a Commission which was given to Satan which he promised to put in execution by his Emissaries After so high a revelation and the hearing of words so sublime this Prophet is buffered by one of the Messengers of Satan by a false Propâ—et who did strike him on the cheek That History doth so much resemble â—his which Saint Paul reciteth of himself that the allusion is most appaâ—ent Now if the Analogy be entire he who buffeted Saint Paul was some false Apostle who did persecute him And so this quality of Angell oâ— messenger of Satan doth not pertain to all sorâ—s of persecutors but to those onely 〈…〉 them who carryed unto others the Doctrine of Satan Of a great number of places in the new Testament which mention the curing of those who were possessed with Spirits In which our Translations change the word which is in the Original Text THe Names of Satan Divel Demon are the Epithets of evil Spirits nevertheless they are not Synonitâ—aâ— and the Scripture doth 〈◊〉 indifferently express them but dotâ— make use of one of them rather the another as they are more condâ—â—cing to the occurrences or matteâ— which are treated The Name 〈◊〉 Divel and that of Demon are 〈◊〉 in the old Testament but are very frequent in the new the language whereof is Greek nevertheless these two words do pass the one for the other When the Holy Spirit doth speak of these evill Spirits which the Son of GOD did cast out of the Bodies of Men or Women It doth not say that it cast forth Divels but that he cast forth Demons that he commanded Demons that he gave power to cast forth Demone c. From which word comes that also of Demoniack Now since in this thing the Holy Spirit doth express the word of Demon and never the word of Divill our Tranflations ought to answer the Originall in the place where we read that he cast forth Divels c. It is true that this change is more tolerable in those tongues to which the word Demon is unknown as in particular to the English Tongue but since the word is become French It would in those places do better in the translation then the Name of Divel I will make no stop at all to give satisfaction to the Question of the Ignorants who will demand If it be not all one to read Divels instead of reading Demons In one word I shall tell them that we ought to read it according to the Originall And without doubt there were reasons which obliged the Evangelists to make use of one of these words and to abstain from the other when they spoke of those Spirits which tormented humane Bodies Many as the Saduces did believe that these Spirits were not substances but onely motions or Impulsions which come by nature Now the word Divel which onely signifies a Slanderer and can be spoken of a man also doth not so well denote a spirituall substance and different from humane kind The word Demon is more significant in this regard for it is the Name which the Pagans gave unto their Gods who in effect were evill Spirits So the Apostle 1 Cor. 10. 20. 21. saith not according to our Translation that the Gentiles sacrificed to Devils but that they sacrificed to Demons I forbear many other observations which might be made on this subject Of Bulls crowned with Garlands which are read in the French Bible Acts 14. 13. THe Originall text saith that the Priest of Jupiter had brought with him Bulls and
Crowns or Garlands But it dot not say that the Bulls were crowned with them It is true enough that the Pagans were accustomed so to adorn those Creatures which were the Victims in their sacrifices by putting chapleâ—s of flowers on their heads or round about their horns But that could not be practised in every season of the year And as for the Garlands which are mentioned in this place the History expresseth not that the Priest in that nature did make use of them It may be that he would have crowned with them Paul and Barâ—abas as the Pagans so did honour their false Gods in their Images And although that these Garlands were brought to crown the Bulls yet the Greek Text saith not that they were already crowned but onely that the Priest brought with him Crowns and Garlands So speaks the Syriack translation and so the Interpreter of the Syriack Tremellius and so also doth the English Bible The French have followed the Latine translation of Beza who in this particular hath not word for word expressed the Originall This Note will not appear frâ—volous but to those onely who not that there is not one joâ—e in the Scripture which is not considerable Of one word which the French adde to the end of the Lords Prayer WE say thine is the Kingdom c. In ages of ages so we speak in pronouncing that Prayer So we read in our Books wherein it is written and even in the French Catechism it self But the Originall Text Mat. 6. 13. where the terms are expressed which conclude that admirable Prayer hath not twice this word Ages It is so word for word Thine is the Kingdom the Power and the Glory in ages Amen This word Ages is there expressed but once instead whereof we redouble it nay with the addition of a particle which represents a change of the Case in the Grammars of the Greeks and Latins This Amplification brought into common use proceeds from this that there being other places of the new Testament in which these words we read To him be glory in ages of ages they have been taken as if they were the very same which are in the end of the Lords Prayer which notwithstanding hath not this doubling of the word ages This Phrase in ages of ages is of the stile of the Hebrews representing a Superlative who would be called Eternity it self the longest Duration which can be imagined This expression is not found but in the Revelat. Chap. 1. ver. 6. and Chap. 5. ver. 13. 14. If any shall reply as it is true enough that these words in ages in the Lords Prayer do signifie as much as in ages of ages I answer wherefore then in reciting the Lords Prayer do we not content our selves with the terms which are there The excuse is not sufficient that we adde nothing to the sense For when we make profession to transcribe or to translate we ought to retain the words of the Originall as far as our vulgar tongues are able to represent them without thrusting in any amplificatioâ— at all I forbear to speak that there is a secret reason for which this phrase in ages of ages hath been reserved for the last Book of the Scripture How the word ages which is in the Originall of the Lords Prayer is translated in the French and English Bibles BEhold here clean contrary to that which I have touched on in the precedent observation for in neither of the one or the other of these two Bibles hath this Prayer so much as once this word ages but in the steed thereof they both say For ever or alwaies Now although the terms are equivalent if it be said in ages or if it be said For ever nevertheless the word ages in the stile of the Scripture do include distinctions of great importance which this Periphrasis doth not contain and which I have not the leisure to illustrate in this place The English Translation is excusable in this because the language hath not a word which properly doth express that which we call ages But since this word is become French and doth better answer to that which is in the Originall Greek it ought to be retained in the French Translation of the Lords Prayer as well as we have retained it in the other places in which it is employed in the same sense and in the same matter Revel. 1. 6. and 5. 13. Of the sacrifice of Isaac ill represented in many pictures and particularly in the front of the English Bible ISaac is here painted on his knees before an Altar and Abraham behind him holding a knife in his hand which is lifted up to give the blow But this picture is false and doth bely the holy History For before that Abraham did advance his arm nay before he had the knife in his hand to strike Isaac Isaac was not before the Altar but on the Altar it self The particulars of the action are recited to us in this order That Abraham did build an Altar and ranged wood upon it that he bound Isaac and put him on the wood and afterwards that he took the knife into his hand to cut his throat Gen. 22. 9. 10. Isaac was then on the Altar not at the foot of the Altar when Abraham did lift up his hand with the knife to strike him It is a great mistake to frame a portraict which contradicts the History Howsoever I shall note this by the way This posture in which Isaac is represented having Abraham behind him and holding a sword in his hand doth cause many to beleive that it was to cut off his head and it is also the common opinion that in this sacrifice Abraham would have taken away the life of his Son by taking off his head But this prejudging although antient and very generall is not soassured as it is imagined to be and at least it ought not to be held for a certain truth The Text saith that Abraham took the knife to cut the throat of his Son now this word is not restrained to that which we call beheading And moreover we ought to consider that Abraham had order to offer his Son as a Holocaust In which kind of sacrifice the victim was not beheaded untill after it were dead For first of all the bloud was let forth either at the throat or at the breast untill the sacrifice was dead after that it was cut in pieces the head was severed from the Body and the other parts the one from the other This was the method of the Holocaust confirmed in Leviticus 1 11. 12. Of the Catachism of the French Churches THis Catechism is no more perfâ—ct than any other of the writings of Men I am not the first that hath so judged It is defective in many points It is prolix and exuberant in questions in certain matters where it ought to be more succinct On the contrary it is too brief there where it ought more to enlarge it self It sometimes dispatcheth