which Christ often upbraids them with As for instance The Rabbins used as appears by the Version of the Septuagint and the Citations of St. Paul in this place to interpret Deut. xxvii 26 as if the meaning of Moses there was that God required of them the most perfect Holiness which if they did not perform they were to expect to be cursed by him But in reality all that Moses says is only that the People were to curse him that did not confirm the words of the Law to do them as I have shewn in my Notes on that place St. Paul who disputes here against the Jews and endeavours to overcome them with their own Weapons reasons from these Opinions of theirs and shews that supposing the Truth of what they asserted it was manifestly impossible any Man should be accounted just before God by the Law because they acknowledged that all men were Sinners So that it is all one as if the Apostle had said You say O Jews that ye expect Justification from God by the Law and think that the Law is a most perfect Rule of Life From whence it follows that you lie under the Curse of the Law because you have not perfectly kept it for you do not pretend to be absolutely sinless and by your own concession the Law denounces a Curse upon all that do not perfectly obey it So that you cannot hope for Justification by the Law but must seek it from the Gospel If it be enquired how I know St. Paul does not reason here from the thing it self but upon the Jews Principles I answer By his citing the place of Scripture here alledged not as it really is but according to the Interpretation of the Rabbins For the words of Moses are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cursed be he that confirmeth not the words of this Law to do them Which the Septuagint render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And these St. Paul follows as far as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but then changes the rest into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But doubtless he would never have alter'd any thing in the words of Moses nor followed the Septuagint at all but render'd the Hebrew himself exactly if he had reasoned from the bare Authority of the Prophet and not from the Opinion of the Jews And it is common with St. Paul to cite the Old Testament so as it was usually alledged by the Doctors of the Jews whom they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 darschanim that is to say with little regard to the circumstances of the place or the proper signification of the words and to argue from them so alledged because that was the custom of the Jews See but the place cited out of the Prophet Habakkuk Chap. ii 4 in vers 11. Vers 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is by perfect Holiness for the Law and a pattern of perfect Holiness was the same in the opinion of the Jews And the thing it self is true tho the Jews had a wrong Notion of the Law 's perfection which truth of the thing it self made St. Paul express himself as the Jews did tho not so accurately as they should have done Vers 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There are three things here worth our enquiring into which most other Interpreters securely pass over First who are meant by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 us Secondly what is the Curse of the Law Thirdly how Christ has redeemed us from it By us we are to understand the Apostle himself and his Countrymen the Jews to whom the Law was given not all Mankind This is evident from the thing it self because other Nations were utter Strangers to the Law of Moses which cannot be said to have been given to such as were always ignorant of it Nay it was not given so much as to the Jews themselves who were born after the revelation of the Gospel and much less yet to Christians tho they knew it because it was already abrogated before they came to the knowledg of it yea before ever they had a being The following words also shew that the Jews are opposed to the Heathens in this Verse and therefore what Dr. Hammond here says in his Paraphrase about the redemption of Men in general tho it be true does not belong to this place because the Discourse is not about all Mankind but the Jews only The Curse of the Law here spoken of seems to be that mentioned by Moses in Deut. xxvii and denounced upon those who were guilty of several Impieties and as I before observed who refused to confirm the Law and did not think themselves obliged by it And those who were so cursed could not expiate their Sins by any Sacrifice but ought to be punished with Death which because it could not always be inflicted as in case the Crime or its Author was not known therefore the Person so offending had a Curse denounced upon him or was pronounced worthy of all manner of Evils and Calamities See my Notes on that Chapter of the Book of Deuteronomy It is certain whilst the Law remained in force or before it was abrogated by God all the Jews ought to have engaged to observe it and it was not lawful for them to say that they would not be obliged by it or live otherwise than according to its prescription And if any of them did so they unavoidably subjected themselves to the Curses of the Law Nay those who thought the Law required perfect Holiness and yet did not think themselves perfectly Holy ought if they would be self-consistent to look upon themselves as under the Law 's Curse But Christ having established a New Covenant whereby that old Mosaical one was abolished through his Death did at the same time free the Jews from all the curses contained in the Law for whoever brings in a new Covenant and makes new Laws abrogates the old Only that the Jews might partake of that Redemption or be absolved from the necessity of observing the Mosaical Law and exempted from its Curses it was requisite they should embrace the Gospel-Covenant and keep it And thus the Jews were redeemed from the Curses of the Law but not the Gentiles who were never obnoxious to them and as St. Paul tells us in Rom. i. shall be judged without the Law The Jews might therefore after the New Covenant's being established by the Death of Christ deny that they were any longer obliged by the Law and neglect its prescriptions where they disagreed with the Gospel without any fear of its curses to which God from that time ceased to have any regard Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Namely for us Jews for Christ offering himself a Sacrifice to God the Father for all Mankind and expiating thereby the Sins of all Men died for the Jews as well as others and at once reconciled them to God and freed them from a necessity of observing the Law which denounced a Curse upon those who transgressed it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
Egyptian but Judaicos ritus the Jewish Rites as we are told by Seutonius in the Life of Tiberius Cap. xxxvi Judaeorumque juventutem per speciem Sacramenti in provincias gravioris coeli distribuit reliquos gentis ejusdem vel similia sectantes urbe submovit sub poena perpetuae servitutis and distributed the Youth of the Jews under the pretence of a military Expedition into Provinces of an unwholsom Air forbidding the rest of that Nation or any that were of the same Sect to make their abode in the City upon pain of perpetual Slavery Claudius also a very little while before the writing of this Epistle Judaeos impulsore Christo as the same Author speaks in the Life of Claudius cap. xxv assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit that is I suppose cast the Jews disagreeing among themselves about Christ or the Christian Religion some standing up for it and others opposing it upon which account Christ may in some sense be said to have been the impulsive Cause of their Banishment out of the City This might be confirmed out of Philo and Josephus but the thing is so clear that it needs no further proof Vers 7. Note b. Whatever our Author here says all these things may much more fitly be understood only of the last Judgment of which see Grotius and other Interpreters Tho St. Paul speaks of the Judgment as of a thing near at hand it does not follow that it is not the last Judgment which he speaks of because not knowing the time when that was to be he was obliged to speak of it as of a thing not afar off that so the Christians might be always ready considering Christ might come when he was least expected CHAP. II. Vers 1. Note a. I Have shewn on the former Epistle that the places which our Author applies to the Destruction of the Jews may very well be understood of the last Judgment And what St. Paul says here being written on occasion of what he had said before must be referred to the same coming of Christ Ibid. Note b. As the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or coming of Christ both in the first Epistle to the Thessalonians and this is his final coming to judg the living and the dead so also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies as Grotius has well observed the gathering together of good men to him that they may be made Copartners with him of eternal Happiness in Heaven See Mat. xxv 31 Our Author should have produced an Example in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signified to be assembled for the Worship of Christ Vers 2. Note c. All that our Author here says may as fitly agree to those who through a misapprehension of St. Paul's Words should have thought that the end of all things and the coming of Christ to judg the World was at hand And so there is no need of recurring to any other coming of Christ Vers 3. Note d. I. To speak the truth I confess none of the various Interpretations which I have read of this place fully satisfy me But as I can easily find something to object against others so there is nothing which I can propose my self as certain The Interpretation which our Author prefers before all others is grounded only on this supposition that there was a vast number of Gnosticks before the Destruction of Jerusalem who were destroyed together with that City which he has no where solidly proved When the Christians are admonished not to believe Impostors it is not necessary to understand it as a Caution to them to avoid the Errors of the Gnosticks for there were a great many Jewish Impostors which Josephus makes mention of in the History of that Age and there might be many more which he passes by It does not appear by any certain account that all or most of the Samaritans who had embraced the Christian Faith fell off to the Heresy of the Gnosticks Our Author has not so much as attempted to prove this and indeed it would have appeared by the Vanity of such an Undertaking that he had not carefully enough examined the Histories of those Times See my Note on his following Annotation II. Tho I acknowledg I can think of nothing here which may be satisfactory I shall however propose to the Reader a Conjecture which seems to be much more probable than either Grotius's or Dr. Hammond's And that is that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Apostle means that great and famous Defection of the Jews when they endeavoured tho to no purpose to shake off the Roman Yoke This Christ in Mat. xxiv foretold before the end should come first of the Jewish Commonwealth and then of the whole World and by this the Christians might know that the end was not at hand because that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had not yet happen'd For the beginning of the Jewish Rebellion was about the end of the Reign of Nero of which see Lib. ii de Bello Judaico cap. 30. according to the Division in the Greek And such a defection is often called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Josephus in the same Book cap. 31. represents the chief of the Jews as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being offended with the boldness of the defection and a little after it is said of Agrippa that he was willing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to spare the Rebels and in cap. 33. the seditious are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have revolted from the Romans The same Words frequently occur afterwards in that signification in Josephus and other Writers The old Glosses have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rebellio segregatio abitus defectio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 discessio discidium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rebellis rebellio transfuga Ibid. Note e. I. I acknowledg that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tho in the singular number must be understood to signify not one Man but a Multitude who yet were to be headed by some one notorious Villain to whom this and the like Characters should of special right belong Nor do I deny but Simon Magus deserved to be thus signalized or rather branded but I do not believe it is he whom the Apostle here has a respect to nor is there any certain History which relates all that is said of him by Dr. Hammond or agrees with his conjectures It is affirmed first by Eusebius out of Justin that Simon went to Rome under the Reign of Claudius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which our Author interprets of the beginning of the Government of Claudius because it seemed to agree better with his conjectures Justin and out of him Eusebius say that Simon was accounted a God and that a Statue was erected to him as such In which learned Men have long since shewn that Justin was mistaken and it may be probably conjectured that that Journy of Simon to Rome was a Fiction of some ignorant Man who had not a due regard to Truth and misunderstood the
which were heretofore under the Consulship of Torquatus and Cotta foretold by Lydius the Etrurian Prophet are now ratified and accomplished for Jupiter has sometime since smitten his own Hills and Temples and thrown fire into the Capitol And therefore the burning of the Capitol under Vespasian was counted a very great calamity as we may see by these tragical words of Tacitus in Hist lib. iii. c. 72. Id facinus post conditam urbem luctuosissimum foedissimumque populo Romano accidit nullo externo hoste propitiis si per mores nostros liceret Deis sedem Jovis Opt. Max. auspicato à majoribus pignus imperii conditam quam non Porsena dedita urbe neque Galli capta temerare potuissent furore principum exscindi Arserat ante Capitolium civili bello sed fraude privata nunc palam obsessum palam incensum Quibus armorum causis quo tantae cladis pretio pro patria bellavimus c. This Action since the first building of the City was the most dismal and shameful that ever happen'd to the People of Rome that when we had no foreign enemy at our gates and the Gods for any thing we had done to provoke them were propitious to us the seat of the great and excellent Jupiter ominously erected as a pledg of Dominion which neither Porsena when the City was delivered to him nor the Gauls who took it by Assault had been able to break into should be destroyed by the fury of our own Princes Once also before the Capitol was burnt during a Civil War but it was then by secret fraud now it was openly beset and openly set on fire Was it for this and that so great a Calamity might befal us that we have been engaged in so many Wars and fought so long for our Country How great the fame of this Accident was among neighbouring Nations and how they interpreted it as a Prodigy the same Writer tells us in Hist 1. 4. c. 54. where having made mention of the Commotions that were in Gaul and Germany he saith Nihil aeque quam incendium Capitolii ut finem Imperii adesse crederent impulerat Captam olim à Gallis urbem sed integra Jovis sede mansisse Imperium Fatali nunc igne signum coelestis irae datum possessionem rerum humanarum Transalpinis-gentibus portendi superstitione vana Druidae canebant Nothing had so much inclined them to think that the end of the Roman Empire was come as the burning of the Capitol That the City had been formerly taken by the Gauls but Jupiter ' s Seat standing safe the Empire had continued Now that by this fatal fire it appeared the Gods were incensed against the Romans and designed to confer the government of the World upon the Nations beyond the Alps was the superstitious tone of the Druids So that these Commotions being appeased and the Capitol rebuilt it might be said that the deadly wound was healed Vers 8. Note e. It should have been added with Grotius that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is understood in the book of life of the Lamb slain written from the beginning of the world that is in which God from the beginning of the World until this time began to write the names of the Confessors and Martyrs for the Truth whom wicked men had persecuted or killed for its sake for of a man that is alive it cannot be said his name was not written from the beginning of the world instead of never for it could not be written before he was born supposing the Discourse to be about a Catalogue only of those who have begun to live as it is here which Dr. Hammond acknowledges Vers 10. Note f. I do by no means think that S. John here has a respect to Passive Obedience as our Author's Countrymen speak but to the Persecutors themselves to whom it is foretold by this Proverb that it should be their lot to suffer the same things they inflicted upon others See Grotius on this place To this purpose is the Subject of Lactantius his Book de mortibus Persecutorum So that in this place their Opinion is neither approved nor condemned who think it lawful to oppose force by force provided there be a prospect of doing it successfully and without too much bloodshed Nor is there any thing said about this matter in the places which the Doctor cites and it is a thing which it 's probable he would not here have thought of unless he had lived in the days of Cromwel But those things which please us we bring to mind upon the least occasion Vers 15. Note m. Excepting the place in the Maccabees all our Author here says is taken out of Hugo Grotius who treats of the same matter more largely and accurately I have alledged a more antient example to this purpose on Numb xxxv 6 than any alledged by either of them See also what Spencer has collected about this Subject de Rit Mos Legg l. 2. c. 14. Vers 17. Note n. What our Author here says of the several ways whereby sacred marks were received and what follows as far as the citation of Martianus Capella he took for the most part out of Grotius but excepting these words Of these Servius and Virgil makes frequen◠mention perhaps it may be so printed in that Edition of Dr. Hammond which Mr. Le Clere used but in the second Edition of it it is Of these Servius ON Virgil c. which if Mr. Le Clerc had known he would not have made this remark which are a manifest corruption of these words of Grotius Talia mystica nomina etiam aliis Diis fuisse ex Servio discimus that other Gods also had such mystical names we may learn from Servius Virgil himself no where makes mention of such names much less does he frequently mention them and perhaps it is but in one place they are mentioned by Servius II. They that had received the mark of Bacchus were not for that reason called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but because when they danced at Bacchus his Feasts they really carried in their hands a bunch of Ivy or a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 III. I wonder that our learned Author who interprets the first Beast of the Idolatry of Rome and especially of the Capitol did not seek for the number of the Beast in the names of the Gods of the Capitol I my self supposing what is said by Grotius and Dr. Hammond to be true and conjecturing that the mark of the name or of the number of the Beast must contain the number made by the letters of the names of Jupiter and Juno who were chiefly worshipped in the Capitol and signify that he who bore that mark was a worshipper of those Gods found the number of the Beast χξςʹ in these words Δ 4 Ι 10 Ο 70 Σ 200 Ε 5 Ι 10 Μ 40 Ι 10 Η 8 Η 8 Ρ 100 Α 1 Σ 200  666 So that he who had these Letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
only speculative Divinity often stumble in particular Passages and many times look for Doctrins true indeed in themselves but nothing at all to their purpose in places where they are not and know not how to make a right use of those places whence they may really be deduced They are contented not to oppose the received Doctrins and think they cannot do amiss in seeking them any where provided the words do not too plainly oppose it By which means we see the Antient Interpreters of Scripture both Greek and Latin because they had no regard to Words or Grammar but minded only truth of Doctrine have strangely mistaken the genuin sense of Scripture Hence in part came innumerable vain Allegories which I do not call vain because they contain false Doctrins but because they are grounded upon no certain reason Hence proceeded the violent Interpretations and pitiful Subtilties with which the Writings of those Interpreters abound We need but read St. Austin's Commentaries on the Psalms where we shall scarce meet with a page that has not some examples of this kind Which if it were a true way of interpreting any thing almost might be proved or disproved out of any place whatsoever This Dr. Hammond carefully avoided and would have avoided more if some particular things had not a little too often occurred to his thoughts as the Heresy of the Gnosticks the Destruction of Jerusalem and Church-Discipline which three things he frequently sought for where no body acquainted with the Apostles stile had ever before look'd for them and few again ever will Yet as I said before Dr. Hammond does not near so often dash upon this Rock as the Antient or most late Interpreters especially those who have written in the last Age. I might add this also which is no small commendation of his Annotations that he follows mostly that scheme of Divinity which is more agreable to Scripture than the Opinions of many Interpreters keeping a middle way between those who deduce a sort of fatal Necessity from all eternity of which necessity the Mind of Man is a mere Instrument and those who like the Heathens are said to deny that Vertue is at all owing to God No Man that reads his Annotations can doubt whether he had that other faculty of an excellent Interpreter which I said lay in an exact knowledg of the stile of Scripture and cannot be acquired but by a constant reading of it We shall find but few Interpreters so well acquainted with the Sacred Writings That frequent and exact comparing of the words and expressions of Scripture with one another which the Reader upon the first opening of the Book may observe puts this matter beyond all doubt The third Qualification which I said was a Critical Habit of judging concerning the meaning of places tho it was not so great in him as the two former was however considerable And this I doubt not he attained by a diligent reading of the best Writers especially Grotius and he would have acquired it in a much greater degree if the constant trouble of defending the Church of England against several sorts of Adversaries had not diverted him But if we compare him with the Antient Interpreters or with the greatest part of those who have written in the foregoing Age we shall find none among the Antients and but few among those of late that can be thought his Equals For the Antients tho they understood Greek trusted more to their skill in Rhetorick than Language and took more pleasure in running out into common places or Allegories than in seriously interpreting words and expressions Origen and St. Jerom who besides understood Hebrew did also much more seldom use their knowledg in that kind than a sort of Eloquence which took much in their Age. And later Interpreters have been more industrious to fill up their Commentaries with their own Divinity and Controversies with other Sects of Christians than with strict enquiries into the signification of Words and Phrases But Dr. Hammond considering what is expected from an Interpreter and knowing the difference between a Preacher or a Divine and an Expositor of Scripture sets himself to perform the part of an Interpreter and seldom concerns himself about any thing else Which being so it cannot reasonably be said that I have spent my time ill in translating Dr. Hammond's Annotations or in illustrating correcting and enlarging them But as mens Judgments commonly are proceeding not from love to Truth but from Passion I find there are others who whether really or seemingly affirm that I am not indeed to be blamed for translating Dr. Hammond but for annexing those things to his Annotations wherein I often charge him with Error or do otherwise contradict his Opinion as if I were bound to assent to all that he says or ought to have so great a reverence for him as to be afraid of professing that I think he was mistaken in his interpretation of some Passages But to give these Men satisfaction if they are willing to be satisfied I would fain know which of the two ought to be most valued Dr. Hammond's Honour or Truth The Reputation of a Man long since dead and whose Opinions no Law divine or humane obliges us to follow or the defence of immortal Truth which we cannot forsake without offending both God and Men If they are of that humour that they had rather maintain the Honour of a learned Divine as I before said but subject to error than Truth they are not fit to be spoken with I will have no contest with such Men as profess themselves enemies to Truth but shall leave them without any reply to the Mercy of their own perverse Temper But the Errors they say of great Men ought to be conceal'd rather than aggravated I answer I have no where aggravated any thing but confuted him in the softest terms whenever I supposed him in a mistake However I don't think the greatest Mens Faults ought to be conceal'd who the greater they are thought to be the more liable unwary men are to be deceived by them and therefore whenever they are out of the way they ought above all others to be set right again It is just we should forgive their Mistakes and bear with their Defects in consideration of their greater Vertues and the notable Service they have done the learned World but we ought not to let Errors pass under the disguise of Truths It becomes all Candidates of Learning especially those that study the Scriptures to endeavour all they can and contend earnestly that Truth upon all occasions may appear not that it may be concealed out of respect to any man or Error receiv'd instead of Truth The only thing justly blamable in those who take upon them to correct the Mistakes of great Men is if they charge them falsly passionately or maliciously not for the manifestation of Truth but to lessen their Reputation or if they endeavour to obscure their great Excellencies and severely inveigh
who expected the Messias under the notion of a temporal King and were exceeding desirous of innovations which sort of Men were more fit to raise a sedition than to advance the Kingdom of Heaven by just and proper Methods To prevent therefore the resorting of evil men to him with a design to innovate and so making a wrong use of his Name and Authority he thought it better till that danger was over to have the publishing of the truth deferred Thus Joh. vi 15 we see the multitude after they had been fed by him fell into such a sort of consultation whereupon when he knew that they would come and take him by force to make him a King he departed alone by himself into a mountain It was an extraordinary piece of Wisdom in Christ to take care there might be no sedition laid either to his or his Disciples charge whilst the Gospel was but begun to be preached for if such a thing could have been done with any appearance of justice every body easily perceives that it would have been a mighty prejudice to the Christian Religion Vers 10. Note f. Since our Author in his Notes upon this place has thought fit to put together all that he had observed concerning the different notions of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will contribute also my share 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 has several significations amongst the Greeks that have nothing to do here but this is to be taken notice of viz. that tho trust be the first notion of that word and its secondary signification is that credit or assent which we give to one who affirms things that we never saw nor have any mathematical demonstration of yet because among things of that kind there are some asserted by all Nations that relate to divine matters and which in points of faith challenge the first place altho we neither see them nor have any mathematical evidence for them therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or by way of eminence a perswasion about matters of Religion So Aelian Var. Histor lib. ii c. 31. having said that there was no Atheist to be found amongst the Barbarians but only among the Greeks and that the Barbarians believed that there were Gods who took care of human affairs and foretold things to come adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having a firm perswasion of these things they offer up sacrifices in a pure manner and keep themselves chast and holy c. When the Jews began to write Greek they used the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same sense for the credit yielded to their sacred Writings and those that believed them they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the Son of Sirach Chap. i. 25 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the things that please him i. e. God are faith and meekness and Ch. xlv 6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he sanctified him by faith and meekness So 1 Macc. iii. 13 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a body of Jews But the Christians that followed the Jews in their way of speaking gave the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Perswasion of those that believed in Christ and opposed it to a twofold kind of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnbelief one of which was proper to the Heathens and the other to the Jews who notwithstanding they credited the Old Testament yet refused to believe Christ and his Apostles However in all these instances 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a perswasion of those things particularly which the Discourse relates to and as those are various so we may if we please make Faith to be of several kinds But because no one can believe the Authority of any Laws but he must also observe them provided he does not disagree with himself therefore no body could seriously and heartily believe that Christ was sent down from Heaven to men to teach them the way of eternal Salvation without obeying Christ's Precepts just as no body believed the Law of Moses to be the only Rule of Life revealed by God who did not in part at least conform themselves thereto And hence this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 came in the Writings of the Apostles to signify not only a perswasion of the truth of the Christian Doctrin but also a disposition of Mind and Practice agreeable to it the necessary effect of believing But it must be observed that in different places of the New Testament in proportion to the Subject treated of this word has a larger or more contracted Notion 1. Where the Discourse is about the Faith of the Patriarchs we are to understand by it such a perswasion of the truth of those things they received as divine Revelations as was accompanied with an answerable temper of Mind and Life In which sense it occurs frequently in the Epistle to the Hebrews Chap. xi and elsewhere 2. Where Christ's discourse is of those that believed in him as transacting upon earth as he does here in S. Matthew and up and down every where in the Gospels by Faith is meant a perswasion of his having been truly sent of God with a power of doing Miracles and of the truth of all his Doctrine as far as it was known 3. But after the Apostles had received the Holy Ghost and expounded the whole Christian Doctrine more at large the notion of Faith included in it a perswasion not only of the truth of Christ's Mission but also of his Apostles and Disciples whose Doctrine God gave a testimony to by innumerable wonders and an assent accordingly yielded to whatever they asserted joined with a Life sutable to such a perswasion And this notion the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 has in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians where St. Paul disputes about Justification For in these places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. a living according to the Christian Institution setting aside the works commanded by the Law of Moses only is said to justify i. e. to procure mens being esteemed just or good and pious by God and being acceptable to him And on the other hand the Apostle denies that Works viz. those which were opposed by the Jews to Faith or the Christian Religion did either under the Gospel or ever of old justify And this he makes good by several Arguments which shall in their proper places be explained It shall suffice at present to have run over the different senses that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is capable of and pointed to its original Signification But there is this further to be added that as Faith includes more than a bare perswasion about the truth of a thing in the mind so this perswasion it self must be such a one as is the result of having seriously weighed and examined the Arguments by which the truth of the Christian Doctrine is confirmed For it is not to be imagined that the Centurion for instance did believe in Christ hand over
is almost like that of the Disciples of John But that ye were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies either that ye are no longer the servants c. or that tho ye were the servants of sin nevertheless ye have obeyed But notwithstanding all this Dr. Hammond's Observation is true if it be accommodated to other places There are for instance several things said in Parables which do not concern the scope of them but are only for ornament sake and to make the Hearers the more attentive tho it seems to have no manner of ground in the places by him alledged But it is common for those that have not from their very youth made it their business carefully to study the Criticks to find difficulties in the plainest things And Dr. Hammond is far from being the only instance of this CHAP. X. Vers 2. Note b. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are certainly used indifferently but those that spake Greek preferred the use of the former because they thought a word of the masculine Gender more proper for the Sirname of a Man than one of the feminine But of this name here given to Simon there will be a fitter occasion to speak when we come to the xvi Chapter Vers 9. Note e. Our learned Author in this Annotation is mistaken I. in that he denies the words spoken by Jacob of himself Gen. xxxii to be declarative of his poverty for all the meaning of that Patriarch is that when he crossed over Jordan in his way to Mesopotamia he was poor and that afterwards he returned back from thence rich See the place and my Notes upon it Tho it would be but ill inferred from thence that he went thither in the habit of a beggar II. Homer does certainly describe Vlisses at his return in the quality of a beggar See Odyss P. verse 197. seqq where Vlisses is represented as carrying a filthy purse full of holes in a great many places and Eumaeus is said to have led him into the City 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Like a dirty beggar and an old man leaning upon a staff It was a long while since the Doctor had read Homer when he was writing this III. I think we ought to take quite another method to reconcile the Evangelists of which I shall speak when I come to the parallel in St. Mark Vers 16. Note f. Our ingenious Author to illustrate the general proposition he lays down by examples plainly misapplies most of the passages here alledged by him For excepting one place out of Matt. xxiii 16 all the rest are eithar precepts or admonitions as those who will but examin them will easily see I shall instance but in two Behold says Christ I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves be ye therefore wise as serpents and simple as doves These words contain a plain precept and that a very necessary one as well as one that is agreeable to Christ's Doctrine For the Apostles being not sent to men that were lovers of Truth and Justice but to such Persons as were more like Beasts than reasonable creatures there was a necessity of their using prudence lest going to address themselves to Men who were wicked to a degree of madness their pains should not only prove ineffectual and to no purpose but they themselves also be oppressed by them And this Christ commands Matt. vii 6 Give not that which is holy unto Dogs c. But they were at the same time to take heed that that prudence of theirs did not turn to craftiness or deceit as it would have done if they had either privately renounced the Gospel which they had publickly preached or feigned themselves inclined to the wicked opinions of the Pharisees They were not to say every thing in all places and in all companies but they were to say nothing that was in the least repugnant to the Doctrines which they had received from their Master or that might hinder the Gospel's propagation That which Christ therefore enjoyns his Apostles is to mix prudence and a sincere plainness together Of which vertues he himself was a most perfect pattern who never exposed himself to the fury of the Jews but when there was a necessity for it But St. Peter offended against this precept by acting the part of a Dissembler of which we have an account given us by St. Paul Gal. ii 12 making use of prudence to an extreme he forfeited the commendation of being sincere and upright The following words Beware of men for they will deliver you c. are a prohibition of Christ to his Apostles not to publish immediately to every one the instructions they had received from him for fear they should be dragged to the Synagogues upon the very first beginning of their ministry A thing which he himself also practised delivering his mind in parables that he might not give too great an occasion for the passions of ill minded men to exert themselves and saying nothing which he thought would not at present be endured by the Persons he spake to But this was to be no hindrance as it really was not to the Apostles from exposing themselves to such dangers as they could not avoid but by a culpable dissembling These things are too manifest to need any longer insisting upon Vers 16. Note g. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being immediately subjoined to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it cannot signify one that does not hurt but one who together with his prudence does not use any cunning or shifting but is fair and upright In this sense we find it used by S. Paul Rom. xvi 19 But yet I would have you wise unto that which is good and simple concerning evil i. e. far from being cunning to do evil So in the Addit to Esther Chap. vi 4 crafty men are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have deceived the simple honesty of Rulers Accordingly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies such a sort of temper in the same manner that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies ingenuity or sincerity to wit when things are simple and not corrupted by any art or deceit whence this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 came to denote a person who had not the least guile to be found in him And so in the same manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used not only for pure as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pure wine but also for a man that is free from craft or deceit The Etymology which Eustathius gives of the word from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is harsh and will not do in this place And therefore the Author of the Etymologicon magnum supplies us with another which is from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to mingle instead of which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the word in use from whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 came to signify primarily pure and secondarily also one that is not corrupted with
his safety depends require For otherwise if this had not been lawful man had been for the Sabbath and not the Sabbath for man in as much as it would have been his duty to set less by his own Life than the observation of the Sabbath Thus if there be a just occasion we are obliged to lay down our lives rather than not observe those precepts of eternal equity and obligation that are contained in the Gospel because the keeping of those precepts was the end for which God created us And yet they too I acknowledg may in a sort be said to be for us because if they were but universally observed they would be a means of making men happy both in this life and everlastingly in the other But the Sabbatical days of rest come quite under another consideration and were not appointed for the good of the mind so much as of the body The Jews according to the intention of the Lawgiver were bound only to observe them so far as they could without inconvenience and consistently with self-preservation In all other cases they were to have a greater regard to their life than to the keeping of holy days Dr. Hammond therefore has made an ill advantage of the ambiguity of this phrase for the good of man which does not always signify the same thing Add to this that I have said what Grotius has upon this place and then there will be no room to doubt but that this learned English Gentleman has mistaken the true design of it Vers 20. Note e. Few that are skilled in the Hebrew will allow our Author that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he shall bring forth judgment unto truth is the same with he shall bring forth a true judgment for to express this the Jews would say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he shall bring forth the judgment of truth It is more probable that the Evangelist who produces rather the sense than the very words of the Prophecy expresses that which the Prophet calls to bring forth judgment unto truth by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and would be understood thus to advance the Doctrine of true Piety so as that it shall prevail over falshood which is the same as to lay down that Doctrine in such a manner as to make it appear true Undoubtedly that Doctrine which is looked upon as true must be said to have overcome and this is the only victory that the Gospel can obtain to be looked upon as true Ibid. Note d. This proverbial expression not to break a bruised reed nor to quench smoking flax is rightly expounded by Dr. Hammond as well as by many others before him I add that the Latins much after the same manner used the phrase extinguere extinctos to signify the killing or destroying outright such as had before but little hope left of safety Thus the Writer to Herennius Lib. 4.52 after he had told how a City was taken by the Soldiers brings in a Woman deprecating the Conquerors anger in these terms Parce per ea quae tibi dulcissima sunt in vita miserere nostri noli extinguere extinctos We beseech you by all that you count sweetest in life to spare and take pity upon us do not resolve to destroy those that are already destroyed Vers 24. Note f. What our Author has about the God Achor perhaps he took out of Selden de Diis Syris Synt. 11. c. 6. where this matter is copiously handled Certain it is that Mr. Selden wrote first But both of them were deceived by a false reading in Pliny whose words in the vulgar editions were corrupted In the Manuscript Copy there is no mention made of the Cyrenaeans nor of Achor Deus as Salmasius in his Plinian exercit p. 10. Edit Vltraj observes who must be consulted by those that have a mind to enquire more throughly into this matter He thinks and very rightly that we may from the marks that are found in the old written copy read the words thus invocant Elei Myiagron Deum muscarum multitudine pestilentiam afferente and this reading was taken into the context of the Paris Edition ann 1685. It will bear likewise a dispute whether it be a probable conjecture of our Author that the Ekronites God Beelzebub was the same with the Grecians Jupiter For Jupiter a Deity among the Greeks was as unknown to the Philistines as Dagon the God of the Philistines was to the Greeks It was a piece of vanity in the poor silly Grecians rashly to think that their Gods were every where worshipped as I might easily shew if it was a thing to be done in this place But I do not here take upon me to explain the Greek Mythology Vers 27. Note g. The Doctor might perhaps have added that the whole of Christ's reasoning in this place consists of Arguments ad hominem for there are several things here supposed as true because they were believed by the Jews which are no where designedly laid down for certain by Christ nor any where confirmed by the Apostles One is that there is such a political order amongst the Devils as that one rules over the rest in the quality of a Prince and under the name of Beelzebub which every one must needs look upon as doubtful Another thing is that that political order should continue for a great while after that time and consequently the Devils should have no civil dissensions among themselves It 's certain that the Persians who called the Devil by the name of Arimanes thought that his Empire would never be at an end till it was overthrown by Oromazes or the good God See Stanley Philosoph Oriental Lib. ii c. 6. And much such an opinion as this seems to have been taken up by the Jews who perhaps had it from the Chaldeans and if we believe learned men the rest also of the Doctrine about the several orders that there are among the Angels It may be further asked perhaps why Christ did not answer an objection which easily springs up in a mans mind upon the reading of this reasoning of his For it might have been pretended by the Pharisees that this was only an artifice in the Prince of the Devils to expel his subject Devils for a little time who might afterwards enter in again unobserved and settle him more securely in his Dominion and so that there seemed to be a dissension among the Devils tho really there was none But this pretence the Doctrine of Christ it self sufficiently confuted and his Resurrection which was purposely intended as a confirmation of his Doctrine put the matter out of all doubt For how could it be imagined that so holy a Doctrine confirm'd by miracles from Heaven should owe its being so universally spread to a previous juggle and contrivance among the Devils This is in effect tho but obscurely suggested by Christ at the 33 d Vers Vers 32. Note h. It is very true that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifies a word is
according to the use of that phrase in Scripture in which it occurs more than once And we are not here to consider what the word Gates signifies when it is alone or joined with any other word but what is the meaning of this phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the signification of that word may be various according as the place is in which it is found Now no body will deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and portae mortis the gates of death are the same and this phrase the gates of death signifies nothing but death it self So Job xxxviii 17 Have the gates of death been opened unto thee or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death So Psal ix 13 Thou that liftest me up from the gates of death i. e. deliverest me from death So Isai xxxviii 10 Hezekiah being in fear of an untimely death says In the cutting off of my days I shall go to the gates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. as it is rendered by the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I shall go to the gates of death So that the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies death it self But what does Christ then mean when he says that the gates of hell should not prevail against Peter or not overcome him namely this that the danger of a certain and speedy death upon the account of his preaching the Gospel should not deter him from discharging the office imposed on him and so not death it self So that Jesus in these words promises Peter after he had professed his belief that he was the Messiah that he should be a foundation of his Church and constant in the profession of the Truth he had declared which he fulfilled accordingly for Peter as we are told by Clemens Ep. c. v. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not only undergo one or two but many sorrows and so becoming a Martyr went to his proper place in glory We may apply to him that passage of Seneca as we find it in Lactantius Lib. vi c. 17. Hic est ille homo honestus non apice purpuráve non lictorum insignis ministerio sed nulla re minor qui cum MORTEM in VICINIA videt non sic perturbatur tanquam rem novam viderit qui sive toto corpore tormenta patienda sunt sive flamma ore recipienda est sive extendendae per patibulum manus non quaerit quid patiatur sed quam bene This is that brave and honorable person who is not remarkable for his fine hat of feathers his purple robe or his guard of Lictors which is the least part of his glory but who when he sees death just before him is not surprized with the strangeness of the sight and whether he is to undergo the torment of the rack or to receive fire into his mouth or have his arms stretched out upon a cross does not regard what but how well he suffers There is one thing that may perhaps here be objected viz. that according to this interpretation Christ does not keep to the Metaphor for after he had called Peter a stone he adds that death should not overcome him It is true but it was neither necessary that Christ should go on in the same Metaphor nor yet supposing that what we refer to Peter did as it is commonly thought belong to the Church will he be found to continue the same Metaphor For he compares the Church to a building which cannot properly be said to be overcome by the gates of death but only to be pulled down or destroyed Nothing is more ordinary in all sort of Writers than to begin with one Metaphor and end with another As for instance Clemens says a little before the words already alledged concerning St. Peter and St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the faithful and most righteous pillars of the Church were persecuted even to death Pillars can neither be persecuted nor dy However by this it appears that St. Matthew or his interpreter very fitly uses here the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifies to overcome by force for this is what Christ means that the terror of having a violent Death set before him should not overcome St. Peters constancy tho he saw the gates of death opened for him yet he should notwithstanding hold fast his pious resolution If any doubt of the signification of the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let them turn to the Greek Indexes to the first 5 books of Diodorus Siculus and the Roman Antiq. of Dion Halicarnassaeus collected by Rhodomannus and Sylburgius where they will meet with more examples than in any Lexicons But it occurs likewise in the same sense often in the version of the Septuagint I know very well that Interpreters commonly make use of these words to prove the perpetuity if not also the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 impeccability of the Church but they will never be able to evince any such thing from this place by Grammatical reasons The thing it self shews that the Church is liable to error nor is there any mention made in this place of errors That the Church has and always will continue I do not in the least doubt because of the nature and force of the Evangelical Covenant but this cannot be concluded from these words in which it is much more probable that St. Peter is spoken of both what goes before and what comes after belonging to him and not to the Church However I submit the whole matter to the judgment of the Learned Vers 19. Note h. I. It is certain I confess that there was a great difference between that Person 's power who is said to have had the key of the house of David in Isaiah and his who is represented in the Revelation as carrying the key of David but it would be hard to prove this from the sound of the phrases if it were not otherwise plain and manifest for the key of David is the key by which the house of David was open'd and shut and therefore the same with the key of the house of David Tho a key be an ensign of power the key of David does not signify the power of David himself but a power over the Kingdom of David Our learned Author is not always happy in his subtilties about little things However Mr. Selden has several Observations with relation to this matter lib. 1. de Synedriis cap. ix which those that will may read in himself II. Indeed for my own part I do not doubt but that the Apostles committed the Government of the Churches to single Bishops and accordingly that these ought to be reckon'd their Successors but as their Gifts were not alike so neither was their Authority equal And therefore whatever Christ says to the Apostles ought not presently to be accommodated to Bishops at least by the same Rule and in the same Latitude Especially in this place where Christ promises to St. Peter and the Apostles something extraordinary
where he mentions these three degrees Exhortationes Castigationes Censura Exhortations and Chastisements and then Censure But if he hear not them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if he be still refractory either through non-conviction of the Fact or non-contrition for it if this second Admonition be not in event 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. xiii 10 to Edification or Instruction if it work not on him Then tell it to the Church I shall tell you what that is presently And if he hear not the Church continue his Refractoriness still let him be unto thee as a Heathen or a Publican which may possibly signify that in that case thou hast liberty to implead him as thou wouldst do any Heathen in any foreign Heathen Court for that Injury that Trespass done to thee which was at the first mentioned For certainly though it were unlawful for a Christian both here and 1 Cor. vi 1 to implead a Christian for a personal Trespass before a Heathen Tribunal yet to deal thus with a Heathen or Publican which was in account the same was not either by Christ or the Apostle counted unlawful but only the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Christian with Christian v. 6. and consequently with a perverse refractory Brother whom you see Christ gives leave to account and deal with as with a Heathen or Publican it would not be unlawful also But another Interpretation I shall not doubt to propose and prefer that by Heathen and Publican may be meant a desperate deplored Sinner such as the Rabbins call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Sinner as in the Gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a deplored Sinner Thus in Musar If he will not then i. e. when two or three Friends have been taken to be present at his Admonition be reconciled go and leave him to himself for such an one is implacable and is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of whom again 't is there said Si nec hoc modo quicquam profecerit i. e. adhibitis amicis if this second Admonition do no good debet eum pudefacere coram multis he must be ashamed before many which may be the meaning of Dic Ecclesiae tell it to the Church as will anon appear by 1 Tim. v. 20 And this interpretation of that Phrase will seem most probable if you mark 1. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Publicans and Sinners are frequently joyned together in the Gospel as once Publicans and Harlots those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sinner-women 2. That the Heathen are call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sinners as when 't is said that Christ was by the Jews delivered into the hands of Sinners i. e. Romans Heathen and in St. Paul not Sinners of the Gentiles and then those words let him be to thee a Heathen and a Publican will sound no more but give him over as a desperate deplored Sinner to whom those Privileges of a Christian viz. of not being impleaded before an Heathen Tribunal c. do not belong i. e. leave him to himself This sure is the simplest rendring of the place and then he that is such that is capable of that Denomination is certainly sit and ripe for the Censures of the Church which follow in the next Verse and are appointed to go out against this refractory incorrigible For so immediately it follows Verily I say unto you who are those you Why 1. In the plural Number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to you Disciples the same that were after made Apostles for so in the first verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Disciples came to him with a question and v. 3. he said verily I say to you i. e. to you Disciples and ver 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what do you think asking the Disciples or appealing to their own judgment and so still the same Auditors continued and his Speech addrest to them I say unto you Disciples whatsoever you shall bind on earth c. After this it follows ver 19. again I say unto you that if two of you shall agree upon earth c. Many false illations are by men of different perswasions made from these words which will all vanish I conceive and the truth be disinvolv'd if the Reader will not despise this one observation which I shall offer to him and it is this that the method oft-times used in Scripture is when it hath proposed one or two severals to speak of to resume the last first and so orderly to go back till it come to the first to which you may accommodate that expression and description of God's method in other things Many that are last are first the last in proposing first in handling or resuming and the first last Other Examples of this Observation I shall leave the Reader to observe when he reads the Scripture more ponderingly and only proceed to help him to take notice of it in the point in hand Three cases it is apparent are here mention'd orderly by our Saviour in the matter of trespass 1. Telling the Trespasser of his fault between him and thee alone 2. Taking one or two with thee to do it more convincingly and with greater Authority 3. Telling the Church of it Having said somewhat to each of these as he delivered them in the three first Verses 15 16 17. he resumes the matter again and speaks first to the last of them ver 18. telling them what after the not succeeding of the third admonition the Apostles and their Successors are to do when the cognizance of this injury and contumacy comes before them which that in every case of trespass it always should I conceive doth not hence appear to be necessary save only in case that the Magistrate or secular Tribunal be Heathen because that Supposition may perhaps be the ground of the sit tibi Ethnicus on which this other is superstructed viz. excommunicate such a Refractory till reformation and then upon that absolve him again and verily I say unto you whatsoever you shall bind on earth c. From this view it is not irrational to conclude that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church and the Disciples considered prophetically under the notion of Apostles i. e. Founders first then Governours of Churches may in that place signify the same thing So saith St. Chrysostom in Mat. Hom. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tell it to the Church i. e. to the President and Rulers of it and Theoph. in Matt. xviii 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the Church for the Rulers of the Church To which purpose it is observable what Kimchi a Jewish learned Rabbi hath affirmed that the Governours and Rulers are oft meant by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Congregation and so the word People Exod. iv 29 doth clearly signify the Elders not all the People Exod. iii. 16 Agreeable to which is the
〈◊〉 which properly signifies a military Captain or Commander whereas the Levites were no Soldiers And this is undoubtedly the reason why Dr. Hammond thought it was the Tribune who was set over the Roman Garison that was called by that name But he and others who have fallen into the same mistake should have remembred that the sacred Functions of the Levites are more than once stiled by Moses a Warfare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Num. viii 24 25. where the Septuag have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And therefore he that was chief over the Levites might very well be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in Greek is usually rendred by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See the Doctor upon Chap. xxiii 11 Note a. CHAP. XXIII Vers 11. Note a. HAVE a care of thinking that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ever signifies to serve or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Servants The Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is applied sometimes to the service of the Levites is therefore made use of because it signifies congregari to assemble or gather together as the Levites used to do about the Tabernacle or Temple or because they were God's garison Soldiers who came together for the defence of the Temple not because that word ever signifies to serve Timothy is called a good Soldier not simply as a Servant of God but as a fighter in God's cause tho the thing considered in it self be the same yet the significations of words are various and it is not all one whether we say a Servant or a Soldier tho both may be said sometimes of the same Person Our Author therefore here looked for a knot in a Bulrush when it had been easy to understand the word here used of Herod's guard Vers 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Cambridg Copy here reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in a great many other places there is as great a variation as this between it and other Copies which discovers it to be a sort of a Paraphrase Vers 47. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. He acknowledged the truth he confessed that Jesus was indeed the Person whom he would have himself believed to be That this is the meaning of this Phrase appears by the following words saying truly this was a Just Man and just in the same manner it is used in Chap. v. 26 of this Gospel and in Josh vii 19 And therefore Grotius who interprets it he acknowledged the power of God and our Author who follows him in his Paraphrase are mistaken CHAP. XXIV Vers 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Their Sorrow was so great that they had not sufficiently taken notice nor looked stedfastly enough upon the Man that had joined himself to their Company to know him to be Jesus So Hagar was so overwhelmed with Grief at the thoughts of her Son 's dying that she did not see or did not take notice of the Well of Water that was just by her Gen. xxi 19 And so when it is said afterwards Vers 31. of this Chapter that the same Disciples Eyes were opened 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meaning is nothing but this that looking more stedfastly upon Christ they knew him which very Phrase is used in the story of Hagar in the same sense Vers 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Pious and Eloquent not like the Pharisees who talked very big of Virtue without practising it and were powerful men in words but not works which was the general reproach cast upon the Philosophers among the Heathens Cebes Thebanus in his Table describing a true Philosopher tells us that he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a prudent Man and mighty in Wisdom both in Word and Deed See Acts vii 22 Vers 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These two Disciples of Christ do not seem to have spoken with the Women themselves but only to have heard the report of others by which means they came to know but half the Truth for the Women affirmed that they had also seen Jesus himself Nor can this seem strange since it is evident from the 21 st verse that these Disciples went from Jerusalem the same day that Christ rose from the Dead a very few Hours after his Resurrection and so could not have a perfect knowledg of all the Circumstances of it Vers 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See my Notes on Gen. xix 2 Vers 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. they besought him instantly so 2 Kings v. 16 Naaman the Syrian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 urged or importuned Elisha to take the Gift which he refused for curing him of his Leprosy See note on Chap. xiv 23 Vers 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. he went out of the Room on a sudden and they could not possibly understand whether he was gone for it is not necessary to suppose that he became invisible before he went out of the Room Pindar uses the same word of Pelops who had conveyed himself away but certainly without becoming invisible Olympion 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he you disappeared So afterwards vers 36. of this Chapter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is he came amongst them on a sudden and before they were aware Vers 45. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. by his explaining the Scriptures to them whereby they came to perceive that there were several things spoken of Christ which they did not before take notice of For Christ had not as yet given them the Holy Ghost and it appears from Acts i. 6 that after all these Discourses of his they did not understand the nature of Christ's Kingdom In my Ars Critica I have interpreted this Phrase more at large Vers 46. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. St. Luke who often omits several Circumstances which are related by the other Evangelists joins together several Discourses that were delivered by Christ at different times and here in this place he seems to connect these words with the foregoing tho they were spoken by Christ many days after for he said the former on the very day of his Resurrection but these latter were not spoken till after the Apostles were come back from Galilee Compare these things with the History of the other Evangelists ANNOTATIONS ON THE GOSPEL according to St. John NB. Tho Mr. Le Clerc did not insert this Paraphrase and Animadversions on the 18 first Verses of the first Chapter of this Gospel in his Latin Edition of Dr. Hammond because it had been publish'd twice before yet 't was thought fit for the convenience of English Readers and to make the Work more complete to put it here in its proper place The Author's Preface to the 2 d Edition of his Paraphrase on the first eighteen Verses I Have already in the first Edition of this little Commentary given the Reasons which induced me to publish it and therefore I shall not here repeat them I freely give my consent to the reprinting of it because it is my interest to have
Of this Regeneration St. John speaks afterwards in Chap. iii. 3 seqq And St. Paul insists upon it very much in his Epistle to the Romans and elsewhere for to this all that he says almost about the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or adoption of the Gentiles has a respect Which my design in this place will not permit me at large to shew Vers 14. Was made flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That by flesh we are to understand human nature is generally observed by Interpreters who may be consulted But the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be said to have been made flesh or man in more respects than one and here it is said to have been made flesh in regard that being clothed as it were with the Flesh of Christ it became conspicuous for Flesh sometimes signifies a conspicuous nature in opposition to one that is spiritual or inconspicuous So it is used by St. Paul in 1 Tim. iii. 16 where he tells us that God appeared in Flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was justified in Spirit c. i. e. God became as it were conspicuous when all the fulness of the Godhead dwelt bodily in Christ in Christ I say who being a Man was conspicuous and visible and in whom God shewed himself to be present I know other Copies have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the sense is the same That the word Flesh is taken here for human Nature as conspicuous appears by the following words in this and by the 18 th verse Tho when I say that Flesh is considered here by St. John as conspicuous or precisely under that notion that is so far from excluding the other properties as the Schoolmen speak of human nature that on the contrary it supposes them For our Flesh is therefore conspicuous because it is a necessary property of human nature to be conspicuous It is rightly said by Divines that Reason was made Flesh not by a conversion of the divine Nature into a human which is as impossible as for a human to be changed into a divine but by an unexpressible indwelling of God whereby the humanity of Christ became the humanity of God in a singular and extraordinary manner as on the other hand the divine Reason was made the Divinity of Christ by that secret union From that time God might be called Flesh and reciprocally the name of God might be attributed to Flesh or Man And upon the account of this conjunction of two Natures in Christ the Apostles speak of him sometimes as God sometimes as a Man and do not only ascribe to Christ what they had seen done by the man Jesus but also what the divine Reason did before Jesus was born see Col. i. 14 seqq Heb. i. 2 10. Ibid. Dwelt among us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is it dwelt in a man who conversed among us All these things Philo was ignorant of or else resolved to be so if it be true what some of the Antients say that having embraced the Christian Religion he afterwards apostatized from it see Euseb Hist Eccles Lib. 2. c. 17. Photius Cod. 105. Ibid. We beheld its Glory i. e. such Miracles as were never before or in the same manner done by any That Miracles are called the Glory of God I have shewn in my Notes on Exod. xvi 7 Amongst those Miracles which were wrought for the honour of Christ a very eminent one was that of his Transfiguration spoken of by St. Peter in his 2 Epist i. 16 17. whose words give great light to this passage For we have not followed saith he cunningly devised Fables when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ but were eye witnesses of his Majesty For be received from God the Father honour and glory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when there came such a voice to him from the magnificent Glory This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased see Mat. xvii Ibid. As of the only begotten whom he accordingly gave that glory to which he had never before conferred on any or ever will The Prophets who were Brethren and the Sons of God in the same manner as one another had often an equal glory put upon them by the Miracles which God wrought at their request But the Miracles of Jesus Christ were so many and great that they were capable if I may so speak of obscuring all that had been formerly wrought by their multitude and splendor By this word only begotten perhaps St. John might have a secret design to oppose the Doctrin of Philo who generally calls the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the only begotten but only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first begotten and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the most antient of the Angels Grotius thinks that the Gnosticks are here condemned who made the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be two different persons but it is uncertain whether those frivolous Syzigiae Pleromatis had been invented when St. John wrote see on vers 16. Ibid. Of or from the Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This must be referred to the word Glory see Grotius Ibid. Full of Grace and Truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If these words be referred to the immediatly foregoing we must supply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who was viz. the only begotten Otherwise they must be included in a Parenthesis as I have done them Grotius however is of another opinion who may be consulted Grace and Truth that is in Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bhesed veemeth of which phrase I have discoursed in my Notes on Gen. xxiv 27 There is an opposition made here between the Gospel and the Law as appears from the 17 th verse The Mosaical Law appointed Sacrifices for the expiation of some sort of Sins which if they were wilfully and knowingly neglected tho it were but once it denounced death upon the Sinner whatever his Repentance was afterwards For other sins there were no expiatory Sacrifices instituted but they were to be punished with death Neither did God by virtue of that Covenant promise to any one that died for transgressing the Law tho never so penitent any mercy in the life to come And yet these were Sins which by reason of the multitude of the Laws were frequently committed so that God discovered nothing but his inflexible Justice in the Law It 's true he promises Forgiveness to the whole Jewish Nation becoming penitent after the destruction of their Commonwealth in Levit. xxvi and elsewhere But particular Persons as long as the Commonwealth stood sinning in that manner as I have said had no hopes of pardon But it is quite otherwise under the Gospel in which God promises pardon to the greatest Sinner upon repentance and amendment of life and that without the intervention of Sacrifices And in this sense the Gospel alone is full of the grace and mercy of God Vers 15. John bare witness or bears witness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. in
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
Idiotick That is the Stile which I before described and which is used by St. Paul And it is not opposed only to the painted Eloquence of Rhetoricians but also to the Elegance of Politicians to whose Stile that of the Vulgar is much inferior This as to St. Paul and the other Writers of the New Testament has been shewn at large by C. Salmasius in Comment de Lingua Hellen. Sect. 2. The other kinds of discourse mention'd by Diogenes I omit because they are not to our present purpose But when I say that a Rhetorical or Political Stile excels that of the Vulgar or Idiotae my meaning is not that it surpassed it only in Ornaments which do not belong to the Matter but also in Disposition and Propriety of words which very much contribute to the perspicuity of any Discourse For which reason one that is skilful in the Greek Language may much more easily understand Demosthenes or Isocrates than St. Paul not only because the stile of this latter has abundance of Hebrew Idioms in it but because the order of his Sentences is many times inverted his Phrases and Terms improper and his Metaphors harsh As Diogenes Laertius also who wrote in an Idiotick Stile and had no great regard to order or choice of words is in many places very hard to understand And such are among the Greek Fathers Epiphanius and the Author Historiae Lausiacae in whose Writings often occur the like difficulties proceeding from negligence of Stile Which being so I cannot sufficiently wonder why Beza was so angry with St. Jerom because he did not admire St. Paul's Eloquence which setting aside his Matter and considering only his Words was certainly none at all But let us hear Beza himself Quid igitur saith he an imperitus loquendi Paulus elinguis ut Hieronimus existimat What then did not St. Paul know how to express himself or had he not the use of his Tongue as St. Jerom thinks No he was not so perfectly tongue-tied neither that the Substance of his Discourse and Doctrine cannot be understood but his Stile is not so clear nor his Expression so elegant as to make every thing that he says easy or pleasant to critical Ears St. Paul did not aim at that disposition in his Words which might facilitate the understanding of a thing in it self obscure or render his Discourse more plain and perspicuous which Beza very well knew and no one can be ignorant of who has read but St. Paul's Epistles in Greek But Beza goes on and saith Imo vero Chrysostomum potius doctissimos quosque ex Graecis ipsam denique rationem sequutus quamvis nativa illa germana masculae facundiae ornamenta ipsi videri possint non defuisse fateor tamen illum fucatae illius rhetorices pigmentis uti noluisse Yea rather following St. Chrysostom and the most learned among the Greeks and Reason it self tho those native and genuin Ornaments of masculine Eloquence seem not to have been wanting in him yet I confess he uses none of those colours of false Rhetorick But a clear way of speaking to begin with his last Words and disposing every thing we say in its right order is no fucus That artifice of those Rhetoricians who endeavor to magnify by words things that are in themselves inconsiderable or skim over those that are base may properly be stiled fucus daubing but not apt Expressions or soft Metaphors and an orderly disposition of every part in a Discourse in which the Speaker has no other end than to make himself easily understood and carefully to avoid all Ambiguity which might lead his Hearers into a mistake And St. Paul's stile is not only without fucus but deficient also in these things which are not discommendable So that if we follow reason we shall never say that St. Paul was eloquent provided it be remembred we are speaking of words or disposition and not of matter That St. Paul's matter is praised by St. Chrysostom and other Greek Fathers and preferred before all the Arguments which the antient Greeks have treated of I know and none but a Mad-man will deny but that they commended his Style or the Order of his Words and Sentences as clear and elegant I do not think and if I did their Authority would not move me because the contrary is so manifest But they were not altogether so void of Understanding as to attribute that Eloquence to St. Paul which he himself disclaims Nor does Beza himself disagree with me in this matter when he adds that St. Paul would not make use of Rhetorick Vt vi spiritus hominum animos ad Christum raperet non autem Sermonis blanditiis adulatorum more alliceret That he might bring men to Christ by the Power of the Spirit and not allure them after the manner of a Flatterer by smoothness of Speech Which is as much as if he had said Those who are affected with what St. Paul says are affected with his Matter not with his Words or Expression as being brought by the Spirit of God to an Enquiry and Love of the Truth tho deliver'd in a rude Stile He adds Cum orationis ipsius totam indolem characterem propius considero c. When I more narrowly consider the whole Strain and Form of his the Apostles Discourse I must needs say I never could see any such Loftiness in Plato himself when ever he undertakes to thunder out the Mysteries of God any such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Majesty or Force in Demonsthenes when ever he applies himself either to terrify Men with the fear of the Divine Judgment or to admonish them or to draw them to contemplate the Goodness of God or to exhort them to the Duties of Piety and Mercy or lastly a more exact Method in teaching even in Aristotle or Galen who were otherwise very excellent and skilful Artists If we consider the things themselves I acknowledg all this to be very true but we are speaking now about Stile and Order of Discourse in which as those Authors mentioned by Beza were superior to St. Paul so as to things themselves they are vastly inferior Yet I do not deny but there occur even in St. Paul also some Sentences admirably well expressed but then they are but rare and his Stile is for the most part barbarous as the Speech or Idiotae uses to be But as things of small moment in themselves being set off with Rhetorical Colours are and have been often admired so on the other hand things of the greatest importance have many times made an obscure and ill ordered Discourse to be extolled wheras those two things should be distinguished and separatly consider'd I have been the larger upon these things that I might shew in what sense and how truly the Apostle here calls himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and what I have said may be of exceeding use to direct us in the interpretation of these Books for knowing that they are written
practice of latter Ages Vers 10. Note b. Tho our Author in this Annotation follows Grotius yet I cannot assent to either of them for this reason because the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the perpetual use both of Sacred and Profane Writers always signifies elsewhere to perswade and never to appease I can neither find after the most diligent search nor remember any passage in any Author I have read in which it can be reasonably taken in any other sense and if I can shew that this signification will agree to all the instances produced by the learned Grotius and Dr. Hammond there will be then no necessity of recurring to any other And this it will be very easy to do when I have only premised that there is an Ellipsis in all the alledged examples in which that which is wanting must be supplied to shew what the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in them signifies In the example out of the Book of Samuel there is a manifest Ellipsis which must be thus supplied 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and David perswaded his Men not to kill the King Not he appeased them but he prevailed with them not to slay him A Patron or Advocate is said indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that is to perswade the Judg not to appease him that is perswade him that his Cause is just For it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 could be rendred to appease the Judg there should be added the Person of the Accused or whose cause is pleaded in the Dative case thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to appease the Judg to the party accused or contending which yet there is no instance of In Mat. xxviii 14 there is the like Ellipsis which must be supplied again in this manner if this come to the Governor's ear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we will perswade him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be angry with you and secure you So in this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is all one as if St. Paul had said do I perswade God or Men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be displeased with me And thus all those Phrases must be understood in which neither the Case of the Defendant nor any Infinitive mood is subjoined to the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which often occurs contrary to what Beza thought I know Henr. Stephanus and other learned Men render it then flectere to incline or bend but it 's plain they have more regard to the sense than the proper signification of the word and in all that multitude of examples which are alledged in the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae the Figure Ellipsis takes place I shall instance only in one by which we shall be able to judg of the rest In Plutarch in Lib. de cohibenda Ira Euclides to his Brother who had angrily said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let me perish if I be not revenged on you returns this mild answer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let me perish if I cannot bend you Peream nisi te flexero in which Version the sense indeed is expressed but not the just import of the word For we must supply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If I cannot perswade you to forgive me this offence or some such thing And that such Supplements as these are understood in all these Phrases may appear by infinite examples of intire expressions wherein the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is made use of some of them to be had out of any Lexicon I have been the larger in disputing against our two learned Men about this word lest mere reasoning from some few places contrary to the rules of Grammar and constant use should prevail A thing which Grotius is very seldom guilty of but Dr. Hammond often as I have shewn CHAP. II. Vers 1. Note a. THAT correction according to which instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is fourteen we ought to read δ. four is proposed by Lud. Cappellus in Hist Apostol Appendice Character 4. which is worth consulting because he starts a great many difficulties there against our Author's Chronology And that Conjecture was approved by Grotius because of the connexion of the Discourse Yet Dr. Pearson has excellently shewn in his Annales Paulinae that St. Paul here reckons the years that had passed from the time of his Conversion But he refers the Jerusalem Synod to the year of Christ xlix and makes St. Paul's Conversion to have happen'd two Years later than Dr. Hammond and that with good reason Consult himself and compare him with Cappellus Vers 6. Note d. I. It is very true what our Author here says about St. Paul's Solaecisms which others using a softer term call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seeming solaecisms But it matters not much by what name they are called if we do but agree as to the thing And it is universally acknowledg'd by those who understand Greek that there are a great many expressions in the Writings of St. Paul which cannot according to the rules of Grammar be resolved into proper Construction The examples alledged by Dr. Hammond put this matter out of all doubt yet some learned Men have made it their business to collect a certain number of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inconsequences and incoherences out of the best Authors both Greek and Latin to shew that the Stile of St. Paul ought not therefore to be accounted the less elegant But there are two things which may make it appear that those Authors are ill compared with St. Paul The first is that those forementioned defects do seldom occur in them whose whole Discourse is otherwise agreable to the Rules of Grammar and has all those ornaments which are requisite to make it proper and elegant On the contrary the stile of St. Paul is both destitute of all those things which are so much admired and commended in any Discourse I speak of words and not of Matter and has abundance of seeming Solaecisms Secondly the most elegant Heathen Writers tho they were at the same time very well skilled both in Grammar and Rhetorick do designedly sometimes violate the Rules of Grammar for variety sake lest their Stile should seem too studied and artificial which therefore may be look'd upon as so many Figures and a particular sort of elegancy But St. Paul naturally falls as it were into these kind of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because regarding things and neglecting words he thought it enough if he were understood by an attentive and diligent Reader who loved the Truths he declared So far is he from designedly diversifying his Discourse with that kind of Negligence that he does not seem to have aimed at so much as the common ornaments of Stile Let us hear about this matter Quintilian in Lib. 9. cap. 3. Esset saith he omne schema vitium si non peteretur sed accideret Virtus est si habet probabile aliquid quod
here because there are some Agonistical terms used he strains them all to the same Metaphor and can see nothing in this place but Metaphors borrowed from the use of the Agones The Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here may much more naturally be interpreted of that Action of Christ when he suddenly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apprehended S. Paul as he was persecuting the Christians in his way to Damascus in order to make him an Apostle But if any one will needs with Dr. Hammond have this to be an Agonistical word I should not interpret it of the attaining a prize but of overtaking or catching viz. when a swift Runner overtook another that ran more slowly as if Christ should be said to have run after St. Paul and overtook him Suidas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The word is applied also to the swiftness of the feet and therefore we say such a one pursuing another that ran away overtook him Vers 20. Note l. I. Our Author in the beginning of this Note puts municipium for municipatus for municipium is the Town corporate it self and municipatus the Privileges or Condition of municipes Free-men of any City or Corporation Which word Tertullian and S. Jerom make use of to explain this place as learned men have observed II. But the truth is neither of these words belong to it for no municeps could say My municipatus or my municipium is in Rome Rome could not be called a municipium which name belonged first only to the Cities of Italy but afterwards also to others the Inhabitants of which were indeed Roman Citizens but in their municipia were govern'd by their own municipal Laws and not those of Rome of which see A. Gellius lib. xvi c. 13. If we would describe the Condition of Christians by a Metaphor taken from the Condition of municipes we ought to say that they have indeed a municipium on Earth but their City is in Heaven III. I can't tell whether the place in Cicero was transcribed by our Author out of Cicero himself but it 's certain it is false quoted For it is in lib. 2. de Legg cap. 2. in these words Omnibus municipibus duas esse censeo patrias unam naturae alteram civitatis not juris ut ille Cato cum esset Tusculi natus not exemplo Catonis qui in populi Romani civitatem not societatem susceptus est If our Author wrote this passage out of Cicero himself he was scarce awake if he transcribed it out of another he did not act prudently See Note on Mat. xiii 54 where this place is cited by Mr. le Cler◠upon another occasion IV. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Acts xxii 28 does not signify municipium or municipatus but the Privilege of the City of Rome Besides that word does not belong to this place for no one would say besides Dr. Hammond who abounds with improprieties of Speech our privilege of Citizenship is in Heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here is all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 City that is Patria Country 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is our City or Country is in Heaven and not on Earth Elsewhere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the way of administring a Commonwealth According to the twofold signification of the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is taken for living in a City or administring a Commonwealth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 has also the two alledged significations But the former only can be admitted here because St. Paul speaks of a Place as appears by the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Heaven See Heb. xi 13 and seqq CHAP. IV. Vers 3. Note a. OF this Phrase see my Note on Deut. xxxii 32 where I have spoken of it at large and confirmed what Dr. Hammond here says But he produces imprudently a piece of a Verse as out of Homer taking it upon trust which is no where extant in him At least as I never read it that I remember so neither can it be found by the help of Seberus's Index It is very ill done in any to alledg the Antients in such a manner that the Reader cannot know whether they are truly cited such Persons deserve never to be trusted Vers 7. Note b. I can easily assent to what our Author here says if we put but Jews instead of Gnosticks or if by the name of Gnosticks we understand the Jews themselves because tho it is certain there were Judaizers wherever the Jews were it is not certain that the Heathen Sect of the Gnosticks was so widely dispersed It must be further added that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not signify only the Mind but also frequently quickness of Wit or Understanding whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be ingenious Hesychius tells us that this word signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly the action of a composed mind that is a clear understanding of things And so St. Paul's meaning here will be that the love of Peace was much better than all the Wit and Subtilty that the Disturbers of the Church boasted of ANNOTATIONS On the Epistle Of St. Paul the Apostle to the Colossians AT the end of the Praemon I. It may not be unuseful to observe that Colossae was even in antient Times a wealthy and populous City as those generally were which the first Preachers of the Gospel went to because of the likelihood of having a greater harvest in them than in others Xenophon in Lib. 1. de Exped Cyri speaks of it in this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he led them through Phrygia one Station eight Parasangae to Colossae a populous rich and great City II. This Epistle seems to have been written in the same Year with the two foregoing that is according to the account of Dr. Pearson whom I follow Anno Christi lxii and the ix th of Nero. CHAP. I. Vers 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be supplied here after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus the visible Image of the invisible God which is to be understood of the Humanity of Christ it self as Beza well observes who may be consulted But to the Humanity of Christ we must add the visible Miracles which he wrought in the view of Multitudes This is that which is otherwise called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Philip. ii 6 Our Author ought to have expressed this more fully in his Paraphrase Ibid. Note a. I. If we carefully examin the places brought by our Author and others to prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies sometimes a Lord we shall find them to be of no force In Psal lxxxix 28 the firstborn of the Kings of the Earth doth not signify a Lord over other Kings but an excellent or most glorious King as Dr. Hammond himself acknowledges and the thing it self shews But Joh xviii 13 makes nothing at all to the purpose for the firstborn of Death
in this who erred in so many other things Did not the same man make Herod to be contemporary with Ptolomaeus Philadelphus and the Septuagint Did not he say that the word Satanas was compounded of Sata and nas tho he was disputing with a Jew who could easily refute such a mistake Did not he very unjustly and falsly and yet with no small confidence accuse the Jews of corrupting the Holy Scriptures And could not he who erred so grosly in these things not to mention any more rashly take an occasion from the inscription of a Statue which he misunderstood to say what was not true He was a Martyr what then Are Martyrs infallible or to be believed when they are manifestly mistaken And if they have been deceived in some easy things and are not to be credited in all why might not they be mistaken in matters of greater difficulty Besides this Inscription if it be understood of Simon Magus is contrary both to the use of the Latin Tongue and the Custom of the Romans nor is it at all countenanced by the History of that Age. In Latin there is none so called absolutely Deus Sanctus besides Semon or Simon if we chuse so to write it tho corruptly an unknown God of the Sabins or Hercules as Lilius Giraldus will inform us in Hist Deorum And it was not the custom of the Romans to erect Statues to private men and that before their Death such as Simon the Samaritan as to Gods nor can any one instance to that purpose be produced out of all the Roman History And if so unusual a thing had been done by Claudius whose Folly so many Writers have recorded there would be some mention made of it by the Heathens whereas there is not the least mark or sign of it any where to be found But says our Author if Justin had been mistaken or wrote what he knew to be false the Emperors to whom he wrote would easily have discovered the Cheat. But the Emperors perhaps did not so much as look into the Apologeticks of Justin it may be which was their ignorance or wickedness they laughed at them and despised every thing else that was good in them because of this error And who can doubt if there was ever any Tripho Judaeus in the World that should have read his Dialogue or any other Jew whatsoever but he would have scorned and that justly what Justin upbraids the Jews with as to the corruption of the sacred Writings which in a modern Author would be called a Calumny The bare authority therefore of Justin is not to be regarded III. But it is confirmed by Irenaeus and Tertullian I have answer'd this in part already by observing that Irenaeus premises before this Story the word dicitur it is said which shews he was not confident of the truth of it but only declares what some others reported And Tertullian as those Apologetick Writers used to do did but transcribe those that went before him never minding or examining whether what they said was true and out of him again this Story was taken by the later Writers of the Church of Rome but that these took any great care not to affirm any thing concerning former Ages but what was certain and unquestionable no one will believe that reads their Writings with his eyes open IV. But if Simon Magus be not the Person here described who is it you will say that is thus characterized I answer Those wicked Zelots and Edomites who forcibly possessed themselves of the Temple of Jerusalem and so settled themselves in the place of God's peculiar residence in which they behaved themselves very proudly and insolently despising all the Laws of God filling the Temple with the blood of the Citizens and profanely using the holy things of it as their own as Josephus in many places tells us First the Zelots made themselves Masters of the Temple and used its holy things as their own as we are told in lib. vi cap. 1. Then John with his Edomites entred into it as we may learn from cap. 11. and as little abstained from the holy things being used to say in his own justification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That those who stood up for God ought boldly to use the consecrated things and they who fought for the Temple be maintained out of it as Josephus informs us in cap. 37. And those that did such things might well enough be said to sit in the Temple of God as God shewing themselves as if they were God Vers 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The things here spoken of seem to be taken from Christ's Discourse in Matth. xxiv where the like things are mentioned as forerunners of the Destrustion of Jerusalem and so of his final Coming Whence it might be easily inferred that the last Judgment was not as yet at hand because those things which were as the Harbingers of the excision of Jerusalem had not as yet happen'd Vers 6. Note h. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is that which restrained the Jews from breaking out into open Rebellion viz. partly the Reverence of the chief men of the Jewish Nation who were against making War with the Romans because they saw there was no hope of shaking off their Yoke and that the thing could not be attempted without the Ruin of the Jews partly the fear of the Roman Armies which the Jews had not yet laid aside especially while they hoped they might live a quiet life under their Governours As long as these things continued in the minds of the Jews the Counsels of the Seditious rested secret and the number of those that were desirous of Innovations was but small but assoon as the chief Men of the Nation began to be despised by the Conspirators and some hope of Victory appear'd because the greatest part of the People were incensed against the Romans and the President was remiss and cowardly then the Jewish Nation like a swift Torrent that should have broken down its banks rushed headlong into its own Destruction then all the vilest sort of men began openly to put in practice their impious Designs This Josephus relates at large in several places of his History of the Jewish War and particularly in lib. 2. And S. Paul wrote this in the 13 th year of Claudius when Felix had been again sent Procurator into Judea at which time tho the Jews were weary of their Yoke and had raised the last year a Tumult yet they still obeyed as to the main body of the Nation What the chief Men among the Jews thought of engaging in a War with the Romans Josephus in many places shews see but Agrippa's Oration in lib. 2. cap. 28. in which he disswades the Jews from rebelling and endeavours to keep in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the seditious And till that time he and the rest of the principal Men of the Jewish Nation had some Authority over the common People but Gessius Florus had so highly injured and
Multitude and pompous Solemnities Note that the Law had imposed this upon Widows or such as were forsaken by their Husbands that they might not be too hasty to marry a second time IV. To the places alledged by Grotius and our Author as well here as on Chap. v. 9 add this out of Livy Lib. x. c. 23. Mr. Le Clere does not cite the place which I wonder at because he blames Dr. Hammond so often for the same thing by which it will appear who it is that is said to be the Husband of one Wife That Historian describing the strife between the Roman Matrons in the Nobles Temple of Chastity out of which Virginia was expelled because she being a Noble Woman had married a Commoner saith Brevis altercatio inde ex iracundia muliebri in contentionem animorum exarsit cum se Virginia patriciam pudicam in patriciae Pudicitiae templum ingressam UNI NUPTAM ad quem virgo deducta sit verò gloriaretur A short quarrel occasion'd by that means through the Womens peevishness grew to a very fierce contention Virginia boasting that she being a noble and vertuous Woman had enter'd into the Nobles Temple of Chastity and had been MARRIED to ONE Man to whom she had been deliver'd a Virgin Vers 15. in Note e. Col. 2. Lin. 8. after the words Donour or Plenipotentiary Dr. Hammond would have done well if he had proved what he asserts here about a Metropolitan Power and the rest of what he says out of Scripture or those Antients which lived nearest the times of the Apostles because he could not but know that there were some in the World who would look upon the greatest part of those things as Fables But perhaps they were delivered first from the Pulpit in a Discourse to the People and afterwards inserted in his Annotations on the New Testament but in an improper place What he says about the Church and the House of God there is no one undoubtedly but knows and it might have been said much more clearly in three words without the tediousness of so many repetitions Ibid. Lin. 39. after the words one and the same Title Our learned Author might have alledged another place out of Maimonides more like this of St. Paul which has been already alledged by Mr. Lightfoot in his Description of the Temple of Jesus Chap. xxii This great Council setting in Garith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the FOUNDATION of the Oral Law and the PILLAR of Instruction For this is said of an Assembly as it is also an Assembly which St. Paul speaks of Ibid. At the end of the same Note I. All this will be insignificant if the words Pillar and ground of Truth should not belong to the Church but to that which follows viz. the mystery of Godliness Which is the opinion of Episcopius and Camero none of the lowest rank of Divines who may be consulted II. I wonder our Author should produce these words as out of the Epistle to the Magnesians for they that did so c. when there are no such words in that Epistle Whether they are to be found in any other place of Ignatius I cannot tell nor have I time to look but it was not prudently done to cite them as out of a place where they are not III. Nor is that confused heap of places out of Ignatius much to the purpose because St. Paul says nothing here about Bishops and because such times may happen wherein it would be a piece of madness to trust Bishops as our Author acknowledges So that whatever is said by Ignatius must all be understood with this exception provided a Bishop truly discharge the Office of a Pastor not if he be a Heretick or a Tyrant who thinks he is not for the Flock but the Flock for him not if he obstinately persist in gross Errors which he will not by any reason be brought to renounce through his Pride or Covetousness It was possible that in the time of Ignatius all the Bishops of whom many had seen the Apostles and many had their Disciples for their Teachers might be Men devoted to the Truth and faithful Pastors and that induced him to insist so much upon their Authority but these are not lessons for all times and places Vers 16. It must be owned that our Author in the precedent Annotations has often acted the part of a Preacher or Divine rather than an Interpreter And therefore to supply what is wanting in him I shall subjoin here out of another English Gentleman a Discourse much more critical than any thing said by Dr. Hammond I mean Dr. Pearson who has treated of the true reading of this place on the 2 d Article of the Apostles Creed p. 128. where after he had said that all the Greek Copies have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God was manifested in the Flesh c. not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was manifested c. he speaks thus Nor need we be troubled with the observation of Grotius on the place suspectam nobis hanc lectionem faciunt Interpretes veteres Latinus Syrus Arabs Ambrosius qui omnes legerunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I confess the vulgar Latin reads it otherwise than the Greek Quod manifestatum est in carne and it cannot be denied but the Syriack however translated by Tremellius agreeth with the Latin and both seem to have read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the joint consent of the Greek Copies and Interpreters are above the Authority of these two Translators and the Arabick set forth in the Biblia Polyglotta agreeth expresly with them But that which Grotius hath farther observed is of far greater consideration Addit Hinemarus Opusculo lv illud 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hic positum a Nestorianis For if at first the Greeks read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were altered into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Nestorians then ought we to correct the Greek Copy by the Latin and confess there is not only no force but not so much as any ground or colour for our Arguments But first it is no way probable that the Nestorians should find it in the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and make it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because that by so doing they had overthrown their own Assertion which was that God was not incarnate nor born of the Virgin Mary that God did not ascend unto Heaven but Christ by the Holy Ghost remaining upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Ephes Part. 1. cap. 17. Secondly it is certain that they did not make this alteration because the Catholick Greeks read it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before there were such Hereticks so called Nestoriani à Nestorio Episcopo Patriarcha Constantinopolitano Aug. Haeres Nestorius from whom that Heresy began was Patriarch of Constantinople after Sisinnius Sisinnius after Atticus Atticus after Nectarius who succeeded Joannes vulgarly called Chrysostomus But S.
evil doers IN THIS they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good Conversation in Christ. II. It is true that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies more than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to see for it is properly to look into or understand throughly for this Verb is immediately derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies a Judg or Witness of the more secret Rites used in Holy Mysteries the sight of which not only the profane Multitude but also the Mystae themselves were debarred which we may learn as from others so especially from J. Meursius in his Eleusinia Sacra I shall produce but one Testimony out of Suidas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were those who took part of the Mysteries they were called at first Mystae and the next Year Epoptae and Ephori Afterwards it follows 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which words he seems to intimate that there is the same difference between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to know viz. superficially or externally as between an Epopta and Mysta The same Author hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consideration Therefore I believe we ought to correct the Old Glosses in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred prospicio to look forward whereas it signifies rather perspicio to look through as I suppose it should be read This signification being supposed there results an excellent sense for by the words of the Christians denying that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the truth could not be understood which false pretenders to Vertue carefully conceal by deceitful words but by their good Works whereby the thing it self is throughly discerned For it could not but be a good Doctrin which made such good Men. Christ shewing his Disciples how they might distinguish Hypocrites from good Men saith beware of false Prophets which will come unto you in sheeps Clothing but inwardly they are ravenous Wolves Ye shall know them by their Fruits Mat. vii 15 For tho they cunningly dissemble their Wickedness it is not long before it discovers it self But on the other hand when we see any Man live well and that for many Years we easily perceive that Man cannot profess a Doctrin which favours Wickedness III. Our Author therefore without necessity recurs to Hesychius and suspects there is a mistake here committed by some Scribe or that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contrary to all Copies and the Analogy of the Greek Language But it is the greatest Absurdity imaginable what he says about the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which never signified suspicere but only suspicari to suspect for which signification there is here no place Besides the Latin suspicere is not to look upon the ground but as it were from some low place to look upon another as above us or reverence him Our Author was scarce awake when he wrote this and it does not seem to have been written by the same hand with the rest of his Annotations Ibid. Note g. I. No Body will doubt but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 phkoudah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 visitation signifies very often Revenge but it is as well known that this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is ambiguous and signifies also God's Benefits So that we may as fitly understand the day of Visitation of the time in which God favourably visits the Heathens when he converts them to the Christian Religion and so the meaning of St. Peter will be By your Conversation so reconcile the Minds of the Heathens to the Christian Religion as that they may at last acknowledg its truth when God shall more fully set it before their Eyes The day of Visitation signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the time when the Gospel is more fully and clearly revealed as manifestly appears from Luke xix 44 where Christ speaking to Jerusalem foretels all those evils which afterwards came upon her because thou knewest not saith he the time of thy Visitation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is wouldst not understand that God called thee by my Ministry to Salvation II. The fame of the Christians flight out of Jerusalem does not seem to have so much as reached the Ears of the Heathens who lived in Asia Minor or the Roman Magistrates and those that attended them through the Asiatick Provinces much less to have been taken notice of by them as a remarkable Deliverance For a great while after the most learned Men among the Romans did not distinguish Christians from Jews as sufficiently appears by Tacitus and Suetonius The Halcyonian days which our Author tells us the Christians enjoyed throughout the whole Roman Empire after the destruction of Jerusalem are mere Dreams Vers 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aeschylus in his Seven Captains that went against Thebes says something very much like this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If any one suffer evil without infamy well and good for this is only gain among the dead But for wicked and vile Men to suffer cannot be reckon'd any Glory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifies wickedness the punishment of which is suffer'd not without Shame and Infamy by him that commits it Vers 24. Note h. If the Apostles words had been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who being upon the Tree bare our Sins there would have been some place for Dr. Hammond's Interpretation But when St. Peter says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he took them up with his Body upon the Tree it is clearly not so much the expiation of Sins as the Mortification of them as the Apostles speak that is here signified For St. Peter's meaning is that our Sins were as it were fastened to the Cross that is mortified when Christ was lifted up upon it See Rom. vi 6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I render with his Body because as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and ב in Hebrew is frequently so taken so the Phrase it self will not bear to be otherwise rendred CHAP. III. Vers 4. Note a. OUR subtil Author sees here two Hebraisms where others cannot see so much as one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be said as well in Greek as in Hebrew and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so true a Greek Phrase that it was used by Plato as Henr. Stephanus in Schediasmatibus has long ago observed Ibid. Note b. I. If St. Peter had made mention of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perhaps there would have been some place for what our Author here says of the corruption of compounded things but because he mentions no simplicity it is nothing to the purpose Instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he should have written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word used by Homer Iliad 1. vers 50. on which Verse the Scholiast makes that remark which Dr. Hammond sets down II. The incorruptibleness of a meek and quiet Spirit wherewith St. Peter would have Women to be adorned seems to be opposed to two things
for a Feast Mat. xxv 21 Judas his indignation against the Woman that anointed Christ what pretence for it besides his Covetousness Mat. xxvi 7 the manner of his Death Mat. xxvii 5 p. 92. Judges among the Jews whence they took their name Mat. iii. 2 To Justify what in St. Paul's dispute with the Jews Rom. iii. 4 Justin Martyr his Authority not much to be regarded 2 Thess ii 4 K. Kabbalistical interpretations of Scripture of what kind 2 Pet. i. 5 Key of David what Mat. xvi 9 Kingdom whether the condition of the Christian Church could be called such after the destruction of Jerusalem Rev. i. 6 Kingdom which a Nobleman went into a far Country to receive how to be understood Luke xix 12 Kings Manuscript whether properly a different Copy or rather a Paraphrase of the New Testament Mat. xx 29 Acts x. 25 Kiss Holy with which the Christians saluted one another Rom. xvi 16 L. Labour of Love what 1 Thess i. 2 Lake burning with Fire and Brimstone whence the Phrase is taken Rev. xix 20 Laodiceans whether St. Paul wrote to them Col. iv 16 Last days which Acts ii 17 Law taken in a larger or stricter Notion John x. 35 Law of Sin and the Spirit what Rom. viii 2 Law of Moses in what sense possible or impossible to be kept Gal. iii. 10 11. the Jews only freed from the Curse of it not the Heathens Ib. v. 13 how it was a Pedagogue to bring us to Christ Gal. iii. 24 why called Elements of the World and weak and beggerly Elements Ibid. iv 3 Letter of the Law what Mat. v. 17 Mar. xii 14 Rom. ii 29 2 Cor. iii. 6 Levi the Publican whether the same with St. Matthew Luke v. 27 Light in a metaphorical sense what 1 Joh. i. 5 To Live with Christ whether it signifies to be in Prosperity 1 Thess v. 10 Lord of Hosts why God is often so stiled 1 Tim. i. 18 M. Malchus a Syrian name John xviii 10 Martyrs their several denominations for distinction sake trifling Rev. iii. 14 Man of Sin whether the Gnosticks or the rebellious Jews 2 Thess ii 3 Melchisedek how said to have been without Father or Mother and to have represented Christ Heb. vii 4 Messenger of Satan what 2 Cor. xii 7 Metropoles their Privileges as to Civil Government Rev. i. 4 Metropolitans whether any in the Apostles times Phil. i. 1 1 Tim. iii. 15 Rev. iv 4 6. Morning Star for the Doctrin of the Gospel 2 Pet. i. 19 Mystery of Iniquity whether the secrets of the Gnostick Sect or the hidden Counsels of the seditious Jews 2 Thess ii 7 N. Nard an Herb or Ointment and why of great Price Mark xiv 3 Name above every Name what Phil. ii 9 to ask in the name of Christ what Joh. xiv 14 Nature for that which is opposed to instruction 1 Cor. xi 14 by nature Children of Wrath spoken of the Jews what Ib. and Eph. ii 3 Neapolis in Palestine confounded by Dr. Hammond with that in Macedonia Acts xvi 13 Number and name of the Beast what Rev. xiii 18 number of a Man what Ibid. O. Oaths why said to be paid to the Lord tho made to others Mat. v. 33 Offering might be said to be sanctified two ways Rom. xv 16 To Open the Eyes or Vnderstanding what Luke xxiv 16 45. Oracles whence so called Rom. iii. 2 living what Ibid. counterfeit Oracles cited by Dr. Hammond Heb. vi 9 Outward darkness what Mat. viii 12 and xxv 30 P. Palestine whether subject to Syria in Herod the Great 's time Luke ii 1 Parables of Christ whether before vulgarly used by the Jews Mat. xx 15 do not always allude to a Custom Chap. xxii 2 nor observe a perfect decorum Chap. xxv 24 every thing in them not allegorical Luke xv 22 Parents whether Magistrates are included in that word Eph. vi 1 4. Passions evil hinder Men from acknowledging Truth John iii. 19 Passive Verbs often used in an Active sense James ii 4 St. Paul how a Roman Citizen Acts xxii 25 whether a single Man 1 Cor. ix 5 some of his Writings may be lost 1 Cor. v. 9 whether conversant in Heathen Writers 1 Cor. xv 33 whether Eloquent 2 Cor. xi 6 Gal. ii 6 disputes with the Jews upon their own principles Gal. iii. 10 16 24. Chap. iv 3 12. St. Peter how it is said the Gates of Hell and Death should not prevail against him Mat. xxvi 18 whether he prophesied of the destruction of Jerusalem 2 Pet. iii. 3 c. the time of his Death John xii 18 Prem to 2 Pet. Phenice a part of Syria whose Inhabitants were therefore called Syro-Phaenicians Mat. xv 22 Philippi a Roman Colony and Metropolis of Macedonia Phil. i. 1 Pilate could have put Christ to Death without the consent of the Jews Mat. xxvii 15 Platonists thought the Devils roved about Mens Sepulchres Mat. ix 28 believed the Immortality of the Soul 1 Cor. xv 29 Plural number put for the Singular Mat. xxi 7 and xxvii 44 To Pray in any ones name what Joh. xiv 14 Preexistence of Souls believed by the Jews John ix 2 High Priesthood when joined with the Dignity of Emperor Heb. vi 9 Prisoners the Custom of releasing them on Festival days Mat. xxvii 15 Prophecies antient of two kinds Mat. ii 15 of the Revelations like the Antient Rev. iv 2 why so obscure Rev. xiii 18 To Prophesy of any one for saying what may be fitly applied to him Mat. xv 7 Prophets cited instead of an allegorical Interpretation of some Passages in them Mat. ii 23 whether they commonly express dismal things covertly Rev. xvi 17 among the Heathens whether they taught the People Vertue Luke i. 67 many false Prophets during the Siege of Jerusalem 2 Thess ii 9 Prophetical expressions not always to be understood in a proper sense nor every particular Phrase to have a special meaning assigned it Rev. iv 2 and ix 17 Propositions universal for particular 1 Cor. xii 28 Publicans of two sorts Mat. xi 19 Purifying by Fire and Water common among the Heathens to signify the cleansing of the mind Mat. iii. 11 Python Spirit of Python what Acts xvi 18 R. Redeeming of time for delaying Rev. v. 16 Regeneration the Stoicks notion of it Mat. xix 28 To Remit and retain Sins spoken of the Apostles what John xx 23 Repetitions for emphasis sake 2 Cor. xi 22 Resurrection of the dead whether it ever signifies no more than a second State or Subsistence Mat. xxii 31 Rest of God under the Law the Land of Canaan under the Gospel Heaven Heb. iii. 11 Revelation of the Sons of God what Rom. viii 19 Riches whether promised under the Gospel 2 Cor. ix 8 9. Righteous for Merciful Mat. i. 19 Right hand of God where mention is made of sitting on it what Mark xvi 19 Rock that followed the Israelites how it is said to have done so why called Spiritual and how said to have
been Christ 1 Cor. x. 4 Rome stiled a Goddess Rev. xiii 1 Rude in Speech how St. Paul so calls himself 2 Cor. xi 6 S. Sacrifices under the Law whether acknowledg'd by the Jews to be Types of Christ Heb. xiii 11 Saints why Christians are so called 1 Cor. vii 14 why the Jews Eph. ii 19 Salt for wood Ashes Luke xiv 34 Salutation see Kiss Sanhedrim of the Jews sat in the form of a Semicircle Rev. iv 4 from them the form of the Heavenly Council represented to St. John in a Vision seems to be taken Ibid. and vers 6. Satan for a Man 2 Cor. ii 11 To Save taken for to heal Mar. v. 34 to preserve Luke xiii 23 Saved so as by Fire what 1 Cor. vii 14 Saviour of all Men but especially of them that believe in what sense God is said so to be 1 Tim. v. 10 Scourging a servil Punishment among the Romans not among the Jews Acts v. 41 Sealed how Christians are said to be so by God 2 Cor. i. 22 Eph. iv 30 how Christ Eph. iv 30 To See God what Mat. v. 8 Joh. i. 18 Sepulchres whited among the Jews Mat. xxiii 27 adorning them charged on 'em as a Crime Luke xi 47 Simon Magus his fabulous contest with St. Peter Rom. i. 23 Prem to 1 Thess 2 Tim. iii. Rev. xii 7 9. whether deisyed by the Romans 2 Thess ii 3 Sin unto Death what John xi 4 Sins of the Men that lived before the Flood 1 Pet. iii. 20 Solaecisms many in St. Paul's stile Gal. ii 6 Son of Man who Mat. xii 8 of Perdition for the wicked Jews 2 Thess ii 3 To Speak as a Man what Rom. vi 19 Spirit for the design of God in the Law Mat. v. 17 Rom. ii 29 2 Cor. iii. 6 17. for a disposition of Mind Rom. viii 15 2 Cor. iv 13 to be in the Spirit what Rom. vii 5 Spirit of Bondage and of Adoption what Rom. viii 15 Spirit of Python what Acts xvi 16 Spirit of Faith what 2 Cor. iv 13 Spiritual who so called by St. Paul Gal. vi 1 spiritual Meat what 1 Cor. x. 3 Stone living whence so called 1 Pet. ii 4 Strong Meat how some Doctrins are so called Heb. v. 14 To Suffer to the Flesh an ambiguous Expression 1 Pet. iv 1 Sun becoming black the Moon as Blood and the Stars falling what those Phrases signify Rev. vi 2 and viii 11 To Sup with Christ and he with us what Rev. iii. 20 Swearing by the Head Mat. v. 38 and by the Throne of God both Heathen Customs Mat. xxiii 22 Synecius a Platonist 1 Cor. xv 29 Syrian a name or Reproach John viii 48 T. Tacitus vindicated from the charge of imputing the burning of Rome to the Christians Rev. xii 6 Temple not profaned with Sepulchres Mat. xxvii 51 two Garisons placed in it Luke xxii 52 Thief on the Cross whether converted in an instant by an extraordinary efficacy of God's Power Mat. xxvii 44 Times of the Gentiles which Luke xxi 24 Tongues the Gift of them and its use 1 Cor. xiv 2 5 10 13 14. Transcribers of the New Testament have sometimes substituted more familiar words in the room of others less known Mat. xiii 35 1 Cor. xi 10 True for righteous Rev. xv 3 the true Bread Meat and Light why Christ is so called John vi 55 Truth to do it what John iii. 21 Types and typical significations the common Doctrin concerning them groundless and vain 1 Cor. x. 3 V. Vanity to which the Gentiles were made subject what Rom. viii 20 Vespasian ill compared by Dr. Hammond with Christ Mat. xxiv 3 Vnclean why the Children of Heathens are so accounted 1 Cor. vii 14 Vpper room in which the Apostles met together and prayed whether in the Temple Acts i. 13 Vrim and Thummim Rom. iii. 2 W. Warfare in a metaphorical sense for the sacred Functions of the Levites about the Temple Luke xxii 52 Washing the Hands among the Jews the occasion of it Mark vii 2 Waters many compared to a multitude of People Rev. xiv 2 Weary and heavy Laden spoken only of the Jews and in what sense Mat. xi 28 To Will set after doing signifies to do a thing heartily or willingly 2 Cor. viii 2 Will worship understood in a bad sense by St. Paul but if taken for a lawful course of Piety not commanded when acceptable to God Col. ii 19 Wine of the Wrath of God what Rev. xiv 10 Wise Men how they knew the Birth and Dignity of Christ Mat. ii 2 did not understand that he was the Son of God and therefore gave him only civil Worship Ibid. p. 9 13. Wisdom of the World and the Princes of this World what 1 Cor. ii 6 The Word of God for God himself Heb. iv 12 Works of supererrogation may be done but are not meritorious 1 Cor. ix 17 work of Faith for a Work of which Faith is the cause 1 Thess i. 2 Z. Zacharias slain between the Temple and the Altar which according to Mr. Le Clerc Mat. xxiii 35 FINIS Books printed for Sam. Buckley at the Dolphin in Fleetstreet AN Inquiry concerning Virtue in two Discourses I. Of Virtue and the belief of a Deity II. Of the Obligations to Virtue 8o. Latitudinarius Orthodoxus I. In Genere de Fide in Religione Naturali Mosaica Christiana II. In Particulari de Christianae Religionis Mysteriis Sancta Trinitate Christi Incarnatione Corporis Resurrectione Coena Dominica Accesserunt Vindiciae Libertatis Christianae Ecclesiae Anglicanae Arthuri Bury S. T. P. contrà ineptias calumnias P. Jurieu Voyages and Discoveries in South-America The first up the River of Amazons which runs a Course of above 1200 Leagues thro the â—â—nest Country in the World not yet planted by the Europeans to Quito in Peru and back again to Brazil perform'd at the Command of the King of Spain by Christopher D'Acugna The second up the River of Plate and thence by Land to the Mines of Potosi by Monsieur Acarete The third from Cayenne into Guiana in search of the Lake of Parima reputed the richest place in the World By M. Grillet and Bechamel Done into English from the Originals being the only Accounts of those parts hitherto extant The whole Illustrated with Notes and Maps 8o. An Account of Monsieur de la Salle's last Expedition and Discoveries in North-America Presented to the French King and publish'd by the Chevalier Tonti Governor of Fort St. Louis in the Province of the Islinois Made English from the Paris Original Also the Adventures of the Sieur de Montauban Captain of the French Buccaniers on the Coasts of Guinea in the Year 1695. 8o. Monsieur De Pointi's Expedition to Cartagena Being a particular Relation I. Of the Taking and Plundering of that City by the French in the Year 1697. II. Of their Meeting with Admiral Nevil in their Return and the Course they steer'd to get clear of him III. Of their