of those modern Writers who have either occasionally or ex professo inquired into this matter succeeded any better than the Ancients have done Scaliger's conjecture though approved by Casaubon and other Learned men and of which he was very fond himself is yet upon account of the harshness of the composition which he being so good a Grammarian would have understood had it been any man's conjecture but his own and for other very good reasons rejected by Grotius and Ludovicus Capellus Scaliger's Conjecture is founded upon Levit. 23. 15 16. And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering seven sabbaths shall be compleat Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty daies and ye shall offer a new meat-offering unto the Lord. From whence he would needs have it that the Jews were used to count their Sabbaths to the Feast of Pentecost from the second day of Unleavened-bread after this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. reckoning from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say the second day of unleavened-bread but then it should not have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Secondly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without an adjection would not nor ever did that can be proved signifie the second day of Unleavened-bread but as they say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in another place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the first day of unleavened-bread and the last day of the Feast so if they had a mind to be understood they must speak out as plainly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 otherwise what second day or what second thing which might be any thing with a seminine gender was meant it would be impossible for any man to divine Thirdly In the place upon which this Conjecture is founded it is not from the second day but from the morrow mimacharath in the Hebrew and in the LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that it is plain if they had followed either the original Hebrew or the Translation of the LXX with which they were better acquainted in those days and from whence they must have borrowed this way of numbering of their Sabbaths if any such thing had been they would not have said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fourthly The Jews in this case did not count by Sabbaths but by days for though it be true what Moses saith that from the morrow after the Sabbath seven Sabbaths were to be compleat yet when he speaks of the way of counting these seven Sabbaths he saith v. 16. Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days and so the Jews at this day keep their account saying the first after Omer the second after Omer c. till they come to fifty daies as Grotius upon this place-hath-observed Fifthly and lastly which I believe has not yet been taken notice of by any other though it be plain demonstration against Joseph Scaliger's opinion he proceeds upon a mistaken notion of the word Sabbath which in this Text hath two significations but neither of them such as will serve his turn for when it is said from the morrow after the sabbath by the Sabbath is understood the first day of Unleavened-bread which was as hath been shewn of a sabbatical nature let it fall upon what day of the week it would and from hence they numbred seven Sabbaths that is not seven Saturdays or Jewish Seventh-daies but seven times seven daies so as if Scaliger's opinion be true and if the Sabbaths were to be counted after his manner then it would not be alwaies the Saturday or Jewish Sabbath on which the Sabbatum Deuteroprôtum would fall but upon any day of the week indifferently so as for example if the second day of Unleavened-bread were upon the Munday then the next Sabbath after it excluding that day that is the next sabbatical Period of seven daies would be upon the Tuesday come seven night and this according to Scaliger would be the Sabbatum Deuteroprôtum and the Wednesday come six Weeks after would be the day of Pentecost But now it is plain that in that Instance of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Gospel of Saint Luke gives us it is to be understood of the Saturday or of the Jewish Sabbath properly and strictly so called for otherwise the Cavil of the Pharisees instead of deserving that solid and judicious answer which our Saviour gives to it would have been ridiculous and would have needed no answer at all since a Sabbath in the meaning and sense of that place from whence Scaliger borrows his Argument might have been understood of any day of the week let it be what it would and though there were no manner of Sanctity in it But if either Scaliger had he been living would have understood or if any now will needs understand for him the word Sabbath of seven revolutions of the Saturday or first day of the week and will have it that the day of Pentecost was the day after the seventh or last of these then let us suppose the Passover it self to be coincident with the Sabbath in which case the second day of Unleavened-bread will be upon our Sunday and upon the Munday come seven weeks the fifty daies will be compleat upon the Tuesday the first day of the Feast of Weeks or the first day of the Feast of Pentecost ought to fall but in regard there have not yet been seven revolutions of the Saturday come about we must stay yet five entire daies longer that is five and fifty daies and the first day of the Feast of Pentecost must alwaies happen upon our Sunday both of which since they are very absurd and contrary to the express words of the Law which reckons but fifty daies from the second day of Unleavened-bread let that day happen upon what day of the week it will it is manifest what is become of Scaliger's opinion of which as absurd as it is Grotius was pleased to say Sententia ista magnis argumentis à suo Authore desensa est that it was defended by its Authour by great and weighty arguments though for some reasons he thought it necessary to dissent from him and Casauben speaking of the same Conjecture saies Tantum dicam Certum atque indubitatum sententioe Scaligeri Fundamentum esse in verbis Mosis Lev. 23. 15. that is I will onely say this that Scaliger ' s opinion is grounded upon a certain and undoubted foundation of Levit. 23. 15. for we have seen how sandy and infirm and rotten that foundation is and how unable it is to support that little building of a very small conjecture how great soever in the opinion of its Authour which Scaliger would have built upon it Scaliger's pretended solution of this difficulty being thus confuted though in truth much the most ingenious and the nighest to truth of any which have been thought
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is either from two Hebrew words erets and chamah because she receives that light from the Sun which is intercepted and obstructed by the Earth or else from two Greek ones which is more likely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because she was the measure of time for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the dorick Dialect is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the common as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Or lastly which I acknowledge to be most likely of all though it do not so much favour my opinion it may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from cutting the Air or Atmosphere as by the passage of the Clouds in a moon-shinynight the Moon seems to doe with a swift and hasty motion from which as looking like a pursuit of some game and from the barking of Dogs whether it be that they are pleased or offended at her brightness she was by the ancient Mythologists made to preside over Hunting and from thence it is that she is called Cynthia that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Cybele from the same Greek word compounded with the Phoenician bel from the Hebrew bahal and Berecynthia by adding to the former composition the Hebrew barach fugit to denote the swiftness of her motion from whence also one of the names of the North-wind Boreas is to be derived it being exactly the Participle in Pohel boreach as Daniel Heinsius in his Exercitation upon Nonnus his Dionysiaca hath before me observed And because it may seem harsh and unusual to compound an Hebrew or Phoenician word with a Greek though in that there be no such absurdity that I know of it is to be noted that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it self as being the Feminine of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is of Hebrew extract as well as the other part of the composition for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is from thohu by which the primigenial Mass is signified in the first Chapter of Genesis from whence the Heathen Theologie derived all its Gods as you may see in the Remains of Hesiod Orpheus Epicharmus Aristophanes and others of the ancient Mythologers From thohu is the Phoenician 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Sanchuniathon and from thence the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thau and sigma being easily changed into one another as may be observed from this that there is a natural sibilus in each of them wherefore the Jews at this day in their pronunciation of thau at the end of a word do alwaies melt it into an s and in this very word of which we are speaking it is manifest that it hath been subject to such a permutation for what the common Greek calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the laconick was used to pronounce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hesychius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so Sibulla is usually supposed to be composed of the laconick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the common Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the Latin sepelio from the Nominative case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the oblique 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mare the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latin sal and salax and as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is from thohu so from choshech in the same Chapter is that other Greek word in the ancient Mythologie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and from tehom in the Hebrew the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so as the true translation of tehom rabah the great abyss would be in Greek by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And now if we can but prove 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be as good Hebrew as the rest the business is done That it is not a Greek word I am almost certain there being no word but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence it can be derived whose signification belongs but to one sex and that too in common with all other Animals whatsoever We must take notice therefore that the old Greek word was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from whence there still remains the Plural Number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the compound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for that what ever it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Since therefore shacan in Hebrew is consedit habitavit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to this Etymology will be properly canis domesticus a mastiff or houshold dogg as among the Latines lar signifies both an house and the dogg that keeps it whence the tutelar Deities of their houses were painted and carved in the shape of Doggs and latrare is quasi larrare to make a noise like a dogg but enough of this Having thus overthrown the Conjecture of Capellus as well as of those other Learned men that went before him I will now to establish mine own opinion upon a certain bottom produce a fragment of Saint Peter out of Clemcns Alexandrinus which whether it be genuine or no is very ancient as being to be found in all the Copies of Clemens and therefore is of greater authority than any modern Conjecture whatsoever The place of Clemens is this Strom. l. 6. speaking of the Jews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vnless the moon appear they never celebrate that sabbath which they call the first that is this Sabbath as all other Feasts is regulated by the Phasis of the Moon it seems therefore there was a Sabbath among the Jews which was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first sabbath wherefore it having been proved already that they had but one beginning of their year in Nisan and it being farther clear that they reckoned their years by months and their months by new-moons this first Sabbath can be no other than the first after the New-moon of Nisan but in regard the reason of this change of the beginning of the year from Tisri to Nisan depended upon the Deliverance of the Israelites from under the Aegyptian Bondage which happened upon the fifteenth of Nisan therefore this day in some sense might be called the beginning of the year and the Sabbath coincident with it or following next after it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the second first sabbath as in a different respect we may call the Sunday incident upon the first of January or next after it the first sunday and that upon the five and twentieth of March or next after it the second first sunday and this is somewhat like that notion which Epiphanius had of this word for he makes it be the second of two Sabbaths the one of which is a legal Sabbath that is any Feast day the other a natural by which he means the Saturday Sabbath which was instituted from the Creation but here is the fault of that solution that he makes it to be no certain day in every year but
Had our Saviour suffered upon the first day of unleavened Bread be would not have answered to the Passover but the Chagigah ibid. The general ignorance of all both ancient and modern Writers what the true meaning of the Sabbatum deuteroprotum should be p. 114 115. Scaliger's conjecture why rejected by Grotius and Capellus p. 115. Scaliger's conjecture laid down and the insufficiency of it shewn in five particulars p. 115 116 117. The Sabbatum deuteroprotum in St. Luke fell certainly upon the Saturday or Jewish Sabbath properly so called p. 117. The absurdity of Scaliger's opinion upon supposition that it always falls upon this day 117 118. Grotius his opinion proposed and rejected in five particulars p. 118 119 120. The conjecture of Capellus depending upon two different accounts of the Jewish year proposed p. 120 121. And proved largely that there neither were nor could be two such different account's from p. 121 to 128. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mensis Moon Month Almenick or Almanack all from the Hebrew Manah numeravit p. 124. The places of Scripture producible in favour of the different account considered p. 125 126. Teshoubath hashanah Tekouphath hashanah in Hebrew what ibid. Shanah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 annus p. 126 127. Tseth hashanah what together with a discovery of the mistake of the LXX and other interpreters p. 127 128. And through this whole Discourse it is undeniably proved that the Jews had no other way of computation but by the motion of the Moon nor any other way of equation to reduce the Lunar and Solar years to a balance but by an intercalary month at the latter end of the year Orach Jareach 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Saturnus what and whence p. 128 129. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Diana 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 129 130. Cynthia Cybele Berecynthia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tohu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 130. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sibylla Choshek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tehom p. 131. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Latrare ibid. A citation produced out of Clemens Alexandrinus to justifie my opinion p. 132. The mistakes of Epiphanius and Chrysostome concerning this matter together with the monstrous absurdity of Isidore Pelufiota p. 132 133. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 agitare words proper and peculiar to festival solemnities and other considerations produced to prove that our Saviour's last Supper was on the Vigil of the Sabbatum deuteroprotum p. 133 134. The last place which is endeavoured to be eluded by Bochartus farther considered and the testimony of Clemens Alexandrinus improved against him for the asserting of my notion of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 134 135. The time of our Saviour's Supper being cleared it is variously disputed by learned men how he could eat the Paschal Lamb the night before the Jews ate theirs and for this they have proposed several expedients First That the Jews followed the Traditions of the Masters contained in certain Talmudical Canons while our Saviour rejecting their Traditions adhered strictly to the Letter of the Law but it is abundantly proved that there were no such Talmudical Canons as are pretended any where used in our Saviour's time from p. 134 to 137. The second Expedient founded in the difference betwixt the Astronomical conjunction and the sensible Phasis and the vanity of it abundantly detected p. 137. The third Expedient of Capellus from the embolism or intercalation of a day in the Jewish Calendar precarious and all these three expedients sufficiently resuted from Joh. 13. 29. A fourth Expedient from the Jews observation of two days together precarious as to the ancient Jews p. 138. Nay it is not onely precarious but plainly false as is abundantly proved from the confession of Maimonides himself that there never was any such custome at Jerusalem among the ancient Jews and from several other reasons p. 139. The Conclusion p. 140. AN EXERCITATION Concerning the true Time of OUR SAVIOUR'S Last Supper WITH HIS DISCIPLES FOR the time of our Saviour's Passover I affirm that it was upon the evening of the fourteenth of Nisan being the night before the Jews by the prescription of the Mosaick Law were to celebrate theirs and for the proof of this I shall produce these following places of Scripture in that order in which they are set down but not answered by the late excellent and profoundly learned Samuel Bochartus who being dead yet speaketh and whose Works will follow him through all generations laden with the spoils of industry and the rewards of praise as long as civility and learning shall endure but it is excusable in those that write so much to be sometimes mistaken and it is usually seen that the errours of great men are like themselves He therefore in his Hierozoicon in that Chapter where he discourses of the Paschal-lamb hath ranged those Scriptures which he pretends to answer in the following order The first is Joh. 13. 1. Now before the Feast of the Passover when Jesus knew that his hour was come And then v. 2. And supper being ended c. From whence the Argument is clear that if this place be to be understood of his last Supper with his Disciples then that last Supper was before the Feast of the Passover The second place is the eighteenth Chapter of the same Gospel at the 28. verse Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment and it was early and they themselves went not into the judgment hall lest they should be defiled but that they might eat the Passover Now this happening as it did the day after or rather the very same day when our Saviour ate his Passover with his Disciples whereas the Jews were not to eat theirs till the night following it is manifest our Saviour's Passover was a night before theirs The third place is Chap. 19. v. 14. And it was the preparation of the Passover and about the sixth hour and he that is Pilate saith unto the Jews Behold your King Now if Christ were betray'd and carryed before Pilate upon the Preparation of the Passover then the Jewish Passover was not yet come for the Parasceve or Preparation of any Feast was the day before it The fourth place is the 31. verse of the same Chapter The Jews therefore because it was the preparation that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day for that Sabbath day was an high day besought Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away In which words there are two things to be considered First We have it again plainly asserted that it was the preparation of the Sabbath which Sabbath this year was coincident with the Passover it self Secondly It is said That that Sabbath day was an high day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And what the meaning of a great or high day is you may see from Isay 1. 13. the new moons and sabbaths the calling of assemblies I cannot away with Where the LXX render it
onely casual or once in so many years lighting upon the concourse of two such Holy days together the latter of which though it be in order second yet it is in nature and dignity first the same inconvenience does likewise attend the solution of St. Chrysostom which in other respects is not so good as that of Epiphanius but of all men unless it be those that have acknowledged their ignorance who yet in this are to be commended for their ingenuity Isidorus Pelusiota has betrayed the greatest want of skill and judgment in this affair for he makes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the second day of the passover but the first of unleavened-bread which is impossible and absurd Thus have I after the unsuccessefull attempts of so many Learned men as well ancient as modern evidently explained what is the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without supposing any thing which is precarious or which does not sufficiently prove it self And since the first sabbath as it was called was a day of more than ordinary Festivity as may be seen by those words of Clemens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek being a word peculiar to Festival solemnities as agitare is in Latin it is but reasonable to suppose that the sabbatum deuteroprôtum or second first sabbath was likewise used to be celebrated with the same Joy and Ceremony with the other as having its name from its relation to it and being in the sense I have explained a first sabbath as well as the other it being the Anniversary of that day upon whose account the order of the months was inverted and therefore indeed had rather a better right to challenge all the solemnity of a Feast-day than the other Again Since it was so that the sabbatum deuteroprôtum must of necessity fall upon one of the daies of Unleavened bread and since the Solemnity would be much greater if it fell on the first which was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Passover it self Lastly Since Christ by this means would in the most signal manner imaginable fulfill the typical adumbration of the Passover if he died upon the parasceve of the first day of Unleavened-bread coincident with the Sabbath which was the most solemn Passover that could be conceived it is manifest from all this that all these things do mutually confirm and strengthn one another that the sabbatum deuteroprôtum was alwaies the third Sabbath in Nisan that it fell upon the year of our Saviour's Passion upon the day of the Passover it self and that our Saviour celebrated his last Supper with his Disciples the night before the Jews were to celebrate their Paschal-feast The last place which Bochartus endeavours to evade is that of Jòh. 19. 31. For that sabbath-day was an high day which I have already occasionally considered and proved against him out of his own authorities how widely he is mistaken I will now onely add to what hath been said already the authority of that place of Clemens Alexandrinus who goes on thus speaking still concerning the Jews 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is that without the phasis of the moon they neither celebrate a new-moon nor the daies of unleavened-bread nor any feast nor high-day from whence it is evident that every Holy-day is not properly in the hellenistical Language 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a great or high day which is distinguished both from the New-moon and from a Feast in the general considered and from the daies of Unleavened-bread so far as their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as I may so call it or their unleavenedness is onely to be considered but when such a day is coincident with the Passover it self as the first day alwaies is and when upon the seventh there is a more than ordinary Festivity a Sabbath and an Holy-convocation this is that which makes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 otherwise though it may be jom tob dies genialis a day of publick joy and gladness yet it is not a great or high day It being so undoubtedly clear that our Saviour's Passover was celebrated the night before that of the Jews and it being unlawfull to sacrifice the Paschal-lamb at any time but on the fourteenth of Nisan between the two evenings this has afforded new matter for the Wits of Learned men to exercise themselves upon to find out an expedient whereby to make it appear lawfull to sacrifice the Paschal-lamb which they suppose to have been eaten at this last Supper by our Saviour and his Disciples There are some that will needs have recourse to certain Talmudical Canons for the more orderly and regular observation of the Jewish Feasts and the rule of the Passover they tell us was Badu that is that if the Passover happened to fall upon the second fourth or sixth day of the week it was transferred to the next day following especially on the second and sixth to hinder the concurrence of two Sabbaths together this was the opinion of Munster in his Annotations and in his Kalendarium Hebraicum and of Zegerus in his Notes upon the New Testament and of Edvardus Liveloeus an English man once Fellow of Trinity College and Hebrew Professor of the University of Cambridge in a Chronological Disputation upon this Subject against Cardinal Toletus and lastly of Isaac Casaubon who follows the other in his Exercitations against Baronius But though it must be acknowledged that such Talmudical Canons there were yet it is equally true that they are of much later date than our Saviour's time when they were used and for a long time after to celebrate the Passover indifferently upon any day of the week though it should so happen that the Sabbath should be the day before it or the day after as hath been proved by undeniable Testimonies from the Talmud and the Jewish Rabbins by Joannes Coch of Bremen in his Notes upon the Massecheth Sanhedrin and after him by Dr. Cudworth in his Learned Treatise of the Sacrament but most particularly of all by Bochartus who has confirmed the Jewish Authority by the concurrence of Christian Writers both Greek and Latin and by the Practice of the Tessarescaidecatitae who in imitation of the Jews were used to observe their Easter not onely upon the Sunday but upon any day of the week on which the fourteenth day of the month should happen to fall nay so little did they scruple the concurrence of two Sabbaths together by the Passovers being either the day before or the day after the Seventh-day-sabbath that in the Mishna in Pesachim we have an express provision in that case as to the time when the daily Evening-sacrifice is to be killed c. 5. Chal hereb pesach lehijoth behereb shabath c. that is If the evening of the passover shall fall upon the preparation of the sabbath then the daily evening-sacrifice must be killed at half an hour past six that is with us at half an hour past twelve and it must
legally be eaten by any but the Priests and for the same reason the plucking a Sheep out of a pit the pulling of ears of Corn and healing of the blind on the sabbath-Sabbath-day are allowed not to be a violation of the Sabbath though expresly contrary to the words of that Commandment wherein the observation of the Sabbath or a feriation from all manner of work or labour is enjoyned which how strictly it was observed not only by the superstition of the Jews but by the appointment of God himself in cases where there was no such absolute necessity we know by the punishment of him who was stoned by the whole congregation for gathering of sticks on the Sabbath day If therefore a divine Law may be dispensed with in cases of necessity at the prudence and discretion of men what can be more plain than that upon the same account a humane law may justly be enacted For this reason because a dispensation of any divine Law in cases not particularly excepted in the Law it self is every whit as much an humane institution as any positive humane Law and if there be the same reason of necessity in both cases that is for the welfare of a particular person and much more of a whole society they are both of them of equal obligation neither will it avail any thing in this case to distinguish betwixt humane institutions in sacred and in civil Matters for certainly the observation of the Sabbath belongs to the former of these and if humane laws may determine in what particular instances the Sabbath is violated and in what it is not that is in what manner the Sabbath shall be observed then it may as well determine nay and much more any other bare external circumstance of Worship whatsoever But above all things we can never too frequently reflect upon what hath been said as to the prohibition of reading the Law and Prophets to the Jews of old which being a thing drawing so great inconvenience after it and which could have no other good meaning than to preserve the peace and unity of the Jewish Church which I have shown plainly without this prohibition could never have been preserved this certainly extends in its consequence with much more conclusiveness to all those expedients of publique peace and safety whatever they be which have no such inconvenience attending which to be sure must be the case of all indifferent matters which would otherwise cease to be indifferent and by being manifestly hurtfull would lose their name But let not any man for all this think or suggest that in this I favour the cause of the Papists who deny the Populace the use of Bibles in the vulgar tongue for in the first place I only represent matter of fact without making any application in the second I say there is great disparity of reason betwixt the Papists and the Jews for had the Vowels been added to the Consonants in the Hebrew Bibles so as the sense might have been more plain and less subject either to errour or design which is the case of all our Bibles in the Modern Tongues there had not then been the same reason to keep them lock't up among the Priests that there was and it would have been as safe to permit every man the use of the Law and Prophets for his own private reading as it was after the seventy had compleated their Translation after which the knowledge of the Law was diffused in common among all the Jews Again If the Law had contained only matters of Morality and rules of Life which is the main business of the Gospel it could not have been so lyable to any dangerous corruption because it would be more difficult for any Doctrine to gain credit among men which contradicted the common sense and the common interest of Mankind but in a book of Rituals and Formalities of external worship as different readings must have produced different rites so those different rites would have produced so many different Parties and Factions among the Jews Fourthly It was absolutely necessary before the appearance of our Saviour in the world that the Scriptures of the Old Testament should be lay'd open to the knowledge both of Jew and Gentile to prepare them for the reception of the Messias that was to come and to render them the more inexcusable especially the former if at his appearance they did not give him that welcome and respectfull entertainment which was due to the greatness of his character and person Fifthly We are expresly commanded in several places of the N. T. to search the Scriptures we are told that all Scripture is written for our instruction and Timothy is commended by St. Paul for his knowledge of the Scripture from his youth upwards and since all these places in the New Testament where the Scripture or Scriptures are mentioned are to be understood of the Old this is sufficient to show how necessary it was sometime before our Saviour's appearance and at that time it self and ever since that the Scriptures of the Old Testament should be lay'd open and exposed to the view of Jew and Gentile because Moses and the Prophets did testifie of the Messias and it would have been impossible to understand how all the Prophecies and Types of the Old Testament were fulfilled in the person and by the sacrifice of the Messias without comparing the Life and History of that person and those types and prophecies together Sixthly Since we are commanded in the Scriptures of the New Testament to study and search into the Scriptures of the Old and that only for this reason because they bear their testimony to the Messias whose types and shadows are explained and unfolded in the Gospel this is sufficient to show the obligation we are under to search the Scriptures of the New Testament also because they can neither be sufficiently understood without one another and the reading of the Old is enjoyned us only for that reason that we may compare it with the New for our better understanding of both and especially the latter Seventhly Since the History of our Saviour's Birth and Life and Miracles and Sufferings are so faithfully and particularly set down in the Gospels as this was unquestionably intended for the benefit of all succeeding generations who would otherwise have lost that History or have received it corrupted and imbezled by foolish and ridiculous Fables so the greatest benefit which any man can receive from a Narrative of this nature is to be expected from the Original Narrative it self or from such a faithfull translation as keeps the closest to the literal and Grammatical sense of the Original besides that such Translations made by men of learning and integrity in all ages into the vulgar tongue for the use of the common people are a perpetual security against all the corruptions and impostures of superstitious ignorant or designing men Eighthly As there is matter of History in the books of the New Testament
thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the calling of assemblies is rendered by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great or high day which in other places is termed an holy convocation by which is meant the first and last day of the three great Feasts which were kept for seven days together in the first and last of which there was a more extraordinary concourse of the People and besides a Sabbath or day of Rest from all manner of secular imploiment which notion if Boâ—â—artus had understood so thoroughly as he should have done if he had known that the seventh day of a Feast was as well 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a great or high day as the first though it was not equally so for by this time most of those that lived at any distance from Jerusalem were gon home he would not have uttered these words Quin apud Jadaeos nullum fuit Festum in quod non quadret hoc nomen that there was no Feast-day among the Jews which might not properly enough be called a great or high day for which he cites that Text of Joh. c. 7. v. 37. speaking of the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the last day that great day of the Feast neither is this any more than what is usual in our own Age as Bochartus could not chuse but know for what day or night is so guilty of excess and riot as that which is the last of the Carnival in Popish Countries and here among our selves the Solemnities of Twelftide and Candlemass are in a manner equal to that of Christmass day Procopius himself whose Authority is produced by Bochartus may be sufficient to put him to silence his words are these expresly asserting a great or high day to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is every day which is termed an holy convocation as the first and seventh day of Vnleavened-bread the day of Pentecost the tenth day of the 〈◊〉 Tisri and in one word every more remarkable â—â— extraordinary Feast-day But you see he expresly tells â—â— as to the Feast of the Passover that onely the first and seventh were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 great or high days â—â—â— the same is to be understood of the Feast of Pentecâ—â— or Weeks and of the Feast of Tabernacles for the latter of which we have the express Authority of Saint Joâ—â— it being absurd to call the seventh day of the Feast 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great or high day of the feast if all the seven daies were so as well as that so that Bechartus his darling Testimony does sufficiently conâ—â—â—â— that opinion which he endeavours to establish upon it for that which he designs to prove is that the second day of Vnleavened bread upon the approach of which he supposes our Saviour to have suffered was a great or 〈◊〉 day which this Testimony will by no means doe nor that of Procopius neither Since therefore it is agreed â—â— all hands that our Saviour did not suffer upon the seventh day of Vnleavened-bread or upon the approach of it what can be more plain than that he underwent his Passion upon the approach of the Feast at that very time when the Paschal-lamb was to be slain and from hence it is though I did not intend to have betray'd that Secret now that Easter sunday by the ancient 〈◊〉 Church was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great or 〈◊〉 Sunday as I have seen it in their Liturgies both in Manuscript and printed For although the Tessarescaidecatitâ— so called from their following the Jewish account celebrated their Easter upon any day of the week indifferently as Eusebius Epiphanius Saint Austin Theodoret and Philastrius assure us yet it was the general way of the Church which we retain to celebrate it upon the Sunday after the anniversary of the Passion which being coincident with an ordinary or weekly commemoration of 〈◊〉 Resurrection which every Sunday is was called the 〈◊〉 or high Sunday as well because of the concurrence 〈◊〉 it were of two Holydaies in one as for that this being our Christian Passover it answers to the first day of Unleavened bread which was an Holy Convocation among the Jews The last place mentioned by Bochartus is Matt. 26. 5. But they said Not on the Feast day lest there be an uprore 〈◊〉 the people Which place to speak truly proves nothing either way For thus much is certain that the Jews were wont to put to death notorious Malefactours and such some of them looked upon our Saviour and others would have had him thought to be upon the Preparation of their solemn Feast-days when there was a general conslux of the People that so the Punishment might be of greater example but at this time because of the great reputation and esteem which our Blessed Lord had gained among the People it was resolved among the Chief-priests and Scribes that his Crucifixion should not be on the Feast-day lest the Concern of the People for him might occasion a Tumult but now it being clear that the Concourse would be in a manner equal either on the first day of Unleavened-bread or on the day before it when all that were to partake of the Passover were actually come to Jerusalem to prepare themselves in order to it we must refer it wholly to the Providence of God who put it into the hearts of the Chief-priests and Scribes upon occasion of Judas his betraying him to doe what they designed at a time when they did not design it that so he might approve himself to be Christ our Passover as Saint Paul calls him and the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world in the Divine Decree but not to be brought actually to the Slaughter untill this fulness of time For this reason it was that not a bone of him was â—â—â—ken when the Theives who were crucify'd together with him not being yet actually dead were dispated this way because a bone of the Passover was not tâ— be broken for this reason he expired at the ninth hour that is about three in the afternoon the very time whâ—â— the Passover was to be killed for this reason he cameâ— Jerusalem as Bochartus himself ingeniously and learâ—ly observes upon the tenth of Nisan the time whâ— the Passovers according to the Law of Moses were 〈◊〉 be set by for Sacrifices on the fourteenth and for the same reason it was as the same Learned man conjectures that he began to preach in the thirtieth year of his age which being the perfect age of a man in his full strength and vigour answers to the Passover of a year old and â—â— continued preaching till his thirty fourth year where if you take years for daies in the Prophetick style 〈◊〉 entring upon his Preaching in his thirtieth year will 〈◊〉 as it were his setting apart in order to his being a Saâ—â—â—fice in the thirty fourth Lastly Our Saviour himself expresly saies Matt. 26. v. 2. Ye know that
after two days is the feast of the Passover and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified because â—â— his Person and Sufferings at that time the meaning and intention of all the Paschal Sacrifices under the Law â—â—â— to be fulfilled Against so plain and so manifold evidence of Scripture to prove that our Saviour's Supper with his Disciples â—â—â— the night before the Passover of the Jews there are â—â— three Places that I know of produced in favour of â—â—â— contrary opinion which if they had been so well â—â—derstood as I hope they will be hereafter had insteâ—â— of confirming that opinion overthrown it The first is Matt. 26. v. 17. Now the first day of tâ—â— feast of unleavened-bread the disciples came to Jesus saâ—ing unto him Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the Passover The second is Mark 14. 12. And the first day of unleavened-bread when they killed the Passover his disciples said unto him Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayst eat the Passover The third and last place is that of Luke 22. 7. Then came the day of unleavened bread when the Passover must be killed In which Places if those Learned men who have stood up in defence of the Latin Church had observed that upon this first day of Unleavened bread wherein the stress of their Argument lies the Passover was to be killed they would then have concluded that this first day could not be any of those seven mentioned in Exodus the first and last of which were to be an Holy Convocation For it was the day before the first of these that the Passover was to be killed that is to say about three of the clock in the afternoon upon the fourteenth of Nisan whereas the Feast upon the Paschal lamb was to begin upon the beginning of the fifteenth which was at six of the clock that evening Besides it is worth our while to observe the particular Phrases by which the two latter Evangelists St. Mark and St. Luke have expressed themselves in which they killed the Passover saith Saint Mark that is when it was the usual custom of the Jews to kill their Passover which was as I have said upon the fourteenth of Nisan which answers to part of our months of March and April but Saint Luke is still more express 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when the Passover must be killed or as a man would express it in Latin quo die solenne erat ex proescripto Legis ex instituto Mosis ex Hebroeorum disciplina ex proecepto Dei ut mactaretur Pascha But then you will ask how it comes to pass that the Parasceve or Preparation to the Passover is called the first day of unleavened-bread to which I answer that first we may look upon it as a Roman way of speaking of which there are many in the New Testament as there must needs be in the Language of those times when Judoea was become a Roman Province and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in Latin Pridie calendarum is Primo die calendarum that is Primo die ante calendas But this though it cannot be deny'd by any that have a distinguishing palate in these matters to be a very plausible conjecture yet I must confess ingenuously I do not think it to be true and therefore I shall not stand upon it That which I take to be the very truth is this That upon this day the Unleavened-cakes were made and the Leaven purged out of all the Jewish houses in order to the Feast which is the present practice of the Jews as you may see in Buxtorf in his Synagoga Judaica and to both of these it is that Saint Paul alludes 1 Cor. c. 5. v. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Purge out therefore the old leaven that ye may be a new lump as ye are unleavened Ludovicus Capellus in his Epicrisis against Cloppenburge somewhere observes that the Leaven is usually purged out of all the Jewish houses by one of the clock upon the day of the Preparation which is two hours before the Passover was to be killed and therefore that day wherein this was done might well enough be called by a Synecdoche of the part for the whole the first day of unleavened-bread not because any Unleavened bread was eaten that day but because upon that day it was made in order to the Feast and because after such a certain time there was no Leaven to be found to which purpose the words of Grotius upon Matt. 26. 17. are considerable Incipiebant autem Judoei locum in quo comesturi erant Pascha parare ab ea nocte quoe antecedit solem decimum quartum pars est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 decimi quarti quod nunc etiam faciunt ejus proeparationis magna est pars anxia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad quam alludit Paulus 1 Cor. 5. 7. solicitè enim eâ nocte antemeridiano tempore sequenti inquirunt ecquid usquam fermentatum supersit etiam micas colligentes and upon this account it is that Josephus in the Third of his Antiquities speaking of the Feast of Unleavened-bread speaks of it in the most proper acceptation of those words for that Feast of seven daies continuance wherein there was no Leaven to be touched or eaten 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the fifteenth of Nisan after the feast of the Passover follows the feast of Vnleavened-bread which continues for seven daies But in his Second Book speaking of the same Feast he saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We celebrate the feast of Vnleavened-bread for eight daies together In which last place it is manifest he must of necessity include the Preparation to the Feast as well as the Feast it self otherwise his eight days will want of their number Having thus vindicated these three Texts of the Evangelists Saint Matthew Mark and Luke from the false Interpretations which the Latin Church and their Defendours whether among themselves or of the Reformation have made and shown that these very places do equally conspire with the rest to overthrow the opinion of that infallible Dictatress the Church of Rome and of all that in this particular have taken her part I will now add one Text more to confirm what hath said and then consider very briefly the Exceptions that have been made or rather the Evasions that are made use of to justifie an indefensible cause The place is Matt. 26. 18. And he Jesus said Go into the city to such a man and say unto him The Master saith My time is at hand I will keep the Passover at thy house with my disciples Where the Reason given why he would needs keep the Passover at this man's house was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 My time is at hand lest the Master of the house should wonder at his message when the time of the Passover was not yet
his dam and on the eighth day thou shalt give it me Levit. 22. 27. When a Bullock or a Sheep or a Goat is brought forth then it shall be seven days under the dam and from the eighth day and thenceforth it shall be accepted for an offering made by fire unto the Lord. And Grotius observes out of Pliny l. 8. c. 51. Pecoris foetum sacrificio purum esse die septimo that Sheep and Lambs are fit for sacrifice on the seventh or eighth day and not till then for that is plainly the sense of Pliny whose words are these Suis foetus sacrificio die quinto purus est pecoris die octavo which confirms what I have said that seven and eight in these instances are all one the latter being only by inclusion of the two terms or by the return of the Septenary or Sabbatical period into it self The same Grotius upon Gen. 17. 12. in which place the first institution of Circumcision is contained uses a passage out of Aristotle in his 7th de animalibus wherein he imagines the reason of Circumcision upon the seventh or eighth day may be found where speaking of infants he says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Children dye frequently before they be seven days old Which is the reason why at that age they usually give them their names having then some hopes when seven days are past that they may continue to live and doe well And he also produces the opinion of Maimonides why Circumcision was not performed till the eighth day Quia antè eum diem infirmior infans quà m ut par sit dolori Because before the eighth day the child was usually so weak that this operation could not be performed without danger of life or too great extremity of pain But now that this reason of Maimonides is no reason at all is plain from this That the Circumcision was never anticipated though the child should prove never so vigorous and strong as it is plain there is great difference in the strength and vigour of children from the very birth as well as afterwards when they come to greater age neither was it ever deferred any longer though at the age of eight days the child should prove never so weakly and unlikely to live This therefore instead of being a solid reason is but a Maimonidism or a Rabbinical dream The same may also be said of Aristotle's reason why children had their Names given them upon the seventh day among the Greeks which term if it were not by custom either anticipated or prorogued according to the differing degrees of health which is the general account why the seventh day above others was pitched upon then this was either no reason at all or which is still worse so very bad a reason as does sufficiently betray and expose it self It is therefore more likely that Aristotle was mistaken in his account and that the true Original of this custom was from the Jews who were used upon the eighth day to perform the Ceremony of Circumcision at which time also the Name was probably given to the child And I think it may be pretty plain from all this that the reason of Circumcision upon the eighth day and of not offering up any animal in sacrifice till then was the same in both cases and had a mystical allusion to the septenary number or to the return of the Sabbatical period into it self as an act of homage or obedience to him who rested the seventh day when he had finished the wonders of his Power Goodness and Wisdom upon the other six From this custom of symbolical swearing by the number seven or with the Pythagoreans by the number four or perhaps from both of these causes it came to pass that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek which signifies properly to count or number is also found to have the signification of swearing as appears by comparing two of the Greek Scholiasts the one the old Interpreter of Homer and the other of Apollonius the Writer of the Argonautiques together that upon Homer is Il. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 264. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Upon which the Scholiast saith thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Ceneus was the Son of Elatus and King of the Lapithoe once a beautifull Virgin but being deflowred by Neptune she requested of him that she might be turned into a man which request of hers was not only granted but she became invulnerable into the bargain and was the most redoubted Hero of that time insomuch that on a certain time fixing his Spear in a place where the Gods were to pass by he would oblige them all to number that is to swear by his Spear at which Jupiter was so angry as well he might that he resolved to be revenged and immediately set the Centaures upon him who though they could not pierce him being invulnerable yet made a hard shift to ram him down by the weight of massy Oaks and Ashes into the earth of which Apollonius in his Argonautiques thus speaks and then follows over again the very same Story as it is told by Apollonius where the Scholiast relating the same Fable though not so particularly as the Interpreter of Homer does what the first calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to number he expresly renders by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to swear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he compelled all that came by to swear by his Spear And then afterwards adds as the reason why Jupiter was so severe upon him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This calamity befell him because he would neither sacrifice nor pray to the Gods but only to his own Spear Neither does it necessarily follow because the Pythagoreans were used to swear by the Tetractys which implies indeed that there was something of Divinity in it that therefore the Tetragrammaton was pointed at or that any respect was had in it to the four letters of which the Name of God either in Greek or Hebrew was composed but only to that root of number and proportion which I have mentioned in which the seeds and principles of all natural Productions were contained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the source and fountain of everlasting nature which word nature is it self only one way of expressing the fruitfulness and plenty of the divine Being in which as in their proper Fountain and Original all the possibilities of things are in a powerfull and hidden manner contained and from which their actualities proceed so that God and nature are indeed but two words for one and the same thing Hanc Deus melior litem natura diremit said Ovid. And Seneca Vis illum fatum vocare non errabis Hic est ex quo suspensa sunt omnia causa causarum Vis illum â—rovidentiam dicere Recte dices Est enim cujus consilio â—â—ic mundo providetur ut inconcussus eat actus suos â—xplicet Vis illum naturam vocare non peccabis Est enim â—x quo nata sunt
at the revolution of the year that is at the return of the Sun from the Autumnal Tropick But these Lights were not onely for Signs and Seasons but also for days and years both of which though they may indifferently be measured either by the Sun's motion or the Moon 's yet I conceive the earliest Antiquity as well in their account of days as months had a particular respect to the motion of the latter and that this was one reason besides what may be taken from the History of the Creation why they began their natural day in the evening from this Planet's having the dominion of the night and as the month was made up as I may say of Lunar daies so was the year of Lunar months at least in process of time when for avoiding of confusion in their Chronological account the motions of the Sun and Moon were adjusted and fitted to one another as it was by the intercalary month of the Jews which they no question borrowed from the neighbour Nations among whom the Moon had the Government of their solemn Feasts as well as among the Jews otherwise to speak properly every entire revolution of one of the Heavenly bodies is that which is called a year at least in the language of all the ancient World For shanah in Hebrew what is it but the repetition of the same motion in the same circle and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because in sese volvitur annus as the Aegyptians paint the year by a Serpent whose tail is inserted into his mouth to signifie the ending of a Planetary motion in the point where it began and the Latin annus is nothing but a great Ring or Circle from whence the diminutive annulus is derived and may in its true signification equally belong to the revolution of a day a month or a year so that for ought we know shanim years in this place may be but exegetical of jamim daies that went before from whence it is that jamim in the Plural number does sometimes signifie years as well as daies and that the terms of a day and a year are in the Prophetick style are in a manner convertible with one another However it is certain whatever the meaning of this place be that it has nothing to doe with the distinction of the sacred and civil year among the Jews which depended upon a particular occasion and was two thousand years younger than the Creation But though this place cannot be of any moment in this controversie yet there is another which I shall now produce that has a greater semblance of argumentation in behalf of this double year and that is Exod. 23. 16. Vechag hahasiph betseth hashanah we render it and the feast of in gathering in the end of the year and the LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 now if Tisni in which month the Feast of In-gathering was to be kept were the end of the year it must also be the beginning of it because the year ends and begins together as hath been shewn so that here we have plainly after the Law was made two beginnings of the year the one in Nisan and the other in Tisri but to this I answer First That this cannot be because in the sacred account to which the Feast of In-gathering must needs refer Tisri was not the first month but the seventh Secondly I take the liberty to say That neither our Translatours nor the LXX themselves have rendred this place as they should have done for whereas they have translated it in the end they ought to have said in the beginning of the year not that there were two beginnings of the Jewish year but because the old year from the Creation began in Tisri the Sun being supposed by Antiquity first to have set out when he began his course from the Autumnal Tropick and it is in allusion to this opinion which the Jews and Chaldees had that this Expression is used betseth hashanah that is not in the end but in the setting forth of the year or of the Sun and so the Sun beginning to run his everlasting course is compared Psal 19. 5. to a bridegroom coming out of his chamber and rejoycing as a Gyant to run his race where what we translate coming out of his chamber is in the Hebrew jotse michouphatho which is the very word used in the place of Exodus last cited And so in that place of Samuel already cited the time when Kings go forth to battel is called â—eth tseth hamelachim that is the time not when they end but when they begin their expedition And thus I hope it is abundantly manifest that there were not two several beginnings of the Jewish year and consequently that the ground upon which Capellus relies is utterly false and mistaken But yet I cannot leave this Discourse till I have observed farther that in that Text of the Psalms which I have just newly produced the way or path of the Sun is called orach from which word the Moon in Hebrew has its name jareach because by her motion the course of the year was observed as Saturn is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there being very frequent commutations in all Languages of a Lene and an Aspirate into one another because he describes the largest circle and is therefore the greatest measure of time or else in the ancient Physiologie which I am very apt to believe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek and Saturnus in Latin were the same with the Moon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Hebrew keren cornu from the horns of the Moon as they are used to be called by us and by the Latin Poets Nec nova crescendo reparabat cornua Phoebe And Saturnus from sathar latuit because of its so often and so long disappearing from whence Italy was called by the Latin Poets saturnia tellus and in common speech latium according to another known Verse of the same Ovid. Dicta fuit latium terra latente Deo And that it may appear to be more than a fancie that the Moon was called jareach because the course of time was measured by her you may observe farther that the Greek and Latin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is exactly the same with the Hebrew orach from whence jareach is derived and signified anciently not barely the four and twentieth part of the natural day as it does usually in the more modern Writers but any of the seasons or quarters of the year as you may see it proved by Isaac Casaubon in his Animadversions upon Athenaeus And I remember somewhere such a Verse as this it is either in Homer or the Anthologie I know not well whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From hence also it was that the Moon was called by the Latins Diana because she had the dominion of the natural day among the Ancients which was reckoned to begin in the evening and by the Greeks 〈◊〉