Commentary on Daniel

Quest. 1. Of the author of this prophetical book of Daniel.

1. Wicked Porphirie in the 12. book of those which he wrote against the Christians, contendeth that this prophesy was not written by Daniel, but by some that lived in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, or after when all these things here prophesied of were fulfilled: but his cauillous objections were long since refuted by Apollinaris, Methodius, Eusebius: and the falsehood thereof is convinced by this, that the Septuagint, who lived almost an 100. years before that Antiochus, did translate this book into Greek: and Josephus in his 11. book Antiquitat. Judah. reporteth how Iaddus the high Priest shown unto Alexander the great this prophesy of Daniel, which foretold of a king, that should destroy the Persian Monarchy, in confidence whereof Alexander proceeded to that battle, and this was 60. years before Antiochus. 2. The Hebrews think, with whom Isidore consenteth, that this book of Daniel, of Ezekiel, and of the 12. Prophets, were written by the wise men of the great Synagogue, who were in the time of Ezra. 3. But that this book was written by the Prophet Daniel, who was so famous among the Kings of Chaldea, and of Persia, beside the title of the book, which is called in the Hebrew sepher Daniel, the book of Daniel; our blessed Savior doth witness the same in the Gospel, When ye shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the Prophet, &c. Matth. 24. 15. Perer. Osiander.

Quest. 2. Of the signification of the name Daniel.

1. The name Daniel signifieth the judgments of God, or God is my judge, which name was given him by the singular providence of God, for both per eum annntiata sunt iudicia Dei, by him the judgments of God were denounced and declared, and God was present with him, as his defender and judge against his adversaries. Bullin.

2. Lyranus then is deceived, who thinketh that in this name there is relation to that judgment which Daniel awarded against the two adulterous Elders, which wrongfully accused Susanna: for that story was not of Dauiels writing, neither is found in the original, as afterward shall more fully be declared.

3. There was another Daniel David's second son by Abigail, who also is called Chileah: but he was long before those times: 2. Sam. 3. 3. 1. Chron. 3. 1.

Quest. 3. Of the kindred of Daniel.

1. Jerome in his preface to Daniel writeth, that the Septuagint in the beginning of the history of Susanna, which they make the 14. chapter of this book, do affirm that Daniel was of the tribe of Levi: whereupon Bellarmine thinketh that there were two Daniel's, one of the tribe of Judah, who writ the prophesy, the other of the tribe of Levi. But herein Perfrius, of his own sect and society, contradicteth him, showing that neither the Synagogue of the Jews then, nor the Church of Christ now, ever acknowledged anymore, then one Daniel to be a writer of Scripture.

2. Dionysius Carthusianus thus remooueth the doubt, that Daniel was by his fathers side of Levi, by his mothers of Judah: so also Isidore thinketh, that Daniel was both of the kindred of the Priests and the kings: because it was usual for those tribes to match together in Marriage: Pererius also rejecteth this as an human conjecture without any ground of the Scripture: Praefat. in Daniel.

3. His opinion then is that Daniel was of the kings stock, and that in him and the rest was fulfilled the prophesy of Isaiah to Hezekiah, that his sons, that is, his posterity should be carried captive into Babylon. Of the same opinion that he was ex genere regio, of the kings stock, are Bullinger, Osiander, with others: Josephus also saith that he was of the kinsmen of Zedekiah king of Judah.

But this is no necessary argument, for that prophesy might be accomplished in either of the kings stock, as well as in Daniel: And Josephus may be deceived in this, as in the like conceit that Daniel was a gelded man, and made an Eunuch: so thinketh also Origen: their conjecture is, because As • penaez to whose care and charge Daniel was committed, is said to be the chief Sarisim of the Eunuchs; but this is no sure argument: for Pharaoh, Genes. 37. is called by that name, who had both wife and children. Calvin.

4. Wherefore concerning Daniel's kindred somewhat is certain, that he was of the tribe of Judah: which is evidently expressed, c. 1. v. 6. Polan. some things are uncertain, as, 1. Whether he were of the kings seed: for they were of the kings seed, and of the Princes, v. 3. therefore not all of the kings seed. Iun. 2. It is uncertain likewise that Daniel's fathers name should be Zabaa, as Epiphanius. 3. Or that Bethoron the upper, which first belonged to Ephraim, and afterward to the Levites, was the country of Daniel, as Dorotheus and Epiphanius.

Quest. 4. Why Daniel's kindred is not particularly expressed in the text.

1. Some think the reason is, because this is an historical, rather then a Prophetical book: but this is no good answer: for so the book also of Nehemiah is historical, and yet his kindred is expressed, the words of Nehemiah the son of Hachaliah.

2. Some make this the cause: Daniel his kindred was well known, and therefore it needed not to be expressed: So was Isaiah's and Jeremiah's, and their kindred well known, and yet it is set down in the beginning of their prophesy.

3. Neither was this the reason, why Daniel inserteth not his name, because among the Chaldes he was called by another name, Belthazar: for c. 10. 2. he saith, I Daniel was in heaviness.

4. Pererius saith, causam satis idoneam & probabilem, &c. I can find no meet or probable cause hereof, why Daniel's genealogy is not expressed.

5. Unless this reason may be yielded, that those Prophets have their kindred expressed, which were specially sent from the Lord upon some message and embassage to his people, as Isaiah, Jeremiah, with the rest: not they which only had visions, without any such special commission: which observation notwithstanding doth not always hold: for Solomon had no such prophetical commission: and yet he is described by his parentage, Prov. 1. 1. Solomon the son of David.

Quest. 5. When Daniel began to prophesy, and at what age.

1. Pererius thinketh that Daniel was some 10. year old when he went into captivity, in the third year of king Jehoiakim, being borne, as he supposeth, about the 25. year of Josiah reign: but this cannot be so, that Daniel was then so young: for 5. years after this he expounded Nebuchadnezzar's dream, which was the 2. year after they stood before the king. c. 2. 1. their three years of education being expired. c. 1. 5. And upon that occasion Daniel began to be famous for his wisdom, celebrated by the Prophet Ezekiel, c. 28. 3. thou art wiser then Daniel. And before that the same Prophet maketh mention of Daniel for his piety, joining him with Noah and Job: of whom the Lord saith, that they should only save their own souls, they shall neither deliver son nor daughter, c. 14. 20. it seemeth then that Daniel was of years to have sons and daughters. Daniel then within five years of his captivity growing into such fame for his wisdom, could not be so very a child, as Epiphanius maketh him, and Isidorus, the one calling him infantem, an infant, the other, puerum, a boy, when he went into captivity: he was rather 17. or 18. year old, as Osiander coniectureth. The ground of Pererius opinion is, because Daniel in the story of Susanna is called a young child, when he delivered her from her false accusers: which he thinketh to have fallen out in the beginning of Daniel's captivity, in the 12. year of his age: but that is a weak ground which is taken from an Apocryphal story.

2. Some think that Daniel began to prophesy one year after Ezekiel, who prophesied the year of the world 3359. and Daniel ann. 3360. Polanus: but that is not like: for Daniel prophesied in the 5. year of his captivity, when he interpreted the kings dream, which was in the 8. year of Iehoiakims reign, for in the third year he went into captivity: but Ezekiel began to prophesy in the 5. year of Iehoiakims or Jeremiah captivity, Ezek. 1. 3. which was 8. years after the 5. year of Daniel's captivity. And how could Ezekiel in his prophesy commend the wisdom of Daniel, if before that time he had not shown it in the interpretation of dreams.

Wherefore it is more probable, that Daniel began his prophesy before Ezekiel: yet not so long before, as Theoderet thinketh, that is 12. years: for so long it was from the 3. year of Jehoiakim, who reigned 11. years, when Daniel was carried away, to the 5. year of Jeconiah captivity. But we must not begin Daniel's prophesy so soon, which was in the 5. year of his captivity, after the three years of his education, and two years more of his service and ministering before the king: though the history of Daniel take beginning from the 3. year of Jehoiakim when Jerusalem was besieged: Daniel then beginning to prophesy in the interpretation of dreams, in the 5. year of his captivity, which was the 8. year of Jehoiakim, began some 6. or 7. years before Ezekiel to show his prophetical gift.

Quest. 6. Of the time when Daniel had his several visions.

1. Pererius thinketh that Daniel expounded the Kings first dream, c. 2. when he was 35. year old: but that can in no wise agree with his former opinion concerning Daniel's age, that he was but ten year old, when he went first into captivity: for this dream was expounded in the 5. year of Daniel's captivity: so that though we hold him to be toward 20. when he was carried away, he could not then be altogether 30. years of age, when he opened the meaning of the Kings first dream. Pappus also is deceived, who thinketh that this very year Ezekiel commended Daniel for his justice and piety, c. 14. for this commendation of Daniel by the Prophet Ezekiel, was at the least in the 6. year of Jeconiah captivity, Ezech. 8. 1. which was the 14. year of Daniel's being in Babel: for he going thither in the 3. year of Jehoiakim, who reigned 11. years, was there eight years of Iehoiakims reign, and then followed the 6. years of Jeconiah captivity: but the occasion of Pappus error is, for that he maketh the third year of Jehoiakim, which he counteth from the time when he became tributary to the King of Babel, which was in his 8. year; in deed the eleventh year of his reign: which shall be shown afterward to be otherwise, in the 1. v. of the 1. chapter.

2. But Pappus collecteth well, that 5. years after this, the same year wherein Jerusalem was taken, that Daniel was celebrated by Ezekiel for his singular wisdom, c. 28. 3. which was in the 11. year of Jeconiah captivity, Ezech. 26. 1. and the last year of Zedekiah his reign: which was in the year of the world 3365.

3. When Nebuchadnezzar set up the golden image, c. 3. it is uncertain, the time being not expressed: but it is like it was after the destruction of Jerusalem and other nations, when Nebuchadnezzar was now become great, and puffed up with his victories.

4. Pappus thinketh that 10. years after, in the year 3375. Nebuchadnezzar had his second dream of the great tree, c. 4. but that cannot be: for this dream the King had after he had conquered the nations, and subdued Egypt, which was the last, and this was after the 27. year of the captivity of Iechonia, Ezech. 30. 1. but the 3375. was but the 21. year of his captivity, 10. year after the taking of Jerusalem, in the 11. year of Zedekiah. Therefore I think rather with Junius, that this second dream of the King, was some 10. years before the ende of Nebuchadnezzers reign, about the 27. of Iechoniah his captivity, in the 37. year of whose captivity Evilmerodach began to reign after Nebuchadnezzar, 2. king. 22. 27. and it was in the 35. year of Nebuchadnezzers reign, and the year of the world 3382.

5. Then follows in order, within one twelve month after, how the King was taken from among men, and lived among beasts 7. years: after which time being restored, he reigned not 7. years, from years 83. to 90. as Pappus, but only two years. Iun. ibid.

6. The visions which Daniel had in the 7. and 8. chapters, which were in the 1. and 3. year of Belthashar, were shown him when Daniel was 80. year old, as Pererius thinketh: but he was then at the least 90. years of age: for he had been in captivity 75. years: from the beginning of Nebuchadnezzers reign (which concurred with part of the 3. and 4. year of Iehoiakims reign, Ierem. 25. 1.) who reigned 45. years, and Evilmerodach his son 30. Bulling. chron. and Daniel is supposed to have been 17. or 18. year old, when he first was carried unto Babel.

7. Pererius taketh it, that Daniel expounded the writing upon the wall to king Balthazar, when he was an 100. year old: but that cannot agree with his former computation, seeing he holdeth that he was but 80. year old, when he saw these visions in the 1. and 3. year of Balthazar: for he reigned in all but 3. years: though indeed Daniel was then toward an 100. year old. Again, Pappus is deceived, who maketh 10. years space between the time of these visions, c. 7. and 8. and the vision of the handwriting upon the wall, which was, as he setteth it down, ann. 3434. the other vision being ann. 1423. as he casteth it: for Balthazar had but three years in all, as it may thus be gathered: The captivity continued 70. years: which must begin from Iechoniah his captivity, in the 37. year whereof began Evilmerodach to reign 30. years: and after him Belthazar 3. years, which in all make 70. years.

8. The next year following, which was the first of Darius, Daniel was advanced to be one of the 3. chief Rulers, c. 6. and the same year he had that prophesy revealed of the 70. weeks. c. 10. 1. Perer. Papp. About this time was Daniel toward an 100. year old: and this was in the year 3425. Bullinger, not ann. 3435. Pappus.

9. The next year after this was Daniel cast into the Lions den, as is declared c. 6.

10. The visions in the 11. chap. Daniel had in the first year of Darius: the visions in the 10. chap. in the 3. year of Cyrus, which Pappus reduceth to the year 3438. but it was the year 3427. Bullinger.

Quest. 7. Of the whole time of Daniel's age, and time of prophesying.

1. Isidorus giveth unto Daniel an 110. years, and thinketh he lived unto the reign of Darius Hystaspes: but this assertion overthroweth it self: for from the third year of Jehoiakim, when Daniel went into captivity, until the reign of Darius Hystaspes, are counted an 128. years, unto the which the age of Daniel being added, which Pererius holdeth to have been but ten, all his years will make an 138. Perer. praefat.

2. Pappus counteth from Daniel's first captivity ann. 3354. unto the 3. year of Cyrus, which he maketh ann. 1438. 92 years: but he is much deceived: for they can come but to 82. years: for the 3. year of Jehoiakim, was 8. years before Jeconiah captivity, from the which the 70. years must be numbered, which ended the first year of Cyrus, then 2. year more of Cyrus reign must be put too, which in all make but 82.

3. Therefore Osianders reckoning hath the best ground; who judgeth that Daniel lived an 100. years: he was 18. when he went into captivity, in the third year of Jehoiakim, from whence to the 3. year of Cyrus, are years 82. which being added to the former number, make just an 100. years.

Quest. 8. Why Daniel is not mentioned to have returned with the rest out of captivity.

Josephus writeth, lib. 10. Antiquit. that Daniel built at Ecbatane in media a goodly tower, which remained unto his time, so fresh and beautiful, as if it had been but lately built: which the Kings of Persia made such account of, as that they made it the place of their sepulture, and committed the keeping thereof to one of the Jewish Priests: but Daniel himself was buried at Babylon: whereupon this question is moved, seeing Daniel lived unto the third year of Cyrus reign, after the Edict was sent forth for the restitution and return of the Jews, why that he returned not with the rest: To the which it may be answered: 1. That Daniel being now stricken in years, an 100. year old, was unfit in respect of his great age, to take so long a journey. 2. Or rather that he remained to be the protector or defender of the Jews which were left behind in Babylon, as many there stayed still. 3. But of all other it is most like, that he was thought a necessary man to be employed about the king for the good of his Nation, and to help forward their cause: as Theodoret thinketh, that Cyrus was taught of Daniel that prophesy of Isai, c. 45. wherein Cyrus is brought in by name, that he should procure the deliverance of the Lord's people.

Quest. 9. Of the times wherein Daniel lived, compared with f • rr • n Curonicles, and of the memorable things which happened therein.

1. The third year of Jehoiakim, where Daniel began his captivity, Pererius thinketh to fall out just in the 32. Olympiad, and the 105. year from the building of Rome, and the 3. year of Cyrus reign, unto the which Daniel attained, he maketh to concur with the 3. year of the 55. Olympiad, and from the building of Rome 200. Bullinger accounteth it otherwise: the first time, which was the 3. year of Jehoiakim, he maketh answerable to the 3. year of the 38. Olympiad, and the 125. year from the building of Rome: the 3. of Cyrus he setteth against the 59. Olympiad, and the 209. year from the founding of Rome: therefore of these things there is no great certainty.

2. The memorable things which happened in the time of Daniel's captivity, which Pererius maketh to contain 90. years, but in just account they make but 82. years (as is before shown) were these: for within this compass of time happened three captivities of the Jews, under Jehoiakim, Iechonia, and Zedekiah, with their deliverance, and return into their country: three great Prophets were amongst the Jews, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel. Among the Romans were kings Ancus Martius, Tarquinius Priscus, Seruius Tullus: among the Grecians flourished the 7. wise men: At this time was Croesus king of Lydia: among the Chaldeans Nebuchadnezzar: of the Medes Cyaxares: and Cyrus founded the Empire of the Persians: the kingdoms of the Jews, Chaldeans, Medes were dissipate, and three famous cities, Jerusalem, Nineveh, Babylon destroyed. Perer.

Quest. 10. Of the excellency, use, and utility, of this book of Daniel.

1. This book is commended by the worthiness of the author, the Prophet Daniel a man beloved of God, to whom he revealed the mysteries and secrets of his will, whom the Prophet for his piety and uprightness joineth with Noah and Job, Ezech. 14. 14. and commendeth for his wisdom, Ezech. 28. 3.

2. Beside, the excellency of the matter doth set forth the price of the work. 1. First, concerning civil matters, it treateth of the change and alteration of states and kingdoms: 2. For Divine it hath the most clear prophesies in all the old Testament of the time of the Messiahs coming. 3. Therein are set forth examples of excellent virtues, of abstinencie in Daniel: of constancy in the three children, which were put into the fiery oven: of piety in Daniel's thrice praying in a day unto his God. 4. Therein are contained the heavenly doctrines of the blessed Trinity, of the resurrection of the body, c. 12. of redemption and remission of sins purchased by Christ death. c. 9. 5. Many admirable and miraculous things are here set forth, as the walking of the three children untouched in the fiery oven, of Daniel's being in the Lions den, of the transplantation of Nebuchadnezzar from being a king, to live amongst brute beasts. 6. yea therein are contained all ways of Prophesying, which are either by dream, or vision, sensible apparitions, or illumination of the mind, all which ways and means the Lord used to reveal and declare his will to his servant the Prophet.

Quest. 11. Of the authority of the prophesy of Daniel.

1. The Jews do derogate much from the authority of this book, not counting it among the Prophetical writings, of the which there are three opinions: 1. Some think that the Jews do not reject the prophesy of Daniel, but only count it among the books called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , holy writings: for they divide the old Testament, into the law contained in the five books of Moses, and the Prophets which are eight, Joshua, the Judges, Samuel, the Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the twelve Prophets: and into the holy writings, as they call them, whereof there are nine, Job, David, the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticles, the Chronicles, Daniel, Ezra, Ester. So Pererius praefat. Likewise Hugo Cardinal, who maketh two kind of Prophets, some that had only gratiam prophecialem, the gift and grace of prophesy: others, which beside the gift were especially called and sent to that ende to prophesy, and in this sense only the Jews hold neither David, nor Daniel to be Prophets.

2. Theoderet doth simply reprehend the Jews for denying Daniel to be a Prophet, and this book to be any of the prophetical writings: so also Junius affirmeth, that the Jews deny this book to be counted among the Hagiographa, or holy writings.

3. But the truth is, as Polanus setteth it down, that the Elder Jews did acknowledge this book to be authentical and canonical, and equal in authority to the book of the Psalms, the Proverbs of Solomon, the Lamentations of Jeremiah, and diverse of them have written commentaries, upon this book, as R. Solomon, R. Levi, Ben Gerson, R. Abraham, Ibn Ezra, R. Saadia, with others: but the later Rabbin's do deny the book of Daniel to be authentical, and therefore seldom read it, as he speaketh of his own experience, how diverse Rabbin's in Moravia whose help he used, did confess, that they seldom did read the prophesy of Daniel: the occasion whereof he thinketh to be this, because Daniel doth so evidently point out the time of the Messiah his coming.

4. But this error of the Jews in rejecting this prophesy of Daniel may thus further be refuted. 1. The books which are called Hagiographa, holy writings, were of three sorts; either they are taken for those books which were laid up by the Ark, and had the miraculous & extraordinary approbation by the Vrim and Thummim, & other visible demonstrations: or for such canonical books, which though they had not that allowance, being written after the captivity, when those visible monuments of the Ark, the Vrim and Thummim ceased, yet were written by the spirit of God, and commended to his Church: and thirdly, those books were called holy writings, which were not made of Canonical authority, but only preferred before other human writings, and received of the Church into some higher order, though not made equal to the the Scriptures. Now though the prophesy of Daniel be not of the first sort, yet that it is authentical and canonical of the second, it thus may appear.

The authority then of this book is set forth by testimony both internal and external: the external is either divine or human: the divine, essential or accidental: the human is either Ecclesiastical and domestical, or foreign or profane: these further shall thus be declared in their order.

1. The internal testimony est spiritus testificatio, the inward witness of the spirit, which cleareth our understanding: that by the same spirit we acknowledge the Divine prophesy of Daniel, by the which he wrote it.

2. The Divine external testimony, which is called essential, is consensio cum diuino canone, the agreement which this prophesy hath with the rest of the Scriptures: and the warrant which Daniel hath from the testimony of Christ, Matth. 24. 15.

3. The Accidental is à signis, & euentis, from the signs which God joined with the prophesy; as Daniel's interpretation of dreams, and his preservation from the lions, c. 6. The events were the true and sensible accomplishment of the predictions and prophesies contained in this book, as all histories, which do write of these Kingdoms do bear record: and where these two do concur with the truth of doctrine, namely, the signs and events, they are diligently to be regarded, Deut. 17.

4. The Ecclesiastical testimony, is the consent of God's Church, and general approbation of the servants and worshippers of God; which though it be not so forcible to persuade us as the former, yet it is a good motion and inducement joined with the rest: hereunto may be added that testimony of Josephus, that all the books which were written unto the time of Artaxerxes were of divine authority.

5. The foreign testimony is the authority and allowance, which this book found even among the Heathen: as is evident in that a great part of this prophesy is written in the Chaldee tongue, which showeth that the truth thereof was even evident to the Chaldeans: Junius. And here may be remembered, how laddus the high Priest, shown Daniel's prophesy unto Alexander the great, and by name that vision, c. 8. how the goat, which signified the Grecians, overcame the ram, which betokened the Persian Monarchy, as Josephus reporteth: whereupon this book was had in great admiration of Alexander.

Quest. 12. Of the difficulty and obscurity of this prophesy.

Pererius giveth these four reasons, and causes thereof. 1. Because diverse things are otherwise reported of foreign historiographers, then they are remembered in this book: as in the 2. chap. Nebuchadonazer is made the mightiest King upon the earth, whereas Herodotus much more extolleth the power of Cyaxares, who reigned about that time among the Medes. c. 5. Balthazar is said to be deprived both of life and kingdom by Darius king of the Medes, whereas other writers ascribe it to Cyrus. c. 11. the Angel foretelleth but of three kings after Cyrus unto Alexanders time, whereas there were many more.

2. The transposing of the story, which is often used in this book, is another cause of the darkness and obscurity: as the prophesies contained in the 7. and 8. chap. which were shown unto Daniel under the reign of Balthazar, in order should be set before the 6. c. Pererius addeth, that the history of Susanna, which happened when Daniel was yet a child, and the story of Bell and the dragon, which was done the Empire of the Chaldes yet standing, should be placed t • e one before the second, the other before the 5. chap. But concerning these two pretended histories, there is no certainty of the truth of them, at the least when and at what time they were done, and therefore this instance might be spared.

3. The prophesies and visions themselves are dark and obscure, as that c. 9. of the 70. weeks, which term when it should take beginning, and how it proceeded, and was continued, is a matter of deep understanding.

4. The variety of histories, which must be used as helps for the understanding of this prophesy: and the change and alteration of so many states and kingdoms, in this book deciphered, do make this prophesy intricate: specially because many of those historical writers, whose works are necessary for the opening and unfolding of this mystical prophesy, are now lost and perished. As Jerome sendeth us to the histories of S • et • nius, Callinicus, Possidonius, Thean, Andronicus, Polybius, Diodorus, Titus Linius, Tr • gus Pompeius; whose histories concerning these matters here prophesied of by Daniel, are now either in part or in whole wanting.

5. And thus much was signified by the Angel, that this history should seem obsure, until the things therein contained were accomplished: as he saith to Daniel, Go thy way Daniel, for the words are closed up, and sealed, till the ende of the time: until then they should be obscure to all: but even afterward also, when the fullness of time is come, none of the wicked shall have understanding: and least we should be discouraged altogether, it is added, but the wise shall understand.

1. Controv. The vulgar Latin translation not the best.

1. Pintus in his Prooeme upon Daniel saith, that the vulgar Latin translation is, omnibus alijs illustrior & prestantior, is a more excellent and worthy translation then any other: and so he preferreth it before the original Hebrew and Chaldee text: therefore that the blind presumption and boldness of these Romanists may herein appear, it shall not be amiss to note some special places wherein the Latin translation hath greatly erred.

1. c. 6. v. 15. The Latin translator readeth, Viri intelligentes regem dixerunt, &c. the men understanding the king, said, &c. whereas in the original the word is, hargishu, they came together. A. I.

2. c. 7. v. 18. The Saints shall take the kingdom. L. where it is truly translated thus: they shall take the kingdom of the Saints. A. P. I.

3. c. 8. 2. I was by the gate of Vlai. L. but in the original, I was by the river Vlay: A. P. I. V. the word is vbal, a river.

4. c. 8. v. 9. and against strength, L. against or toward the pleasant or delectable ( land.) V. A. P. I. G. hatzebi, beauty or delight it self.

5. c. 8. v. 13. and he said to him. L. he said to me. A. P. V. I. &c. the word is eelai, to me.

6. c. 11. 6. to make friendship. L. to make an equal ( peace.) A. P. I. V. mesharim, rectitudines, equality, rightnes.

7. C. 11. v. 8. he shall carry captive their gods, and their graven images, L. their gods and their Princes. A. P. V. G. I. nesichehem, their princes: nesich, a prince.

8. C. 11. v. 22. the arms of the fighter shall be subdued. L. the arms of the overflowing shall be overthrown. A. P. V. I. shataph, to overflow.

9. C. 11. 45. he shall plant the tabernacle of (Apadno.) L. the tabernacle of his palace. A. P. V. I. G.

10. C. 12. 2. some to shame, vt videant semper, that they may always see. L. some to shame and perpetual contempt. A. P. V. G. I. the word is diron, contempt.

By these few places given in instance, a conjecture may be made of the rest of the translation, that being so erroneous it cannot be compared for gravity or authority to the original. The other places of moment, wherein this translation often slippeth, shall be noted in the diverse readings upon every Chapter.

2. Controv. The history of Susanna, the Song of the three children, and of Bell and the Dragon, are no parts of Daniel, nor of the Canonical Scripture.

The Romanists would thus persuade, that these histories which are annexed to Daniel, and make in the vulgar Latin translation the 13. and 14. chap. to be Canonical.

1. Because the Council of Trent hath so defined them to be held for Canonical Scripture.

2. They are used and recited in the Roman liturgy and Mass as Canonical Scripture.

3. They are cited and alleged by diverse of the Fathers.

4. Diuerse of the Fathers of the Greek Church, as Origen, Athanasius, Chrysostom, Cyril, do hold these parcels to be Canonical. Thus Bellar. lib. 1. de verb. Dei. c. 9. Pintus in prooem. Perer. lib. 16. in Daniel, in praefat.

Contra. 1. The Tridentine Council or Chapter rather, was no true general Council; but a partial conuenticle of the Romanists, wherein there were not so many Bishops congregate or assembled together, as have been in many provincial Synods. 2. And though it had been a lawful Synod, yet it had no lawful authority to make the canon of the Scripture, which belongeth only unto God: the Church only is to declare, not to constitute the sacred Canon. 3. Neither can they produce any general Council, wherein the Pontificiall canon of Scripture hath been confirmed.

2. Pererius himself giveth instance of many things which are rehearsed in the Popish Mass, which are not canonical: as the legend of S. Catharine, how her body was placed by the Angels in mount Sinai: the Mass of the immaculate conception of the virgin Marie: and somewhat is taken out of the 4. book of Esdras: all these he himself confesseth not to be of Canonical authority, though publicly recited and sung in their Mass: the argument therefore followeth not.

3. Neither is all taken to be Canonical, which is cited by the Fathers: for they many times do allege the testimonies of Poets, and heathen writers: and the later writers do produce the authorities of the Elder fathers, Justin, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Cyprian, Origen: are their works therefore to be held canonical?

4. Though some of the Greek Fathers, therein following the Greek translation, which was of great authority, do make these histories Canonical; yet their testimony is not sufficient to make that part of Scripture, which is not. And against their judgment, we may oppose the sentence of other Fathers, as of Jerome, who doubteth not to call the historical narrations of Bel and the Dragon, fables: likewise he allegeth how Eusebius and Apollinarius would not answer Porphirie his cauillous exceptions against these supposed parcels of Daniel, because they were not found in the original, neither were held to be of divine authority. Pererius here answereth, Nobis cuae non sit, quid isti senserint, quidve scriptis prodiderint: mihi pluris est divus Ignatius Martyr, Athanasius, Chrysostomus, &c. We need not care what these thought, or what they set forth in writing: I make more account of holy Ignatius Martyr, Athanasius, Chrysostom, &c. In which indifferent answer, he teacheth us what to say: If he care not what Eusebius, Apollinarius, Jerome think or write on this matter; why should it move us, what Ignatius, Athanasius, with the rest, testify in this cause? neither do I see why the one should be more accounted of, or held of greater authority then the other.

Our contrary Arguments against the Canonical authority of these additions, are these which follow:

1. They are not extant in the Hebrew and Chaldee original.

2. They contain some things contradictory to the Canonical histories: as the Apocryphal story saith that Daniel was of the tribe of Levi, whereas he is said in the true story to be of the tribe of Judah, c. 1. v. 6.

3. Josephus making mention of all the other histories recorded in this book, yet omitteth these two as Apocryphal relations.

4. Jerome toucheth certain objections propounded by a Jew against these Apocryphal additions. 1. That it is not like, that the three children had so much leisure, as to go through all the elements and creatures in their hymn or song. 2. It was no such miraculous thing, but a natural work to kill the Dragon with gobbets, and balls of pitch. 3. And it is without example, that any Prophet was so transported in body, as Abacuk was taken up by the hair of the head to go and minister unto Daniel.

Answ. Here the Romanists do give us this slender satisfaction. 1. That this book might be translated by Theodotian out of the Hebrew or Chaldee, which is now extant: or it might be written in the Greek tongue originally, by some stirred by the spirit of God, as the author of Ecclesiasticus was. Perer.

2. There might be two Daniel's, one of Judah, another of Levi. Bellarm.

3. Josephus omitteth many things in his history of the Jews antiquities. Perer.

4. 1. So Jonah prayed in the Whales belly, being in great danger, as the other were in the fire. 2. Solomon though moved by the spirit of God, yet by human wisdom decided the controversy between the two harlots. 3. Enoch and Helias were translated in their bodies. Hug. Card. in proleg. Hieron. in Daniel.

Contra. 1. It is evident that this book was not translated either out of Chaldee or Hebrew, by the Greek allusion: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as if one should say, alluding to a cutting or pricking tree, he will cut thee: and in the Greek tongue originally were none of the Canonical books of the Old Testament written: for unto the Jews were committed the oracles of God, Rom. 3. 2. but the books set forth in the Greek could not be committed to the Hebrews.

2. If there were two Daniel's, why are those additions annexed to the prophesy of Dani • l, as parts thereof, he being not the author?

3. Josephus omitteth many matters of circumstance, but complete histories, and the same memorable, he seldom omitteth: but this argument is urged, not as necessary, but only probable.

4. 1. It is one thing to pray in distress as Jonah did, another to give thanks at large unto God, before riddance from the danger: for that had been in some sort to tempt God, to stay longer in the danger then there was cause. 2. That experiment of Solomon's wisdom is set forth as an act of a prudent and wise man, directed by the spirit of God: but the other is set down as a prophetical act: therefore the instance is not alike. 3. Enoch and Helias were translated out of the world, but not from place to place, as this Abacuk is supposed to have been: and it cannot be gathered, that they retained their bodies still, when they were taken up: but rather, that by the power of God they were dissolved: which we are to think for the honor of Christ, who was the first that in his whole humanity entered the heavens.

1. Quest. v. 1. Of the third year of Jehoiakim, which is called the fourth, Ier. 25. 1. how these places are reconciled.

1. Polanus saith, that the prophet Jeremiah there speaketh not of the captivity of Jehoiakim, as here Daniel doth, but only of a certain prophesy delivered by Jeremiah in the fourth year: so that he thinketh the third year here named, and the fourth year there mentioned, not to concure together: But that the same time and year in both places is signified it is evident, because the fourth year of Jehoiakim, is said there to be the first year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign. Ier. 25. 1. And the last year of Jehoiakim which was the 11. is elsewhere found to be the 7. of Nebuchadnezzar, Ierem. 52. 28. and in the 8. year of the king of Babels reign, 2. King. 24. 12. that is in the end of the one & beginning of an other; so that if the seventh or eight year of Nebuchadnezzar fall into the 11. year of Jehoiakim, then the first year must concur with the others third and fourth.

2. Calvin thinketh to dissolve this knot by the distinction of Nebuchadnezzar the father, and Nebuchadnezzar the son: that in one place the one is spoken of, and the other in the other: but the question is not concerning the year of Nebuchadnexzars reign, but the year of Iehoiakims reign, wherein Jerusalem should be besieged: so that the doubt remaineth still.

3. Therefore the best solution is, that the first year of Nebuchadnezzar did concur with the ende of the third and the beginning of the fourth year of Jehoiakim, Vatab. Iun. Genevens. factum est inter annum tertium • t quartum, it came to pass between the third and fourth year, &c. Pintus: who thinketh that after the same manner the Evangelists may be reconciled, Mark, who saith that Christ was crucified about the third hour, and John, who writeth that he was crucified at the fixed hour: because Christ was crucified Intervallo illo, in that space which was between the third and sixth hour: but though this solution be not so fit for that place, which otherwise may be reconciled, yet it may serve very conveniently here.

But Calvin taketh hereunto this exception: that Nebuchadnezzar's first year cannot concur with Iehoiakims third and fourth, because Daniel three years after was brought before Nebuchadnezzar in the second year of his reign. Dan. 2. 1. Answ. That is not to be referred to the year of the kings reign, but rather to the time of Daniel's ministry and employment with the king, that in the second year of his service he expounded the kings dream.

Polanus objecteth thus, that this confusion of years, that the ende of one should be the beginning of another, is observed in the reign of diverse kings, the one succeeding another: but here the history of one king only is set down: But this comparing of years is more usual, in setting together the reigns of diverse kings at the same time, then of diverse kings one suceeding another: as is most evident in the comparing of the years of the reign of the kings of Judah and Israel together, throughout the books of the kings: here then the years of one and the same king are not compared together, but the years of Nebuchadnezzar, and Iehoiakims reign.

Quest. 2. How this third year of Iehoiakims reign is to be counted.

1. Josephus thinketh that it was the 8. year of his reign, so also the author of the Ecclesiastical history following Josephus, when Nebuchadnezzar came and besieged Jerusalem: and of the same opinion are Lyranus, Hugo Cardinal. Dyonis. Carthusian. Bullinger, Polanus, Pappus, that the third year must be counted not from the beginning of Iehoiakims reign, but from the time, that he was made tributary to Nebuchadnezzar, which was in the 8. year of Iehoiakims reign: and from that time he served Nebuchadnezzar 3. years: so that the third year from the imposition of tribute concurreth with the 11. year of Iehoiakims reign, Polanus: who thus reasoneth for his opinion,

1. The third year of Jehoiakim here spoken of, was the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar, Ierem. 52. 28. when 3023. Jews were carried into captivity: but the third year of Iehoiakims reign was but the first of Nebuchadnezzar's. 2. If this were the third year of Iehoiakims reign, and consequently the first of Nebuchadnezzar's, then it would follow that Zedekiah was taken in the 21. year of Nebuchadnezzar, which was in the 18. year, Ierem. 52. 29.

Contra. 1. He is deceived in thinking that the captivity there spoken of, Ier. 52. 28. in the seventh of Nebuchadnezzar, was that first captivity, when Daniel was carried away: for there were two assaults and invasions of the land in the reign of Jehoiakim, one in the third and fourth year of Jehoiakim, and the first of Nebuchadnezzar, another in the 11. year, which was the 7. of Nebuchadnezzar, whereof Jeremiah speaketh.

2. The collection and inference of 21. years hath no consequence: for from Iehoiakims 3. year, who reigned in all but 11. years, to the last of Zedekiah, who also reigned 11. years, which make in all but 22. years, three being deducted, there are but 19. years.

2. Wherefore the truer opinion is, that this year here mentioned must be understood to be the 3. year of Iehoiakims reign, and not from the time of the tribute imposed. 1. Pererius saith, it is violenta & dura interpretatio, a forced and hard interpretation, the third year being simply named, to understand it otherwise, then of the third year of his reign. 2. Junius yieldeth this reason, because Ierem. 25. 1. the fourth year of Iehoiakims reign inchoate or begun concurreth with the first of Nebuchadnezzar, then it must of necessity follow, that Nebuchadnezzar's seventh must fall into Iehoiakims eleventh year: add hereunto an eleven years of Zedekiahs reign, and so it will fall out that Zedekiah was taken in the 18. year of Nebuchadnezzar, as is set down by the Prophet Jeremiah, chap. 52. 29.

Melancthon herein consenteth, that Nebuchadnezzar came against Jerusalem in the third year of Iehoiakims reign, and imposed tribute upon him, and carried away some pray: and after he had served him 3. years, and he then would have cast off the king of Babels yoke, then the seventh year after, which was in the 11. year of Iehoiakims reign, Nebuchadnezzar came up and carried away Jehoiakim, and his son Jeconiah reigned in his stead.

Quest. 3. Of Jehoiakim and Iehoiachin, what difference between them.

1. Josiah had 4. sons, the first was Iochanan, called also Iehoachaz, the second Jehoiakim or Eliakim, who is here mentioned, the third Matthanias, called also Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum, 1. Chron. 3. 15. this Jehoiakim is also called Shallum, Ierem. 22. 11. so Epiphanius testifieth, tom. 1. sect. 8. that he was called Sellus.

2. Jehoiakim written with koph and mem, was the name of the father, Iehoiachin written with caph and nun, was the name of the son, Pintus: and before him Jerome in 1. Matth.

3. Rupertus then is deceived, who confoundeth these two, and maketh but one Joachim, in whose third year Nebuchadnezzar came up and besieged Jerusalem, and carried Joachim captive: whereas it was Jehoiakim the father, in whose third year Nebuchadnezzar came up, and Iehoiachin, or Iechoniah his son, who was carried captive to Babylon.

4. But whereas Matth. 1. 11. there is mention made only of Iechoniah: Josiah begat Iechoniah and his brethren, &c. and again verse. 12. Jeconiah begat Salathiel; Pererius observeth out of Epiphanius, and Beza also is of the same opinion, that in the first place Jeconiah is taken for Jehoiakim the father, in the latter for the son, for otherwise there are not 42. but only 41. generations there rehearsed.

Quest. 4. Why the King of Babel had such an envy against Jehoiakim.

1. First, Nebuchadnezzar came against him, because he was made king by Pharaoh Necho king of Egypt, with whom Nebuchadnezzar had war and subdued his country: and thereupon Jehoiakim became tributary to the king of Babel. 2. But Nebuchadnezzar's hatred was more increased afterward, when as after three years Jehoiakim rebelled against him, and would have cast off his yoke: then the king of Babel came up the second time, and carried Jehoiakim away captive, who after he was dead, was cast out and lay unburied, according to Jeremiah his prophesy. c. 22. 19. 3. But the greatest cause of all was the purpose of God to punish the wickedness of the king and his people, for he killed the Prophet Viiah, Ierem. 26. cut Jeremiah his prophesy with a knife, and cast it into the fire, Ierem. 36. beside there were found in his body when he was dead marks of idolatry, as Lyranus following the Hebrew noteth upon that place, 2. Chron. 36. 8. Concerning the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and his abominations, which he did, and that which was found upon him, &c. God therefore for his cruelty, impiety, idolatry, brought this judgment upon him. Pere.

Quest. 5. Of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babel, and how many there were of that name.

1. Pintus thinketh that Nebuchadnezzar was a general name to the kings of Babylon, as the kings of Egypt were called by the name of Pharaoh, and the kings of the Philistines of Abimelek. And he further is of opinion, that this Nebuchadnezzar had a son of the same name: and that neither of them are the same with that Nebuchadnezzar mentioned in the story of Judith, who sent Holofernes against the Jews: for that was after the return of the Jews out of captivity, as appeareth, Judith 5. beside he thinketh, that neither Nebuchadnezzar the father, nor the son, was that Nebuchadnezzar, which destroyed Tyrus according to the prophesy of Ezekiel, 26. 7. which he taketh to be Cyrus or Alexander. But Pintus is in many things here deceived. 1. It is not to be shown out of the sacred history of Scripture, that all the kings of Babylon were called by the name of Nebuchadnezzar, but the contrary rather appeareth, for this kings sons name was Evilmerodach, 2. King. 25. 27. and his son Balthazar, Dan. 5. 2. And this Nebuchadnezzar was the son, not the father: and the second was called great Nebuchadnezzar, for his great exploits, and many victories: for next unto this succeeded Evilmerodach. So throughout the whole prophesy of Daniel we must understand the second Nebuchadnezzar. Iun. 3. We easily agree, that neither of these could be that Nebuchadnezzar mentioned in the book of Judith: for who that was it is uncertain, and there is small certainty of anything in the book beside: for Pintus will have that story referred to the times after the captivity: Pererius thinketh it was done before the captivity in the time of Manasseh: but neither of these can stand: not the first, for we read of no Nebuchadnezzar after the captivity, when the kingdom was translated from the Chaldeans to the Persians: nor the second, for that story of Judith maketh mention of the casting down of the Temple, cap. 5. 18. which had not yet been done in the days of Manasseh. 4. This Nebuchadnezzar was the same which besieged Tyrus, which he besieged 13. years as witnesseth Josephus, lib. 10. c. 11. he could not be Cyrus or Alexander, for he is called the king of Babel, Ezek. 26. 7.

2. Pererius acknowledgeth that there were two Nebuchadnezzar's, the one here spoken of, and in the Prophets, the other, whereof mention is made in the book of Judith; whom he taketh to have been before this: and he misliketh their opinion, who take this Nebuchadnezzar some for Cyrus, some for Cambises, some for Artaxerxes, or Darius Ochus, the last king but one of the Persians: for neither was the Temple yet built again under the reign of Cyrus and Cambises, as is mentioned, Judith 5. and Artaxerxes was 200. years after the return of the Jews from captivity: whereas the story of Judith seemeth to have fallen out immediately after: Judith 5. 19. Pere.

Contra. 1. It appeareth what small certainty there is of the Apocryphal book of Judith, seeing it cannot be agreed upon, who that king Nebuchadnezzar was. 2. He could not be the Elder Nebuchadnezzar: for in his time the temple was not destroyed, but in his sons: but before the time of Judith it had been destroyed, Judith 5. 18.

3. Wherefore their opinion is to be preferred that make two Nebuchadnezzar's, the father, and the son, who was called Nebuchadnezzar the great: Iun. Calvin, Bullinger. Polanus, so also Josephus, who giveth unto the reign of the Elder 23. years, and to the other 43. This Nebuchadnezzar seemeth to be the same, whom Ptolemy calleth Nabopolassar, in the 19. year of whose reign he saith the captivity of Babylon began. Polan.

Quest. 6. Of the acts and exploits of Nebuchadnezzar.

1. Josephus out of Berosus who wrote of the Chaldee affairs, reporteth of Nebuchadnezzar the second, that being sent by his father the Elder Nebuchadnezzar against the king of Egypt, who revolted from him, and in the mean time hearing of his fathers death, returned to Babylon, and took the government upon him: where he did many princely and sumptuous works: he beautified the temple of Belus, repaired the edifices of the city, enlarged the river, compassed the city with a treble wall: built a goodly palace, in the space of 25. days (which seemeth incredible,) and built high rocks and mountains upon vaults of stone, and upon them planted orchards as hanging aloft, because his wife being brought up in Medea, desired to see some resemblance of her country: for the like acts he referreth us to the histories of Megasthenes the Indian historiographer, and Diocles who wrote of the Persian histories, and Philostratus of the Pheniceans, who witnesseth that Nebuchadnezzar besieged Tyrus 13. years, which began in the 7. year of his reign: as Pererius noteth.

2. His acts set down in the Scriptures were these: in the third year of Jehoiakim he besieged Jerusalem, and carried the spoil of the city into Babylon: in the 11. year he came again, and took the city and carried many into captivity, and slue Jehoiakim, who wanted the honor of burial: then he set in his place his son Iehoaichin, whom after 3. months he removed, and appointed Zedekiah in his place, in whose 11. year, which was the 18. of Nebuchadnezzar, he took Zedekiah and put out his eyes: and the 19. year he burnt the city and Temple, and carried away the people captive: these things are thus testified. 2. King. 24. 25. Ierem. 52. And of Nebuchadnezzar's expedition against Cyrus, Ezekiel maketh mention, c. 26. to c. 30. In the 25. year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign he subdued Egypt, and removed all the Jews that were thither fled, to Babylon: Pererius addeth further that in the 25. year of his reign he had that vision of the image, c. 2. but that was rather in the 5. year of his reign, as is before shown, quest. 6. general. After this he set up the great golden image, c. 3. and was translated from the company of men, and lived among brute beasts for the space of seven years, cap. 4. then he was restored to his kingdom, which he enjoyed peaceably to the ende of his days. Pere.

Quest. 7. Of the time of Nebuchadnezzar's reign.

1. Josephus thinketh that Nebuchadnezzar reigned 43. years: so also Eusebius, and Pererius consenteth: wherein he doth not much vary from the years of his reign which may be collected out of Scripture.

2. Some think that all his reign made up 45. years: Bulling, rather 44. between both: for in the 8. year of his reign he took Jeconiah prisoner, in the 37. year of whose captivity, Evil-merodach the son of Nebuchadnezzar began to reign, who lift up the head of Iehoiachin out of prison; these two numbers put together, 8. and 37. make 45. and one year must be deducted, because Nebuchadnezzar is supposed to have died in the 36 year of Iechoniahs captivity, the last year of his reign, and so the whole sum of years remaineth 44.

Quest. 8. Of the city of Babylon.

1. The occasion of the first founding of this city and of the name thereof, is declared Gen. 11. so called first Babel of the confusion of tongues, and afterwards Babylon, & the country about Babylonia: 2. Nimrod who was the first king or tyrant rather after the flood, in which sense he is called a mighty hunter, is held to have been the first founder of Babylon: which was afterward enlarged by Semiramis, whom Julius Solinus, and Diodorus Siculus, whom Jerome followeth, think to have been the first builder of Babylon: but she only enlarged it, and raised up the walls. 3. In this city and the country thereabout the Jews were held in captivity 70. years: which term being the stinted time of man's life, Psal. 90. 10. showeth that man during the time of his life, and abode in this world, is but a captive, and stranger: as Jacob called his life a pilgrimage, Gen. 47. 9. Pintus.

2. Polanus thinketh there were 3. cities of this name Babylon, one in Assyria, whereof mention is made, 2. king 17. 24. another in Chaldea, which is here called the land of Sennaar, and the third in Egypt, which is now called Alcayr, the seat of the Sultanes of Egypt.

But I think the received opinion is more probable, that there were only two Babylon's, one in Chaldea, the other in Egypt, or in the confines of Arabia: whereof Raphael Volateran. treateth lib. 12. now called Cayro, Pintus, that Babel mentioned 2. King. 17. 24. from whence the king of Ashur brought some to inhabit Samaria, is Babylon in Chaldea, which was then subject to the king of Ashur.

3. Stephanus also is deceived, who thinketh this Babylon to be the same city, which was called Seleucia, built by Seleucus Nicanor, which was indeed built not far off from Babylon, some 300. stadia or furlongs, by which occasion Babylon became desolate, and not so much frequented: but they were not all one city: Polanus.

Quest. 9. ver. 1. Of the city Jerusalem.

1. Jerusalem it was the chief city of Palestine, first founded by Melchizedek, as Josephus thinketh, who Gen. 14. is called the king of Shalem: 2. It had diverse names, it was first called Shalem, Gen. 14. Psal. 75. 3. then Iebus, of Iebusi the son of Canaan, Josh. 18. 28. afterward it was named Jerusalem, which signifieth the vision of peace; and last of all Aelia, of Aelius Adrianus the Emperor, who built mount Caluarie, and diverse other parts of the city. Volat. l. 11. 3. It was divided into two parts, the upper city where was mount Zion, the city of David, and the Temple, & the nether or base city, which was under the hill. Pol. 4. The city Jerusalem is sometime taken in Scripture for the Church of God, as Hebr. 12. 22. Ye are come to Mount Sinai, to the city of the living God, to celestial Jerusalem. Pintus.

Quest. 10. v. 2. What this phrase meaneth, To be given into ones hand.

v. 2. And the Lord gave Jehoiakim, &c. into his hand, &c. The hand is diversely taken in Scripture. 1. As first to put the soul or life in the hand, signifieth to put the life in danger, Judge. 12. 3. Iepthah saith, I put my life in my hands. 2. The hand signifieth a league or covenant: as the giving of the hand, implieth the plighting of the troth: as Esech. 17. 18. He hath despised the oath, and broken the covenant, yet lo, he had given his hand! 3. It signifieth ministry and service: as Exod. 38. 21. These are the parts of the Tabernacle, &c. for the office of the Levites by the hand of Ithamar. 4. The hand signifieth help and assistance, as 1. Sam. 22. 17. Saul commandeth the Priests to be slain, because their hand was with David, that is, they were aiding and helping unto him. 5. To lift up the hand against a place, is to assault it, and threaten against it, as Isa. 10. 32. He shall lift up his hand toward the mount of the daughter of Zion. 6. To lift up the hands is to pray: 1. Tim. 2. 9. I will that the men pray everywhere, lifting up pure hands. 7. To wash the hands, is to purge the heart and works from impurity and uncleanness, as Psal. 26. 6. I will wash mine hands in innocence, O Lord, and compass thine altar. 8. To put the hand to the mouth, signifieth to eat, 1. Sam. 14. 27. as Jonathan is said to have put his hands to his mouth, when he did eat of the honey. 9. To lay the hand also upon the mouth, is a figne of silence: Job. 29. 9. The Princes stayed talk, and laid their hand on their mouth. 10. By the hands also are understood the works & labors of men's vocations, as Eph. 4. 28. Let him that stole, steal no more, but rather labor, and work with his hands. 11. To do a thing with an high hand, is to do it presumptuously: Numb. 15. 30. 12. To touch with the hand, is to humble or afflict: Psal. 32. 4. Thy hand is heavy upon me day and night. 13. But to give into the hands of any, is to bring under their power and subjection, as Judge. 7. 1. The Lord gave them into the hands of Midian seven years: and so it is taken here. Pintus.

Quest. 11. How Jehoiakim was given into Nebuchadnezzar's hand, whether he carried him to Babylon.

1. Some think that Jehoiakim was bound in chains and carried to Babylon: as the Latin translator readeth, 2. Chron. 36. 6. & vinctum in catenis duxit in Babylonem: and being bound in chains he carried him to Babylon: but the true reading is, he bound him in chains to carry him to Babylon. Iun. Vatab. Gen.

2. Hugo Card, to justify the Latin translation, thinketh that he was carried to Babylon, and brought back again to Jerusalem, and there killed, and his body cast without the walls unburied, which was after, at the request of the citizens, suffered to be buried. But this had been an idle and superfluous course, to carry him to Babel, and recarie him. And beside it is against the text, that he was buried at all: Ierem. 22. 19. He shall be buried, as an asse is buried, even drawn, and cast forth without the gates of Jerusalem. and, c. 36. 30. His dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heat, and in the night to the frost.

3. Lyranus and Caietane think, that Nebuchadnezzar caused Jehoiakim to be bound, having a purpose to carry him to Babylon, but afterward he changed his mind, and only imposed a tribute upon him: but no such thing can be gathered in the text, that the King altered his mind for that matter, or laid any imposition upon him.

4. Josephus thinketh that Nebuchadnezzar commanded Jehoiakim to be killed at Jerusalem, and his body to be cast out of the gates: but the phrase used, 2. king. 24. 6. Jehoiakim slept with his fathers, seemeth to import, not a violent, but a natural death. And if he were killed at Jerusalem, he needed not to have been bound in chains to be carried into captivity.

5. Wherefore the more probable opinion is, that at this expedition Jehoiakim only became tributary to the king of Babel, 2. king. 24. 1. but he died afterward in the way, as he was going into captivity (the second time that Nebuchadnezzar came up against him, which was in his 11. year) before he was past the borders of Judea, and it may seem not far from Jerusalem: and so he may be said to be cast out of the gates, that is, the borders and confines thereof. Iun. Polan.

Quest. 12. Whether Daniel at this time went into captivity with Jehoiakim.

1. Lyranus and Dionys. Carth. do refer the captivity of Daniel to the 11. year of Iehoiakims reign: but the text here is contrary, which maketh mention only of the third year of Jehoiakim, when Daniel went into captivity, and other children of the Princes of Judah.

2. Jerome thinketh, that Daniel and Ezekiel were carried away captive together with Ieconias, who reigned but 3. months after his father Jehoiakim: but this text evidently showeth, that Daniel was carried to Babylon the 3. year of Iehoiakims reign, which was 8. year before the captivity of Ieconias.

3. But Josephus is in a greater error, who thinketh, that Daniel was taken captive together with king Zedekiah: for this was 18. years after: Daniel went into captivity the 3. year of Jehoiakim; the next year was the first of Nebuchadnezzar. Ierem. 25. 1. But Zedekiah was carried away in the 18. year of Zedekiah. Ierem. 52. 29. Peter.

Quest. 13. Why it pleased God that Daniel and others that feared God should be taken captives.

Though God sometime think good to exempt and deliver the righteous from temporal calamities, as Noah from the flood, Lot out of the flames of Sodom, the Israelites from the plagues of Egypt: yet sometimes it pleaseth him that such temporal chastisements should fall upon the righteous, as this captivity upon Daniel for these causes.

1. The general reasons may be yielded to be these. 1. God getteth himself hereby greater glory in the deliverance of his servants, as he did when the 3. children were cast into the fire, and Daniel into the Lions den, and yet they escaped the rage of the one, and Daniel the cruelty of the other. 2. Hereby also the patience of the godly is tried and exercised, and others by their godly example are encouraged. Pin.

2. The special reasons why Daniel went into captivity were, 1. that he might be as a guide and comfort to the people to keep them in the fear of God. 2. that by this means Daniel might become more famous, and be advanced for the good of his Church. 3. that by his means these idolatrous Kings and people might come to some knowledge of God. Pererius.

Quest. 14. Of the meaning of these words, ver. 2. Which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god.

1. Junius understandeth this clause of Jehoiakim and the rest which were carried captive into Babylon into the land of Shinar: and the vessels were brought into his gods treasury: so also Polanus. But this exposition seemeth not so fit: 1. it is not like that the men were carried into the house of their God, but rather the vessels, Calvin, Polanus thinketh that the land of Shinar is called the house of his God. But beside that this were an improper speech, to call the whole region an house, which is otherwhere named the land of Shinar, Gen. 11. 2. this house is expounded to be the temple, 2. Chron. 36. 7. Nebuchadnezzar carried of the vessels of the house of the Lord to Babel, and put them in his temple at Babel. 2. Here only Jehoiakim is mentioned to be given into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar: but the Hebrew affix is in the plural number, and therefore is better referred to the vessels, which also is the nearer antecedent. 3. Neither was Jehoiakim carried at this time into captivity nor brought at all to Babel, as is shown before, Quest. 11.

2. Therefore both these clauses are better referred to the vessels, that he first brought them into the house of his god, and then laid them up in his gods treasury, not converting them unto any civil use, Osian. Pintus. Some think the last clause is added, because the treasury was a special place in the temple where such things were laid up: first then he brought them to his own palace, and then to the treasury of the temple of his God, which was also in his house. Vatabl.

Quest. 15. Of the land of Shinar, or Shingar.

1. This land of Shinar or Shingar was the lower part of Mesopotamia, which contained Chaldea and Babylon, lying under the mount Sangara, whereof there was a town so called: the Hebrew letter aijn is pronounced often as the Greek g, as in these words, Gomorrhah, Gaza, which begin with that letter, and are pronounced with a double aspiration, as Hhamarrha, Hhaza, Iun. Polan.

2. This was the land wherein the towes of Babel was built, Gen. 11. 2. whereof the whole region was called Babylonia; whereas then 2. Chron. 36. 7. he is said to have carried the vessels to Babel, there is no contradiction: for they were both names of the same country. Polan.

Quest. 16. Of the gods and idols of the Chaldes.

Ver. 2. To the house of his God. The Chaldeans had five idols, 3. gods, and two goddesses: 1. their first god was Bel, a name contracted of Behel, which cometh of Bahal, which signifieth a Lord: Berosus saith this was Jupiter Belus the son of Saturn, to whom was erected a temple in Babylon, with a vast and huge tower in the middes, which continued unto the time of Vespasian the Emperor, as Pliny witnesseth, lib. 6. c. 26.

2. The second god was the Sun which they called rach, that is a king, because he is the chief among the planets: and the Persians call him Mithra, as Justinus Martyr saith, dialogue. in Tryphon. the priests of this idol were called Raciophantae, observers of the Sun.

3. Their third god was Nego the fire, so called of the brightness, which was carried about among them.

4. Their first goddess was Shacha, which was the earth, worshipped also of the Romans under the names of Opis and Tellus: of the Syrians called Dorcetha. In the honor of this goddess they used to keep a feast five days together in Babylon: during which time the masters were under the dominion of their servants: this festival: time was called Shache, whereof Babylon was called Sheshach of keeping this feast, Ierem. 25. 27. and 52. 41.

5. Their other goddess was Mulitta which was Venus, whose priests were called Natitae or Natophantae, the observers of fair Venus. Polan. But the chiefest of their idols was Bel, Isaiah 46. 1. Bel is bowed down: which Junius in that place thinketh was taken for the Sun, whom the Assyrians and Chaldeans worshipped: But he was the same who was called Jupiter Belus, Plin. 6. 26. as is before shown: they worshipped the Sun and the fire beside.

Quest. 17. Ver. 2. What is to be commended, what discommended in Nebuchadnezzar in carrying away part of the vessels of the Temple.

Ver. 2. With part of the vessels of the house of God. 1. Herein he is commended for his moderation, that he would not as an insatiable conqueror, that came only to spoil, carry away all the vessels of the temple, but contented himself with part: which notwithstanding was God's special work so moving the heart of Nebuchadnezzar, that the temple yet standing should not be stripped of all the ornaments. Pere. 2. In that he put them not to any civil house, neither enriched himself by them, but laid them up in the temple of his god: vnde aliquam religionem Deo exhibuit, wherein he shown some reverence unto God in reverencing the vessels of the Sanctuary: gloss. ordinar. Pere. 3. But herein the gross blindness of Nebuchadnezzar appeareth, who giveth the honor of this victory unto his idols, which was only due unto God: as Habakkuk saith, they sacrificed unto their nets, cap. 1. Iun.

Quest. 18. Why it pleased God to suffer that the vessels of the Temple should be carried away.

1. God thereby would punish the wickedness and impiety of the Jews, for it is no small judgment, rebus sacris priuari, to be deprived of sacred things. 2. Herein also the Lord shown his just indignation against the sins of the people, that he would rather abijcere res suas, cast off his own things which were dedicate to his service. And for the same cause he refused their oblations, saying, incense is abomination unto me, Isaiah. 1. 13. 3. The Lord herein also reproved their carnal confidence, thinking that the Temple and the vessels thereof were sufficient defense unto them: therefore the Prophet Jeremiah saith, cap. 7. 4. trust not in lying words, saying, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord. 4. And by occasion of the transporting of these vessels, the Lord shown his wonderful and strange works in Babylon, as by the writing of an hand upon the wall, when Baltazar profaned the vessels of the Temple. The like work the Lord shown among the Philistines, when at the presence of the Ark, Dagon their idol lost both his head and hands, Pere. While the kings of Babel did regard with some reverence the holy vessels, they pr • spered, as Nebuchadnezzar, and Evil-merodach his son: but when they grew to be presumptuous and profane in abusing them, as Baltazar did, the Lord judged them for their contempt. 5. God also hereby signified, that he needed not anything of theirs, as any vessels of gold and silver, but such things being offered unto God tended only to the good of the offerer. Pintus.

Quest. 19. Of Ashpenah the master of the Enuches his name and office.

V. 3. And the king said to Ashpenah &c. 1. there are three parts of the kings charge unto this Ashpenaz: first concerning the transporting and carrying of certain children of the Kings seed, and of other nobles: for at this time Jehoiakim the king himself went not into captivity: then what choice was to be made of them, both for their kindred, and for their qualities of body, and mind, v. 4. and to what ende, that they might stand before the king: And in the third place order is taken v. 5. for their provision and diet.

2. Concerning the name Ashpenaz it signifieth in the Chaldee tongue, magistrum obiurgantium, the master of the controllers, that is, the chief controller and governor of the kings house: as Ctesias useth the word Ashpamitres, which signifieth the master or chief of the Priests, Iun.

3. The kings of the Chaldeans, Persians, Egyptians, at the first used Eunuchs, which were gelded men, as their chamberlaines, specially for the custody of their concubines: in Hebrew they are called sarisim of saras, which signifieth to pull away: but afterward the principal officers and servants to the kings were called by that name, as Potiphar Pharaohs chief steward or captain is called an Eunuch, that is a Courtier: And the Queen of Ethiopia her Eunuch whom Philip baptized was her treasurer, Act. 8. the word Eunuch is derived of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a chamber, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , to keep; they first attended upon the king in his chamber: So this Ashpenaz was a chief minister or officer to the king: Polan, Osian, Pin.

Quest. 20. Whether Daniel may be proved from hence to have been an Eunuch in the first sense.

1. Of this opinion are Josephus, Origen, Simon Metaphrastes, that Daniel was indeed an Eunuch: and in him, and the rest of the kings • eed, some think that prophesy of Isaiah to Hezekiah to be fulfilled, that his sons should be Eunuchs in the King of Babels palace, 2. King. 20. 18. But it is not necessary, as is shown before, to take an Eunuch always in that sense: for that name generally is applied to the principal officers and ministers of the king.

2. Some are of opinion, that Daniel was called an Eunuch because of his perpetual virginity: Dorotheus in Sinops. Epiphan. in vita Daniel. so also Damascene. lib. 4. de fide orthodex. cap. 25. but this may be gainsaied by that place, Ezek. 14. 20. that Noah, Daniel, Job, should deliver neither son, nor daughter: it may seem then that they all had sons and daughters: P • rerius hereunto answereth, 1. that by sons and daughters here are meant the things most dear and precious: but this is a forced and wrested sense: for the text speaketh evidently of the delivering of the persons of men, not of any other precious things. 2. it is sufficient (saith he) to understand some of these only to have had sons and daughters, though not all, &c. But Daniel by this text can be no more denied to have had sons and daughters, then either Noah or Job: yet, I confess that this being but a supposition, and conditional speech; that if these three Noah, Job, Daniel, were in the midst of it, they should deliver neither son, nor daughter, doth not necessarily conclude that Daniel had sons and daughters, & yet he might have both. 3. Now howsoever it was for his virginiti • , certain it is he was no Eunuch, as Lyranus, and Carthusianus, and Pintus infer upon these words, ver. 4. they must be children without blemish: which collection though Pe •••• us mislike, yet it may be warranted, Levite. 21. 20. where this very kind of defect in the secret parts is counted among other blemishes. And whereas Perer, saith, that they were only to respect the outward comliness and beauty, which he saith is held longer to continue in Eunuchs, I rather think with Lyranus, taliter castrati sunt male gratiosi etiam in facis, that such as are deprived of their vitilitie, have for the most part less grace in their countenance.

Quest. 21. Who are understood here by the Princes.

1. The word is partemim, which R. Joseph Kimhi would derive of the word Perath, which was the name of the great river Euphrates: and that thereby are signified the Princes of the region about Euphrates: but this agreeth not to this place, as Calvin noteth, for these princes were of Judah whose children were taken, they inhabited not near Euphrates. 2. Some derive the word of Pharah, to fructify and increase: noting such as were truly noble, and excelling others: some of Parath, which signifieth to devide: because the Magistrates and Judges, which decided controversies, were of the nobler sort. 3. Some rather think that it was a strange word taken up in the Chaldee tongue: Mercer. Junius conjecture in that parthani may come of the Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and so it generally signifieth the first, chief, or principal men. 4. The Latin interpreter it expresseth by the word tyrannorum, the seed of the tyrants: but that word, howsoever at the first in the Greek tongue it was used in the better part to signify great and excellent men, yet now it is applied unto such which are cruel governors, and are usually called tyrants: thereforre it is no fit word to express the sense here. 5. The Septuagint retain it as a proper name and title of dignity, Pharthammin, but that is not like: for the Princes among the Persians were so called, Ester. 1. 3. there were not the like titles of honor among the Jews, which were among the Persians: I therefore prefer before the rest, the opinion of Mercerus and Iun.

Quest. 22. Why the children of the Princes and Nobles were taken captives.

The reasons hereof may be these. 1. the king herein shown his triumph and victory in carrying away the more principal men's sons. 2. And because such having had noble education, and not trained up as the vulgar sort, were meetest to attend upon the king: to the which ende he sorted them out from the rest. 3. And this might be his policy also herein, that these principal men's sons being brought up with the king of Babel, and so instructed in the manners and religion of the Chaldeans, might thereby have their hearts, and affections enstranged, and alienated from their country. 4. And he might have further this purpose therein, to keep them as pledges, and hostages, the better to contain the Jews in obedience and subjection. Calvin.

Quest. 23. How the Lord performed his promise to David that his kingdom should be established forever, 2. Sam. 16. seeing Jehoiakim was given into Nebuchadnezzers hand.

1. We must consider, that the promise in respect of David's temporal seed was conditional; that the Lord would make sure the kingdom so long as they continued in obedience: but if they brake the condition, the Lord was not tied to make good his promise. 2. Yet the spiritual kingdom in the Messiah, which was of the seed of David according to the flesh, shall remain forever without any condition or exception. 3. And although Jehoiakim were given into Nebuchadnezzar's hand, yet the kingdom well nigh continued after this 20. years in David's posterity: and the Lord by degrees did proceed to take away the scepter from Judah, which for David's sake he would have continued still if they would have taken any warning. 4. But it must not be thought that God's purpose and promise to David was changed and overturned by any superior power: and even Nebuchadnezzar herein was the minister of God, to execute his judgments: for it is said, that the Lord gave Jehoiakim into his hand, v. 2. Polan.

Quest. 24. Whether it were lawful for Daniel to be taught the learning of the Chaldeans.

v. 4. And whom they might teach the learning, &c. Though among the Chaldeans there were curious and superstitious arts, for both iudiciarie Astrology, and Genethlialogie, the casting of men's natiuities, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , divination by the dead, are held to have been invented by the Chaldeans; yet they had other profitable sciences, as Astronomy, Geometry, and other liberal arts, which Daniel might safely learn, as Moses was brought up in the knowledge of the Egyptians, whose superstitious inventions notwithstanding he abhorred: and if Daniel refused to be defiled with their meats, which were but for the body, much more did he take heed not to have his soul defiled with superstitious inventions. Calvin.

Quest. 25. Of the Chaldee language, and the difference between it, and the Hebrew.

1. The Chaldeans called in Hebrew Chasdim, had their original from Arphachsad the son of Sem: the Chaldeans at the first comprehended the Hebrews also, for Heber the son of Selah, the son of Arphacsad, was the father of the Hebrews: and Abraham the Hebrew was borne in Vr of the Chaldees. 2. At the first the knowledge of God did flourish among the Chaldeans, till idolatry and superstition increasing, it pleased God to single out Abraham, in whom the true religion should be preserved. 3. The most ancient tongue was the Hebrew, which was preserved in Hebers family, and so descended to Abraham, who also because he lived among the Chaldeans, could speak the language of that nation. 4. But seeing Daniel here being an Hebrew borne, was to be taught the Chaldee language, then Philo is deceived, who thinketh the Chaldee and Hebrew to be all one. 5. Neither was the Chaldee and Syrian tongue the same, which is the opinion of Mercerus: so thinketh also Hugo Cardinal. following the ordinary Gloss: some think that the Syrian tongue differed not much from the Chaldee, but was the more eloquent language, and therefore used of the learned, Genevens. Dan. 2. 6. But I rather think with Tremellius and Polanus, that howsoever in times past there was small difference: for that part of this book which is written in the Chaldee tongue from the 4. v. of the 2. chapter to the ende of the seventh, is called also the Aramites or Syrians language, c. 2. 4. yet now they do manifestly differ, the ancient Chaldee speech, and the common Syrian language. 7. Now the Chaldee tongue is either that purer kind of speaking and writing which is used here in Daniel from 2. c. v. 4. to the ende of the seventh, and Ezra c. 4. unto the seventh, which was then commonly used in Babylon: or else it was more impure, such as the three Targums are written in, namely of Onkelus, Ionathas, and the Hierosolymitan: as also the two Talmuds, the one of Babylon, the other of Jerusalem. ex Polan.

Quest. 26. v. 4. Of the necessary institution of schools, and the manner and order thereof.

v. 4. Teach the learning and language of the Chaldeans. 1. Hence appeareth, that the institution of schools, wherein youth should be brought up in good letters, was very ancient: for here in Babylon, such as were afterward to be employed in the state, had their education in learning. So among the Egyptians they had the like use, where Moses was taught the learning of the Egyptians. Among the Israelites 48. cities were appointed for the Levites, which were as the common Schools and Universities for the whole kingdom. Samuel and Elisha had their Schools and Colleges of Prophets. Among the Grecians, Athens was famous for the study of Arts: and in Egypt Alexandria: yea, the rude Indians had their Gymnosophistes: and the Romans had their Colleges of Augures.

2. Beside hence it is gathered that the chief care of the promoting of learning belongeth to the King, as here Nebuchadnezzar giveth it in charge.

3. And because kings being occupied with other affairs cannot themselves attend that business, they are to set over such places good overseers, as here the King committeth the care of this business to Ashpenaz.

4. And as here choice is made of the best wits, and such as were not deformed, to be brought up in learning; so such should now be preferred to places of learning, as are like to profit well in that profession: and not every spittle, and dulhead to be obtruded and thrust into such places by favor, to make a scholar of, being fit for no other employment.

5. These upon whom this learned education is bestowed, were the sons of Nobles; whereas in many places noble men think it a disgrace to be learned: whereas there cannot be a greater ornament unto true nobility, then learning.

6. Here also it is shown what they should learn, to be instructed in the knowledge of the tongues, whereby a way is made for other learning.

7. And they must not be always learning: a time is prefixed here of three years, to take trial how they profit: they which are put to learning must not be non proficientes, but after some time make some proof how they profit.

8. The king also provideth su • ficient maintenance for them, a competent diet, not superfluous: but in times past Abbeys had too much, and now Schools of learning have too little. Bulling.

Quest. 27. Why other names were given them.

1. Quia nomina Judea oderant & fugerant, because the Chaldeans did hate and shun Hebrew and Jewish names, Iun, so also Hugo Card, indign ferebat quod vocarentur nominibus Iudaeae, the king could not endure that they should be called with the names of Judea: to the same purpose Lyranus, nomina Hebraica erant Babyloniis abominabilia, the Hebrew names were abominable to the Babylonians.

2. In changing of their names, the conquerer shown his power over them, and that by this mutation of their names, they might know themselves to be servants: for it is a sign of superiority to impose names: as Adam gave names unto the creatures; he also gave a name unto his wife: so conquerors used to give names to them whom they subdued: As Pharaoh king of Egypt, would have Eliakim king of Judah called Jehoiakim: and Nebuchadnezzar called Mattaniah the last king of the Jews Zedekiah: Polan. Among the Romans they which were adopted and received into the number of the citizens, did change their names for a remembrance and memorial of that benefit: and servants likewise, when they were manumitted did take unto them the names of noble and free men. Alexander.

3. But there was a further reason in it: vt deleret rex memoriam propriae gentis, that by this means the king might blot out the memory of their own nation and kindred.

4. And beside the names were abolished, which had any mention of God, as El. Yah. as one of these was in all their names: Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, Azariah, and in the new names given unto them there were quasi trophaea deorum suorum, as monuments of their gods: So by this means they thought to extinguish all memory of their religion. Iun. Polan.

Quest. 28. Of the signification of their names both the new, and the old.

1. Daniel signifieth the judgment of God, or whom the Lord judgeth, Hananiah is named of grace and favor: Mishael some interpret, asked of God: Pap. Osiander: but the better derivation is, which is of God: Iun. Azariah helped of God.

2. Their new names are thus interpreted: Belteshazar some would have signify, scrutator the saur • , a searcher of treasure, Pintus: some custos insignis thesauri, a keeper of a notable treasure, Bulling: some take it to signify divine treasure: Osiander, or the keeper of Bel, their idol: Pap. But the true sense is: one laying up or keeping the treasury of Bell: for the word is compounded of Bel and teshah to lay up, and atzar treasure, Iun. Polan. this name was given by Ashpenaz to Daniel, but at the kings appointment, and therefore it is said, that the king named him Belthazar, cap. 5. 12. Shadrach, some expound a legate or embassadour, Osiander. some delicate, Bullin. Pap. some a delicate field: Pintus. but the true notation is this: 1. the inspiration of rach that is the sun: for shadah signifieth to inspire, and rach, a king, which name they give unto the Sun. Meshach some interpret prolonging, Pintus: some industrious, Pappus: some precious; Bullinger, Osiander: But it is compounded of Meh, which, and shach the name of Venus their festival gods: Meshach, that is, who is of the gods shacah, the festival goddess: for the Babylonians used upon the 16. day of the month Loy to celebrate the feast of their gods shacha for 5. days together, during which time one of the servants was Lord and ruler of the family, appareled in a princely robe called Segane, the Hebrews call it Saga: Iun. ex Athenaeolib. 14. dipnosophrast. Abednego some interpret servus lucis, servant of the light, Pap. some servus illustris, a famous servant; Osiander. some the servant of Nego which was the star of Venus: Bullin. some think it should be read Abednebo, the servant of Nebo the God of the Chaldeans: some give the sense servus anxius, a careful servant, Pintus: But the true derivation is, of ghebat a servant, and Nego fire, which the Chaldeans worshipped as a God: So then in all these four names, there was some memorial of the Chaldean idols; of Bel in the first, rach which was the Sun in the next, of their goddess Shacah, which was Venus in the third, and of their god Nego in the last. Iun. Polan.

Quest. 29. Ver. 8. Why Daniel refused to eat of the kings meat, and of the diverse kinds of abstinence.

Ver. 8. D •• iel had determined in his heart, that he would not defile himself with the portion of the kings meat: 1. here we may remember that there are four kinds of unlawful abstinence.

1. Some of the Philosophers, as Pythagoras, Empedocles, Apollonius, Porphyrius, because they imagined that the souls of men did pass into the bodies of beasts, & in varia se corpora endure, and did as it were cloth themselves with diverse bodies: for this cause they abstained from the eating of flesh.

2. There were certain heretics, who therefore would eat no flesh, because they held them to be evil by nature, & a malo quodam principio conditas, and made at the first by some evil powers: such were the Heretics Marcion, Tacianus, the Encratites, the Manichees: against whom Augustine did write, at large confuting their errors, but specially in his books against blasphemous Faustus the Manichee.

3. Some were in another error, who at the first being converted from Iudais • e, did think they were bound to abstain from certain meats as unclean, according to the law of Moses, concerning whom the Apostles made a decree. Act. 15.

4. And some other there are, which have a perverse opinion of fasting, which think that the perfection of a Christian consisteth in fasting; or they fast only for the praise of men, and opinion of the world. All these are in great error, and do offend in their fasting, but Daniel's abstinence was of none of these kinds. Pere.

Quest. 30. The causes which moved Daniel to forbear the kings meat.

There were many pollutions in the meat, which served at the kings table: 1. they might eat such flesh as was counted unclean by the law of Moses; as swine's flesh, hares and conies, were held to be unclean by the law of the Hebrews, and diverse others both beasts, fish, and foul, as is declared, Deut. 14. which might be notwithstanding used as delicate meats in the kings court. Pap, Bullinger: which meats though of their own nature they defiled not, yet by the institution of God being forbidden, they defiled the eater, in respect of his disobedience to the law.

2. Beside they in the beginning of their feasts did praise the gods of gold and silver, and so consecrated their meats and table to their idols: for which cause Daniel and the rest abstained. Iun. Polan. Lyranus. Hugo Cardi. And though the first observation of meats was only legal, and ceased with the rest of the ceremonies: yet the abstaining from things offered to idols was perpetual afterward observed of the Christians, as both is evident by S. Paul, 1. Cor. 8. 10. where he speaketh of those that sat down in the idol temples; and by the practice of the Primitive Church, as Caecilius objected to the Christians, praeceptos & delibatos altaribus cibos abhorretis, &c. ye abhor meats commanded, that are consecrate to idols.

3. Beside sciebat perturbationum fontem esse intemperantiam, he did know that intemperance was the fountain of all distemperature: he remembered that Adam was cast out of paradise, for eating of the forbidden fruit, and Esau lost his birthright for a mess of pottage: Daniel therefore and the rest abstained, least they might be entangled with the desire of their delicate meats. Pintus.

4. An other reason was that the king by this sweet poison should not cause him to forget his religion; Geneuens▪ ne inescaretur talibus illecebris, least he should have been caught with such baits: he therefore shunneth the occasion.

Quest. 31. verse. 8. How Daniel should have been defiled with the kings meat.

Though that the meat it self in it own nature could not have defiled Daniel, as our Blessed Savior saith, that which goeth into the mouth, defileth not the man, Matth. 15. 11. yet four ways Daniel should have defiled himself and others.

1. He had offended the godly if they were weak, in following his example, so wounding their own conscience; if they were strong, yet they would have grieved, to see the law of God transgressed.

2. The profane should have been scandalized, if they were enemies, in causing them to blaspheme, if they were indifferent, and such as of whom there might be hope, in putting before them a stumbling block, they might have discouraged them from embracing their religion, in seeing them to do contrary to their own profession.

3. Their own conscience they should have defiled in sinning against the • nowledge, and disobeying the law.

4. God they should have contemned, in neglecting his law, and so in a manner have polluted him: as in another case the Priests are said to have polluted God, for offering unclean bread upon his altar, Malachi. 1. 7. Polan.

Quest. 32. Whether Daniel ever after abstained from the kings meat.

It is like that Daniel afterward did both eat and drink of the kings provision: for he was of the kings Court, and was the chief officer about the king, and sat in the kings gate, cap. 2. 49. therefore it is not unlike but that he did live at the kings diet, neither do we read of Joseph, that was in the like estimation with Pharaoh, that he refused the kings meat. Calvin. The reasons why Daniel abstained now, and not afterward may be these. 1. Daniel, principio abstinuit à lautitijs aulae ne inescaretur, at the beginning abstained from the delicats of the court, lest he should have been entangled, Cal. but afterward there was not the like fear, when Daniel was called to place of government, and depended not upon the command and authority of others, as now he did. So also Pellic • iam grandaevus & extra periculum constitutus, vinum bibisse legitur, &c. when he waxed old and was out of danger, he is found to have drunk wine, &c. 2. this must be admitted ceremonialia cedere magnae, necessitati, that the ceremonialls must give place unto extreme necessity: It is no question, but the people of the Jews being in captivity did sometime eat of the meats forbidden by the law, rather then they should be famished: but if the eating of such meats had been a denial of their faith and religion, in that case, they should rather have chosen to die, then in the least ceremony to deny their faith: Osian. Daniel might then in his captivity upon such necessity eat such things, as in their country were not lawful, as other of his brethren did: but at this time his profession being called in question, least by such baits and enticements he might have been drawn away from it, he did in a godly resolution abstain.

Quest. 32. Ver. 9. What favor it was which Daniel found with the chief of the Ennuches not obtaining his request.

Ver. 9. Now God had brought Daniel into favor, &c. 1. Some think, that whereas the chief of the Eunuchs after excuseth himself by his fear, lest if he should have granted his request, to allow him other diet then the king had appointed, these two effects should have followed, their countenances would look worse, and his life should be in danger, that the Eunuch did deny his request: quod tentara, tnon successerat, that which he tried did not take place, Bulling▪ repulsam est passus, he suffered a repulse, Calvin. Pelican. impetrari non potuit, that could not be obtained which he desired. But this opinion is contrary to the text: which saith that God gave Daniel favor with the chief of the Eunuchs: but if he had altogether taken the repulse, he had found small favor.

2. Wherefore herein consisted the favor, which Daniel found. 1. in that he was not angry with Daniel for making such a bold request contrary to the kings commandment. 2. neither doth he urge him to keep the kings order for his diet. 3. or complaineth of him to the king. 4. but chiefly herein his favor appeared, in that he pretending his fear and danger, did insinuate, that he could be contented, so that it might be done without any such danger or inconvenience, Polan. And he secretly might also give him an hint to go unto the under officer the butler, that attended upon them, who was the fitter man to wink at it, if question afterward should have been made: for it is like the butler afterward being found so willing, that he knew the chief officers pleasure therein. Iun. Polan.

Quest. 33. Of Daniel's request to the butler or officer.

Ver. 12. Prooue thy servants I pray thee ten days, &c. 1. Daniel first propoundeth his request simply, that he would prove them 10. days with course bread of pulse, and water to drink: he setteth only ten days, neither too long a time, vt de facili posset impetrare, that he might more easily obtain his request: nor too short, that the truth might appear, and some experience be had in that time, Lyranus. for in the space of 10. days it might well be seen, whe •• their bodies macrescerent, vel pinguescerent, did wax leaner or fatter. Pelican.

2. Then follow the conditions of his request: the one is expressed, that unless their countenances should be in as good liking as theirs, which fed of the kings allowance, they would ask no further favor: so he doth wisely antevertere, prevent what might be objected: for Daniel knew he would insist upon the same reasons which the chief of the Eunuchs had done, v. 10. that their faces should be worse liking, and so he might be blamed. Calvin.

3. An other condition or supposal though not expressed, yet may be supplied, is that they did not purpose to make unto themselves any benefit of the kings meat, but they were contented it should be to his use that attended upon them, as may be gathered, v. 16. where it is said, that the butler took from them the allowance of the kings meat and wine, and gave them pulse. Iun.

Quest. 34. Whether Daniel tempted not God, in setting a certain number of days.

1. In the Apocryphal history of Judith, c. 8. 12. Judith chargeth Ozias and the other governors of Bethulia, that they had tempted God in prescribing the space of five days, within which time, if they had no help, they would give up the city: But here Daniel doth not of any temerity, or presumption set this prefixed time, but fidei magnitudine, by the greatness of his faith, as Jerome saith: Pere. so also Hugo Cardinal. he was certior factus à Domino de foelici euentu, he was assured by the Lord of happy success. Calvin. And Daniel herein and his companions, did not only depend upon God's general promises out of his word, but they had some particular revelation and direction for this thing. Iun.

2. But it will be objected, if Daniel had such assurance, why then speaketh he so doubtfully, as referring the whole matter to his discretion: saying, ver. 13. as thou seest deal with thy servants: to this it may be answered, Daniel allocutus est altorem humanitus, vt tamen de re diuinitus confirmatus esset, Daniel indeed speaketh unto his keeper after an usual manner, yet was in himself confirmed from God in this matter. Iun.

3. Daniel then having both the word of God to abstain from such meats as were forbidden, Deut. 14. and God's general promise beside, that God would bless their bread and water, if they would serve him, Exod. 23. 15. and further ex arcana renelatione certior factus, being assured by secret revelation, of the event, was moved to propound this term of 10. days. Polan.

Quest. 35. verse. 12. Why Daniel did choose rather to eat of pulse, then of the kings meat.

1. Daniel here preferred not this course diet before the kings delicates upon any superstitious opinion, as thinking thereby to merit with God, and to be more acceptable for the meats sake; for according to the Apostles rule, both he which eateth, eateth to the Lord, and giveth God thanks, and he that eateth not, eateth not to the Lord, and giveth God thanks, Rom. 14. 6. every creature is good, and we may thankfully take whatsoever the Lord hath prepared for our food. Polan.

2. But this may be one reason why Daniel made choice of pulse and seeds, herbs and such like, because such things were not at any time forbidden unto the Jews, before or under the law, neque de talibus fiebat oblatio idolis, neither of such things did they use to offer unto idols: And therefore the Apostle saith, Rom. 14. 2. that he which was weak (not in body but in mind) did eat herbs, least he should chance to eat things offered to idols. Lyranus.

3. Daniel might have eaten course bread, and other viler meats, but he contented himself with seeds and herbs, as the word hazeroghim signifieth, vt scilicet assidne gemeret, &c. that he might daily mourn, and remember his afflicted country, which he might easily have forgotten, if he had given himself to a delicate life. And thefore Moses also did forsake Pharaohs Court, and chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God.

Quest. 36. verse. 15. Whether the beauty and strength in Daniel and the rest feeding of this course food, was a natural work.

1. There are diverse reasons in nature, why they which live of simp •• • nd course food, should be better liking, then many which live in fullness and plenty: 〈◊〉 the variety of meat causeth variety of diseases, the more simple the food then is, the more agreeable it is to nature, Osiander. 2. continual use and custom to keep a slender diet, doth make it familiar and most wholesome to the body. 3. the strong constitution, temperature, and complexion of the body doth cause unto some better nourishment and strength, then a better diet doth unto those, that are of a bad constitution. 4. the cheerfulness of the mind, and inward contentedness helpeth much, even in a thin diet to strengthen nature: Pere. As the wise man saith, that a morsel of 〈◊〉 with peace, is better then a house full of sacrifices with strife, that is, with disquietness of mind.

2. But this great increase of beauty and favor in Daniel and his companions, proceeded rather of the singular and extraordinary blessing of God, then of their thin diet: for they only did not exceed those in the goodness of their complexion, which fed of the kings meats, but their countenance in themselves appeared faiter and better liking, then at any time before. Pere.

Quest. 37. ver. 17. Of the knowledge and understanding which God gave unto Daniel and the other three, whether it were natural or supernatural.

1. This knowledge which was given unto them all was partly ordinary in all human learning, which was common unto them all: the Vulgar latin interpreter readeth, in omni libro, in every book: but the word sepher is as well taken for the literature, the knowledge of arts and sciences, as for a book, Polan. partly this knowledge was extraordinary in the understanding of visions and dreams, which was peculiarly above the rest given unto Daniel. Iun.

2. The knowledge of arts is obtained three ways: either naturally as Aristotle and Plato attained unto their learning: or supernaturally as Adam and Solomon had their wisdom and knowledge infused of God: or partly by natural means, partly by supernatural, as here Daniel and the other three used instructors, and other helps to come unto their knowledge, but yet it was specially the gift of God.

3. For, whereas they attained unto a greater perfection, then any other, and that in so short a time, in the space of 3. years, it is evident, that they had more by God's special gift, then by any human industry. Pere.

Quest. 38. Whether Daniel and the rest learned the curious arts of the Chaldeans.

1. Pererius opinion is that whereas the Chaldeans had many vain and curious arts, as Magicke, Coniecturing, Inchanting, Iudiciarie Astrology, and such like, that they might learn and know these speculative, by way of speculation, to confute them and avoid them, not to practice or exercise them: as God himself and the Angels have the knowledge of such things: and the abuse in such knowledge, is either in the too great desire and affection, which they have unto them which learn them, or in the evil ende, which they propound, seeking their own gain, or others commodity therein.

Contra. 1. But that the very study and knowledge of such damnable arts is unlawful, by this it appeareth, because they which were converted to the faith in Ephesus burned their books of such curious arts: which they needed not to have done, if the having and reading of such books had been lawful, Act. 29. 2. God knoweth all things, and is perfectly good, and cannot be tempted of evil: but man is easily seduced and perverted: and Angels have not their knowledge by labor and learning as man hath, but by the light of their nature: therefore those examples are not alike: 3. even profitable human arts may be by these means abused: but unprofitable in their best use are unlawful.

2. Osiander thinketh, that their Chaldean instructors would have obtruded upon them their superstitious precepts among other instruction: but as they abstained from the kings meat, not to be defiled thereby; so it is like they did take heed of such corrupt and unlawful arts.

3. But it is more like, that as the kings meat was withdrawn from them, so by God's providence they were preserved from all contagion of their superstitious inventions, only being trained up •• their commendable learning, as Muses was in the Egyptian sciences. Calvin.

Quest. 39. Whether it be lawful to use the arts and inventions of the heathen.

1. The profitable inventions of the heathen, Christians may safely and lawfully use: for like as in a tree, there are leaves for ornament, as well as fruit for necessary use: so the soul must be adorned as with the sound precepts of Theology instead of fruit, so it must be garnished with the knowledge of the arts, as the ornaments and leaves. But when any thing erroneous doth offer it self in their writings, 〈◊〉 must either shun it altogether, or cautelously read it; as we gather roses in a garden, but take heed of the pricks and thorns. Deut, 21. when any of Israel took a maid in battle, whom he liked, he was first to pair her nails, and shave her head, before he married her • so we must cut away in human secular learning such things as are noxious and superstuous, and then captive it to the use of Christian religion. Pintus.

2. The books then and writing of the Heathen are fit and convenient to be read: first in regard of some truth, which is set forth in them: 1. for everyone naturally desireth to understand and apprehend the truth. 2. yea and the spirit of God is the author of all truth: so that the light which shined in the darkness and blindness of the Heathen proceeded from the spirit of God, the true illuminator of the world. 3. their writings contain many profitable inventions and precepts for man's life, as in the handling of moral virtues, of politic precepts, of mechanical arts.

Secondly, even the knowledge of their errors is profitable. 1. that we may know them to confute and abhor them. 2. that knowing their errors we may the better avoid them our selves, and win others from them. 3. to show the excellency of the Scriptures, wherein is no error or impurity, before all other human learning and writing: for there are five things requisite and necessary for everyone to know: 1. that the soul is immortal: for he will never be persuaded to virtue, that thinketh there is nothing to be feared, or hoped for after this life. 2. what is the chief ende and happiness, which every man is to propound unto himself. 3. which is the way whereby that ende may be achieved. 4. whether God not only in general, but in particular watch over us by his providence. 5. how this watchful God, and most vigilant heavenly father is to be served and honored. All which things so necessary to be known, are either not at all handled by the Philosophers, or very absurdly, deceitfully, erroneously. Perer.

3. But it will be thus objected. 1. seeing the Scriptures are alone sufficient to salvation, what need we foreign helps? 2. S. Paul Coloss. 28. seemeth to condemn Philosophy, beware least any man spoil you through Philosophy. 3. Julian the Apostate, thus objected, Cur abhorrent Christiani a sacrisiciis Gentilium, cum non abhorrent à libris Gentilium, why do Christians abhor the sacrifices of the Gentiles, seeing they do not abhor, not abstain from reading of their books?

Answer. 1. The Scriptures are indeed alone sufficient for such things as belong unto salvation, neither to any such ende do Christians crave help from the heathen; but they use them only as supplies concerning things belonging unto this life: therefore as kings and princes use the service of artificers, husbandmen, cookes, for inferior services, so it is not unbeseeming a Christian to make use of the Gentiles inventions.

2. S. Paul simply condemneth not philosophy, as that which consisteth of physical, moral, or political principles and observations: but he speaketh against that erroneous part of Philosophy and vain speculation, as in the adoration of Angels, and such like: and thus the Apostle expoundeth himself, in the next words, let no man spoil you through Philosophy, and vain deceit.

3. There is not the like reason between the writings and sacrifices of the Heathen, for their books may be read without hurt, one may choose the good and leave the evil; but the sacrifices are altogether evil and idolatrous: yet the things in themselves, which they offer in sacrifice, the abuse set apart, Christians abhor not, as wine, bread, flesh; for they are the good creatures of God: but the abuse of them to most filthy idolatry, they only abhor and condemn. Per.

4. Notwithstanding therefore whatsoever is, or can be objected, there is a lawful and commendable use of human arts and learning among Christians: like as Moses made use of the Egyptian, and Daniel of the Chaldean learning, and S. Paul in his writings of the sayings of the heathen poets: So the Christian Fathers armed themselves against the heathen with their own weapons: as Cyrillus Alexand. against Julian, Origen against Celsus, Methodius against Porphyry, Hieronimus against Jovinian, the Apologies of Quadratus and Aristides Christian philosophers which were presented to Adrianus the Emperor in the behalf of the Christians, are fraught with great store of heathen testimonies: so also are the writings of Justinus, Tertullian, Eusebius, Lanctantius, Augustine, with others.

Quest. 40. Of the dreams and visions which Daniel had understanding of.

1. The visions were such, as were shown unto men waking: which were of two sorts, either, expressae signis corporalibus, such as were indeed expressed and represented by corporal signs, as the hand which appeared unto Balthazar upon the wall, and left a material writing behind it; or else per similitudines imaginarias effectae, such as were exhibited by certain imaginary similitudes: such were diverse visions, which Jeremiah and Ezekiel had, and the visions shown to Daniel in this book: by dreams are understood such visions, as were represented unto men in their sleep. Per.

2. But this must be understood neither of natural and human dreams, the interpretation whereof belongeth unto Physicians and Philosophers, but of divine dreams.

3. And hereby also is signified that Daniel excelled in all kind of propho •• e, which is understood by these two, visions and dreams, Numb. 12. 6. Iun. so that Daniel only of these four was endued with the gift of prophesying. Genevens.

Quest. 41. Whether this gift of understanding visions and dreams were in Daniel as an habit permanent and remaining always in him.

Lyranus seemeth to be of opinion, that this gift was habitual in Daniel, and that it was always present with him: 1. because as God gave the other knowledge, which was an habit in them, so he gave Daniel this gift of understanding dreams: 2. there are but three things in the soul, potentiae, passions, habitus, powers and faculties, as to will, to understand, passions and affections, and habits as of virtues, arts, and such like: But this gift to expound dreams, was no faculty of the mind, for then it should have been general, and much less was it any passion, which are most seen in the sensitive part; therefore it was an habit.

Contra. 1. Both knowledge was given to the rest, and this special understanding to Daniel by the Lord the only fountain and author of every good gift, but they were not given in the same manner. 2. naturally in the soul these three things are to be found, but this gift in Daniel was supernatural, and therefore is not comprehended in that division of the natural faculties and parts of the soul.

2. Wherefore I subscribe rather unto Pererius, donum illud non fuisse in Daniele tanquam habitum permanentem, &c. that this gift in Daniel was not as a permanent habit always remanying with him, as may be thus shown. 1. An habit which is always permanent, one may use when he will, where, and how he will; but so could not Daniel use this prophetical gift of interpreting dreams: for when the first dream of the king was propounded to him, he obtained the interpretation thereof by his and his brethren's earnest prayers, and he desired the king to give him leisure, c. 2. 16. likewise when he heard the other dream, he held his peace by the space of an hour, c. 4. 16. in his heart beseeching the Lord to cause him to understand it.

2. As it was in other Prophetical gifts, so in this: but the Prophets did not always prophesy, but at such time as the spirit of God came upon them, and did illuminate them: as the prophet Elisha caused a Musician to play before him, and then he prophesied: Nathan when first David consulted with him to build God an house, had then no prophesy or revelation till the night following, 2. Sam. 7. the prophetical illumination then is like unto the light, not which is always inherent in the body of the Sun, but which at times shineth in the air, and sometime is overcast: so the prophets could not prophesy when they would themselves, but as they received present illumination, and direction of the spirit.

3. Now yet they were still called Prophets, even then, when they prophesied not, both because of their vocation and calling, they were threunto appointed by God, as Jeremiah, was sanctified in his mothers womb to be a Prophet, or because they did often prophesy, ex frequentia prophetandi, they had the name of Prophets. Pere.

Quest. 42. Of the diverse kinds of dreams, and whether there be any divine dreams.

Dreams usually are divided into these three kinds, natural, human, which are called animalia, and supernatural. 1. Natural are such, which are chiefly raised by natural objects, as when men dream of meat and drink being hungry or thirsty: of such dreams speaketh the Prophet Isaiah, 29. 80. And these dreams are incident to brute beasts. 2. Human dreams are such as are raised by the multitude of the business, wherein men are occupied in the day: such dreams the Preacher describeth, Eccles. 5. 2. A dream cometh by the multitude of business. 3. Supernatural dreams are of two kinds, either divine, which are sent of God for some spiritual instruction and admonition, or the signification of some things to come: such were the dreams of Pharaoh, Gen. 41. and Nebuchadnezzar in this book, c. 2. 4. and c. 4. There are also Diabolical dreams, which are wrought by Satan to se •• ce and deceive: for if he can by inward suggestions delude and deceive the mind, he can also as well by vain dreams and fancies insinuate himself to deceive: such were the vain visions and illusions which he deceived the priests of Baa • by, when he went as a lying spirit in the months of them all, to persuade Ahab to go and fall at Ramath in Gilead. Pappus.

Quest. 43. Whether there be any divine dreams.

1. Aristotle in his book 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of divination by dreams, denieth that there are any divine dreams at all: he confesseth that there are somnia daemonica, dreams demonicall or spiritual: but there also he ascribeth unto nature: his reasons against divine dreams are these,

1. If there were any such divine dreams, they should be sent and shown to the best and most wise and virtuous men, and not to men of every sort, as they are.

2. If God would teach men, he would rather do it by day then by night.

3. Where God instructeth men, he doth it plainly and manifestly, not obscurely and doubtfully, as is the revelation by dreams.

4. Bruit beasts have their dreams, therefore they are not divine.

2. Contra. These arguments are soon answered. 1. Such dreams are for the most part shown unto good men, but not always, least they should think that by their worthiness they had deserved that grace: and when it pleaseth God to manifest himself by such dreams to other then to the righteous, it is for their conversion, or for the common good of his Church: such were the dreams which Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar had.

2. To appoint the Lord to instruct men by day, rather then by night, is to prescribe laws unto him: he best knoweth the ways and means, when and how to speak unto men's souls.

3. Though dreams are in themselves obscure, yet God giveth also the interpretation of them, as of Pharaohs dreams by Joseph, of Nabuchadnezars by Daniel: he leaveth not men in doubtfulness and suspense, as Apollos ambiguous oracles did.

4. Beasts have in deed some kind of dreams, namely such as are natural and caused in the fantasy and sensitive part: but this kind of divine and supernatural dreams they have not: such as was Pharaohs and Nabuchadnezzars dreams, and Joseph's, Matth. 1. Papp.

Quest. 44. Whether there be any truth or certainty in dreams.

1. As Cicero said, that there is nothing so absurd, which is not found to have been said by some of the Philosophers; so some of them have maintained, that all dreams were true, and had their certain signification: of which opinion was Protagoras, with other Stoics, whose general opinion was, that the truth consisted not in the nature of things, but only in the opinion of men: and that some dreams were held to be vain and frivolous, the reason they said to be this, because they are difficult, ambiguous, and obscure, and so are not well perceived and understood.

Contra. But this opinion is confuted by the Scriptures, beside daily experience, which showeth that men have many thousand dreams, which never take effect: and if one of a thousand agree with the event, it is accidental, and by some casual occurrent, and not otherwise: The Preacher saith, in the multitude of dreams and vanities are many words, Eccl. 5. 6. he joineth dreams and vanities together. The Prophet giveth instance of such vain dreams, in an hungry man that dreameth, and behold (in his imagination) he eateth, and when he awaketh, his soul is empty, Isa. 29. 8. what is this else but a vain dream? Such are the dreams of drunken, frantic, covetous men, who dream of such vain things as their mind is occupied in: such dreams are like the apparitions in the clouds, many forms and fashions are there seen, which are soon dispersed of the wind, and come to nothing.

2. Some held the contrary opinion, that no credit was to be given to any dreams at all, as Xenophanes, Caliphonius, and the Epicures, for seeing all dreams were of the same nature, and some were vain and frivolous, all must be held to be so. Again say they, if there were any certainty in dreams, they must proceed from some certain causes: either God, or nature: but it is not like Deum obire lectos dormientium, that God should compass men's beds when they are asleep, and cast dreams into their minds: and nature is the cause of order, but in dreams there is confusion and disorder.

Contr. 1. All dreams are not of one nature, therefore it followeth not, if some be vain, that all are. 2. God's providence watcheth over men both waking and sleeping: he passeth not from place to place, but being in heaven beholdeth all things, and doth whatsoever it pleaseth him in heaven and in earth. 3. Nature worketh certently and orderly, when it worketh by certain and settled causes: variable and turbulent causes must bring forth the like effects: but true and divine dreams are most certain, constant, and orderly, as proceeding from him, who is the author of order.

3. Wherefore the resolution here is, that as there are some vain and phant • sticall dreams procured by men's distempered humors in their bodies, or their disordered and unsettled imaginations in their mind; so there are divine, profound, and holy dreams: as were the dreams and visions by night of Abraham, Abimelech, Jacob, Laban, Joseph, Pharaoh, Solomon, Nebuchadnezzar, Paul, Act. 16. 9. which holy dreams and visions had their evident signification, and sure effect. Perer.

Quest. 45. Of the causes of true dreams.

1. Plato his opinion was, that dreams were procured by spirits, who were the mediators that went between God and man: he thought that God himself did not meddle with human affairs, but by the mediation and intercourse of such spirits, and that by them therefore all dreams were procured. But the contrary is evident, that some dreams are wrought only by natural means, as by the multitude of business in the day, Eccles. 5. 2. and where there is any spiritual cause, that the Lord himself sometime is the agent, as it is said, God came to Abimelech in a dream, Gen. 20. 3.

2. Aristotle on the contrary held, that all true dreams proceeded of natural causes: but that is untrue also: for the prediction and foretelling of things to come, which often is shown in dreams, cannot by any natural means be searched out.

3. The Stoics made three causes of dreams, God, fatal necessity, and the liberty of the soul, which in sleep is free from all other perturbations. Contr. The first cause we allow, but not of all dreams: but fatal necessity there is none, for then God who is most free, should himself be tied to such fatal necessity, and connection of causes: and if the freeness of the soul in sleep caused such dreams, then one should as well have such dreams as an other: for in the time of rest every man's soul is free from the business of the day.

4. Porphyrius thinketh, that the notions which are naturally in the soul, which it brought with it into the body, are the causes of dreams: which notions show more freely in the night, then in the day. But Christian religion acknowledgeth no such former notions, or preexistence of the soul before it came to the body: for the Lord formeth the spirit of man within him, Zachar. 12. 1.

5. Synesius maketh the fantastical part of the soul to be the cause of dreams: that as the representations of diverse things are raised in the fantasy, so the soul thereupon conceiveth dreams: and therefore Pythogoras going to bed used to fall asleep with the sound of the harp, and so prepared himself to have quiet and pleasant dreams. But yet the cause appeareth not, why such imaginations and representations should be raised up in the fantasy: the fantasy affecteth the soul, but how cometh the fantasy to be so affected first?

6. Hippocrates maketh two causes of dreams, the divine and supernatural instinct, which is infused of God, and the natural disposition of the body: for as the humors are affected; if there be emptiness or fullness, or any distemperature in the body, the dreams are answerable. But as these are the true causes of divine, and natural dreams: so of other dreams other causes must be found out. Hippocrates then toucheth the true causes of some, but not of all dreams.

7. Gregory maketh six causes of dreams: 1. the fullness or emptiness of the body: 2. the diu • ne cogitations: 3. the illusion of Satan: 4. the illusion of Satan and man's thoughts together: 5. the divine revelation: 6. the divine instinct and human thoughts concurring together. But as Hippocrates alleged not all the causes; so Gregory maketh more causes then he needeth, as now shall be shown.

8. As then there are four sort of dreams, as hath been before declared, Quest. 42. so there are four causes of the same.

1. Natural dreams proceed of natural causes; as cholerike men dream of fire, phlegmatike of water, melancholic men of darkness and blackness: and any distempered humor or affected part of the body often raiseth a dream agreeable, as Galen reporteth of one that dreamed that one of his legs was made of stone, and presently after he was taken with a palsy and nummenesse in that leg. And Pliny writeth how P. Cornelius Ruffinus in his sleep thought that he suddenly became blind, and when he awaked, he was blind in deed.

2. Of human dreams, human affairs are the cause, which leave a strong impression in the mind, whereby such like dreams are engendered in the night, as the thoughts were in the day: so mariners dream of the sea and fish, husbandmen of the fields, shepherds of their sheep: of this kind was Hannibals dream, who having now swallowed Italy in his desire, as he transported his armies from Spain thither he had a dream, wherein he saw a most hideous serpent destroying and devouring all where he went: this dream was answerable to his desire, and seemed to issue forth of his former thoughts.

3. The third sort of dreams is Diabolical, which Satan casteth into men's minds to seduce and deceive them, and of these the Devil is the author, who is the third general cause of dreams: for if some dreams were not caused by Satan, why should the Lord condemn such dreamers of dreams, which should go about to seduce and deceive the people, Deut. 13. 1. Of this kind may be thought Alexanders dream to have been, who (coming to Ptolemy the next king of Egypt after being sore wounded by a venomous dart, and of that wound like to die) fell asleep by him, and in his sleep saw a serpent bringing a root in his mouth, showing the place where it grew, whereby Ptolemy was healed.

These Sathanicall dreams are of two sorts: for some of them do prognosticate of things to come, which Satan can foretell two ways, either by natural causes he can foresee the events, or he doth foretell such things as he knoweth he is permitted of God to do: the other kind of Diabolical dreams tendeth to the inciting and stirring up of men to sin, as murder, lust, or other ungodliness.

4. The fourth cause of dreams, is God himself, who by dreams and visions in the night diversely instructeth men, and teuealeth unto them things to come. ex Perer.

Quest. 46. How Diabolical, and Divine dreams may be discerned.

1. Diabolical dreams are discerned, 1. by the matter, if they be unchaste and unclean dreams provoking unto any vice or impiety: 2. by the ende, if one shall have a revelation in a dream of things to come, whereof there is no profitable ende, but only the feeding of men's curiosity, or the maintaining of superstition. 3. by men's persons also a conjecture may be made; as if unclean and corrupt dreams be offered unto godly and righteous men: therein they are to suspect the craft of Satan, that he goeth about to assault and tempt them.

2. Concerning Divine dreams they are two ways principally discerned: by the excellency of the matter, as when things to come are revealed, the knowledge whereof only belongeth unto God, or the Lord discovereth man's secret thoughts, which he only can descry: the other way is by the illumination of the mind, when the Lord doth so evidently reveal himself unto the soul and mind of man, that he nothing doubteth of the author of those dreams, but knoweth assuredly, that the Lord spake unto him in a dream: such were the dreams which Abraham, Joseph, Daniel, Paul had: for like as naturally the soul hath light to discern of the first notions and principles; so the mind in this case is illuminate to acknowledge the divine instinct.

3. In diverse manners and to diverse purposes doth the Lord speak unto men in dreams: 1. sometime he terrifieth and feareth them, as he stayed Abimelek and Laban by fearful dreams, that they should do no hurt, the one to Abraham, the other to Jacob. 2. sometime the Lord encourageth men by dreams to enterprise some great work, as he did Gideon, Judge. 7. 9. 3. he admonisheth some by dreams, what they should do, as Paul, Act. 16. and Joseph, Matth. 1. 4. God instructeth by dreams concerning things to come, as he did in Pharaohs and Nabuchadnezzers dreams.

4. And as the ends, and purposes are diverse, why the Lord sendeth dreams; so also the kinds are diverse. 1. some divine dreams are plain and manifest, and need no interpretation; such were the dreams of Joseph of the stars, and the sheaves. 2. sometime God speaketh with them himself in their dreams, as with Abimelech, Gen. 20. sometime an Angel appeareth, as to Joseph, Matth. 1. sometime a man, as to Paul, Act. 16. 3. sometime God sendeth dreams not expected or desired, such were Pharaohs and Nebuchadnezzers dreams: sometime they are first craved and desired, as God revealed unto Daniel in a vision by night the interpretation of Nebuchadnezzers dream, which he himself had before begged and entreated by prayer. 4. and some divine dreams are answerable to the precedent thoughts of the heart, as Joseph's dream was to direct him what he should do with Marie, whom he was careful of before, and much troubled in himself about that matter.

Quest. 47. Why it pleased God by visions and dreams to instruct his servants.

1. One reason Hippocrates yieldeth, because in the day time men are distracted with many affairs and much business, so that the mind is not so free and apt in the day, to receive such spiritual direction, as in the night.

2. Aristotle saith, that dreams come in the night, propter noctis silentium, & sense • um exteriorum vacationem, because of the silence of the night, and the rest and intermission of the senses: and the soul then being not hindered, neither by the occurrent business of the day, nor by the employment of the senses, is more ready and free to attend upon God.

3. Beside the night is secret, and so the Lord may then secretly insinuate his will without any disturbance of the party, or observation of others, &c.

4. By this it appeareth also quanto sit Deus potentior ad hominem docendum, &c. how much more powerful God is to teach and instruct man, then any other can: for one man only can instruct another waking, and giving attention; but God can instruct men in their sleep. Averroes hath this opinion, he denieth not but that a man in sleep may have a prophetical instinct, yet he thinketh that other arts and sciences cannot be inspired by that means, which are only attained unto by precept and experience, and by the help of the outward sense. But herein he showeth his ignorance, not knowing the Scriptures, and the power of God: for though ordinarily arts are learned by such means, yet God hath infused knowledge without any such • elps: as into Noah, Bezaleel and Aholiab the builders of the Sanctuary, Solomon, the Apostles.

5. Add further, that seeing sleep is an image and representation of death, by this means we are taught, that the soul liveth after the death of the body, and hath more perfect knowledge and illumination, then while it was in the body: as more visions and revelations have been shown unto men in their dreams, their body being asleep, then when they were awake.

Quest. 48. Why visions and dreams are often shown unto simple and unlearned men.

1. By this one reason Aristotle, and after him Cicero would eleuate the authority of divine dreams: for thus they object, that if there were any such divine dreams given unto men by God, ea non obscuris & indoctis hominibus, sed viris sapientia praeditis dari par erat, it was meet they should be given not unto obscure and unlearned men, but unto such as were wise, &c.

2. To this objection we thus answer: 1. that such Sathanicall dreams as were used among the heathen, were inspired into the simple, ignorant, and superstitious, that were apt to believe anything, that they might not perceive the fraud of those spirits, whose oracles were vain, and void of truth, doubtful and ambiguous. 2. but divine dreams in deed were for the most part revealed unto wise and prudent men, as unto Abraham, Joseph, Solomon, Daniel. 3. sometime also such dreams were sent upon mean men of no great learning or wisdom in the world, but they were such as were devout and religious: which their holiness and piety did make them more capable of heavenly visions and revelations; whereas the wisdom and greatness of this world doth puff man up, and so is an impediment and obstacle to such mystical instructions. 4. God also hath sometime given such dreams unto wicked and impious men, as to Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar: but then such dreams were shown them, not for their own benefit, but for the good of God's Church: and beside though they had dreams, yet they had not the interpretation of them, but therein used the help of God's servants, as Pharaoh of Joseph, Nebuchadnezzar of Daniel.

Quest. 49. Why dreams are not always clear and manifest, but darkly and obscurely propounded.

1. The reason why diabolical dreams, such as were usual among the Heathen, were obscure and doubtful, may readily be rendered; because the spirits which deceived them, had no certain knowledge of things to come, and therefore the dreams and oracles which they gave, were so doubtfully and obscurely propounded, that howsoever the event was, it might seem answerable to the dream: and if they failed in their hope, the interpretation should be laid not upon the revelation which was given, but upon themselves, that could not rightly understand it.

2. But Divine dreams either were evident, plain, and manifest, as the dreams which Abimelech, Solomon, and Joseph had, Matth. 1. or if they were obscure, it was for one of these causes: 1. that they might seek unto the servants of God for the interpretation of their dreams, as Pharaoh did unto Joseph. 2. that the servants of God themselves might by earnest prayer beg of God the understanding and interpretation of such dreams. 3. the manifold mysteries shut up in such short visions made them the more obscure: as c. 2. the vision of the image comprehended more, then could be contained in a long process of speech: such visions the more compendious, so much the more obscure were they. 4. the Lord thought good obscurely and darkly to reveal his will in dreams, that the truth might lie as hid for a time, till such time as they were fulfilled and accomplished: as Joseph's dreams of the bending of the sheaves and bowing of the stars, were not perfectly understood, till he was advanced in Egypt.

Quest. 50. What dreams may be observed, and by whom.

1. To observe all dreams is frivolous, and superstitious: 1. for this were much like to the ridiculous customs of the Heathen, that took upon them to conjecture by the flying of birds, and looking into the entralls of beasts. 2. beside it savoreth of the Stoicall fatal necessity, to think that all things necessarily should follow, as men surmise by their dreams. 3. And if star-gazing be condemned of the wise, and curious Astrological observations, much more is such coniecturing by dreams to be contemned, which hath more uncertainty in it then the other.

2. Some dreams notwithstanding (though not all) may be marked: but yet Iamblicus rule is frivolous; that such dreams as happen either in the beginning of sleep, before the mind be overcast with the fuming vapors of meats and drink, or in the ende when now all such vapors are concocted and digested by sleep, are worthy of observation: but those which come in the middes of sleep, the body then being drenched as it were, and fuming with such vapors, are not at all to be regarded: for this were to limit God, to appoint him his times and seasons, when he should inspire men.

3. There are then natural dreams, which may be observed for a man's health: by such Physicians do judge of the distemper of the humors, and of inclination to diseases: there are also other human dreams, wherein men's infirmities do show themselves, and so thereby perceiving what vices they are subject unto, they may be admonished to amend them: such dreams may lawfully be observed, which tend either to the health of the body, or the soul. But divine dreams are most worthy of observation of all other, whereby the Lord doth often signify his will concerning things to come: which kind of dreams cannot be interpreted but by the same spirit whereby they are sent: as Daniel saith to the King, The secret which the king hath demanded, can neither the wise, the Astrologians, the Enchanters, and Soothsayers declare unto the King: but there is a God in heaven which revealeth secrets. c. 2. 27, 28.

Quest. 51. Whether in divine dreams there is a free use of reason and the will, and the same acceptable to God.

1. Pererius thinketh that in such dreams and visions, there is soluta vis rationis, but not perfectus liberi arbitrij vsus, a free use of reason, but not the perfect use of freewill, for to that there is required the liberty of all the senses, and powers, that then homo should be Dominus sui, Lord of himself.

2. Contra. 1. In that sense, man hath no perfect use of free will neither waking nor sleeping, to be as Lord of himself▪ to evil man's will is free; but he cannot bonum agere, nisi à bono agatur, do any good, unless he be drawn thereunto of God, which is good: 2. but the use of the reason and will is otherwise as free in such visions and dreams, as when men are waking: for the soul and understanding sleepeth not, neither is bound in sleep, but the sense only: And this notably appeareth by that heavenly dream and vision, which Solomon had, 1. King 3. 5. wherein both God first bid Solomon ask what he would, and he asked wisdom; and God approved this his petition, and actually gave him his request: and all this was done while he was asleep: Solomon could not have made such request of God, nor the Lord accepted it, if it had been a fancy and imagination only in his sleep: But to this diverse answers are made;

1. Pererius saith, that Solomon had before made that petition unto God for wisdom, which his petition the Lord approved in his sleep, not because it was made then, but before; But no such thing in extant in the text, of any former petition: the first motion and occasion was given by the Lord himself, who said to Solomon in his dream, Ask what I shall give thee, and thereupon he made his request for wisdom.

2. Tostatus hath another answer, which Pererius rather approveth then the former, that whatsoever is said there to be done, non revera, sed per imaginariam tantum dormientis visionem esse factum, was not verily done, but in the imaginary vision of Solomon being asleep: But this cannot be admitted, imaginary petitions are not accepted of God, and they only have imaginary effects: but here Solomon was verily endued with wisdom even in his sleep: for presently after he waked, he perceived that it was a divine dream, and felt himself increased with that excellent gift of wisdom, which immediately after he put in execution.

3. Therefore it may safely be held, that this was more then a simple dream: for dreams are but representations of things past, present, or to come, but here there was an actual collation of that, which was shown in the dream: It was therefore both a dream, and a vision concurring with the dream; a dream it was, because it fell out in sleep, but in this dream Solomon's soul had free conference with God, in which respect it may be said to be a vision.

Quest. 52. verse. 21. How Daniel is said to have been unto the 1. year of king Cyrus.

1. Some think that this is to be understood of the time of Daniel's prophesying: Theoderet: so also Calvin: among the Assyrians, and Chaldeans, agnitus erat pro summo propheta, he was taken for a great prophet: but this cannot be the meaning: for he had some prophetical visions in the 3. year of Cyrus, cap. 10. 1.

2. Much less can it be referred to the time of Daniel's life, as Pelican seemeth to think: for he lived to the 3. year of Cyrus, how long after it is uncertain: upon which reason Jerome resolveth, non vitae illius tempus accipiendum est, the time of his life cannot be here taken.

3. Osiander thinketh that hereby is signified, that • e lived and continued so long, that he saw to his great joy the return of his people out of captivity, which was in the 1. year of Cyrus: This indeed is most true, but in this place, mention being made of Daniel's standing before the king, that is, his ministering in the Court, there is more understood then simply his continuing and remaining until that time.

4. Vatablus giveth this exposition, that so long he was minister in aula regis, a principal officer in the kings Court: but so was he afterward also a chief governor under Cyrus. c. 6.

5. Lyranus thinketh that hereby is signified the honor and glory of Daniel in regno Chaldaeorum & Persarum, in the kingdom both of the Chaldeans and Persians: but the words unto the first year of Cyrus, are exclusiuely rather then inclusively to be taken: as though that time determined the space here set.

6. Therefore the purpose and intent of these words is, not to show the term when Daniel's prophesy or state in honor ended, but to signify that during all the time of the Chaldean Monarchy he continued in great honor and reputation in Babylon and Chaldea: postea à Dario in Medos translatus est, afterward he was translated by Darius unto the Medes; Jerome, Iun. Polan. and among them also he was in great honor: But from the time that he first stood before Nebuchadnezzar and served him, he was in estimation all that kings days, and in the reign of Evilmerodach his son, and of Balthazars his son: though it may seem that he was not altogether so much set by in Balthazar time, as before. Osiander.

1. Doct. verse. 2. The translating of kingdoms, subduing of cities, is ordered and disposed by God.

Vers. 2. And the Lord gave Ieh • iakim, &c. into his hand, &c. which showeth, that all things are ruled and governed by God's providence: that kings and princes, states, cities, and common wealths are in God's hand, to alter and turn them, as it seemeth best to himself: whereof we may make a double use: for as it is to our comfort, that we are in God's hand, and under his protection: so in that he delivereth the impenitent into the hands of Tyrants, by them to be corrected and chastised, it ought to terrify and move unto repentance. Bulling.

2. Doct. verse. 8. That men's hearts are in the hand of God.

Ver. 8. He required the chief of the Eunuchs, that he might not defile himself: Hence it is evident, seeing this chief officer of the kings took no exception to this free speech of Daniel, charging the kings table and meats with pollution▪ that God ruled and inclined his heart, to favor Daniel, and to take all in good part, which he said: Some would have said to Daniel, what? doest thou charge the kings Court and religion with impurity and uncleanness? are ye Hebrews only the pure men, and is there no religion good beside yours? This then was God's work thus to qualify the heart and affection of Ashpenah toward Daniel: so it is here found to be true, as the wiseman saith: The kings heart is in the hand of God, &c. he turneth it whithersoever it pleaseth him, Prov. 21. 1.

3. Doct. verse. 12. Of th • commendation of fasting.

Vers. 12. Let them give us pulse to eat: By this example of Daniel's abstinence, who preferred a thin and course diet before the kings full and delicate dishes, we see how excellent a thing frugality and temperance is: Even among the heathen Philosophers parsimonie and sparing diet was much set by: Socrates being asked, wherein he differed from other men, answered, illi vivunt vt comedant; ego edo vt viuam, they live to eat, but I eat to live: the sobriety of Democritus, and Demosthenes is much celebrated among the heathen: The Egyptians lived of herbs, and the fruits o • trees: the food of the Argives in time past were peares, of the Athenians figs, of the Medes almonds, of the Ethiopians locusts, of the Arabians milk.

They say that the spittle of a man fasting killeth a serpent: So fasting joined with prayer, is a spiritual remedy against the spiritual serpent, and his temptations. Jerome calleth it, caeterarum virtutum fundamentum, the foundation of other virtues: Chrysostom, alimentum animae, the nourishment of the soul: Basil saith it is similitudo hominum cum Angels, that which maketh men like unto Angels.

Christ sanctified fasting and abstinence by his own example: and Satan sought to interrupt and break off his holy fast: thereby showing how sovereign a remedy it is against his temptations, seeing he would not suffer Christ ro hold out his fast: for as a ship the lighter it is being vnloaden of the burdens doth better brook the water, and endure the force of the winds: so he which is given to a temperate and sober life, melius effugit fluctus & nymbos tentationum, doth better escape the floods and tempests of temptation. Pintus.

4. Doct. That true virtue consisteth in the inward purpose of the heart, not in the outward appearance.

Vers. 8. Daniel had determined in his heart, that he would not defile himself. Daniel's continency was not in outward show, but rooted and grounded in the heart, which is the seat of virtue: for that is not virtue which is done only to the sight of others, and for ostentation to seek the praise of men, but that which lieth hid in the heart: The Pharisees gave their alms, prayed, fasted, to be seen of men; but Christ teacheth his Disciples to pray and fast in secret, that the Lord may approve their work, and not men, Matth. 6. And S. Paul saith, that he is not a Jew, which is one outward, &c. but he is a Jew, which is one within, &c. whose praise is not of men, but of God. Polan.

5. Doct. Of worldly fear which carrieth away carnal men.

Ver. 10. The chief of the Eunuchs said to Daniel, I fear my Lord the king, &c. This man feared more the terrene power of the visible Emperor, thē the celestial majesty of the omnipotent and invisible God: as Tertullian objected to the Romans, maiore formidine Caesarē obseruatis, quā ipsum de Olymp • Jovē, with greater fear ye observe Caesar, then Jupiter himself of Olympus, &c. they stand more in awe of their great commander in earth, then of their supposed gods in heaven: But the Apostles had a contrary resolution, whether it be right in the sight of God to obey you rather then God, judge ye, Act. 4. 19. Polan.

6. Doct. ver. 12. Prooue thy servants ten days, of the certainty of faith.

Bullinger hereupon noteth fides non fallit, nec deserit Deus constāter inherentes verbo, &c. faith falleth not, neither doth God forsake those which constantly cleave unto his word, &c. Daniel with his three brethren and companions were assured, that God would give success according to their faith: and if they in this particular thing, which concerned but an outward observation of the law, had such assurance and confidence: much more ought we to be assured of such things, which God hath promised concerning everlasting life: for all things (as our Blessed Savior saith) are possible to him that believeth, Mark. 9. 23.

7. Doct. That learning is necessary in Kings.

Ver. 19. And the king communed with them: Nebuchadnezzar being a great warrior and conqueror, yet was himself so well seen in the knowledge of the Chaldeans, who were held to be the most learned in the world, that he was able himself to sift and examine these 4. men, whom he found in wisdom to go beyond all his wisemen and soothsayers in Babylon. Such learned princes, among the people of God, were David, Solomon, Hezekiah, Josiah: among the Heathen, Alexander the great, Scipio Africanus, Julius Caesar, with others: and among the Christian Emperors, Constantine the great, who decided the controversies and questions among the Christian Bishops: And this famous kingdom of England hath had most learned princes: Henerie the 8. Edward the 6. Queen Elizabeth of late blessed memory, and our now Sovereign king James, who is able to confer learnedly with any man in his faculty, as here Nebuchadnezzar doth with Daniel and the other three.

8. Doct. That the perfection even of human arts and learning is to be found in the Church of God.

Ver. 20. And he found them ten times better, then all the enchanters, and Astrologians, &c. Like as these four fearing God obtained greater wisdom even in the Chaldean learning, then any of the other cunning men: So it may be seen this day, that even the liberal sciences, which were invented among the Heathen, have been much perfected among Christians; who have added unto their beginnings: for seeing God is the giver and author of every good gift, who are more like to receive such gifts, then his own people, who can tell how to ask them of him: they therefore are in great error, who either in times past gave the preeminence of learning unto the Gentiles before the Christians, or now to the Papists and Romanists, before the professors of the gospel: it is evident to all the world, that neither for the knowledge of tongues or arts, we are anything inferior unto them.

1. Controv. Whether the changing of the Popes name be grounded upon the example of Peter.

Vers. 7. Unto whom the chief of the Eunuchs gave other names: hereupon Pintus taketh occasion to speak of that custom of the Roman Bishops, who at their inauguration do take unto them new names: Celius Rhodiginus out of Platina allegeth this to be the reason thereof, because Sergiu • the second had but an homely name before, he was called os porci, swine's face, and thereupon would be called by a new name, as being ashamed of his old: But Pintus thinketh rather, that it took beginning from Peter, whose name the Lord changed, calling him in the Syrian tongue Cephas, which in the Greek signifieth ( petros ) a stone: and out of this he falleth into another matter, that this was not that Cephas mentioned, Galath. 2. who was not Peter, but one of the 72. disciples: for it is not like that S. Paul would reprove Peter Pontificem maximum, the chief priest to his face; neither is that John the Apostle, who is there also spoken off, but one of the disciples, for Paul himself saith, c. 1. 19. that he had seen none of the Apostles, but James the Lord's brother: and again it appeareth, c. 2. 70. that James, Cephas, and John speak of Peter as of another man beside themselves, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed to me, as of the circumcision to Peter, &c. to this purpose Pintus.

Contra. 1. Platina one of their own historiographers may be credited for a matter of fact and story, who was best acquainted with the doings of that Sea: Pintus conceit cometh too late to check their own register: and if the changing of Popes names be grounded upon the change of Peters name by Christ, why did not the Popes before Sergius alter their names: or why do they not expect the authority of Christ to innouate their names, but take them up themselves?

2. As for that Cephas or Peter whom S. Paul reproved, he was no other but Peter the Apostle. 1. for be it admitted, that one of the disciples was called Cephas, yet he was not named Peter too: but this was reproved under the name of Peter: 2. that Peter which was a pillar of the Church, and to whom the Apostleship of the circumcision was committed, was reproved by S. Paul: but none of the disciples were Apostles, or any Apostleship committed unto them. 3. this Peter was one of the chief, Galath. 2. 6. but the disciples were not counted among the chief.

Neither do the contrary arguments conclude anything. 1. for whence can they prove, that Peter was the chief of the Apostles: the contrary is enforced here, that Peter with the rest gave unto Paul the right hand of fellowship, therefore there was an equality among them: and in that Paul so boldly reproveth Peter, it showeth that there was no superiority. 2. S. Paul speaketh of his twice coming to Jerusalem, first after three years, and then he saw none of the Apostles but James: then after fourteen years, Galat. 2. v. 1. when he found at Jerusalem, James, Peter, and John. This then is a simple collection, that at his first coming he saw none but James, therefore he saw no more of the Apostles at his second coming. 3. Neither doth the construction of the words help him any thing at all: for, v. 7. it is only said, when they saw, &c. James, Cephas, John, are not there named: and if they were, if we understand it thus, when James, Cephas and John saw that the Gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the Gospel of the circumcision was to Peter, or Cephas, it doth not follow, that Peter should be none of those three: for it is an usual Hebraism, to repeat the antecedent instead of the pronoun • , as Exod. 10. 13. He (that is Pharaoh) thrust them out from the presence of Pharaoh: who is so simple to gather hereupon, that there were two Pharaohs. 4. Whereas Pintus nameth Clemens, Oecumenius, Theophylact, as favorers of this opinion, that this Cephas was another beside Peter, many Fathers of greater authority may be produced, which hold that Peter the Apostle was reproved by S. Paul, as Cyprian, Jerome, Augustine, Ambrose, with others: as is elsewhere shown at large, Synops. p. 139.

2. Controv. That fasting is not meritorious, nor satisfactory.

Upon this example of Daniel, verse. 8. who determined with himself not to be defiled with the kings meats, Pererius taketh occasion to set down generally the ends of Christian abstinence, which he maketh to be these eight. 1. to mitigate and oppress the anger of God kindled against sin. 2. to obtain somewhat at the hand of God. 3. to imitate the abstinence of Christ and his Apostles. 4. to satisfy God for their own sins and others. 5. to overcome the temptations of Satan. 6. to prevent sins to come. 7. to subdue the concupiscence of the flesh. 8. to make the soul more prompt and ready for spiritual exercise and meditation.

Contra. The rest of the causes of abstinence being admitted, three of them we worthily take exception to, namely the 1. 3. 4.

1. God's wrath cannot be appeased by any work of ours: it is only Christ, in whom God is well pleased with us, and who hath made an atonement for us, he only hath offered a sacrifice of sweet smelling savor unto God for us, Ephes. 5. 2. 2. Neither can we imitate the miraculous fast of our blessed Savior, who continued 40. days and nights without eating anything: neither did Christ fast to that ende, to give us an example to do the like: but wherein we should imitate Christ, he himself teacheth us, saying, learn of me, that I am meek and lowly in heart. 3. And that fasting doth not satisfy for sin, it is evident by the example of the vainglorious Pharisee, who boasted in his prayer, that he fasted twice in the week, and yet he was not thereby justified: see more hereof Synops. p. 955.

3. Controv. That the prescript of fasting days for religion, and forbearing of certain kinds of meat, is not warranted here by Daniel's abstinence.

Pintus upon this example groundeth the lenten-fast of 40. days, and other fasts observed in the Papal Church; and thereupon inveigheth against Protestants, calling them heretics, because they do Ecclesiae ieiunia aspernari, despise the fasts of the Church: and saith whereas we pretend to have reformed the Church, non Ecclesiae, sed sectae Epicureae reformatores, &c. we are not reformers of the Church, but of the Epicures sect: Pintus, p. 18.

Contra. 1. Protestants only reject their superstitious and hypocritical fasts: true fasting (which is an abstinence from all meats and drinks for a time, to make their prayers more fervent) they practice more then Papists, who know not what such fasting meaneth. 2. Who are the Epicures and belly gods of this age, their fat Monks and Abbey-lubbers are witnesses: who while they forbear eating of flesh, do feed upon other delicate meats and daint • e confections, with drinking of wine, which do more pamper the flesh and enflame the lust. 3. This example of Daniel doth nothing at all fit their turn: 1. Daniel kept this abstinence 3. years together. 2. he abstained as well from eating of fish as flesh. 3. neither did he drink any wine all this time of abstinence: let them go now and imitate Daniel's fast themselves; which they would take to be a very hard penance. Polan.

4. Controv. verse. 20. What the wisemen of the Chaldeans were: and whether the wisemen which came to Christ were kings.

Pintus upon this place giveth this note, that the wise men among the Chaldeans and Persians were called Magi, which is a Persian word, and was the same with a Philosopher among the Grecians, and a Gymnosophist among the Indians: and because the kings of the East were philosophers, they were called Magi, wisemen: and so the wise men which came to Christ, Matth. 2. are held by an ancient tradition of the Church to have been kings, as Tertullian, Jerome, and Augustine affirm, with other. Pintus, p. 24.

Contra. 1. Jerome writing upon the 72. Psalm, calleth them not reges, but regum typos, kings, but types of the kings: Augustine saith, monente subdolo sermon regis, alacres eunt, being craftily warned by the king, they go cheerfully: not as it is corruptly read, reges alacres eunt, the kings go on cheerfully: 2. Tertullian indeed saith, nam & Magos reges fere oriens habuit: in the East, they had for the most part the Magi or wisemen for their kings, &c. But this can hardly be proved: the wise men were of great authority with the Persian kings, and did usurp the kingdom a while, before Darius was chosen king: but the Magi were not kings. 3. And if this be such a firm tradition of the Church; that these 3. wisemen were kings, what tradition have they for the rest, that these three kings lie buried at Collen, and that their names, were Gaspar, Melchior, Balthasar: which three names written in parchment, and hung about the neck, they say are available to drive away any disease from the body. 4. If they had been kings, Herod would have been afraid to have entertained them being jealous of his kingdom, neither is it like that the Evangelist would have omitted it, it being much for the honor of Christ, that he was adored of kings in his infancy: see Beza, in his annotat. Matth. 2. 1.

5. Controv. v. 20. Of the Magicians among the Chaldeans, and how that such were always opposite to the true Church of God, as diverse of the Popes were such.

1. The word chartummim, is a strange and foreign word, and is taken properly (as Ibn Ezra ) for the Magician, or Genethliake, the caster of men's natiuities.

2. In the beginning the term of Magicians was honorable among the Persians▪ for they were such as professed the knowledge both of divine and human things, and were assistant unto Kings: they were the same among the Persians, with the Priests or Prophets in Egypt, the Philosophers in Greece▪ among the French the Druidae, among the Indians the Gymnosophistes: among the Bactrians the Samanaei.

3. But afterward these Magi fell to practicing of unlawful arts, to invocate spirits, and to confederate themselves with devils: of whom they learned their enchantments and coniurations, as Theodoret allegeth out of Porphirie.

4. Such were the Magicians and Sorcerers in Egypt, of whom Jannes and Jambres were the chief, which resisted Moses.

Most of the Heretics were Magicians, as Simon Magus, and Menander his successor, and Marcion, as Justinus witnesseth, Apolog. 2. pro Christian. and one Marcus, who by his magical impostures deceived many, as Irenaeus. Many of the Popes were professed Magicians, and by such Diabolical practices obtained the Popedom: as Sylvester the 2. Sylvester the 3. Gregory the 6. Benedict the 9. John the 12. who in playing at dice was wont to call upon the devil, as Luitprandus, and to offer wine unto him, as Fasciculus temp. Gregory the 7. did use to carry about with him a book of Necromancie, and was condemned as a Magician and Sorcerer in the Synod at Brixia, as Abb. Vrspergens. and Benno Cardinal. write, Polan. Thus in the adversary Church Magicians have been had in great reputation; as here they were accounted of among the Chaldeans: But as Daniel by his godly wisdom obscured them all; so the light of God's truth and Gospel hath prevailed agrinst all such abominations.

1. Observ. v. 2. That victory and conquest is to be used moderately.

V. 2. With part of the vessels of the house of God. Although this was especially wrought by God's providence, that Nebuchadnezzar carried away only part of the vessels of the Temple, that some might still remain for the service thereof; yet in this victorious king is set forth an example of moderation, who is contented to take part of these holy vessels, and carrieth away part of the chief men into captivity: he maketh not havoc and spoil of all: which teacheth, that Princes should not use their victory, to make desolation, and lay all wast, but rather to help to bring things to better order. Bulling.

2. Observ. Princes can do no more then God permitteth.

Herein also evidently appeareth God's work, Nebuchadnezzar had no power to carry away more of the men or vessels, then God gave into his hand: for the text saith, God gave Jehoiakim into his hand, &c. with part of the vessels of the house of God. If God had given all into his hand, he had taken all: but now he is limited, he taketh no more then God would he should take, Papp. So like as, though the Sea rage, and the waves thereof rise, yet the Lord keepeth it within the bounds, and bindeth as it were with swaddling bands, Job. 38. 9. So the Lord stayeth the rage and fury of the mighty men of the earth: they have no power to do anything▪ but from God: as Jesus said unto Pilate, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above, John. 19. 11.

3. Observ. The Lord punisheth by degrees.

At this time Nebuchadnezzar only carried away part of the holy vessels, and some few, Daniel with other persons, but afterward he took Jeconiah the king himself, and carried him into captivity; and last of all he put out Zedekiahs eyes, burnt the Temple, and made havoc of the city, and removed the most of the inhabitants into captivity. Thus the Lord proceedeth by degrees, to see if he can draw the people by his smaller corrections to repentance, till he pour out the whole viole of his wrath at once upon them, Osiander. This manner of the Lord's proceeding in his judgments by degrees is well expressed, Levite. 26. v. 18. 21. 24. how the Lord still punisheth his people seven times more, that is, with more grievous judgments when they do not profit by the former.

4. Observ. God will not be honored with evil gotten goods.

Nebuchadnezzar ha • ing taken the vessels of the Temple, doth offer them in the house of God, thus honoring his idol with unjust spoils: but our God will not so be served: the wise man saith, Honor the Lord with thy riches, that is, thine own, and not an others: They which offer unto God, or give unto the poor of that which is gotten by extortion, are herein like unto Nebuchadnezzar: and they be compared unto the Eagle, which liveth of the pray of other birds, and that which she leaveth, doth distribute among the rest, Pintus. The law of Moses forbiddeth, that any should bring the price of a whore into God's house, Deut. 23. 18. nothing is acceptable unto God, which is gotten by unlawful and dishonest means.

5. Observ. v. 8. Against the riotous living, and excessive expenses of students.

Vers. 8. Daniel had determined not to defile himself with the kings meat • , &c. This great abstinence in Daniel and the rest, who were sequestered, and set apart for the study of wisdom, Bull. well applieth against the evil use of students in these days, which are not mediocri mensa, & honesta vest contenti, content with moderate fare, and modest garments, but do exceed both ways: Many which live of exhibition, and upon the foundation of liberal patrons, do frequent tavernes, and ruffle in their silks, to the great offense and scandal of that kind of University life, and to the hindrance of much benevolence, which otherwise would be bestowed that way.

6. Obserua. verse. 18. That time is to be redeemed.

Vers. 18. When the time was expired, that the king had appointed to bring them in, &c. The time appointed for the instruction of Daniel, and his fellows was 3. years, this time being expired, then the king calleth them to account, to see how they had profited: which example is worthy to be followed, by those, who are set over Colleges of students, to see, that they misspend not their time in vain, but go forward in their studies. Bullinger. As there is nothing more precious then time, so the loss of nothing is more to be lamented: therefore the preacher would have a young man remember his Creator in the days of his youth, before the evil days come. &c. Eccles. 12. 1.