Works

§. Of Jesus Christ the Son of God.

This title of The Son of God, is proclaimed of Christ from Heaven, at his baptism, when he is to begin to preach the Gospel, as it is said here to be the Gospel of the Son of God. And it was necessary that so much should be intimated and learned concerning him, as the author of the Gospel, Because 1. The Gospel was the full revealing and opening of the will of the Father. 2. The overthrow and ruin of the Rites and Ceremonies of Moses. 3. The admission of heathen and strangers to be the Church and people of the Lord, whereas Israel had been his peculiar before. 4. It was a Doctrine of trusting in another, and not ones self for salvation, and who was fit for doing the three former, or for being the object of the latter, but Jesus Christ the Son of God, who came from the bosom of the Father, was the substance and body of those shadows and Ceremonies, might raze that partition wall, which in the giving of the Law himself had reared, and did not only preach the Doctrine of the Gospel, but also fully perform the Law.

It seemeth by the Syrian, Arabic, Uulgar Latin, Victor Antiochenus, Origen cited by him, and others, that some Copies read, As it is written in Isaiah the Prophet: and so Jansen thinketh it was so written by Mark himself, but purposely changed by the Doctors of the Church, as we read it now, to avoid the difficulty which the other reading carried with it.

But, first, it were a very strange and impious, though an easy way of resolving doubts, to add to, or diminish from the Text at pleasure, as the Text shall seem easy or difficult: This is not to expound the Bible, but to make a new one, or a Text of ones own head.

Secondly, In ancienter times then any of theirs that are produced, which read, In Isaiah the Prophet, it was read as we do, In the Prophets, as Jansen himself showeth out of Irenaeus, lib. 3. chap. 11.

Thirdly, The one half of the words alleged in the Text, are not in Isaiah at all, but in Malachi: and the first half also, for that is considerable. For though sometime the New Testament in Allegations from the Old, do closely couch two several places together under one quotation, as if they were but one; yet maketh it sure, that the first always is that very place which it takes on it to cite, though the second be another: as Acts 7. 7. Steven alledgeth a speech of God, as if uttered to Abraham alone; whereas it is two several quotations, and two several speeches tied up in one; the one spoken to Abraham indeed, but the other to Moses, almost four hundred years after; and that to Abraham is set the first, for he is the subject whereupon the allegation is produced.

Fourthly, It is a manner of speech not used in the New Testament, to say, it is written, or it is said in such or such a Prophet, but by him. We find indeed, It is written in the Law, Luke 10. 26. And, It is written in the book of Psalms, Acts 1. 20. Yea, It is written in the Prophets, Joh. 6. 45. but nowhere that it is written in a single Prophet.

Fifthly, To read as we do, As it is written in the Prophets, agreeth with the ordinary and usual division of the Old Testament, by the Hebrews, into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Oraietha, Nebhyim, Chetubbim. The Law, the Prophets, and the Holy writs; approved and followed by our Savior, Luke 24. 44. and alluded to by the Evangelist here.

[ Before thy face, &c. Thy way before thee. ] The former is neither in the Hebrew, nor in the LXX at all: the latter is in them both, but clean contrary, for they both have it, The way before me.

But, first, The Evangelists and Apostles, when they take on them to cite any Text from the Old Testament, are not so punctual to observe the exact and strict form of words, as the pith of them, or sense of the place; as might be instanced in many particulars: so that the difference of the words would not prejudice the agreement in sense, were there not so flat difference of person, as me and thee.

Secondly, The Majesty of Scripture doth often show itself in requoting of places, in this, that it alledgeth them in difference of words and difference of sense, yea, sometimes in contrariety, not to make one place to cross or deny another, but by the variety one to explain and illustrate another, as in corresponding places in the Old Testament might be shown at large, as Gen. 10. 22, 23. cited, 1 Chron. 1. 17. Gen. 36. 12. compared with 1 Chron. 1. 36. 1 Sam. 25. 44. paralleled, 2 Sam. 21. 8. 2 Chron. 3. 15. with Jer. 52. 21. and very many other places of the like nature: wherein the Holy Ghost having penned a thing in one place, doth by variety of words and sense, enlarge and expound himself in another. And the same divine authority and Majesty doth he also use in the New Testament, both in parallel places in itself, and in citations in it, from the Old. So that this difference in hand, betwixt My face, in Malachi; and thy face, in Mark, is not contradictory or crossing one another, but explicatory or one explaining another, and both together do result to the greater mystery. For Christ is the face or presence of the Father: and so is he plainly called, Exod. 33. 14. and in Christ, the Father came and revealed himself among men: and the words in both places, both in the Prophet and in the Evangelist, are to be taken for the words of the Father; in the one, spoken of the Son, and in the other, to him: In Malachi thus, Behold I send my Messenger before me to prepare the way before my face; that is, before the Son, as he is in his own nature, the very brightness of the glory of the Father, and the express image of his person, Heb. 1. 3. and in Mark thus, to prepare the way before thy face, that is, before thee, O Son, when thou comest to undertake the work of Redemption, and to publish the Gospel. And this change of persons in Grammatical construction is usual in the Hebrews Eloquence and Rhetoric; as 1 Sam. 2. 23. My heart rejoiceth in the Lord, I rejoice in thy salvation. There is none holy as the Lord, for there is none beside thee, &c. Zech. 12. 10. They shall look upon me, whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him: and 14. 5. The Lord my God shall come, and all the Saints with thee.

This Tiberius was the third Emperor of the Romans, the son of Livia, the wife of Augustus, and by him adopted into the family of the Caesar's, and to the Empire: A man of such subtlety, cruelty, avarice, and bestiality, that for all, or indeed for any of these, few stories can show his parallel: And as if in this very beginning of the Gospel, he were produced of such a constitution, to teach us what to look for from that cruel and abominable City, in all ages and successions.

Now Tiberius his fifteenth was the year of the world 3957. And the time of the year that John began to Baptize in it, was about Easter, or the vernal Equinox, as may be concluded from the time of the Baptism of our Savior. For if Jesus were baptized in Tisri or September, as is cleared hereafter, he being then but just entering upon his thirtieth year, as the Law required, Numb. 4. And if John being six months elder then our Savior, as it is plain he was, did enter his Ministry at the very same age, according to the same Law, it readily follows, that the time mentioned, was the time when he began to Preach. It was indeed Tiberius his fifteenth when John began to baptize, but it may very well be questioned, whether it were so when our Savior was baptized by him: For the exact beginning of every year of Tiberius his reign, was from the fourteenth of the Kalends of September, or the eighteenth of August, at what time Augustus died: Suetonius. in Aug. cap. 100. That fifteenth of the Emperor therefore, in the Spring time of which John began to baptize, was expired before September, when our Savior was baptized, and so his baptism is to be reputed in the year of the world 3958. which was then but newly begun, and in the sixteenth year of Tiberius, but newly begun neither, unless you will reckon the year of the Emperor, as the Romans did the year of the Consuls, from January to January: But this we will not controvert, nor cross the common and constant opinion of all times, that holdeth our Savior to have been baptized in Tiberius his fifteenth.

§. Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea.

Here is called Procurator Judeae by Tacitus, Annal. lib. 15. and hath this brand set upon him by Egisippus, that he was Vir nequam & parvi faciens mendacium, De excid. Jerus. l. 2. c. 5. A wicked man and one that made little conscience of a lie; from which unconscionable disposition, those words of his, What is truth, Joh. 18. 38. seem to proceed, in scorn of truth, and derision of it. He succeeded Gratus, in the government of Judea: managed it with a great deal of troublesomness and vexation to the nation: and at last was put out of his rule by Vitellius, and sent to Rome, to answer for his misdemeanors. Joseph. Antiq. lib. 18. c. 3. 4, 5. Philo in legatione.

§. Herod being Tetrarch of Galilee.

This was Antipas the son of Herod the great, and called also Herod after his Father, a man that after a long and wicked misdemeanor, in his place, was at last banished by Gaius upon the accusation of his Nephew Herod Agrippa, and Herodias his incestuous mate with him, as shall be shown in a more proper place.

§. Tetrarch.

Some tying themselves too strictly, to the signification of the Greek word, understand by Tetrarch, him that governeth the fourth part of a Kingdom, for the Original word includeth four: and accordingly have concluded, that the Kingdom of Herod the great was divided by Augustus after his death into four parts, and given to his four sons, Archelaus [in whose room they say succeeded Pontius Pilate ] Herod Antipas, Philip, and Lysanias. In this strictness hath the Syrian Translator taken the word, rendering it thus, Herod being the fourth Ruler in Galilee, and Philip the fourth ruler in Iturea. And the Arabic thus: Herod being head over a fourth part, even Galilee: and so in the rest. But if the opinion be narrowly examined, these absurdities will be found in it.

First, It maketh a Tetrarchy to be nothing else, but exactly the fourth part of a Kingdom, whereas Pliny, lib. 5. cap. 18. speaketh of Tetrarchies that were like Kingdoms, and compacted into Kingdoms, and he nameth Trachonitis for one. His words are these: Intercurrunt, cinguntque has Uerbes, Tetrarchiae regnorum instar singulae, & in regna contribuuntur, Trachonitis, Paneas, in qua Cesarea cum supradicto fonte Abila. And in chap. 23. he saith, Caelosyria had seventeen Tetrarchies, Tetrarchias in regna descriptas, barbaris nominibus decem & septem.

Secondly, It divideth Herod's kingdom into four parts, whereas it was parted only into three, to his three Sons, Joseph. Ant. lib. 17.

Thirdly, It maketh Lysanias to be Herod's son, which he was not at all.

A Tetrarch therefore seemeth rather to be one that was in the fourth rank or degree of excellency and government in the Roman Empire: the Emperor that was Lord of all the Empire being the first, the Proconsul that governed a Province the second, a King the third, and a Tetrarch the fourth. So Mishueh, and Shalish in the Hebrew, signify a man▪ second or third to the King.

§. And his brother Philip being Tetrarch, &c.

Herod made Antipas [ whom he had intended for King, but changing his mind, he changed his last will ] Tetrarch of Galilee and Peraea. And the Kingdom he bestowed on Archelaus: And Gaulonitis and Trachonitus, and Batanaea, and Paneas he bestowed on Philip who was his own son, and own brother to Archelaus, to be a Tetrarchy, Josep. Ant. l. 17. c. 10.

§. Of Iturea.

This Country seemeth to have taken its denomination from Itur one of the sons of Ishmael, Gen. 25. 15. and it lay edging upon Arabia, but reckoned to Syria, and upon that reference mentioned by the Evangelist here. For he speaketh of these Countries and Tetrarchies, because Syria and Judea were but one Province, and under one Proconsul. And therefore as he nameth the government of Canaan, in the two Countries of Judea and Galilee, so doth he also the government of Syria, under three, Ituria, Trachonitis and Abilene: And this is agreeable to what he had done in Chap. 2. 1. when he spake of the time of our Savior's birth: for as he there dateth the Tax that then was, by the time of a governor of Syria, so doth he now the beginning of the Gospel by the time of the Rulers there, as well as in Judea. And this was also most suitable to the Roman Records, where, seeing that Syria and Judea were joined together into one Province, it is not to be doubted, but their Governors were named together, as members of one body.

§. And the Region of Trachonitis.

The name of this Country, as it seemeth by Strabo, was taken from two mountains, or Rocks, called Trachones: and they very probably so called from the Hebrew word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which signifieth wearisomeness, in regard of the irksome and tedious difficulty of passing over them: as Strabo instantly after them, speaketh of other mountains towards Arabia and Iturea, which he titleth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , hills hard to travel over. Josephus supposeth Uz the eldest son of Aram, to have been the first Inhabiter of this Country, Antiq. lib. 1. cap. 7. but whether it were that son of his or no, it is not so material to inquire, as it is to observe that it was reputed a Country belonging to Aram, or within the compass of Syria: very thievish in the time of Herod, and the Inhabitants living upon the robbery of the Damascens, that lay near unto them: Joseph. Antiq. lib. 15. cap. 13.

§. Lysanias.

He was not a son of Herod, as is supposed by some, nor an immediate son of Ptolemy Mennaeus, neither, as is held by others. [For though Josephus Antiq. lib. 14. cap. 23. and de Bel. lib. cap. 11. telleth that Lysanias succeeded his father Ptolemy Mennaeus, yet it cannot be the same man possibly, that St. Luke here speaketh of, for that Lysanias was slain by the means of Cleopatra, a good space of time before our Savior was born, Jos. Antiq. lib. 15. cap. 4.] But the Lysanias here mentioned, might be the great Grandchild of Mennaeus, or someone of that house, that bare the same name with Mennaeus his immediate son and successor.

§. Abilene.

This Country was so named from the City Abila, which Ptolemy, lib. 5. cap. 15. hath reckoned for a City of Caelosyria, [or as some Copies have it, of Decapolis ] and with this title, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Abila surnamed from Lysanias: see also Pliny, lib. 5. cap. 18. This word soundeth so near to the word Havilah, Gen. 2. 11. & 10. 7. that it may very well be supposed to have descended from it, and the name of the place from that son of Cush, that planted with his brethren mentioned with him, in Arabia and thereabouts.

There could be but one High Priest properly so called at one time: and that Caiaphas was he at this time, it is most clear, both out of Josephus, and out of the Scripture. Now Annas is said to be High Priest with him, because he was the Nasi or head of the Sanhedrin, and so represented Moses, as Caiaphas did Aaron, and he was of the seed of the Priests, as well as Caiaphas was. An evidence of his being the head of the great Council, is, in that when our Savior was apprehended, he was first led to Annas, Joh. 18. 13. and by him bound and sent to Caiaphas, ver. 24. and that Annas is first placed in the Council, Act. 4. 6. We shall have more punctual occasion hereafter to look after this man, and then will we see what we can find spoken of him by Josephus.

§. The Word of the Lord came to John.

Such was the commission of the Prophets, as Jer. 1. 2. Ezek. 6. 1, &c. And this proclaimeth John a Prophet, as well as they. And here had he his warrant for his Ministry, and this was the institution of the Sacrament of Baptism. Now whether the word of the Lord that came to John and to the Prophets, be to be understood of his personal and substantial word, as Joh. 1. 1. or of the word of Prophesy suggested to them by the Holy Ghost; and whether John had this word imparted to him, by vision, or dream, or rapture, or what other way, it is not so material to inquire, as it is difficult to resolve; only this is not impertinent to observe, That whereas the race of the Prophets that were sent to teach and to preach to the people by the word of the Lord, was expired and extinguished long ago, in the death of Malachi the last of that race, there is now another race of such preachers to be raised again, viz. John, and the great Prophet, and the Apostles, and this is the entrance or beginning to that glorious generation. For we are to distinguish, betwixt having the gift and spirit of Prophesy, and betwixt being sent by that spirit for a constant Preacher to the people. Deborah and Barak, and Huldab and Hannah, and divers others both men and women had the spirit of Prophesy upon them, but never had warrant to go and preach, and to be constant ministers to the Church. But Isaiah, and Jeremy, and Ezekiel, and the rest of that form, under the Old Testament, and John and the Apostles under the New, had not only the spirit of Prophesy upon them, to foretell things to come, but they had also the word of the Lord came unto them, which gave them commission to be continual preachers, and entered them into the function of a constant Ministry. As see how the Baptist himself explaineth what is meant by this word of the Lord coming to him, Joh. 1. 33. He sent me to baptize.

§. To John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.

The children of the Priests when they came to age, were to be installed and enrolled into the service of the Temple; their names being entered there, and the name of their father. To this custom the Evangelist seemeth to refer, when he calleth, John the Son of Zacharias in this place, and at this time, when he was to enter upon his Ministerial function: which though he did not at the Temple, as others used to do, but had another kind of employment laid upon him, by the Word of the Lord coming to him in the Wilderness in the place of his converse; yet [as had he been there, he must have been enrolled and registered, thus, John the Son of Zacharias began his Ministration at such a time, or to this purpose, so] doth the Holy Ghost inrol him here, at his entrance into this his Ministry of another kind, the word of the Lord came to John the son of Zacharias. And the like passage we may observe in the same Evangelist concerning our Savior at his being baptized, and when he also entered upon his function.

That is, in the Cities and Towns in the wilderness, as Josh. 15. 61, 62. & 1 Sam. 23. 14. 24. some of which were probably within the territories, and under the command of Hebron the place where John was born: for there is mention of the Cities of Hebron, 2 Sam. 2. 3.

It is the most likely that John began to preach in the place where he was born, and from thence went to other places as he saw occasion, and the Spirit moved him: And indeed Hebron itself was in a manner a City of the Wilderness, as well as the others mentioned, though there be no such expression concerning it, as is of them: and if those words, Luke 2. So He was in the deserts, till the day of his showing unto Israel, were interpreted concerning his being in Hebron; the interpretation might very well be justified, though to avoid cavil and offense, we have expounded it of places, which the Scripture calleth Deserts or Wildernesses in express terms.

However, be it in Hebron, or out of Hebron that John was educated, conversed, and began to preach; certain it is, that he did the last of these in some Cities of the Wilderness, not far from Hebron: and if it be said that he baptized also in these Cities where he preached, and as yet was not gone down to Jordan, till Jerusalem and all Judea heard of him, and came to be baptized, and then he went thither for the conveniency of water: I suppose it crosseth nothing, either in the History or Mystery, and it averreth no more concerning John now, then we shall find him doing hereafter; namely, baptizing in other waters besides Jordan. And indeed how can it rationally be understood otherwise, then that John baptized first in these Cities and Towns, before multitude of company drew him down unto the River?

For, first, it cannot be conceived that he walked or stood in the open fields near Jordan, and there began to preach; but that he betook himself to Towns or Cities where was concourse of people.

Secondly, it can as little be conceived, that when any people in this or that City embraced his Doctrine, and desired to be baptized, that he should bring them to the River, which was sometime far off, or delay them till all the multitude should meet him there together; unless it could be shown that the water of Jordan was only allowed to be baptized in, and no other; the contrary to which we shall se •• non.

The Story therefore and progress of his Ministry and baptizing, out of the three Evangelists may be compiled thus: That first he came preaching in the Wilderness of Judea, in the Towns and Cities that were there, about the place of his education; That he baptized there those that were converted by his preaching, and that desired to be baptized by him: That he went abroad from thence, up and down all the Country round about Jordan, and when his converts, and the concourse were now grown numerous, he baptized them in Jordan, because there was water enough, as John 3. 23.

§ And preach the baptism of Repentance.

The Evangelist useth this title or epithet, in opposition to Circumcision, and baptizing of Proselytes, which had been the way and door of admission in to the Church before. They might very fitly be called the Circumcision and baptism of perfomance, as this the baptism of repentance. For whosoever received circumcision was engaged by it to the performance of the whole Law, Gal. 5. 2. And the like was every Proselyte engaged that received Baptism. But this baptism of John, or the baptism in the Christian Church is clean of another nature. For whereas those two challenged of everyone that went through those doors into the Church, that they should stand debtors to the whole Law, and be obliged to a legal righteousness: our baptism requireth a clean contrary thing, namely, that we should be obliged to repentance, in regard that the performance of the Law is a thing that is to us impossible, and that we should be buried with Christ in his death, and seek after his righteousness, seeing that we have none of our own. Hence appeareth clearly, first, a reason why the baptism of John is called the beginning of the Gospel, for it opened a door, and gave an inlet into the Church upon other terms, then had ever been before. And, secondly, that baptism belongeth to Children, though it be the baptism of repentance, and they know not what repentance means: For it requireth not their repentance at their receiving of the Sacrament, when they stand but in the door or entry of the Church, but it engageth them to repentance for the time to come, or when they being now entered into the Church, shall come to the use of reason, and knowledge of the engagement: And so was it with the children that were circumcised: for they when they underwent that Sacrament, undertook obedience to the whole Law, and yet they knew not what, either obedience, or the Law meant: But that undertaking was, what they were to do when they came to the years of knowledge and apprehension.

The Phrase, the Kingdom of Heaven, which is so frequently and commonly used in the Gospel, is taken from, Dan. 2. 44. and 7. 14. And it meaneth the spiritual Kingdom of Christ in and under the Gospel, as it is published and preached unto all Nations. For though the phrase be generally and truly understood to mean the preaching of the Gospel; yet doth it most properly and naturally signify the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles, or among all Nations; as might be shown, by the signification of the word Heaven, by the manner of speech here used, that it is at hand, and so again, Mat. 4. 17. when the Gospel was now Preached already: by the Text of Daniel, from whence the phrase is taken, and by divers places in the Gospel where it is used; but the full clearing of this, I have chosen to refer to that difficult place which will call for it to be cleared, when the Lord shall bring us thither, Matth. 16. 19. To thee will I give the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven: where I conceive Christ to have foretold to Peter; that he should be the first that should Preach the Gospel, and open the door of Faith unto the Gentiles, as Acts 15. 7. and 10.

Now, The Kingdom of Heaven signifying thus, not barely and simply the Preaching of the Gospel, but the Preaching of it to the Gentiles and their conversion, it showeth how proper and pregnant an argument this was to enforce the doctrine and practice of Repentance upon the Jews, because the calling of the Gentiles was near at hand, which would prove their rejection and casting off, if they did not repent, as Deut. 32. 21.

Before the coming of Christ, these four Earthly Kingdoms that are mentioned by Daniel in the Chapters cited, bare all the sway, and domineered over all the world with cruelty and tyranny: but when they were destroyed, at his coming he set up a Kingdom of his own, and swayed the Scepter of Righteousness over all Nations, and ruled them with his word and Spirit. And whereas before his coming also, the Church consisted but of one Nation and Kingdom: and was couched upon a small parcel of Earth, the Land of Canaan, • nd had earthly promises, and earthly rites; when he came and published the Gospel, he gathered a Church of all Kingdoms and Nations, and Languages under Heaven; and built it up with Heavenly and Spiritual promises and instructions, and thus The Kingdom of Heaven may fitly be understood in opposition to these two earthly ones.

These borrowed phrases, intend the removing of obstacles and stumbling blocks out of the way, and plaining and clearing the way for men to come to Christ, and to the obedience of the Gospel. The Jews conceive that the cloud of glory that led the people of Israel in the wilderness, did really and according to the letter, do what is here spoken of, for facilitating of their march and journey: as that it levelled Mountains, raised valleys, and laid all of a flat, that it burnt up bushes and smoothed rocks, and made all plain, that they might travail without trouble or offense.

And some of them also say, that when Jeroboam set up his goden calves and Idolatry in Bethel, and Dan, that he and his wicked agents laid ambushments and scouts in the ways to Jerusalem, to catch up everyone that should go thither to worship, and to this purpose they apply that saying of the Prophet, Hos. 5. 1. O ye Priests and O ye house of the King, ye have been a snare on Mizpah, and a net upon Tabor, And the revolters are profound to make slaughter, &c. If either of these things were undoubtedly so, as they suppose, how properly might this passage of the Prophet Isaiah, and of the Evangelist from him, be thought to refer thereunto; but since they be but surmisals, it is safest to take the words for a borrowed speech, to express what was said before, the removing of obstacles in the way to Christ.

Not to John, but to God: For neither was it possible for John to hear their confessions, nor was it necessary. Not possible, because of the vast multitudes that came to be baptized: nor necessary, for to tell him they had committed such and such sins, what conduced it either to their baptism or forgiveness.

Nor was this their confession of their sins, before there being baptized, but after: For first, if we should strictly take the Grammatical construction of the word, that importeth their confessing, it is not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which would have denoted that they had confessed before they were baptized, but it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in both the Evangelists, that speak of that matter.

Secondly, It was far more agreeable to the end and doctrine of Baptism, that their confession of sin should be after their baptizing then before, in that they were baptized to repentance, ver. 11. and not e contra; the Sacrament was more intentionally to enter them into repentance, then repentance to enter them into the Sacrament; For, as was said before, it obliged them more properly to repentance after the receiving of it then before.

Thirdly, the gesture of our Savior after his Baptism seemeth to have been according to the common custom and gesture of the people, and as he coming out of the water fell to prayer, so they when they came out, used to do, to make their penitent confession to the Lord.

The Pharisees, Sadducees, and Esseans, the three Sects of the Jews; Josephus Antiq. lib. 13. c. 9. are those three Sheepherds spoken of, Zech. 11. 8. whom our Savior at his coming was to cut off.

The two former, whom we have now in hand, are very frequent in mention in the Gospel: men of enmity one against another, yet both joint enemies to Christ and to his Apostles.

The original of the Pharisees is not so easy to go back unto, as that of the Sadducees, nor is the significancy of their name so readily determined and fixed upon as the other; The Sadducees, it is well known were so called from Sadoc, the first Author of their Sect, and he the Scholar of Antigonus; Rabbi Nathan in his Aboth. Perek. 5. hath thus clearly given us their original. Antigonus of Socoh, saith he, received his learning from Simeon the just: This was his saying: Be not as servants that serve their Master, because of receiving a reward, but be as servants that serve their Master, not for the receiving of a reward, but let the fear of God be upon you. This Antigonus had two Scholars, which changed his words; they changed them to their Scholars, and their Scholars to theirs: They stood up and taught after them, and said, what saw our Fathers to say thus? is it possible that a work-man may do his work all the day, and not receive his wages at even? But if our Fathers had known that there is a world to come, and that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, they would never have said thus: They stood up and separated from the Law, and from them broke out the two Sects, the Sadducees, and Baithusaeans: the Sadducees after the name of Sadoc: and the Baithusaeans, after the name of Baithus. So he. Now this Antigonus, whose good doctrine had this bad construction, was Scholar to Simeon the just, whom we shall have occasion to look after by and by.

But the time and occasion of the rising of the Pharisees, is of more obscurity, and the reason of their name admitteth of more conjectures; As, whether they were so called from Perush, which importeth Exposition, for that they took upon them to be the great Expositors of the Law by their Traditions; or from Parush, which betokeneth separation, for that they accounted and pretended themselves more holy then others of the people, and so became Separatists from them, as despising them, Luke 18. 9. Either of which Etymologies carry with them a fair and plausible probability of their notation, but the last most agreeable to what both the Scripture, and other writings have said of them, in regard of their singularity; and as we shall have further occasion to descry, when we come to meet with them in their Doctrines, Practises or Opinions.

And the time of their first starting up, is yet obscurer: But to speak mine own thoughts, I cannot but conceive them to have been somewhat more ancient then the Sadducees, though but a little: And that that passage of the Prophet Malachi, [when he and the Spirit of Prophecy with him was to leave this world] Remember the Law of Moses, Mal. 4. 4. gave occasion to the rising of the Pharisees, and to the confirming of the Sadducees in their opinion when they had taken it up. For whereas the Spirit of Prophecy and revelation was now to depart from Israel, God having revealed as much of himself, and of his will to them, as he thought fit and necessary: He sendeth back the people in this defect of Prophetick guidance and direction, to the Law of Moses, to be their study, and their rule of Faith, and of Obedience. Hence did a certain generation among them take occasion and opportunity, to vent and broach traditions and glosses upon the Law, pretending them to have descended from Moses himself, and to have been handed over to them, from hand to hand, and as the Prophets while their race continued, expounded Moses, and instructed the people in the knowledge of the Law, by the Spirit of God, so these men (now the Prophts were gone) took on them to explain Moses, and the Law also, and by a way which they pretended to be of equal authority with the words of the Prophets, For that, say they, is God's own gloss upon his own Law, and this he taught Moses while he was with him in the Mount: And this, Moses taught Joshua, and Joshua the Elders, and Eli received it from the Elders and from Phinehas and Samuel from Eli, and David from Samuel, and Ahijah the Shilonite from David, and Elias from Ahijah, and Elisha from Elias, and Jehoiada the Priest from Elisha, and Zacharias from Jehoiada, and Hosea from Zacharias, and Amos from Hosea, and Isaiah from Amos, and Micah from Isaiah, and Joel from Micah, and Nahum from Joel, and Habakkuk from Nahum, and Zephaniah from Habakkuk, and Jeremy from Zephaniah, and Baruch from Jeremiah, and Ezra and his School from Baruch. The School of Ezra was called the men of the great Synagogue, and they were Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, Azariah, Nehemiah, Mordecai, Bilshan, Zerubbabel, and many wise men with them, to an hundred and twenty: The last of them was Simeon the just, and he was in the number of the hundred and twenty, and he was High Priest afte • Ezra. Vid. Rambam in Mishu. Tom. 1. statim sub initio.

This nameless number that were between the time of Zerubbabel, Nehemiah, Mordecai, and those holy men that we find mentioned in Scripture, and between the times of Simeon the just, I suspect to be the Generation that afforded the rise and original of Pharisaism and Traditions: For there was a good large space of time and distance detween Ezra and Simeon the just, as might be cleared by several particulars, if that were needful. And a preparative, if not a ground-work, to Pharisaism, and traditions seemeth to be that famous speech of the great Synagogue mentioned in Pirck. Aboth. Per. 1. The men of the great Synagogue said three things, Be deliberate in judgment, and raise up Scholars in abundance, and make a hedge to the Law: Now the lesson of making a hedge to the Law, by a fixed and determinate exposition, was to bring on, and into credit, those glosses and traditions which they would produce and bring upon it. For that the Law should lie to the Commons without any fence about it, to keep men off from breaking in upon it by their own interpretations and expositions of it, they could soon persuade the People, was a thing not to be tolerated or endured: and when they had wrought this lesson home upon their hearts, then had they glosses ready of their own invention to put upon it, as to hedge or fence in from private interpretations. These glosses or expositions they had a twofold trick to bring into request.

First, To pretend strongly that they had descended traditionally from Moses, and from God himself, as the pretended pedigree of them is shown before.

And secondly, to use a strict and severe preciseness in their own conversation, and to pretend and show a holiness above other men, and to withdraw from them as too profane for their society, that this might bring their persons into admiration, and their traditions into repute. And thus they came by their name of Separatists, and thus they laid the foundation for traditions.

And as the Pharisees took this opportunity and occasion from those words of the Prophet, Remember the Law of Moses, to vent their foolish and wicked Expositions upon Moses, as seeming thereby to do the people a singular benefit, and to make as singular a fence to Moses himself: So likewise did the Sadducees make use of the same occasion to confirm themselves in the error they had taken up, and to assert it unto others, in that in all the Law of Moses, to the study of which the Holy Ghost had especially directed them in those times, and which Scripture only they embraced, there is not mention nor hint at all as they pretended, of the resurrection of the dead, or of a world to come.

§ Coming to his Baptism.

The Pharisees and Sadducees were not repulsed by John, though he call them by such a name as Vipers, but they were baptized by him: as is most apparent by comparing the relation that Saint Luke maketh of this Story and this together: That saying therefore of Luke, Chap. 7. 20. But the Pharisees, rejected the Counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him, is to be understood of some of that Sect and not all.

§ O generation of Vipers.

By Generation we are not to understand the present age, as when it is said, shall rise up in judgment with this Generation; An adulterous generation seeketh a sign, &c. that is, the people of this age: It is not to be so taken, as if the Baptist meant this present Generation are Vipers: for it is not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Original, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : though he include no less in what he speaketh, and though, if ever generation were viperous, that was. But the Baptist useth an expression, that hitteth and reflecteth upon their Fathers, and predecessors as well as themselves, for he calleth them a brood or offspring of Vipers: intimating that they and their Fathers were Vipers both. And this he doth, that he might face and affront that fond and vain opinion of theirs, which so much deluded them, and whereupon they built great hopes and made great boasting, namely, of their being the children of Abraham: No, saith John, Say not within yourselves, we have Abraham to our Father, for ye are not the seed of the promise, but the seed of the Serpent: And thus he speaketh not only to the Pharisees and Sadducees, the heretics of the Nation, but as Luke enlargeth it, to all the multitude that came to be baptized: Commenting upon the first promise at this first preaching of the Gospel, and as on the one hand proclaiming Jesus that was coming after him to be the seed of the Woman, so on the other, declaring the Jews to be now become the seed of the Serpent who should persecute and kill the seed of the Woman, howsoever they boasted themselves for the holy seed of Abraham.

And the same lesson our Savior readeth them, when he giveth them the same title, Mat. 12. 34. and 23. 33.

Vipers are the worst and most deadly of any Serpents; for they destroy and kill suddenly, Act. 28. 4. 6. See Job 20. 16. Isai. 30. 6. and 59. 5. from whence the Baptist and our Savior seem to have this phrase and Epithet: and Isai. 41. 24. as the margin of our English and an Expositor in Dav. Kimchi do interpret it.

§ To flee from the wrath to come.

In this speech, John seemeth to refer to the last words in all the Old Testament: where Malachi prophesying of the Baptist, and of his beginning to preach the Gospel, He shall turn, saith he, the hearts of the Fathers to the Children, and the hearts of the Children to the Fathers, Lest I come and smite the Land with a curse. This meaneth, that wrath to come, which should surely fall upon them, if they should disobey the Gospel, which was now the last means offered them for their conversion, and so it came to pass with them, when about forty four years after this, they were destroyed by the Romans.

This was their common boasting: as John 9. 33. the Chaldee Paraphrast, and R. Sol. on Isai. 62. 6. And so doth Rabbi Solomon conceive, that the Edomites were proud of their descent from Abraham as well as the Jews: for thus he expoundeth those words in the Prophecy of Obadiah, ver. 3. Which dwellest in the clefts of the Rock: He leaneth upon the staff of his Fathers, Abraham and Isaac, and they will not profit him.

§ Of these stones to raise up children to Abraham.

Some take this figuratively, as Ignat. Mart. Epist. ad Magnesios. Clem. Alex. Portrept. ad Graec. and others, of the Gentiles, who are stony-hearted toward the Truth, and who worship stocks and stones, God is able to raise up children to Abraham: But it is rather to be interpreted literally for the crying down of their idle boasting: That it was but a vain prop whereupon they leaned, to think that it was enough for them that they were descended of Abraham, for God by his omniponent power was able to make as good and towardly children to Abraham as they were, even of stones.

Whether we read it rationally, as doth the Vulgar Latin, For now the ax, or conjunctively, as doth our English, And now also; it plainly showeth itself to be an Argument or Reason used to enforce something that goeth before. And indeed it suiteth so very well with any of the three verses next preceding, that it is hard to tell, to which most properly it should be applied. For being laid to the seventh verse, it doth so strongly confirm that there was a wrath to come, that it showeth it to be hard by, and even close at hand, For now the ax is laid to the root of the Trees. Join it to the eighth verse and it followeth the metaphor that is used there, of bringing forth fruit, and enforceth the exhortation or Doctrine that is there given, from the danger that may follow on unfruitful trees, For now the ax is laid to the root of them. Or apply it likewise to the verse next preceding, and it doth argue against the carnal confidence that the Jews had in their descending of the stock of Abraham, paraphrastically thus: Ye have had warning of wrath that is to come, and you think you are out of the danger of it, because ye are the children of Abraham, and descended lineally from his loins; a Prerogative so little to be boasted of, that it may be common with you to stones, for God is able of them to raise up children unto Abraham, and a shelter so little to be trusted under, that look to yourselves, the Ax is already laid to the root of the trees.

Some by the Ax understand the word of God, and the preaching of the same, or the publication of the Gospel: from Jerem. 23. 29. after the reading of the LXX: and from Hosea 6. 5. Others, Christ himself, consisting say they of two natures, divine and human, as an Ax of two parts, the head and the handle. But the current of the most, and the best Expositors understand it of the judgments of God: and that it is so to be understood, may be strongly concluded by these reasons.

First, because the context both before and after, speaketh of Judgment and vengeance to come upon the impenitent and unfruitful, as wrath to come, ver. 7. and casting into fire, and fire unquenchable, ver. 10. 12. and therefore it is most proper to expound the Ax as an instrument destroying, for judgment or destruction.

Secondly, this place seemeth plainly to have reference to Isaiah. 10. 33, 34. Behold, the Lord, the Lord of hosts shall lop the bough with terror: and the high ones of stature shall be hewn down, and the haughty shall be humbled. And he shall cut down the thickets of the Forests with iron, and Lebanon shall fall by a mighty one: which how the more ancient Jews understood of the destruction of their State and Kingdom, and that near upon the coming of Christ, a testimony of their own in their Talmud, in the treatise Berachoth may sufficiently evidence. There was a certain Jew, say they, was plowing, and one of his Oxen lowed. The Ox lowing, told of the coming of the Lord. A certain Arabian passing by, heard the lowing of the Ox, and said unto the Jew: O Jew! unyoke thine Oxen, and care not for thine implements, for your Sanctuary is destroyed: And the Ox lowed again: and the Arabian saith, O Jew! yoke thine Oxen, and make fit thine implements, for your Messias is born, &c. Rabbi Abuhi said, And what need you to learn this of an Arabian? The text is plain in Isaiah which saith, Lebanon shall fall by a mighty one: and it followeth, And there shall come forth a rod out of the stemm of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his root.

§ To the root of the trees.

First, by the root of the trees, might be understood the root of Jesse, of which mention was made before from Isaiah 11. 1. For in all the crosses and calamities, Wars, overthrows, and captivities, that had befallen the Nation of the Jews, the stock of Jesse, or line of David, could never be rooted out, or extinguished, because the promise that Christ should come out of it, did preserve and keep it alive, in despite of all opposition, till he that was promised did come indeed. But now, seeing that he was come, and that that line had no more the shelter, and preservative of the promise, it also must come to ruin and rooting out as well as others.

Secondly, the Ax is now laid to the very root of your confidence and boasting: For whereas ye say within yourselves, and stand upon it, that ye have Abraham to your Father: the time is now come, that that distinction betwixt who is, and who is not, of the Seed of Abraham, shall be no more regarded, nor looked after: but everyone of what Nation soever that feareth God shall be accepted of him, and the seed of Abraham for not fearing him shall be rejected, and that privilege not respected at all.

Thirdly, Jerusalem was at the root of the whole Nation, from which they derived the sap of rellgion and policy, but now the ax of destruction is laid even to that.

Fourthly, this phrase may be understood, as comparing the ruin of the Jews here threatened, with those desolations they had felt before: For then, as at the captivity of Babylon for example, they were not utterly cut off from their Land forever, but had a promise of returning, and returned, and were planted there again: but now the vengeance threatened must strike at very root, and quite destroy them from being a Nation forever, and from all hope of returning to their Country anymore.

By the Ax being now laid to the root of the trees, may fitly be understood, 1. The certainty of their desolation. And 2. the nearness: in that the instrument of their destruction was already prepared and brought close to them, the Romans, that should ruin their City and Nation, being already Masters and Rulers over them.

Or, the multitude, as verse. 7. which verse compared with this, showeth, that the question what shall we do then? proceeded from those to whom the Baptist addressed his last speech, O ye generation of Vipers, &c. which were Pharisees and Sadducees, as appeareth by Matthew, and other multitude mixed among, as by Luke. Now whether this their question proceeded from the apprehension of the danger threatened, or application of the exhortation urged, whether they desired to learn how to avoid the evil of the wrath to come, or to do the good works of repentance, when they ask, what shall we do? is neither so material to search, nor easy to find, as it is fit to observe, how powerfully the doctrine of the Baptist hath wrought with them, when it hath thus brought them to look off the goodness of Abraham in which they trusted, and to think after goodness of their own.

It appeareth by the Baptists answer, that their question demanded what were those good fruits, that he called upon them to bring forth, ver. 8, 9. and the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here may seem to have respect to the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in those verses.

His answer is an exhortation to Alms-deeds, or giving to the needy, rather then any other lesson, not that thereby they might think to satisfy for their sins, or merit for themselves, but for divers other important and considerable ends. For, 1. he setteth them this as an easy lesson, for yet they were but very children in the Evangelical School: To have put them at their first entry into this School, to the hard lecture of self-denial, mortification, patience and joy in persecution, and other such things as these, had been too strong meat for such babes, too difficult a task for such infants to take out, and therefore he setteth them this easy Copy, and layeth no greater an imposition upon them, then what even the weakest of them might follow and undergo, to impart of their abundance to the poor.

2. The tenor of the Gospel is mercy and not sacrifice, Hosea, 6. 7. Mat. 12. 7. and therefore he putteth not upon them the cost of oblations and offerings which were required by the Law, nor the fasting and pining of the body, as did many of his own Disciples, but the lovely works of Charity and Mercy, the first and most visible of which is relief of the needy.

3. By this he putteth them to trial, how they forsake the world, by parting with their worldly goods, how they live by faith in not fearing poverty though they give of their wealth away, how they love their neighbor as themselves, in making him partner of what they have, and how their eyes are fixed on things to come, by giving away here, and looking for reward thereof in heaven.

And, 4. it may be very well supposed that among the multitude that stood before him, the Baptist saw some rich, and some poor, some in good clothing, and some in mean, and that the present object that he beheld might be some occasion to him to propose this lesson to be put presently in practice.

§ That hath two Coats, &c.

He requireth not willful Poverty, but Alms-deeds of their superfluity, not to give away their coat if they have but one, but if they have two, then give one of them; and to the same purpose he useth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Meats, in the plural number; not to go naked themselves, that they may clothe others, nor to prevent others begging by their alms, and to beg themselves, but what they have above their own necessaries, to contribute to the necessities of the needy, and first to love themselves, and then their neighbors as themselves.

Publicans at the first were such as gathered the tributes and custom of the Romans in those Countries and Provinces that were under their dominion. And this at that time was an honorable place and calling. For Tully commending M. Varro to Brutus giveth these two reasons of the strong tie of friendship betwixt them: The one is, saith he, because he is versed in my way of studies in which I am chiefly delighted. And the other, because he betook himself maturely to the company of the Publicans, which indeed I would not have had him to have done, because he had suffered great losses, and yet the cause of that common order, of me most highly esteemed, made our friendship the stronger. And in his Oration for Plancius, he saith, That the flower of the Roman Knights, the ornament of the City, the strength of the Common-wealth, is comprehended in the order of the Publicans. And so it was an honorable memorial that was left, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , To him that had played the good Publican. Suetonius in vita Vespasiani statim sub initio.

But in after times the quality of the Office itself, and the conditions of the Officers became very much altered. For now men of inferior rank farmed those places, and took the Office upon an yearly rent, and quickly brought the calling into disgrace. So that in the Gospel Publicans are branded with a special note of infamy above other men, and still go hand in hand with the most notorious sinners.

And this, first, generally everywhere, because of their covetousness, and racking exactions, which are the common fruits of buying and farming of Offices. Tacitus calleth them immodestiam Publicanorum, the immodesty of the Publicans, and mentioneth a general complaint against them in the time of Nero, and some reformation of their injuriousness. And Soudas giveth them this character, The life of the Publicans, is open violence, unpunished rapine, an unseasonable trade, and a shameless merchandize.

Secondly, More especially were men of this profession odious among the Jews; because, whereas they held themselves to be a freeborn Nation, and that they ought not to subject to any, nor pay tribute, but only their dues to God, and homage to their own King, these wretches, as enemies to the common Liberty, did help forward their subjection in exacting of custom, though they were of the same Nation themselves, complying too much with the Romans company, contrary to Jews punctualness of sequestration from the Heathen, and too too much with their tyranny in augmenting those burdens of bondage which they had made heavy enough before.

By this answer is approved what is said immediately before, about their extortion, that not only they sided with the Romans, in putting the Jews their own Nation to tribute, but also did aggravate the burden themselves, by exaction of more then was required by the Roman Governors. Now it is observable, that of the Pharisees and Sadducees the Baptist requireth affirmatively some duties to be done. He that hath two coats, &c. because these people stood upon their own righteousness, and pleaded perfection: therefore will he try them by the touchstone of action: but of the Soldiers and Publicans, he requireth only negatively, some enormities to be foregon: for they being notoriously and scandalously wicked, it was necessary they should first cease to do evil, before they could learn or be brought to do good.

These were Romans, or some of other Nations under the Roman pay; for no one can think that the Romans would use the Jews for their garrisons in their own Country, lest they should rebel: and here do the Gentiles first hearken to the Gospel.

§ Do violence to no man, &c.

The Baptist in his answer tieth both hand, tongue and heart, deed, word, and thought from the injury of another, their profession especially tending so much toward injuriousness.

First, he forbiddeth them to open violence in act, whether by blows, ravishing, plunder, firing, or such like mischiefs as attend the wars, and go with Soldiers.

Secondly, secret underminings, by false accusing, abusing the power of the Superior to the wrong of another, when their own could not reach, and sewing the Foxes skin to, when the Lions was too short. And,

Thirdly, discontentation and repining at their wages, which indeed was the cause and original of both the other. And so is that a main argument used by Percennius, which moved the great mutiny of the three legions in Pannonia, in the very entry of the Reign of Tiberius, Denis in diem assibus corpus & animam aestimari: How poor a thing it was that their lives and bodies were rated and set to sale but at ten farthings a days Tacit. Annal. lib. 1.

It is observable in both the answers of the Baptist, to the Publicans and to the Soldiers, that he gainsayeth not their professions, but their abuse of them: to the one he forbiddeth not to gather tribute, but to exact more: and to the other not to exercise Soldiery, but practice violenc.

Divers things there were that concurred, to make the Jews to think of Christ, when they saw the Baptist, and to muse in heart whether he were he or not.

First, the first and the prime one was the agreement of the time. For they had learned by divers pregnant evidences both in the Law and in the Prophts that this was the time when Christ should come: for now was the Scepter departed from Judah, now was the Lawgiver or Sanhedrin slain by Herod, now were the Romans Lord's of their Nation, and now were Daniel's seventies expired, by which they knew that this was the time, and now they looked that the Kingdom of Heaven should appear, Luke 19. 11. and they gather together from all Nations to Jerusalem to see its appearing, Act. 2. as was hinted before.

When therefore, secondly, in this time of their great expectation, they behold the excellent sanctity, piety, and zeal; the admirable strictness, austerity and Spirit; And,

Thirdly, The strange, unusual and powerful manner of the preaching of the Baptist, it is no wonder if they entertained a doubtful and musing thought of him, whether he were the Christ or no. And,

Fourthly, Their longing desire and earnest wishing after Messias his coming, might something forward such a conceit, for facile credimus quod volumus; and the Greek word doth import a desire joined with their expectation. So Christ in Gen. 49. 10. is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the LXX, the expectation of the Nations; and their desire, Hag. 2. 7. It is not unlike but the coming of the wise men, the words of Simeon and Anna, and other testimonies of Christ then come, were dispersed among very many, and notice taken of them, and this might be a strengthening and helping forward of this surmise: but that the strangeness of the Baptists birth, and of what befell his Father about it, should be any induction or seconding thereunto, as some do hold, is hard to be believed, unless we can think that either this people had forgot to look after the Tribe of Judah for the Messias, or that Elizabeth's alliance to that Tribe, for she was cousin to the Virgin Mary, Luke 1. 36. did satisfy them if they looked after it.

Whereas some hold that John knew the thoughts of their hearts, by the Revelation of the Spirit, for it is said only before that they mused of the matter in their heart, and put it not to question, it is far more probable, that John came to know this their thought, by some outward expression of their own. For among so great a multitude, when they were all in the same doubt and hesitation, it was impossible, but there would break out some whisperings, questions, arguings, or other token of the general conceit, that even a slow and dull apprehension might in short time have found it out.

§. I indeed baptize you, &c.

All the Evangelists have this answer of the Baptist, in regard of the substance, but in some circumstances there is difference among them. As first, whereas Luke saith, that these words were occasioned from him by the thoughts of the people, Matthew, that hitherto hath joined with him in this story, even to the very words, that hath no such thing as about the questions aforementioned, nor about this supposal, but joineth this as a continued speech to the Pharisees and Sadducees: but this needeth to breed no scruple, seeing that it is not only usual, but also necessary among the four, one to relate what another hath omitted, and one to declare at large, what another hath done in brief.

Secondly, Whereas both Luke and Matthew have set this testimony of the Baptist after other speeches of his made before; Mark, as was mentioned before, hath set it the first of all his Preaching, and indeed hath mentioned no speech else: But this he hath done, partly because he would hasten to the Baptism, Preaching, and Miracles of Christ, partly because Matthew had set out the matter at large before; but chiefly to give us to know that this witness went along with John in all his Sermons, and to all companies that came to be baptized.

Thirdly, Whereas Luke hath alleged this speech as an answer to the people's thoughts, John hath brought it as an answer to an open question, Joh. 1. 25, 26, 27. And here it may be questioned indeed, whether these two speak of one and the same thing, and of the same time: But the resolution is easy, that they do not. For as it is plain by Luke, that these words mentioned by him, proceeded from John before the Baptism of Christ, so is it as plain by John, that those in him came from him after: for in ver. 26. he intimateth that Christ himself had already stood among them, but they knew him not; No nor he himself, but by the Holy Ghost, which he saw descend upon him, ver. 33. By which is confimed what was said even now, that John made sure to bear this witness to Christ, at all times, and before all companies. Now because the eyes of the people upon himself, looked at the strangeness of his Baptism, and the sanctity of his person, therefore doth he apply this his testimony accordingly, by comparing Christ and himself, and his baptism and his together, and proclaiming his own inferiority in both, as far as baptism with water only, is below baptizing with the Holy Ghost, and further then the servant that unties his Masters shoos, below him that wears them.

§. I baptize you.

Mark hath it in another tense, I have baptized: which either may import the continuedness of Johns baptizing, this being compared with Matthew and Luke as Jansen hath conjoined them, I have baptized, and do baptize you. Or, rather doth it intimate that he still baptized the companies that came unto him, and then gave this testimony to them concerning Christ. For his preaching was first of repentance, and then having won the people to be baptized, he brought them to the water and baptized them in the name of him that was to come after him, Act. 19. 4. So that these seem to have been the words that he used in sprinkling or applying the water. I baptize thee with water, but a mightier then I cometh, who shall baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire.

§. With water.

In the Greek it is indifferently, with or in, answerable to the significancy of Beth the Hebrew preposition, either local or instrumental: And according to both senses it may be taken here. For as it is undoubted that John brought those that were to be baptized into the River, Matth. 3. 6. 16. So is it almost as little to be doubted, that when they were there he threw and sprinkled the water upon them, both to answer the types of sprinkling that had preceded in the Law, and the predictions thereof that were given by the Prophets, Ezek. 36. 25. understood by Jerome of baptism, Epist. 83. So Act. 8. 38. The Eunuch first goeth into the water, and then Philip baptizeth him.

§. Water.

As the form of the Church was changed at the coming of Christ, from Jewish to Christian, and from Legal to Evangelical, so is it no wonder if the Sacraments were changed therewithal. For if Christ were to give a new law, as Moses did the old, which the Jews themselves confess that he must, and the Prophets had foretold that he should do; it was also necessary that he should give these new, as well as other things. But it is some wonder, that seeing he instituted the Sacrament that should succeed the Passover so near to the nature of the Passover, as that it was a supper as well as it, that there should such a main distance and difference be between Baptism and Circumcision, the one of which should succeed the other; for what affinity betwixt washing with water, and cutting off of the foreskin? For the better viewing of the reason of which difference, it will be necessary to consider the main particulars of either Sacrament apart, and then may the Reader compare them together in their variety.

First, then, Circumcision to Abraham was a seal of the promise, thou shalt be the father of many Nations: but to his seed, of the promise of the Land of Canaan, I will give to thee, and to thy seed, all the Land of Canaan: therefore thou and thy seed after thee, shall keep my Covenant, Gen. 17. 8, 9. And such a different end may be observed in the administration of baptism to Christ himself, and the administering of it unto Christians. The Text alleged sealeth the lease of the Land of Canaan to the seed of Abraham with the seal of Circumcision, and confineth that Ceremony only to that Land, and only to their continuance there. And upon this inference, [I will give thy seed the Land of Canaan; therefore shall they keep my Covenant ] it was that Joshua, as soon as ever they had set foot upon that Land, was commanded to circumcise them, Josh. 5. And from hence it will follow, first, that that Land must be considered dilated, as far as Circumcision went with the seed of Abraham, in Ishmaelites, Midianites, Edomites and others.

Secondly, Hence they will be found to erect circumcision again in the Church of Christ, that hold the called Jews shall have a temporal Kingdom again in the Land of Canaan.

And, thirdly, hence it may be resolved why that Sacrament was deferred so long, and not given to the World before. Adam, Enoch, Noah, Eber, &c. were not circumcised; because to them a fixed and settled place for the Church to reside together was not designed, but when such a one is designed to Abraham, then circumcision is given also.

The Land of Canaan was bequeathed to Sem by his father Noah, the occasion was, because Cham, and his Son Canaan derided Noah's nakedness as he lay asleep in the midst of his Tent: when therefore that Land is to be settled upon the right heirs of Sem, to which God in the Prophetick spirit of Noah intended it, a seal, and an assurance thereof is given in that member, which had been derided by Canaan, to his loss of that Land, and to his perpetual slavery. This was a main reason, why Males alone were circumcised, and why in that member; because a male alone, and that member in him was so derided. Other reasons of the institution of the Ceremony, and only for masculines, and in that part, might concur for instruction [such as are given by Lombard, Aquinas, Biel, Lyra and others] but that they were not of the nature or essence of the Sacrament, and that this forementioned was the vigor and spirit of it, may be concluded by these two things.

First, That Circumcision concerned not the children of Israel only, but the whole seed of Abraham: For those children of his by his Concubines, that lived in Arabia, as Ishmaelites, Dedanites, Medianites, Midianites, Shuhites, Amalekites, and the rest were circumcised as well as Israel in Palestine. Those Countries whither Abraham had sent them to inhabit were once in the possession of Canaanites, till he obtained them by conquest of the four Kings, Gen. 14. and thither he sendeth them with the seal of Circumcision upon them, which gave them interest in the Land there, as well as Isaac had elsewhere: Abraham taught his children, and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord, Gen. 18. 19. which though this offspring of his in Arabia did not long in other things, yet in circumcision it did. So that from hence may result the observation of another end, and reason of the institution of this Ceremony, namely, for distinction, not of Israel from other Nations, as Lyranus would have it, but of the seed of Abraham from all other people.

Secondly, Howsoever all the Israelites dwelling before the coming of our Savior out of the Land of Canaan, as both of the Babylonian and Grecian dispersion, used Cicumcision in Heathens Lands, and used it lawfully; yet it was because their claim and interest to the Land of Canaan did still continue: nay, this was one reason why it held up some store of years after Christ his coming and ascension: but when Jerusalem was destroyed, and their lease of that Land of promise, either expired or forfeited, or both; then did this seal of it fall and come to ruin also, and might not lawfully be used ever after: and when they must forever relinquish the Land, they must forever also relinquish this seal or Ceremony that had assured it. This well considered, will cause us also to observe:

First, That the interest of Israel in the holy Land began to shake, when baptism came to shoulder out Circumcision. Secondly, That John most properly preached much of the Kingdom of Heaven, for their earthly one began to cease when baptism began to extinguish Circumcision.

As Circumcision itself had relation to the inheritance of the Land of the Canaanites: so the fixed time for the administration of it; namely, the eighth day seemeth also to have some aim and respect to the same thing. For seven nations were in that Land, which the Children of Abraham were to subdue and dwell in their stead, Canaanites, Hittites, Hivites, Perizzites, Girgashites, Amorites, and Jebusites, Deut. 7. 1. Josh. 3. 10. In correspondency to this number of seven Nations that were to be subdued, Jericho the first field fought in that Land, is compassed seven days, and seven - times the seventh day. And in like answerableness, every child of Abraham for seven days, was like the children of those seven Nations, but on the eighth day he was to receive circumcision the pledge of that interest and claim that he had in that Land, which those seven Nations had usurped.

This then was the ground-work and Original of that Sacrament, that every Son of Abraham might bear in his body the seal of the inheritance of the Land of promise, and the badge of distinction from all other people, and that this visible sign might make him strive after the invisible grace which it sealed, the inheritance of Heaven, and walking as the peculiar of the Lord. From which appropriated and restrictive ends of the Rite, the necessity of the changing of it at the coming of Christ doth plainly appear: for when there was to be no more distinction betwixt the children of Abraham, and other people, and no one land more peculiarized then another, but of every Land and Nation he that feareth God, and worketh righteousness is accepted of him; that badge of appropriation, and seal of singularity, must either clean come to nothing, or become unnecessary.

Now that baptism did succeed in the stead thereof, some reasons may be given. As, first, because the Sacraments of the New Testament were to be gentle and easy, instead of the smart and burdensome ones of the Law. Secondly, Because God would comply with men even in their own common custom, of washing children when they are newly born, Ezek. 16. 4. 9. and turn the common to a sacred use, thereby to catch and win them the more. But, thirdly, this one main reason may serve for all; namely, the near correspondency that is between the Sacrament, and the thing signified, and the full significancy that the element beareth of the grace that it signeth forth. To which, fourthly, might be added, that baptism took place in the Christian Church, to fulfil the types and predictions that had gone before of it under Moses Law, and before. As in the flood and Ark, 1 Pet. 3. 21. in the passage through the red Sea and Jordan, 1 Cor. 10. 2. in the purifications and sprinklings at the Sanctuary: But especially in four remarkable particulars, was this fore-signified and typed out in a special manner.

First, In Jacob's admission of the preserved Shechemites to his family and communion, Gen. 35. 2. And Jacob said to his household, and to all that were with him, Put away the strange God's that are among you, and be clean, and change your garments. Wherein he enjoineth them three things for their admission to his Church. 1. To relinquish their idolatry. 2. To wash or baptize their bodies, for so must the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Make yourselves clean, be understood, and so it is well rendered by Ibn Ezra. Especially, 3. Since he giveth order for the changing of their garments: All three containing the cleansing of their minds, bodies and clothes. And there observe, first, that when Circumcision in the next Chapter before had proved a Sacrament of death to the Shechemites; Jacob useth baptism for admission of Proselytes in the stead thereof. Secondly, That the company to be admitted are females, [unless there were some Syrian male Idolaters] for all the males of Shechem were slain, Gen. 34. 25. or at the least, the most of them, and therefore he useth a Sacrament which women also might come under, for under circumcision they did not come.

Secondly, In the admission of the Israelites to the hearing of the Law, by sanctification and washing, Exod. 19. 10. from which the Jews themselves did ground the baptizing of Proselytes, as a special ground.

Thirdly, At the making of the Covenant at Sinai, the introduction of Israel to the visible Church, was by baptism, or the sprinkling of water as well as of blood, as saith St. Paul, Heb. 9. 19. yea, and even the Jews themselves. Our Rabbins teach, saith Rabbi Solomon, that our Fathers entered into the Covenant, and baptism, and sprinkling of blood: for there was no sprinkling of blood without baptism. R. Sol. in loc. 4. In that in the times of David and Solomon, when heathens were converted to the Jews Religion by multitudes, their admission to their Church was by baptism, and not by circumcision. And the groundwork of this their practice, was, because, Israel coming out of Egypt washed their garments; and the Priests coming from their common employments, to their function, washed their bodies: Let all be concluded in the words of the Talmud, Rabbi Akiba said, O Israel you are blessed: Before whom are ye justified or cleansed? Or who is he that cleanseth you? It is your heavenly Father, as it is said, I will pour clean water upon you. In Kippurim.

Our Masters say, That bastards and Gibeonites, shall be all justified in time to come. And this is the doctrine of Ezekiel, as it is written, I will pour clean water upon you. In Kiddushin.

Here the Schools think they find a main difference between the baptism of John, and the baptism used in the Christian Church; because that was only the baptism of repentance, and the other of grace, and remission of sins: but that there was no essential or substantial difference between them, shall be seen anon.

Though by this mightiness of Christ above the Baptist, his omnipotency or all-powerfulness as he is God, may well and truly be understood, as many Expositors do take it, yet since John speaketh of him, as he should show himself among the people when he came, and in comparison with himself as concerning preaching and baptizing, it cannot be but his words have respect to some particular things, wherein Christ shown this mightiness above John, yea, even conversing among men in his human flesh, and in what respected his preaching and ministerial Office. And these may be reduced unto these four heads.

First, The power of miracles, which Christ had, but John had not: For John wrought no miracle, Joh. 10. 41. Nor was it fit he should, since he in whom that power rested as in its proper center, was so near to come, and so ready to show it.

Secondly, In the different power of the Preaching of John, and of our Savior, and their conversion of the people, John many, but Christ far more, as Joh. 3. 26.

Thirdly, In the seal and confirmation of their Doctrine and Ministry; for whereas John sealed it with his death, our Savior did not only so, but also with his resurrection.

Fourthly, In continuance and increase of their preaching, and Disciples, and this difference John showeth himself, Joh. 3. 30. To which may be annexed the excellency of Christ's baptism above that of Johns, which is the very thing that is in comparison, I baptize you with water, but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

§. The latchet of whose shoos I am not worthy to unloose.

The sense is but strained which delighteth so many, namely, that John confesseth under this simile, that he is unable to resolve the great mystery of the incarnation; Seeing Matthew giveth this his speech in other words, and Mark by adding one word more to these, maketh it more necessary to take them in their literal meaning. For Matthew hath it thus, Whose shoos I am not worthy to bear, and Mark. The latchet of whose shoos, I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. Both jointly showing, that the Baptist hath no mystical and figurative meaning in this his speech, but doth in plain and down-right terms aver his inferiority to Christ, that was to come after him, to be infinitely great, and more then a servants that ties his Masters shoos, or carries them, is to his Master. For these meanest and basest of offices of servant to Master, he instanceth in, that he might express the infinite distance betwixt him and Christ, the more to the life, and to the people's apprehension.

§. He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

Hence ariseth that opinion so mightily taken up in the Schools, and embraced, concerning the great disparity and difference betwixt the Baptism used in the Christian Church, and the Baptism of John; for this (say they) could not confer grace, but the other doth, and Johns was but as a mean betwixt the purifications of the Jews, and the baptism of Christians. In which, first, the words of the Baptist are misconstrued, and secondly, there is a difference pretended where there is none at all.

For, first, John compareth not his own baptism with ours, but his own with Christ's. For that he meaneth not the baptism that Christ instituted to be used by others, but that he practiced and exhibited personally himself, is plain, in that he mentioneth not water in Christ's baptizing, which our Savior himself doth, when he speaketh of the baptism that they mean, Joh. 3. 5. and in that he saith personally that Christ should baptize, which with water he never did, Joh. 4. 2.

Secondly, By the Holy Ghost, wherewith Christ should baptize, is not meant the grace concomitant to our Christian baptism, as they suppose, but his sending down the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, as is plain by our Savior's own exposition, Act. 1. 5. For John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. Where using the very same words with these of the Baptist, and applying the baptizing with the Holy Ghost plainly and undeniably to his sending down of the Holy Ghost on Pentecost day, he hath given a sure, plain and undoubted explanation of these words.

Thirdly, Neither, if the baptism of John, and the baptism used in the Christian Church be well compared together, will any such difference or diversity be found betwixt them, nay, set the form of words aside, no difference at all.

For, first, They both had the same institution from Christ, for he that sent the Apostles to baptize, sent also the Baptist, John 1. 33.

Secondly, They both had the same element, water.

Thirdly, They had both the same end, repentance. For though our Christian baptism is called the Baptism for remission of sins, Act. 2. 38. &c. and a great deal of preeminence of this, above that of John, picked as is thought out of that title, yet is it no more then what is said of the baptism of John, Mark 1. 4.

Fourthly, Whereas it is commonly said, that one end of our Savior's being baptized was, that he might sanctify our baptism, how can this be supposed, if he received not our baptism, but one different from it?

Fifthly, The Disciples were baptized with no baptism but that of John, for Christ baptized them not, and who other should do, it cannot be imagined, and therefore if this of ours be more excellent then Johns, we have a better baptism then the Apostles that first administered it.

Sixthly, and lastly, Howsoever the Schools without any stumbling, do hold rebaptization of those that had received the baptism of John, this crosseth their own tenet, that his was a degree above the washings under the Law, for their imperfection was shown by their reiteration, and in this they make his to differ nothing at all. And whereas it is said, Act. 19. 5. that some that were baptized with the baptism of John upon Paul's instruction of them, were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus: it was rather their renewing to their baptism, then their baptism to them, and not that they took any other then that of John, but that they now began to entertain and apply it to the right intent. As it may be exemplified in circumcision in any heathen son of Abraham: as in Jethro for an instance. He was circumcised while he was an unbeliever, because he was a Midianite, a child of Abraham; now when he came to be a convert, and embraced the true Religion, he was not to be circumcised again, for that was not possible, but he then began to know and apply the right use and meaning of his circumcision, and so was renewed to it, and not it to him: Or those words, [When they heard this they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus,] may be understood to be the words of Paul, and not of Luke, as see Beza in loc.

This phrase of baptizing with the Holy Ghost showeth, first, the restoring of the Holy Ghost, which long ago was departed from Israel, and gone up.

Secondly, The abundance and plenteousness of that gift when it should be exhibited, that it should be as water poured upon them, as the word is used, Joel 2. 28.

Thirdly, It showeth whither all the washings and purifyings of the Law aimed, and had respect, namely to the washing and purging of men by the Holy Ghost.

§. You.

That is, some of you, as 1 Sam. 8. 11. He will take your sons, that is, some of them: or You, that is, the people, as Deut. 18. 15. The Lord shall raise to thee a Prophet, that is, to thy people, and unto him you shall hearken, that is, the Nation of your posterity.

§. And with fire.

From Isa. 4. 4. The Lord shall wash the filthiness of the Daughter of Zion, and purge the blood of Jerusalem out of the midst thereof, by the spirit of Judgment, and by the spirit of burning. It is easily to be resolved what John meaneth here by fire, seeing our Savior himself hath applied the other part of his speech to the coming down of the Holy Ghost on Pentecost day, when we know he appeared in the visible shape of Tongues of fire, Act. 2. Now Christ's baptizing in this manner with fire, was, 1. That the giving of the Holy Ghost might fully answer the giving of the Law, both for time and manner, for both were given at Pentecost, and both in fire. 2. To express the various operations of the Holy Ghost, which are fitly resembled and represented by the effects of fire: As 1. To enlighten with knowledge; 2. To inflame with zeal; 3. To burn up corruption; 4. To purify the nature; 5. To turn the man to its own qualification of sanctity, as fire maketh all things that it seizeth like itself. 3. To strike terror in the hearts of men, lest they should despise the Gospel, and to win reverence to the Holy Ghost, for fear of the fire. 4. Hereby was clearly and fully shown, the life and significancy of the sacrifices under the Law, upon whom there came a fire from Heaven: intimating that they are lively sacrifices, and accepted, who are inflamed by the Holy Ghost from above.

And thus the two elements that have and shall destroy the world, water and fire, hath God been pleased to use for the benefit and salvation of his chosen.

By the fan in the hand of Christ, the most Expositors understand the power of judgment that God the Father hath committed to him, For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment to the Son, Joh. 5. 22. And thus some take it for an argument against security to all: and others, against Apostasy to those that have been baptized with the Holy Ghost: and that as the Baptist in the former words hath told what Christ would do, at his first coming and appearance, so in these, what he will do at his second: but I rather adhere to the interpretation of them that by the Fan of Christ, understand the Gospel, and his preaching and publication of the same; and that upon these reasons:

First, Because unless it be thus taken, we have not here any testimony at all given by the Baptist to the people, concerning that part of the Office of Christ. Now that being a matter of so great importance, as that the Prophets do more insist upon the preaching of Christ, and his power in the Gospel, then upon any other thing that concerned him in the work of Redemption, and this being in several respects more regardable then his baptizing with the Holy Ghost, it cannot be imagined that John should omit to bear witness of him for such a thing, nay it had been to neglect to bear witness of him for the chief thing of all.

Secondly, Because the Gospel or the Word of God is the proper touchstone that trieth and differenceth betwixt gold and dross, truth and falsehood, pure and vile: and this is the instrument wherewith he confoundeth every strong hold that exalteth itself against himself, Isa. 11. 4. 2 Thes. 2. 8. Revel. 1. 16. & 2. 16. And,

Thirdly, Because John speaketh of Christ as he should presently show himself among them, as it is apparent in the verse preceding, and not as he should show himself at the end of the world.

§. His floor.

If these words and those that follow, be applied to the whole Church in all places, and at all times in general, the application may be very profitable and pertinent, as giving warning to all men, to bring forth the fruits of repentance, for fear of the judgment to come, and so the end of this verse may be of the same use with the end of the ninth to all men whatsoever; but that by the floor of Christ in this place is meant the Church of Israel, or the nation of the Jews alone, may be concluded upon these observations:

First, That the title given, His floor, is but the very Epithet of Isaiah, that he giveth to Israel, Isa. 21. 10. Oh my threshing, and the corn of my floor: which though some Expositors both Jewish and Christian apply to Babel, yet let the Reader upon common reason, and serious examination be the Judge.

Secondly, Because the phrase of fanning of that Nation betokeneth their final desolation, Jer. 15. 7. I will fan them with a fan in the gates of the Land: and the Baptist seemeth in these expressions his fan and his floor, to have reference to these two Prophets.

Thirdly, Because the words being thus appropriated to Israel, they have the more agreement with the verses preceding, which tell of the wrath to come upon that Nation, and of the ax already laid to the root of that tree.

Fourthly, The phrase of thoroughly purging, which the Greek word importeth, [and the same word is used both by Luke and Mark ] denoteth a final separation of the Wheat and chaff, and an utter consumption of the wicked, and this being spoken only to the Jews, and to those Gentiles that were mingled with them, they cannot so fitly be applied to anything as to that Nation, and their utter desolation; for God had often purged them before; but now their thorough purging is near at hand, when Christ by the fan of the Gospel shall have sifted and tried them, and found them out, who was Wheat, and who was chaff. And,

Fifthly, This Exposition is consented to, even by the Jews themselves, the more ancient of whom have held, that the coming of Christ should be the final desolation of their Nation. So doth their whole Sanhedrin confess, Joh. 11. 48. This man doth many miracles, and if we let him alone, all men will believe on him, and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and Nation. And to the same tenor of confession is that collection of the Talmud cited ere while from the last verse of the tenth Chapter of Isaiah, and the first of the eleventh, where the fall of the forest and Lebanon, and the coming of the branch out of the stem of Jesse, are laid together. And to the same purpose doth the Chaldee Paraphrast render Isa. 66. 7. Before her pains came, she was redeemed, and before the pangs of her birth, Messias her King was revealed. A Text from which Rabbi Samuel bar Nachaman in Bereshith Rabba concludeth that the destruction of the Temple, and the birth of the Messias should be near together.

And lastly, that this verse, as it was spoken only, so also is to be applied only to the Jews, may be somewhat inferred from the Titles given to the parties spoken of, wheat and chaff, which both grow from one root, and come up upon the same stalk: resembling fitly both the believing and unbelieving Jews, or the godly and wicked of them, both descended from the same National Original. And to back this observation, it is observable, that whereas our Savior maketh his metaphor of Wheat and Tares, because he would only show the difference betwixt the righteous and the wicked, the Baptist doth his of Wheat and chaff, because he would not only show the same difference in condition, but also their agreement and identity in Nation.

§. The Wheat he will gather.

By Wheat and chaff, might very well be understood true and false doctrine, and the rather because the Scripture elsewhere calleth them by such terms, Jer. 23. 28. and maketh the fire of the Word of God, the trier and touchstone of them both, 1 Cor. 3. 12, 13, 15. from Deut. 33. 2. and the rather still, because the words are spoken to Pharisees and Sadducees, which were both very erroneous in their tenets: but that it will be very harsh to apply the gathering into the Garner, and the unquenchableness of the fire in reference to doctrine: therefore the two different titles are severally and properly to be understood of righteous and wicked men's persons differenced in those their several qualifications: and under this interpretation may the truth or falsity of doctrine be also understood: Now the righteous or Saints of God, are fitly compared to Wheat in diverse respects, as in goodness, usefulness, weight and fullness, whereas the wicked on the contrary are like chaff, in being refuse, vile, unprofitable, light, empty, and fittest for the fire.

§. He will gather.

The observation is not far amiss, especially the significancy and force of the Greek word regarded, that from hence inferreth, that the righteous lie scatteredly and dispersedly among the wicked: but the word gathering doth not always necessarily import so much, for a Leper was said to be gathered when he was cleansed, 2 King. 5. 3. which was not from amongst men, but unto them: and the manner of speech here, seemeth to be taken from the gathering of harvest or ripe fruits, Exod. 23. 16. or from the gathering of dying men unto their rest, as Gen. 25. 8. 17.

§. Into the Garner.

Seeing that the main intent of the verse is to show forth the destruction of Jerusalem, as is proved before, by these words might well be understood the care and charge that God took of his faithful ones in that ruin, when by the warning of a voice in the Temple that said Migremus hinc, let us flit hence, he removed them to Pella, a place far enough distant from the danger, but that our Savior hath taught us to understand it of the rest in Heaven, in his parable of the Wheat and Tares, Matth. 13.