PPuritanSearch
Primary source research library
English Puritan & Reformed

Works

John Lightfoot (1602-1675) · 3,989,977 words · 17733 min

Large work readerShowing section 92 of 144. Corpus search still uses the whole work; source find opens the first matching section.
Section 92/144

Now therefore the fore-knowledge of things to come, of which the discourse here is, is to be numbered among those things, which flowed from the anointing of the Holy Spirit, and from immediate revelation; not from the Hypostatic Union of the Natures. So that those things which were revealed by Christ to his Church, he had them from the revelation of the Spirit, not from that Union. Nor is it any derogation or detraction from the Dignity of his Person, that he saith, he knew not that day and hour of the destruction of Jerusalem: yea it excellently agrees with his Office and Deputation, who being the Fathers Servant, Messenger, and Minister, followed the orders of the Father, and obeyed him in all things. The Son knoweth not, that is, It is not revealed to him from the Father, to reveal to the Church. Revel. I. 1. The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him.

We omit enquiring concerning the Knowledge of Christ, being now raised from death: whether, and how far, it exceeded his knowledge while yet he conversed on earth. It is without doubt, that being now raised from the dead, he merited all kind of Revelation (See Revel. V. 9. And they sung a new song, saying, thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof, for thou wast slain, &c.) and that he conversing on earth before his death, acted with the vigor of the Holy Spirit, and of that unspeakable holiness which flowed from the Union of the Human Nature with the Divine, the

Divine Nature in the mean time suspending its infinite activity of Omnipotence. So that Christ might work miracles, and know things to come, in the same manner as the Prophets also did, namely, by the Holy Ghost, but in a larger measure; and might overcome the Devil not so much by the Omnipotence of the Divine Nature, as by the infinite holiness of his Person, and of his obedience. So that if you either look upon him, as the Minister and Servant of God; or if you look upon the constitution, as I may so call it, and condition of his Person, These words of his, Of that day and hour knoweth not the Son also, carry nothing of incongruity along with them: yea, do excellently speak out his substitution, as a Servant, and the constitution of his Person, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 God-man.

The reason, why the Divine Wisdom would have the time of the destruction of Jerusalem so concealed, is well known to itself; but by men, since the time of it was unsearchable, the reason certainly is not easy to be searched. We may conjecture, that the time was hid, partly lest the Godly might be terrified with the sound of it, as 2 Thes. II. 2. partly, that the Ungodly, and those that would be secure, might be taken in the snares of their own security, as Mat. XXIV. 38. But let secret things belong to God.

CHAP. XIV.

VERS. III.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Of Spikenard.

WHAT if I should render it, Nardinum Balaninum, Nardin of Balanus? Nardin consists of Omphacium, Balaninum, Bulrush, Nard, Amomum, Myrrh, Balsam, &c. And again, Myrobalanum is common to the Troglodytes, and to Thebais, and to that part of Arabia, which divides Judea from Egypt, a growing ointment, as appears by the very name, whereby also is shewn that it is the maste of a tree.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , as all know, among the Greeks, is Glans, Maste, or an Acorn: so also is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Pistaca among the Talmudists. There are prescribed by the Talmudists various remedies for various diseases: among others this: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 For a Pluri ie (or as others will have it, A certain disease of the head) Take to the quantity of the Maste of A moniac. The Gloss is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the maste of Cedar. The Aruch saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is the grain of a fruit, which is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Glans.

The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Nard, is Hebrew from the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nerd, and the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is Syriac, from the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Pistaca. So that the Ointment might be called Unguentum Balaninum, Balanine ointment: in the composition of which, Nard, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Maste or Myrobalane were the chief ingredients.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Poured it upon his head.

In Talm dic Language, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 What are the Testimonies that the woman married is a Virgin? If she goes forth to be married 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with a veil let down over her eyes, yet with her head not veiled. The scattering of n ts is also a testimony. These are in Judea, but what are in Babylon? Rabh saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If ointment be pon the head of the Rabbins (The Gloss is, the women poured ointment upon the heads 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the Scholars, and anointed them) Rabh Papa said to Abai, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Does that Doctor speak of the aromatic ointment used in bridg-chambers? (The Gloss is, Are the Rabbins such, to be anointed with such Oyntments?) He answered, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 O Orphan (that is, O thou unacquainted with the Customs) Did not thy other pour out ointment for you (at thy wedding) upon the heads of the Rabins. Thus, a certain Rab in got a wife for his son in the house of Rabbah bar Ulla; and they said to him, Rabbah bar ulla also got a wife in the house of a certain Rabbin for his Son 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And he poured out ointment upon the heads of the Rabbins.

From the Tradition produced, it may be asked, whether it were customary in Judea to wet the heads of the Rabbins with ointments in the marriages of Virgins, as it was in Babylon? Or, whether it were so customary otherwise, to anoint their heads; as that such an anointing at weddings, were not so memorable a matter, as it was in Babylon? Certainly in both places, however they anointed men's heads for healths sake, it was accounted unfitting for Rabbins to smell of aromatical ointments. It is undecent, say the Jerusalem Talmudists, for a Scholar of the Wise men to smell of spices. And you have the judgment of the Babylonians in this very place, when it is inquired among them, and that as it were with a certain kind of disatisfaction, whether Rabbins be such as that they should be anointed with aromatical ointments, as the more nice sort are wont to be anointed. From this opinion everywhere received among them, you may more aptly understand, why the other Disciples as well as Judas, did bear the lavish of the ointment with some indignation: He out of wicked covetousness; but they partly as not willing that so precious a thing should be lost, and partly, as not liking so nice a custom should be used towards their Master, from which the Masters of the Jews themselves were so averse. And our Savior taking off the envy of what was done, applies this anointing to his burial, both in his intention, and in the intention of the woman; that it might not seem to be done out of some delicate niceness.

VERS. V.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Above three hundred pence.
  • I. THE prizes of such precious ointments (as it seems in Pliny ) were commonly known. For thus he, The price of Costus is XVI pounds. The price of Spike (Nard) is XC pounds. The Leaves have made a difference in the value. From the broadness of them, it is called Hadrospherum, with greater Leaves, it is worth X xxx (that is thirty pence) That with a lesser leaf, is called Mesopherum, it is sold at X lx (sixty pence) The most esteemed is that called Microspherum, having the least leaf, and the price of it is X lxxv (seventy five pence) And elsewhere. To these the merchants have added, that which they call Daphnois, surnamed Isocinnamon, and they make the price of it to be CCC ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Three hundred pence. ) See more there.
  • II. It is not easy to reduce this sum of three hundred pence to its proper value; partly, because a penny was twofold, a silver penny, and a gold one: partly, because there was a double value and estimation of money, namely that of Jerusalem, and that of Tyre, as we observed before. Let these be silver (which we believe) which are of much less value than gold: and let them be Jerusalem pence (which we also believe) which are cheaper than the Tyrian; yet they plainly speak the great wealth of Magdalene, who poured out an ointment of such a value, when before she had spent some such other.

Which brings to my mind those things, which are spoken by the Masters, concerning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The box of spices, which the husband was bound to give the wife according to the proportion of her dowry. But this is not spoken, saith Rabh Jesse, but of Jerusalem people. There is an example of a daughter of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nicodemus ben Gorion, to whom the Wise men appointed four hundred crowns of gold for a chest of spices for one day. She said to them, I wish you may so appoint for their daughters; and they answered after her, Amen. The Gloss is, The husband was to give to his wife ten Zuzees for every Manah, which she brought with her, to buy spices with which she used to wash herself, &c. Behold! a most wealthy woman of Jerusalem, daughter of Nicodemus, in the contract and instrument of whose marriage, was written A thousand thousand gold pence out of the house of her Father, besides those she had out of the house of her Father in-Law: whom yet you have in the same story reduced to that extreme poverty, that she picked up barley corns for her food out of the cattles dung.

VERS. VII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
For ye have the poor always with you.

SAmuel saith, There is no difference between this world, and the days of the Messias, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 anless in regard of the affliction of the Heathen kingdoms, as it is said, A poor man shall not be wanting out of the midst of the earth (Deut. XV. 11.) Observe a Jew cofessing that there shall be poor men even in the days of the Messias. Which how it agrees with their received opinion of the pompous kingdom of the Messias, let him look to it. R. Solomon and Ibn Ezra write, If thou shalt obey the words of the Lord, there shall not be a poor man in thee: but thou wilt not obey, therefore a poor man shall never be wanting. Upon this received reason of the thing, confess also, O Samuel, that there shall be disobedient persons in the days of the Messias; which indeed, when the true Messias came, proved too too true, in thy Nation.

VERS. XII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
And on the first day of unleavened bread.

SO Matth. Chap. XXVI. 17. and Luke, Chap. XXII. 7. And now let them tell me, who think that Christ indeed kept his Passover the fourteenth day, but the Jews not before the fifteenth, because this year their Passover was transferred unto the fifteenth day, by reason of the following Sabbath: Let them tell me, I say, whether the Evangelists speak according to the day prescribed by Moses, or according to the day prescribed by the Masters of the Traditions, and used by the Nation: If according to Moses, then the fifteenth day was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the first of Unleavened bread, Exod. XII. 15, 18. But if according to the manner of the Nation, then it was the fourteenth. And whether the Evangelists speak according to this custom, let us inquire briefly.

Sometime indeed the whole seven days feast was transferred to another month; and that not only from that Law, Numb. IX. but from other causes also; concerning which see the places quoted in the margin But when the time appointed for the feast occurred, the Lamb was always slain on the fourteenth day.

I. Let us begin with a story, where an occasion occurs, not very unlike that, for which they, of whom we spake, think the Passover this year was transferred; namely, because of the following Sabbath. The story is this.

After the death of Shemaiah and Abtalion, the sons of Betyra obtained the chief place: Hillel went up from Babylon to inquire concerning three doubts. When he was now at Jerusalem, and the fourteenth day of the first month fell out on the Sabbath; ( observe that ) it appeared not to the sons of Betyra, whether the Passover drove off the Sabbath, or no. Which when Hillel had determined in many words, and had added moreover, that he had learnt this from Shemaiah and Abtalion, they laid down their authority, and made Hillel president. When they had chosen him President, he derided them saying, What need have you of this Babylonian? Did you not serve the two chief Men of the world, Shemaiah and Abtalion, who sat among you?
These things which are already said make enough to our purpose; but with the Readers leave, let us add the whole story.
While he thus scoffed at them, he forgot a Tradition. For they said, What is to be done with the people, if they bring not their knives? He answered, I have heard this tradition, but I have forgot. But let them alone, for although they are not Prophets, they are Prophets sons. Presently everyone, whose Passover was a Lamb, stuck his knife into the fleece of it; and whose Passover was a Kid, hung his knife upon the horns of it.

And now, let the impartial Reader judge between the reason which is given for the transferring the Passover this year unto the fifteenth day, namely, because of the Sabbath following, that they might not be forced to abstain from servile work for two days together; and the reason, for which it might with good reason be transferred that year, concerning which the story is. The fourteenth day fell on a Sabbath, a scruple ariseth, whether the Sabbath gives way to the Passover? Or the Passover to the Sabbath? The very chief men of the Sanhedrin, and the Oracles of Traditions are not able to resolve the business. A great Article of Religion is transacting, and what is here to be done? O ye sons of Betyra, transfer but the Passover unto the next day, and the knot is untied. Certainly, if this had been either usual, or lawful they had provided, that the affairs of Religion, and their authority and fame, should not have sunk in this strait. But that was not to be suffered.

II. Let us add a Tradition, which you may justly wonder at. Five things, if they come in uncleanness, are not eaten in uncleanness: the sheaf of first fruits, the two loaves, the Shew-bread, the Peace-offerings of the Congregation, and the Goats of the New-Moons. But 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Passover which comes in uncleanness, is eaten in uncleanness: because it comes not originally, unless to be eaten.

Upon which Tradition thus Maimonides. The Lord saith, And there were some that were unclean by the Carkass of a man, ( Numb. IX. 6.) and he determines of them, that they be put off from the Passover of the first month to the Passover of the second. And the Tradition is, that it was thus determined, because they were few. But if the whole Congregation should have been unclean, or if the greatest part of it should have been unclean, yet they offer the Passover, though they are unclean. Therefore they say, Particular men are put off to the second Passover, but the whole Congregation is not put off to the second Passover. In like manner, All the oblations of the Congregation, they offer them in uncleanness, if the most are unclean; which we learn also from the Passover. For the Lord saith of the Passover, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That it is to be offered in its set time, (Note that) and saith also, of the oblations of the Congregation, Ye shall do this to the Lord in your set times, and to them all he prescribes a set time. Every thing therefore, to which a time is set, is also offered in uncleanness, if so be very many of the Congregation, or very many of the Priests be unclean.

We find, that the Congregation makes their Passover in uncleanness, in that time, when most of them are unclean. And if known uncleanness be thus dispensed with, much more doubted uncleanness. But what need is there of such dispensation? Could ye not put off the Passover, O ye Fathers of the Sanhedrin, for one or two days, that the people might be purified? By no means: for the Passover is to be offered 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In its set time, the fourteenth day, without any dispensation. For

III. Thus the Canons of that Church concerning that day. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In the light of the fourteenth day they seek for leaven by candle light. The Gloss is, In the night to which the day following is the fourteenth day. And go to all the Commentators, and they will teach, that this was done upon the going out of the thirteenth day. And Maimonides, From the words of the Scribes, they look for and rid away leaven in the beginning of the night of the fourteenth day, and that by the light of the Candle. For in the night time all are within their houses, and a Candle is most proper for such a search. Therefore they do not appoint employments in the end of the thirteenth day, nor doth a wise Man begin to recite his Phylacteries in that time, lest thereby by reason of his length he be hindered from seeking for leaven in its season. And the same Author elsewhere, It is forbidden to eat leaven on the fourteenth day from noon, and onwards, viz. from the beginning of the seventh hour—Our wise Men also forbad eating it from the beginning of the sixth hour—Nay, the fifth hour they eat not leaven, lest perhaps the day be cloudy, and so a mistake arise about the time—Behold, you learn, that it is lawful to eat leaven on the fourteenth day to the end of the fourth hour; but in the fifth hour it is not to be used. The same Author elsewhere writes thus , The Passover was not to be killed, but in the Court, where the other sacrifices were killed. And it was to be killed on the fourteenth day after noon, after the daily sacrifice.

And now, Reader, tell me what day the Evangelists call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The first day of unleavened bread: and whether it be anything probable, that the Passover was ever transferred unto the fifteenth day? Much less is it probable, that Christ this year kept his Passover one day before the Passovers of the Jews.

For the Passover was not to be slain but in the Court, where the other sacrifices were slain, as we heard just now from Maimonides; and see the Rubric of bringing in the Lambs into the Court, and of slaying them . And then tell me seriously, whither it be credible, that the Priests in the Temple, against the set decree of the Sanhedrin that year (as the opinion we contradict imports) would kill Christ's one, only, single Lamb; when by that decree it ought not to be killed before tomorrow? When Christ said to his Disciples, Ye know, that after two days is the Passover; and when he Commanded them, Go ye, and prepare for us the Passover, it is a wonder they did not reply, True indeed, Sir, it ought to be after two days, but it is put off this year to a day later, so that now it is after three days. It is impossible therefore that we should obey you now; for the Priests will not allow of killing before tomorrow.

We have said enough, I suppose, in this matter. But while I am speaking of the day of the Passover, let me add a few words, although not to the business concerning which we have been treating; and they perhaps not unworthy of our consideration.

He that mourns washes himself, and eats his Passover in the Even. A Proselyte, which is made a Proselyte on the Eve of the Passover, the School of Shammai saith, Let him be baptized, and eat his Passover in the Even: the School of Hillel saith, He that separates himself from uncircumcision (that is, From Heathens and Heathenism) is, as if he separated himself from a sepulcher. The Gloss, And hath need of seven days purification. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 There were Soldiers at Jerusalem, who baptized themselves, and eat their Passovers in the Even. A thing certainly to be noted, Proselytes, the same day made Proselytes, and eating the Passover; and that, as it seems, without Circumcision, but admitted only by baptism.

The care of the School of Hillel in this case, did not so much repulse a Proselyte from eating the Passover, who was made a Proselyte and baptized on the day of the Passover; as provided for the future, that such an one in following years should not obtrude himself to eat the Passover in uncleanness. For while he was in Heathenism, he contracted not uncleanness from the touch of a Sepulcher, but being made a Proselyte he contracted uncleanness by it. These are the words of the Gloss.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
That we prepare, that thou mayest eat the Passover.

For the Passovers were prepared by the servants for their Masters. If any say to his fervant, Go and kill me the Passover, and he kills a Kid, let him eat of it: if he kill a Lamb, let him eat of it: if a Kid and a Lamb, let him eat of the former, &c.

VERS. XXVI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
And when they had sung an Hymn.
  • 1. WHAT z difference is there between the first Passover and the second? (that is, The Passover of the first month, and of the second, Numb. IX.) In the first, everyone is bound under that Law, Leaven shall not be seen; nor found among you. In the second, Leaven and unleavened bread may be with a man in his house. In the first, he is bound to an Hymn, when he eats the Passover. In the second, he is not bound to an Hymn, when he eats it. In both, he is bound to an Hymn while he makes, or kills. Both are to be eaten roast, and with unleavened bread, and bitter herbs, and both drive away the Sabbath. The Gemarists ask, Whence this is, that they are bound to an Hymn, while they eat the Passover? R. Jochanan in the name of R. Simeon ben Josedek saith, The Scripture saith, You shall have a song, as in the night, when a Feast is kept ( Esa. XXX. 29.) The night which is set apart for a Feast, is bound to an Hymn: The night which is not set apart for a Feast, is not bound to an Hymn. The Gloss writes thus, As ye are wont to sing in the night, when a Feast is kept. But there is no night, wherein they are obliged to a song, besides the night when the Passover is eaten.
  • II. That Hymn is called by the Rabbins the Hallel; and was from the beginning of Psal. CXIII. to the end of Psal. CXVIII. which they cut in two parts, and a part of it they repeated in the very middle of the banquet, and they reserved a part to the end.

How far the former portion extended, is disputed between the Schools of Shammai, and Hillel. That of Shammai saith, Unto the end of Psal. CXIII. That of Hillel saith, Unto the end of Psalm CXIV. But these things must not stop us. The Hymn which Christ now sung with his Disciples after meat, was the latter part. In which, as the Masters of the Traditions observe, these five things are mentioned. The going out of Egypt. The cutting in two of the Red Sea. The delivery of the Law. The Resurrection of the dead, and the sorrows of the Messias. The going out of Egypt, as it is written, When Israel went out of Egypt. The cutting in two of the Red Sea, as it is written, The Sea saw it and fled. The Delivery of the Law, as it is written, The Mountains leaped like Rams. The Resurrection of the dead, as it is written, I will walk before the Lord in the Land of the living. And the sorrows of the Messias, as it is written, Not unto us Lord, Not unto us.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
They went out to the Mount of Olives.

They were bound by the Traditional Canons to lodge within Jerusalem. On the first Passover everyone is bound to lodge ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) Also on the second Passover he is bound to lodge. The Gloss thus, He that keeps the Passover is bound to lodge in Jerusalem the first night. But it is disputed, whether it be the same night, wherein the Lamb is eaten: or the night first following the feast day. See the place: and let not the Lion of the Tribe of Judah be restrained in those cobwebs.

SECT. XXXVI. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Abba Father.

AS it is necessary to distinguish between the Hebrew and Chaldee Idiom in the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abi, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abba. So you may, I had almost said, you must distinguish of their sense. For the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abi, signifies indeed a natural Father, but withal a civil Father also, an Elder, a Master, a Doctor, a Magistrate: But the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abba, denotes only a natural Father, with which we comprehend also an adopting Father: yea, it denotes My Father.

: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let no man say to his neighbor 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Father is nobler than thy Father. R. Chaija asked Rabh the son of his brother, when he came into the Land of Israel, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Doth my Father live? And he answereth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And doth your Mother live? As if he should have said, You know your Mother is dead, so you may know your Father is dead. Solomon said, Observe ye 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 what my Father saith? So in the Targum infinite times.

And we may observe in the Holy Scriptures, wheresoever mention is made of a natural Father, the Targumists use the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abba: but when of a civil Father, they use another word.

  • I. Of a natural Father.
    • Gen. XXII. 7, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And he said, Abi, my Father. The Targum reads 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And said, Abba, my Father.
    • Gen. XXVII. 34. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bless me even me also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abi, O my Father. The Targum reads, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bless me also, Abba, my Father.
    • Gen. XLVIII. 18. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Not so, Abi, my Father. Targum 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Not so, Abba, my Father.
    • Judge. XI. 36. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abi, my Father, if thou hast opened thy mouth. Targum, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abba, my Father, if thou hast opened thy mouth.
    • Esa. VIII. 4. The Targum reads 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Before the child shall know to cry, Abba, my Father, and my Mother. See also the Targum upon Ios. II. 13. and Judge. XIV. 16. and elsewhere very frequently.
  • II. Of a civil Father.
    • Gen. IV. 20, 21. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He was, Abi, the Father of such as dwell in Tents.
    • —He was, Abi, the Father of such as handle the Harp, &c. The Targum reads 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He was, Rabba, the Prince, or, the Master of them.
    • 1 Sam. X. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But who is, Abihem, their Father. Targum, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Who is their, Rab, Master, or, Prince.
    • 2 Kings II. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abi, Abi, my Father, my Father. The Targum, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rabbi, Rabbi.
    • 2 Kings V. 13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And they said, Abi, my Father. The Targum, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And they said, Mari, my Lord.
    • 2 Kings VI. 21. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abi, my Father, shall I smite them? Targum, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rabbi, shall, &c.

Hence appears the reason of those words of the Apostle, Rom. VIII. 15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Ye have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry Abba, Father. And Gal. IV. 6. Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. It was one thing to call God 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Father, that is, Lord, King, Teacher, Governor, &c. and another to call him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abba, my Father. The doctrine of adoption in the proper sense was altogether unknown to the Jewish Schools, (though they boasted that the people of Israel alone were adopted by God above all other Nations:) and yet they called God 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Father, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Our Father, that is, our God, Lord and King, &c. But since ye are sons, saith the Apostle, ye cry 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abba, O my Father, in the proper and truly paternal sense.

Thus Christ in this place, however under an unspeakable agony, and compassed about on all sides with anguishments, and with a very cloudy and darksome providence: yet he acknowledges, invokes, and finds God 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 his Father, in a most sweet sense.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . We cry Abba, Father. Did the Saints invoking God, and calling him Abba, add also Father? Did Christ also use the same addition of the Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Father, and did he repeat the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Abba, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abi? Father seems rather here to be added by Mark, and there also by St. Paul, for explication of the word Abba: and this is so much the more probable also, because it is expressed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Father, and not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , O Father, in the Vocative.

VERS. LI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Having a linnin cloth cast about his naked body.

IT is well rendered by the Vulgar, Amictus Sindone, Cloathed in Sindon, or, fine linnin: for to that the words have respect: not that he had some linnin loosely and by chance cast about him; but that the garment wherewith he always went clothed, was of Sindon, that is of linnin. Let us hearken a little to the Talmudists.

The Rabbins deliver, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sindon (linnin) with fringes, what of them? The School of Shammai absolves; The School of Hillel binds. And the wise Men determine according to the School of Hillel. R. Eliezer ben R. Zadoc saith, Whosoever wears Hyacinth (purple) in Jerusalem, is among those who make men admire. By Hyacinthinum, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 purple, they understand those fringes that were to put them in mind of the Law, Numb. XV. And by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sindon, linnin, is understood 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A Cloak, or that garment which as it serves for clothing the body, so it is doubly serviceable to Religion. For, 1. To this garment were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The fringes fastened, concerning which mention is made Numb. XV. 38. 2. With this garment they commonly covered their heads when they prayed. Hence that in the Gemarists in the place quoted. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Talith, or, the Cloak, whereby the boy covereth his head, and a great part of himself, if any one of elder years, goes forth clothed with it in a more immodest manner, he is bound to wear fringes. And elsewhere, The Priests who veil themselves, when they go up into the pulpit, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with a cloak which is not their own, &c.

But now it was customary to wear this cloak, in the Summer especially, and in Jerusalem for the most part, made of Sindon, or of linnin. And the question between the Schools of Shammai, and Hillel arose hence, that when the fringes were▪ woolen, and the cloak linnin, how would the suspicion of wearing things of different sorts be avoided? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 R. Zeira loosed his Sindon. The Gloss is, He loosed his fringes from his Sindon (that is, from his Talith which was of Sindon, linnin) because it was of linnin, &c. The Angel found Rabh Ketina 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 clothed in Sindon; and said to him, O Ketina, Ketina, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sindon in the Summer, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And a short cloak in the Winter.

You see that word which is spoke by the Evangelist 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 About his naked body, carries an emphasis: for it was most usual to be clothed with Sindon for an outer garment. What therefore must we say of this young man? I suspect in the first place, that he was not a Disciple of Jesus, but that he now followed, as some curious looker on to see what this multitude would at last produce. And to such a suspicion they certainly do consent, who think him to have been roused from his bed, and hastily followed the rout with nothing but his shirt on, without any other clothes. I suppose, secondly, St. Mark in the phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 having a Sindon cast about him, spake according to the known and vulgar dialect of the Nation 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Clothed with a Sindon. For none shall ever persuade me, that he would use an Idiom anything uncouth, or strange to the Nation; and that when he used the very same phrase in Greek, with that Jewish one, he intended not to propound the very same sense. But now, you clearly see, they themselves being our Teachers, what is the meaning of being clothed with a Sindon, with them; namely, to have a Talith or cloak made of linnin; that garment to which the fringes hung. I suppose, in the last place, that this young man, out of Religion, or superstition rather, more than ordinary, had put on his Sindon and nothing but that upon his naked body, neglecting his inner garment (commonly called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chaluk, ) and indeed neglecting his body. For there were some amongst the Jews that did so macerate their bodies, and afflict them with hunger and cold even above the severe rule of other Sects.

Josephus in his own life, writes thus:

I was sixteen years old, and I resolved to make trial of the institution of the three Sects among us, the Pharisees, the Sadducees and the Essenes: for I judged I should be able very well to choose the best of them, if I thoroughly learned them all. Afflicting therefore and much tormenting myself, I tried them all. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. But judging with myself, that it was not enough to have tried these Sects, and hearing of one Banus, that lived in the Wilderness, that he used a garment 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 made of leaves, or the bark of trees, and no food but what grew of its own accord, and often by day and by night washing himself in cold water, I became a Follower of him, and for three years abode with him.

And in that place in the Talmudists, which we but now produced, at that very story of Rabh Ketina, wearing a Sindon in the Winter for his Talith, we have these words; The Religious in elder times, when they had wove three wings (of the Talith) they joined 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Purple, whereof the Fringes were made. But otherwise 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They are Religious who impose upon themselves things heavier than ordinary. And immediately follows the story of the Angel and Ketina, who did so. There were some who heaped up upon themselves burdens and yokes of Religion above the common rule; and that this is to be understood by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 such as laid upon themselves heavier things than ordinary, both the practice of some Jews persuade, and the word itself speaks it, being used by the Gemarists in the same sense elsewhere.

Such we suppose was this young man (as Josephus was, when a young man, of whom before) who, when others armed themselves against the cold with a double garment, namely 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 An inner garment, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a Talith, or Cloak, he clothed himself with a single garment, and that of Sindon, or linnin, and under the show of some more austere Religion; neglecting the ordinary custom, and care of himself.

The thing taken in the sense which we propound, speaks the furious madness of this most wicked rout so much the more, in as much as they spared not a man, and he a young man, bearing most evident marks of a more severe Religion.

VERS. LVI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Their witness agreed not together.

THE Traditional Canons in these cases divide testimonies into three parts.

  • I. There was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A vain testimony: which being heard, there is no more enquiry made from that witness, there is no more use made of him, but he is set aside, as speaking nothing to the business.
  • II. There was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A standing testimony, (for let me so turn it here) which although it proved not the matter without doubt, yet it was not rejected by the Judges, but admitted to examination by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Citation, that is, others being admitted to try to disprove it, if they could.
  • III. There was the Testimony 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the words of them that agreed, or, fitted together. (this also was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A standing evidence ) when the words of two witnesses agreed, and were to the same purpose. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , An even evidence. Of these see the Tract Sanhedrin . Where also discourse is had concerning exact search and examination of the Witnesses by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Inquisition, and Scrutiny and Citation: by which curious disquisition, if they had examined the witnesses that babbled, and barked against Christ, Oh! the unspeakable and infinite innocence of the most Blessed Jesus, which envy and madness itself, never so much sworn together against his life, could have fastened any crime upon!

It is said verse. 55. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . They sought for witness against Christ. This is neither equal, O Fathers of the Sanhedrin, nor agreeable to your rule. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In judgments about the life of any man, they begin first to transact about quitting the party, who is tried, and they begin not with those things which make for his condemnation. Whether the Sanhedrin now followed that Canon in their scrutiny about Christ's case, let them look to it: by their whole process it sufficiently appears, whither their disquisition tended. And let it be granted, that they pretended some color of justice and mercy, and permitted that any who would might come forth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and testify something in his behalf; Where was any such now to be found? When all his Disciples turned their backs upon him, and the Fathers of the Traditions had provided, that whosoever should confess him to be Christ should be struck with the thunder of their excommunication, Joh. IX. 22.

CHAP. XV.

VERS. I.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Early in the morning they held a Consultation, and the whole Council.

AT what time do the Judges sit in judgment? The lesser Sanhedrin and the Bench of Three sit after morning prayers are ended, until the end of the sixth hour. But the great Sanhedrin sits after the morning daily sacrifice to the afternoon daily sacrifice. And on Sabbaths, and feast days (as this day was that is here spoken of) it sat in Bethmidrash (or the Chapel) in the Court of the Gentiles.

The Sanhedrin of one and seventy Elders, it is not necessary, that they all sit in their place which is in the Temple. But when it is necessary, that all meet together, let all meet together. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The whole Council.

But in other times, he that hath business of his own, let him attend his own business, and then return. With this Proviso, that nothing be wanting of the number of three and twenty upon the Bench continually during the whole time of the Session ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Consultation.) If any must go out, let him look round, whether his Collegues be three and twenty: if they be, let him go out: but if not, let him wait till another enter in.

VERS. VI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c.
At the feast he released, &c.

THE Syriac reads 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and so the Arab, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Every feast. Beza, singulis festis, At each of the feasts, which pleases me not at all. For it is plainly said by Pilate himself, That I should release unto you one at the Passover, Joh. XVIII. 39. And the releasing of a prisoner suites not so well to the other feasts, as to the Passover. Because the Passover carries with it the memory of the Release of the people out of Egypt: but other feasts had other respects. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , I would render by way of paraphrase, According to the nature and quality of the feast, which was a monument of release.

The words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here and there used by the Syrian, and the Arab for feast, and especially 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 remind me of that Disputation of the Gemarists upon the second word in the Tract Avodah Zarah; namely, whether it be to be writ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 whereby is denoted a feast day of the Heathens.

VERS. VII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Barabbas.

LET us mention also with him a very famous rogue in the Talmudists 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ben Dinai, whose name also was Eleazar. Of whom they have this passage worthy of Chronological observation. From the time that murderers were multiplied the beheading the red Cow ceased; namely, from the time that Eleazar Ben Dinai came; who was also called Tichinnah ben Perishah: but again they called him, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The son of a murderer. Of him mention is made elsewhere , where it is written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ben Donai. See also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ben Nezer the King of the Robbers .

VERS. XXI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Coming out of the Country, or, field.

: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They bring wood out of the field (on a Feast day) either bound together: or, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from some place fenced round, or scattered. The Gloss there is, They bring wood on a feast day out of the field, which is within the limits of the Sabbath, if it be bound together on the Eve of the feast day, &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is a place watched and fenced in every w r And Rambam writes, Rabbi Jose saith, If there be a door in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 such a fenced place, although it be distant from the City, almost two thousand cubits, which are the limits of the Sabbath, one may bring wood thence.

It may be conceived, that Simon the Cyrenean, came out of the field thus loaded with wood; and you may conceive that he had given occasion to the Soldiers or Executioners, why they would lay the Cross upon him, namely, because they saw that he was a strong bearer, and instead of one burden, they laid this other upon him to bear.

VERS. XXV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
And it was the third hour, and they crucified him.

BUT John saith, Chap. XIX. 14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth hour: namely, when Pilate delivered him to be crucified. From the former clause, It was the preparation of the Passover, hath sprung that opinion, of which we have said something before, concerning the transferring of the eating of the Lamb this year to the fifteenth day. For they think by The preparation of the Passover, is to be understood the preparation of the Lamb, or for the eating of the Lamb. For which interpretation they think that makes, which is said by the same John, Chap. XVIII. 28. They would not go into the Judgment Hall, lest they should be defiled, but that they might eat the Passover. And hence it is confidently concluded by them, that however Christ eat his Lamb the day before, yet the Jews were to •• t theirs this very day.

We will discourse first of the day, as it here occurs under the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The preparation of the Passover; and then of the hour.

I. Every Israelite was bound, within that seven days solemnity, after the Lamb was eaten, to these two things. 1. To appear before the Lord in the Court, and that with a Sacrifice. 2. To solemn joy and mirth, and that also with Sacrifices. The former was called by the Jews 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Appearance. The latter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chagigah, The Festival.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 All are bound to appear, except deaf and dumb, fools, young children, &c. And a little after, The School of Shammai saith, Let the appearance be with two silver pieces of money ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) And the Chagigah be with a Meah of Silver ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) The School of Hillel saith, Let the Appearance be with a Meah of Silver, and the Chagigah with two pieces of Silvr. The Gloss writes thus, All are bound to make their Appearance from that precept, All thy Males shall appear, &c. ( Exod. XXXIII. 17.) And it is necessary that they appear in the Court in the Feast. He that appears, when he placeth himself in the Court, Let him bring a burnt offering, which is by no means to be of l ss price than two pieces of silver, that is of two Meahs of Silver. They are bound also to the Peace offerings of the Chagigah, by that Law, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ye shall keep it a Feast to the Lord ( Exod. XII. 14.) Rambam upon the place thus; saith the Lord, let them not appear before me empty, Deut. XVI. 16. That is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let him bring an oblation of a burnt Sacrifice in his hand, when he goes up to the Feast. And those burnt Sacrifices are called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Burnt Sacrifices of Appearance, and also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Appearance, without the addition of the word, Burnt Sacrifice. And the Chagigah, from thence because the Lord saith, Ye shall keep it a Feast to the Lord. It means this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That a man bring Peace offerings, and these Peace offerings are called Chagigah.

II. Of these two, namely, The Appearance and the Chagihah, the Chagigah was the greater and more famous. For

First, Certain persons were obliged to the Chagigah, who were not obliged to the Appearance. He that indeed is not deaf, but yet is dumb, is not obliged to Appearance; but yet he is obliged 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to rejoice. It is true some of the Gemarists distinguish between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chagigah, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rejoicing. But one Glosser upon the place alleged 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That which he saith of Rejoicing obtains also of the Chagigah. And another saith, He is bound 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to Rejoicing, namely to rejoice in the Feast; as it is written, And thou shalt rejoice in thy Feast. And they say elsewhere, that that rejoicing is over the Peace offerings, namely, in eating flesh.

Secondly, Appearance was not tied so strictly to the first day, but the Chagigah was tied to it. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Burnt sacrifices by vow and free will-offerings are offered on the common days of the Feast, they are not offered on a Feast day: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But the burnt sacrifices of Appearance may be offered also on a Feast day: and when they are offered, let them not be offered but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 out of common cattle: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But the Peace offerings of Rejoicing also out of the Tithes. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Chagigah of the first Feast day of the Passover, the School of Shammai saith, let it be of (Cholin) common cattle: the School of Hillel saith, let it be of the Tithes. What is it, that it teaches of the Chagigah of the first Feast day of the Passover? Rabh Jesse saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Chagigah of the fifteenth day is so: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Chagigah of the fourteenth, not. The Gloss is, The burnt-offerings of Appearance were not offered the first day of the Feast, although they were due to the Feast, because compensation might be made by them the day following.

The Chagigah of the first Feast day was without doubt due; although it had flesh enough otherways. For as it was said a little before, They offered Peace-offerings on that Feastday 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 because they had need of them for private food: and although there was food enough, yet the Chagigah was to be offered, as the due of the day.

The Chagigah of the fourteenth day was this, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 When any 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , company was numerous, they joined the Chagigah also with the Paschal Lamb, that they might eat the Passover even till they were filled. But now the Chagigah of that first day was not but of common cattle: but the Chagigah of the fourteenth day might also be of the Tithes.

It was a greater matter to offer of common cattle (or Cholin ) than of the Tithes or the First born; for they were owing to the Lord by right; but to offer the Cholin, was the part of further devotion and free-will.

That therefore which John saith, That the Jews would not go into the Judgment-Hall, lest they should be polluted, but that they might eat the Passover, is to be understood of that Chagigah, of the fifteenth day, not of the Paschal Lamb: for that also is called the Passover, Deut. XVI. 2. Thou shalt sacrifice the Passover to the Lord of thy flocks and of thy herds. Of thy flocks; this indeed by virtue of that precept, Exod. XII. 3. But what have we to do with herds? Of thy herds, saith R. Solomon, for the Chagigah. And Ibn Ezra saith, Of thy Flocks, according to the Duty of the Passover; Of thy Herds, for the Peace offerings, and produceth that 2 Chron. XXX. 24. and XXXV. 8. The Targum of Jonathan writes, Ye shall kill the Passover before the Lord your God, between the Eves, and your sheep and Oxen on the morrow, in that very day, in joy of the Feast.

In one Glosser, mention is made of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The less Passover, by which if he understands not the Passover of the second month, which is very usually called by them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The second Passover, or the Passover of the second month, instruct me what he means by it. However this matter is cle r in Moses, that Oxen or the sacrifices offered after the Lamb eaten, are called also the Passover as well as the Lamb itself.

And no wonder, when the Lamb was the very least part of the Joy, and there were seven Feast days after he was eaten: and when the Lamb was a thing rubbing up the remembrance of affliction, rather than denoting gladness and making merry. For the unleavened bread was marked out by the Holy Scripture under that very notion, and so also the bitter herbs, which were things that belonged to the Lamb. But how much of the solemnity of the Feast is attributed to the Chagigah, and the other Sacrifices after that, it would be too much to mention, since it occurs everywhere.

Hear the author of the Aruch concerning the Chagigah of Pentecost. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chag denotes dancing, and clapping hands for joy. In the Syriac Language it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chigah: and so in the Scripture 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ( Psal. CVII. 27. The interlinear Version reads They went in a round, and moved themselves like a drunken man) And from this root it is that they eat and drink and dance, or make holy day. And the Sacrifice of the Chagigah, which they were bound to bring on a Feast day, is that concerning which the Scripture saith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And thou shalt make 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chag a Solemnity of weeks to the Lord thy God, a free-will-offering of thy hand, &c. Deut. XVI. 10.

And now tell me, whence received that Feast its denomination that it should be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Feast of weeks? Not from the offering of the loaves of first-fruits, but from the Chagigah, and the feasting on the Chagigah. The same is to be said of the Feast of the Passover. So that John said nothing strange to the ears of Jews, when he said, They went not into the Judgment Hall, lest they might be polluted, but that they might eat the Passover; pointing with his finger to the Chagigah, and not to the Lamb eaten indeed the day before.

The word Passover might sound to the same sense in those words of his also, It was the Preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth hour. It was the Preparation to the Chagigah, and not to the Lamb. But I suspect something more may be understood, namely, that on that day both food was prepared, and minds for the mirth of the whole Feast. So that the Passover denotes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The Feast, not this or that particular appendage to the Feast. The burnt Sacrifices which were offered in the Appearance 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they all became God's, as the Masters say truly; and he who offered them, carried not back the least part of them with him. But the Sacrifices of the Chagigah, whether they were oxen, or sheep, the greatest part of them returned to them that offered them; and with them, they and their friends made solemn and joyful feastings, while they tarried at Jerusalem. So that the oblation of these the first day of the Feast, was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The Preparation of the Passover; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The Preparation of Pentecost, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The preparation of the Feast of Tabernacles. That is, the Day and manner of preparing food for the following mirth of the Feast. In the same sense was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The Preparation of the Sabbath, namely, The preparation of food and things necessary to the Sabbath. Of which we shall speak at Vers. 42.

Having thus dispatched these things, let us now come to the hour itself. It was the Preparation of the Passover, saith John, and about the sixth hour, when Pilate delivered Christ to be crucified. And it was the third hour, saith Mark, and they crucified him.

It is disputed by the Gemarists, how far the evidences of two men may agree and consent, whereof one saith, This I saw done in that hour; and the other saith, I saw it done another hour. One saith, the second hour, another, the third, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Their Testimony consist together. One saith, The third hour, another, the fifth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Their Testimony is vain; as R. Meir saith. But saith R. Judah, Their Testimony consists together. But if one saith, The fifth hour, another, the seventh hour, their testimony is vain; because in the fifth hour, the Sun is in the East part of Heaven; in the seventh, in the West part. They dispute largely concerning this matter in the place alleged, and concerning evidences differing in words, nevertheless as to the thing itself they conclude, that both may be true, because witnesses may be deceived in the computation of hours. Which to conclude concerning the Evangelists were impious and blasphemous. But there is one supposes the Copiers were deceived in their transcription, and would have the computation of John corrected into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And it was about the third hour. Too bodly, and indeed without any reason. For it is neither credible, nor possible indeed, that those things which went before our Savior's crucifixion should be done 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (to use the words of the Talmudists ) in the three first hours of the day. The Harmony therefore of the Evangelists is to be fetched elsewhere?

I. Let us repeat that out of Maimonides; The great Sanhedrin sat from the morning daily Sacrifice until the afternoon daily Sacrifice. But now when the morning daily Sacrifice was at the third hour, the Sanhedrin sat not before that hour. Take heed therefore Thou, that wouldst have the words of John, And it was about the sixth hour, to be changed into, And it was about the third hour, lest thou becomest guilty of a great Solecism. For Pilate could not deliver Christ to be crucified about the third hour, when the Sanhedrin sat not before the Third hour, and Christ was not yet delivered to Pilate.

But you will say, The words of Mark do obscure these things much more. For if the Sanhedrin that delivered up Christ met not together before the third hour, one can no way say, that they crucified him the third hour.

We do here propound two things for the explanation of this matter.

Let the first be taken from the day itself, and from the hour itself. That day was the Preparation of the Passover, a day of high solemnity, and when it behooved the Priests, and the other Fathers of the Sanhedrin, to be present at the third hour in the Temple, and to offer their Chagigahs, that were preparative to the whole seven days festivity: but they employed themselves in another thing, namely this. You may observe, that he saith not, It was the third hour, when; but It was the third hour, And they crucified him. That is, When the third hour now was, and was passed, yet they omitted not to prosecute his crucifixion, when indeed, according to the manner of the Feast, and the obligation of Religion, they ought to have been employed otherwise. I indeed should rather sit down satisfied with this interpretation, than to accuse the holy Text as depraved, or to deprave it more with my amendment. But

Secondly, There is another sense also not to be despised, if our judgment is anything, which we fetch from a custom usual in the Sanhedrin, but from which they now swerved. They are treating concerning a guilty person condemned to hanging; with whom they deal in this process 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They tarry until Sunset approach 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And then they finish his judgment, and put him to death. Note that, They finish not his judgment until Sunset draw near. If you ask the reason, a more general one may be given, which respected all persons condemned to die; and a more special one, which respected him which was to be hanged.

I. There was that which is called by the Talmudists 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The affliction of judgment: by which Phrase they understand not judgment that is not just, but when he that is condemned, after judgment past, is not presently put to death. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If you finish his judgment on the Sabbath (mark that) and put him to death on the first day of the week 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 You afflict his judgment. Where the Gloss is, As long as his judgment is not finished, it is not the affliction of judgment, because he expects every hour to be absolved. But when judgment is ended, he expects death, &c. Therefore they delayed but little between the finishing of judgment, and execution.

II. As to those that were to be hanged 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They delayed the finishing his judgment, and they hanged him not in the morning, lest they might grow slack about his burial, and might fall into forgetfulness, and might sin against the Law, ( Deut. XXI. 23.) but near Sunset, that they might presently bury him. So the Gloss. They put him to death not sooner for this reason: they finished not his judgment sooner for the reason above said.

And now let us resume the words of Mark, And it was the third hour, and they crucified him. The Sanhedrin used not to finish the judgment of hanging, until they were now ready to rise up and depart from the Council and Bench, after the Mincha, the day now inclining toward Sunset: but these men finished the Judgment of Jesus, and hastened him to the Cross, when they first came into the Court at the third hour, at the time of the daily sacrifice; which was very unusual, and different from the custom.

VERS. XXXIV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Eloi, Eloi.

IN Matthew it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Eli, Eli in the very same Syllables of Psal. XXII. 1. Mark according to the present dialect (namely, the Chaldee ) useth the pronunciation of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or at least according to the pronunciation of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Eloi, Judge. V. 5. in the LXX.

VERS. XLII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
The Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath.

YOU will ask, whether any day going before the Sabbath was called Parasceue, The Preparation. Among the Hebrews indeed it is commonly said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Eve of the Sabbath. But be it granted: whence is it called, The Preparation? Either that they prepared themselves for the Sabbath? or rather, that they prepared provisions to be eaten on the Sabbath? And that by the Law, On the sixth day they shall prepare, &c. Whatsoever ye will bake, bake today; and whatsoever ye will seeth, seeth today, &c. Exod. XVI. 5, 23. Hence 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, Preparation, is a very usual word with them in this sense 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A common day prepares for the Sabbath, and a common day prepares for a feast day. But those reasons do not hold good 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to forbid the Preparation, while as yet there remains much of the day▪ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Preparation.

But you will say, If a Feast day prepares not for the Sabbath, which Maimonides saith, such an Interpretation will not suit with the words, which we are now handling, that it should be called The Preparation, in respect of provisions prepared for the Sabbath, on that day. Let the Masters themselves answer.

: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 On a feast day, which happens on a Sabbath Eve, let not, a man in the beginning seeth food after the Feast day for the Sabbath day, but let him seeth for the Feast day, and if any remains, let it be reserved f r the Sabbath. But 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (according to the letter, Let him make a boiling, but the sense is) Let him prepare food on the Eve of the Feast day, and let him depend upon it for the Sabbath. The School of Shammai saith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A twofold food: that of Hillel saith One food.

Maimonides speaks plainer.

On a Feast day, that falls in with a Sabbath Eve, they do not bake nor seeth on the Feast day what they eat on the Sabbath. And this prohibition is from the words of the Scribes: namely, That none seeth on a Feast day for a common day: for this is arguing a majori ad minus, from the greater to the less: if a man seeth not for the Sabbath day much less for a common day. But if he provides food on the Eve of the Feast day, on which he may depend, ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) then if he bake or seeth on the Feast day for the Sabbath, it is permitted: and that, on which he depends, is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The mixing of food. And why it is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mixing? ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A mingling together) Namely, as that mixing which they make concerning the Courts or the Vesteries, on the Sabbath Eve, is for acknowledgment, that is, that they should not think, that it is lawful to carry anything from place to place on the Sabbath: So this food is for acknowledgment and remembrance, that they should not think or imagine that it is lawful to bake anything on a Feast day, which is not eaten that day: therefore this food is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the mixing of food.

Of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the mixing of Courts we speak 2 Cor. X. 16. The sum of the matter is this; many families dwelt by one common Court: now therefore when it was not lawful to carry out anything on the Sabbath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from a place which was of one right, and condition, to a place which was of another; therefore it was not lawful for any of those families to carry out anything out of his house into the Court joining to his door, and on the contrary; All partook of the communion and mixture of the right, and that by eating together of that food, which was brought together by them all, and then it was lawful. So in this case, whereof we are now treating. Since it was not lawful by the Canons of the Scribes, to prepare any food on a Feast day for the Sabbath that followed on the morrow: and since of necessity something was to be prepared for the Sabbath, they mollified the rigor of the Canon thus; that first some food should be prepared on the Feast day, which was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a mixture as it were of right; and depending upon this thus prepared, they might prepare anything for the morrow Sabbath.

Of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the mixture of foods, mention occurs in the Talmudists infinite times, and these things which have been spoke concerning them, afford not a little light to the clause, which we are now handling, and to others, where the word Preparation occurs; and make those things plainer, which we have said concerning the Preparation of the Passover; namely, that it denoteth not either the preparation of the Paschal Lamb, nor the preparation of the people to eat the Lamb; but the preparation of meats to be eaten in the Passover week. Nor in this place, if it be aplyed to the Sabbath, doth it denote any other thing than the preparation of food for the Sabbath now approaching. So that that day, wherein Christ was crucified, was a double preparation in the double sense alleged. Namely, the whole day, but especially from the third hour was The Preparation of the Passover, or of the whole week following; and the Evening of the day was the Preparation of the Sabbath following on the morrow.

Of that Sabbath John saith, which we cannot let pass, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . That the day of that Sabbath was a great day, Chap. XIX. 31. For it was the day of the people's appearance in the Temple; it was the day of the offering of the sheaf of firstfruits; and I ask, whether before that day Christ's persecutors had offered their Chagigahs?

VERS. XLIII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
An honorable Counselor.

THE Vulgar reads, Nobilis Decurio, A noble Officer. Erasmus, Honestus Senator, An honorable Senator. Beza, Honoratus Senator, An honorable Senator. The Talmud may serve here instead of a Lexicon.

Was it the Chamber 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of the chief Men? Was it not the Chamber 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of the Counselors? First it was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Chamber of the Counselors: but when the high priesthood was brought with money, and yearly changed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the chief Counselors of the King are yearly changed, thence it was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Chamber 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the Proedri Chief Men. The Gloss is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Counselors, denotes Princes. True indeed and hence, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Noble men and common Persons are contradistinguished. But should one not understand those Princes and Nobles in the proper sense of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that is, Counselors? For who sees not that the word is Greek? and so the Aruch 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is a Greek word.

Which fixeth our eyes faster upon the words of the Gloss at the Gemara in the place alleged, From the beginning, in the days of Simeon the Just, who lived a greater while, they called it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Chamber 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of the Counselors. What? Did the Greek Language so flourish at Jerusalem in the times of Simeon the Just; that, a Chamber in the Temple should be called by a Greek name? If that Simeon be he who met Aleander the Great, which the Talmudists suppose, then some reason appears for it, but if not, inquire further. However that was the Chamber of the High Priest, as appears often in the Talmudists, not that he always lived there, nor that once in the year he resorted thither; but because it was that place, where he sat with the Council of the Priests, and consulted concerning the public service, and affairs of the Temple. Hence in the Jerusalem writers mention is made of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Simeon the Counselor. And in this sense is that to be taken, if I mistake not, which occurs once and again in the Babylonian Talmudists, concerning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Sons of the high Priest, deciding several things; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The house of Judgment of the Priests.

Hence we think Joseph of Arimathea was called with good reason 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , A Counselor, because he was a Priest, and one of that Sacerdotal Bench 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It was called the Chamber 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , saith the Aruch, that is, of Counselors.

CHAP. XVI.

VERS. I.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
That they might come and anoint him.

WHAT is that, that is allowed as to the living, (on the Sabbath day) but as to the dead it is not? It is anointing.

VERS. II.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c.
And very early in the morning, &c.

THE distinction of the Twilight among the Rabbins was this.

I. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The hind of the morning: the first appearance of light. R. Chaiia Rabb, and R. Simeon ben Chalaphta travailing together in a certain morning in the Valley of Arbel, saw the hind of the morning, that its light spread the sky. R. Chaiia said, Such shall be the Redemption of Israel. First, It goes forward by degrees, and by little and little, but by how much the more it shall go forward, by so much the more it shall increase.

It was at that time that Christ arose; namely, in the first morning; as may be gathered from the words of Matthew. And to this the title of the two and twentieth Psalm seems to have respect, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 See also Revel. XXII. 16. I am the bright and morning Star. And now you may imagine the women went out of their houses towards the Sepulcher.

II. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 When one may distinguish between purple color and white. From what time do they recite their Phylacterical prayers in the morning? From that time, that one may distinguish between purple color and white. R. Eliezer saith, Between purple color and green. Before this time was Obscurum adhuc coeptae lucis. The obscurity of the begun light, as Tacitus his expression is .

III. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 When the East begins to lighten.

IV. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sunrise. From the hind of the morning going forth, until the East begins to lighten; and from the time the East begins to lighten, until Sun rise, &c.

According to these four parts of time, one might not improperly suit the four Phrases of the Evangelists. According to the first, Matthews, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . As it began to dawn. According to the second, Johns, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Early in the morning when it was yet dark. To the third, Luke's, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Very early in the morning. To the fourth, Marks, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Very early in the morning, and yet, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . At the rising of the Sun.

For the woman came twice to the Sepulcher, as John teacheth: by whom the other Evangelists are to be explained. Which being well considered, the reconciling them together is very easy.

VERS. XIII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Neither believed they them.

THAT in the verses immediately going before the discourse is of the two Disciples going to Emmaus, is without all controversy. And then, how do these things consist with that relation in Luke, who saith, That they two returning to Jerusalem, found the Eleven gathered together, and those that were with them, who said, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon? Luke XXIV. 23, 34. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , saying, evidently makes those to be the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of the Eleven, and of those that were gathered together with them. Which when you read the Versions you would scarcely suspect. For when that word is rendered by the Syriac, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by the Arabic 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by the Vulgar, Dicentes; by the Italian, Dicendo; by the French, Disans; by the English, Saying; who, I pray, would take it in another sense, than that those two, that returned from Emmaus, said The Lord is risen indeed, &c. But in the Original Greek, when it is the accusative case, it is plainly to be referred to the Eleven Disciples, and those that were together with them. As if they had discoursed among themselves of the appearance made to Peter, either before, or now in the very access of those two coming from Emmaus. And yet saith this our Evangelist, that when those two had related the whole business, they gave credit, no not to them. So that according to Luke, they believed Christ was risen and had appeared to Simon, before they told their story; but according to Mark, they believed it not, no not when they had told it.

The reconciling therefore of the Evangelists is to be fetched thence, that those words pronounced by the Eleven, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. The Lord is risen indeed, &c, doth not manifest their absolute confession of the Resurrection of Christ, but a conjectural reason of the sudden and unexpected return of Peter.

I believe that Peter was going with Cleophas into Galilee, and that being moved with the words of Christ told him by the women, Say to his Disciples and Peter, I go before you into Galilee. Think with yourself, how doubtful Peter was, and how he fluctuated within himself, after his threefold denial, and how he gasped to see the Lord again, if he were risen, and to cast himself an humble supplicant at his feet. When therefore he heard these things from the women (and he had heard it indeed from Christ himself, while he was yet alive, that when he arose, he would go before them into Galilee ) and when the rest were very little moved with the report of his Resurrection, nor as yet stirred from that place, he will try a journey into Galilee, and Alpheus with him. Which when it was well known to the rest, and saw him return so soon, and so unexpectedly, Certainly, say they, the Lord is risen, and hath appeared to Peter, otherwise he had not so soon come back again. And yet when he and Cleopas open the whole matter, they do not yet believe even them.

VERS. XV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
To every creature.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 To every Creature, a manner of speech most common among the Jews: by which

  • I. Are denoted all men. The wise Men say, Let the mind of man always be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mingled, or complacent, to the creatures. The Gloss there is. To do with every man according to complacency 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He makes the Holy Spirit to dwell upon the creatures: that is, Upon men. In every Judge in the Bench of three is required Prudence, Mercy, Religion, hatred of money, Love of truth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and love of the creatures: that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The love of mankind.
  • II. But especially by that phrase the Gentiles are understood. R. Jose saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Woe to the Creatures, which see, and know not what they see; which stand and know not upon what they stand, namely, upon what the earth stands, &c. He understands the Heathens especially, who were not instructed concerning the creation of things. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The speech of all the Creatures (that is, of the Heathens) is only of earthly things, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And all the prayers of the Creatures are for earthly things; Lord let the Earth be fruitful, let the Earth prosper. But all the prayers of Israelites are only for the holy place; Lord let the Temple be built, &c. Observe, how 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Creatures, are opposed to Israelites.

And the parallel words of Matthew, Chap. XXVIII. do sufficiently prove this to be the sense of the phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , every creature, in this place: that which in Mark is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Preach to every creature, in that place in Matthew is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Disciple all Nations; as those words also of S. Paul, Coloss. I. 23. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The Gospel that was preached in all the creation.

In the same sense you must of necessity understand the same phrase, Rom. VIII. 22. Where, if you take the whole passage concerning the Gentiles breathing after the Evangelical liberty of the Sons of God, you render the sense very easy, and very agreeable to the mind of the Apostle, and to the signification of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Creature, or Creation. When they who render it otherwise, dash upon, I know not what, rough and kno ty sense. Let me, although tis out of my road, thus paraphrase the whole place.

Vers. 19. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. For the earnest expectation of the Creature, or of the Heathen World, waiteth for the revelation of the Sons of God. For God had promised, and had very often pronounced by his Prophets, that he would gather together, and adopt to himself innumerable sons among the Gentiles. Therefore the whole Gentile World doth now greedily expect the revelation, and production of those sons.

Vers. 20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. For the Creature, the whole Heathen World, was subjected to the vanity of their mind: (as Rom. I. 21. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Became vain in their imaginations. And Eph. I. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The Gentiles walk in the vanity of their mind, not willingly, but because of him that subjected it.

Vers. 21. Under hope, because the Creature also (or that Heathen World) shall be freed from the servie of (sinful) corruption (which is in the World through lust, 2 Pet. I. 4.) into the (Gospel) liberty of the Sons of God. From the service of Satan, of Idols, and of Lusts, into the liberty, which the sons of God enjoy through the Gospel.

Vers. 22. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. For we know, that the whole Creature (or Heathen World) groaneth together, and travaileth, and, as it were with a convex weight, howeth down unto this very time, to be born and brought forth.

Vers. 23. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. Neither the Gentiles only, but we Jews also (however we belong to a Nation, envious of the Heathen) to whom God hath granted the first fruits of the Spirit, we sigh among ourselves for their sakes, waiting for the adoption, that is, the redemption of our Mystical body, whereof the Gentiles make a very great part.

FINIS.



CHAP. I.

VERS. I.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
The beginning of the Gospel.

THE Preaching and Baptism of John was the very gate, and entrance into the state and dispensation of the Gospel. For

  • I. He opened the door of a new Church by a new Sacrament of admission into the Church.
  • II. Poynting as it were with the finger at the Messias that was coming, he shown the beginning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . of the world to come.
  • III. In that manner, as the Jews by Baptism admitted Gentile Proselytes, into the Jewish Church; he admits both Jews and Gentiles into the Gospel Church.
  • IV. For the doctrine of justification by works, which the Schools of the Scribes had defiled all Religion with, he brings in a new (and yet not a new) and truly saving doctrine of Faith and Repentance.

VERS. II.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
As it is written in the Prophets.

HERE a doubt is made of the true reading: namely, whether it be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , In the Prophets, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , In Isaiah the Prophet. These particulars make for the former.

  • I. When two places are cited out of two Prophets, it is far more congruously said, As it is witten in the Prophets, than, As it is written in Isaiah, but especially, when the place first alleged is not in Isaiah, but in another Prophet.
  • II. It was very customary among the Jews (to whose custom in this matter it is very probable the Apostles conformed themselves in their Sermons) to hear many testimonies cited out of many Prophets under this form of speech 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 As it is written in the Prophets. If one only were cited, if two, if more, this was the most common manner of citing them, As it is written in the Prophets. But it is without all example, when two testimonies are taken out of two Prophets, to name only the last, which is done here, if it were to be read, As it written in Isaiah the Prophet.
  • III. It is clear enough from the scope of the Evangelist, that he propounded to himself to cite those two places, both out of Malachi; and out of Isaiah. For he doth two things most evidently. 1. He mentions the Preaching of the Baptist, for the illustrating of which he produceth the same text, which both Matthew and Luke do, out of Isaiah. 2. He saith that that preaching was The beginning of the Gospel; to prove which he very aptly cites Malachi, of sending a Messenger, and of preparing the way of the Lord.

But what shall we answer to Antiquity, and to so many, and so great men reading, As it is written in Isaiah the Prophet. I wonder, saith the very learned Grotius, that any doubt is made of the truth of this writing, when beside the Authority of copies, and Irenaeus so citing it, there is a manifest agreement of the ancient Interpreters, the Syriac, the Latin, the Arabic. True indeed, nor can it be denied that very many of the Ancients so read, but the Ancients read also, As it is written in the Prophets. One Arabic copy hath, In Isaiah the Prophet: but another hath, In the Prophets. Irenaeus once reads, In Isaiah: but reads twice, In the Prophets. And, so we find it written, saith the famous Beza, (who yet follows the other reading,) in all our ancient copies, except two, and that my very ancient one, in which we read, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , In Isaiah the Prophet.

The whole knot of the question lies in the cause of changing the reading; Why, As it is written in Isaiah the Prophet, should be changed into, As it is written in the Prophets; the cause is manifest, saith that very learned man, namely, because a double testimony is taken out of two Prophets. But there could be no cause, saith he, of changing of them. For if Mark in his own Manuscipt, wrote, As it is written in the Prophets, by what way could this reading at last creep in, As it is written in Isaiah, when two Prophets are manifestly cited?

Reader, will you give leave to an innoncent and modest guess. I am apt to suspect, that, in the Copies of the Jewish Christians, it was read, In Isaiah the Prophet; but in those of the Gentile Christians, In the Prophets: and that the change among the Jews arose from hence, that St. Mark seems to go contrary to a most received Canon and Custom of the Jews. He that reads the Prophets in the Synagouges 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let him not skip from one Prophet to another. But in the lesser Prophets, he may skip: with this provision only that he skip not backward: that is, not from the latter to the former.

But you see, how Mark skips here (from whom far be it, to be subject to such foolish Canons) from a Prophet of one rank, namely, from a Prophet who was one of the twelve, to a Prophet of another rank: and you see also, how he skips backward from Malachi to Isaiah. This perhaps was not so pleasing to the Christian-Jews, too much Judaizing yet, nor could they well bear, that this allegation should be read in their Churches, so differently from the common use. Hence, In Isaiah the Prophet, was inserted for, In the Prophets. And that they did so much the more boldly, because those words which are cited out of Malachi are not exactly agreeable either to the Hebrew Original, or the Greek Version: and those that are cited from Isaiah, are cited also by Matthew and Luke; and the sense of them which are cited from Malachi may also be fetched from the place alleged out of Isaiah.

VERS. VI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Cloathed with Camels hair.

IN the Talmudists it would be read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Camels Wool. He hath not a garment besides a Woolen one, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to add wool (or hair) of Camels, and wool of Hares. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Wool of Sheep, and Wool of Camels which they mix, &c. And a little after, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If he make a garment of Camels hair, and weave in i but one thread of Linnen, it is forbidden, as things of different kinds.

There is one that thinks, that those garments of Adam, concerning which it is said, that God made for them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Coats of Skins, were of Camels hair. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In the Law of R. Meir, They found written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Garments of light. R. Isaac saith, that they were like those thin linen garments, which come from Betshan. R. Samuel bar Nachman saith, they were of the wool (or hair) of Camels, and the wool of Hares.

We cannot pass that by without observation that it is said; That in the Law of R. Meir they found written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Garments of light, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Garments of Skins. The like to which is that, In the Law of R. Meir they found it written instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Behold it was very good, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And behold death is a good thing. Where by the Law of R. Meir, seems to be understood some volum of the Law, in the margin of which, or in some papers put in, that Rabbin had writ his critical toys, and his foolish pieces of wit upon the Law, or some such trifling commentary of his own upon it.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
Eating Locusts.

They who had not nobler provision, hunted after Locusts for food. The Gemarists seign, that there are eight hundred kinds of them, namely of such as are clean. That Lexicographer certainly would be very acute, who could describe all these kinds particularly by their names.

The Rabbins deliver, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He that hunts Locusts, Wasps (a kind of Locusts) Hornets, and Flies on the Sabbath, is guilty. The Gloss there, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are a kind of clean locusts, and are eaten. And the Gemara a little after, He that hunts Locusts in the time of the dew (on the Sabbath) is not guilty. The Gloss there writes thus, The Locusts in the time of the dew are purblind; so that if you hunt them at that time, they stop their pace. The Gemara goes on, Eliezer ben Mahbai saith, If they go in Flocks he is not guilty. The Gloss writes, If they flock together in troops, and be as it were ready to be taken, he is not guilty, who hunts them even in the time of heat.

VERS. XIII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
And was with the Wild Beasts.

HE was among the wild beasts, but was not touched by them. So Adam first before his fall.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
And Angels ministered to him.

Forty days he was tempted by Satan invisibly, and Angels ministered to him visibly. Satan at last put on the appearance of an Angle of light, and pretending to wait on him, as the rest also did, hid his hook of temptation the more artificially.

VERS. XXIV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
Art thou come to destroy us?

US? Whom? The Devils? or those Galileans in the Synagouge? See what the Masters say. In that Generation in which the Son of David shall come, saith Rabban Gamaliel, Galilea shall be laid wast, and the Galileans shall wander from City to City, and shall not obtain mercy. If such a report obtained in the Nation, the Devil thence got a very fit occasion in this possessed man, of affrighting the Galileans from receiving Christ, because they were to expect nothing from his coming, but devastation.

VERS. XXXVIII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Towns.

WHAT this word means may be excellently well discovered by searching into the distinction between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to which 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Cities, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Villages, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Towns in the Evangelists do answer.

  • I. I render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Cities, But by what word, you will say, will you render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ? By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Towns. A man cannot compel his wife to follow him to dwell. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from Town to City, nor from City to Town. The proper English of which take from what follows. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is plain why he cannot force her from City to Town, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because in a City anything is to be found, or to be had; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But in a Town anything is not to be had. The Gloss writes, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kerac is greater than Ir (that is, A City than a Town) And there is a place of broad streets, where all neighbouring Inhabitants meet at a Market, and there anything is to be had. So the same Gloss elsewhere, Kerac is a place of broad streets, where men met together from many places, &c.

    The Gemarists go on: R. Josi bar Chaninah saith, Whence is it, that dwelling in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Keracin (cities) is more inconvenient? For it is said, And they blessed all the people who offered themselves willingly to dwell at Jerusalem. (Neh. XI.) Note by the way, that Jerusalem was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kerac. The Gloss there is, Dwelling in Keracin is worse, because all dwell there, and the houses are straightened, and join one to another, so that there is not free air. But 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In a Town are gardens and paradices by the houses, and the air is more wholesome.

    〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Keracim therefore were 1. Cities girt with walls. Hence is that distinction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that there were some Keracin which were girt with walls from the days of Joshua, and some walled afterwards. 2. Trading and Mart Cities, and that were greater and nobler than the rest.

  • II. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 therefore were Villages, or Country Towns, in which no Synagogue was. Hence is that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A Kerac (a City) in which are not ten men to make a Synagogue, is to be reckoned for a Village. And where some of a Village are bound to read the book of Esther in the Feast of Purim: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 it is indulged to them to do it on a Synagogue day: that is, when they had not a Synagogue among them, but must resort to some neighbor Town, where a Synagogue was, it was permitted them to go thither on some week day, appointed for meeting together in the Synagogue; and that they might not take the trouble of a journey on another day, however that day was appointed by Law for that Lession.
  • III. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Which word is commonly rendered Urbs or Civitas; A City, and denoted generally fortified Cities and Towns also not fortified, where Synagogues were, and Villages where they were not. Hence is that distinction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That was a great City where there was a Synagogue: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A small City, where there was not.

    By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 therefore here are to be understood Towns, where there were Synagogues, which nevertheless were not either fortified, or Towns of trade: among us English called Church-Towns.




VERS. I.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
The beginning of the Gospel.

THE Preaching and Baptism of John was the very gate, and entrance into the state and dispensation of the Gospel. For

  • I. He opened the door of a new Church by a new Sacrament of admission into the Church.
  • II. Poynting as it were with the finger at the Messias that was coming, he shown the beginning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . of the world to come.
  • III. In that manner, as the Jews by Baptism admitted Gentile Proselytes, into the Jewish Church; he admits both Jews and Gentiles into the Gospel Church.
  • IV. For the doctrine of justification by works, which the Schools of the Scribes had defiled all Religion with, he brings in a new (and yet not a new) and truly saving doctrine of Faith and Repentance.



VERS. II.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
As it is written in the Prophets.

HERE a doubt is made of the true reading: namely, whether it be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , In the Prophets, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , In Isaiah the Prophet. These particulars make for the former.

  • I. When two places are cited out of two Prophets, it is far more congruously said, As it is witten in the Prophets, than, As it is written in Isaiah, but especially, when the place first alleged is not in Isaiah, but in another Prophet.
  • II. It was very customary among the Jews (to whose custom in this matter it is very probable the Apostles conformed themselves in their Sermons) to hear many testimonies cited out of many Prophets under this form of speech 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 As it is written in the Prophets. If one only were cited, if two, if more, this was the most common manner of citing them, As it is written in the Prophets. But it is without all example, when two testimonies are taken out of two Prophets, to name only the last, which is done here, if it were to be read, As it written in Isaiah the Prophet.
  • III. It is clear enough from the scope of the Evangelist, that he propounded to himself to cite those two places, both out of Malachi; and out of Isaiah. For he doth two things most evidently. 1. He mentions the Preaching of the Baptist, for the illustrating of which he produceth the same text, which both Matthew and Luke do, out of Isaiah. 2. He saith that that preaching was The beginning of the Gospel; to prove which he very aptly cites Malachi, of sending a Messenger, and of preparing the way of the Lord.

But what shall we answer to Antiquity, and to so many, and so great men reading, As it is written in Isaiah the Prophet. I wonder, saith the very learned Grotius, that any doubt is made of the truth of this writing, when beside the Authority of copies, and Irenaeus so citing it, there is a manifest agreement of the ancient Interpreters, the Syriac, the Latin, the Arabic. True indeed, nor can it be denied that very many of the Ancients so read, but the Ancients read also, As it is written in the Prophets. One Arabic copy hath, In Isaiah the Prophet: but another hath, In the Prophets. Irenaeus once reads, In Isaiah: but reads twice, In the Prophets. And, so we find it written, saith the famous Beza, (who yet follows the other reading,) in all our ancient copies, except two, and that my very ancient one, in which we read, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , In Isaiah the Prophet.

The whole knot of the question lies in the cause of changing the reading; Why, As it is written in Isaiah the Prophet, should be changed into, As it is written in the Prophets; the cause is manifest, saith that very learned man, namely, because a double testimony is taken out of two Prophets. But there could be no cause, saith he, of changing of them. For if Mark in his own Manuscipt, wrote, As it is written in the Prophets, by what way could this reading at last creep in, As it is written in Isaiah, when two Prophets are manifestly cited?

Reader, will you give leave to an innoncent and modest guess. I am apt to suspect, that, in the Copies of the Jewish Christians, it was read, In Isaiah the Prophet; but in those of the Gentile Christians, In the Prophets: and that the change among the Jews arose from hence, that St. Mark seems to go contrary to a most received Canon and Custom of the Jews. He that reads the Prophets in the Synagouges 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let him not skip from one Prophet to another. But in the lesser Prophets, he may skip: with this provision only that he skip not backward: that is, not from the latter to the former.

But you see, how Mark skips here (from whom far be it, to be subject to such foolish Canons) from a Prophet of one rank, namely, from a Prophet who was one of the twelve, to a Prophet of another rank: and you see also, how he skips backward from Malachi to Isaiah. This perhaps was not so pleasing to the Christian-Jews, too much Judaizing yet, nor could they well bear, that this allegation should be read in their Churches, so differently from the common use. Hence, In Isaiah the Prophet, was inserted for, In the Prophets. And that they did so much the more boldly, because those words which are cited out of Malachi are not exactly agreeable either to the Hebrew Original, or the Greek Version: and those that are cited from Isaiah, are cited also by Matthew and Luke; and the sense of them which are cited from Malachi may also be fetched from the place alleged out of Isaiah.




VERS. VI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Cloathed with Camels hair.

IN the Talmudists it would be read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Camels Wool. He hath not a garment besides a Woolen one, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to add wool (or hair) of Camels, and wool of Hares. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Wool of Sheep, and Wool of Camels which they mix, &c. And a little after, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If he make a garment of Camels hair, and weave in i but one thread of Linnen, it is forbidden, as things of different kinds.

There is one that thinks, that those garments of Adam, concerning which it is said, that God made for them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Coats of Skins, were of Camels hair. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In the Law of R. Meir, They found written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Garments of light. R. Isaac saith, that they were like those thin linen garments, which come from Betshan. R. Samuel bar Nachman saith, they were of the wool (or hair) of Camels, and the wool of Hares.

We cannot pass that by without observation that it is said; That in the Law of R. Meir they found written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Garments of light, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Garments of Skins. The like to which is that, In the Law of R. Meir they found it written instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Behold it was very good, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And behold death is a good thing. Where by the Law of R. Meir, seems to be understood some volum of the Law, in the margin of which, or in some papers put in, that Rabbin had writ his critical toys, and his foolish pieces of wit upon the Law, or some such trifling commentary of his own upon it.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
Eating Locusts.

They who had not nobler provision, hunted after Locusts for food. The Gemarists seign, that there are eight hundred kinds of them, namely of such as are clean. That Lexicographer certainly would be very acute, who could describe all these kinds particularly by their names.

The Rabbins deliver, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He that hunts Locusts, Wasps (a kind of Locusts) Hornets, and Flies on the Sabbath, is guilty. The Gloss there, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are a kind of clean locusts, and are eaten. And the Gemara a little after, He that hunts Locusts in the time of the dew (on the Sabbath) is not guilty. The Gloss there writes thus, The Locusts in the time of the dew are purblind; so that if you hunt them at that time, they stop their pace. The Gemara goes on, Eliezer ben Mahbai saith, If they go in Flocks he is not guilty. The Gloss writes, If they flock together in troops, and be as it were ready to be taken, he is not guilty, who hunts them even in the time of heat.




VERS. XIII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
And was with the Wild Beasts.

HE was among the wild beasts, but was not touched by them. So Adam first before his fall.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
And Angels ministered to him.

Forty days he was tempted by Satan invisibly, and Angels ministered to him visibly. Satan at last put on the appearance of an Angle of light, and pretending to wait on him, as the rest also did, hid his hook of temptation the more artificially.




VERS. XXIV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
Art thou come to destroy us?

US? Whom? The Devils? or those Galileans in the Synagouge? See what the Masters say. In that Generation in which the Son of David shall come, saith Rabban Gamaliel, Galilea shall be laid wast, and the Galileans shall wander from City to City, and shall not obtain mercy. If such a report obtained in the Nation, the Devil thence got a very fit occasion in this possessed man, of affrighting the Galileans from receiving Christ, because they were to expect nothing from his coming, but devastation.




VERS. XXXVIII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Towns.

WHAT this word means may be excellently well discovered by searching into the distinction between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to which 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Cities, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Villages, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Towns in the Evangelists do answer.

  • I. I render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Cities, But by what word, you will say, will you render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ? By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Towns. A man cannot compel his wife to follow him to dwell. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from Town to City, nor from City to Town. The proper English of which take from what follows. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is plain why he cannot force her from City to Town, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because in a City anything is to be found, or to be had; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But in a Town anything is not to be had. The Gloss writes, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kerac is greater than Ir (that is, A City than a Town) And there is a place of broad streets, where all neighbouring Inhabitants meet at a Market, and there anything is to be had. So the same Gloss elsewhere, Kerac is a place of broad streets, where men met together from many places, &c.

    The Gemarists go on: R. Josi bar Chaninah saith, Whence is it, that dwelling in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Keracin (cities) is more inconvenient? For it is said, And they blessed all the people who offered themselves willingly to dwell at Jerusalem. (Neh. XI.) Note by the way, that Jerusalem was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Kerac. The Gloss there is, Dwelling in Keracin is worse, because all dwell there, and the houses are straightened, and join one to another, so that there is not free air. But 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In a Town are gardens and paradices by the houses, and the air is more wholesome.

    〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Keracim therefore were 1. Cities girt with walls. Hence is that distinction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that there were some Keracin which were girt with walls from the days of Joshua, and some walled afterwards. 2. Trading and Mart Cities, and that were greater and nobler than the rest.

  • II. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 therefore were Villages, or Country Towns, in which no Synagogue was. Hence is that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A Kerac (a City) in which are not ten men to make a Synagogue, is to be reckoned for a Village. And where some of a Village are bound to read the book of Esther in the Feast of Purim: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 it is indulged to them to do it on a Synagogue day: that is, when they had not a Synagogue among them, but must resort to some neighbor Town, where a Synagogue was, it was permitted them to go thither on some week day, appointed for meeting together in the Synagogue; and that they might not take the trouble of a journey on another day, however that day was appointed by Law for that Lession.
  • III. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Which word is commonly rendered Urbs or Civitas; A City, and denoted generally fortified Cities and Towns also not fortified, where Synagogues were, and Villages where they were not. Hence is that distinction 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That was a great City where there was a Synagogue: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A small City, where there was not.

    By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 therefore here are to be understood Towns, where there were Synagogues, which nevertheless were not either fortified, or Towns of trade: among us English called Church-Towns.




CHAP. II.

VERS. IV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c.
They uncovered the roof, &c.

HERE I recollect that phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The way of the roof. When Rabh Honna was dead, his Bier could not be carried out through the door, the door being too strait, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Therefore they thought good to draw it out and let it down through the roof, or (through the way of the roof.) But Rabh Chasda said to them, Behold, we have learned from him, That it redounds to the honor of a wise man to be carried out by the door.

It is written, And they shall eat within thy gaies ( Deut. XXVI. 12.) that is, when the entrance into the house is by the gate. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 To except the way through the roof. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Does he enter into the house, using the way through the gate? or using the way through the roof? The place treats of an House, in the lower part of which the Owner dwells, but the upper part, that which is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is let out to another. It is asked, What way he must enter, who dwells in an upper room, whether by the door, and the lower parts, where the Owner dwells? Or whether he must climb up to the roof 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by the way to the roof: that is, as the Gloss hath it, That he ascend without the house by a ladder set against it, for entrance into the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Upper Room, and so go into the Upper Room.

By ladders set up or perhaps fastened there before, they first draw up this Parylitic 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , upon the Roof, Luke V. 19. Then seeing there was a door in every roof, through which they went up from the lower parts of the house into the roof, and this being too narrow to let down the bed and the sick man in it, they widen that space by pulling off the tiles that lay about it.

Well: having made a hole through the roof, the Paralitic is let down 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Into the Upper Chamber. There Christ sits, and the Pharisees, and the Doctors of the Law with him, and not in the lower parts of the house. For it was customary for them, when they discoursed of the Law or Religion, to go up into the Upper Chamber.

These are the Traditions, which they taught 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In the Upper Chamber of Hananiah, ben Hezekiah, ben Garon. The Elders went up 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into an Upper Chamber in Jericho. They went up also into an Upper Chamber in Jabneh. Rab. Jochanan and his Disciples went up 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to an Upper Chamber, and read and expounded. Compare Mark XIV. 15. Act. I. 13. and XX. 8.

VERS. VII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
Who can forgive sins?

A Certain Heretic said to Rabh Idith, It is written, And he said unto Moses, Come up unto the Lord ( Exod. XXIV. 1.) It should rather have been said, Come up to me. He answereth, This is Mitatron, whose name is like the name of his Lord, as it is written, My Name is in him, ( Exod. XXIII. 21.) If it be so, then said the other, he is to be worshipped. To whom Idith replied, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Properly: Do not embitter, or, provoke him; but they illy and perversely read, Do not change for him, do not exchange me for him. If that be the sense, said the other, What is the meaning of that, He will not forgive your sins? He answered, true indeed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 For we received him not so much as for a messenger. The Gloss is, He will not forgive your sins, that is, He cannot pardon your sins, and then what advantage is there from him? For he had not the power of pardoning our sins; we therefore rejected him, &c. Ye rejected him indeed, in whom was the name of Jehovah: but alas! how much to your own mischief!

VERS. IX.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ;
Which is easier to say, &c.

HE that observes the use of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is easy, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is hard, in the Jewish Schools (and the School men were now with Christ ) cannot think it improper, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should be of the same import with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Which word denotes the thing, or the sense plain, smooth and without scruple, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is hard, denotes the contrary. As if our Savior had said, were not the sense plainer, and more suited to the present business, to have said, Arise and take up thy bed, than to say, Thy sins are forgiven thee? But I say thus, That ye may know that the Son of man hath power, &c. He does not speak of the easiness of the pronunciation of the words, but of the easiness of the sense. And I should thus render the words, It is easier to say to the Paralytic, Thy sins are forgiven thee, than to say, &c. Whether to say, as it is vulgarly rendered, hath a sense not to be disapproved of; but, Then to say, hath a sense more emphatical. Is not the sense easier, as to the present business, to say, Thy sins are forgiven, than to say, Rise up and walk▪

VERS. XII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
He went out before them all.

IT is very well rendered, Before them all: and it might truly be rendered Against them all, according to another signification of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . That is, when the multitude was so crowded, that there was no way of going out through it, he being not only made whole, but strong and lusty, pressed through the press of the multitude, and stoutly made his way with his bed upon his shoulders.

VERS. XVI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
And Sinners.

WHO were they? Di ers, Usurers, Plunderers, Publicans, Shepherds of lesser Cattle, those that sell the fruit of the seventh year, those that make gain of birds with their fists, &c.

VERS. XXVI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
In the days of Abiathar the High Priest.

IT is well enough known, what is here said in defense of the purity of the text: namely, that Ahimelech the father was called Abiathar, and Abiathar the Son was called also Ahimelech. But I suppose, that something more was propounded by our Savior in these words. For it was common to the Jews, under Abiathar, to understand the Urim and Thummim. Nor without good reason, when it appears, that under the Father and the Son, both of that name, the mention of enquiring by Urim and Thummim is more frequent, than it is ever anywhere else; and after Abiathar the Son, there is scarcely mention of it at all. Christ therefore very properly adds 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In the days of Abiathar the High Priest, therein speaking according to a very received opinion in the Nation: as though he had said, David eat the Shew-bred given him by the High Priest, who had the Oracle by Urim and Thummim present with him, and who acted by the Divine direction.

Ahitopel, that is, A Counselor, Benaiah, the Son of Jehoiadah, that is the Sanhedrin, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abiathar, that is, Urim and Thummim.




VERS. IV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c.
They uncovered the roof, &c.

HERE I recollect that phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The way of the roof. When Rabh Honna was dead, his Bier could not be carried out through the door, the door being too strait, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Therefore they thought good to draw it out and let it down through the roof, or (through the way of the roof.) But Rabh Chasda said to them, Behold, we have learned from him, That it redounds to the honor of a wise man to be carried out by the door.

It is written, And they shall eat within thy gaies ( Deut. XXVI. 12.) that is, when the entrance into the house is by the gate. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 To except the way through the roof. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Does he enter into the house, using the way through the gate? or using the way through the roof? The place treats of an House, in the lower part of which the Owner dwells, but the upper part, that which is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is let out to another. It is asked, What way he must enter, who dwells in an upper room, whether by the door, and the lower parts, where the Owner dwells? Or whether he must climb up to the roof 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by the way to the roof: that is, as the Gloss hath it, That he ascend without the house by a ladder set against it, for entrance into the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Upper Room, and so go into the Upper Room.

By ladders set up or perhaps fastened there before, they first draw up this Parylitic 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , upon the Roof, Luke V. 19. Then seeing there was a door in every roof, through which they went up from the lower parts of the house into the roof, and this being too narrow to let down the bed and the sick man in it, they widen that space by pulling off the tiles that lay about it.

Well: having made a hole through the roof, the Paralitic is let down 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Into the Upper Chamber. There Christ sits, and the Pharisees, and the Doctors of the Law with him, and not in the lower parts of the house. For it was customary for them, when they discoursed of the Law or Religion, to go up into the Upper Chamber.

These are the Traditions, which they taught 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In the Upper Chamber of Hananiah, ben Hezekiah, ben Garon. The Elders went up 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into an Upper Chamber in Jericho. They went up also into an Upper Chamber in Jabneh. Rab. Jochanan and his Disciples went up 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to an Upper Chamber, and read and expounded. Compare Mark XIV. 15. Act. I. 13. and XX. 8.




VERS. VII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
Who can forgive sins?

A Certain Heretic said to Rabh Idith, It is written, And he said unto Moses, Come up unto the Lord ( Exod. XXIV. 1.) It should rather have been said, Come up to me. He answereth, This is Mitatron, whose name is like the name of his Lord, as it is written, My Name is in him, ( Exod. XXIII. 21.) If it be so, then said the other, he is to be worshipped. To whom Idith replied, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Properly: Do not embitter, or, provoke him; but they illy and perversely read, Do not change for him, do not exchange me for him. If that be the sense, said the other, What is the meaning of that, He will not forgive your sins? He answered, true indeed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 For we received him not so much as for a messenger. The Gloss is, He will not forgive your sins, that is, He cannot pardon your sins, and then what advantage is there from him? For he had not the power of pardoning our sins; we therefore rejected him, &c. Ye rejected him indeed, in whom was the name of Jehovah: but alas! how much to your own mischief!




VERS. IX.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ;
Which is easier to say, &c.

HE that observes the use of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is easy, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is hard, in the Jewish Schools (and the School men were now with Christ ) cannot think it improper, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should be of the same import with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Which word denotes the thing, or the sense plain, smooth and without scruple, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 It is hard, denotes the contrary. As if our Savior had said, were not the sense plainer, and more suited to the present business, to have said, Arise and take up thy bed, than to say, Thy sins are forgiven thee? But I say thus, That ye may know that the Son of man hath power, &c. He does not speak of the easiness of the pronunciation of the words, but of the easiness of the sense. And I should thus render the words, It is easier to say to the Paralytic, Thy sins are forgiven thee, than to say, &c. Whether to say, as it is vulgarly rendered, hath a sense not to be disapproved of; but, Then to say, hath a sense more emphatical. Is not the sense easier, as to the present business, to say, Thy sins are forgiven, than to say, Rise up and walk▪




VERS. XII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
He went out before them all.

IT is very well rendered, Before them all: and it might truly be rendered Against them all, according to another signification of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . That is, when the multitude was so crowded, that there was no way of going out through it, he being not only made whole, but strong and lusty, pressed through the press of the multitude, and stoutly made his way with his bed upon his shoulders.




VERS. XVI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
And Sinners.

WHO were they? Di ers, Usurers, Plunderers, Publicans, Shepherds of lesser Cattle, those that sell the fruit of the seventh year, those that make gain of birds with their fists, &c.




VERS. XXVI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
In the days of Abiathar the High Priest.

IT is well enough known, what is here said in defense of the purity of the text: namely, that Ahimelech the father was called Abiathar, and Abiathar the Son was called also Ahimelech. But I suppose, that something more was propounded by our Savior in these words. For it was common to the Jews, under Abiathar, to understand the Urim and Thummim. Nor without good reason, when it appears, that under the Father and the Son, both of that name, the mention of enquiring by Urim and Thummim is more frequent, than it is ever anywhere else; and after Abiathar the Son, there is scarcely mention of it at all. Christ therefore very properly adds 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In the days of Abiathar the High Priest, therein speaking according to a very received opinion in the Nation: as though he had said, David eat the Shew-bred given him by the High Priest, who had the Oracle by Urim and Thummim present with him, and who acted by the Divine direction.

Ahitopel, that is, A Counselor, Benaiah, the Son of Jehoiadah, that is the Sanhedrin, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abiathar, that is, Urim and Thummim.




CHAP. III.

VERS. IV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
But they held their peace.

THIS reminds me of the like carriage of the Sanhedrin, in judging a Servant of King Janneus, a murderer, when Janneus himself was present in the Sanhedrin. It was found sufficiently that he was guilty, but for fear they dared not to utter their opinion, when Simeon ben Sheta, President of the Sanhedrin required it. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He looked on his right hand, and they fixed their eyes upon the earth, on his left hand, and they fixed their eyes upon the earth, &c.

VERS. XVII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
Boanerges.
  • I. SEE what Beza saith here. To which our very learned Hugh Broughton, a man very well exercised in these studies, replies. The Jews to this very day pronounce Ceva by oa, as Noabhyim for Nebhyim. So Boanerges. When Theodore Beza will have it written Benerges, the very Jews themselves will defend our Gospel.

    Certainly it is somewhat hard, and bold to accuse the Scripture of St. Mark, as corrupt, for this manner of pronunciation, when among the Jews, the pronouncing of some letters, vowels, words, was so different and indifferent, that they pronounced one way in Galilee, another way in Samaria, and another way in Judea. And I remember, saith the famous Ludouicus de Dieu, that I heard the excellent Expenius say, that he had it from the mouth of a very learned Maronite, that it could not be taught by any Grammatical rules, and hardly by word of mouth, what sound Scheva hath among the Syrians.

    That Castel of noted fame, which is called Masada in Josephus, Pliny, Solinus, and others (in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) in Strabo is▪ Moasada, very agreeable to this our sound. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Some scorched rocks about Moasada. Where without all controversy, he speaks of Masada.

  • II. There is is a controversy also about the word Erges. It is obscure in what manner it is applied to Thunder. But give me your judgment, courteous Reader, what 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is in this story. The Father of Samuel sat in the Synagogue of Shaph, and Jathib, in Nehardea. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The divine Glory came, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He heard the voice of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and went not out: the Angels came, and he was affrighted.

    Of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rigsha the Glossers say nothing. And we do not confidently render it Thunder, nor yet do we well know how to render it better: if so be it doth not denote 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the sound as of a mighty rushing wind, Act. II. 2. But let the Reader judge.

  • III. As obscure is the reason of the name, imposed upon these two Disciples, as the derivation of the word. We have only this certain in this business, that we never find them called by this name elsewhere. Christ called Simon Peter, and likewise others called him Peter, and he calls himself so. But you never find James called Boanerges, or John so called, either by themselves or by others. We must trust conjecture for the rest.
  • IV. It is well enough known, what the Phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bath Kol, the daughter of thunder, means among the Jews. Our Savior using another word, seems to respect another Etymology of the name. But it is demanded, what that is. He calls Simon Peter with respect had to the work he was to ply, in building the Church of the Gentiles upon a rock. For he first opened the door to let in the Gospel among the Gentiles. Whether were James and John called Sons of thunder with respect had to their stout discoursing against the Jews, we neither dare to say, nor can we deny it. James did this, as it seems, to the loss of his life, Act. XII.

    But what if allusion be here made to the two Registers, or Scribes of the Sanhedrin? whereof one sat on the right hand, and the other on the left; one wrote the Votes of those that quitted, the other the Votes of those that condemned. Or to the President himself, and the Vice-President? Whose definitive sentence, summing up the Votes of the whole Sanhedrin, was like thunder and lightning to the condemned persons, and seemed to all like the Oracles given from Sinai out of lightning and thunder.

  • V. But whatsoever that was in the mind of our Savior, that moved him to imprint this name upon them, when these two Brethren, above all the other Disciples, would have fire fall from Heaven upon that Town of the Samaritans, which refused to give Christ entertainment, Luke, IX. 54. they seem to act according to the sense of this surname. And when the Mother of these desired a place for one of them on Christ's right hand, and for the other on his left, she took the confidence of such a request probably from this, that Christ had set so honorable a name upon them above the other Disciples. And when John himself calls himself The Elder 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and he was sufficiently known to those to whom he writ, under that bare title 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Elder; I cannot but suspect, this distinguishing Character arose hence. All the Apostles indeed were Elders, which Peter saith of himself, 1 Pet. V. 1. but I ask, whether any of the twelve, besides this our Apostle, (his Brother James being now dead) could be known to those that were absent under this title The Elder, by a proper, not additional name, as he is in his two latter Epistles.

VERS. XXI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
He is beside himself.

IN the Talmudists it is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 His judgment is gone, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 His understanding is ceased. If any becomes mute, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and yet is of a sound mind, and they say to him, shall we write a bill of Divorce for thy wife? and he nods with his head, and they try him thrice, &c. And it is necessary, that they make trial of him more exactly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lest perhaps he might be deprived of his senses. This is to be understood of a dumb person, made so by some Paralytical or Apoplectical stroke, which sometimes wounds the understanding.

The Rabbins deliver: If any one is sick, and in the mean time any of his friends die, they do not make it known to him, that such a one is dead, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lest his understanding be disturbed. One thus lamented R. Simeon ben Lachish; Where art thou, O Bar Lachish? Where art thou, O bar Lachish? And so cried out 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Until his understanding perished. For so the Gloss renders it.

How fitly this word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 expresseth these Phrases, is readily observed by him, who understandeth both Languages. And a Jew reading these words in Mark, would presently have recourse to the sense of those phrases in his nation; which do not always signify madness, or being bereft of ones wits, in the proper sense, but sometimes and very frequently some discomposure of the understanding for the present, from some too vehement passion. So say Christ's friends, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 His knowledge is snatched away. He hath forgotten himself, and his own health, he is so vehement and hot in discharging his office, and in preaching, that he is transported beyond himself, and his understanding is disturbed, that he neither takes care of his necessary food, nor of his sleep. Those his friends indeed have need of an Apology, that they had no sounder, nor holier, nor wiser conceit of him: but it is scarcely credible, that they thought him to be fallen into plain and absolute madness, and pure distraction. For he had conversed among the multitudes before, at all times, in all places, and yet his friends do not say this of him. But now he was retired to his own house at Capernaum, were he might justly expect rest and repose; yet the multitudes rush upon him there, so that he could not enjoy his table and his bed at his own home. Therefore his friends and kinsfolk of Nazareth (among whom was his Mother, verse. 31.) hearing this, unanimously run to him, to get him away from the multitude, for they said among themselves 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , He is too much transported beyond himself, and is forgetful of himself.




VERS. IV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
But they held their peace.

THIS reminds me of the like carriage of the Sanhedrin, in judging a Servant of King Janneus, a murderer, when Janneus himself was present in the Sanhedrin. It was found sufficiently that he was guilty, but for fear they dared not to utter their opinion, when Simeon ben Sheta, President of the Sanhedrin required it. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He looked on his right hand, and they fixed their eyes upon the earth, on his left hand, and they fixed their eyes upon the earth, &c.




VERS. XVII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
Boanerges.
  • I. SEE what Beza saith here. To which our very learned Hugh Broughton, a man very well exercised in these studies, replies. The Jews to this very day pronounce Ceva by oa, as Noabhyim for Nebhyim. So Boanerges. When Theodore Beza will have it written Benerges, the very Jews themselves will defend our Gospel.

    Certainly it is somewhat hard, and bold to accuse the Scripture of St. Mark, as corrupt, for this manner of pronunciation, when among the Jews, the pronouncing of some letters, vowels, words, was so different and indifferent, that they pronounced one way in Galilee, another way in Samaria, and another way in Judea. And I remember, saith the famous Ludouicus de Dieu, that I heard the excellent Expenius say, that he had it from the mouth of a very learned Maronite, that it could not be taught by any Grammatical rules, and hardly by word of mouth, what sound Scheva hath among the Syrians.

    That Castel of noted fame, which is called Masada in Josephus, Pliny, Solinus, and others (in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) in Strabo is▪ Moasada, very agreeable to this our sound. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Some scorched rocks about Moasada. Where without all controversy, he speaks of Masada.

  • II. There is is a controversy also about the word Erges. It is obscure in what manner it is applied to Thunder. But give me your judgment, courteous Reader, what 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is in this story. The Father of Samuel sat in the Synagogue of Shaph, and Jathib, in Nehardea. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The divine Glory came, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He heard the voice of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and went not out: the Angels came, and he was affrighted.

    Of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rigsha the Glossers say nothing. And we do not confidently render it Thunder, nor yet do we well know how to render it better: if so be it doth not denote 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the sound as of a mighty rushing wind, Act. II. 2. But let the Reader judge.

  • III. As obscure is the reason of the name, imposed upon these two Disciples, as the derivation of the word. We have only this certain in this business, that we never find them called by this name elsewhere. Christ called Simon Peter, and likewise others called him Peter, and he calls himself so. But you never find James called Boanerges, or John so called, either by themselves or by others. We must trust conjecture for the rest.
  • IV. It is well enough known, what the Phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bath Kol, the daughter of thunder, means among the Jews. Our Savior using another word, seems to respect another Etymology of the name. But it is demanded, what that is. He calls Simon Peter with respect had to the work he was to ply, in building the Church of the Gentiles upon a rock. For he first opened the door to let in the Gospel among the Gentiles. Whether were James and John called Sons of thunder with respect had to their stout discoursing against the Jews, we neither dare to say, nor can we deny it. James did this, as it seems, to the loss of his life, Act. XII.

    But what if allusion be here made to the two Registers, or Scribes of the Sanhedrin? whereof one sat on the right hand, and the other on the left; one wrote the Votes of those that quitted, the other the Votes of those that condemned. Or to the President himself, and the Vice-President? Whose definitive sentence, summing up the Votes of the whole Sanhedrin, was like thunder and lightning to the condemned persons, and seemed to all like the Oracles given from Sinai out of lightning and thunder.

  • V. But whatsoever that was in the mind of our Savior, that moved him to imprint this name upon them, when these two Brethren, above all the other Disciples, would have fire fall from Heaven upon that Town of the Samaritans, which refused to give Christ entertainment, Luke, IX. 54. they seem to act according to the sense of this surname. And when the Mother of these desired a place for one of them on Christ's right hand, and for the other on his left, she took the confidence of such a request probably from this, that Christ had set so honorable a name upon them above the other Disciples. And when John himself calls himself The Elder 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and he was sufficiently known to those to whom he writ, under that bare title 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Elder; I cannot but suspect, this distinguishing Character arose hence. All the Apostles indeed were Elders, which Peter saith of himself, 1 Pet. V. 1. but I ask, whether any of the twelve, besides this our Apostle, (his Brother James being now dead) could be known to those that were absent under this title The Elder, by a proper, not additional name, as he is in his two latter Epistles.



VERS. XXI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
He is beside himself.

IN the Talmudists it is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 His judgment is gone, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 His understanding is ceased. If any becomes mute, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and yet is of a sound mind, and they say to him, shall we write a bill of Divorce for thy wife? and he nods with his head, and they try him thrice, &c. And it is necessary, that they make trial of him more exactly, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 lest perhaps he might be deprived of his senses. This is to be understood of a dumb person, made so by some Paralytical or Apoplectical stroke, which sometimes wounds the understanding.

The Rabbins deliver: If any one is sick, and in the mean time any of his friends die, they do not make it known to him, that such a one is dead, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lest his understanding be disturbed. One thus lamented R. Simeon ben Lachish; Where art thou, O Bar Lachish? Where art thou, O bar Lachish? And so cried out 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Until his understanding perished. For so the Gloss renders it.

How fitly this word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 expresseth these Phrases, is readily observed by him, who understandeth both Languages. And a Jew reading these words in Mark, would presently have recourse to the sense of those phrases in his nation; which do not always signify madness, or being bereft of ones wits, in the proper sense, but sometimes and very frequently some discomposure of the understanding for the present, from some too vehement passion. So say Christ's friends, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 His knowledge is snatched away. He hath forgotten himself, and his own health, he is so vehement and hot in discharging his office, and in preaching, that he is transported beyond himself, and his understanding is disturbed, that he neither takes care of his necessary food, nor of his sleep. Those his friends indeed have need of an Apology, that they had no sounder, nor holier, nor wiser conceit of him: but it is scarcely credible, that they thought him to be fallen into plain and absolute madness, and pure distraction. For he had conversed among the multitudes before, at all times, in all places, and yet his friends do not say this of him. But now he was retired to his own house at Capernaum, were he might justly expect rest and repose; yet the multitudes rush upon him there, so that he could not enjoy his table and his bed at his own home. Therefore his friends and kinsfolk of Nazareth (among whom was his Mother, verse. 31.) hearing this, unanimously run to him, to get him away from the multitude, for they said among themselves 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , He is too much transported beyond himself, and is forgetful of himself.




CHAP. IV.

VERS. I.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
He began to teach.

THAT is, he taught, by a Phrase very usual to these holy writers, because very usual to the Nation. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rabh Canah began to be tedious in his oration; that is, He was tedious 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That Scholar began to weep, that is, He wept. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Ox began to low, that is, He lowed. When the Tyrants letter was brought to the Rabbins 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they began to weep, that is, They wept.

This our Evangelist useth also another word, and that numberless times almost: the others also use it, but not so frequently: namely, the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , presently; which answereth to the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Out of hand, most common among the Talmudists. We meet with it in this our Evangelist seven or eight times in the first Chapter, and elsewhere very frequently: and that not seldom according to the custom of the Idiom, more than out of any necessity of the thing signified.

VERS. IV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
And some fell.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 According to what falls. The Gloss there, According to the measure which one sows. And there the Gemarists speak of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 seed falling out of the hand: that is, that is cast out of the hand of the sower: and of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 seed falling from the Oxen: that is, that which is scattered and sown by the sowing Oxen. For, as the Gloss speaks, sometimes they sow with the hand, and sometimes they put the seed into a cart full of holes, and drive the Oxen upon the plowed earth, and the seed falls through the holes.

VERS. V.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Because it had not depth of earth.

FOR it was rocky, whose turf nevertheless was thick enough, and very fruitful. But this ground which the parable supposeth, wanted that thickness. You have not a more fruitful land among all lands, than the land of Egypt: nor a more fruitful Country in Egypt, than Zoan. And yet Hebron, which was rocky, exceeded it sevenfold. Note that, It was rocky, and yet so fruitful.

VERS. VII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Upon thorns.

THE Parable supposeth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A field not freed from thorns.

VERS. XI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
To them that are without.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Those without in Jewish speech were the Gentiles; a phrase taken hence, that they called all Lands and Countries, besides their own 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Without the land. Would you have an exact instance of this distinction. A tree, half of which grows within the land of Israel, and half without the land, the fruits of it which are to be tithed, and the common fruits are confounded. They are the words of Rabba. But Rabban Simeon Ben Gamaliel saith, That part which grows within the place, that is bound to tithing (that is, within the land of Israel) is to be tithed: that which grows in the place free from tithing (that is, without the land) is free. The Gloss is, For if the roots of the tree are without the land, it is free, although the tree itself extends itself sixteen cubits within the land.

Hence 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Books 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that are without, are Heathen Books. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Extraneous books of Greek wisdom.

This is the common signification of the phrase. And certainly it foretells dreadful things, when our blessed Savior stigmatizeth the Jewish Nation with that very name, that they were wont to call the Heathens by.

The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Those without, occurs also in the Talmudists, when it signifies the Jews themselves, that is some of the Jewish Nation. Here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Karaites, who rejected Traditions; there 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Those without, are opposed to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The wise Men. He that puts his Phylacteries on his forehead, or in the Palm of his hand 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Behold! he follows the custom of the Karaites. And he that overlays one of them with gold, and puts it upon his garment, which is at his hand, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Behold! he follows the custom of those that are without. Where the Gloss, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are men, who follow their own will, and not the judgment of the wise Men. They are supposed to wear Phylacteries, and to be Jews; but when they do according to their pleasure, and despise the rules of the wise Men, they are esteemed as Those that are without, or Heathens. So was the whole Jewish Nation according to Christ's censure, which despised the Evangelical Wisdom.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
All things are done in Parables.
  • I. How much is the Jewish Nation deceived concerning the times of the Messias? They think his forerunner Elias will explain all difficulties, resolve scruples, and will render all things plain; so that when the Messias shall come after him, there shall be nothing obscure or dark in the Law and in Religion. Hence these expressions and the like to them. One found a bill of contracts in his keeping, and knew not what it meant. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Let it be laid up till Elias shall come. And more in the same Tract concerning things found, when it is not known to whom they are to be restored, Let them be laid up till Elias come. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That passage Ezek. XLV. 18, 19. Where 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A burnt offering is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A sacrifice for sin, Elias will unfold. Infinite examples of that sort occur.

    But alas! thou art deceived, O Jew! all things are made clear which make to eternal Salvation, Elias and Messias, John and Christ preaching the Gospel, when they came; but they are obscure to you, both by reason of your voluntary blindness, who have shut your eyes and your mind against the saving Doctrine of the Gospel; and from the just judgment of the Messias, who justly preached in clouds and in covered expressions to them, who would not see the Sun, and the open light.

  • II. How those words have wracked Interpreters, Is a Candle put under a bushel? &c. And, There is nothing hidden, &c. You see also without a Candle. A very easy sense of them is gathered from the context. When Christ speaks in Parables, A light is put under a b shel. But the light, saith he, is not come for this end, that it should be so hidden; nor indeed were it sit so to hide it, but that the Divine Justice would have it so, that they who will not see the light, should not enjoy the light. But There is nothing hid which shall not be made manifest by the brightness of the Doctrine of the Gospel, so there be Eyes, that do not refuse the light, nor voluntarily become purblind. Therefore take you heed how you hear, lest ye be like them, and Divine Justice meet to you by the same measure, as is measured to them, namely, that they shall never hear, because they will not hear.



VERS. I.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
He began to teach.

THAT is, he taught, by a Phrase very usual to these holy writers, because very usual to the Nation. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rabh Canah began to be tedious in his oration; that is, He was tedious 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That Scholar began to weep, that is, He wept. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Ox began to low, that is, He lowed. When the Tyrants letter was brought to the Rabbins 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they began to weep, that is, They wept.

This our Evangelist useth also another word, and that numberless times almost: the others also use it, but not so frequently: namely, the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , presently; which answereth to the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Out of hand, most common among the Talmudists. We meet with it in this our Evangelist seven or eight times in the first Chapter, and elsewhere very frequently: and that not seldom according to the custom of the Idiom, more than out of any necessity of the thing signified.




VERS. IV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
And some fell.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 According to what falls. The Gloss there, According to the measure which one sows. And there the Gemarists speak of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 seed falling out of the hand: that is, that is cast out of the hand of the sower: and of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 seed falling from the Oxen: that is, that which is scattered and sown by the sowing Oxen. For, as the Gloss speaks, sometimes they sow with the hand, and sometimes they put the seed into a cart full of holes, and drive the Oxen upon the plowed earth, and the seed falls through the holes.




VERS. V.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Because it had not depth of earth.

FOR it was rocky, whose turf nevertheless was thick enough, and very fruitful. But this ground which the parable supposeth, wanted that thickness. You have not a more fruitful land among all lands, than the land of Egypt: nor a more fruitful Country in Egypt, than Zoan. And yet Hebron, which was rocky, exceeded it sevenfold. Note that, It was rocky, and yet so fruitful.




VERS. VII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .
Upon thorns.

THE Parable supposeth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A field not freed from thorns.