Works

VERS. III.

THE East gate of the Court of the Gentiles, had the Metropolis Shushan painted on it. And through this gate the High Priest went out to burn the red Cow. And, All the Walls of that Court were high, except the East Wall; because the Priest, when he burnt the red Cow, stood upon the top of Mount Olivet, and took his aim, and looked upon the gate of the Temple, in that time when he sprinkled the blood. And, The Priest stood with his face turned Westward, kills the Cow with his right hand, and receives the blood with the lest, but sprinkleth it with his right, and that seven times, directly towards the holy of Holies.

It is true indeed, from any Tract of Olivet, the Temple might be well seen: but the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 over against, if it doth not direct to this very place, yet some place certainly in the same line: and it cannot but recall to our mind that action of the High Priest.

VERS. VII.

THINK here, how the Traditions of the Scribes affrighted the Nation with the Report of Gog and Magog, immediately to go before the coming of Messiah.

R. Eliezer ben Abina saith, When you see Kingdoms disturbing one another, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Then expect the footsteps of the Messiah. And know that this is true from hence, that so it was in the days of Abraham; for Kingdoms disturbed one another, and then came redemption to Abraham. And elsewhere , So they came against Abraham, and so they shall come with Gog and Magog. And again, The Rabbins deliver. In the first year of that week (of years) that the Son of David is to come, shall that be fulfilled, I will rain upon one City, but I will not rain upon another ( Amos IV.) The second year, The Arrows of famine shall be sent forth. The third, The famine shall be grievous, and men and women and children, holy men, and men of good works, shall die. And there shall be a forgetfulness of the Law among those that learn it. The fourth year, Fulness, and not fullness. The fifth year, Great fullness, for they shall eat, and drink and rejoice, and the Law shall return to its Scholars. The sixth year, Voices. (The Gloss is, A fame shall be spread, that the Son of David comes, or, they shall sound with the trumpet) The seventh year, Wars, and in the going out of that seventh year, the Son of David shall come.

VERS. VIII.

ES • i. LXVI. 7, 8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; &c. Before she travailed she brought forth, before the labor of pains came, she was delivered, and brought forth a male. Who hath heard such a thing? &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Does the earth bring forth in one day, or is a Nation also brought forth at once? For Zion was in travail and brought forth her sons.

The Prophet here says two things.

• I. That Christ should be born before the destruction of Jerusalem. The Jews themselves collect and acknowledge this out of this Prophesy. It is in the Great Genesis, a very ancient book, thus R. Samuel bar Nahaman said, Whence prove you, that in the day when the des • ruction of the Temple was, Messias was born? He answered, From this that is said in the last Chapter of Isaiah, Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her bringing forth shall come, she brought forth a male child. In the same hour that the destruction of the Temple was, Israel cried out, as though she were bringing forth. And Jonathan in the Ch • ldee translation said, Before her trouble came, she was saved, and before pains of childbirth came upon her, Messiah was revealed. (In the Chaldee it is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 A King shall manifest himself. )

  In like manner in the same Book: R. Samuel bar Nahaman said; It happened that Elias went by the way in the day, wherein the Destruction of the Temple was, and he heard a certain voice crying out and saying, The holy Temple is destroyed. Which when he heard, he imagined, how he could destroy the World; but travailing forward, he saw men plowing and sowing; to whom he said, God is angry with the World, and will destroy his house, and lead his children Captives to the Gentiles, and do you labor for temporal Victuals? And another voice was heard saying, Let them work, for the Savior of Israel is born. And Elias said, where is he? And the voice said, In Bethlehem of Judah, &c. These words this Author speaks, and these words they speak.

• II. As it is not without good reason gathered, that Christ shall be born before the destruction of the City, from that clause, Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her bringing forth came ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the pangs of travail) she brought forth a male child: so also from that clause 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. Is a Nation brought forth at once, for Zion travailed and brought forth her children; is gathered as well, that the Gentiles were to be gathered and called to the faith, before that destruction; which our Savior most plainly teacheth, ver. 10. But the Gospel must first be preached among all Nations. For how the Gentiles which should believe are called the Children of Zion, and the Children of the Church of Israel, everywhere in the Prophets, there is no need to show, for everyone knows it.

  In this sense is the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , pangs, or sorrows, in this place to be understood, and it agrees not only with the sense of the Prophet alleged, but with a most common phrase and opinion in the Nation concerning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Sorrows of the Messiah, that is concerning the calamities which they expected would happen at the coming of the Messiah.

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ulla saith, the Messias shall come, but I shall not see him, so also saith Rabba, Messias shall come, but I shall not see him. That is, he shall not be to be seen. Abai saith to Rabba, Why? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Because of the sorrows of the Messias. It is a Tradition. His Disciples asked R. Eleazar, What may a man do to be delivered from the sorrows of Messias? Let him be conversant in the Law, and in the works of mercy. The Gloss is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That is the terrors and the sorrows, which shall be in his days. He that feasts thrice on the Sabbath day, shall be delivered from three miseries, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 From the sorrows of Messiah, from the judgment of Hell, and from the War of Gog and Magog. Where the Gloss is this, From the sorrows of Messias. For in that age wherein the Son of David shall come, there will be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an accusation of the Scholars of the Wise men. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 denotes such pains as women in child birth endure.

VERS. XXXII.

OF what day and hour? That the discourse is of the day of the destruction of Jerusalem, is so evident, both by the Disciples question, and by the whole thread of Christ's discourse, that it is a wonder, any should understand these words of the day and hour of the last judgment.

Two things are demanded of our Savior, ver. 4. The one is, When shall these things be, that one stone shall not be left upon another? And the second is, What shall be the sign of this consummation? To the latter he answereth throughout the whole Chapter hitherto. To the former in the present words. He had said indeed in the verse before, Heaven and Earth shall pass away, &c. not for resolution to the question propounded, (for there was no enquiry at all concerning the dissolution of Heaven and Earth,) but for confirmation of the truth of thing, which he had related. As though he had said, ye ask when such an overthrow of the Temple shall happen; when it shall be, and what shall be the signs of it. I answer, These and those, and the other signs shall go before it; and these my words of the thing itself, to come to pass, and of the signs going before, are firmer than Heaven and Earth itself. But whereas ye inquire of the precise time, that is not to be inquired after, For of that day and hour knoweth no man.

We cannot but remember here, that even among the Beholders of the destruction of the Temple, there is a difference concerning the Day of the destruction; that that day and hour was so little known before the event, that even after the event they who saw the flames disagreed among themselves concerning the Day. Josephus, an eye witness, saw the burning of the Temple, and he ascribed it to the Tenth day of the month A • , or Lou • . For thus he, The Temple perished the tenth day of the month Lous, (or August) a day fatal to the Temple, as having been on that day consumed in flames by the King of Babylon. Rabban Jochanan ben Zaccai saw the same conflagration, and he together with the whole Jewish Nation, ascribes it to the ninth day of that month, not the tenth; yet so that he saith, If I had not lived in that age, I had not judged it, but to have happened on the tenth day. For as the Gloss upon Maimonides writes, It was the evening, when they set fire to it, and the Temple burnt until sun-set the tenth day. In the Jerusalem Talmud therefore Rabbi, and R. Joshua ben Levi fasted the ninth and tenth days. See also the Tract Bab. Taanith

For the day of Vengeance is in my heart, and the year of my redeemed come • th, Isaiah. LXIII. 4. What means? The day of Vengeance is in my haert? R. Jochanan saith, I have revealed it to my heart, to my members I have not revealed it. R. Simeon ben Lachish saith, I have revealed it to my heart, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but to the ministering Angels I have not revealed it. And Jalkut on that place thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 My heart reveals it not to my mouth, to whom should my mouth reveal it?

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that is, Neither the Angels, nor the Messias. For in that sense the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Son, is to be taken in this place, and elsewhere, very often. As in that passage, Joh. V. 19. The Son, that is, The Messias, can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do. ver. 20. The Father loveth the Messias, &c. ver. 26. He hath given to the Messias to have life in himself, &c. And that the word Son, is to be rendered in this sense, appears from verse 27. He hath given him authority also to execute judgment, because he is the Son of man. Observe that, Because he is the Son of man.

• I. It is one thing to understand the Son of God barely and abstractly for the second person in the Holy Trinity; another to understand him for the Messias, or that second person incarnate. To say that the second Person in the Trinity knows not something, is blasphemous; to say so of the Messias, is not so, who nevertheless was the same with the second Person in the Trinity. For although the second Person, abstractly considered according to his mere Diety, was co-equal with the Father, co-omnipotent, co-omniscient, co-eternal with him, &c. Yet Messias, who was God-man, considered as Messias, was a servant and a messenger of the Father, and received commands and authority from the Father. And those expressions, The Son can do nothing of himself, &c. will not in the least serve the Arians turn; if you take them in this sense, which you must necessarily do; Messias can do nothing of himself, because he is a Servant and a Deputy.
• II. We must distinguish between the execellencies, and perfections of Christ, which flowed from the Hypostatical union of the two natures, and those which flowed from the donation and anointing of the Holy Spirit. From the Hypostatical Union of the Natures flowed the infinite dignity of his Person, his impeccability, his infinite self-sufficiency to perform the Law, and to satisfy the divine justice. From the anointing of the Spirit flowed, his Power of miracles, his fore-knowledge of things to come, and all kind of knowledge of Evangelic Mysteries. Those rendered him a fit and perfect Redeemer; these a fit and perfect Minister of the Gospel.

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.

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 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.

• 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

• 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.

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 〉 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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.