for a Feast Mat. xxv 21 Judas his indignation against the Woman that anointed Christ what pretence for it besides his Covetousness Mat. xxvi 7 the manner of his Death Mat. xxvii 5 p. 92. Judges among the Jews whence they took their name Mat. iii. 2 To Justify what in St. Paul's dispute with the Jews Rom. iii. 4 Justin Martyr his Authority not much to be regarded 2 Thess ii 4 K. Kabbalistical interpretations of Scripture of what kind 2 Pet. i. 5 Key of David what Mat. xvi 9 Kingdom whether the condition of the Christian Church could be called such after the destruction of Jerusalem Rev. i. 6 Kingdom which a Nobleman went into a far Country to receive how to be understood Luke xix 12 Kings Manuscript whether properly a different Copy or rather a Paraphrase of the New Testament Mat. xx 29 Acts x. 25 Kiss Holy with which the Christians saluted one another Rom. xvi 16 L. Labour of Love what 1 Thess i. 2 Lake burning with Fire and Brimstone whence the Phrase is taken Rev. xix 20 Laodiceans whether St. Paul wrote to them Col. iv 16 Last days which Acts ii 17 Law taken in a larger or stricter Notion John x. 35 Law of Sin and the Spirit what Rom. viii 2 Law of Moses in what sense possible or impossible to be kept Gal. iii. 10 11. the Jews only freed from the Curse of it not the Heathens Ib. v. 13 how it was a Pedagogue to bring us to Christ Gal. iii. 24 why called Elements of the World and weak and beggerly Elements Ibid. iv 3 Letter of the Law what Mat. v. 17 Mar. xii 14 Rom. ii 29 2 Cor. iii. 6 Levi the Publican whether the same with St. Matthew Luke v. 27 Light in a metaphorical sense what 1 Joh. i. 5 To Live with Christ whether it signifies to be in Prosperity 1 Thess v. 10 Lord of Hosts why God is often so stiled 1 Tim. i. 18 M. Malchus a Syrian name John xviii 10 Martyrs their several denominations for distinction sake trifling Rev. iii. 14 Man of Sin whether the Gnosticks or the rebellious Jews 2 Thess ii 3 Melchisedek how said to have been without Father or Mother and to have represented Christ Heb. vii 4 Messenger of Satan what 2 Cor. xii 7 Metropoles their Privileges as to Civil Government Rev. i. 4 Metropolitans whether any in the Apostles times Phil. i. 1 1 Tim. iii. 15 Rev. iv 4 6. Morning Star for the Doctrin of the Gospel 2 Pet. i. 19 Mystery of Iniquity whether the secrets of the Gnostick Sect or the hidden Counsels of the seditious Jews 2 Thess ii 7 N. Nard an Herb or Ointment and why of great Price Mark xiv 3 Name above every Name what Phil. ii 9 to ask in the name of Christ what Joh. xiv 14 Nature for that which is opposed to instruction 1 Cor. xi 14 by nature Children of Wrath spoken of the Jews what Ib. and Eph. ii 3 Neapolis in Palestine confounded by Dr. Hammond with that in Macedonia Acts xvi 13 Number and name of the Beast what Rev. xiii 18 number of a Man what Ibid. O. Oaths why said to be paid to the Lord tho made to others Mat. v. 33 Offering might be said to be sanctified two ways Rom. xv 16 To Open the Eyes or Vnderstanding what Luke xxiv 16 45. Oracles whence so called Rom. iii. 2 living what Ibid. counterfeit Oracles cited by Dr. Hammond Heb. vi 9 Outward darkness what Mat. viii 12 and xxv 30 P. Palestine whether subject to Syria in Herod the Great 's time Luke ii 1 Parables of Christ whether before vulgarly used by the Jews Mat. xx 15 do not always allude to a Custom Chap. xxii 2 nor observe a perfect decorum Chap. xxv 24 every thing in them not allegorical Luke xv 22 Parents whether Magistrates are included in that word Eph. vi 1 4. Passions evil hinder Men from acknowledging Truth John iii. 19 Passive Verbs often used in an Active sense James ii 4 St. Paul how a Roman Citizen Acts xxii 25 whether a single Man 1 Cor. ix 5 some of his Writings may be lost 1 Cor. v. 9 whether conversant in Heathen Writers 1 Cor. xv 33 whether Eloquent 2 Cor. xi 6 Gal. ii 6 disputes with the Jews upon their own principles Gal. iii. 10 16 24. Chap. iv 3 12. St. Peter how it is said the Gates of Hell and Death should not prevail against him Mat. xxvi 18 whether he prophesied of the destruction of Jerusalem 2 Pet. iii. 3 c. the time of his Death John xii 18 Prem to 2 Pet. Phenice a part of Syria whose Inhabitants were therefore called Syro-Phaenicians Mat. xv 22 Philippi a Roman Colony and Metropolis of Macedonia Phil. i. 1 Pilate could have put Christ to Death without the consent of the Jews Mat. xxvii 15 Platonists thought the Devils roved about Mens Sepulchres Mat. ix 28 believed the Immortality of the Soul 1 Cor. xv 29 Plural number put for the Singular Mat. xxi 7 and xxvii 44 To Pray in any ones name what Joh. xiv 14 Preexistence of Souls believed by the Jews John ix 2 High Priesthood when joined with the Dignity of Emperor Heb. vi 9 Prisoners the Custom of releasing them on Festival days Mat. xxvii 15 Prophecies antient of two kinds Mat. ii 15 of the Revelations like the Antient Rev. iv 2 why so obscure Rev. xiii 18 To Prophesy of any one for saying what may be fitly applied to him Mat. xv 7 Prophets cited instead of an allegorical Interpretation of some Passages in them Mat. ii 23 whether they commonly express dismal things covertly Rev. xvi 17 among the Heathens whether they taught the People Vertue Luke i. 67 many false Prophets during the Siege of Jerusalem 2 Thess ii 9 Prophetical expressions not always to be understood in a proper sense nor every particular Phrase to have a special meaning assigned it Rev. iv 2 and ix 17 Propositions universal for particular 1 Cor. xii 28 Publicans of two sorts Mat. xi 19 Purifying by Fire and Water common among the Heathens to signify the cleansing of the mind Mat. iii. 11 Python Spirit of Python what Acts xvi 18 R. Redeeming of time for delaying Rev. v. 16 Regeneration the Stoicks notion of it Mat. xix 28 To Remit and retain Sins spoken of the Apostles what John xx 23 Repetitions for emphasis sake 2 Cor. xi 22 Resurrection of the dead whether it ever signifies no more than a second State or Subsistence Mat. xxii 31 Rest of God under the Law the Land of Canaan under the Gospel Heaven Heb. iii. 11 Revelation of the Sons of God what Rom. viii 19 Riches whether promised under the Gospel 2 Cor. ix 8 9. Righteous for Merciful Mat. i. 19 Right hand of God where mention is made of sitting on it what Mark xvi 19 Rock that followed the Israelites how it is said to have done so why called Spiritual and how said to have
according to the use of that phrase in Scripture in which it occurs more than once And we are not here to consider what the word Gates signifies when it is alone or joined with any other word but what is the meaning of this phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the signification of that word may be various according as the place is in which it is found Now no body will deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and portae mortis the gates of death are the same and this phrase the gates of death signifies nothing but death it self So Job xxxviii 17 Have the gates of death been opened unto thee or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death So Psal ix 13 Thou that liftest me up from the gates of death i. e. deliverest me from death So Isai xxxviii 10 Hezekiah being in fear of an untimely death says In the cutting off of my days I shall go to the gates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. as it is rendered by the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I shall go to the gates of death So that the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies death it self But what does Christ then mean when he says that the gates of hell should not prevail against Peter or not overcome him namely this that the danger of a certain and speedy death upon the account of his preaching the Gospel should not deter him from discharging the office imposed on him and so not death it self So that Jesus in these words promises Peter after he had professed his belief that he was the Messiah that he should be a foundation of his Church and constant in the profession of the Truth he had declared which he fulfilled accordingly for Peter as we are told by Clemens Ep. c. v. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not only undergo one or two but many sorrows and so becoming a Martyr went to his proper place in glory We may apply to him that passage of Seneca as we find it in Lactantius Lib. vi c. 17. Hic est ille homo honestus non apice purpuráve non lictorum insignis ministerio sed nulla re minor qui cum MORTEM in VICINIA videt non sic perturbatur tanquam rem novam viderit qui sive toto corpore tormenta patienda sunt sive flamma ore recipienda est sive extendendae per patibulum manus non quaerit quid patiatur sed quam bene This is that brave and honorable person who is not remarkable for his fine hat of feathers his purple robe or his guard of Lictors which is the least part of his glory but who when he sees death just before him is not surprized with the strangeness of the sight and whether he is to undergo the torment of the rack or to receive fire into his mouth or have his arms stretched out upon a cross does not regard what but how well he suffers There is one thing that may perhaps here be objected viz. that according to this interpretation Christ does not keep to the Metaphor for after he had called Peter a stone he adds that death should not overcome him It is true but it was neither necessary that Christ should go on in the same Metaphor nor yet supposing that what we refer to Peter did as it is commonly thought belong to the Church will he be found to continue the same Metaphor For he compares the Church to a building which cannot properly be said to be overcome by the gates of death but only to be pulled down or destroyed Nothing is more ordinary in all sort of Writers than to begin with one Metaphor and end with another As for instance Clemens says a little before the words already alledged concerning St. Peter and St. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the faithful and most righteous pillars of the Church were persecuted even to death Pillars can neither be persecuted nor dy However by this it appears that St. Matthew or his interpreter very fitly uses here the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifies to overcome by force for this is what Christ means that the terror of having a violent Death set before him should not overcome St. Peters constancy tho he saw the gates of death opened for him yet he should notwithstanding hold fast his pious resolution If any doubt of the signification of the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let them turn to the Greek Indexes to the first 5 books of Diodorus Siculus and the Roman Antiq. of Dion Halicarnassaeus collected by Rhodomannus and Sylburgius where they will meet with more examples than in any Lexicons But it occurs likewise in the same sense often in the version of the Septuagint I know very well that Interpreters commonly make use of these words to prove the perpetuity if not also the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 impeccability of the Church but they will never be able to evince any such thing from this place by Grammatical reasons The thing it self shews that the Church is liable to error nor is there any mention made in this place of errors That the Church has and always will continue I do not in the least doubt because of the nature and force of the Evangelical Covenant but this cannot be concluded from these words in which it is much more probable that St. Peter is spoken of both what goes before and what comes after belonging to him and not to the Church However I submit the whole matter to the judgment of the Learned Vers 19. Note h. I. It is certain I confess that there was a great difference between that Person 's power who is said to have had the key of the house of David in Isaiah and his who is represented in the Revelation as carrying the key of David but it would be hard to prove this from the sound of the phrases if it were not otherwise plain and manifest for the key of David is the key by which the house of David was open'd and shut and therefore the same with the key of the house of David Tho a key be an ensign of power the key of David does not signify the power of David himself but a power over the Kingdom of David Our learned Author is not always happy in his subtilties about little things However Mr. Selden has several Observations with relation to this matter lib. 1. de Synedriis cap. ix which those that will may read in himself II. Indeed for my own part I do not doubt but that the Apostles committed the Government of the Churches to single Bishops and accordingly that these ought to be reckon'd their Successors but as their Gifts were not alike so neither was their Authority equal And therefore whatever Christ says to the Apostles ought not presently to be accommodated to Bishops at least by the same Rule and in the same Latitude Especially in this place where Christ promises to St. Peter and the Apostles something extraordinary
Inscription of the antient Apostolical Epistle of Clemens Romanus to the Corinthians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Church of God that dwells at Rome meaning I conceive by the Title the Church himself who wrote the Epistle and was chief there or Bishop at that time and the other Clergy with him for so the other part of the Inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Church of God at Corinth is after explained by him in the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Bishops and Deacons But if this will not be acknowledged then by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I shall give you leave to understand any meeting or Congregation of pious men either a consessus Presbyterorum a College of Presbyters which were ordinarily assistant to the Bishop in the antient Church or possibly the whole or any part of the People convened whose Authority or consent may work somewhat upon the Offender as S. Paul conceives it were apt to do when he commands Timothy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to rebuke the offenders before all men i. e. in the presence of the community of the People 1 Tim. v. 20 and perhaps when he speaks of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. ii 6 the rebuke that was by or under the many though it be not certain whether that signify the chastisement as our English reads punishment and censure inflicted by the Presbytery or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under them those assisting or joining in the censure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts of Canonical severity which in case of sorrow and relenting of the Offender upon rebuke or admonition before ejection out of the Church were wont to be thought sufficient without excommunication and after excommunication as in this place to the Corinthians if they were submitted to were sufficient tho not presently to restore him to the Communion yet to make him capable of being prayed for by the Church 1 John v. 16 and to be delivered from the stripes of Satan the diseases that the delivering to Satan in the Apostles times brought upon them or whether as the words may be render'd it import the rebuke or reproof viz. the third admonition or the second given by the Bishop which was equivalent to that which was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under or in the presence of many viz. of the People or Congregation The former of these senses seems more agreeable to the place to the Corinthians the latter rather to belong to that in 1 Tim. and so that which even now in Musar was coram multis before many and in St. Paul if not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under many yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the presence of all men Christ may here express by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Church This Interpretation being admitted or not rejected it then follows commodiously and reasonably in the Text of the Evangelist that after the matter is brought to them i. e. to those many or after this act of reproof or rebuke before them and upon continued refractoriness to these last admonitions then the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that sure is the Apostles or Governors of the Church the Pastors which cannot be in any reason excluded from under the former word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Church whatsoever it signifies and those already promised this power chap. xvi may or shall bind or excommunicate them And that is the sum of the 18 th verse in reference to the 17 th And then vers 19 c. Thus Dr. Hammond who adds some things like what we have had already upon Chap. vii 6 If any be desirous of more they may turn to the Treatise it self viz. Power of the Keys Chap. ii Sect. 6. seqq We should compare these things with what Grotius says upon this place of S. Matthew which is a great deal more plain and natural The Doctor takes for granted what he ought to have proved that Christ speaks to his Apostles as the Governours of the Church Vers 23. Note c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Eastern People used but one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hebed to signify both ministros liberae sortis Servants who were at their own disposal and Mancipia Slaves as I have observed in my Notes upon Gen. xx 8 And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek Interpreters and Writers of the New Testament has also the same ambiguity in it But when we speak Latin there is no reason why we should not use various words according to the nature of the subject spoken of Thus those whom S. Matthew here calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ought to be render'd by Ministri Servants because Slaves or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are never sold by their Master that he may have what is owing him paid Vers 28. Note d. The Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used here in its proper signification for when we take any man by the Collar and hale him along against his will we almost choak him The Latin Phrase for it is obtorto collo trahere which Erasmus here makes use of So Plautus in Paenulo Act. iii. Sc. 5. ver 45. Priusquà m hinc obtorto collo ad praetorem trahor Which is well interpreted by learned men to take hold of a man's collar and squeeze his jaws together and then drag him along So a Philosopher is represented by Lucian in Hermotimo demanding his pay of one of his Scholars and haling him before the Justice or Praetor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having thrown his cloak about his neck And in the same Author in Lapithis this Stoick Philosopher is reproached with this very thing thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor do I take my Scholars by the throat and drag them before the Justice if they do not pay me my stipend when it is due See also the Dial. between Aeacus Protesilaus Menelaus and Paris Vers 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Every body must perceive that these words cannot be urged to signify that the Justice of God will in its Retributions take notice of every single circumstance in the sins of men We must consider only the main scope of Christ which is no more than that those who do not forgive their Brethren their Offences shall not obtain forgiveness from God for theirs This is all therefore that can be concluded from this place not as the Doctor and Grotius before him says that Sins which are once pardoned in this life may be again charged upon a man If we consider the thing in it self 't is then only that God passes Judgment upon men when after the course of their life is ended they are sent into the place of Rewards or Punishments So that that is the time when persons are pardoned or condemned and there is no need of any previous Sentence CHAP. XIX Vers 8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But you will say then that to ones thinking God should have changed it True if it were the ordinary way of God to change the dispositions of
and the Apostles by Christ cannot be matter of doubt with any Christian but I question whether the importance of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be such as that the Authority which belonged to the Apostolical Office can by Grammatical Reasons be thence deduced Mission does not to speak properly signify Authority but only the purpose or action of sending by which there is a greater or lesser Power conferred upon the person sent according as seems good to the person that sends him Nor can the person that is so sent assume to himself the Authority of him that sent him merely because he sent him but only because when he was sent he received such or such a Commission which he is obliged also not to exceed This our Author seems indeed to have perceived tho but obscurely whilst he affirms and denies in the same Annotation that the word Apostle is a Title of Dignity II. The Talmudists term'd them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Messengers of the Congregation that were sent by the Synagogues on any business whatsoever and who among other Offices which they performed offered up Prayers for those who could not pray for themselves in the Synagogue especially at the beginning of the new year and on the day of expiation See Joan. Buxtorf in Lexic Talmud and Camp Vitringa de Synagog Lib. 3. Part 2. c. 11. But there were never any Tithes either due or paid to the Synagogues but only to the Temple as long as it stood to which also it was that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spoken of in Philo brought money and not to the Synagogues Thus Philo p. 785. Ed. Gen. saith of Augustus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he knew that they gathered the consecrated moneys under the name of first-fruits and sent them to Jerusalem by those who were going to offer up sacrifices there The like he repeats in p. 801. where he calls those persons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vers 22. Note e. Tho it be true that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometimes taken for a man yet the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not signify to cast out a man as wicked but to defame as Grotius has evidently proved whom the Reader may consult Vers 30. Note f. It is true that the person here intended is a poor man who makes use of what is anothers but that the Phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to require Vsury or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by it self to receive upon use I am not apt to believe if those words be considered conjunctly For it is not all one as to the finding out the signification of words what connexion or relation they have with one another I rather chuse therefore to understand this Precept of Christ thus That those who can be without what another person who absolutely needs it possesses of theirs tho it be unjustly detained from them ought rather to recede from their right than by taking what is their own again reduce a poor distressed man to his last shifts Indeed if a rich man should unjustly keep back what is anothers which he stands in no need of it would not be the part of a liberal Man but a Fool to neglect his right but there cannot be a more generous or liberal Action than to connive at such a fault in a poor man And this being a very good sense of this Precept and agreeable to the usual signification of every word in it I do not see why we should recur to any other CHAP. VII Vers 3. Note a. OUR Author might have added that it was ordinary in Scripture to bring in Messengers speaking in the same words that those would have done who sent them if they had been present See my Index to the Pentateuch upon the word Nuntius Vers 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. They acknowledged God to be just and themselves to be guilty and that they deserved the destruction which John had denounced against them Of the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 see our Notes upon Rom. iii. 4 Vers 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. They rejected Gods purpose of reforming them by John's Ministry See Acts xx 27 Vers 44. Note c. See my Notes on Gen. xviii 4 CHAP. VIII Vers 3. Note a. I. IT is true indeed that the meats at Feasts were divided and distributed to the Guests by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ministring Servants but he is mistaken whoever thinks with Dr. Hammond that the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies this particular action rather than any other service nor do the places alledged by him prove it Servants had various employments which were all called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as among the Latins ministeria He that divided the Meats was not called by the general name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek and in Latin scissor or carptor See Laur. Pignorius and Aus Popma in Comment de Servis The Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Luke xii 37 does not signify only to divide to every one his portion of meat but any errand or employment that used to be given to Servants whilst their Masters were feasting The same I say of Matth. xx 28 and Mark x. 45 which the Doctor puts a forced sense upon when they might be most fitly explained according to the constant signification almost of that Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 II. Our Learned Author had not sufficiently examined the passage he speaks of in St. Matthew for it is manifest that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there signifies to exercise Dominion or Kingly Authority over Subjects and not that of a Master over Servants the Discourse not being about Masters and Servants but about Kings and Subjects Ye know that the Princes of the Nations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exercise Dominion over them It follows and those that are great exercise Authority upon them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such an Authority as belongs to a Vice-Roy or the King's Lieutenant Christ here forbids the Governours of his Church to assume a Regal Power over Christians which they do whensoever they put them to death or persecute such as cannot say just as they say or to take any such Authority upon them which on pretence of acting in the name of the Supreme Governor Jesus Christ they might easily abuse to the destruction of Christians In fine he would have nothing done in an imperious domineering way but all by perswasion and entreaty III. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in John ii are those that served the Guests in all things which they wanted as well as in distributing to them Meat and Drink It is not from this latter that the Deacons of the Church were so called as by a Metaphor taken from a Feast but rather from a borrowed signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is taken sometimes for
in her Bowels the Fathers of two great People of which People that which did first become the most numerous and acquired the greatest Riches and Power should afterwards serve the other tho in the beginning not so powerful 13. To which purpose also is that saying of God in Malachi that he had preferred Jacob and his Posterity to Esau and his Progeny and upon the former conferred much greater Benefits 14. Perhaps some may object that God according to this Doctrin seems to be unjust who as I affirm so much prefers one People before another that are no better than they But that does not in the least follow from this Doctrin 15. For Moses whom none will affirm to charge God with any injustice tells us that when he had prayed God to continue to go before the Camp of the Israelites tho they had deserved his anger and prevailed he received this answer from him that the Israelites tho they had heinously offended him since he had begun to shew them favour should find him also for the future gracious to them and still be accounted by him his People 16. So that the Mercy of God in calling any Nation to the knowledg of himself and making them his peculiar People does not use to depend on the Merits of that Nation but on his own free Will and arbitrary Purpose This is if I am not mistaken the Series of the Apostle's discourse which being so explained directly answers his design in this place and admirably agrees with the sense of the places he refers to in Moses as it is in Moses himself About the 12 th Verse we must consult Grotius Vers 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here seems to refer to the sense latent in the foregoing words in which tho St. Paul speaks only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning the election yet by this very thing that he declares God to chuse a Nation whom he may shew a peculiar kindness to he intimates that he leaves other non-elect Nations in their Sins For as I before suggested there can be no election where something is not cast off because that which is not chosen must necessarily be rejected And to this the Apostle's words in this and the Verses following refer wherein he discourses separately concerning rejection as in the foregoing he had mostly treated about election So that I should paraphrase this 17th Verse thus Moses also teaches us that as to the rejection or praeterition of sinful Nations whereby it comes to pass that the People so abandoned fall into the greatest evils and calamities that may without blasphemy be imputed to God because he says he was commanded to speak to Pharaoh in God's name to this sense that he if he so pleased could easily destroy both the King himself and the whole Egyptian Nation and so make his People a free passage which they had so often refused them out of their Country but he would suffer Pharaoh still to live that he might give further demonstrations of his Power and make his Name great and famous throughout the World See what I have written on Moses's words in Exod. ix 15 16. for what our Author says in the following Annotation does not agree with them Ibid. Note h. Tho the Hebrew word be in the Preterperfect tense yet I have rendred it in its proper place as if it were the Future because of the Verse foregoing which seems to require its being so rendered See my Notes on that place by which this must be understood Vers 18. Note i. By God's hardening the Heart of Pharaoh I think is neither intended any action of God upon Pharaoh's Mind nor so much as any withdrawing of his Grace from him seeing there is neither any mention made of such withdrawing in Moses nor is it necessary to suppose it Nor do I think that Moses purposely abstained from using the Phrase the Lord hardened his Heart till the sixth Plague that he inflicted upon that Egyptian King was past as if then and not before he particularly forsook him For before ever Moses went to Pharaoh God foretold that he would harden him Exod. iv 21 which refers to all his obstinacy from first to last See therefore my Notes on that place Vers 28. Note k. What our Author says in this Annotation he took from Grotius with whom nevertheless I cannot agree in correcting this place out of one Alexandrian Copy contrary to the Authority of all the rest and the Antient Interpreters It is harsh I confess for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be put after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the construction is intricate but neither is it much clearer in the Septuagint Besides in alledging Testimonies of Scripture there is but little regard had to the series of the Discourse provided the Writers words are but to the purpose and rightly quoted The words in the Hebrew are thus vers 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Septuagint render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 finishing and making up his account in Righteousness whence it is probable they read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hhorets the Participle Benoni for Pahul Then follows in v. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because an account cast up will the Lord make in all the Earth by which it appears that they thought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chiljon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chalah to signify an account and if that be true we may render the words something more commodiously tho to the same sense thus he will hasten an account exactly cast up in Righteousness for an account and that exactly cast up will the Lord God of Hosts make in the whole Earth The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signify diligently and particularly cast up and this very thing in part 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also seems to signify so as to be the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to cast up or draw together several sums into one And the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the use of the Chaldee I render by to hasten In French the words might be translated thus il dépêchera de faire exactament son compte avec justice car le Seigneur créateur Dieu des armées fera un compte un compte exact dans tout le païs He will hasten to make exactly his account with Justice for the Lord God of Hosts will make an account and an exact account in all the Land The Prophet's meaning is that as one who carefully casts up an account of his expences and receits sees if there remains any thing over and tho it be but a small sum lays it safe up so God will destroy all the wicked and save only the good tho they be but very few which admirably well sutes with the design of the Apostle I shall add nothing more in this place because I intend hereafter if God permit to
Paul here speaks as Grotius before our Author had observed of that Rod with which he had chastized Elymas the incestuous Person Hymenaeus and Philetus and with which St. Peter had chastized Ananias and Sapphira but I confess I cannot digest what Dr. Hammond here and elsewhere does viz. the confounding of that miraculous Power of the Apostles with the ordinary Excommunication of Bishops He ought to have proved first that that delivering to Satan or any other such Punishments inflicted by the Apostles were the arms not only of the Apostles but of all the Governors of the Christian Church which he neither ever did before his Death nor I believe would ever do if he were to live again This was a Seal which God set to the Apostles Doctrin to fix the Christian Church upon a lasting and immoveable Foundation and all the rest of the Miracles wrought in the Apostles time were designed to the same end But that being once settled no Man had such a Power granted him nor can any one be supposed to have had the like Authority II. However it is well observed by the Doctor that carnal here is all one with weak which I shall confirm both by Reason and Examples The Flesh is very often opposed to the Spirit that is the Body to the Soul in which comparison the Flesh is the most infirm and feeble and hence the word carnal came to signify weak as it is used in Isa xxxi 3 where the Prophet thus bespeaks the Jews who put too much confidence in the Egyptians The Egyptians are Men and not God and their Horses Flesh and not Spirit the Lord shall turn his Hand and he that helpeth shall fall and he that is holpen shall fall down and they shall all be consumed together To this purpose also is that saying of Christ in Mat. xxvi 41 The Spirit indeed is willing but the Flesh is weak III. Tho 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies sometimes Excommunication in the Writings of the Fathers and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may very aptly be applied to a Mind full of Pride and Obstinacy and by those Vices fortified against the Truth yet it in no wise follows that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the Excommunication of an obdurate Sinner What words do or may separately signify they do not always signify conjunctly as every one knows who is any thing of a Critick in this sort of Learning The reason is because one Phrase can have but one metaphorical sense belonging to it and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being properly a strong Hold or Fence and here translated to signify whatever Flesh and Blood puts in the way of the Gospel to hinder the success and efficacy of if it is necessary that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be rendred the destruction of the Fence and to destroy the Fence by a Metaphor taken from Military Affairs So in vers 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to excommunicate those that reason but to overthrow reasonings Nor let any one say that Fences are destroyed and Reasonings overthrown by Excommunication for granting that yet it will not follow that the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Noun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in these Phrases signify to excommunicate and excommunication IV. It is a pleasant mistake also in our Author which his too great desirousness to find Excommunication every where spoken of in the Writings of the Apostles led him into when he says that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in vers 8. signifies Excommunication where St. Paul saith that he might boast of the Power which God had given him for edification and not for destruction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For who does not see that the opposite here to the Edification of the House of God is not excommunication but destruction One may as well say an Edifice is excommunicated meaning that it is destroyed as that an excommunicated Person is edified to signify that his Sins are forgiven him The same must be said of Chap. xiii 10 where the same Phrase occurs V. Even in Ecclesiastical Writers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not properly signify Excommunication but only Abdication or degrading from Office and is applied to Clergymen nor is it always joined with Excommunication See Intt. on the Eleventh Apostolical Canon Vers 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Author intrudes again into this place the Censures of the Church without any distinction whereas those Apostolical Arms of which I before spake are here intended And indeed with whatever Arguments any Philosopher came armed or what sublimity soever his Reasonings seemed to have in them if he attempted to disturb the Church by Heretical Doctrins and went to resist the Apostles as if he had found them in an error the Apostles could presently shew how much he was mistaken by sending a Disease upon him such as Blindness which St. Paul inflicted on Elymas or delivering to Satan to which others were subjected For these were plain signs by which it appeared that God approved of the Apostles Doctrin But in ordinary Excommunication the case is otherwise For all that can be concluded from that is that when any one upon the springing up of some new Controversies was excommunicated for disagreeing with the Bishop of the Church to which he belonged the Bishop and the rest perhaps of the Clergy were of another Opinion which might as easily be the worse of the two as the better For Excommunication was a certain evidence of Mens differing among themselves but not that the excommunicate Person was in an error because one that had the Truth on his side might be excommunicated by ignorant and prejudiced Persons But if any were chastised in the manner aforesaid by the Apostles viz. by having a Disease inflicted on their Bodies this was an infallible proof of their being Hereticks because God would not have suffered any pious orthodox Person to undergo a Punishment which he had not at all deserved Besides that a Miracle wrought in confirmation of any Doctrin such as this was the present inflicting of a Distemper upon Mens Bodies was of it self sufficient to shew the falsness of any thing advanced in contradiction to it tho with some appearance of probability but certainly the Excommunication of any Bishop who might as easily abuse his Authority as others fall into Error was no sure evidence of any Man 's being an Heretick These two things therefore must not be confounded nor the ordinary Governors of the Church equal'd to the Apostles in their Censures any more than in other Gifts and Endowments as our Author occultly does whether designedly and knowingly I cannot tell but I am sure without reason CHAP. XI Vers 2. Note a. I. THE first signification which our Author produces out of Pollux sutes best with this place for St. Paul does not say simply that he was an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which cannot
the Liberality of the Holy Ghost but without reason for who will grant him that that interpretation is rightly deduced from the following words as if Bowels and Mercies signified Liberality But see the Notes on that place ANNOTATIONS On the Epistle Of St. Paul the Apostle to the Galatians AT the end of the Premon I. We have no certain ground to believe that those whom St. Paul confutes in this Epistle were Uncircumcised but it is much more probable they had received Circumcision whether they were Jews or Gentiles II. That the Christians had so much reason to be afraid of the Jews in Galatia that the Gnosticks should be forced to feign themselves Jews when they were not is not at all likely For the Roman Magistrates as appears by the instance of Gallio did not give much ear to the Accusations of the Jews or lend their Axes or Rods to the Circumcised And that without the Magistrate the Jews could do any great matters will not be thought by any who know what was the form of the Roman Government So that it had been much better to say that St. Paul here opposes the Jews who indeed had embraced the Christian Religion but yet were tenacious of their antient Customs and Ceremonies CHAP. I. Vers 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We must supply here the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that there may be a perfect opposition thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not from Men neither by Men but by Jesus Christ and from God the Father Besides it is certain that God the Father did not call St. Paul immediately but by Christ who appeared to him as he was on his Journey to Damascus Vers 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dr. Hammond brings into his Paraphrase on this place not only his Gnosticks but Men that by birth were Heathens and uncircumcised as if in Galatia they had been under the same necessity of endeavouring to gain the favour of the Jews as in Judaea But there should have been something in St. Paul to support this interpretation otherwise it may very reasonably be rejected as I have already said at the end of the Premonition It is more than probable that these disturbers of the Churches of Galatia were Jews and consequently circumcised and had embraced the Gospel the Design and Virtue of which they did not however understand I confess Grotius in the Preface to his Annotations had gone before our Author in the contrary Opinion but how great soever the Authority of that learned Man is with me when it is not accompanied with solid Reasons it does not in the least move my assent He thinks that St. Paul is more vehement in this than in his other Epistles because those who would have deprived the called among the Gentiles of their Liberty as to the Jewish Ceremonies were not Jews whose zeal for their Religion might in some measure be excused but Strangers who lived in Judaea of whom the chief was Cerinthus But it 's true it was a pardonable thing in the Jews themselves to observe the antient Rites imposed upon their Nation and to be willing that the rest of their Countrymen should observe them provided they were otherwise obedient to Christ but to impose them upon the Gentiles and endeavour to make all the World submit to the same Yoke this surely could no more be born in the Jews than in others Besides there is nothing here that gives the least ground to think that those who were so zealous for the observation of the Mosaical Ceremonies were by birth Heathens But Grotius goes on and says And such were those who at Philippi taught the same Doctrine as St. Paul himself tells us Phil. iii. 3 To which I say it appears indeed by St. Paul's words that there were some at Philippi who gloried in the Circumcision of the Flesh but they were Jews and not Gentiles For we saith St. Paul are the Circumcision who worship God in the Spirit and glory in Christ Jesus and have no confidence in the Flesh In which words he has undoubtedly a respect to the Jews who gloried in fleshly Circumcision as the context evidently shews So that I wonder that both Grotius and our Author should alledg this place The same Men saith the learned Grotius asserted the necessity of conforming to the Law of Moses not out of any principle of true Piety but that they might grow rich and great by the assistance of the Jews But I confess I do not see what Honors or Profits Men that were Heathens and Uncircumcised could expect from the Jews a People despised and hated by the Romans and that in a Roman Province as Galatia ever since the time of Augustus had been as we are told by Strabo Lib. 12. I wish either of these learned Men had essayed to prove more at large what they say for they would presently have perceived the vanity of such an undertaking But perhaps they thereby avoided those pressures which lay upon the Christians for in those times the Jews by the Roman Laws and Edicts had the free exercise of their Religion which the Christians had not but begun then to be persecuted as appears from the Acts and other Epistles of St. Paul To which I answer if such as were not heartily and really Jews had a mind to escape persecution they ought rather to have feigned themselves Heathens than Jews in Galatia Besides tho the Jews were allowed the profession of their Religion in the Roman Empire they had not therefore any power granted them over others so as to be able to do any hurt to the Christians They might indeed by Calumnies and such kind of unjust Methods endeavour to mischief them but that was all they could do as sufficiently appears from the Acts of the Apostles And they annoyed the Christians that way who were resolved to obey all Christ's commands and firmly adhered to their purpose whom upon that account they accused and charged with Sedition but they could not molest Men who if it were necessary feigned themselves to be Heathens of which sort were the Gnosticks Vers 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our Author in his Paraphrase rightly thinks that this has a respect to the second degree of Excommunication but I don't well understand what he means by the last words that none is to have any commerce with in sacred matters For if we may judg of the effects of Excommunication by the Doctrin of the Rabbins excommunicated Persons were neither excluded out of the Temple nor the Synagogue as Mr. Selden has shewn de Synedr Judaeorum Lib. 1. cap. vii It was only unlawful to converse with them familiarly and within the space of four Cubits as the same Author has proved at large And if the Christians at that time behaved themselves otherwise towards the excommunicated our Author would not have spent his time ill to have shewn it us For it is not safe to judg of what was done in those Primitive times by the
whom he had banished Dyrrachium and Philippi and other Towns to inhabit By this it appears how a little before St. Paul's time Philippi came to be enlarged because that City had twice received a Colony of Romans We may consult Foy-Vaillant on Numismata aerea Coloniarum The same Author testifies that Philippi in pieces of Coin is stiled Metropolis But that there was any regard had in that to Ecclesiastical order or dignity of Bishops even from the very time of St. Paul Dr. Hammond has not proved nor will any other I believe prove tho the thing be undoubtedly more antient than many think The Passage alledged out of the Digest is in lib. 50. tit 15. de censibus leg 8. § 8. and is Paulus's not Vlpian's as is said by our Author who it seems cited him upon trust He might have added that of Celsus in leg 6. Colonia Philippensis juris Italici est II. Our Author affirms that after Vespasian had brought a Colony into Caesarea that City became immediately even in respect of Ecclesiastical Government a Metropolis under which Jerusalem it self was But at that time there was no Jerusalem because it had been razed to the ground and was not rebuilt till under Adrian who put into it a Roman Colony as we are told by Xiphilinus in the Life of Adrian and as appears by a great many Medals in which it is called COL AEL CAP. Colonia Aelia Capitolina And who told our Author there was a Bishop at Caesarea in the time of Vespasian From what marks of Antiquity did he gather that the Caesarean Bishops were reckoned superior in Dignity and Order to those of Jerusalem from the Age of Vespasian If what he says be true that a City which had a Roman Colony brought into it was made a Metropolis Jerusalem enjoyed that Privilege as well as Caesarea tho not quite so soon Vlpian in the foremention'd Tit. lib. 1. § 6. saith Palaestina duae fuerunt Coloniae Caesariensis Aelia Capitolina sed neutra jus Italicum habet But I look upon this also as improbable III. I am ready to think that the reason why the Antients place Philippi sometimes in Thrace and sometimes in Macedonia is not because those Provinces were variously divided which yet I do not deny but because when Cities stand upon the borders of any two Countries it is doubtful to which of them they belong The same I say of Nicopolis What our Author says besides about many Churches and those Episcopal depending upon the Metropolis of Philippi is nothing but Conjecture which I am not wholly for rejecting but which I do not easily believe Learned Men often partly prove things out of the Ancients and partly make up by Guess and Conjecture what they would have to be true then they equal their Conjectures to that which they have proved and from all put together they very easily infer what they please Because St. Paul preached the Gospel first at Philippi does it presently follow that that City was also accounted the Metropolis in respect of Ecclesiastical Order The rest also is very deceitful and uncertain Ibid. Note b. I. The Opinion of Grotius and others seems to be much plainer who think that as the words Presbyter and Bishop are promiscuously used tho' there was one Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so called so also the word Bishop signifies both Orders first and second which is the reason why we meet with this word in the Plural Number where the Discourse is but of one Church There was a Communion of Names between Ministers of the first and second Rank so that those of the first Rank were sometimes stiled Presbyters and those of the second Bishops not because their Authority was the same and their Office in every respect alike but because there was little or no difference between them as to preaching the Gospel and administring the Sacraments But the particular Power of Ordination might belong to one Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so called II. That which our Author says about Metropolitans and by the help of which alone he defends himself against his Adversaries as to those Apostolical Times is very uncertain nor can it be proved by the Authority of the Writers of the following Ages who speak of the Primitive Times according to the Customs of their own and not from any certain Knowledg not to say at present that Bishops or Presbyters aspiring to that Dignity cannot always safely be heard in their own cause It is not probable that there was any Episcopal Church in the Proconsular Asia besides Ephesus at the time spoken of in Acts xx or in Macedonia besides Philippi and Thessalonica But a little while after when the number of Christians was encreased there were other Episcopal Seats constituted in them Ibid. Note c. I. I also have spoken pretty largely of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on Luke viii 2 and I shall not repeat what I have there said Our Author in the beginning of this Note uses the word dimensum for demensum tho that it self was not proper to be used in this place because demensum signifies the Portion or Allowance of Servants not of Guests See Frid. Taubmannus on Plautus his Stich Acts i. Sc. ii vers 3. II. I think indeed with Dr. Hammond that the Original or Deacons must be fetched from the Jews and that Deacons were in the Christian Church what the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hhazanim were in the Jewish Synagogue But I do not think we have any thing to do here with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 schoterim which was the Name only of the Officers that attended upon Magistrates or certain publick Criers See my Note on Exod. ver 8. III. Nor do I think that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Juniors ought to be confounded with the Charanitae especially in Acts v. 6 where any of the younger sort who were accidentally then present seem to be meant Tho the Disciples of Doctors are called Juniors in Maimonides it does not therefore follow that that word must be so taken where-ever we meet with it IV. The Saying of the Jews about the decay of Learning among them which our Author speaks of is in Sotae fol. 49.1 thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Since the second House was destroyed the wise Men began to be as the Scribes and the Scribes as the Minister of the Synagogue and lastly the Minister of the Synagogue as the People of the Earth Which Dr. Hammond mistranslates and inverts the Words themselves They may be found by those that may perhaps have a mind to turn to them in the Editions of Joan. Chr. Wagenseilius in Sotae Cap. ix S. 15. It appears that our Author did not look into this Saying himself but went upon trust for it and that made him render it so ill and not so much as refer to the Book in which it is set down Vers 13. Note e. Some years ago there arose a great Controversy about this place
admonished by the whole Congregation But it may be he was not the Bishop of Colosse but an Evangelist who did not execute his Office so diligently as he ought and lying idle among the Colossians or somewhere in the Neighbourhood was to be admonished by them Which seems the more probable because this Archippus in the Epistle to Philemon ver 2. is called the fellow Souldier 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of St. Paul On which place see Grotius Vers 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Grotius who is followed therein by our Author thinks there is a Hebraism in these words for see that thou fulfil in the Lord the Ministry which thou hast received so that the phrase in the Lord should signify according to the Precepts of the Lord. But tho I do not deny but this may be the meaning of St. Paul's words they are capable of two other senses first Consider throughly the Office which thou hast received in the Lord in order to a complete discharge of it or else secondly Consider in the Lord that is as in the sight of the Lord or according to the Precepts of the Lord c. So the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometimes taken as in 2 John 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. See your selves that we lose not those things which we have wrought but that we receive a full Reward that is throughly consider or examin your selves c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are all one and according to the various significations of the Preposition ב which is ordinarily rendred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and used in a manifold sense signify diverse things I confess I do not know which of these senses is the best Vers 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The bare remembring of St. Paul's Bonds being in it self no part of Piety it is consequent the design of the Apostle in these words must be to admonish the Colossians to behave themselves both towards God and towards him as became those that were mindful of his Bonds that is who very well knew that he was cast into those Bonds only for the sake of the Gospel or to be constant in the profession of the Christian Religion as he was and love him and pray to God in his behalf that he might be set at liberty ANNOTATIONS On the First Epistle Of St. Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians AT the end of the Praemon I. Dr. Pearson and other the most exact Chronologers suppose this Epistle was written in the year of Christ lii or the xii th of Claudius II. I have already several times observed that the Jews were neither so formidable as our Author thought nor the Christians so perfectly set free from persecution by their destruction throughout all the parts of the Roman Empire so as that those who dwelt in Greece found the Heathens more favourable to them after the overthrow of Jerusalem and the excision of the Jews III. I do not easily believe what Eusebius says about the journey of Simon Magus to Rome nor St. Peter's contest with him which seems to be all taken ex Clementinis and out of Justin the former being a feigned History and Justin having run into a mistake through his ignorance in the Latin Tongue as learned Men have long ago observed I wonder our Author in this discerning Age in Quo pueri nasum Rhinocerotis habent should build his Interpretation upon such rotten and nauseous Fables But he produces you will say the Testimonies of Eusebius and St. Jerom and Orosius But this is but one Witness all this while because the two latter only transcribed Eusebius and the single Authority of Eusebius is not much to be regarded because he often affirms things without considering whether they are true or false and some that are manifestly feigned It 's true Justin makes mention of the Statue of Simon in his Apology commonly called the Second but he says nothing at all about St. Peter's Conflict or Victory over him which he would never have omitted if that had been the general opinion of those times because it might be made very great use of against the Heathens whom he upbraids with deifying Simon Irenaeus also mentions the Statue in Lib. 1. c. 20. but says nothing about the contest That was but an invention of the false Clement which other rashly received for truth There being very few if any Historical Records in the first Age excepting the Acts of the Apostles Men that had nothing else to do misemployed their wits in devising Fables which the injudiciousness of Posterity has almost made it a Crime to question the truth of But I am sorry to find Dr. Hammond should so easily give Credit to these Trifles CHAP. I. Vers 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There are a few things which it may not be amiss to remark upon this Chapter tho Dr. Hammond has passed it over without any Annotations contenting himself to express what he thought to be the meaning of it in his Paraphrase Grotius explaining these words tells us that the Apostle non nominat hic Presbyteros Diaconos quia recens erat Ecclesia nec dum formam plenam acceperat does not name here Presbyters and Deacons because the Church of Thessalonica had been but lately gathered and not yet formed into a regular Church But if this reason be good none of the Churches to which St. Paul wrote except that of Philippi were regularly formed Churches because there is no mention made of Church-Governors Bishops and Deacons in the inscriptions of any of the Epistles but to the Philippians But who will believe that the Ephesian and Corinthian Churches in which St. Paul had for a great while resided were not yet so constituted as to have Rectors in them and yet that the Church of Philippi in which he made a shorter stay had Of the Church of Ephesus the contrary appears from Acts xx 17 28. and of the Corinthian by the Epistles themselves written to that Church So that there must be another reason given for St. Paul's not making mention of Bishops and Deacons in the Inscriptions of all his Epistles And that which seems to me the most probable is that the Governors of the Primitive Churches were modest humble Men who were unwilling to have themselves distinguished from the rest of the People in the front of St. Paul's Epistles that they might not appear to pretend to any magisterial Authority but to look upon themselves only as Ministers instituted for the sake of Order and Christian Society There are a great many signs of this especially in the Epistles to the Corinthians in which the Governors of the Churches of Achaia are no where order'd to use any Authority in the Administration of their Office or in curbing evil Men who broke the Order of the Church St. Paul every where speaks to whole Churches never to the Governors of them apart from the People However I would not be thought
II. Our Author supposes that a constant Faith and holy Life would be an infallible means to preserve the Christians which as I acknowledg to be most true understood of eternal Salvation so I do not believe it true if understood of a Deliverance from the Persecutions of the Romans For could not the Gnosticks feign themselves to be Heathens and do sacrifice to their Gods that they might not be accounted Jews And that if I am not mistaken was abundantly enough to cause a distinction to be put between them and the Circumcised especially if the Gnosticks as our Author thinks were not real Jews Besides the Christians in Greece whilst the Romans were incensed against the Jews did not escape the fury of the Magistrates because they were Christians but because they were not Jews and were look'd upon as peaceable Men who were not for making any disturbance in the Government I wonder our learned Author did not see these things but so often serves himself of an Hypothesis which he never attempted to prove by History Vers 10. Note b. Our Author goes on to fasten his own Conjectures upon St. Paul without any regard to Grammar I. It is true indeed that to live may signify to be in prosperity and there are several examples of the word taken in that sense as our Author has shewn on Chap. iii. 8 of this Epistle but that to live with Christ has ever any such signification Dr. Hammond will never prove without examples to any that understand Greek or are acquainted with the stile of Scripture Whatever a word signifies alone it does not signify in conjunction with others Whatever is meant by it in one place it cannot signify in all In this place to live with Christ does not only include the notion of eternal Life but signifies nothing else as the bare reading of the Verse shews who died for us that whether we wake or sleep we might live together with him Can Christ be said to have died for the Christians of Thessalonica that they might not perish in that destruction which was to come upon the Jews but survive them Where does the Scripture mention any such end of the Death of Christ Dr. Hammond did not think fit to say so much as this in his Paraphrase where he does not express the words of St. Paul but what he himself thought II. But Christ having died for Men that they might live with him i. e. that they might enjoy eternal Life with him in Heaven and that being the sense of the Apostle's words the next thing to be consider'd is what is meant in this place by waking or sleeping And because St. Paul says that neither of these things signifies any thing to Salvation for whether we wake or sleep we shall live together with Christ those Phrases cannot be thought to signify either a Vice or a Virtue contrary to what they do in vers 6 7 8. Our Author who thinks the Discourse is about a temporal Deliverance interprets them of Sollicitude and Security which I cannot admit because I affirm that the Discourse is about eternal Salvation as the thing it self also declares What therefore do they signify why this and nothing else Whether we are still alive when he shall come to judg the Living and Dead or whether we die before that time As in Chap. iv 13 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those who were asleep are they who shall be dead at the coming of Christ so here those who shall be awake signify them which shall be found alive at that time as Grotius well observes whom our Author ought to have followed What the Doctor says in this Annotation besides I have already confuted III. Yet there is one thing perhaps that may be objected in favour of Dr. Hammond viz. that St. Paul seems to speak of a thing which was to come to pass in his time because he exhorts the Thessalonians to watch in ver 6. lest they should be found in Darkness at the day of the Lord 's sudden Coming But God having not revealed the day in which he will judg Mankind so much as to his Son Jesus Christ whilst he conversed in this World but only said that it would come on a sudden and when it was least expected with a design seemingly to keep Men from delaying their Repentance while they hope to have time enough to repent before that day comes it is no wonder that St. Paul here speaks of the last Judgment as a thing which was to happen in his Age. He could not speak otherwise seeing God had not revealed the thing more clearly To which purpose it must be observed that he does not deny but that the Judgment was deferred in which there would have been a manifest Error but only teach the Thessalonians that Men ought to be always prepared for fear of being surprized by the sudden coming of Christ I know indeed Dr. Hammond in his Paraphrase of the 2 d Verse represents the Apostle as saying that the Coming of Christ was not far off but if we read St. Paul's words we shall see that he only teaches that it would be sudden and unexpected not that it was near at hand or shortly to be For it is compared to the coming of a Thief in the Night in which nothing but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or unexpectedness of it is considered Vers 12. Note c. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may much more simply be interpreted to signify the Governors of both Orders in the Church who may be comprehended under the common name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being all set over the Church of Thessalonica tho not with an equal Authority Considering this is grounded upon the proper signification of the word it may much more easily be admitted than that there were more Episcopal Churches in Macedonia besides that of Philippi and Thessalonica which were contained under these as their Metropolitans See my Note on Philip. i. 1 Vers 22. Note e. Our Author rightly interprets the words of St. Paul in this place of all kind of Evil for after the Apostle had said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prove all things hold fast that which is good it very fitly follows abstain from all kind of evil which is all one as if he had said When ye have carefully examined all that any Prophet shall say to you be sure to embrace and retain whatever you find to be good but reject all that is evil As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not signify that which has an appearance of good so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is set opposite to it is not every appearance of Evil but all that is really Evil. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is often taken for kind there is no need of proving But if any doubt of it they may consult the old Glosses of Labbaeus his Edition on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vers 23. Note f. I. This in earnest is a medly of
Christ but God the Father can in no sense be said to die See Dr. Hammond's Annot. on the Inscription of the New Testament So that this Discourse is to be look'd on merely as the play of an Hellenistical Writer who because he saw that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was used for that Covenant whereof Christ is the Mediator and signified also a Testament and Christ was dead thence deduced Consectaries which are true indeed consider'd in themselves but here rely upon weak Principles rather to set off his Discourse according to the custom of that Age than to convert the unbelieving Jews to the Christian Faith by force of reasoning They who think every thing said in these Writings is mathematically demonstrative are greatly mistaken and have not read them with due Attention Nor does this lessen the Authority of this Epistle the Writer of which no where says that he would bring nothing but Demonstrations All the Heads of the Christian Doctrine which he prosecutes are very true and may be demonstrated by other places of Scripture but the manner in which he illustrates them is plainly like the custom of those times as we may see by Philo in whom there are often such accommodations as Divines speak of places of Scriptures and consequences deduced from them in which no regard at all is had to Grammar and the only thing observed is that the thing it self illustrated by them be true That was the way of that Age which we ought no more to wonder at than at our own present Customs Vers 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The similitude between the Old Covenant and a Testament which is here urged is that in both there is a Death observable in a Testament of the Testator in the Covenant of a Sacrifice and that by that Death both are confirmed tho not in the same manner This is but a slight Similitude from which nothing can be philosophically inferred but considering the Custom of that Age an elegant way of reasoning I know that Grotius would have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be taken in a more general Notion for an explication of the import of the Testator 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his Will. Which is true where the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 brith is translated and nothing is added to shew there is a respect had to a Testament properly so called but where there is mention made of the death of a Testator the Discourse is about the last signification of his Will as in this place Vers 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is fashioned according to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Sanctuary of Heaven is the Pattern or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the likeness of which the Tabernacle was made See my Note on 1 Cor. x. 7 But wherein consisted that likeness In this that as God in a special manner is thought to dwell in Heaven so he dwelt in the Mosaical Sanctuary This Similitude is certain what is further added out of Philo or others are mere Conjectures and for the most part vain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 niceties CHAP. X. Vers 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is by its 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so to reconcile and render them acceptable to God as that they might hope for eternal Happiness from him See my Note on Chap. vii 11 Vers 26. Note b. I. That it is a defection or falling away from Christianity which is here meant there can be no doubt but that we are to understand it of a defection to the Gnosticks rather than to the Heathens or Jews our Author has not proved for there is nothing said in this place which does not exactly agree to those who had revolted to the Syrians or Jews after they had known the truth of the Christian Religion II. What our Author here adds about the contempt of the Governors of the Church I do not see upon what ground it relies for Men did not ordinarily revolt from the Christian Faith out of a contempt of the Governors of the Church but rather of the Gospel it self They forsook the Assemblies of the Christians not to shew they despised their Bishops but to secure their Lives and Possessions for which they had so high a value that for their sakes they trod under foot the Son of God accounted the Blood of the Covenant as a profane thing and reproached the Spirit of Grace 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 indeed is the Office of Bishops but private Men also may exhort one another and there is no mention here of the Governors of the Church III. What is meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Law of Moses I shall afterwards explain But it is strange that Councils are here appealed to and such examples brought out of them to shew what it is to reproach the Spirit of Grace which is to speak contumeliously of the Spirit vouchsafed under the Gospel to the Apostles Vers 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not simply to violate but by words and deeds to declare a Man will not observe the Law and does not think it ought to be observed or scornfully to reject it And for that wickedness among the Jews there was no Sacrifice of Expiation as we are told in Num. xv 30 where see my Notes add also Deut. xxvii 26 xxix 19 The Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to reject in Luke vii 30 x. 16 John xii 48 Jude 8. and elsewhere So the Old Glosses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reprobo to reject 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 refellit disapproves Hesychius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vers 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dr. Hammond observes in the Margin of the English Translation that the Alexandrian Copy reads here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So does also the Vulgar vinctis compassi estis ye have sympathised with the bound which reading is countenanced likewise by the Syriack Interpreter So also it was read in two Copies of R. Stephanus And I doubt not but that is the true reading which was changed by those who rashly supposed St. Paul was the Author of this Epistle CHAP. XI Vers 1. Note a. I. IN the place cited out of Ezekiel in the Chaldee Paraphrast 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must not be rendred ausi sunt they took Confidence but impudenter confirmant they impudently confirm viz. sermonem suum ratum fore That their word should be made good or come to pass The Hebrew Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be rendred they have made others to hope that the thing should be accomplished But supposing this our Author's conjecture is nevertheless good II. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Septuagints Version of Mich. v. 7 must not be translated to subsist but to hope The Hebrew has The Remnant of Jacob shall be among the Nations and in the midst of many People as a dew from the Lord as showers upon the Grass which does not wait for any Man nor stay
to another Course of Life Ibid. Note c. For Jerem. xxxv we must read Isai xxxv which place had bin cited by Grotius and others Vers 4. Note d. Here our Author confounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a vain fighting with ones own Shadow with skirmishing or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are not the same among the antient Greeks Vers 16. Note f. That which is here produced out of the Rabbins I have shewn to be vain on Gen. xxv 31 Esau was certainly profane in this that he despised the last Benediction of his Father as thinking it to be of less value than a Mess of Pottage Vers 23. Note h. There may also be an allusion here to Exod. iv 22 where Israel is said to be God's Firstborn because of the peculiar benefits which God had conferred upon him For the Christian Church succeeded in the place of Israel according to the flesh Ibid. Note i. This is a figurative expression of which I have spoken on Exod. xxxii 32 God is represented to have as it were a Book in which he writes down his peculiar Favourites as Kings have Registers of the names of those whom they imploy in their service or upon whom they confer any benefits Ibid. Note k. I easily believe this phrase was taken from the use of the Jews but our Author who looks here besides for I know not what Agonistical sense ought to have produced at least one place in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signified a Conqueror in the Games which he could not do And therefore he ought to have been contented with what he had borrowed from Grotius about the use of the Jews Vers 24. Note l. I. Our learned Author would have done much better if he had followed Grotius what he here says being either wrested or affirmed without reason To begin with his last words I will not say that the authority of the Writers of Liturgies whoever they be is of little moment to the explication of particular places of Scripture because they had scarce any tincture of Critical Learning as every one knows But I will say that our Author supposes here two things which may be called into question First that a bloody Sacrifice was offer'd up by Abel which is uncertain as I have shewn on Gen. iv 4 Secondly that all the Sacrifices were Types that is in the language of our modern Divines Prefigurations of the Sacrifice of Christ which if denied can be proved by no Argument tho I acknowledg there was some likeness between them in which sense they might be called Types and Shadows of the Sacrifice of Christ because of their Similitude not because of a design to presignify one by the other which no one knew of Yet our Author in his Paraphrase attributes his own opinion to the Writer of this Epistle who has nothing at all here about that matter See my Note on 1 Cor. x. 3 II. The efficacy of Christ's Sacrifice is not compared here with the efficacy of Abel's Sacrifice but the thing which Abel called for whether by his own or the Blood of Sacrifices with the thing which Christ demands And therefore the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 better things which cannot be referred to efficacy and respects nothing but what Christ obtained But it is said the design of this Epistle is to shew the preheminence of the Gospel above the Law I do not deny it but every particular word does not tend to that design for there are also a great many things intermix'd in it foreign to that design So that I had rather with most Interpreters look upon these words as an allusion to what is said of Abel in Chap. xi 4 which opinion is manifestly confirmed by the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in both places For as there Abel is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of his Blood which in Gen. iv 10 is said to have cried unto God from the Earth So here the Blood of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than Abel or than the Blood of Abel Vers 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is undoubtedly a Periphrasis of Moses but he is not to be thought to have spoken from Mount Sinai when he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gave Oracles from which he himself said nothing but in the Camp when he heard the Responses of God from the Sanctuary which he afterwards declared to the People II. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not seem to be Christ who for the most part taught the Gospel upon Earth tho sometimes also but rarely he revealed himself to the Apostles from Heaven after his Resurrection I rather think it is to be understood with Grotius of those Voices which came from Heaven on the behalf of Christ mention'd in Mat. iii. 17 xvii 5 and elsewhere CHAP. XIII Vers 4. Note a. DEs Erasmus and Nicol. Zegerus had gone before our Author in this Interpretation but Beza objects against it the following words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where if that interpretation be allowed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this manner Let Marriage be honourable in all and the Bed undefiled for Fornicators and Adulterers God will judg I am of opinion the Antients read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is in a Greek and Latin Copy and in the Vulgar Translation which has enim and that this was changed into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by those who did not think these words were an Exhortation Vers 9. Note d. When our Author made this collection he does not seem to have looked into Acts xv 40 where to be commended or deliver'd to the Grace of God is without doubt to be recommended by Prayer to the divine Goodness Besides the words which he produces is following are in Acts xiv 26 But he seems to have fallen into a mistake because there is also the same expression in this latter place of the Acts immediately preceding them And thence sailed to Antioch from whence they had been recommended to the grace of God for the Work which they fulfilled But here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to be sent to preach the Gospel but to be recommended by Prayer to the divine Grace tho this had been done that Paul and Barnabas might preach the Gospel with success Vers 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He alludes to the Sacrifices offer'd up on the day of Expiation as every one sees But to make the series of the Discourse clear he should have expressed what is here to be understood and upon which that which follows depends Christ is an expiatory Sacrifice which we must eat that we may have an interest in the efficacy of it as we are taught by Christ in John vi 50 and seqq But by the Mosaical Rites no Man tasted of such a Sacrifice so that they who desire to
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 founders and interpreters of the Christian Religion that for a thousand Years after Constantin the Church was purer than it was before or that there were fewer false Doctrins by publick Authority establish'd in many Churches In that interval of time there were not only many Heresies which created almost perpetual differences but very great Errors crept in among Christians which were openly approved by the Governors of Churches so that the Church-Discipline which our Author so much boasts of was used only to confirm those Errors and with the consent of Princes to kill or at least abuse those who dared to oppose them So that if this Kingdom be to be extended to the thousand following Years it must not be thought consist in sanctity of Life and purity of Doctrin but only in the Liberty which the Christians should enjoy in the greatest part of the Roman Empire so that they might be good and pious Men without being envied or persecuted by the Heathens Vers 7. Note e. I. I wonder our learned Author here took so much pains to confute very weak Objections and yet took no notice of the Heresies which disturbed the Eastern and Western Churches at the time when he supposes the Christians reigned as I have before observed II. He takes it for certain that not only Alaricus spared the Christians and destroyed none but Heathens but also that Gensericus and Attila did the same which he does not prove This should have been shewn and not that which he proves of Julian in so many words when no one can deny it who has read any thing of the History of those times III. I confess I don't approve of the opinion of the Millenaries but I wonder Dr. Hammond here objects against them the condemnation of the Church and gives them the odious name of Hereticks For as that is but a small Error if the rest of the Doctrins of Christianity be retain'd as they were by Irenaeus so the Church had not received any Revelation about that matter from the times of the Apostles Vers 8. Note f. I. That Gog and Magog signify the People who dwelt about the Mountain Caucasus has been so clearly shewn by Sam. Bochart Geogr. Sacr. Lib. iii. c. 12. that it is impossible to doubt of it And the Turks having invaded Asia from those places our Author might hence have confirmed his Interpretation which I wonder he did not seeing he alledges that Writer elsewhere For what is said here by Grotius cannot in the least be compared with what we may learn from Bochart as to this matter II. It is true indeed that Gyges was sometime Ruler of Lydia but the Kings which succeeded him were not therefore as I remember called Gygae tho it be affirmed by Grotius and after him by Dr. Hammond who absurdly deduces it from this place whereas Gyges and his Posterity were in part antienter than Ezekiel and partly his Contemporaries and therefore sure that name could not be taken from the Revelation III. If the Empire of the Turks be here referred to I had rather interpret the beloved City and the Camp of the Saints of all the Eastern Church than Constantinople alone But vers 9. seems to oppose it in which a sudden Victory over Gog and Magog seems rather to be promised than the taking of that City by those People threatned Yet this and all other things of that kind I leave undetermin'd CHAP. XXI Vers 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cicero Tuscul Quaest Lib. ii c. 15. having defined labor and dolor Labour and Sorrow adds haec duo Graeci illi quoram copiosior est lingua quam nostra uno nomine appellant These two things the Grecians whose Language is more copious than ours call by one name He means the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as what he says afterwards as well as the thing it self shews So in Epictetus Enchir. Cap. xiv 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If Sorrow present it self you will find patience In this place also Sorrow seems to be intended Vers 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These words seem also to signify the Apostles as may be gather'd both from the number here specified and from this that by them all Nations enter'd into the Church If this and the like things be to be applied to the Church in later times as Dr. Hammond thinks it must be remember'd that the praises here given to it must be understood comparatively so as for that Church to be opposed to the Jews and Heathens in comparison of which it is not unworthy of these Commendations But we must not measure its Doctrins or Practices by the perfect Rule of the Gospel from which Dr. Hammond himself did not think but it had departed tho he would not acknowledg it Vers 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To wit from the bottom of the Mountain on which the City stood to the top of its Walls for the Walls themselves were not so very high It is somewhat uncertain whether all the sides of this Square were twelve thousand Furlongs in length so as that the whole Circuit was forty eight thousand Furlongs as also the height of the Mountain joined with the height of the Walls or whether a fourth part only of that number is to be assigned to each of the sides that is three thousand Furlongs The former is most likely so as that an exceeding great City should be described nothing but what is great and spacious being here to be thought on Vers 17. Note f. By a man's Cubit here I rather understand an ordinary Cubit as in Deut. iii. 11 where without doubt Moses speaks of a Cubit of six handbreadths In Ezekiel also the Discourse is not about a Cubit of a Foot but of six handbreadths as is evident from vers 5. Chap. xl where the Angel is said to have had in his hand a measuring Reed of six Cubits by the Cubit and an handbreadth that is six Jewish not Babylonian Cubits See Dr. Cumberland of the Jewish Measures CHAP. XXII Vers 1. Note a. IT was sufficient to say that by the Authority of the Lamb sitting upon his Throne Baptism was instituted which is very true and is here signified granting that the Water in Baptism is meant by the Water proceeding out of the Throne The rest Dr. Hammond adds of his own Invention to find out here the power of the Keys as he does in other places where no one else would think them referred to The same he does afterwards but being in hast to make an end of this tedious work I shall not particularly examin what he says nor would it be worth while For who but he could here mistake He describes to us for instance the happy Condition of the Christians from Constantin to the Year MCCC living under the Discipline of Church-Governors and a most pure Church during that interval and most worthy of Christ Which that we might believe either the New Testament must have been many
however not agreeing in their Opinions about the day nor so much as the year in which Christ was born one might be ready perhaps to question the Authority of Justin and Tertullian who tell us that the Tables on which this enrolling here spoken of was made were extant in their time For from those Records this whole matter might easily have been known and it would have been an inexcusable neglect in the Christians of that age who could have looked into those publick Registers and transmitted to Posterity what they had there read and yet would not do it But I am afraid that Tertullian and others spake only by guess because it was not certainly known that those Records were lost But this is not a place to treat of this matter Vers 14. Note e. The Alexandrian and Cambridg Copies which are both venerable for their antiquity and the Latin and Gothick Interpreters have that reading which the Doctor here expounds And therefore it is not true as Grotius says that all the Copies consent in reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tho the greatest part read it so Vers 35. Note f. It is easy to conjecture what was the occasion of that grief that like a sword pierced through the heart of this holy Woman For how could she see without extreme sorrow and trouble almost all the Jews persecuting her Son and that with such implacable fury as to nail him at last to a Cross As for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is either Mary her self according to the genius of the Hebrew or if you please her heart which might metaphorically be said to be struck through when she beheld her Son crucified So in Statius Lib. x. Thebaid a Father hearing his Sons life demanded received the sentence Non secus ac torta trajectus cuspide pectus exanimis There was no need of interpreting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here to be the sensitive Soul to give light to an easy phrase used also in other Languages CHAP. III. Vers 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Doctor interprets this in his paraphrase thus Governour of that fourth division of the kingdom called Galilee by which words there is no body but would think that Herod was here equal'd with Pilate and was a President sent by Tiberius But the difference between a Governour or President and a Tetrarch he explains in part in his Annotations He should have added that this Herodes Antipas was in possession of this Tetrarchship in pursuance of Herod the Great 's will and did not send the revenue of that territory to Rome as the Roman Presidents did but converted it to his own use He depended indeed upon Caesar against whose will he could not have took possession of his inheritance and who could take it away from him when ever he pleased and at last did so But he was not however the Emperors tributary but his friend and wanted nothing but the title of one to make him a King And upon this account Josephus Antiq. Jud. Lib. 17. Cap. 10. calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I make this remark because our Author seems in another place by an intolerable impropriety of speech to give Herod the title of a Roman Governour as if he had not ruled his Principality in his own name but in the Emperors See Note on Matt. xxii 16 Vers 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The force of this word is not sufficiently expressed by the Doctor in his Paraphrase St. Luke's words are to be rendred thus And Jesus himself when he began to execute his office or to preach the Gospel was about thirty years old and as was supposed was the Son of Joseph c. In the last words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is nothing but a form of passing over to the next words and they who interpret it otherwise make a difficulty where there is none 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot be said in Greek for he began which yet is commonly here supposed tho without producing any such Example I should paraphrase therefore this Passage thus When Jesus first began to preach the Gospel which he did a little after he had been baptized by John he was about thirty years old and was of the Stock of David his Mother being of the same Family and Joseph her Husband who was the Son of c. CHAP. IV. Vers 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Besides what has been said by Grotius to confirm the truth of this reading it may be farther observed that it is read so in Beza's Cambridg Copy and three others which he mentions besides that which the Authors of the Coptick and Gothick Versions made use of Vers 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is wanting in the Alexandrian and Beza's antient Copy It is not expressed in the 3 d Verse nor in Matth. iv 6 And therefore Beza who uses to render that Article by a demonstrative Pronoun has here omitted it and told us in his Notes that he suspected it It was possible that the Devil might have known it to have been affirmed by Mary and Joseph that Jesus was conceived without the assistance of a Man and by the power of the Holy Ghost and that for that reason the Angel who had foretold his Birth had said that he should be called the Son of God but it was possible also that he might question whether that was true or no and so be willing to tempt our Saviour himself that he might be more fully satisfied about it And accordingly the Temptation may be thus expressed If thou art the Son of God and not of a Man as thy Mother says cast thy self down from hence for since thou may'st put thy trust in God thy Father there is nothing that thou needest to fear because it is written in Psal xci concerning those that trust in God that he has commanded his Angels to take care of them CHAP. V. Vers 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Luke here follows S. Mark but St. Matthew Chap. ix 9 mentions his own name It is supposed by most and by our Author here among the rest that Levi was but another name for S. Matthew but this is confuted by Grotius by divers considerable Arguments in his Notes on Matt. ix which I wonder that Dr. Hammond should take no notice of but follow the common Opinion St. Matthew and Levi were perhaps Companions in the same Custom or Tollhouse and dwelt together And Christ seems to have called them both and to have been entertained at a Feast by them both at their own house But Levi was not chosen to be one of the twelve Apostles And yet why St. Mark and Luke pass by Matthew and make mention of Levi I confess I can give no reason CHAP. VI. Vers 13. Note c. I. THat Christ was commissioned and authorized by God to found and govern the Church