the Chaldaeans c. and they shall gather the captivity as the sand v. 9. So as without question this denuntiation of the Prophet was here directed to the Jews whom he here calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 despisers that they should behold and with astonishment admire the work of the Lord which he was to do in their days so as for very amazement and consternation they should seek to hide themselves and wish the very hills would come down and cover them from the dreadful wrath which was to come And least this fate should now come again upon the Jews the Apostle bids them in this place beware in the foregoing verse foresignifying the fearful Destruction of Jerusalem then near at hand V. 48. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et crediderunt quotquot erant praeordinati ad vitam aeternam as the Old Latin Ordinati as Beza but in the same sense as we Translate it also And as many as were ordained to eternal life believed But this is but a harsh and unusual version of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being no where to be found in that sense neither doth it agree with the sense of Scripture as many are of opinion And truly I for my part doubt whether all that then believed were praeordained to eternal life might there not be some Apostates I am sure there is nothing to oblige my faith thereto I conceive no more then those which in Corinth are called Saints who surely believed also otherwise the Apostle would never have called them Saints neither had they been reputed part of the Church which was in Corinth who I suppose there is no man will affirm were all saved as are in their sense those who were preordained to eternal life That therefore this place may bring no weight to the establishing of so controverted a sense of which there will never be an end of disputing till Elias comes why may not these words be better distinguished and Translated thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et crediderunt quotquot convenerunt in vitam aeternam And as many as were met together believed in eternal life The Jews held themselves unworthy of eternal life by putting the word of God from them v. 46. But the Gentiles when they heard it they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord and as many as were met together believed in eternal life 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being taken in the same sense with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which word was used v. 44. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is one of the articles of our Creed the very subject of the Apostles preaching Joh. c. 17. v. 3. And as for the interpretation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is not unsuitable to the place no more is it new without Authority For the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is frequently by the LXX Translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 convenio and congrego is also by them Translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Exod. c. 29. v. 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et conveniam ibi filiis Israel Pagnin And there I will meet with the children of Israel as in our own Translation And though some perhaps may say that this was a mistake in the Seventy Interpreters which yet is but spoken of free cost for Aquila Symmachus and Theodotio Translated so likewise or that they meant praecipiam as their Latin Interpreter would have it certainly the genuine sence of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath in it something near of kin to our Interpretation For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in ordine colloco to place in order so as it aborreth not from our sence to say And as many as were placed in order to hear the word of God believed in eternal life or as many as were instructed according to the force of the word praecipiam that is as many as were instructed in what the Apostle taught them Nor can I be otherwise perswaded but that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must necessarily be construed with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what sense soever is put upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 C. 14. v. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That is as some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And when they had appointed them Elders or as others When they had ordained them Elders in the Ecclesiastical sense as it is at this day used But which of these two is the truer or more proper in this place is no small question If I may speak with liberty after a serious disquisition I cannot but profess I totally assent to them who would have Luke here mean 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having appointed and not Ordained in the other sense For I am not convinced with Argument or Testimony so as to believe that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did by it self alone at that time or many years after signifie either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Imposition of hands or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Consecration So that all which Zonaras affirms concerning the true acception of this word in the beginning of his Scholia upon the first Canon of the Apostles to what end or by what impulse soever I think is very really right and true Whose words because they fully express my meaning and that they may be better understood by other Authorities which I shall alledge I have thought fit here to set down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Now adays a course of prayers and invocation on the holy Spirit when one is initiated into the Priesthood and receiveth consecration is called Cheirotonia from thence so termed because the Bishop extends his hand over him whom he blesseth when he is chosen into holy orders But Anciently the choice or suffrage was called Cheirotonia For when it was lawful for the multitude in their Cities to choose their Priests or Bishops the multitude met together and some chose one man some another but that it might appear whose suffrage won they say the Electors did use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to stretch forth their hands and by their hands so stretched forth or up they were numbred who chose the one and who the other And him who was Elected by the most suffrages or voices they placed in the high Priesthood that is made him Bishop And from hence was the name of Chierotonia taken which also the Fathers of the Councils are found so to have used calling their suffrage Cheirotonia An example whereof he bringeth out of the fifth Canon of the Council of Laodicea And thus far Zovaras From whom it manifestly appears that the word Cheirotonia in the Ecclesiastical sense as it is now used of Ordination was then new and borrowed long after the Apostles times And to prove this yet more fully laying aside and barring all suspected and questionable Authorities let us do it with such Testimonies of Primitive writers whose Authority is sound and received of all Beginning first with
And this interpretation seems to be more reasonable then that of their's who interpret it of Judas as if St Luke should mean that he was gone to his own or to his proper place to wit as they would have it unto Hell T is true no man can make other judgment But I cannot for all that think the Evangelist had any such meaning in these words I rather with Chrysostom look upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The prudence of the man how he speaks not contumeliously nor insults c. Which plainly argues that he thought not that it was the meaning of St Luke in these words to adjudge Judas into Hell For what could he have said of Judas more contumelious then that he was gone to his own place meaning Hell Neither was it the business of an Historian or Evangelist to interpose his own opinion but rather to leave Judas to the judgment of God it being enough for him to have related matter of fact as he had promised and professed to do in the beginning of his Gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Even as they had delivered things unto us who were eye-witnesses from the beginning c. But who will you say was an eye-witness of Judas his going to or being in Hell C. 2. v. 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quoniam non derelinques animam meam in Hade neque dabis sanctum tuum videre corruptionem Because thou wilt not leave my soul in Hell nor give thy holy one to see corruption The first branch of this verse seems to concern his Soul which was not left in the state of death as other humane Souls I say left in the state of death for it is not one and the same thing to die or to be dead and to be or to remain in the state of death or if you please as it is v. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in vinculis in the bonds of death as Athanasius and Beza interpret the word and so in the Psalmist in the LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are Synonymous or in those receptacles where the Souls of the Godly are reserved till they receive their crown as St Augustin or in the middle of the shadow of death where the Souls of the dead are as Irenaeus or in Hades or in Hell whither we are taught by the Apostles Creed that he descended or went into Where by the way I cannot but observe that our English Hell comes from the Saxon HELAN celare tegere to hide or cover so as it may be said to have the same signification with Hades 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a place that cannot be seen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 locus sine luce Phavor or else in Paradise with the Soul of the Thief All which several expressions serve but to signifie one and the same thing For I do not see but Paradise may very lawfully be interpreted a receptacle or separated place for departed Souls from the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 separavit locus separatus or septum a close such as for pleasure and delight our Parks and Gardens are from which cause this word hath obtained with the Hebrews the meaning of bliss and pleasure And I cannot but think the Greeks borrowed the word from the Hebrews and that neither of them owe it to the Persian For though perchance which yet is by no means certain Nehemiah might borrow it from the Persian who lived in the Persian Court yet Solomon t is certain which used the same word in Ecclesiastes and in Canticles many ages before Nehemiah's time writ in the Hebrew tongue neither is there any reason at all to think that he ever used the Persian dialect Neither is such a termination with the Hebrews so unusual with whom such Anomalous words are frequent that we should so earnestly disown it as their due Neither doth the Rabbins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies death which is a separation differ from our sense Why should we therefore fly from the Hebrew to the Persian and acknowledge him to be the true owner of the word I confess I value the Authority of Julius Pollux but I shall not swear unto it However in summ I conceive it not unreasonable to say that the Godly who are in the state of death are in Paradise in what ever place secluded and finally to conclude that this first branch of the verse concerns only his Soul as the latter plainly concerns his body which saw no corruption as other human bodies do And in this sense doth Peter expressly explain the words v. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Non relicta est anima ejus in Hade neque caro ejus vidit corruptionem That his Soul was not left in Hell neither did his flesh see corruption Plainly distinguishing between his Soul and Body as if he did it of set purpose to the end that none should think this place concerned the Sepulchre or Grave of Christ alone as some would have that say that Hades signifieth nothing else For Perversissimum est c. as Tertullian saith lib. de Carne Christi It is a most perverse thing that naming the flesh we should understand the Soul or naming the Soul we should understand the flesh The truth of their names is the safety of their properties Neither doth Athanasius speak less plainly to our purpose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Neither did death prevail to subjugate his human nature so far as to detain it in its bonds neither could corruption by any tyrannical invasion exercise its power to the putrefaction of his body Humanae ista lex necessitatis c. saith Hilary It is a law of humane necessity that the bodies being buried the Souls descend into Hell which descent the Lord himself did not refuse to shew the truth of his manhood or human nature And doubtless this is the scope of Peters words in this place of purpose to prove the Resurrection of Christ and that he was not left in the state of death as other mortals are And this opinion I hold to be pious and consonant to faith I believe the immortality of the Soul I believe the Resurrection of the body and its reunition with the Soul and life everlasting I am no friend to Purgatory nor to any prayer supplication or application to any Saint save only to our sole Mediator Jesus Christ who for that particular end ascended into the holy of holies that is into the highest heavens that there he may commend our prayers to our Father which is in heaven who from hence also conceive may be drawn a cogent argument that prayers ought not to be made to Saints whom Religion hath not yet placed in that holy of holies to wit the highest heavens and so qualified for fitting Mediators But there are not few and those no mean ones neither who positively say there is no receptacle of Souls
You have the same phrase in the same sense c. 26. v. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The which whilst I was doing that is whilst he was persecuting the Jews v. 11. As he went to Damascus c. He saw a light from heaven c. C. 26. v. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Saying nothing other then what the Prophets and Moses said should come to pass if Christ was subject for to suffer if he was the first from the Resurrection of the dead c. Si passibilis Christus is the Translation of the Interlineary and the vulgar Latin neither can the Greek words admit any other The Jews expected then as still to this very day they do expect a Messias whose Kingdom should be of this world and so did the Apostles also at the first before his Resurrection and therefore could by no means believe that he could be subject unto Death or Passion To root out which opinion out of their thoughts St Paul would not have them perswaded barely by his word but convinceth them by the Testimony of their own very Prophets before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be understood C. 27. v. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hanc injuriam commonly This harm but why not better this storm if it be true that Suidas saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eo quod pluat pondus or graviter Because it raineth heavily or grievously And we have in Julius Pollux 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ventus insolens or procellosus A boisterous or stormy wind And thus Translated the sense is altogether as good if not better Oportuit auscultasse mihi non solvisse à Creta vitasse hanc tempestatem jacturam Ye ought to have harkned unto me and not to have loosed from Crete and to have avoided this storm and loss ANNOTATIONS On the Ep. To the Romans Ch. 1. v. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These words seem to be expounded with most significancy by trajection For the righteousness of God by Faith is in it revealed for Faith that is to be believed As if it were written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That such trajections are very frequent I have shewed in sundry places it is called c. 3.22 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The righteousness of God by Faith of or in Jesus Christ And in truth is the main purpose of this Epistle As for the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is used in the same sence immediately before v. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To or for the obedience of Faith that is that the Faith may be obeyed among all Nations as also c. 15.18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the obedience of the Gentiles that is that the Gentiles may be made obedient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the Gospel is the power of God unto Salvation to every one that believeth there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Jew first and also to the Greek v. 16. So that it most fitly followes For therein is the righteousness of God by Faith revealed that it may be believed as it is written Justus autem ex fide vivet That he that is just by Faith shall live to wit he shall inherit eternal life For the Gospel is the power of God to save every one that believeth in his Son You may see the like trajections Act. 13.27 2 Cor. 4.4 1 Pet. 3.21 C. 2. v. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Opus legis The work of the law The work or business of the law is to accuse or to excuse and this is that conscience which is written in the hearts of all C. 3. v. 5 6 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Si vero iniquitas nostra justitiam dei commendat quid dicemus Nonne injustus est Deus qui infert iram secundum hominem loquor absit Tum enim quomodo Deus judicabit mundum Si enim veritas dei in meo mendacio abundavit ad gloriam ipsius quid ego tanquam peccator adhuc judicor non sicut blasphemamur sicut quidam nos aiunt dicere quoniam fecerimus mala ut venirent bona quorum judicium justum est But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God what shall we say is not God unjust who inflicteth punishment I speak as a man far be it For then how shall God judge the world for if the truth of God through my falsness hath more abounded unto his glory why am I yet judged as a sinner and not as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say because we have done evil that good might follow whose judgment is just Most Interpreters do here omit the conjunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as redundant But I conceive it is by no means to be pretermitted for that it is the very word that explains the whole sense which hitherto is very perplext and obscure The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is commonly rendred in the Imperative Faciamus Let us do I have Translated in the subjunctive Aorist in its proper sense together with the conjunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quoniam fecerimus because we have done The particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have Translated with Grotius in the Interrogative Negative Nonne is not for so the sense requires it being spoken carnally or like a man to charge God with injustice and so you shall find the word to be taken Matth. c. 12. v. 23. Joh. c. 4. v. 29. and elsewhere Those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. which divide the coherence I have distinguished with a larger Parenthesis that the connexion and inference of the sense may more easily appear which is plainly thus For if our unrighteousness commends the righteousness of God what shall we say is not God unjust who inflicteth punishment for if the truth of God through my falsness hath more abounded unto his glory why am I yet judged as a sinner and not rather judged because we have done evil that good might come whose judgment that so judge is just For if they were called into judgment because they had done evil that good might come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to man they might say that God was unjust for punishing them as sinners who had done nothing but what tended to his glory and this judgment in their opinion is just But if this should be granted how should God judge the world if with this plea the wicked might avoid his judgment there would be none left to punish And therefore the Apostle adds I speak as a man according to the Sophistical argumentation of the Jews or as Hierome saith Secundum te qui talia sentis According to thee who so thinkest But far be it from our thoughts for God cannot be unjust C. 5. v. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For a righteous man scarce any man will die but for a good man peradventure some will dare to die 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Old Glossary is benignus and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
iis qui peccaverunt quem in iis qui non peccaverunt per illud peccatum Adami eo quod unusquisque in similitudine Adami creatus est quia Adamus typus fuit illius qui erat venturus Nevertheless death reigned therefore from Adam to Moses as well in those that sinned as also in those that sinned not by that sin of Adam because that every one is born in the likeness of Adam and because Adam was the type of him that was to come From which words I could make no other construction but that he plainly means that death did reign over all by the sin of Adam for these two causes because every one was born in the likeness of Adam and because Adam was the type of him who was to come Both which reasons seem to me one and the same the one being a reddition or explication only of the other it being all one to say that Adam was a type of his Posterity and that Adam's Posterity was born in his likeness But to say that death reigned over all by the sin of Adam because Adam was the type of Christ is surely an inconsequent argument Whereas to affirm that death reigned over all by the sin of Adam because Adam was a type that represented all his Posterity methinks answers fitly to the place and is very easie for the lowest capacity at first sight to apprehend C. 6. v. 4. Christ is said to be raised from the dead 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By the glory of the Father as it is commonly rendred Beza would have it In gloriam Patris 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the glory of the Father The Translation either way is harsh Why may it not be much better rendred by a familiar trajection Per Patrem gloriae By the Father of glory which is significant and apt as he is elsewhere called Dominus gloriae and Deus gloriae The Lord of glory and the God of glory And so is he expresly called Eph. c. 1. v. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pater gloriae The Father of glory C 7. v. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from the body of this death Or as it is in our margin from this body of death And why not O wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from the death of this body that is thus captivated under the Law of sin which is in its members v. 23. And so the sense without any Metaphor is plain and sutable to the scope of the place There being nothing more familiar then such trajections Examples whereof you may see Heb. c. 7. v. 4. Jam. c. 2. v. 1. c. 3. v. 3. 1 Pet. c. 3. v. 21. 2 Pet. c. 1. v. 19. You have one in the margin of this very place V. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 These words are to be supplied out of the former whereto they are a perfect answer The Apostles trembling question was Who shall deliver me from the death of this body that is such a slave to sin to which he forthwith answers I thank God he will deliver me through Jesus Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being to be understood as a reddition to the question C. 8. v. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. I cannot see how there can be construction here but by a Metathesis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Eo enim quod impotentia legis debilis erat propter carnem Deus filium suum mittens c. For in that the weakness of the Law was impotent because of the flesh God sending his own Son c. C. 9. v. 10 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. To reconcile the sense and construction of these words wherein there hath been so much labour you must understand the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by an Hebraism or Graecism frequent in every Page almost in Holy Writ Whereof see note on Mar. c. 12. v. 40. Promissionis enim verbum hoc est secundum tempus hoc veniam erit Sarae filius non solum vero sed Rebecca ex altero erat gravida ex Isaac patre nostro nondum enim natis c. Dictum est ei major serviet minori For this is the word of promise At this time I will come and Sara shall have a son and not only so but Rebecca also by another was with child by our Father Isaac For the children being not yet born c. It was said unto her The elder shall serve the younger As much as to say that Rebecca was with child also by another word of promise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relating to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I conceive to be a more proper phrase then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For if a man be said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Numb c. 5. v. 20. then is it rightly said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rebecca retinuit semen patris nostri Isaac that is concepit she was with child by her Father Isaac So that there was not such necessity for the learned Beza to pronounce so positively Est itaque depravatus hic locus a quopiam Graecae linguae prorsus ignaro This place is depraved by some person ignorant of the Greek tongue When as so easie and frequent a remedy is at hand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 According to this time are the words of the LXX whom Paul it seems did follow and they questionless read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so rendred it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this time for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the time of life accoding as it is Gen. c. 18. v. 10. and 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secundum or circa tempus vitae At or about the time of life I will return unto thee And I suspect it is not rightly read in the Hebrew it self Gen. c. 17. v. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at this time which should have been rather written conformably with the other places relating to this story 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at the time of life As for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in our sense it is abundantly familiar The LXX use it for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 altero another Gen. c. 43. v. 13. Psal 108. v. 14. You shall find it likewise in the same sence 1 Cor. c. 4. v. 6. and in Dioscor and Greg. Nazian take but the pains to look in Steph. Thes V. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Here is no necessity for Anantopodosis the coherence of the place is plain and ready distinguish but the words aright Nay but O man who art thou that repliest against God if God being willing to shew his wrath and to make his power known hath endured with much long suffering the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction The intervenient words Shall the thing
scire quicquam inter vos nisi Jesum Christum eumque crucifixum For I determined not to know any thing among you but Jesus Christ and him crucified But to confess my ignorance I profess I do not comprehend the meaning of this expression I had rather thought the Apostle intended to tell the Corinthians what was necessary for them to know and not for himself Some therefore seeking to avoid the inconvenience of this phrase would have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to preach or to declare but that signification is surely strain'd too far from the genuine sense and common use of the word to deserve acceptance That the interpretation may be fitted to a better sense the use of words and Grammatical construction I think we may more rightly say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is an elleiptical expression instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like to that in the Hebrew Habak c. 1. v. 5. as it is usually read and Translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Videte intergentes Behold among the Heathen that is ye who are among the Heathen or behold ye Heathen Or in Luk. c. 21. v. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And some of you shall they cause to be put to death Or Joh. c. 6. v. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dixerunt ergo discipuli as the Old Latin Then said some of his disciples And so we may render it with very good sense Non enim decrevi eos qui inter vos sunt aliquid scire nisi Jesum Christum eùmque crucifixum For I determined not that you or those that are among you should know any thing but Jesus Christ and him crucified And therefore he saith He came not with excellency of speech or wisdom but in weakness and in fear not with the perswasive words of human wisdom but in the demonstration of the spirit and of power V. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sapientiam loquimur in perfectis We speak wisdom in things that are perfect He speaks not of persons meaning the Corinthians whom in the following chapter v. 1. he calls babes in Christ so far were they distant from perfection but rather in things that are holy or sacred For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hesych and Phavor So Heb. c. 2. v. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make perfect and to sanctifie or consecrate are all one It is a manner of speech peculiar to this place My speech and my preaching was not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the perswasive words of humane wisdom but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the demonstration of the spirit We speak wisdom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in things sacred or holy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a mystery 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in words taught of the holy spirit Through the whole series of his discourse in this chapter there is no mention of to whom he spake but of what or how he spake to wit of things sacred and mysterious which eye hath not seen nor ear heard nor hath entred into the heart of man v. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à Dionysio vocatur vis divina operans in sacris Ecclesiasticis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sacro consecro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Naz. appellat baptismum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Idem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etiam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicebant eximia vel sanctiora vel Justa Bud. com ling. Grae. p. 624. 625. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was with the Athenians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lawful oath Andocides in the same place C. 3. v. 12 13 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The sense of this place is this If any Minister of the Gospel shall build upon this foundation which is Jesus Christ gold silver or pretious stones that is a pure solid and stable doctrine concerning the Faith of Christ or hay wood and stubble that is a frail fading and temporary doctrine what ever it be the day shall declare it when the fire of trial cometh what every mans work is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the fire of persecution shall try In that day they who were builded on the pure and solid doctrine of Faith shall remain stedfast and so the Minister shall receive his reward to wit the perseverance of his disciples but they who were faintly rooted in the Faith when the trial of persecution cometh immediately fall away and become Apostates from the Faith and so that Minister shall suffer loss he shall lose his labour and the reward of his pains but he himself shall be saved 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But so as he pass through the fire of persecution with constancy and steddiness to the Faith himself Upon this account it was that St John after he had forewarned the Elect Lady and her Children of the deceivers and the Antichrist who were entred into the world gives them this farther caution 2 Ep. v. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Videte vosmetipsos ne perdamus quae operati sumus sed ut mercedem plenam accipiamus Look to your selves that we loose not those things which we have wrought but that we may receive a full reward Not as in the Vulgar Latin and some Greek copies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Videte vosmetipsos ne perdatis quae operati estis sed ut mercedem plenam accipiatis Whereby the allusion to St Paul is wholly lost See Philip. c. 2. v. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Verbum vitae firmiter tenentes Holding fast the word of life Ut gloriari possim in die Christi That I may glory in the day of Christ. Behold the reward of Paul the perseverance of the Philippians in the word of life C. 4. v. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Litterally of mans day but the sense is the Judgment of man In our language we call him a Days man that is chosen an Vmpire to judge between party and party probably from the Latin phrase à dicendo diem from appointing a day in which the Days man was to give his judgement C. 5. v. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quid enim mihi de iis qui foris sunt judicare Nonne de iis qui intus sunt vos judicatis eos vero qui foris sunt judicat Deus Tollite ergo sceleratum istum ex vobis ipsis For what have I to do to judge them that are without Do not ye judge them that are within but them that are without God judgeth Therefore put away from among you that wicked person This reading and Translation do neither agree with the context nor with the scope of the Apostle whose main business is in this Chapter to reprove the Corinthians because they had not judged the incestuous person who was a brother and within the Church as they ought to have done and in the next
because they had no Judgment seats at all Whereas by this question do ye not judge those that are within is implicitly granted that they were not to be blamed at all for their slackness in this duty That therefore we may reconcile the coherence of the Text and the Apostle to himself and the meaning of the place may be made somewhat plainer then hitherto it is We must first alter the points as Theophylact doth witness some did before his time and then the reading in a letter and an accent and that not without Authority for so Theodoret did read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the evil for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the evil person and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall judge for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 judgeth And so reads the Greek edition of Aldus prepared by Asulanus and set out in print 1518. And so doth the Old Latin read judicabit for judicat and malum I suppose in the Neuter gender Thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quid enim mihi eos qui foris sunt judicareâ—… Non omnino Eos qui intus sunt judicaâ—… vos eos vero qui extra sunt judicabit Deâ—… tolletis malum è vobis For what have â—… to do to judge them that are without Not at all Judge ye those that are within but those that are without God will judge and ye shall take away the evil from among you As if he should say It concerns not us at all to judge those that are without the Church do ye your duty in judging those that are within it and so doing ye shall take away the evil from among your selves that is ye shall not be guilty of the evil but as for those that are out of the Church its fitting for you to leave them to the Judgment of God And to speak the truth as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the evil in the Neuter gender doth very well suit with the scope of this place so doth it with the use of the phrase in the Old Testament from whence without doubt the Apostle borrowed it So Chrysostom on the place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Meminit dictionis in Veteri He remembred the phrase in the Old Testament and so Theodoret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mosaicum apposuit Testimonium He put to the Testimony of Moses But that this phrase will bear no other reading or sense in the Old Testament but in the Neuter gender will evidently appear to those who shall diligently examine the circumstances of the places wherever they find it For example where is mention made of the Damosel on whom her virginity was not found Deut. c. 22. v. 21. She shall be stoned with stones that she die 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So shalt thou put away the evil from among you that is the guilt of the evil as Deut. c. 21. v. 9. And he that is but a smatterer in Greek will presently discern it to be a fault in the Roman edition of the LXX which renders in this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Masculine gender as also in the 22. and 24. verses of the same chapter in both which places the same reading is altogether as incongruous though it was prudently forborn in our new Poliglott Bibles from the emendation of it least the Romanists should from thence have taken occasion to cavil with our Edition for corrupting of their copy C. 6. v. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Negotium habens Having a matter that is litem a controversie suite or action against another so as it might more properly and significantly be rendred having a suite or action against another in which sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is frequently understood with the Greeks as is negotium also with the Latins V. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Indigni estis ut de minimis judicetis As the vulgar Latin Are ye unworthy to judge of the smallest matters But this Translation is not adequate to the words Beza seems to go somewhat nearer Indigni estis minimis judiciis But neither is that plain For the Apostle intends not the act of Judgment but the place And therefore it would be more fitly rendred according to the force of the word Indigni estis minimis fubselliis Are ye unworthy of the least places of judicature For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in no Author signifies the act of Judgment but the Bench or Seat where Judgment is given the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which sense t is used Jud. c. 5. v. 9. Dan. c. 7. V. 10. Susan v. 49. Jam. c. 2. v. 6. As if he should have said What Are ye who shall sit on Thrones as it is in another place judging the Twelve tribes of Israel unworthy of the smallest seats of Judgment here Subsellia are called the seats of Judicature in which Judgments are given of the smallest matters according to Asconius V. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The commmon version suites neither with the custom of speech among the Greeks with construction or with sense Secularia igitur judicia si habeatis contemptibiles qui sunt in Ecclesiâ illos constituite ad judicandum If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life set them to judge who are least esteemed of the Church Where by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 judicia judgments the Interpreters seem to understand suits at Law but as I told you in the former animadversion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in no Author signifies any such thing as a suit at Law If they say they mean Judgment seats their language is not clear and besides they then plainly affirm that which the Apostle positively denies who reproves them for that very cause for that they had none but would be judged rather by Infidels And if this were granted the inference is not so suitable to sense and reason but that there may be cause enough 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to suspend a mans assent and to enquire further into the truth of the Translation Which I conceive with the leave of Antiquity may be very easily restored into a more commodious sense and Syntax thus only varying the points 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secularia igitur subsellia si habeatis hos contemptibiles in Ecclesiâ constituite Set ye up therefore secular Judgment seats if ye account these persons contemptible in the Church As if he should say What will ye go to Law before the Infidels who cannot but be despicable to the Church in that they are no part of it Will ye suffer the unjust and wicked to judge between you whom ye your selves shall one day judge Are ye ignorant that ye shall Judge the very Angels How much more worthy then are ye of these petty seats of Judgment Appoint ye therefore Judges among your selves set up some Judgment seats I speak unto your shame is it so that there is not a wise man among you not one who can judge between brother and brother but that you go
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Certain of the sect of the Pharisees c. So as you may very lawfully Translate Qui vero videbantur esse aliquid qualescunque tandem illi fuerint nihil meâ interest But what ever they were who seemed to be something it is no matter to me God accepteth no mans person Or it may be Translated thus with regularity and sense enough distinguishing only after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nihil vero ab iis qui videbantur esse aliquid qualescunque illi fuerint meâ interest But nothing from those who seemed to be something what ever they were concerneth me at all That is nothing that they either said or did concerns me for as it follow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They that seemed to be something added nothing to me V. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For I through the Law am dead to the Law that is by the knowledge of the Law do know that by the Law there is no life and therefore to the Law acknowledge my self dead that I may live unto God C. 3. v. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The best Expositor of these words without comparison is the Aethiopick Interpreter Deus tamen unus est duorum But God is one of the two Wherefore then is the Law that was ordained by the Angels by the hand of a Mediatour But a Mediatour is not a Mediatour of one party alone it being necessary that there be two parties between whom there is a Mediatour Now one of these two parties between whom there was a Mediatour to convey the Law is God Neither can there be any other intelligible sense rendred of the words What is the unity or simplicity of the essence of God to the scope of the place or the Apostles purpose But if he say that God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one of the two between whom Moses was a Mediatour the sense is obvious do not the promises of that very God which he gave to Abraham fight with the Law he gave by the hand of Moses God forbid c. How Moses was this Mediatour between God and the children of Israel you may find punctually recorded Levit. c. 26. v. 46. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Haec sunt lex quam dedit Dominus inter se filios Israel in monte Sina per manum Mosis These are the Law which the Lord gave between him and the children of Israel in mount Sina 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the hand of Moses the very phrase used in this place ANNOTATIONS On the Ep. To the Ephesians Ch. 1. v. 7 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secundum divitias gratiae ipsius quam abundare fecit in nobis According to the riches of his grace which he hath made to abound in us in all wisdom and prudence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be understood here in the Hebrews Hiphil as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 2 Cor. c. 9. v. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a common phrase with the Greeks who according to the Atticks do put the Relative in the same case with the Antecedent as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Coram Deo cui credidit Before God whom he believed Rom. c. 4. v. 17. C. 2. v. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of what word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you should be governed I conceive there hath been a long mistake by reason of the incommodious distinction of the Chapters Most Interpreters after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vos you add of their own the verb vivificavit hath he quickned to supply the sense One affirms that this Accusative 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you is governed of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath he quickned v. 5. by a chain of figures For he saith there is in this place an Hyperbaton and a Synchysis an Apocope or cutting short of the Period which is a kind of an Anantopodoton the cause of which anomaly or irregularity is the interjection of some long sentence But to what end serves all this pomp of figures What need is there of them in a matter which if duly observed is not at all obscure For look but back to the Nineteenth verse of the foregoing Chapter and you shall find sense coherence and construction extreamly plain and safe without supplement or figure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. And what is the exceeding greatness of his power toward us who believe and toward you who were dead in trespasses and sins The intervenient words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. According to the working of his mighty power c. to the end of that Chapter being all properly included in a Parenthesis To this I cannot imagin any thing to be objected but the length of the Parenthesis it being of it self not only plain but extreamly fit and proper not to say necessary But I beseech you is not the Parenthesis altogether as long if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you be governed of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath he quickned v. 5. and the construction much more harsh see also Rom. c. 1. v. 1. c. unto the 7 and c. 2. where v. 13 14 15 are all included in one Parenthesis not much shorter then this Besides many other places in which you may find Parentheses well near as long but much more perplext and intricate Nay no less then a whole Chapter hath been allowed to a Parenthesis by no mean Judgement In the mean while you may observe what obscurity this importune division of the Chapters causeth to the Text. And where it bringeth not obscurity it is yet an unhansom fraction dividing matter that is coherent As you may see in Colos c. 4. v. 1. which in all reason should have been joyned to the foregoing Chapter Coherent cum superioribus neque scindenda fuere Grot. C. 3. v. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That now may be known to principalities and powers the manifold wisdom of God in heavenly things throughout the Church Things that pertain to the leading of an eternal life in heaven Joh. c. 3. v. 12. Eph. c. 1. v. 3. They are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 heavenly things though done on earth as Chrysostom observes in another place Whereas some interpret the Principalities and Powers to be the Angels methinks is far from the scope of the place For to what intent or advantage were it if perhaps by the preaching of the Gospel many mysteries of Christianity might be made known unto the Angels which to them were hid before This grace v. 8. was given to Paul to make known these things But Paul had no Commission to preach unto the Angels neither did he but to the Princes of the Gentiles Others object that the Gospel was not known to the Princes of the Gentiles or to earthly Powers till the days of Constantine and that therefore the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 now Principalities and Powers must be meant the Angels But if it were not known surely it might have been I
themselves negative Atticks add a negation as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quis est mendax nisi qui negat Jesum esse Christum Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ 1 Joh. c. 2. v. 12. Whereas the literal interpretation is Who is a liar but he who denieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Jesus is not the Christ So that we may with modesty say that though the word commanding as it is supplied doth express the meaning of the place sufficiently yet is it not according to rules of Grammar C. 5. v. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But if any widow hath children or nephews let them first learn to be pious to their own house and to requite their parents 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is all one with parentes revereri to reverence their parents for as Stephanus tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth sometime signifie pietatis officio fungi erga parentes to perform the duties of piety to ones parents For there is a piety towards parents as well as toward God And in that sense t is said in Virgil Sum pius Aeneas he was called pious Aeneas for his piety to his Father Anchises in that he carried him away being aged on his back at the firing and destruction of Troy And so you have in Cicero 3. Offic. Ipsi patriae conducit pios habere cives in parentes It is behoveful for the common wealth to have citizens pious to their parents And in Quintil. Praestanda pietas parentibus Piety is to be perform'd to parents V. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Old Latin Traslates it right Simul autem otiosae discunt circumire domos And withall being idle they learn to wander about from house to house Though Beza is pleased to blame this version saying it was an harsh Enallage forgetting himself I suppose that with the Greeks the participle is frequently put for the Infinitive with words that signifie any affection of the mind as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Memini vidisse I remember that I saw it And I hope it cannot be denied but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to learn doth signifie an affection of the mind as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to remember V. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Drink no longer water c. This verse seems to have crept into this place besides the meaning of the Apostle by some accident Perhaps it was added in the margent and by the inadvertency of the Transcriber inserted in its wrong place For the 22 and 24 v. cohere punctually together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Lay hands suddenly on no man neither be partaker of other mens sin keep thy self clear that is be not guilty of their sin for some mens sins are manifest before hand preceding to Judgment that is which go before the laying on of hands of which he may possibly judge who layeth on his hands wherefore he cannot be excused from the guilt of those sins if he layeth on his hands and some they follow after that is their sins are not manifest till after Judgment or laying on of hands and of these there can be no certain Judgment and therefore he shall not be guilty or partaker of them who layeth on his hands and this is the sense of Chrysostom So as the 23. v. seems to have been inserted by some mistake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phavor Purus inscius Pure or ignorant of C. 6. v. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They who are to partake of their well doing or honest labour The sense running thus They that have believing Masters let them not despise them because they are brethren but let them rather serve them because they who are to partake or have the benefit of their work are believers and beloved Or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be taken in the common acception of the word that is beneficii who are to partake of the benefit to wit of their service V. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Existimantium pietatem esse quaestum or mercaturam as the Arabick Translater renders it Supposing that Godliness is a trade to get by or a way or means to get a living He speaks of those that profess Religion that they may thereby grow rich or get a living Yet Godliness with contentment is mercatura magna 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a great or sure way to get by Whereas they who make hast to be rich by the pretence of Religion fall into temptations and a snare for the love of mony is the root of all evils v. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ipsa actio comparandi acquirendi Modus victus quaerendi seu quaestus faciendi Steph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dicunt enim duobus tantum uti modis faciendi quaestum agriculturâ parsimoniâ Plut. They used but two ways of getting tillage and patrimony or thrift So quaestus is a craft or trade to get by Vall. Cicer. Plaut c. ANNOTATIONS On the II. Ep. To Timothy Ch. 2. v. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Cum modestia eos corripientem qui resistunt forte dabit eis paenitentiam In meekness instructing or rebuking those who oppose themselves perhaps God may give them repentance So Theophylact 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Fortasse inquit erit aliqua emendatio Perhaps he saith there may be some amendment fortasse dederit Dominus paenitentiam perhaps the Lord may give them repentance So the Greek Interpreters Translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the Chaldee Samaritan and English render forte perhaps Gen. c. 24. v. 5. and 29. c. 43. v. 12. c. 50. v. 15. And Gen. c. 32. v. 20. They Translate the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which elsewhere they render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 C. 3. v. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Qui sese immergunt in familias Emphatically with us Who dive into Families more properly than Who creep into Families ANNOTATIONS On the Ep. To Titus Ch. 1. v. 2 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In hope of eternal life which God who cannot lie promised before the world began but hath made manifest in due time by or according to his word in or by preaching wherewith I have been instructed c. Before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so in Aristophanes you have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acording to my meaning Whereof there are numerous examples in the New Testament See likewise 2 Tim. c. 1. v. 9 10 11. where is the same sense and expression in effect Only instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ANNOTATIONS On the Ep. To The Hebrews Ch. 1. v. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Certainly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place is somewhat more then single 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is commonly Translated Splendor ejus gloriae The brightness of his glory For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is as it were 〈◊〉
And therefore I cannot but dissent from his opinion though never so highly priz'd Confessing my self prone toward the sense of them who make Melchizedec a Type of Christ although I must ingenuously profess I do not understand however they salve the matter how it can be said of Melchizedec who as they confess was a mortal man in one place that he remains a Priest for ever and in another that it is witnessed of him by the Scripture for so I understand the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Apostles phrase that he liveth I may perhaps apprehend their meaning who refer these words by way of Allegory unto the Son of God and it may be consonant to my Faith that it should be so but it is not so to my sense and reason how it can be so which it is not just should be led captive without shew of demonstration how the thing is done which they say is done except it be in matters of extream necessity For it is a safe rule and perpetually good Proprie semper sumenda sunt vocabula nisi quid aliter accipere cogat alioqui nihil firmum erit in Scriptura Words are always to be taken in their proper sense unless something necessitate to take them otherwise else nothing will be firm in Scripture Riber in Heb. But here is no such necessity in this place For if I be not extreamly mistaken there is yet an interpretation left which doth reconcile these apparent difficulties in the Text fairly enough and also overthrow Cunaeus his opinion by rendring and distinguishing the words in another manner then ever yet they have been and that without any force to Grammar or use of speech among the holy Penmen To demonstrate this I must in the first place tell you that these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Hic enim Melchisedec c. unto the end of v. 8. cannot be rightly construed and expounded but jointly with the words foregoing beginning c. 6. v. 19 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Et ingredientem usque in interiora velaminis c. And which entreth into the inner part of the vail where the forerunner for us is entred Jesus or where Jesus the forerunner for us is entred being made an high Priest for ever after the order or similitude of Melchizedec c. In the farther explaining whereof you are to observe that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not a Relative to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor to be construed with it but to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 preceding immediately before as also that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Appositive to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and ought to be construed separately in a Parenthesis with the words following unto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this manner 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hic enim ipse Melchisedec rex Salem c. manet Sacerdos in perpetuum For this Jesus the Melchizedec King of Salem Priest of the most high God who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the Kings and blessed him to whom also Abraham gave the tenth part of all first being by interpretation King of righteousness and after that King of Salem which is King of peace without Father without Mother without descent having neither beginning of days nor end of life but made like unto the Son of God abideth a Priest continually 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 word for word is This that is This man or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jesus may be repeated or understood Either lawfully In summ the meaning of the words is this For this Jesus who is entred into the inner part of the vail c. c. 6. v. 19 20. being the Melchizedec as it is elsewhere said I am the true vine and that rock was Christ that is prefigured in Melchizedec who was made like unto him in that he is called the Priest of the most high God King of righteousness and peace having neither beginning of days nor end of life attributes congruous only to the Son of God I say this Jesus according to the true and genuine interpretation of the words abideth a Priest continually but not Melchizedec But because Melchizedec is by Moses stiled the Priest of the most high God and the King of righteousness and peace and because neither his Genealogy nor Birth nor Death are recorded in Scripture therefore was he a most fit and proper type and figure of the eternal Priesthood and Royalty of Christ and for that cause said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 made like unto the Son of God My arguments for this interpretation are these First its lawful according to the rules of Syntax Secondly because it accommodates the sense and renders that place interpretable which the Apostle was pleased to call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sermonem difficilem explicatu A speech hard to be interpreted c. 5. v. 11. Thirdly because the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be as well demonstrative as expletive and in this place rather for if it were to be rendred For this Melchizedec the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had been more significantly omitted reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but because the Article is added it seems to intimate that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Relative to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be construed with Melchizedec 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Melchizedec As our learned Abbot upon Psal 110. v. 4. For Jesus Christ indeed is the true Melchizedec In which place he also reads Thou art the Priest for ever as if it were read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which reading in it self is lawful and doth more eminently set forth his singular right to the eternal Priesthood with exclusion to any other competitor whatsoever Fourthly and Lastly this interpretation avoids two egregious contradictions the one in nature that a mortal man should live for ever the other in Faith that there should be two high Priests that should remain for ever And now follows the other difficulty which ariseth from v. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et hic quidem decimas accipiunt morientes homines ibi vero accipit de quo testatum est quod vivit And here men that die receive tythes but there he that receiveth them lives for ever From whence it is concluded without contradiction that Melchizedec is there said to live because he who receiveth tythes is said to live but no body in the foregoing words is said to have received tythes but Melchizedec who received them from Abraham and therefore it must be Melchizedec of whom it is witnessed that he liveth Whereto it is briefly answered First that the word accipit receiveth is not in the Greek Text. Secondly that the Scripture doth no where say that Melchizedec liveth What then is the sense deficient by no means It perfectly and formally agrees with the whole order of the Apostles discourse both in this Chapter and the
c. Zanch. I could add to these an innumerable heap of Testimonies but these I think are enough to prove two irrefragable doctrines First that Baptism is properly and solely the type of the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ by Faith wherein we are assured of the humanity and Godhead of our Saviour the very foundation of our Christian Faith And Secondly of the Resurrection of all true Christians who are Baptized in and live according to that Faith knowing that if they shall rise from the death of sin to newness of life they shall also after death with Christ arise to glory I shall only add the Judgment of an ingenuous and learned man whose Testimony in this matter is not to be suspected or refused His words are these Porro quamvis immersionis Caeremonia olim fuit communior c. Though the Ceremony of immersion was anciently more common as appears by the unanimous discourse of the Fathers when they speak of this matter and doth more lively represent the death burial and Resurrection of the Lord and us which are mystically done in Baptism The which signification of immersion the Fathers do often urge c. From whence St Thomas affirms that the Ceremony or rite of dipping is the most commendable Yet there have been many reasons for which sometimes it was convenient to change this custom of dipping into some other kind of Ceremony near unto it c. From hence therefore the Ceremony of perfusion or pouring on of water as middle between sprinkling and dipping was much in use which custom Bonaventure saith was in his time much observed in the French Churches and some others though he confess the Ceremony of dipping was the more common the more fit and the more secure as St Thomas teacheth However where the custom of perfusion or aspersion sprinkling of or pouring on of the water is now in use it ought not to be altered by private Authority Nay since now it is so generally in practise throughout the Church it ought by no means to be call'd in question Thus far Estius In whose words we have a manifest and ingenious concession that dipping was the Ancient Ceremony which constantly the Fathers taught as more lively representing the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ and us that the Schoolmen held the same for the most secure and commendable custom that the custom of perfusion crept in unawares into the Church for what causes he mentions not But because the custom hath been long in use he doth not think it fit it should be called into question whether it be lawful or no. And to this Judgment I willingly subscribe so as the Ministers of Baptism would teach the true and genuine reason of its institution which by the change of the Ceremony is almost lost so that they for the most part teach now a days that Allegorical one of washing occasioned by the now constant custom of perfusion which I will not yet deny may be piously and profitably taught sometimes for the Fathers and the Apostles themselves did sometimes do it Though with leave be it spoken I am still of opinion that it would be more for the honour of the Church and for the peace and security of Religion if the old custom could conveniently be restored which surely it might safely enough in respect of indangering the health of the Infants if Baptism were only to be administred at set times in the year as it was Antiently in the Church Which custom what should hinder to be revived I do not see but the opinion of those who hold Baptism so necessary to Salvation as that without it there 's none to be hoped for and yet in danger of death there might be a liberty allowed for it at other times The case then being thus I beseech you what so visible affinity is there between burial and washing that Christian Baptism should be thought to draw its Original from the lotions or washings of the Jews If it were true that our Baptism did signifie washing or ablution or were it true that the Jews did Anciently admit into their Church either their Own or Proselytes by collation of Baptism which hath been so much urged by Learned men they might be probable arguments that the institution of our Baptism was fetch 't from the Baptismes or washings of the Jews But when the contrary is made so evident concerning the first and there appears no certainty for the second I conceive there is little reason to adhere to this new and uncertain doctrine which the Fathers never heard or dreamed of For that our Baptism is truly a type of burial and Resurrection litteral and mystical and not of washing hath been already sufficiently declared And as for the other argument as it is far off from any cogency in it to force the assent so is it liable to very much question it having so little help of the Authority of Scripture to defend it that I can scarce find any footsteps of it in the Old Testament They would derive its Original from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lavit or purgavit to wash or cleanse Exod. c. 19. v. 10. But as I take it the Rabbins use for Baptism the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies dipping or immersion thereby notably shewing that they owe the notion of the word to the Greeks or rather to the Christians For what affinity is there so near between purgation and immersion cleansing and dipping But the thing of it self was so uncertain that the Masters themselves did disagree about it For in the very Text they urge which is cited out of the Talmud Rabbi Eliezer doth expresly contradict Rabbi Joshua who was the first as far as I can learn that ever did assert this kind of Baptism among the Jews For Rabbi Eliezer who was at least coetaneous if not elder to Rabbi Joshua expresly saith Proselytum circumcisum non Baptizatum verum esse Proselytum nam fic legimus de patribus Abrahamo Isaaco Jacobo qui circumcisi erant non Baptizati That a Proselyte circumcised and not Baptized was a true Proselyte for so we read of our Fathers Abraham Isaac and Jacob who were Circumcised and not Baptized On the other side Rabbi Joshua affirms Eum qui Baptizatus est non circumcisus esse Proselytum That he was a Proselyte who was Baptized and not circumcised But to which of these shall I yield my belief To Eliezer who affirms that which the Scripture affirms or to Joshua who affirms that which the Scripture no where mentions T is true the Masters stood all for Rabbi Joshua it was their interest so to do it was for the honour of their Religion that the Christians might be said to borrow their Ceremonies from them But when I see learned and judicious persons in these times fetch the foundations of truth from the Rabbins and that to establish a new opinion I cannot but wonder at it Unde
nobis missus est Talmudus c. They are the words of Buxtorfius in his Synag Jud. From whence was the Talmud sent us that we should give it so much credit as to believe that the Law of Moses could or ought to be understood by it And if not the Law of Moses much less the Law of the Gospel to which they were professed enemies The Talmud is called by the same Author Errorum Labyrinthus fabularum Judaicarum fundamentum The Labyrinth of errours and the foundation of Jewish Fables and it was first perfected and acknowledged to be Authentick Five Hundred years after Christ and out of it Maimonides and all the rest did suck their learning Surely therefore there 's little reason to acquiesce in its Authority or Testimony But what was the matter that this old Rabbin should so constantly deny that which was like to advance the honour of his Religion but that his conscience was throughly convinc'd of his assertion I cannot but admire the ingenuity of the man who maintained the light of this truth so firmly against and amidst so many Impostours of his Nation who perhaps thought it a Glorious Triumph to obtrude a counterfit opinion upon the innocent world not yet solicitous of their machinations And that which moves me more Josephus himself not to speak of all the Fathers before the Talmud who was likewise a Jew and of the same age with Rabbi Eliezer who writ also purposely of the customs and Ceremonies of his Nation is totally silent in this matter so that it is an argument to me next to demonstration that two persons of such eminency both Jews and coeval the one should expresly deny the other in all his History make no mention of this Baptism Besides if Baptism in the sense of our days had been in use among the Jews in former times wherefore did the Pharisees say to John the Baptist Joh. c. 1. v. 25. Why then Baptizest thou if thou be not that Christ nor Elias nor that Prophet Do they not plainly intimate thereby that there was no use nor practise of Baptism before and that it was a received opinion among them that there was none to be used till Elias or that Prophet came Such a solemn and publick mersation was altogether unusual with the Jews till that time as Grotius saith upon the words aforementioned How then there can be any such affinity between our Baptism and the washings of the Jews that the one should therefore by any pretext or right be said to succeed the other I confess I understand not it is beyond my Faith But they say that Arrian calls the Jew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is one that 's dipt but I rather think with his Commentator Ipsum confuse loqui velle potius Christianum Judaeum That he being a Heathen spake confusedly or promiscuously and that he rather meant a Christian Jew as Lubin also upon that of Juvenal Nunc sacri fontis nemus delubra locantur Judaeis will have the Jews there to be meant the Christians Qui edicto Domitiani urbe pulsi sylvas illas habitare cogebantur Who being by Domitians Edict expell'd the City were forc'd to inhabit those woods which were sacred to the Heathenish devotions But to put an end to this discourse I do affirm with Alexander de Halys Tinctio est formalis causa Baptismi That dipping is the formal cause of Baptism There remaineth only to resolve what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Concerning which word I conceive with Beza Grotius Estius and others that in this place it properly signifies stipulatio a covenant or promise As it is interpreted by the Glossaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stipulatio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Promitto spondeo stipulor In which sense I conceive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is also to be taken Sirac c. 33. v. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Homo sensatus credet legi lex ei fidelis sicut sponsio vel stipulatio justorum A man of understanding will trust the Law and the Law will be Faithful unto him as the promise or covenant of the Just T is true It properly signifies rogatio but as rogatio legis among the Latins was used for legis latio and for the Law it self and rogare legem for legem ferre or statuere because it was the custom that the Magistrate when at any time a Law was to be enacted did ask the people Rogaret populum Velitis jubeatis ne Quirites hoc fieri Do you desire or will that this be a Law upon whose answer that they did the Law was publish't and this was called rogatio legis or the enacting of a Law so was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Greeks though properly it signifies rogatio for the same reasons taken for stipulatio or a covenant nay we have in our Holy-okes Etymological Dictionary rogare stipulari and surely the Law it self is nothing but a covenant I say for the same reasons for as Pomponius tells us Stipulatio was Verborum conceptio quibus is qui interrogatur dicturum facturumve se quod interrogatus est responderit A conception of words wherewith he that was asked did answer that he would say or do the thing which he was asked and that it took its name from the Interrogator as the worthier person was the opinion of Accursius and other Interpreters of the Law All which doth suit very well in our present case For in Ancient times when the Catechumeni who were to be Baptized were interrogated by the Priest whether they did believe in the Resurrection of the dead and the life to come upon their answer that they did the covenant was accepted and they were by him immediately Baptized in that Faith as you may see in Chrysostom and others the like custom whereunto is still retained in our Church when in time of Baptism to the question of the Minister Wilt thou be Baptized in this Faith the Sponsors or Sureties forthwith answer it is our desire And this I take to be the Apostles meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place I have insisted the longer on these words that I might more evidently shew that the proper end of Baptism is to represent the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ and our Faith in it and not properly a sign of washing from the filth of sin which the Apostle seems expresly in these words to deny though many think or at least speak otherwise C. 4. v. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By a familiar trajection In quo hospitantur blaspemantes non concurrentibus vobis in eandem luxuriae confusionem Wherein they abide continue or rest or lodge themselves blaspheming you not running together with them into the same excess of riot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hospitatur Act. c. 10. v. 6. V. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I suppose in this place to make the construction and the sense
agree you must understand the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a thing very frequent or resume the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the third verse altering onely the case And then render it For to this end was the Gospel preached to them that are dead that they may be condemned who were according to men in the flesh but that those who were according to God in the spirit may live Or thus that they may be condemned who walked after men in the flesh and they live who walked after God in the spirit ANNOTATIONS On the II. Ep. General Of S. Peter Ch. 1. v. 5. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ubique locus est accusativo si intelligas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a common rule Et hoc ipsum cum omni diligentia introducentes i. e. promoventes jungite invicem cum fide virtutem cum virtute scientiam c. And promoting this very thing to wit that ye may be partakers of the divine nature v. 4. with all diligence join hand in hand with your Faith virtue with your vertue knowledge with your knowledge temperance with your temperance patience with your patience godliness with your godliness brotherly kindness and with your brotherly kindness charity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is frequently put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I cannot but think that the Apostle in this place had some reflection on the Ancient customs of the Heathen when they lead their Chorus For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth properly signifie Chorum ducere or in Choro ducere To lead a Chorus or in a Chorus Now in their Chorus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were complicated together Steph. or as in Homer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They danced holding one anothers hands by the palm waiting each on other or Ministring each to other from whence this word seemeth to have obtained these several significations But behold here a goodly Chorus of Graces where Faith leads the Chorus and the rest of the Graces wait all upon her as it were mutually joyned by the hands and sustaining each the other And this sense I suppose may well fit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col. c. 2. v. 19. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. c. 4. v. 16. V. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quod omnis Prophetia Scripturae propria interpretatione non fit Thus the Interlineary and the Old Latin Interpreter That every Prophesie of Scripture is not fulfilled in the proper interpretation or that every Prophecy is not fulfilled in the proper interpretation of the writing or of what is written taking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Scriptio or Scriptum as it often is in humane Authors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phavor Though others think it more Grammatical to Translate it thus Quod omnis Prophetia Scripture propriae interpretationis non est That every Prophecy of Scripture is not of its proper interpretation But Translate it which way you will the sense is still the same all one as if he had said That every Prophecy was not accomplished according to the litteral that is the proper meaning of the Scripture For Prophesies have for the most part a typical mystical or analogical sense though some time some Prophesie hath a literal one as that concerning Josiah 1 King c. 13. v. 2. and some time a literal and mystical Isai c. 7. v. 14. and that of the Son of the Prophetess Isai c. 8. v. 3 4. As many of the Fathers do expound it And this sense doth fitly agree with the context v. 19. We have also a more sure word of Prophesie whereunto ye do well that ye take heed as unto a light that shineth in a dark place until the day dawn and the day star arise in your hearts What I beseech you is this light that shineth in a dark place but the Prophesies of Christ in the proper interpretation of the Scripture that is in the letter obscure and wrapped up in darkeness until the day star of the Gospel do manifest and declare the type and mystery in their hearts and therefore he tells them that they ought to know this chiefly and to take heed that they stuck not too much in the naked letter but that they should rather turn their minds to the meaning of the Prophecy to the mystery which was covered in the letter or written word For as it follows v. 21. Prophesie came not of old time by the will of man that is they did not Prophesie in old time of their own head according to their own will but holy men of God spake as they were inspired and acted by the holy spirit in figures riddles types and mysteries that those who saw 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the letter of the Scripture or the written word might not see 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the solution or interpretation of it unless to whom the day star of the Gospel was risen in their hearts ANNOTATIONS On the I. Ep. General Of S. John Ch. 2. v. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To words that are in themselves negative the Atticks add a negation whereof you may see Animad on 1 Tim. c. 4. v. 3. Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ he is Antichrist who denieth the Father and the Son Whosoever denieth the Son hath not the Father It is unseasonable and needless to add those words which follow in the English and are restored by them and Beza out of the Syriack and Latin copies they being wanting in the Greek To wit He that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also Which words are indeed altogether superfluous and serve to no use but rather destroy the sense For those words Who ever denieth the Son hath not the Father are a meer proof of the antecedent proposition That he is Antichrist who denieth the Father and the Son by an answer to a tacit objection As if if any should object I am not Antichrist for I do not Deny the Father and the Son for I acknowledge the Father it should be immediately replied Yea but thou art Antichrist whoever thou art and sayest so and deniest the Son for he who denieth the Son hath not the Father For every one that loveth him that begat loveth him that is begotten of him c. 5. v. 1. And he who honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father who sent him Joh. c. 5. v. 23. ANNOTATIONS ON The Revelation Ch. 2. v. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Behold I will cast her and those that commit fornication with her on the bed into great affliction This trajection is so familiar that I cannot but wonder that any should scruple at it Especially the common version being so insignificant The Alexandrian copy reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And I will cast her into prison but because its single I think we are not to acquiesce in it neither is the reading altogether so pleasing that I am much delighted with it C. 13. v. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If these words be understood of the Lamb which was slain from the foundation of the world as many think then are they to be understood of Christ exhibited in the type of the Lamb which from the beginning of the world was slain by Abel for a Sacrifice whereby he testified his Faith in Christ to come and offer'd himself a Sacrifice for the sins of the world But perhaps we may better say with the Greek Scholiast 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is an Hyperbaton as if we were to read Whose names are not written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that was slain As were theirs which did not worship the Dragon such as were in the Greek Scholiast 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All those that were Martyrs for their piety in the Old Testament as also Luke saith in his Gospel c. 10. v. 20. Rejoyce that your names are written in heaven And for confirmation of this Hyperbaton we read c. 17. v. 8. And they that dwell on the earth shall wonder 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whose names are not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world Where no mention at all is made of the Lamb that was slain Which is a kind of demonstration that the words are to be understood as they are before rendred according to the Scholiast FINIS