may be Object expounded thus God did actually purpose to sanctifie it after the giving of the Law If to sanctifie the seventh day be only Resp to purpose to sanctifie it then the Sabbath was no more sanctified since the creation then ab aeterno for then God purposed it should be sanctified c. For the further clearing of this truth I shall give you the Arguments of some learned persons why they conceive that the Sabbath was not instituted till the giving of the Law on mount Sinai Adam in innocency should not have Arg. 1 needed a Sabbath not his soul for every day was a Sabbath to that nor his body because his body was not then subject to wearinesse neither could it be appointed for the ease of servants because then no such thing as servitude in the world The Sabbath was instituted not for Resp 1 common rest or rest from natural wearinesse principally but for holy rest that the soul might have more immediate communion with God Returne to thy rest O my soule saith the Psalmist The rest of the soule is not a ceasing from all operation for that cannot stand with the nature of a spirit hence the soul is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an act because it is still in action a spirit cannot be and not act but when the soule centers on God then it is said to rest Bodies rest in their proper places and souls rest in the enjoying of their proper objects Now Adam in innocency thogh his body was not subject to wearinesse might stand in need of such a rest as this is Adam was to serve God in a particular calling God took the man put him into the garden of Eden that he might dresse it keep Gen. 2. 5. it now Luther professeth It followes from hence saith he that if Adam had stood in his innocency yet he should have kept the seventh day holy viz. on that day he should have taught his children what was the Word of God wherein his worship did consist and wholly have sequestred himself to his service on other days he should have dressed and kept the garden though every day was to be spent in holinesse mediately in seeing God in the creatures and meeting with God in his labour yet it was not unsuitable for that estate to have one day in the week for more immediate and special converse with God and though it was no paine to him to dresse the garden yet this must needs take up his thoughts while he was about it The Saints and Angels in Heaven have Object had no set Sabbath and why man in innocency The state of innocency on earth should Resp not have been in all things alike to the state of glory in heaven and particularly in this there should have been marriage dressing of the garden day and night in Paradise but no such thing in Heaven We do not read that there was any other Arg. 2 positive precept or law given to our first parents in the state of innocency but only this that they should not eat of the forbidden fruit Now the command of God for the observation of the Sabbath is a positive command and that appears because although the worship of God do belong to the Law natural viz. founded in the Law of nature yet the circumstance of time when God in an especial manner is to be worshipped that we should keep an holy rest unto the Lord every seventh day this is a positive precept and was never determined by the Law of nature That Adam had from the creation at Resp least that which amounted to a positive Law for the observance of the Sabbath is plaine It is said God sanctified the seventh day Now though this word is variously taken in the Scripture yet in this place the seventh day must be said to be sanctified one of these two wayes Either by infusion of holinesse or sanctification into it now the circumstance of a seventh day is not capable of sanctification in this sense only rational creatures Angels and men may be said thus to be sanctified By separation of it from common use and dedication of it to an holy use as the Temple and Tabernacle were which had no inherent holinesse in them Now if the Sabbath were thus sanctified it must either be for the use of God or man either God must impose upon himself the observation of every seventh day to keep it holy which is absurd or else it was dedicated and consecrated for mans sake and use and if so man had that which amounted to a positive Law for the observation of the Sabbath When Moses makes repetition of the Arg. 3 Law of God Deut. 5. 15. he laies downe this as a ground of the observation of the seventh day as a Sabbath the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt therefore the Sabbath was not instituted from the creation This that is urged is placed by God by Resp way of preface and motive as an argument for the observation of all the Commandments yet who will say that none of them were in force till the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt This was one reason why the Sabbath Resp 2 should be sanctified but not the only reason therefore Exod. 20. 6. the reason that is rendered there why the seventh day is the Sabbath is this for in six dayes the Lord made heaven and earth c. The Jewes were to observe the Sabbath not only upon the ground of its first institution but upon reasons proper and peculiar to that Nation It is likely their deliverance out of Egypt was on the Sabbath day and therefore urged by Moses as a ground of their observation of it We finde not any expresse mention Arg. 4 that the Patriarchs before Moses time did sanctifie a Sabbath We may as well argue it was not kept Resp all the time of the Judges and Samuel because no expresse mention made in those Books of any such thing No doubt but they observed it because Object it was published on mount Sinai The like may we say of the Patriarchs Resp 1 before the promulgation of the Law on mount Sinai because it was sanctified from the Creation Abraham is commended for keeping Gods Commandments and the Sabbath is one of Gen. 26.5 them We may as well argue that the Patriarchs for two thousand five hundred yeares together observed not any day at all for the worship and service of God for there is in Scripture as much mention of a Sabbath as any other day yea It is plaine in the Scripture that the Jewes did keep the Sabbath before the Law was given This is that which the Lord hath said To morrow is the rest of the holy Exo 16.23 Sabhath unto the Lord c. I might adde that it is not improbable but the sacrifices of Cain and Abel were upon the Sabbath-day the usual stated time for such services If a time had not beene set apart even in Adams
it be proved that women are to receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper but by consequence That any one particular Church is a true Church but by consequence that fasting daies and thanksgiving-daies may be observed upon occasion but by consequence And here you have the great vapour of the Anabaptists spending it selfe and coming to nothing viz. where do you finde it expressely said in any place of Scripture that infants are to be baptized if we have it by necessary consequence it is sufficient 25. Rule It is usuall for the Spirit of God to expresse both the duties and the priviledges of the people of God under the New Testament by phrases taken from the Oeconomy and Administration of the Old To instance 1. For the duties of the New Testament to offer sacrifice is a phrase proper to the administration under the Old Testament and yet this is pressed as a dutie under the New So Paul I beseech you therefore brethren Rom. i2 i. by the mercies of God that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice holy acceptable unto God which is our reasonable service 2. For the priviledges of the New Testament for instance It shall come to passe Esay 2.21 in the last dayes that the mountaine of the Lords house shall be established in the top of the mountaines and shall be exalted above the hils and al Nations shall flow unto it The meaning is not that there should be another temple raised like that at Jerusalem but it is to be expounded of the spreading of the Gospel New Testament-priviledges set out by an expression taken from an Old Testament-administration So I will poure Joel 2.28 29. out my Spirit upon all flesh and your sonnes and your daughters shall prophesy your old men shall dreame dreames your young men shall see visions The meaning of this Scripture is not that God in the time of the Gospel would discover himselfe unto his people by dreames and visions but that God would give a greater measure of light and bestow a greater measure of his Spirit on those that should live under the Gospel then those that lived under the Law and that this is the meaning of it is cleare by the Apostle Peters quotation of it Acts 2.17 26. Rule When the Scripture makes mention of â—lthy actions either naturall or sinâ—ull it expresses them in comley termes 1. When it speakes of naturall actions as Judg. 3.24 't is said of Ehud that he covered his feet in the Summer-chamber Judg. 3.24 viz. he was easing of nature for they had long coates which covered their feet when they eased nature 2. When it speakes of sinful uncleannesse So stollen waters are sweet viz. adultery is sweet So see how incest is described saith Jacob to Reuben Thou wentest up to thy Gen. 49 4â— fathers bed And yet this is very observable that the Scripture when it speakes of Idolatry and spirituall whoredome maketh use of plain termes marke how the phrase is altered when God speakes of Idolatry Thou hast Ezek. 16. 2â— built thy high place at every head of the way and hast made thy beauty to be abhorred and hast opened thy feet to every one that passeth by and multiplied thy whoredomes A Learned Author gives this account of it Idolatry is such a subtill thing that we are not sensible of its defilement as we are of bodily whoredome and therefore the Lord expresses it in plain termes that we may hate it the more 27. Rule The circumstance of time with relation to the person or thing that is spoken of in the Scripture must heedfully be observed Hence was that saying of Augustine Distribue tempora concordabit Scriptura Distinguish concerning the time and then Scriptures will agree For instance we read concerning Jotham the Son of Vâ—â—iah 2 King 15 33 that he reigned sixteene yeares in Jerusalem and yet in the same Chapter mention is made of the twentieth yeare of Jotham now distribue tempora concordabit Scriptura 2 King 15. 30 distinguish concerning the time and you will reconcile these Scriptures For Jotham reigned alone onely sixteene yeares but he reigned with his Father Vâ—â—iah who being smitten with Leprosy could not manage the affaires of the Kingdome foure yeares in all twenty yeares 28. Rule We are to consider in the perusall of Scripture what speeches are proper and what speeches are figurative The Scriptures have a proper and literall sense and they have an allegoricall and figurative sense Now it is a dangerous thing when the words are properly to be taken to understand them figuratively or to take them figuratively when they are to be understood properly For instance 1. 'T is dangerous to understand those places of Scripture properly which are to be taken figuratively as in the Prophet Malachi Behold I will send you Elijah the Prophet before the coming of the great and Mal. 4.5 dreadfull day of the Lord. The Jewes expound this properly of Elias Tishbites when the Prophet meant them figuratively of John the Baptist who came with the gifts of Elias for so you have John called But I say unto you â—aith our Saviour unto his disciples that Elias is come already and Mat. 17. 12 13. they knew him not but have done unto him whatsoever they listed c. Then the Disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist Another instance you have Beware of the Leaven of the Pharisees Mat. 16.6 The Disciples understood it properly when Christ meant figuratively So Except a man be borne againe he cannot enter into Joh. 3.3 the Kingdome of God That which Christ meant figuratively of regeneration Nicodemus understands literally 2. 'T is dangerous to understand those places figuratively which should be taken properly thus the Familists turne all the history of Christ into an Allegory Heaven and Hell into an allegory and without repentance their salvation also Such an one was he who reading that place of Scripture where it is said of Judas that having received the sop he went immediately out erat nox and it was night puts both together as spoken of Judas He saith he was the night that went out as Christ was the Sun that gave knowledge to his Disciples who were day So Judas was the night who gave knowledge to the Jewes who were darknesse A senselesse conceit but I mention it to shew you the danger of allegorizing the Scriptures Origen was very faulty this way in turning all Scripture almost into an allegory And it is observable that he who was so much for allegories understood that literally which was to be taken mystically There are some Eunuchs which were so borne Mat. 19.12 from their mothers wombe and there are Eunuchs which were made so of men and there be Eunuchs which have made themselves Eunuchs for the Kingdome of heavens sake And truly I think there was the finger of God plainly to be seene in this providence his punishment
dayes for Divine service how improbable is it that Cain and Abel should concurre at the same time in bringing their offerings unto the Lord and if not at the same time how could Cain discerne that Abels offering was respected and accepted of God when his was Gen. 4.3 not and besides it is said In processe of time it came to passe that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord. In the processe of time or at the end of days as it is in the margin of your Bibles and as the original will bear it viz. on the Sabbath-day when there is an end of the dayes of the week and they begin again I might adde that it is not improbable but that Noah and his family kept the Sabbath in the Ark for it is said that he stayed Gen. 8. 10 12. other seven dayes and sent forth the Dove out of the Ark and verse 12. He stayed other seven dayes and sent forth the Dove why did Noah this on the seventh day It was likely that then Noah and his family were at prayer and engaged in the worship and service of God and at such times it is good to make experiments of Gods fatherly care of us and providence over us Quest. 3. verse 4. In the first Chapter it is said that God made the heavens and the earth in six dayes and in this verse it is said These are the generations of the heaven and the earth in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens From this place some would gather that Resp 1 all the world was made in one day and that Moses doth divide the creation into six dayes propter captum that it might be the better understood Others conceive that Moses relates to that first matter or substance of which all things were created now this was made in one day Others think with whom I close that Moses doth not speak strictly here but indefinitely in the day the Lord made the earth that is to say in the time the Lord made the earth so it is taken in other places of Scripture To day if you will hear Psal 95.7 his voice c. Quest. 4. verse 5. How God could be said to create every plant of the field before it was in the earth Either the meaning is that they were Resp 1 created potentialiter in the first masse and so created before they were in the earth Or else the meaning is this God created every plant of the field before it was in the earth viz. there was not a plant in the earth before God created it Quest 5. verse 7. It is said God formed man of the dust of the earth How can man be said to be made of dust or earth when he is made of the four elements earth fire aire water Moses saies God formed man of the dust Resp 1 of the earth but not only of the dust of the earth Moses loquitur de terra ut de causa partiali non totali Moses speaks of the dust but as part of that matter of which man was made But he expresses the one and therefore Object by consequence denies the other This is just as if a man by calling one his Resp fathers sonne should deny him to be his mothers Quest 6. verse 7. Why doth the Lord speak distinctly in this verse concerning mans body and soul We shall finde God speaks of other creatures in the bulk body and soul together Let the waters bring forth abandantly the moving creature that hath life and so verse Gen. 1. 20 24 24. Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kinde c. To note the spirituality and immateriality Resp 1 of the soul the soul of man non educitur ex potentiâ materiae as the Learned phrase it but the body was made of one kind of substance and the soul of another for Consider 1. The condition and nature of its object speaks this truth Seneca could say Hoc habet argumentum anima suae divinitatis quòd illam divina delectant This argument of its spirituality hath the soul of man in its own essence that it is delighted with things divine and spiritual If the soul were material we could not reach to the knowledge of any thing but that which is material and we might as well see Angels with our eyes as understand them with our mindes We say Receptio fit per modum recipientis you cannot fill a chest with vertue 2. It s independence on the body it is able of it self to performe its own actions without the help and concurrence of the outward man It seeth when the eys beshut and sometimes seeth not when the eyes be open It travelleth while the body resteth resteth when the body travelleth Rev. 1. 10. When John saw his glorious revelation he is said to be in the spirit when Paul had his revelations and saw things unutterable he knew not whether he were in the body or out of the body for beleevers to know that there are laid up for the Saints such joyes which eye hath not seene nor eare heard what is this but to leave sense behinde us and out-run our bodies 3. Time that wears out all corporeal things addes perfection to the souls and understandings of men old men who have the weakest bodies have the most lively and vigorous souls yea we may observe that men who have the most admirable soul-accomplishments have usually the weakest bodies and are not of the longest lives 'T is a remarkable passage that of Saint John to Gaius I wish saith he that thy body prospered even as thy soul prospers Here is a clear text against the Atheists of these dayes that question whether there be a soul or not the truth is a man cannot doubt of it without it as a man cannot prove Logick to be unnecessary but by Logick as a man cannot say he is dumb without speaking Quest 7. verse 7. In what sense these words are to be understood He breathed into his face the breath of life for the Manichees from hence held that the soul was part of Gods Essence as the breath is part of a mans substance It is true in mans breath there is part of Resp his substance but these words are not spoken of God properly but metaphorically if Moses should have said Jehovah by the power of his Spirit without making use of any elementary matter breathed into man a vital soul An horrid blasphemy to think the Essence of God should be subject to change ignorance sinne c. as the soul is Quest. 8. verse 7. Why is God said to breath into his nostrils or face the breath of life rather then into any other part of the body Because the operations of the soul discover themselves in no part of the body Resp 1 more then in the face hence a living man is usually pictured smiling or reading c. And besides the face and head
sense of it The Lord speaketh those words Ironically Resp as before Quest 14. verse 15. It is said God put the man into the garden of Eden to dresse it and yet afterwards it is pronounced as a curse In the sweat of thy face thou shalt eate thy bread Gen. 3.16 Man should have laboured if he had continued Resp in his first estate but those irksome concomitants of labour paine sweat wearisomeness spending of the strength and spirits are the product of sinne Quest 15. verse 16 17. Here the Lord gives a Law to man Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eate but of the tree of the knowledge of good ond evil thou shalt not eate and yet the Apostle saies The Law is not made for the 1 Tim. 1.9 righteous The Law is not made to the righteous Resp 1 person so as he should be under the vindicative or punishing part of it he continuing in his righteousnesse and in this sense it may be applied to man in innocency man in innocency might be under the directive part of the Law though not under the vindicative part of it The Apostle speaks of Gospel-times when man was in another state his meaning is the law is not made to the beleever so as he should abide under the cursing condemning power of it the godly are under the desert of the curse of the Law but not the actual curse and condemnation thereof nor doth it follow as a Reverend Author very well observes that there is no Law because it doth not curse It is a good rule in Divinity A remotione actûs secundi in subjecto impediti non valet argumentum ad remotionem actûs primi From the removal of an act or operation the argument doth not hold to the removing of the thing it self As it doth not follow The fire did not burne the three Worthies therefore there was no fire God did hinder the act And if that could be in natural agents which work naturally how much rather in moral such as the Law is of condemnation which works according to the appointment of God Quest 16. verse 16 17. Why would God give man a positive 〈…〉 â—esides that natural Law that was 〈…〉 his heart 〈…〉 thereby Gods dominion and powâ—◠〈◊〉 man might be the more acknowâ—â—â—ged man might have submitted to the â—oral Law of God not so much in order â—o the command as because it was suitable to that principle which was within him for the Moral Law at first was written in mans heart Even as the Heathens do abstaine from many sinnes not because forbidden by God but as dissonant to their natural reason therefore God gives him a positive Law Ut nulla alia causa esset obedientiae nisi obedientia So that the forbidding to eat was not from any sinne in the action but from the will of the Law-giver As if a man forbid another to touch such an herb because it is poison this herb is contrary to a mans health whether it be forbidden or not and therefore he may abstaine from it not because of the command but because it is contrary to his health but to forbid the eating of something that is wholsome to the body and delightful to the taste here indeed is a triall of obedience Quest 17. verse 16 17. Whether sensitive creatures be capable of being under the obligation of a Law Neg. Inter bruta silent Leges for Resp 1. There can be no satisfaction to justice in inflicting an evil upon them no satisfaction to be had from such things as are not apprehensive of punishment Seneca Quà m stultum est his irasci quae iram nostram nec meruerunt nec sentiunt 2. A punishment inflicted upon them hath no power to mend brutes or to give an example to others amongst them 3. Nec turpe nec honestum among them no duty nor obedience to be expected from them no praise nor dispraise due to them no punishment nor reward to be distributed among them Levit. 20. 15. I a man lie with a beast Object he shall surely be put to death and ye shall slay the beast The meaning of that place is not this Resp that the beast was guilty of a crime or had violated a Law and therefore was to be condemned and put to death but it was in order to the happinesse and welfare of man bestia cum homine concumbens was to be stoned 1. Because it was the occasion of so foul a fact and so fatall punishment unto man 2. That the sight and presence of the object might not repeat so prodigious a crime in the thoughts of men Exo. 21. 28. If an Oxe gore a man or a Object woman that they dye then the Oxe shall be stoned This was ad poenam exigendam à domino Resp the putting of that to death was a punishment to the owner for not looking to it better Quest 18. verse 17. It is said In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye what is meant by death in that place Spirituall temporal eternal death 1. Spiritual death this is comprehended Resp in the very nature of sinne spiritual death is nothing else but a separation of God from the soule now the nearer the correspondence is between the soule and sinne the further the distance is between the soul and God 2. Temporal death for so the Spirit of God expounds his meaning afterwards In the Gen. 3.19 sweat of thy browes shalt thou eat thy bread dusl thou art and to dust shalt thou returne 3. Eternall death this is cleared by the Apostle Paul when he saies The wages of sinne is death and that he principally Rom 6.23 intends eternall death in that place is clear by the life to which it is opposed The gift of God is eternall life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Quest 19. verse 17. Whether Adam was created mortal or Whether Adam was mortall before his eating of the forbidden fruit Neg. As appears by the threat pronounced Resp against him In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death 'T is said of God Who onely hath immortality Object 1 Tim. 6.16 A thing may be said to be immortall severall Resp wayes 1. Simply and independently immortall omni modo in every respect and so is that Scripture to be understood Who onely hath immortality 2. Immortal secundùm substantiam in regard of its substance there are some beings that are segregated from matter and corporeity and are not è potentiâ Materiae Educti as the Learned phrase it as Angels and rationall soules now these though they are not immortall simply and independently yet they are so as I may phrase it substantially 3. Immortal by the power and mercy of God or immortal by the power and justice of God the power and justice of God given immortality to the bodies of the damned in hel and the power and goodnes of God gives immortality to the bodies of the Saints in
in a grosse and heinous sin without having the least intimation of it from God which will be hard to affirme especially if you consider how David one of these holy men delighted in the Law of God and that it was his meditation day and night We do not read that any of the Prophets Argu. 2 whom God sent on purpose to tell his people of their sinnes gave them the least notice concerning the sin of having more wives then one Neither do ye read that Lat was reproved Object for his incest We may easily gather from the text that Resp it was known in those dayes that that kind of incest was a sin for else why did Lots Daughters make their father drunk and if Lot knew it to be a sinne we cannot from thence conclude the Patriarchs knew Polygamy to be so Jacob married two sisters and yet we Object do not read God reproved him for it The hand of God was upon Jacob for a Resp 1 considerable part of his life you know his complaint Few and evil are the dayes of the yeares of my pilgrimage A particular person possibly may commit a grosse sin ignorantly and dye without the knowledge of it but it is hard to say the same of the whole Church of God If having more wives then one were a sin to the Patriarchs then all their wives but one were harlots and all their children almost base borne which assertion sounds so harshly that a man can take little pleasure in the entertaining of it Thus I have given you the severall judgements of learned men concerning this point I shall now give you my own sense of it with submission to others in severall Propositions 1. Prop. That we finde not in the whole book of God at least in expresse words that God dispensed with his Law against plurality of wives as to the Patriarchs and whether or no it can be proved by consequence will appeare afterwards 2. Prap. That I conceive there can no reason be rendred why the Lord should be pleased with the Patriarchs having more wives then one but the same may be urged à fortiori why it should be so from the beginning God created but one man and one woman he could have created more but it did not please him so to do 3. Prop. That text in Malachi is worthy our consideration in this case where you have the Lord reproving his people thus Because Mal. 2. 14 15 16 the Lord hath been witnesse between thee and the wife of thy youth against whom thou hast dealt treacherously yet she is thy companion and the wife of thy covenant And did he not make one Yet had he the residue of the spirit and wherefore one That he might seek a godly seed therefore take heed to your spirit and let none deale treacherously against the wife of his youth for the Lord the God of Israel saith he hateth putting away c. I know the Lord urges this against a mans putting away his wife but marke from whence he takes his rise viz. from the primitive institution of marriage and God argues à fortiori If the Lord was pleased that one man should have but one wife at first and made a law to that end and purpose and if a man deales treacherously against his wife by marrying another though he lives with them both how treacherously hast thou dealt with the wife of thy youth in putting her away from thee you may be sure the Lord hates putting away 4. Prop. That that text of Scripture where God reckons it as a mercy that he gave David 2 Sam. 12. 7 8. his Masters wives into his bosome must not so be expounded as if it were a mercy in it self to have many wives but in regard of the concomitants of it I gave thee thy Masters wives into thy bosome viz. I gave thee the Kingdome For it was a custome among the Jews when a King died and another succeeded in his stead for the successor to have the deceased Kings wives which was the reason why Solomon was so exceedingly incensed against Adonijah for moving to have Abishag to wife because she accompanied David as his wife and it was the same as if he should aske the Crown and so by consequence was guilty of treason for marke what Solomon saith And King Solomon answered and said unto his Mother And 1 King 2. 22. why doest thou aske Abishag the Shunamite for Adonijah aske for him the Kingdome also There were two reasons why Achitophel perswaded Absalom to lie with his fathers wives on the house top in the sight of all Israel 1. That he might engage him into the commission of such a crime that David neither in honour nor justice could passe by and by consequence that himselfe and his party might not be brought to condigne punishment which might come to passe by a close between David and Absalom 2. Because by this act he did virtually proclaime himselfe King to all Israel And therefore by the way I crave leave to demurre to the two answers given by learned men to this argument urged formerly For the first 't is true this phrase of giving into a mans bosome doth not alwayes in Scripture signifie a marriage-union but for all that hath yet been said it may signifie so if the phrase will beare it and so it is in this case For the second Though the Law of God might be against marriage with Mothers in Law yet this might lye hid to the Patriarchs it being onely deducible by consequence and not expressely interminis in the text 5. Prop. That the holy Patriarchs might live and dye in the continuall practice of this sinne and yet be saved because known sins require particular repentance but if sinnes be unknown or unconsidered by reason that men are carried away with the sway of the times as the Patriarchs were then a generall repentance sufficeth as David Who can understand his errours cleans thou me from secret faults Psa 19.12 6. Prop. That which is a grosse sin under the Gospel when God hath clearly revealed unto us his minde in this Case might be a sinne of a lesser size under the Law yea even under the dispensation of the Gospel that which was an Errour of Infirmity in the time of the Apostles at the first promulgation of it viz. that the Messiah should not suffer death is now after a more full and clear discovery of the minde of God a most grosse and horrid blasphemy 7. Prop. That although the holy Patriarchs knew that there was such a Law that a man should leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife and they shall be one flesh yet it might not be cleare that the sense and meaning of that Law was that one man should have but one wife 8. Prop. That Polygamy under the Law being nothing near so heinous a sin as Polygamy under the Gospel the inconveniences following thereupon were not so great then
unto me all ye that are weary heavy-laden c. He told â—e that coming to Christ was before weary and heavy-laden Whereas if he had read but his Grammar he might have known that though coming to Christ go before being weary and heavy-laden in order of words yet weary and heavy-laden go in construction and in order of sense So it is said there of the Gentiles that As Act. 13 48 many as were or dained to eternall life believed Some tell us the words should be rendered thus As many as were addicted to eternall life beleeved viz. as many as were addicted and disposed heaven-ward afterwards beleeved whereas the words in the Original run thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And they beleeved as many of them as were ordained to eternall life that word which is placed in the last place in our English Bibles which I suppose might be one occasion of the mistake is placed in the fiâ—st in the Greek 5. Rule In the interpreting of Scriptures we must observe who it is that speaks whether a Prophet or one of a more private capacity if it be a Prophet whether he speakes in his owne person or in anothers If he speakes in the person of another we must observe whether he speaks in the person of God or man or of a good man or a wicked man These things must carefully be heeded if you would understand the Scriptures for instance Solomon personates the Atheist That which befalleth the sonnes of men befalleth Eccl. 3.19 beasts even one thing befalleth them as the one dieth so dieth the other yea they have all one breath so that a man hath no preeminence above a â—east and whereas the Atheist heard some speak of the ascent of mans spirit he replies Who knoweth the spirit of a ver 21. man that goeth upward viz. Who can tell there is such a difference between a man and a beast This is not known onely talked of and guessed A learned Author enlarges himselfe on this Scripture thus Is it not strange saith he that any of those who are called sober Christians should plant their opinion in this soyle of Atheisme and make that a proofe of their faith which Solomon onely brings as a proof of some mens infidelity there is no more reason to ground the tenet of the soules mortality on this text then there is encouragement unto intemperancy from that Rejoyce Oh young man in thy youth c. Eccl. 11.9 6. Rule The Scripture is the word of truth and yet every thing that is writen in the Scriptures considered without reference to the context or the person that speaks is not truth hence is that rule made use of by Divines in this case Scripturae narratio quamvis verissima sit non tamen omnia quae ibi dicta sunt vera esse dicuntur for instance He casteth out Divels through Beelzebub the Luk. 11.15 chief of Divels The words in themselves considered are blasphemous and false and yet the Scriptâ—ral narration of them is true 7. Rule In the expounding of Scripture we are not so much to respect from whence words are deâ—ived as how they are used this Axiom is out of Aquinas the School-men Verbis non tam spectandum ex quo â—uà m ad quid sumantur as we see the branches of trees spread much further then their roots so derivative words are often of larger extent of signification then their primitives as for instance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a sound or an echo but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to Catechize or to iâ—struct in the principles of religion That thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been iâ—structed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 1.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth tingo to dip or plunge into the water yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is frequently if not alwayes taken more largely for anâ— kind of washing rinsing or cleansing where there is no dipping at all the Apostles were baptized with fire yet they were not dipt into it tables beds are said in the originall to be baptized viz. washed not dipt the Israelites in the wildernesse were baptized with the cloud yet not dipt into it the children of Zebedee were to be baptized with the Baptisme of blood wherewith our Saviour was baptized yet neither he nor they were dipt into blood so the Ancients speake of the Baptisme of tears wherewith all penitents are washed yet there is no dipping in such a Bâ—ptisme 8. Rule We must not only take notice of those phrases or words which are made use of by the Spirit of God in the Scrâ—ptures but also in what respect those phrases or words are made use of in that particular text which we desire to understand for instance it is said This is life eternall that they might know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent If the Father be Joh. 17.3 the only true God how then is the Son or the Holy Ghost God For the answering of this difficulty we must consider upon what account Christ calleth God Father in this place we must know therefore that verse 1. though he â—seth the word Father yet Father is nor there taken for the first person in the Trinity but as a common attribute of the Deity so it is elsewhere taken our Saviour in his Prayer teacheth us Mat. 6.9 to say Our Father so V. 14. If ye forgive men their trespasses your heavenly Father will also forgive you according to which interpretation this text is parallel to that of the Apostle There is one God and one Mediatour betwixt God and man the man Christ 1 Tim. 2.5 Jesus So in John it is said The Spirit of truth which proceedeth from the Father he shall testifie Joh. 15.26 of me Now if this rule be not observed here will arise a difficulty if the Spirit proceed from the Father onely how doth he proceed from the Father and the Son We must consider therefore upon what account the Spirit is said to proceed from the Father in the place above alledged viz. because he proceedeth from the Father originally not because he proceedeth from the Father only elsewhere he is called the Spirit of the Son And because ye are sonnes God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into Gal. 4.6 your hearts crying Abba Father 9. Rule In the time of St. Paul the Iewish ceremonies were things indifferent which might be used or not used as they saw-it tend to Gods Glory and the good of the Church now this is profitable to know for the understanding of the History of the Acts where we shall finde Paul using Circumcision and yet writeth against it in his Epistles There are three things observable as to the use of Ceremonies 1. Before the death of Christ the use of Ceremonies was not indifferent but necessary as being commanded of God 2.
was like his sin As the taking of literall Scriptures in a figurative sense was his sin so the taking of a figurative in a literall was his punishment But you may aske me when the Quest litterall sense is to be left When it is repugnant to the analogy of Resp faith or that systeeme of Divinity which is evidently grounded upon the Word of God For instance when it is said Every branch in me that beareth not frait we Joh. 15.2 must not interpret the branches that beare not fruit to be really in Christ as parts of his mysticall body because this is against the Analogy of faith we know that no branch which is truely engraffed into Christ can ever be taken away and therefore we must understand the phrase of such as are in Christ visiblâ—â— as members not of his true body but of his visible Church The Inchanters Rods are related to be turned into Serpents now they must be interpreted to seeme so rather then to be so because the literall interpretation is against the analogy of faith the changing of the natures of creatures being beyond the sphere of the activity of the devils power So when we are commanded to pluck out our right eye and cut off our right hand if they offend us this cannot be expounded literally because it is against the analogy of faith God hath expressely commanded Thou shalt not kill 29. Rule Although the proffer of salvation in the Scripture be conditionall yet is neither the decree of God nor the purchase of Christ relating thereunto conditionall The Lord Jesus did not redeeme us if we did beleeve but that we might beleeve there is a condition in the things proffered but none in the will of God Gods offering salvation upon condition of beleeving doth onely note that faith is a meanes tending thereunto In like manner Gods promises are not for the forme of them to be compared with his purposes or intentions that which is performed upon a condition is not intended upon a condition so to be performed God absolutely intended to make his elect to beleeve and to save them their beliefe is but a condition to their salvation not to Gods intention which is absolute For the further clearing of this consider that the voluntas signi may be conditionall and the voluntas beneplaciti may be absolute and yet there may be a sweet Harmony between them To this purpose observe that a conditionall proposition having such a condition annexed to it as will certainly and infallibly be effected is equivalent to an absolute affirmative categoricall proposition As if a man sayes he will take a journey to morrow if he be able and knowes certainly he shall be able this is eqâ—ivalent to an absolute affirmative categoricall proposition that he will absolutely go So on the contrary if a proposition be conditionall and hath a condition annexed to it which is impossible and shall never be effected this is equivalent to an absolute categoricall negative proposition when Reprobâ—tes are told if they beleeve they shall be saved it is equivalent to this proposition they shall not be saved because they shall not beleeve So that the outward tender though conditionall may answer to an absolute decree the render it selfe being equivalently absolute 30. Rule The Scripture sometimes speakes of a thing as absolutely and infallibly coming to passe by vertue of Gods ordination and yet the same thing may be in its owne nature contingent For instance it was prophesied concerning Christ that not a bone of him should be broken now Christs legs were not broken not because in themselves considered they could not be broken but because Gods decree could not be broken they were capable of being broken and yeâ— not capable capable in respect of themselves incapable in regard of Gods decree When there is a non-essentiall connexion between things we say there is contingency when there is an essentiall connexion there we say there is necessity For instance â—ationality and risibility are necessary to a man because a man cannot be a man but he must have a power both to reason and laugh they do ingredi essentiam but that a man doth exercise his reason or not exercise it that a man doth laugh or not laugh is contingent the power is necessary but the act is contingent Christs legs in respect of themselves were as apt to be broken as the malefactours therefore the not breaking of them was contingent as to the souldiers though coming to passe necessarily as to Gods decree Contingent things are nothing the lesse contingent for some kinde of extrinsecal necessity 31. Rule Negations in Scripture must be read with these cautions 1. Sometimes they deny not simply but onely in comparison I will have mercy Mat. 9.13 and not sacrifice that is I will have mercy rather then sacrifice So When thou makest a dinner or a supper call not thy friends Luk. 14.12 13. nor thy brethren neither thy kinsmen nor thy rich neighbours c. But when thou makest a feast call the poore the maimed the lame the blind Bid not your brethren but the poore that is the poore rather then your brethren 2. Sometimes negatives deny onely according to the conceit and opinion of the hearers So God is not the God of the dead but of the living He is not the God Ma. 22.32 of the dead that is of such dead whom the Sadduces thought dead who should never rise againe for Christ spake this to the Sadduces who denyed the resurrection as appeares by the context So Jesus said Joh. 7.16 My doctrine is not mine but his that sent me Is not mine that is as you take me to be a meere man 32. Rule The truth of an Hypotheticall Proposition doth not depend upon the truth of the two Propositions the Antecedent and the consequent but upon the necessary connexion viz. The Antecedent and consequent of an Hypotheticall Proposition may be true and yet the Proposition may be false it selfe and è contrà the Antecedent and consequent of an Hypotheticall Proposition may be false and yet the Proposition may be true it selfe For instance If Isaac were Abrahams Son then he were truly good both parts considered apart are true yet the Proposition it selfe is false because there is no necessary connexion between the Antecedent and the Consequent If a man be irrational he is a beast both parts are false yet the Proposition true Paul sayes to the Centurion and to the Souldiers Except these abide in the Ship ye cannot be saved both parts are false Act. 27.31 either that the Ship-men should not abide in the Ship or that any man in the Ship should not be saved God having before determined that there should be no losse of any mans life among them so saith Paul I exhort you to be of good chear for there shall be no losse of any mans life among you but of the Ver. 22 Ship yet the connexion is true
is the seat of all the senses except the touch which indeed is spread all over the body so that the principal part of the body is put here for the whole God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life viz. into his body the breath of life Because life seemes to be seated in the nostrils Nares Externum Respirationis organum breath the necessary consequent of life hence God is said to breath into his nostrils because it is the part by which we breath and live Quest 9. verse 8. Why the Lord planted the Garden of Eden for the use of man when he knew that man would not continue in his primitive state and so by consequence be cast out of Paradise God would deale with man not according Resp 1 to his own foreknowledge of what he would be but according to that state he was in for the present God placed him in Paradise that he might know by woful experience of how much good he was deprived by transgressing of the command of God Gods dispensation herein towards man was like that other dispensation of his towards the Devils they were first placed in heaven though God knew that afterwards for their sinne they should be cast out of heaven Quest 10. verse 8. It is said That there viz. in Paradice God put the man whom he had formed Now the question is whether there were any other creatures in Paradise besides man Affir For these Reasons Resp 1. Because man while he was in Paradise had dominion over all the creatures 2. If Eve had neither seen the Serpent nor any other creature before the temptation it is likely she would have been startled with the sight of the Serpent and not easily have treated with it 3. If the beasts had not been in Paradise man would have been deprived of that great pleasure that he might be partaker of from the sight of the variety of creatures over which he had dominion 4. Because man gave names to the creatures in Paradise verse 20. Quest. 11. verse 9. Why one of the trees that was planted by God in the midst of Paradise was called the tree of life Some conceive that it was called so effectivè Resp 1 because the fruit of it had a special quality and efficacie with it to preserve Adam immortal Others conceive with whom I rather close that it was called so significative because it was a sacramental signe annexed to the Covenant of works assuring life and immortality upon condition of perfect obedience But it seemes that the fruit of the tree Object of life should have made man immortal for it is said And the Lord said Behold the man is become like one of us to know good and evil Gen. 3.22 now lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life therefore the Lord sent him forth from the garden of Eden c. I suppose this is an Ironical expression Resp as when the Lord said Behold the man is become like one of us to know good and evil this was spoken ironically and the meaning was they were become most unlike him so in these words ironically he upbraids him after the same manner Lest saith the Lord he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat and live for ever not that there was any danger of his living for ever but in derision of any such hope or expectation Quest 12. verse 9. Whether the tree of life in Paradise was a type of Christ Neg. For the clearing of this consider Resp 1. That we should be very wary of Allegorizing any part of the Scriptures The Libertines of our times are so daring as to turne all the Scriptures into an Allegory as the Gnosticks of old made abstinence from adultery forbidden in the seventh Commandment a type of our spiritual chastity it is the designe of some frothy wits to typisie and allegorize Gods Commandments out of the Law and his truths out of the Gospel 2. That it is an unwary Assertion that the tree of life in Paradise was a type of Christ although the tree of life and sundry other things in Paradise are made similitudes to set forth Jesus Christ yet it is agross mistake to make every metaphor or similitude and allusion to be a type The Husbandmans sowing of the seed is a similitude of preaching the Word yet it is no type of it The head the members of mans body are similitudes of Christ the head and the Church his members but will any affirme these were types of Christ Just thus was the tree of life a similitude to which the holy Ghost alludes in making mention of Christ but not a type and the reason is because the Covenant of works by which Adam was to live is directly contrary to the Covenant of grace by faith in Christ Adam therefore was not capable of any types then to reveale Christ to him of whom the first Covenant cannot speak and of whom Adam stood in no need But though Adam stood in no need of Object Christ as a Redeemer yet as a Confirmer of him in that state and why may we not conceive That if Adam had not sinned Christ should have beene incarnate and that then he should have beene head of mankinde as now the head of Angels and if so the tree of life might be a type of Christ If the tree of life was a type of mans Resp 1 Confirmation by Christ then there would have beene a type of Christ which never should have beene fulfilled I conceive it a dangerous assertion to say Christ would have beene incarnated if Adam had not sinned because the Scripture nameth this to be the principal end of Christs coming into the world to save that which was lost Ultra Scripturam sapere est insanire May not a man say the tree of life was a type of Christ by Anticipation Object This is as much as to say it was not a type Resp then which is the thing we contend for Quest 13. verse 9. Why was the other tree called the tree of knowledge of good and evil Not Effectivè because the fruit thereof Resp 1 had any such quality or vertue that being eaten it would work and encrease knowledge or quicknesse of wit indeed the Socinians border upon this opinion and they say Adam and Eve were created simple and weak in knowledge and that this tree was to beget it and encrease it But significativè because it was another sacramental sign annexed to the Covenant of works sealing death and damnation in case of disobedience and it did signifie that upon the eating thereof they should experimentally know good and evil viz. the worth of good by the want of it and the presence of evil by the sense of it But it is said Man is become like one of Object us knowing good and evil now God cannot be said to know the worth of good by the want of it or the presence of evil by the