HONORATISSIMO CELEBERRIMOQUE VIRO, PROSAPIA NOBILISSIMA SIMVL ET SVIS ILLUSTRI MERITIS,  
IN PARLIAMENTARIO REGNI ANGLICANI CONSESSV SENATORI EXIMIO,  
MECAENATI SVO NATIVO, SED CONSILIO CONSVETUDINEQVE CONFIRMATIORI,  
CERTE MULTIS NOMINIBUS PLURIMUM NEC VNQUAM SATIS OBSERVANDO,  
GULIELMO PIERREPONTE ARMIGERO;  
(CUJUS BENEFICIA RELIGIOSO QUODAM SILENTIO SUSPICERE AC REVERERI, QUAM PROTERERE PROFANAREQUE SERMONE NIMIS INCONGRVO SATIUS EST VISUM,)  
TRACTATUS DUOS SEQUENTES (QUORUM ALTER PRIORIS SOBOLES EST ET APPENDIX,)  
ANIMI SUI JUXT A AFQUE OFFICII, SED IMPAR UTRIUSQUE SYMBOLUM, L.M.D.D.C.Q.  
Laurentius Sarson.   

¶ To the Reader.  
The less skilful Reader may omit what is contained between page 25. and page 69. The rest was delivered in Sermons, and is both more practical and facile.   
1. TIM. 1.15. 
This is a faithful saying (in another translation, a true saying) and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief.  
WE may observe in this Scripture three general parts: First, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Preface, or introduction to a doctrine preached by S. Paul, This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation. Secondly, the doctrine itself, Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners: I may fitly apply to my Text, what is spoken of the Church, Cant. 7.2. Thy belly is a heap of wheat hedged in with lilies. Thirdly, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Epilogue, whereof I am chief. The Preface contains his commendation of the doctrine, and the Epilogue the application of it to himself. Here's meat, and sauce, and a stomach. We have in the doctrine 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Clem. Alex. Admonit. ad Gentes.  spiritual food, the bread of life, the Manna which came down from heaven, Christ's merits, sinner's redemption. Here's meat which should need no sauce were not our stomaches vitiated, and squeamish of what most nutritive.  
S. Paul in the end of the verse intimateth his hungering and thirsting after Christ's merits; For those words, of whom I am chief, although they have other respects and moments not to be omitted, are the yawning or gasping of an hungry soul, a groan under the weight of sin, a panting after nearer union with Christ. Such is the stomach of each Christian, of all who are apprehensive of their own emptiness, and affected with it, of all who have not scared consciences, hardened hearts, and stupefied affections. These words are likewise an application of Christ's merits to himself, Christ came into the world to save sinners; such only efficaciously, as are, or shall be wearied with their sins, and weary of them: such as acknowledge their sins, and desire to be delivered from the guilt, and from the stain of them; from the punishment and from the practice of sin; and find that they are unable to relieve themselves, unable to justify or sanctify themselves; and therefore are willing to accept of a Saviour.  
The last particle of the verse is, as you see, vox esurientis, & vox mendicantis, & vox comedentis. I doubt not but many an honest soul here present reads in his own heart, what no language can express, S. Paul's affections resulting from the conjunction of two of his apprehensions expressed in my Text, one of his own spiritual wants, the other of God's free grace in Christ, with what intention of love and desire, with what comfort, with what devotion, with what zeal he embraced a Saviour. We have here a full resemblance of that in the Psalmist, Psal. 81.10. I am the Lord thy God which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, open thy mouth wide (harcebh-pica, dilare thy mouth) and I will fill it. If here be any who have not tasted how good and gracious the Lord is, here is also sauce sufficient to commend unto their palates the Gospel-provision set before them, 'Tis a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, equivalent to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used by our Saviour. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (in Hebrew) signifies both true and faithful. 
* See He●●sius in his P●●●●gomena in ●●er●itat. sacr.. And upon Matth. 12.20. See notes upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Theocritus his syrinx, cidyll. 32.  Nothing is more usual, then that when a word hath several significations, another word, whether in the same or in a distinct language, having properly one of the significations, should be enlarged to the rest: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 faithful, is the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 true.  
These words, I conceive, have a double aspect, one to S. Paul, another to the doctrine preached by him: Each brings forth twins:  
First, they contain the qualities, the value, the worth, the truth and acceptableness of the doctrine.  
Secondly, they precede the doctrine; are a preface, an introduction to it. I shall defer the first of these habitudes till I come to the doctrine itself.  
That respect also which they have to S. Paul is double: The words speak him who wrote them, a Saint; but may be considered as the language of one that had been a Saul, a persecutor, (that is, of a convert, reflecting upon his sins:) or as the words of a preacher of the Gospel. Under the former relation, they may be termed vox exultantis; and under the other, vox evangelizantis.  
I shall premise to the main doctrine somewhat upon the words preceding, as they are a preface or introduction; moreover as they have respect to S. Paul.  
First of the first, as these words, This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, are a preface or introduction to the doctrine following, they afford us this observation, viz. That men's hearts are so perverse about spiritual things, that art, rhetoric, an holy craft and wiliness is necessary in the delivery of points of greatest concernment, of greatest advantage, such as hold out to them salvation. We must not conceive that S. Paul's Epistles written to Timothy, concerned Timothy alone; each Epistle in the New Testament, to whomsoever it is inscribed, may serve for the instruction of each sinner (those excepted, who by the sin against the holy Ghost have debarred themselves from heaven) and of each convert. Wicked men are averse from attending to what would conduce most to their welfare. First I shall clear the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and then the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
That it is so, is evinced from those many aggravations of natural men's perverseness in Scripture.  
First, from plain and direct expressions of man's perverseness. The 13. of the 2. of Jeremy is to this purpose very accommodate; For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns that can hold no water. See also Jer. 5.3. O Lord, are not thine eyes upon the truth? thou hast sticken them, but they have not grieved; thou hast consumed them, but they have refused to receive correction: they have made their faces harder than a rock, they have refused to return. Of many other Scriptures suitable to this occasion, I shall commend to you only the first of the Proverbs, Wisdom uttereth her voice in the chief places of concourse, stretcheth out her hand, plays the Oratresse both for elocution and action: but her auditors set at nought her counsel, would none of her reproof.  
Secondly, from those contained in comparisons of men with beasts. Man is compared to the beast that perisheth, Psal. 49.12. to the dromedary in the wilderness, Jer. 2.24. to a wild ass' colt, Job 11.12. to the deaf adder, Psal. 58.4. 
* Their thoughts (like cockatrice eggs) break out into viperous words and actions. See R.D. Kimch. upon the text.  to cockatrices and spiders, Esay 59.5. to a horse rushing into the battle, Jer. 8.6. Brutes, because they want reason, oft run away from those that would feed them, and perform to them other good offices, and run into danger.  
The dromedary in the wilderness cannot be taken but in her month, when she is bagged. The wild ass' colt is the wildest of wild asses. The deaf adder, although by spitting out his poison he might renew his age, stoppeth his ears, by applying one to the earth, and covering the other with his tail, lest he should hear the voice of the charmer. The war-horse rusheth upon the pikes, upon destruction.  
Man is more brutish than beasts, than the dullest of beasts, Esa. 1.3. The ox knoweth his owner, and ass his master's crib; but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider. Here's what astonisheth both heaven and earth. God lays open his grievances to the heavens, and to the earth, things inanimate; as if those were more intelligent, and more ingenious than men. Israel neglected his owner and his nourisher, God who had chosen him for a peculiar possession, who constantly, sometimes by his extraordinary providence, had maintained him. The ox and the ass gave place to their owner and master in the stable at Bethlehem, when as men denied him room in the inn. But this morosity might proceed from a venial ignorance; falls much short of that more than brutish stupidity, which is here described. Wicked men do not only refuse Christ, an object of their beneficence in his poor members; but likewise offering to provide for them: They know that godliness is great gain, hath the promises of this life and that to come, and yet reject it.  
In the New Testament, wicked men are compared to dogs and swine, Matth. 7.6. Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. 
* Nihil aliud est totus mundus ante conversionem, nisi aut hara porcorum, vel colluvies rabidorum canum. Aug.  Impure men are here compared to creatures unclean according to the Law, dogs and swine. Should you cast what is precious to swine, they are ready to trample it (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) inter pedes suos: if to dogs, they will turn again and by't you. But to trample under their feet, and to turn again, and to rend those that come near them, agree to the nature of both those creatures. In every wicked man there is something answerable to each of those ill conditions in dogs and swine. They neglect, contemn, and vilify grace and mercy offered in Christ: They tread under foot the Son of God, count the blood of the Covenant an unholy thing, and do despite to the Spirit of grace, Heb. 10.29.  
Thirdly, from Gods complaining of sin and sinners. This in Greek is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and is defined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, vituperatio, utpote eorum qui contemnunt, aut negligunt. God complains to the heavens and to the earth, that he had nourished and brought up children, who rebelled against him, Esa. 1.2.  
Fourthly, from Gods groaning under men's stubborn and stiffnecked rebellion. He complains of Israel with a sigh, Esa. 1.4. Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evil doers, children that are corrupters; they have forsaken the Lord, they have provoked the holy one of Israel to anger, they are gone away backward. 'Tis a small thing that the whole creation groaneth under man's sin, and traveleth together in pain, Rom. 8.22. God himself is pressed with men's iniquities, as a cart is pressed that is full of sheaves, Amos 2.13. The Almighty expresseth another sigh, Esa. 1.24. Ah, I will ease me of mine adversaries, and avenge me of mine enemies.  
Fifthly, from God upbraiding such as have been resolute in impenitency, Christ upbraided the cities, wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repent not, Matth. 11.20. God in holy Scriptures by many accusations, and reprehensions, and chide of sinners, expostulations with them, redargutions of their perverse ways, lament for their destruction, expresseth emphatically mens averseness from terms of eternal peace and salvation. I may add, that promises and threaten are oft repeated, that sometimes the hearts of God's children unless they be mollified with afflictions, will not kindly receive the impressions of the Spirit. I shall have occasion of illustrating these particulars, when I show that Christ came into the world to save sinners. No believer so completely closeth with Christ, and promises founded in him, as that he may not seasonably be the object of exhortations, of motives and inducements to nearer union with a Saviour. The Israelites in their journey to Canaan had a pull-back-inclination towards Egypt. Lot's wife looked back towards Sodom. David must be afflicted that he may learn God's statutes. So you have the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the doctrine proved. I shall be brief in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Wicked men have sin reigning in them: And there is in each regenerate person, together with the kingdom of David the house of Saul. Grace and lust have junctas habitationes, though not divisum imperium: though they reign not together, yet they dwell together. They exist not only propè, but unà; are not only juxta se posita, but likewise mutuò se penetrantia. They have, though not the same father, yet the same mother; and as they are sisters, so also twins; are together in the womb, and born together; in godly men together in each faculty, and in each good action. There's iniquity in the best of our performances. The godly fall so far short of the closest union possible with Christ, as they fall short of integrity, of perfection in grace. The godly are not so loosed from themselves, as that S. Paul may imitate the Areopagites, omit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, when he speaks to them about spiritual things. He's wont to premise insinuations: Sometimes he conciliates affection by loving compellations; the word Brethren is frequent with him: Sometimes by mild and gentle entreat, I beseech you, be followers of me, 1. Cor. 4.16. Sometimes by both joined together, I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you give up your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service, Rom. 12.1.  
In my Text there is insinuatio ex re ●●ta, & ipsis causae visceribus sumta. And insinuation of this kind is most potent. We are ready always to inquire cui bono. If we search all Rhetorics cells, we shall not find any trope or figure, which was at any time so impudent or imprudent, as to persuade any thing which had not faciem boni. The unjust judge, (Luke 18.) although he neither feared God, nor regarded man, had his end in avenging the widow of her adversary. He did it ad redimendum vexationem: because the widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, left by her continual coming she weary me.  
S. Paul borroweth a preface from his doctrine: that furnisheth him with arguments most prevalent over men's affections. It's true and worthy of all acceptation. Here's 
* Themist. Orat. 9  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, aditus illustris. The Rhetoricians rule concerning Exordium's is observed: Neither is he wanting in the observance of that other rule prescribed by Horace to Poets, (useful also for Orators,) Si vis me flere, dolendum est Primùm ipsi tibi. Himself is affected with what he writes to others.  
In the verse next but one before, he commemorates that he had been a blasphemer, a persecutor, and injurious. He adds in that verse, that he obtained mercy. In the 14. verse he mentioneth his pledges of mercy obtained; of his justification, viz. his faith and love. These graces assured him of God's favour. In the 15. verse he celebrates and crowns the fountain of all mercy and grace: 'Tis a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. His affections strive with his faith, and as if more nimble, first drop out of his pen, get the first vent and expression, preface to the Gospel-doctrine he believed. So I am fallen upon the words of the preface, as they have respect to S. Paul.  
They are as so considered, in the first place (vox conversi peccatoris in Christo exultantis) the voice of a convert triumphing in Gods free grace in Christ. He who had so much used Esau's hands, now hath got jacob's voice: and the context will vindicate him from dissimulation. Her's lumen non siccum, sed affectibus maceratum. Here are good tidings, if true; and they are as true as profitable to souls which have been enthralled under sin and Satan. They are as true as truth itself. That Christ come into the world to save sinners, is the only cordial to a sinne-sick soul. Here is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Moreover such truth as is suitable to the stomach, as well as pleasing to the palate, such truth as apports nourishment to each true Christian. I shall speak of the truth and acceptableness of the doctrine delivered by S. Paul, hereafter.  
You see how the words of the preface respected S. Paul a sinner: I shall now explain them more largely, as they are vox evangelizantis, as they are the words of Paul a preacher of the Gospel.  
The words of the Preface may be considered as respecting S. Paul, a preacher of the Gospel, both as they are a preface, and as they contain the qualities of the following doctrine. As referred to him under the first of those notions, they commend unto us those bowels of pity, and that sincerity which he used in the dispensing of Gospel-truths. As he freely received, so he freely and without envy giveth: with the lepers (2. Kings 7.9.) apprehends he should contract guilt and blame to himself, if he withheld good tidings: himself eâdem operâ triumphs in the rich and sure mercies of the Gospel, and with best advantage commends them to others.  
The words of the preface, as they contain the qualities of the doctrine following, referred to S. Paul, speak him one which taught truth; moreover such truth as was worthy of all acceptation.  
1. God's faithful Ministers, such as labour sincerely in God's vineyard, preach truth.  
2. What is worthy of all acceptation.  
3. They join these two together.  
First of the first. Those who are faithful in the ministry preach truth. This hath been their constant practice: To give instances of all would take up more time than is allowed me. I must in the proof of the point rather use an example, than an enumeration. S. Paul, as if it was decreed that truth should viam invenire vel facere, useth the profession of it sometimes for a preface, and sometimes for an apology; for a preface in my Text, This is a faithful saying: for an apology, Acts 26.25. I am not mad, most noble Festus, but speak forth the words of truth and soberness: for a preface and apology together, Rom. 9.1. I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the holy Ghost. You see the practice of S. Paul; and he thought also that he had the Spirit of God, 1. Cor. 7.40.  
This argumentation although from an example, is valid. We may argue from a part to the whole in essentials. And to be well affected towards the truth, is essential to each sincere preacher of the Gospel. Should we esteem the 17. of the third of the Epistle to the Philippians, and the sixteenth of the fourth of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, in which S. Paul exhorts us to be followers of him, to be counsel rather than precept, to have been dictated by a private spirit; yet we could not but acknowledge the first of the 11. of the first to the Corinthians, an Oracle: there he saith, Be ye followers of me, even as I am also of Christ: Truth is Christ's banner. The Apostles, and all who have been his sectatours, have fought under it, & hoc signo vicerunt. Christ is truth itself, archetypal truth. He is truth essentially, so could not but use it in his expressions, whether theoretical or practical. His enemies the Pharisees and Herodians make a glorious confession, Matth. 22.16. We know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man; for thou regardest not the person of men. And in John 8.40. Ye seek to kill me a man that hath told you the truth which I have heard of God. He was born to this end, that he should bear witness of the truth, Joh. 18.37. He was truth according to his essence, likewise according to his offices. He was, and likewise taught, and by holy violence imposed upon his subjects the true way to salvation. He is the way, the truth, and the life, Joh. 14.6. He is full of grace and truth, Joh. 1.14. The Law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ, Joh. 1.17. We cannot be saved by the Law; the new Covenant, that of grace is the true way to heaven.  
The sweetness of this truth is described in the Canticles, As the apple tree among the trees of the wood, so is my beloved amongst the sons; I sat down under his shadow with great delight, and his fruit was sweet to my taste, Cant. 2.3. The fruit of this beloved one is the good tidings of the Gospel. The hands of those who open to Christ (who admit him into their souls) drop with myrrh, Can. 5.5. Obedience is truth propagated (veritas protensa). Truth, like the precious ointment wherewith the high Priests were installed, runs down from the head into the skirts of each Christians garments. The anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you: and this anointing is truth, 1. Joh. 2.27.  
But neither do I deny that (mor nghobher ngal cappoth hammanghul) myrrha transiens super manubria serae, may fitly be interpreted grace disposing us to admit truth, when it knocks at the doors of our hearts. Myrrh passing upon the handles of the lock, is grace oiling the locks of our hearts: A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand. Those who invent, or propagate falsehood, are Satan's agents. Christ prayeth to the Father for his disciples (Joh. 17.17.) that he would sanctify them through his truth. He promiseth his disciples another Comforter, who should abide with them for ever, even the spirit of truth, Joh. 14.16, 17. cap. 15.26. he foretelleth that the Spirit of truth should guide them into all truth, Joh. 16.13. Christ is the head of truth, Alpha and Omega, Apoc. 1.11. His Ministers the 24. Elders have the next place to him. Apoc. 4: 4. These are the neck of truth, Beta and Psi. With the Grecians the Alphabet was truth's statue: Veritas effingebatur ex literis Graecis, cujus caput ex α & ω, collum ex β & ł, & caetera deinceps membra ex literis prioribus, deinceps ex sequentibus & posterioribus per seriem quandam. All Gods children, and so his faithful Ministers are incorporated into truth: Gods Ministers are ambassadors and agents for the God of truth, (and as the Jews are wont to say in another sense) speak in the language of him that sent them. They are anointed with the Spirit of truth.  
You have proof of the point à posteriori & á priori. Here an objection is obvious: Do none of those who have devoted themselves to the preaching of the Gospel, swerve from truth?  
I acknowledge that they frequently do. I answer, first that I spoke concerning such as were sincere in the ministry. There are ravenous wolves in lambs attire: many out of covetousness, pretend what ambition will not suffer them to perform. If we roll over Ecclesiastical histories, we shall find that ambition created all the ancient errors and heresies. Too many nowadays are readier to close with errors hatched by Papists, and to arrogate to themselves to be the first inventors of them, then to retain truth professed by those who have ever been thought Orthodox. I yield that some betrusted with most, are most defective in their duties. Some mancipated to themselves, abound in dissimulation. I spoke of such as were faithful labourers in God's harvest; such preach not themselves, not their own inventions, but the truth of the Gospel. Secondly, there are relics of weakness, & imperfection, and darkness in God's children: they sometimes embrace a cloud in stead of a goddess. I shall now propound to you some considerations which commend truth to us, and will be to us so many motives to love it, and use it.  
First, true doctrine is to be preferred before false, because it is more firm and permanent. Plato saith in his first book de legib●●, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. We may pronounce the same of truth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Errors and heresies are (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) short-lived. So much is abundantly confirmed by Ecclesiastical histories.  
Secondly, truth is of a prevailing nature. He that sat upon the white horse (Revel. 6.2.) had a bow, and a crow● was given to him, and he went forth conquering and to conquer. We are assured that Christ is risen from the dead (howsoever the Jews oppugn that truth) because all who at any time rise up against him, fall.  
Thirdly, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Truth is sweet (as Mercury's Priests were wont to say when they eat their figs)▪ Falshood, lies, errors, heresies are of a contrary quality. We took sweet counsel together, and walked unto the house of God in company, Psal. 55.14. My meditation of him shall be sweet: I will be glad in the Lord, Psal. 104.34. How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea sweeter th●n honey to my mouth. Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way, Psal. 119.103, 104. They shall hear my words, for they are sweet, Psal. 141.6▪  
What's true may be bitter and unpleasant, but this is by accident, besides the nature of truth. The unpleasantness is not to be imputed to truth, but to the subject, the matter about which it is conversant: Who wish that this or that report may prove false, express no dislike of truth. They could wish at the same time the contrary was true. Those palates are vitiated, diseased, non-sensicall, which disrelish truth. Lactantius saith wittily and truly (Divin. Instit. epitome. c. 6.) Veritas licèt ad praesens sit insuavie, tamen cùm fructus ejus atque utilitas apparuerit, non edium pariet (ut ait Poeta) sed gratiam. All truth is amiable, but especially the truths of Christian religion. Evangelicall truths are solomon's (imrei-nongham) eloquia jucunditatis, Prov. 16.24. They are as the honeycomb, sweet to the soul, and healing to the bones. Truly the light is sweet, and a pleasant thing it is for the eyes to behold the sun, Eccles. 11.7. The Commeedians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (life is sweet) is a good comment upon this Text. But neither is that of the Psalmist to be pretermitted in its explication, God's word is a light to our feet, and a lantern to our steps.  
Fourthly, truth is the power of God to the conversion of souls.  
Fifthly, truth is spiritually nutritive of the soul. Painted fire will not burn. Meat received only in a dream will not nourish. Imaginary truth, Chimeras will not refresh and feed the soul. Error in the judgement is wont to side with perverseness in the will and affections, wickedness in life and conversation. Such is the destiny and lot of falsehood. If any doctrines not faithful should be able to advance sanctity, Papists tenants concerning a possibility of fulfilling the Law, and concerning merit, should be they. But we see it is quite otherwise: no sect in the world is more defective in purity of life. God, although want often to work good out of evil, never cooperates with evil means which spoil him of his glory. The Gospel is the bread of life, pabulum animarum. As it is the power of God to the conversion of sinners, so likewise to the increase of grace.  
Sixthly, truth is of an healing nature.  
2. In the next place, God's Ministers preach what is worthy of all acceptation: deliver honourable truths, likewise precious truths. They preach axioms. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may be taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, shall be the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Here's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The words are capable likewise of another construction, viz. to be worthy of all acceptation shall not formally signify the truth of the doctrine, that it is such as may safely be received, believed; but the comfortableness of it, the benefit and advantage from what signified by it.  
What S. Paul here expresseth may in part be comprehended by the affections of the Argives, when by the Romans delivered from the tyranny of the Macedonians and Spartans', Quae gaudia, quae vociferationes fuerunt? quid florum in Consulem profuderunt? The Praeco in the quinquenniall games at Nemea, is forced to pronounce the word Liberty, iterum iterúmque. 
* It concerneth not in regard of my present use of the story, whether the falling of that fowl out of the air to the ground ought rather to be imputed to rarefaction, or vertiginousnesse together with astonishment, an effect thereof. Plutarch maketh mention of both these reasons in his Flaminius, and clearly preferreth the latter in his Pompey.  The air was so dissipated with their acclamations, ut corvi fortuitò supervolantes, in stadium deciderent. They entertained that news of liberty as worthy of acceptation. 'Twas to be wished that thousands were not duller in their affections, when spiritual liberty is offered; when Christ offers to rescue us from our ghostly enemies, from those arch-tyrants sin and Satan. Certainly this news ought to be welcomed with greater enlargement of affections, with fuller expressions of joy and thankfulness. Here's news worthy of all acceptation.  
3. Truth and acceptableness concur together in the doctrine of God's faithful Ministers. Truth and acceptableness, I say, not truth and acceptance. When light came into the world, when truth was incarnated, sons of Belial preferred darkness before light. Gospel-truths are worthy of all acceptation. That they are not at all times accepted, is to be imputed unto the unworthiness of some to whom they are offered. There's defectiveness in such Ministers, in whose doctrine truth, and worthiness of acceptation meet not together. Some out of pusillanimity, ambition, or covetousness, wholly accommodate their doctrine to the spirits of vain men to whom they preach; altogether neglect truth, unless it serve as a stalking-horse to their own ends. Others busy themselves and disturb the world with empty and worthless curiosities. Luther justly complained of the Schoolmen, that they had changed uses into utrums. Some spider-wits spin out themselves into cobwebs.  
There are some truths not worthy of all acceptation. Probable conjectures are much to be preferred before palpable falsehood; certain truth before conjectures; acceptable truth before frivolous knowledge: what truths are worthy of all acceptation, aught to have the first place in our estimations, in our acceptations. Labour not for the meat which perisheth.  
I may here add an opportune caution. No one ought to arrogate such truth and acceptableness to his own judgement, as may fit it for a rule to be imposed upon others. Learned D. Davenant in his little Treatise zealous for the peace of the Church, determines well, That the Papists, should they not err in fundamentals, yet were not to be received into union and communion, because they obtrude upon others for a rule of doctrine and manners, the Pope's feigned infallibility.  
After this caution an advertisement will be seasonable. That we may be enabled to preach as we ought, truth's worthy of all acceptation, knowledge is necessary. Truth's statue (as I said) consisted of the Alphabet. Ignorant Doctors are unworthy deliverers of truths worthy all acceptation. We speak what we know, saith our Saviour, Joh. 3.11: We know what we worship, Joh. 4.22. Those who take upon them to be Christ's Ministers, must propound their Master for a pattern. Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth, 2. Tim. 2.15.  
To divide rightly the word of truth requireth knowledge, and knowledge sufficient for this task nowadays prerequires industry. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. The spirit of prophecy rested upon many in the Primitive times; Eusebius saith, upon some in his age. 
* I cannot assent to Miltiades (quoted by Eusebius out of Apollinarius) affirming that the gift of prophesying shall remain in each Church till Christ's last coming. His words are these, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. See Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. 5. cap. 17.  We have no warrant to expect it, after truth propagated, and sufficiently confirmed by former miracles.  
As we prefer the newest Philosophy, so the ancientest Divinity. We may justly suspect them of falsehood and delusions who arrogate to themselves to utter Oracles, to teach by revelation. 
* Lactant. de fall. sap. lib. 3. cap. 8.  Anaxagoras complained, circumfasa esse omnia tenebri●. Empedocles, augustas esse sensuum semitas. Democritus, quasi in puteo quodam sic alto, ut fundus sic nullus, veritatem jacere de●●ersam. The well is deep, and these wanted buckets wherewith to draw: we have a Doctor, who if we be not wanting to ourselves will direct us into truth, but who is not wont to expend miracles where ordinary means may be had. We ought to be diligent in our private callings, sed labor est inhibere volantes.  
I have heard it objected against our Clergy, that many of those who were more sober and temperate made it their chief work (proficere rather than prodesse) to inform themselves, more than to instruct others; to know, rather than to teach. Some by their ambition of being Seraphims, are hindered from being Angels; they are so much for illumination, that they are nothing at all for ministry. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Fieri solet ut quicquid pauci assequi possunt, id in multorum reprehensionem incurrat. Ptolem. Tetrab. lib. 1. cap. 1. See also Petiscus in his Epistle prefixed to his trigonometry, edit. 1. The author of nuncius propheticus, towards the end of his apology for humane learning.  I easily believe what a learned Divine, when some alleged, that he bestowed his time in unprofitable studies, apologized for himself, That they were not angry with him for his ignorance, but for his knowledge; that he neglected not what they knew, though he studied some things whereof they were ignorant: but conceive also, against the other extreme, that none ought to live to themselves; that 'tis not sufficient that men do no hurt, but that they are bound to do good: likewise, that they ought to perform such offices to those committed to their charge, as their places require. Contemplation, when occasion of being useful to others is offered, especially if we have admitted of any engagement, must strike sail to practise.  
Knowledge alone neither commends us to God, or good men. The devils know more than any mortal. Many of the school affirm, that the most glorious, the most illuminated of all the Angels fell, that which was the measure of the perfections, and durations of the rest, might be called avum. Lombard (sent. lib. 2. dist. 9) saith, Aliqui Angeli de singulis ordinibus ceciderunt: de ordine namque superiori Lucifer ille fuit, quo nullus dignior conditus fuit. Apostolus etiam principatus & potestates tenebrarum nominat, ostendens de ordinibus illi● cecidisse. Any man's knowledge is unprofitable, whilst sequestrated for pride, and used only in such ways as are most subservient to vainglory.  
'Tis a great question, whether or no those did well who published our Saviour's miracles, when he had charged them to tell not man. Aquinas saith 2.2 ●. q. 104. art. 4. Dominus curatis dixit, Videte nè quis sciat, non quaesi intendens eos per virtutem divini praecepti obligare; sed (sicut Gregor. 19 moral. c. 18. à med.) servis suis se sequentibus exemplum dedit, ut ipsi quidem virtutes suas occultare desiderent, & tamen ut alii eorum exemplo proficiant, prodantur inviti.  
I had now done with the first part of my Text, but that a direction to another mean conducible to the delivery of faithful and most acceptable doctrine is very convenient. Religion must be joined with knowledge. Many which abound in knowledge, for want of grace invent falsehood, deliver not truth, much less truth worthy of all acceptation. Men enabled by religion, deliver saving truths more feelingly, more fully, and more easily.  
These are like such as speak of a country or city which they have seen, which they have before their eyes: others discourse of spiritual things, as if they had seen them only in maps. Experimental knowledge availeth most to the efficacious preaching of Theological truths.  
I have done with the testimony, This is a faithful and true saying: I come now ad rem testatam, the doctrine itself, Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. I shall in the handling of these words only give you summa rerum capita, upon which as I mention them, you may expatiate by your larger meditations.  
Mankind was in a lost condition, therefore is fitly represented unto us by the lost groat, the lost sheep, and the prodigal child, Luke 15. As in a lost condition, so in a slavish condition, captivated by sin and Satan; which condition was so much the more wretched, in that we wanted due apprehensions of our own misery. We were not only Satan's captives, but mancipated to sin, and rebels against God. We were prone and headling into our own destruction, we stood in need of one to seek us, in that we went astray; of one to save us, in that we were captivated; one to pardon us, in that we had contumaciously rebelled against our Creator. These three degrees of man's wretchedness are comprehended in the word sinners. But in this Text perhaps, such are called sinners, who are sensible of their sins. Christ only saveth such as conceive themselves to stand in need of deliverance. He only healeth such as stand in need of a Physician, that is, such as are affected with a sense of their maladies. I answer, to save hath a double acception; sometimes 'tis the same that to pay a ransom for another, or others; to give satisfaction for their offences: In this sense Christ may be said to save all, even such as are not affected with their need of a Saviour. Sometimes to save implies somewhat more, to wit, after the ransom paid, to take out of the hand, out of the power of the enemy such as are ransomed. 'Tis said concerning Lot, that while he lingered, the men laid hold upon his hand, and the hand of his wife, and upon the hand of his two daughters, the Lord being merciful unto him: and they brought him forth, and set him without the city, Gen. 19.16. Christ by the powerful workings of his Spirit, haileth such as shall be saved out of the dominion of sin and Satan, draweth them to the Father. Here is redemption applied. None are thus saved, but such as are apprehensive of their natural bondage. But the sense of our own wants, and such graces as are wrought into the hearts of all that shall be saved from eternal punishments, are to be attributed to Christ's sufferings. Grace both preventing, and concomitant, and subsequent, that is, grace predisposing, and grace actually converting, and grace preserving us in a state of salvation, in God's favour, were purchased by Christ. He came into the world to pay a sufficient price, for the redemption of all mankind; but to save efficaciously, such as should believe on him. I shall take sinners according to the three dimensions , and salvation in its largest extent. Christ came to save those who were in so forlorn a condition, that they were even past sense of their misery.  
First, Christ came. Secondly, he came to save. Thirdly, he came to save sinners.  
I shall premise a brief explication of the words Christ and Jesus, and then endeavour to illustrate these propositions: Christ is the same that anointed. He is called Messiah from the Chaldee participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unctus, originally from the Hebrew verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unxit. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a sceptre of righteousness. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oleum laetitiae magnitudo est oblectationis, Alsheach in locum.  oil of gladness 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Above thy fellows, viz. perfect righteous men that have not sinned. Alsheach ibid. Perhaps he cast this dart at Christ. What he saith is true, if applied to Scribes and Pharisees, who in their own opinion were righteous. A little after, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because that blessed one loved Israel more than the Heathen, and more then, Angels of ministry. Companions also may signify, saith he, such as have not merited: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because thou shalt receive their part in the garden of Eden. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Myrrh, and Aloes, and Cassia are garments of honour (or precious garments) of the soul of the righteous. Clemens Alexandrinus agreeably upon that in the 9 verse of the Psalm quoted, (Upon thy right hand did stand the Queen in gold of Ophir) saith well; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. P●d●gog. l. 2. c. 10.  above thy fellows, Psal. 45.6, 7.  
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the , to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord, Esa. 61.1, 2. Luke 4.18, 19 Our Saviour (as Bishop Andrews thinks) was anointed only according to his humane nature. I should rather think, that as he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he was Christ as well as Jesus. All who at any time have been anointed by God, first, have been set apart for some office, some encounter (or agony); secondly, enabled, at least in some measure, to perform what they were designed for: thirdly, were fragrant in the nostrils even of God himself. Those who were anointed in regard of the first qualification, were sacred persons. By virtue of the second, they were rendered more nimble and cheerful in the performance of their duties▪ The third containeth their interest in others affections. From these resulteth gladness (or joy) in themselves. We may by gladness perhaps (not unseasonably) understand vigour of courage, and strength (like oil) above the lees of fear, and the reach of danger; in the seventh comma of the 45. Palm. The 3, 4, and 5. verses of that Psalm, seem to inform us, whither the anointing attributed to our Saviour alludes. He's such a champion against ignorance, sin, Satan, hell; against all the power of darkness, as cannot operam & oleum perdere. Our Saviour according to his divine nature, by reason of infinite perfection, was uncapable of any accession of abilities, yet was anointed, to wit, set apart (as I may speak with reverence) and dissigned for the Mediatorship, by the Senate of the sacred Trinity so ordering. In our nature assumed he suffered for our sins, so performed the office of a Priest. Illuminating and sanctifying grace, which he purchased for us by his sufferings, are duly ascribed to him, and speak him a Prophet and a King. Christ who according to his divine nature, had essential dominion over all creatures, as God-man was appointed the heir of all things. According to his humane nature he was anointed with the holy Ghost. He was anointed in his two natures, according to several capacities, but so as he was but one Priest, one Prophet, one King, one Mediator. God the Son was active, the humane nature passive in the union, yet both united are one Christ. Christ's performances for his Church, with their fragrancy and savour of rest, refresh both God and man. God the Father pronounceth concerning him, This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. Christ was inaugurated at his baptism, but anointed in 
* Absurdissimum est ut credamus Christum cùm jam triginta annorum esset, accepisse Spiritum sanctum, cùm Johannes à quo baptizatus est, spiritu sancto repletus fuerit jam indè ab utero matris, tametsi modo longè inferiori quàm Christus. Aug. de Trin. lib. 15. c. 26.  the instant of the union of his two natures. He was Christ the Lord at his birth, Luke 2.11. The Lords Christ, when seen by Simeon, Luke 2.26. Christ had for some years a Patent-dormient. Kings, Priests, and Prophets were not deposed or degraded in time of sleep, howsoever the functions of their offices were intermitted. 
† Alioqui enim Christo ab initio Spiritus vel omnino non datus, vel ad mensuram datus fuisset, quod negat ejus praecursor. Estius in sentent l. 2. distinct. 14. sect. 2.  His humane nature received a fullness of grace, as soon as united to the divine. Some object against this truth what we read Luke 2.52. Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, & in favour with God and man. He increased in grace & wisdom, if not in himself, yet in others, among whom he was conversant, and whom he instructed. He increased in grace and wisdom, if not really, yet in the opinion of others. He acquired some knowledge acceptable to God and man. As he grew in stature, so for some time in the exercise of wisdom; and in favour really with men; and as they would conceive, with God. He grew in the exercise of wisdom and grace, in the sight both of God and man. That I may express what I conceive to be the mind of the Text, The use and exercise of his wisdom as it was more enlarged, became more lovely in the sight of God and man.  
Maimonides noteth (Halacoth Melachim Perek 1.) That no King but the first of the family was anointed; as Saul, as David: or upon strife, as Solomon by reason of Adonias, Joas for Athalia, Joachas for his elder brother Joachim: but Joshua the next king to Moses was not anointed. Christ a spiritual King, a King that reigneth in men's affections, by the appointment of God the Father; the A and Ω of that kind, moreover who hath not his kingdom without contradiction and strife, was according to Maimonides principles not unduly anointed. Christ as a King, as a Priest, and as a Prophet, was anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows. He was each of these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So much is plentifully expressed in the Epistle to the Hebrews. As a Priest he fare surpassed legal priests. Heb. in 7, 8, 9 and 10, chapters.  
The twelve Patriarches, Exod. 28. have each of them his precious stone inscribed with his name, in the breastplate of judgement, a symbol of the Church under the Law; Levie hath the Calcedonie, Judah the Smaragd: But Revel. 21. in the foundation of the new Jerusalem, the Church under the Gospel, Levy hath the Smaragd, and Judah the Chalcedon. (The tribes have their stones in Aaron's breastplate according to their births.) Our Saviour's Chalcedon in Levie's place, telleth us that he hath put an end to Legal sacrifices. If levitical sacrifices could have expiated sins, it had not been necessary that the Priesthood should have been translated. As a King he fare excelled all who were types of him both in power and honour. Alsheach interpreteth what is spoken Psal. 45. concerning the Messiah, to be meant of Israel, and by their companions, understandeth heathens' and Angels of ministry, etc. Sure we are, that Christ was & is exalted above all earthly Monarches, and above the glorious Angels. These are but ministering spirits: None of them hath dominion over men's hearts. God said to none of them at any time, Sat thou at my right hand till I make thine enemies my footstool. God spoke in times passed by the Prophets, but poured out himself in the latter times once for all by his Son. Christ's prophetical office is abundantly more communicable, then either of his other .. No one merely a creature could by sacrificing himself expiate man's sins; or yet oversway men's perverse affections: but what light and information Christ imparts to any dark soul, he may communicate by ministers, angels or men. Yet the full revelation to be made of Evangelicall mysteries was reserved for Christ, as prerogative to his Prophetical office. What Christ performed as a Priest, and what he performs as a King, is compatible to none of his creatures. Had not his sufferings been vigorated by his divine nature, they could not have prevailed against our sins, (by which we offended an infinite God,) before the tribunal of divine justice. Neither can any creature create grace in our hearts: no earthly sceptre can sway our wills and affections. These are preeminencies of Christ's Kingly office. What Christ performed or performs as a Prophet (except that he is the fountain of truths revealed) is not impossible to a creature. All truths which can be revealed to any, may be communicated to the mind by the ministry of angels, may be derived by the ear, or the eye, from these or other rational creatures. Christ (beside that he is the author of all truths according to his divinity) deferred many truths till the fullness of time, and then as God and man delivered them, that so he might exalt even his humane nature, above all Prophets who were before or under the Law, his Ministers, and but forerunners and types of truth to be incarnated. Christ by himself, and his disciples revealed some mysteries hidden from the beginning of the world, 
* Where a prediction according to the plain literal sense, was in the intention of the holy Ghost to be oftener fulfilled then once, the Prophet which foretold it, did always distinctly foresee the event in the first place foretold, or the first fulfilling of his own prediction. There is not the like necessity for us to believe or think that he had the like distinct foresight or apprehension of those events, in which one and the self same prophecy was the second, third, or fourth time to be fulfilled. Of such predictions as were but once to be fulfilled, & that according to the plain literal sense, this affirmative is universally true; (The Prophets had always a distinct knowledge or apprehension of the sum or substance of the events which are said to come to pass, that their saying might be fulfilled.) D. Jackson in his book entitled, The knowledge of Christ Jesus, chap. 16.  explained many before uttered. Christ was in densitaribus sylvae, in the Old Testament. When God gave the Law on mount Sinai, there were (saith Salvianus) nebulae Deo plena. There were nebulae Christo plena in the time of the Law: but in the fullness of time the Sun of righteousness broke forth, dispelled legal mists, and ceremonies, conferred upon 'tis the abundance of the blessing of the Gospel, delivered to S. John a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of daniel's prophecies, which concerned the last times of the world, by which they were much illustrated. Plutarch reports (in the life of Lysander) that the priests of Apollo's temple at Delphos, subservient to Lysander's ambition of the kingdom of Lacedemonia, and what plotted by him and his faction, gave out, That they kept secret books of very ancient Oracles, which they themselves durst not touch nor handle, neither might any man read them, unless he was begotten of the seed of Apollo, who should come after a long time, and make his birth appear unto the Priests that kept these papers, and that by some secret mark and token, which they had amongst them: and thereby being known for Apollo's son, he might then take the books, and read the ancient revelations and prophecies of the same. Apollo's priests seduced by covetousness, abused truth into falsehood, by misapplying it. A true prediction touching the son of the only wise God, to be born of a virgin, and his preeminency in unfolding old prophecies, and adding new, received from Jews, or some of the Sibyls, or some prophet among the Gentiles (as was Balaam) was made the platform of this fiction.  
Secondly, Christ had yet advantage incomprehensibly greater, than what hitherto mentioned above other prophets, viz. according to his divine nature was the donour of the spirit of prophecy. Where God the Father is said to have spoken to the fathers (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) by piece-meal, (divine truths revealed to the Prophets concerning Christ, were not revealed altogether) and after divers manners: God the Son who is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the eternal word and wisdom of the Father, cannot be conceived to be excluded. The three sacred persons equally concur to all the works ad extra ascribed to each. Although Christ was not in the times of the Old Testa●●●● the Father's vicegerent in the revelation of divine tru●●s, as under the New, yet he also according to his divinity then spoke to the Prophets. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Homer. Iliad. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  No creature how sagacious soever, howsoever improved by industry and experience, (sigh God can in each moment change the course of nature) can certainly foreknow, unless informed by divine revelation any thing which may properly be said to be future (Gods attributes, as they are by natural reason known to be immutable, so their duration is coexsistent) much less humane actions, or what is dispensed solely by divine providence, without mediation of secundary causes. Prophecy strictly taken, is a prediction of what contingent.  

* There's vates praeteritorum with Dr. Jackson in his Knowledge of Christ Jesus, chap. 17. with Adrian in his Isagog. in S. Scriptur●m, Prophecy is of things past, present, or to come. Moses by the spirit of prophecy wr●●e about the creation. See also 1 Sam. 10.2. 2. Kings 6.12. Chalchas in Homer knew (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Things present, future, and past. Elisha prophesied of things present, 2. Kings 5.26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. See reverend Mr. Boyse upon Chrysost. in Gen. Hom. 2. p. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (in Euseb. demonstrat. Evang. lib. 5. procemio) one that prophesyeth. That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is oft the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is cleared by Exod. 7.1. (as translated by Onkelos, (And Jehovah said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a Master (or Prince) to Pharaoh; and Aaron thy brother shall be thine interpreter.) Molinaeus his vates, lib. 1. c. 4. Scultetus his deliciae evangel. c. 7. and authors quoted by H. Stephen in his Lexicon upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; but if it ought always (as the Lexicographer now praised conceiveth) to be interpreted according to that notion, I cannot see why Prophets should be distinguished from other, God's Ministers (Eph. 4.11.) who were undeniably antistites Dei & sacrorum. The most common use of the word Prophet, (besides consent of authors; whom I might in great plenty and with little labour quote to this purpose) assureth us that the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as an ingredient of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hath for the most part its proper signification. Antistites fa●orum, with Heathens were called prophetae, because some of them were the mouths of Oracles. We see how prophetae by a familiar Synecdoche might be enlarged to the full signification of Antistes. Epimenides is entitled a prophet by Paul in his Epistle to Titus, chap. 1. Besides that he is reported to have been a prophet (properly so called) by Tully (the Divin●t. lib. 1.) he might also deserve the name in that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (which Diogenes arrogates to himself in Lucian, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying a foreteller of things future, as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, might be used for a Poet, (ordinary practice of authentic authors sufficiently warranting) who much more properly might be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Poets feigned themselves Enthusiasts.  To relate what's past and contingent without aid from ●emory and history, by a Metaphor hath frequently the name of prophecy, as not less difficult, and proceeding from the same principles. Let them sh●w the former things what they be, or declare us things for to come, that we may know ye are gods, Esa. 41.22, 23. Tria proposuerat Porphyrius de divinis operibus: Primum ad haec anima● esse caus●m instrumentalem: Secundum, animam quandoque esse causam principalem▪ Tertium, animam posse ita esse ex aquo concausam, ut ex ea, Spiritúque divino, tertia quaedam species substantiae, vel subsistentiae fiat. Jambl. de mist. c. 28.  
Ait animam quandoque generare potestat●m, essentiâmque daemoniacam imaginantem futura, ibid.  
Porphyrius ait, Vaticinium esse passionem q●●ndam phantasiae subortam, vel ex cogitationibus nostris, vel instinctu corporalis in nobis naturae, vel similiter incide●●tem ut & phreneticis contingit vaticinari. Ad hoc autem adhibet signa, quod in statu vaticinis agit quidem imaginatio vehementer, sensus autem interim ●coupantur, & cuhibentur: Item quod suffumigationes adhibentur divinaturo, videlicet ad phantasiam afficiondam. Item ●●●●cationes ad eandem affectionem incitand●●. Item quòd non omnes, sed juvenes simpliciorésque ad hoc idonei sunt. Jambl. de Myster. c. 29.  
Porphyrius conjectabat affectionem quandam nostrae naturae vel corporalem, vel animalom ad vaticinium conferre praecipuè, ex eo quod qui advocabant in hominem vaticinium, gestabant lapillos quosdam, atque herbas, ligabántque nodos sacros, itémque ligata solvebant: mutabant quoque proposita in eyes, qui talia ab illis acceperant, & ex malis meliora reddebant: ibid.  
Idem ait, Non esse contemnendam artem, quae ex certis vaporibus ad ignem sub opportunis stellarum influ●cibus facit deorum idola in a●re protinus apparentia similia quodammodo diis, & habentia similem aliquam efficaciam: ibid.  
Porphyrius ait, Idolorum factores in fabrica observare coelestium cursum, dicentes, quo potissimùm coelestium currente, & cum quo, vel quibus concurrente vaticinia vera provenient, aut falsa: item quae ibi fiunt, utrùm significativa sint, effectiuáve, vel contra significationis efficacia vacua. cap. eodem.  
There be some perfumes prescribed by the writers of natural magic, which procure pleasant dreams; and some others (as they say) that procure prophetical dreams; as the seeds of flax, fleawort, etc. Thus the Lord Verulam in his natural history, cent. 10. exper. 933.  
That the Teraphim (mentioned in Genesis, and Judges, and Hosea) were used in divination, is conspicuous from S. Austin in's 94. question upon Genesis, from Abenezra upon the 31. of Genesis, and from the names by which the word is translated. We find in the Septuagint, in Hosea, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same word by which they interpret Urim, in the ●8. of the first of Samuel; in Zachary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with Aquila the Teraphim are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In the Targum of Hosea, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 declarantes. In the 4. of Hosea, verse 12. My people ask counsel at their stocks, and their staff declareth unto them. A wizard is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Levit. 20.6.27. and a living creature whose mouth, after it had been put in the mouth of the wizard, foretold future things, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Jews from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to know. The devil and his agents arrogated to themselves the faculty of foreknowing and declaring future things, and many were so fond as to believe them. Such future events as proceeded in an ordinary course from celestial and sublunary bodies, the devil might foretell by his insight into nature: but predictions of this sort are improperly termed prophecy. He might discover some future contingent things by knowing the Scriptures; as that Alexander the great should subdue the Persians. He might foretell also what God revealed to him: the deaths perhaps of some persons, because God had appointed him their executioner. Sometimes he gave his Oracles according to conjectural knowledge, as taking notice of humane affairs; their counsels and contrivances. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. (Aeschilus in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.) sent to Dodona (in Aeschilus his Prometheus) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  He dissembled his ignorance oft by silence, oft by ambiguous answers. He fastened his predictions to material symbols, as accommodate to man's earthy affections, and alienating the mind from what spiritual. In 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, now mentioned, and other his delusions, would have the positures of the stars observed, that so he might induce men to worship the host of heaven. But these and 
† See Clemens Alexand. in's Admonit. ad Gentes. Euseb. his prooem. to his first book dem●st. Evang. Strozzius Cigogn. de spirit. & incant. part. 1. lib. 3. c. 2.  other such his arts settle far below prophecy. Holy Scriptures altogether direct us to God as the fountain of those precious gifts conferred upon Prophets, and the sole object of our praise and thankfulness due for them. S. John (Apoc. 1.10.) heard behind him a great voice as of a trumpet. These words behind me, as M. Brightman observes, are wont to shadow out the free mercy of God, which recalleth us being careless, not regarding, negligent. So in Isaiah chap. 30.21. Thy ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying, This is the way, walk in it. Jewish Doctors derogate from that freedom, according to which God communicates himself, by the several conditions which they feign to be prerequired, that one should become a Prophet. Their first is (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) a natural disposition, to wit, a good temperature of body, even from the conception. See Maimon. in More Nevochim, p. 2. c. 36. Secondly, that the party be (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) amply accomplished with wit and fortunes. Abarbinel (in his preface to his Comments upon Esay) requires descent or pedigree elevating above the vulgar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dixêre (Rabbini nostri) beatae memoriae non quiescere facit sanctus benedictus ille shechinam suam, nisi super familias prosapiatas quae in Israele. Esay (saith he) was of the seed royal, and exceeded others in the spirit of prophecy by virtue of his family. Thirdly, (
‖ I have learned what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (translated by Bechai from the original in Arabic into Hebrew in a Tractate of it inscribd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 4. I find that a Pharisee is one that celebrates a jubilee in his countenance, but mourneth inwardly; his heart is exceedingly large, but so as his soul is very humble. This I conceive to be the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That he is  of whatsoever is wont to divert from the practice of piety, is intimated in the words following: Rambam (the fundament. Legis, c. 7. parag. 2.) prescrib●● to such as would be candidates for the spirit of prophecy, sanctimony and abstinency from commerce with the world. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 spiritus S. vociferatur, ●di coetum improborum, & cum impiis non habitabo. Thus R. Isaac in Tauchuma. fol. ●6.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) a sequestration from common and profane custom of life. Fourthly, 
* See Bava Bathra, cap. 1. Jachiad. praefat. to his comment. upon Daniel.  (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) congruity of place: this they deny to be found any where but in Judea. Fifthly, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) opportunity of time. All ages (say they) are not accommodate for the receiving of prophecies. Sixthly, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) a divine disposition, that is, the free gift and suggestion of God, without which the other conditions are by them granted to remain impotent and unfruitful.  
We may almost by one glance upon sacred Scriptures, perceive that the greater part of these conditions were not common to all prophets there mentioned. Jambh thus is Orthodox: Verum namque vaticinium (
* De mysteriis cap. 28.  saith he) non est naturae passibilis, & aliquo corpore, loco, tempore clausa, sed ab his omnibus absolutae, ut queat quocunque in loco vel tempore facta, pariter simpliciterque prospicere: True prophecy is not of a passable nature, cloistered up in some certain body, place or time, but free from all these, that it may foresee alike things done in any place, and at any time. Gregory and Thom. Aquinas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ait Gregorius in homil. Pentecostes: Implet (scilicet Spiritus Sanctus) cit haraedum puerum, & Psalmistam facit: Implet pastorem armentarium, sycomoros vellicantem, & prophetam facit. Non ergo requiritur aliqua dispositio praecedeus ad prophetiam, sed dependet ex sola voluntate Spiritus sancti, de quo dicitur 1. ad Cor. 12. Haec omnia operatur n●●s atque idem Spiritus, dividens singulis prout vult: Thom. Aquin. 2.2. Qu. 172. Art. 3.  
As it is clear that God determined not the dispensation of prophecies to circumstances of time and place, nor yet to men's natural tempers or fortunes; so likewise that the spirit of prophecy found Balaam mingled with malice and covetousness, and Saul out of envy persecuting David, how abstracted soever they were from these vices whilst they prophesied. I acknowledge that God's Prophets, as many of them as were sanctified, could not but be emancipated from the tyranny of vile affections, but moreover had all corruptions settled, which might hinder them from attending to God speaking to them. God did not always immediately work the latter of these effects in their minds. Elisha (2. Kings 3.15.) called for a minstrel, to dispel his grief (
* See R. D. Kimchi upon the place.  say some Hebrew Doctors) for the loss of Elijah, from whose translation till the than present occasion, the spirit of prophecy (
* See R. D. Kimchi upon the place.  say the same authors) rested not upon him: to compose his spirits, (
‖ See R. D. Kimchi, and Ralbag upon the place.  say some,) much moved with indignation at Jehoram. See also 1. Sam. 10.5. chap. 16.17. Tacitus saith of the Jews (Hist. lib. 5.) Sacerdotes eorum tibiis, timpanísque, concinebant. Grotius upon the last of the Scriptures quoted, thus commenteth. Marinus de Proclo● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Apollonius de Miris, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ubi & alia ad hanc rem. Pythagore●s moris fuit, ait Quintilianus lib. 9 cap. 4. cùm somnum peterent, ad lyram priùs lenire mentes, ut si quid fuisset turbidarum cogitationum componerent. Plato likewise in's laws attributes the same virtue to music. Add that of Stesichorus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. See also Butler in the Preface to his principles of Music. As Elisha's mind might be settled and quieted by Music, so also raised up to an expectation of God communicating himself.  
Thirdly, Christ knew all truths from all eternity, depended not upon any for information about those truths which he delivered.  
Fourthly, whereas Prophets and Prophetesses in times past received divine truths after divers manners, Christ according to his humane nature, in all probability, was only informed that way which is most perfect, viz. by the word of the Lord, instilled into his mind when he was awake: That the contents of this reason may become facile, 'tis necessary that I enumerate the several ways, after which God revealed himself to Prophets under the Law, and before the Law, and explain some of them. God spoke to Elijah by a still small voice, 1. Kings 19.12. to Samuel with a louder, 1. Sam. 3. (Samuel by reason of this voice presented to his outward sense, was esteemed a Prophet throughout Israel.) Such under the New Testament was that by which he signified that Christ was his well-beloved Son, in whom he was well pleased, Matth. 3. and that which was heard at our Saviour's transfiguration, Matth. 17. and another mentioned in the 12. of John. This was called Bathcol, filia vocis, and was gradus nuus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex gradibus spiritus sancti. This way of revealing himself God used frequently after prophecy, and Urim and Thummim ceased, in the time of the second Temple, as Paulus Fagius relates upon Pirke avoth. The still small voice, and louder, of which I have spoken, were in all probability produced by God, without the concourse of any creature. God long before the Law given to Moses, prophesied to Hagar by the audible voice of an Angel, that her son should be spread into a great nation, Gen. 21.18. God after this way several times revealed himself (under the Law) in the Old Testament, to Zacharias and the Virgin Mary in the New. God sometimes spoke to his Prophets by outward visions. By fire burning the bush, but not consuming it, Exod. 3.2. signified to Moses, that the Israelites, though heavily afflicted, should not be utterly destroyed by the Egyptians. Externall voices and visions by which things future were presignified, were created by God, or produced by the ministry of Angels. Visions might, many of them be carved in wood, stone, other matter; more of them (yet not all) be painted. It's impossible to engrave fire, or to paint sounds. The hand-writing upon the wall, which Daniel read, supplied the place of prophetical speech. Each prophetical speech might be exhibited in letters. God spoke sometimes by Urim and Thummim, on the breast of the high Priest. Concerning this kind of prediction, see Leu. 8.8. Numb. 27.21. 1. Sam. 28.6. Josephus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, l. 3. c. 9 Abenezra, and Menachem upon Exod. 28. Jarehi and Abenezra upon Levit. 8.8. Maimon. about the implements of the Sanctuary, cap. 10. sect. 11, 12. Ainsworth upon Exod. 28. Empereur in Mosis Kimchi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad scientiam, lib. 2. cap. 7. Whether or no answers given by Urim and Thummim, and the writing upon the wall in Belshazzars palace, were immediately from God, or by the mediation of Angels, is concealed from us. The two Tables of the Law given to Moses on mount Sinai, were written with the finger of God, Exod. 31.18. If we compare with this text that of the Psalmist in the 8. Psalm, vers. 3. (When I consider the heavens the work of thy fingers) we shall conceive with Maimonides in the 66. chap. of the first part of his More Nevochim, that the Law was made the same way that the heavens. He tells us how: All natural things are called the work of God: but more especially what began by creation: such was the Law, saith the same author. I shall produce his words as construed by Buxtorfius; Quemadmodum stellas non per instrumentum aliquod in coelo collocavit & existere fecit, sed per primam suam voluntatem. Sic quoque Scriptura illa fuit scripta per primam ipsius voluntatem, sine aliquo instrumento. (This his conceit I find countenanced by the fifth chap. of Pirke Avoth.) I shall add his quotation of the Talmud to the same purpose; Nosti, quod in hunc sensum in Mischnâ legitur; decem res creatae sunt inter vesperas, & ex eorum numero quoque est Scriptura Tabularum; ex quo colligimus, extra controversiam, & in confesso apud omnes semper fuisse, Scripturam tabularum esse sicut reliqua opera creationis, quemadmodum in Mischna exposuimus. Cabalists say, that God created the world in order to the Law. In the creation of the world the holy Ghost moved upon the waters; when the Law was to be engraven upon the tables of stone, God descended upon the mount: The same finger which wrought the book of nature, wrote the Law: The world's potentia divina, the Law voluntas Dei protensa: The world's a compendious expression or copy of God's power, the Law of his will; this in letters, that in hieroglyphics. 
* Who conceive from Act. 7.53. Gal. 3.19. Heb. 2.2. the Law was spoken by Angels, (besides that the Syriack interpreter Acts 7.53. hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Per manum mandati angeli, and by this Angel meaneth Christ, as may be gathered from his translation of Gal. 3.19. where he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 angels, in that angels are distinguished from a Mediator, who as he thought was no other but Christ; neither could more angels than one, unless because they organised the air, or clouds, or some other body, be said to pronounce the Law) may see Heinsius upon the first of those texts. Maimon. also telleth us (in his More Nevochim, par. 2. c. 41.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that a Prophet is oft called an Angel. There are mentioned in the acts of the Nicene Council, part. 1. lib. 1. c. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  No created knowledge was the midwife to either of these births: the writing as well as what written was immediately from God. God sometimes revealed to his Prophets what should come to pass by (species) resemblances impressed in their minds. These were of two sons; are resembled by those which convey sensible objects to the ear, and the eye, and are called vision and the word of the Lord. The Prophets were the mouth of God, and eyes of the Church. Vision by Hebrews is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Dan. 10.7.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The word of the Lord in Hebrew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
* See Onkelus upon Gen. 20.3.  in Chalde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Latin verbum, (sermo, if we prefer the term which best pleaseth Cyprian.) The word of the Lord is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spirit of the Lord, Ezech. 11.5. and by Onkelus translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spirit of prophecy. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word of the Lord, Ezech. 14.2. by Onkelus is interpreted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word of prophecy. Vision, as likewise the word of the Lord, when it denounceth judgements against any people or person 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the burden of the Lord, Jer. 23.33 in Jonathans' targum is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prophecy in the name of the Lord.  is called (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) a burden; each of them when delivered in sleep 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a dream; and every dream sent into the mind from God, if predictive of future matters, (that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
‖ Prophecy although it properly signify (as the notation of the word intimateth) a prediction in outward words, is in the mind ratione principii. Thom. Aquin. 2.2. q 171. art. 1. concludes that prophecy first and principally consists in knowledge, secundarily in speech.  prophecy coming in a dream, as R.D. Kimchi upon Jer. 23.27.) is found under one of these. The hand of the Lord Jehovah, Ezech. 8.1. is (as Kimchi well glosseth) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spirit of prophecy as it cometh in its strength. Each prophetical influence may be called the spirit of prophecy, and the spirit of the Lord, as because it is the gift of God, so in that it's fitly resembled by wind: moreover in the first respect may be termed Spiritus sanctus, in the other Spiritus sacer. On the day of Pentecost when the Apostles were to be endued with the gift of tongues, there came a sound from heaven, as of a mighty rushing wind. Influences, such as that which was called the word of the Lord, enabled the Apostles to speak with several languages. These, like wind, could not be contained. Balaam could not but speak what God said unto him. When the spirit rested upon the seventy Elders, they prophesied and did not cease, Numb. 11.25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Spirit, is interpreted by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spirit of prophecy, in Onkelus his paraphrase upon that Comma. There's vehemency in the spirit of prophecy, which renders it like a rushing wind. Nescit tarda molimina Spiritus sanctus. Those words of Ezechiel chap. 8. The hand of the Lord fell upon me, may be understood concerning the spirit of prophecy, as it comprehends vision and the word of the Lord. The prophet affords instances of both revealed to him, in the three chapters next following. And Villalpand tells us, Spiritum Dei cadere; there is irruere, aut lapsum esse desuper cum vi, & energiâ more fulguris▪ quo illuminatus simul atque excitatus est propheta, non secus quàm si fulgure repentè tangeretur. Suidas saith concerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (which God promiseth, Ezech. 11.19. and elsewhere) that it is not the holy Spirit, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I may say the like concerning the spirit of prophecy, but with this difference; that is of the appetitive faculty, this of the understanding. Prophecy may be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to both respects mentioned. I adhere rather to the first as the reason of the name. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, majestas divina, which rested upon Prophets with the Jews frequently is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And the spirit of Jacob revived, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Gen. 45.27. in Jarchie's comment, is interpreted by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
* The resting of the spirit of prophecy upon Prophets is called descensio, Quandoquidem genus humanum in infimo loco, infimóque gradu constitutum est respectu Dei: ipse autem Deus in supremo gradu, non quidem ratione loci, sed ratione essentiae, majestatis, & potentiae, ideò quando ipsi placet sapientiam largiri alicui, vel prophetiae donum super quosdam ex nobis effundere, vocatur mansio prophetiae super aliquo, vel habitatio majestatis, & praesentiae divinae in loco aliquo (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Descensio: & è contrario, ablatio prophetiae ab homine, aut recessio majestatis divinae è loco quopiam (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Ascensio. Maimon. in More Nevoch. part. 1. c. 10.  quievit super eo divina majestas. In Onkelus his paraphrase by (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) & quievit Spiritus sanctus super Jacobo; in Jonathan by (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) & quievit Spiritus prophetiae (
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Non quiescit shechinah nisi super forti. See Elias in his Tisby upon the word. See also Maimon. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, chap. 7. sect. 1. and 5. The places of the Talmud, etc. quoted by Vorstius upon these of Maimonides.  to wit, which had forsaken him by reason of his mourning for the supposed death of his son. These glosses upon Gen. 45.27. unless we conceive the authors of them, all, or some of them heterodoxicall, will persuade that shechina ruach hakkodesh, and the spirit of prophecy, had sometimes with Hebrews the same signification. I shall add another author for further confirmation. Our Doctors (saith Elias Tisbites upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) call the holy Ghost shechinah, because it resteth upon the Prophets. In the authors words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Gemara of Massecheth Joma, cap. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are reckoned as two of five distinct ornaments in which the second temple came short of the first. It's there enquired why the word by which God signified that he would be glorified in the second temple, Hag. 1.8. should suffer an Apocope of He, written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rather than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (and I will be glorified)? The answer there given is this, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
These five things were wanting by which the first and the second Sanctuary differed, & these are they, Arca cum propitiatorio & Cherubin, Ignis coelestis, Majestas divina, Spiritus sanctus, Vrim & Thummim. In Shulchan Aruch, under the radix 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the five things mentioned by Talmudists, in the place quoted are thus distinguished. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arca, operculum, & Cherubin, una res: Majestas divina, res secunda: Spiritus sanctus, qui & prophetia, res tertia: Vrim & Thummim, res quarta: ignis de coelo, res quinta. The same are reckoned up, but in other order, by R. D. Kimchi upon Haggai 1.8. The first is omitted by Rasi upon that text, who yet quoteth Massecheth Joma. There is nothing in these testimonies (howsoever they have been misinterpreted) repugnant to what I have asserted. It's clear that by shechinah they mean the glory of God appearing between the cherubims. I see not but that according to the minds of Hebrew Doctors, God may be said to dwell or to abide, wheresoever he declareth himself by any supernatural effect; as in the bush in which he appeared to Moses; or mount Sinai, where he gave the Law; in the first Sanctuary; in the minds of Prophets, and of all sanctified persons. Nothing's more usual, then that the effect which manifesteth divine power, should be called shechinah. Divine abode or dwelling, in this notion is abstracted from brevity and longinquity of time (unless with Ramus and his sectatours, we comprehend eternity within the latitude of time, as common to all durations) is indifferent to all times howsoever extended. 
* Shechinah properly signifieth abode or dwelling any where; but tropically that which abideth or resteth in any place, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any extraordinary effect of divine power, such a glorious symbol of God's presence and power hath the Name of God. Exod. 24.10. And they saw the God of Israel, etc. is in Onkelus his Targum, And they saw the glory of the God of Israel; in the Seventy, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And they saw the place where the God of Israel stood.  Shechinah is the same that God's presence, by supernatural manifestation of himself. As shechinah called the spirit of the Lord (Ezech. 11.5. and with Jews commonly the holy spirit) is said to have rested upon certain persons, and in certain places; so the spirit of glory and of God, is said to rest upon those, who are reproached for the name of Christ, 1. Pet. 4.14. God's glory is manifested by those gracious effects of his spirit, wherewith he supporteth those, who suffer for his sake. The heart of a believer reproached for the name of Christ, is (as Onkelus paraphraseth upon Gen. 28.17. in which Comma, the place in which Jacob slept, is called the house of God, and the gate of heaven) no private place, but a place wherein God taketh pleasure; and over against this place is the gate of heaven. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (which Beza did not apprehend) may be an exegesis of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Syriack Interpreter saw as much, with whom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is construed, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quia Spiritus gloriosus Dei quiescit super vos. 
* See Esay 4.5. and D. Kimchi upon that text. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the●e words of Kimchi, the cloud which rested over the Tabernacle, and that which in the Sanctuary of the Temple, as also one feigned about to  by day the houses of Jews eminent above the vulgarin wisdom & religion, in the times of restauration and refreshment, is called a cloud of glory.  A cloud in which God appeared to the Israelites (Exod. 16.10.) is called (in Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Onkelus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) the glory of the Lord. The clouds by which God was manifested in the Sanctuary, is called by Hebrews Shechinah. God promiseth Exod. 29.43. that the tabernacle should be sanctified by his glory. And vers. 45. that he would dwell among the children of Israel; (in Onkelus his translation, that he would settle his shechinah in the midst of the children of Israel.  
We cannot doubt, but that the spirit of glory, in that place of S. Peter quoted, if we appeal to Jews as Interpreters, will prove the same that shechinah. God's manifestation of his presence in his Church upon earth for a deteermined time, is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Apoc. 21.3.) and is also shechinah. There is in Christ's humane nature a shechinah which shall never expire. The place in which Jacob slept, as he was going from Beersheba toward Haran, in Onkelus upon Gen. 28.16. is a place in which (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) the glory of the Lord rested. To a place so graciously visited by God, is contradistinguished in the same paraphrase on the verse following, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a private place. It's competently clear, that each supernatural effect of divine power may be called shechinah. I see not but 
* Ruach hakkodesh, or the Spirit of God, (the third person of the sacred Trinity excepted) and shechinah, are of equal latitude.  Ruach Hakkodesh, as without the sacred Trinity, and shechinah, may be esteemed reciprocal. Prophecy is called the spirit of the Lord, Ezech. 11.5. wisdom, understanding, counsel and might, knowledge, & the fear of the Lord, are called the spirit of the Lord, Esa. 11.2. See also Ezech. 11.19. 1. Pet. 4.14. Exod. 21.3. with Jews and Mahumedans (which learned M. Selden observes in Eutychii origines p. 21.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Spiritus sanctus super ordinatos quiescens. Ordination with the Jews (saith the author praised, ibid.) according to it's external effect, reddebat idoneos judiciis exercendis, adeò ut in 
* viz. sive vigintitrium virale, sive septuaginta unius virale.  Synedriaerite cooptari possent. The internal effect was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the holy Ghost. If any Jewish writers affirm that this gift was conferred in ordination, towards the latter times of the second Temple, they must understand, if they will consist with themselves, some virtue distinct from prophecy, which might enable to decide causes propounded. It's generally confessed by Jews, that God withheld from their forefathers the spirit of prophecy, within short time after the building of the second house. What may be objected concerning their dissensions in judicature, may easily be removed, unless it can be proved that Jews thought that such virtue was perpetually conferred in ordination, and could not be forfeited. The Seventy, of which the first great Sanhedrin consisted, as soon as they were ordained by God, were endued with the spirit of prophecy. From this event (I conjecture) Spiritus sanctus began to signify the inward effect of ordination, in what sense soever used afterwards. No one can doubt but (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) the spirit, is (as Onkelus paraphraseth) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spirit of prophecy, Num. 11.25, 29. I deny not but Ruach Hakkodesh, & Shechinah, signify distinct things in Massecheth Joma, and some other places quoted. It's sufficiently known that ob defectum vocabulorum, words frequently without additament, are by use determined to part of their primary significations. I may add that 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in this sense, john 7.39. Acts 19.1.  Ruach Hakkodesh, (the holy Ghost, or the spirit of God) is more frequently used for the spirit of prophecy, then for other exhibitions of Gods extraordinary presence. This occasioned a mistake in Bomberge's and Buxtorf's edition of Onkelus upon Exod. 31.3. They insert 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The spirit of God conferred upon Bezaleel, (Exod. 31.3.) with Onkelus, according to the Spanish Bible, is a spirit from before the Lord, but with Bomberge and Buxtorf the spirit of prophecy from before the Lord. The spirit of prophecy evermore informed what was, is, or should be done: The spirit conferred upon Bezaleel only enabled him to do somewhat. The holy Ghost suggested to Bezaleel skill in order to the structure of the Tabernacle. Those have mistaken them to have been reciprocal. Those who are reproached for the name of Christ, may probably be said to have the spirit of glory resting on them, in regard of their present glorious condition (by reason of the value and excellency of grace) to be preferred before worldly prosperity; to have the spirit of God resting upon them, in that they are assured by 
* Prophecy is archetypally in God, in those who are instructed by God's prophets, as commodities in the possession of those who have purchased them at the second hand. Who instructed by a Prophet, relates future contingent things, cannot without acyrologie be called a Prophet (Aquin. 2.2. quaest. 173. art. 2, 3.) yet may be said to have the spirit of God resting upon him, as affected with any prophecy applied to his own occasions, by special aid from God's spirit. To interpret prophecies contained in sacred Scriptures, is to prophecy, 1. Cor. 14.1, 3, 4, 5, 6. I deny not but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signify the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and consequently be attributed to those who interpret Scriptures immediately doctrinal: but to prophecy seems to signify, as I have said in 1. Cor. 14. as in the 6. verse, distinguished from doctrine. See Beza upon the place.  divine revelation, and the comfortable influence of God's spirit, that God will add a gracious event to their sufferings. Their sufferings, if we subduct the spirit of glory, and the spirit of God, will be much sunk below nothing. That I may yet more fully explain this Scripture, the spirit of glory seems to allude to Esay 4.5, 6. and to the pillar of the cloud which marched before the Israelites by day, and that of fire, which went before them by night in the wilderness. The comfortable influences of God's spirit in the hearts of those who are reproached for the name of Christ, may be fitly called the spirit of glory, in that a pledge of God's extraordinary presence; but moreover as like the pillar of fire, illuminating and comforting them beset with gloomy afflictions, and like a cloud sheltering them from temptations which are suggested by their sufferings. That I may add another gloss, a cloud of afflictions resting upon God's children, is so fare from intercepting the light and sunshine of God's countenance, that with the cloud which overshadowed the tabernacle, and that which rested in the temple, it's a token and pledge of his more than ordinary presence. It may be enquired how ruach hakkodesh, if it signify prophetical influence, can be said to have been wanting in the times of the second Temple, unless Haggie, Zachary, and Malachy be denied to have been Prophets. R. Bechai upon the paraschah in Genesis, called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, endeavoureth to remove this scruple. The Scripture saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as if it should say, 
* The latter times, as well as the first under the second Temple, are to be excepted. The Jews in whose age John the Baptist lived, counted him a Prophet, Matth. 14.5. & 21.6. Our Saviour is said (in Josephus Antiquit. Judaic. lib. 18. c. 4.) to have been (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) a wise man, (he meaneth a Prophet.) Josephus (in his Jewish war) reporteth himself to have been a Prophet, that he foretold to Vespasian Nero's death. Abarbinel upon Esay 11. maketh the times of the second Temple altogether barren of prophecy, that he might render them uncapable of the Messiah. He misreporteth his brethren the Rabbins into the same opinion. The Prophet (he saith) reckoneth up ten conditions, which must necessarily be found in King Messiah. The first of them concerneth his lineage and family. The second condition containeth his degree of prophecy. The Spirit of Jehovah which should rest upon the Messiah, is with Abarbinel the Spirit of prophecy. This prophecy concerning the Messiah, could not (saith he) be fulfilled in Hezekiah, because he was not a Prophet; nor in the times of the second Temple, quòd non fuerit in eyes prophetia, & non Spiritus sanctus, sicut acceperunt sapientes beata memoriae.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Habitare faciam in eo gloriam, quae est shechinah: sed non habitavit in eo ità jugiter ut in templo primo. Shechinah here signifies otherwise then in comments upon Haggie 1.8. aforequoted, viz. the spirit of prophecy. Seder Olam zuta determineth in what year of the world prophesy expired. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In diebus Meshullam floruit regnum Graeciae, anno scilicet quinquagesimo secundo Medorum & Persarum: & mortui sunt Haggaeus, Zacharia, & Maleachi. Eo tempore cessavit prophetia ab Israel: ipse est annus mundi ter millesimus quadringentesimus quartus. Abenezra saith of Malachy (in Malach. c. 1.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he was the last of the Prophets. The greater part of the Jews, by whom prophecy is termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forasmuch as they deny distinction of persons in the Divine essence, attended in the use of the term, that God (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) that holy blessed one (as they love to speak) was a Spirit. (The holy Spirit) doth not only signify the third person in the sacred Trinity, but likewise the essence of God. Tropes from the cause to the effect, & from the thing signified to the sign are usual. But perhaps the name Ruach hakkodesh as signifying prophecy, was first borrowed from the third person of the glorious Trinity. We gather from the writings of some Rabbis on this side Christ, (besides that it's uncertain whether or no prophecy before Christ incarnated, was called the holy Ghost) a Trinity of Divine Persons. Shechinah is called the spirit of the Lord, Ezech. 11.5. the spirit of God, 1. Pet. 4.14. The word spirit in each of these Scriptures, is by a Metonymy translated from the holy Ghost to the thing there signified.  
Lest any demand, why prophetical influences, or any other symbol of God's extraordinary presence, should be called by the name of the third, rather than of the first or second person of the sacred Trinity, I propound as probable these reasons following.  
1. The Spirit of God moving upon the face of the waters, (Gen. 1.2.) supposeth for God cherishing, ripening, perfecting the rudiments of the world in the creation. What transcends the sphere of created activity, is equivalent to creation. The archetypal discovery of things contingent and future, is of that rank. Should I yield that the bodies assumed by God the Son, when he preluded to his incarnation; the fire which appeared to Moses in the bush; the pillar of fire, and the pillar of the cloud, which went before the Israelites in the wilderness; the cloud and lightning upon mount Sinai; the fire which consumed the sacrifices, and the cloud over the ark in the Sanctuary, etc. were not produced immediately out of the barren womb of nonentity, nor yet from indisposed matter; yet by an allusion made to an expression used in the history of the beginning of God's works ad extra, the holy Ghost may signify Gods more than ordinary manifestation of himself.  
2. As creation (which was the first of God's works) is attributed to the first person of the sacred Trinity; redemption which is the foundation of all good to be communicated to us, which fallen man cannot lay claim to titulo creaturae, to God the Son; so God's manifestations of himself, which confer to the applying of Christ's merits to ourselves, which bring salvation home to our souls, are attributed to the third person. Prophecies which illuminate our minds, and sanctifying graces are by this account fitly ascribed to the Spirit.  
3. If we attend the order of persons in the sacred Trinity, the holy Ghost is nearest to creatures: So the absolving and perfecting of God's works is congruously attributed to him: He is fitly said to brood the waters, to overshadow the Virgin Mary, to seal the elect. Apponit ultimam manum to prophetical influences. The hand of the Lord fell upon Ezechiel, Ezech. 8.1.  
In the minds of all Prophets illuminated by the word of 〈…〉 Lord, or vision 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 insculpta est forma spiritualis, (as R. Meir in Avoda Kodesch, but in another sense). I conceive not that God spoke to the Prophets by compounding or dividing acquired species, although I think not that way impossible. Jamblichus requires the same conditions to prophecy, which Plotinus (in the last book of his last Euneade, and the last chapter;) to consummate man's happiness. 
* De myster. c. 22.  Praesagia (saith he) sunt animae redeuntis in se, in statu simili somno, in se (inquam, id est, in rationes seminales & intellectuales. He expresseth himself more clearly in these words following: Quoniam verò sunt in anima rationes generabilium penes potentiam ejus, tum effectivam, tum etiam cognitivam, atque hae rationes dependent à rationibus, quae sunt in diis, ideò anima his conjuncta, rationes in se suscitat in actum. There is a seminal virtue in the cognitive part of the soul, which cherished by an union made with the divine nature, propagateth itself into prophecy. The soul withdrawing its self from worldly affairs, is thickened into stronger virtue, and suscitated by an union made with the ideas in the divine essence, is productive of prophecy. Plato in his sixth book de Republ. giveth the same account of Philosophy to be attained, & was of the same opinion concerning Prophecy. Marsilius Ficinus in his argument to that book, expresseth Plato's judgement in these words; Ostendit Plato Philasophi montem in ipsa veritatis indagatione s●jungi à corporo, atque ex quadam sui cognitione divinae menti conjungi, ac per insitas sibi ab initio formulas idearum, ideas ipsas attingere, ab eísque ipso contactu lumen excutere, quo mox facta foecundior concipiat, imò facta validior pariat veritatem, id est, per ipsas suas conceptiones ideis undique congruat. Compare Plato's words in the book praised. To one who is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he prescribes this course; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Non ante fatigetur & expetere desinat quàm propriam cujusque naturam eâ animi vi attigerit quâ id apprehendere convenit. convenit autem vi quadam cognatâ: quâ cùm adhaeserit, séque ei quod verè est, miscuerit, atque indè reverâ intelligentiam veritatémque genuerit, cognoscet utique verum, veréque vivet atque aletur. The soul by an earnest desiring and diligent searching after truth; (that is, by love) is united (saith he) to the ideas of the chief good, is thence enlightened and strengthened, and so conceiv's and brings forth truth, apprehensions congruous to the ideas in the divine essence. Jews vary somewhat from this opinion, as holding that the soul whilst the spirit of prophecy resteth upon it, is mingled with the order of Angels, called Ishim. I shall not spend time in explaining their conceit (which hath in it more subtlety than truth). See Maimon. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cap. 2. sect. 2. and Jews cited by Vorstius upon the place. 
* Prophecy must necessarily differ also from the beatifical vision, quia evacuabitur in patria, 1. Cor. 13.8.  Prophecy is not to be referred to innate ideas stirred up and quickened in the mind; not to a metamorphosis of the mind, by which some Rabbins imagine it to be elevated into Angelical perfection; but to representations produced in the understanding. Those forms infused into the minds of Prophets, whether visio or verbum, were in them 
* Tho. Aquin. in 2.2. quaest. 171. art. 3.  non per modum habitûs, sed per modum passionis, seu impressionis transeuntis.  
As Prophets could not foretell all things, so neither had they those supernatural impressions which they received, remaining with them at all times. Prophetical light was in their understanding as in the air, not as in the Sun. S. Paul spoke with tongues more than all the Corinthians, 1. Cor. 14.18. probably with more than the rest of the Apostles by acquired skill; but God suggested language to each of his extraordinary ministers according to necessity.  
That I may yet further explain ideas impressed upon the minds of Prophets▪ I shall show how they differed one kind of them from the other. The word of the Lord in the mind of the Prophet, is of the same nature with representations produced by words; Vision after the manner of resemblances arising from things: Sicut humana consuetudo verbis, ità divina potentia factis loquitur, (as S. Austin in his 49. epistle.) He who by his word created the world, doth by his power also form his creatures into words. Nor doth he in this way only apply himself to the outward senses, as did Tarqvinius to the messenger sent from his son, by lopping off the heads of the tallest poppies. Who received Prophetical vision, had elegant characters written in their minds by the finger of God. Her's eloquence above the style of humane expression. In the first chapter of Ezechiel the eighth verse, Behold, I even I am against thee, and will execute judgements in the midst of thee, in the sight of the heathen. Here's Verbum Domini. Thus saith the Lord, is prefixed before it. In the second verse of the tenth chap. And he spoke unto the man clothed in linen, and said, Go in between the wheels, even under the Cherub, and fill thy hand with coals of fire from between the Cherubims, and scatter them over the city. And he went in my sight. Here is vision. There the species impressed in the mind of the Prophet were immediately verborum, but there rerum▪ There seemed something to be spoken, here somewhat to be done. There the Lord foretold the destruction of Jerusalem, here by coals of fire scattered over the city, praefigured it. The word of the Lord was either proper or tropical; and sometimes was contained in one trope, and sometimes in an allegory: of this last sort is that Esay 6.25. The wolf and the lamb shall feed together. The same distinction hath place in vision.  
In external visions there might be tropi & allegoria rerum, by which future things were presignified. Again, what was presented to the eye, was sometimes real, sometimes merely an apparition: of the former sort was the cloud which appeared to Elijahs servant; and according t● Abenezra, the fire in the bush which consumed it not. His words are these: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it was in the bush, burning round about. He conceived the fire to purify the place of the Shechinah, or divine presence here, as afterwards the Mount on which the law was given. The mountain burned with fire, Deut. 9.15. The Shechinah had fire with it in the first temple. Of the other sort of external visions (not improbably) was the writing upon the wall read by Daniel (Dan. 5.17.) By the vision of the cloud rain was foretold; by the fire in the bush not consuming it, God revealed to Moses that the Israelites afflicted by the Egyptians should not be consumed. That was a tropical vision, this an allegorical. In the minds of Prophets (which I may fitly term theatres of future events,) we may observe the like difference of visions. They were proper, tropical, or allegorical. To this last sort may be referred what we have in the 8. verse of the 8. chapter of the Revelation. A great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea, and the third part of the sea became blood. As also third parts of the sun, moon, and stars darkened, and the day and night not shining for a third part, verse 12. And the star falling down from heaven to earth, Rev. 9.1. the locusts coming out of the smoke upon the earth, etc. vers. 3. such also the visions of the horses, and them that sat on them, verses the 17, 18, 19 by the instances given the first difference of vision and the word of the Lord is sufficiently illustrated.  
Secondly, These differed, in that vision oft times by simple appearances, by terms of invention, as hieroglyphics, exhibited what should come to pass. Such was the vision of the seven thunders, Rev. 10.4. this is a vision of sounds. This question is propounded in Plato (lib. 6. de repub.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (wherewith do we see such things as are seen by us?) the answer is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (with sight.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; do we not also by hearing see those things which are heard, and by other senses other sensible objects? His answer is affirmative. Each kind of sensible objects are seen by that sense to which they are proportionable. Colours are seen by the eye, & sounds by the ear, etc. Both sounds and colours, all things which were apprehended by any Prophet, such excepted as had representations answerable to articulate and significant voices, were seen by the mind. This of thunder is (I say) a vision of sounds. Here Deus factis loquitur; here things exhibited to the eye of the mind, represent other things distinct from themselves. But the word of the Lord requireth axiomatical disposition, as we may gather from examples throughout the Scripture.  
Thirdly, Prophetical vision had evermore the word of the Lord, joined with it, unless it exhibited to the mind proper representations of things presignified. But the word of the Lord, if conceived in tropical, or also allegorical terms, in which it was to be exhibited to the people; if not clear by itself, was in proper representations, which also were verbum Domini, elucidated in the mind of the prophet. A 
* See Thom. Aquin 2.2. q. 173. art. 2 (in corpore articuli) & 4. Cùm autem monetur propheta, sed non cognoscit, non est perfecta prophetia, sed instinctus quidam propheticus. See also D. Jackson in his bhok entitled, The knowledge of Christ Jesus, chap. 16.  prophet properly so called understood the analogy between visions and the events represented by them. Without this knowledge he remained unable to foretell what should come to pass, and so unworthy of the name of a prophet. He only telleth what is present, but cannot foretell what is future, who imparteth to others prophetical resemblances which he doth not understand: neither visions allegorical, or simply tropical, sufficed to predictions. This is clear from 
† Gen. 41.  Pharaohs two dreams. Although he saw seven ill favoured and lean-fleshed kine to devour seven wellfavoured and fat kine; and the seven thin ears of corn, to devour the seven rank and full ears, yet he understood not that there should ensue seven good years, and after those seven bad years, and that the scarcity should consume the plenty, till he met with an interpreter. Joseph through divine illumination could expound Pharaohs visions, in like manner as if they had been originally his own. This light vouchsafed to Joseph was like such similitudes as are wont to be produced by speech, and consequently was verbum Domini. His understanding unless so illuminated could not certainly apprehend from the dreams what should come to pass (although he should have known that they were sent into Pharaohs mind by God, and that they were significative of somewhat future) no more than by its self infallibly foreknow contingent things. No created mind can be raised into this perspicacity. Prescience of what is contingent is proper and peculiar to God. Prophetical vision was oft times illustrated, as we see, by the word of the Lord. The word of the Lord was manifest in itself, or declared by prophetical influence of the same kind. This is their third difference. I acknowledge (without revocation of what hath been said concerning vision and the word of the Lord distinguished,) that a prophet informed by either kind of divine influences mentioned was called (Roeh and chozeh) a seer, and that God spoke to his prophets by visions. I well attend that the word of the Lord to Ananias, is called (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) a vision, (Acts 9.10.) that Isaiah saw the word of the Lord, Isaiah 2.1. moreover that God spoke in divers manners to the Fathers by the prophets. An answer is mingled with the objection. I add that the understanding may be called the eye of the soul, that a prophet by Heathens was called vates (as 
* Thom. Aquin. 2.2. quaest. 171 art. 1.  some conceive) à vi mentis, as more perspicacious than others; that the word of the Lord, was supernatural light. Moreover that external words, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) when written, became the objects of outward sight, and that Deus factis loquitur. Abarbinel in his preface to his comment upon Esay, conceiveth (although we read oft in sacred Scriptures that God spoke to Moses,) that the Lord never revealed himself to Moses, by that kind of prophecy which is called the word of the Lord. Hence it is clear, he thought the word of the Lord to be a distinct kind, or (at least) manner of prophecy, and that God spoke to the prophets by other revelations besides the prophetical word. For further satisfaction see Aristot. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as digested by Goulson, chap. 13. But in his works Graeco-Lat. printed at Paris in 4. tomes, Ann. 1639. chapter 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Angels which appeared visibly to men might be called (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) visions, according to Luke 1.22. The spirit which keeps our souls in life, performs the offices of the soul, doth abundantly compensate that scantness which is in its faculties. Man's happy in his defects. These occasionally unite him to God, who vouchsafes graciously to become their compensation. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 moreover 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (see Aristotle in the fifth chapter of his third book de anima, t. 18.) the same after an eminent manner agrees to God. God's works within us are as admirable as his works without us. What he made by creation without us, that he can create again by illumination within us. By repeating what he spoke in the beginning of the creation, Let there be light; he can make us to understand whatsoever he hath made. What Aristotle attributes to the mind is much rather to be ascribed to God. Intellectus, as it is agens, cannot be said to make all things, but with limitations. 
* Any created understanding, at most is but (as Aeschylus saith of fire stolen by Prometheus) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Intellectus agens (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) makes all things quoad cognosci. God likewise maketh all things quoad esse, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Such things as are known, have not only to be known, but also to be even their essences from the chief good, (as Plato divinely in his 6. de repub.) Again, the understanding makes all things quoad cognosci, that is, all things which in an ordinary way are known: God can make whatsoever hath a being, to be known. 
* Colleg. Conimbr. in 3. de anima, c. 5. q. 2. a. 1.  The Peripatetics tell us, that intellectus agens hath three offices: 1. illustrate phantasmata: 2. efficit objectum intelligibile actu: 3. producit in intellectu species intelligibiles. Some add a fourth, viz. that it compoundeth and divideth simple representations of things intelligible. These conditions if truly attributed to the understanding, may be attributed also to God, as concurring with it. 
* Plato lib. 6. de repub.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. He makes the sight to see, and such things as are seen to be perceived. The understanding in all its actions dependeth upon God, but God in the production of intelligible representations needs not the concourse of the understanding, nor yet the presence of the object from whence those intellectual forms, which are commonly said to be produced ab intellectu agente, proceed. Vision and the word of the Lord were immediately from God; the intellectual faculty and intelligible objects not interceding. God hath vouchsafed to perform by himself the three offices of the understanding afore mentioned. Christ, when he had expounded the Scriptures to his disciples, opened their understandings, Luke 24.44, 45. God by giving the spirit of prophecy, illustrated what was to be known, illuminated the minds of those to whom he communicated himself, and made what was remote actually intelligible. Moreover vision and the word of the Lord, in the minds of prophets were representative of things compounded or divided. Themistius tells us that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that intellectus agens is most like unto God. Alexander in his second book de anima, chap. 20. and 21. holds that intellectus agens is God, that it is that understanding which was the creator of all things. Plato seems to be almost of the same opinion by his sixth book de republica. Themistius upon the third de anima conceives as much. What Aristotle (as appears from his words before cited) attributes to a light within us, Plato (de repub. lib. 6.) refers to a sun without us; to him who is the true light, that enlighteneth every one that cometh into the world, (I mean) to the eternal Son of God. Knowledge (saith Plato) is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Besides the eye of the mind and intelligible objects, he judgeth a sun necessary to the procreation of sight, of truth, of knowledge. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This sun (to wit whose beams are knowledge and truth) I call the offspring (or son) of the chief good, whom the chief good hath begotten like and equal to himself: what this in an intelligible place to the mind and things understood, that the other corporeal sun in a visible place to the sight and things seen. Almost each word is big with a deity. The son of the chief good! and whom the chief good hath begotten! and begotten like to himself! and who is that to the mind and things intelligible, which the sun to the sight and visible objects! and that sun in an intelligible world, as this in the visible! He could not speak more clearly that there is a Son of God; or that this Son of God is God; or that by him mankind is illustrated. Platonists had as good reason to conceive that S. John was one of their tribe from the ninth as from the first verse of the first chapter of his 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. thus Amelius in Euseb. praeparat. Evangel. lib. 11. c. 19 Vigerus thus translateth him into latin: Atque hoc planè verbum erat, inquit, per quod sempiternum cùm esset, existebant omnia quae siebant, quemadmod m Heraclitus loqueretur, quod ipsum videlicet Barbarus etiam ille, apud Deum in principii gradu ac dignitate constitutum, imò & Deum simul esse pronunciat: per quod facta simpliciter omnia s●nt, in quo quicquid factum est, & vivens & vita, & aliquod pro sua quodque naturae fuerit, etc.  Gospel. Mankind is illuminated by Christ the eternal word and wisdom of God. This illumination by Plato hath place in Metaphysical contemplations. Corruptible things are (saith he) confused, mingled with darkness, and (as colours not illustrated by the sun) have a perpetual cloud upon them. The mind converting itself to these, is perplexed and intricated in uncertainty and diversity of opinions. Truth and knowledge are begotten by an union of the soul with the ideas of the divine essence. According to Plato God (we see) is intellectus agens, to wit, performeth, when metaphysical truths are understood, what offices are commonly ascribed to that faculty. That God performs by himself what is attributed to the said faculty, when truths are conveyed into the mind after a metaphysical way, viz. by the spirit of prophecy; cannot be denied. That the lowest order of Angels, by the Rabbins supposed to confer the spirit of prophecy, 
* See Maimon. de sundam. legit, c. 7. sect. 2. Vorstius upon that tractate, c. 1. p. 19 c. 7. p. 90. Selden, de Jure Naturali & Gentium juxta disciplinam Hebraeorum, lib. 1 c 9 p. 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115. That learned Author in these pages confirmeth, that some Pagans, Jews, Mahumedans, and Christians have conceived, that somewhat distinct from the soul, to wit, the supreme God, or some of his ministering spirits, or each answerably to differences of persons, and occasions, were intellectus agens. I have not h●re produced any testimonies about Intellectus agens, but what occasioned by discoursing of prophecy, I cited in public, before that noble work was printed. Authentic writings intimate, as I shall sh●w hereafter, that God spoke to the Prophets sometimes immediately, sometimes by his ambassadors the Angels. Later Jews (as sectatours of Plato) are more for mediators, than were their predecessors; yet some of them as they hold that their nation is governed immediately by divine providence (without the intercession of the host of heaven and the Angels) so likewise that God immediately illuminated Hebrews, which became Prophets. I may not here omit that Ralbag upon Pro. 1.8. departeth from most writers of his tribe (I mean Jewish Doctors) as making intellectus agens the mind, or a faculty of it, and that, against all reason, passive. Upon the comma quoted, (My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother) by father he understandeth God, and by mother, intellectus agens. Intellectus agens, (its convenient here to prefer his sense before a Grammatical construction) conceiveth Prophetical influences instilled into it by God. For this cause (as he goeth on) our Doctors of blessed memory have called it Metatron, which signifieth a mother in the Roman language  is by them called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intellectus agens, evidently shows that they were of the same opinion.  
The Apostles filled with the holy Ghost, began to speak with other tongues, as the spirit gave them utterance, Acts 2.4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est sententiosa quaedam & mirifica loqui: cujusmodi erant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, item non tam ex se quàm ex numinis afflatu & impulsu loqui, sicut de prophetis scribitur, 2. Pet. 1.21. Thus Beza upon that text. They spoke with other tongues, as the spirit imprinted in their minds representations, or characters, such as was the prophetical word. It's easy likewise by what hath been spoken, to interpret that of our Saviour, Mat. 10.19. It shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. Divine truths contained in sacred Scriptures, by which soever of the ways mentioned at first revealed to Prophets, when to be committed to writing, were by the word of the Lord as a new edition imprinted in the mind of the penman, if not known before to such a person, or if forgotten, perhaps sometimes as to be further confirmed to him; 
* Maimonie saw this truth, but perplexed, & as through a cloud. See More Nevoch. part. 2. cap. 45. de secundo gradu prophetia.  at least wise God by the secret insinuation of his spirit, unless he used the ministry of an Angel, or some other outward expression equivalent, commanded that he should write what he perceived. And what thou seest write in a book, Rev. 1.11. Writ the things which thou hast seen, etc. vers. 19 We have other instances in the Apocalypse, chap. 14.13. and 19.6. and 21.5. When any one by divine authority wrote, what he knew by the light of nature, or what things he had seen done, his Commission had the like signature. That divine influence which was called the word of the Lord, was oft (as I may fitly call it) the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that or somewhat equivalent, was always the seal of truths, whereof God peculiarly and by way of appropriation vouchsafed to be accounted the author.  
I have reckoned up several ways, and (I believe) the heads of all, according to which God revealed himself to his Prophets. Those who understood what should come to pass, by notions instilled into their minds, had vast advantage if compared with such as were informed by external resemblances, 
† See Maimon. de fundam. leg. c. 7. & Vorsti●● ibid.  and are the only men by Rabbins thought worthy to be entitled Prophets. Some Hebrew Doctors affirm, that Bathcol (filia vocis, of which I have spoken already) was in Israel after prophecy ceased; and that Urim and Thummim is one of the 
‖ According to some Hebrew Doctors some degrees of the holy Ghost fall short of prophecy. Urim and Thummim are disposed by Maimon. in the second degree of (or rather to) prophecy. See More Nevoch. part. 2. cap. 45. Abarbinel with others are divided from Maimon. etc. He affirmeth in his Comments upon Esay 11. that there was no prophecy, and that there was no holy Ghost in the times of the second House. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bath kol according to this Doctor could be no degree of the holy Ghost.  degrees of the holy Ghost, between that voice and prophecy. But I cannot persuade myself to rely upon rabbinical Scriptures, unless for history concerning things appertaining to their own nation & their ancestors; neither in that perpetually.  
Prophecy seems to be distinguished from dreams sent into the mind by God, and from Urim. 1. Sam. 28.6. When Saul enquired of the Lord, the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Vrim, nor by Prophets.  
General words for several reasons are confined to part of their signification.  
Moreover, those were Prophets eminently, who had resemblances of things future impressed upon their minds as occasions required, throughout the remainder or 
* Necessariò enim ause●tur prophetia ab omnibus reliquis prophetis (excepto Mose) ante mortem istorum; ídque vel brevi, vel diu, sicuti patet exemplo Jeremiae, de quo dicitur; ad finiendum: vel, quo finiebatur verbum Domini in ore Jeremiae: & Davidis de quo legimus; & ista sunt verba Davidis postrema. Idem enim est judicium de omnibus. More Nevoch part. 2. c. 45. Although I approved not Maimonides his opinion, I conceived it not necessary to contradict it.  greatest part of their lives after God once began to reveal himself in such manner to them. God sometimes upon special occasions revealed himself to some extraordinarily in dreams, whom he never (if we may judge by histories propagated to us, and other probable reasons) before or after illuminated by prophetical influences. See Gen. 20.3. & 31.24. Matth. 2.12. Joseph the husband of the Virgin Mary, though God spoke to him sundry times in dreams, according to his private exigencies, moreover when he commanded him to flee into Egypt, communicated to him the present danger of the child Jesus; when he enjoined him to return into Judea, the death of Herod who had sought the life of the child, is not where called a prophet. God signified not to Saul by dreams what he should do, or what he should omit, as to Laban, Abimelech, and to the wise men of the east, who had visited our Saviour at Bethlehem, and to Joseph. God neither made him a prophet for his private and present necessity, nor yet informed him by his prophets in ordinary.  

† Quando verò dicitur, & venit Deus ad N. in somnio noctis, id prophetia minimè nuncupari potest, neque vir tal●● propheta: sensus etenim est quòd (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) adm●nitio, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quaedam, viro ejusmodi á Deo facta fuerit; deinde quod in somnio illa contigerit. Nam quemadmodum Deus caussatur, ut homo moveatur ad alium vel defendendum & liberandum, vel perdendum & cccidendum: sic quoque caussa est Deus ortus illarum rerum, quas in somniis nocturnis exoriri vult. Notum enim est, neque ullum dubium, quin Laban Syrus perfectissimè impius fuerit & idololatra: & Abimelech, licèt vir bonus in suo populo fuerit, tamen de ipso, de terra & regno ejus dicit Abraham, Non est timor Dei in isto loco: nihilominus de utroque, Labane, inquam, & Abimelecho legimus; & venit Deus ad Abimelech in somnio noctis: & venit Deus ad Labanem Syrum in somnio noctis. Quocirca observa istam differentiam inter haec duo, & venit Dominus: Item, & dixit Dominus: & inter in somnio noctis, & in visionibus noctis. De Jacobo dicitur, Et dixit Deus ad Israelem in visionibus noctis: de Labane autem & Abimelecho, & venit Deus, etc. Hac de causa exposuit Onk los ista; & venit verbum à Domino: non autem dixit de duobus istis, & revelavit se Dominus. Maimon. part. 2. cap 41. Compare Matth. 2.12. The wisemen being warned of God in a dream, that they should not return to Herod▪ departed into their own country another way. This Scripture in part approveth what cited out of Maimonides. Eliphaz, though not to be reckoned a Prophet, was instructed from visions of the night, Job 4.13. Truths not contingent, but of eternal necessity, are suggested to him after the way of prophecy, by which we are virtually admonished not to plead with God.  Again, those more properly may be said to have been prophets, who were informed by divine revelation what should come to pass, than those who merely what they should do or omit. God oft vouchsafed the latter to some to whom he denied the former; but was wont to reveal the latter to whom he communicated the former. God frequently in dreams imparted to men what he would have them to do or omit; so by Urim and Thummim to the Israelites, that they should go up or not go up to battle, without presignification of any event. The rest of the Israelites were commanded to go up against the Benjamites, yet were discomfited by them. God instructed not Saul whether or no he should go up against the Philistims, by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by any who was wont to foretell future events. The words are yet capable of another interpretation. God answered not Saul by dreams or by Vrim, that is, revealed not to him whether or no he should go up to battle; nor yet by prophets, that is, what should be the issue, if he went up, whether or no he should be victorious.  
That noted place in Homer, Il. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. is explained by what I have now commented upon 1. Sam. 28.6. Among the Egyptians the high Priest is reported by Aelian in the last book of his history, to have worn about his neck a saphire stone, which was called (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Truth, (in imitation of the Jews Urim and Thummim, which also Empereur upon Moses Kimchi's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad scientiam, l. 2. c. 7. and Ainsworth upon Exod. 28. observed. Urim & Thummim in regard of the manner after which Gods will was thereby revealed, may be referred to prophecy. And the dignity of the high Priest resulting from this ornament was the more conspicuous, in that revelation was in the first place made to himself alone, and by him communicated to those who came to inquire of the Lord. When any enquired, the Priest stood with his face before the Ark; and he that enquired stood behind him, with his face to the back of the Priest, if we may believe Maimonie, etc. Paul instructed by a differing kind of revelation, had as great advantage of his fellow-travellers. He heard an articulate voice, they only a sound. God oft conversed as privately, but not so familiarly, with those to whom he communicated himself by outward, as with them into whom he inspired inward representations of things to be made known. God was more intimate to these transcribed himself into their minds: they were pleni Deo. But howsoever ideas of things to be known infused into the mind, were more a man's own than those that were objects of the ear or the eye; the word of the Lord derived by the sense of hearing, or (when written) by sight, more enabled to prediction of things to be accomplished. Externall vision, howsoever tropical, together with the word of the Lord interpreting it, sufficed to the foretelling of what should come to pass; and internal vision, unless exhibited in proper resemblances, plain terms, was impotent to that purpose.  
The external word was sufficient by itself to make a Prophet. Samuel by the Lords speaking audibly to him, was known to be a Prophet throughout Israel.  
If God (as Josephus reporteth Antiquit. Judaic. l. 3. c. 9) when he would be pleased to go forth with the Israelites armies, and to deliver their enemies into their hands, foretold victory toward them by supernatural splendour of the twelve precious stones in the breast plate of judgement, verbum propheticum statum determined that sign to this signification. The onyx upon the right shoulder of the Priest, shining in time of sacrifice could not be the Urim. Abenezra upon Exod. 28. observeth that Urim, as also Thummim, is (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) res plures. Josephus perhaps thought the twelve precious stones named Exod. 28. as by extraordinary brightness prophesying victory, were the Urim, (lights:) and as by their native and constant virtues representing that holiness and integrity which God expected in his ministers were Tummim (perfections.) What before expressed at large, and quoted, oppose some difficulties against this opinion. Abenezra telleth us expressly upon Levit. 8.8. that Urim and Tummim were not the stones of the breastplate. That I may regress whence I have diverted; Abarbinel (in his Preface to his comments on Esay,) dormitat, 
* See also Maimon. in More Nevoc. part. 2. c. 36. 42, 44. & passim.  as conceiving 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (somnium & visio) to be species of prophecy, adequately dividing it; moreover (with his author there cited) as believing that the Word of the Lord is (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Prophecy conveyed in a dream. Although we find not in sacred Scriptures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (And the word of the Lord, was to Moses) nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) The word of the Lord, which was to Moses,) it is clear that both Moses and Esay were oft illuminated by that kind of prophetical influence. Who received vision or the word of the Lord, waking, had advantage of those, who received the same kind of prophetical influence, sleeping. Hebrew Doctors are discovered to have been of this judgement, asserting 
* See Abarbinel in the preface to his comments upon Esay.  that the spirit of prophecy never came upon Moses, who by their unanimous consent is the coriphaeus of Prophets, nor upon Isaiah eminent in prophecy, except when his spirit was dejected with grief for Hezekiah, but when he was waking. Christ was informed according to his humane nature by that 
* It appears from what precedeth that there were two kinds of prophetical resemblances, the Word of the Lord, and vision, that each (distributed ex subjectis) was internal or external, that inward representations of each kind, in regard of the dispositions of the subject, may be distributed into those which fell into the minds of Prophets waking, and those which were infused in time of sleep. I conceive that agreeably enough to Hebr. 1.1. a distinct subject, or varying disposition (such as mentioned) of the same, sufficeth to make distinctum (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) modum prophetiae, but that I may fully be understood; add that Christ was altogether informed by the most perfect kind of prophecy, (viz the word of the Lord,) conveyed after the most familiar and noble way (to wit, infused into his mind,) and when he was most conveniently disposed (viz. awake.)  manner of revelation, which was most noble, by the word of the Lord impressed upon his mind, whilst he was waking. No instances can be alleged against this assertion. Christ, as a man, was accomplished in prophecy, both for substance and circumstances, to the extent of humane capacity.  
Fifthy, Prophetical influence was not at any time conveyed into Christ's mind by the ministry of an Angel. Deus permittit quaedam (saith Julius Scaliger: 
* Exercit. 307. sect. 25. ) alia insinuat per se, id est, afflatu: alia per ministros immateriales: alia per materiales, unde oriuntur disciplinae ex scientiarum communicatione: alia per principia naturalia connata nobis: quae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ab Aristotele appellantur. Plato imagined that the souls of some men departed made daemons, dispensed prophecy to the living, as 
* De Isid. & Osyride.  Plutarch observeth. Whether or no souls in statu separato, can communicate their conceits to those in statu conjuncto, or yet one with another; and if so, by what means, are difficulties which cannot be resolved by the light of natural reason. I doubt not, but Scaligers immaterial ministers are the Angels. I cannot see but these may illuminate men's souls, as well as one another. 
* See Vorstius upon Maimon. de fundamentis legis. c. 7.  Talis prophetiae extruitur discriptio ex Hebraeorum ment: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prophetia est influxus promanans à creatore in prophetam, interventu ultimi gradus angelorum, seu Ischin. When the spirit (of prophecy) resteth upon any one (saith Maimonie de Fundam. leg. c. 7. sect. 2.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commiscebitur animae ejus cum gradu Angelorum, qui vocantur Ishim. In's More Nevochim, he excepteth Moses. He affirmeth that all other Prophets were illuminated by the ministry of Angels. The same author (de cultu stellarum ac planetarum, & statutis Gentium, cap. 6. sect. 2.) witnesseth that Ob (that old serpent) gave answers to those who enquired of him, 
* Compare with this place, after Dionys. Voss. Esay 29.4.  not perceivable by the ear, but (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) cogitation. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Angelus praefectus spiritibus (viz. of those who are about to die, and of the dead) by Talmudists is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perhaps from species (which are like to things represented) impressed upon the spirits of such as are obnoxious to this Angel, about to die, (whose souls he is supposed to call out of their bodies) or dead. Rabbins affirm that species were sometimes instilled by Angels into the understanding, sometimes into the fancy according to divers degrees of prophecy. I shall add Thom. Aquin. primâ summae Theol. q. 111. art. 1. He followeth Dyonis. affirming (cap. 4. coelest. Hierarch.) that prophetical revelations are not conferred upon men but by the mediation of Angels. Intellectus humanus (as he fond conceiveth) non potest ipsam intelligibilem veritatem nudam capere, quia connaturale est ei ut intelligat per conversionem ad phantasmata, & ideò intelligibilem veritatem proponunt Angels hominibus sub similitudinibus sensibilium; secundùm illud quod dicit Dionys. cap. 1. coelest. Hierar. Quod impossibile est aliter lucere nobis divinum radium, nisi varietate sacrorum velaminum circumvelatum.  
R. Meir in Avoda Kodesh part. 4. c. 28. is of opinion that Angels never conveyed revelation to prophets properly so called: that according to the opinion of some ancient writers, they were created on the first and fifth days, and invested in airy bodies, appeared to such as were below the degree of Prophets, constituted in the first degree of vision, which was called (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) gradus vestimenti, or in the second which was called (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) apertio oculorum.  
These conceits may conveniently be omitted without refutation. An Angel spoke within Zacharie, Zach. 2.3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is, after Hierome, & ecce angelus, qui loquebatur in me egrediebatur. (Yet I deny not but the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signify what I find in the Caldee paraphrast, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is (as in our English translation) talking with me. I find in August. de spiritu & anima (if that book be his work) this sentence; Angeli miris modis visiones suas facili quâdam ac potenti unione nostras esse faciunt, & quodam ineffabili modo in spiritu nostro informant, atque imprimunt, ut spiritus earum non possit oblivisci. Erasmus denies this tractate to be S. Augustine's; and Trithemius saith that Hugo à sancto victore compiled it. But S. Augustine in his 4. book de Trinitate, hath what to the purpose. Neque ad illud quidem digni habiti sunt (he speaks concerning heathenish philosophers) ut eis ista per sanctos angelos nunciarentur, sive forinsecus per sensus corporis, sive interioribus revelationibus in spiritu expressis, sicut patribus nostris verâ pietate praeditis, haec demonstrata sunt. As God used Angels in the dispensing of prophecies that he might honour them by so noble employment, so men are the more ennobled, when they have more immediate converse with God. 
† I may here seasonably add to what I before quoted out of Jews, the opinion of Mahumedans. They tell us that God speaketh to man three ways, viz per inspirationem, aut compellando ex occulto, aut per missionem legati. He revealed (say they) to Abraham that he should sacrifice his son. He spoke after the second way to Moses. So he speaketh to angels. Sic quoque alloquetur Deꝰ aliquando piam animam, videlicet vel in morte vel in resurrectione, vel in ingressu in paradisum. God spoke to Christ (say they) as to other prophets (Moses excepted) by an angel vide plura apud Levin. Warner. incompend. hist. eorum quae Muhammedani de Christo, & praecipuis aliquot religionis Christianae capitib. tradiderunt, p. 8, 19 My Thesis (viz. That Christ according to his humane nature was immediately illuminated) is confirmed by Jews and Mahumedans contradicting it.  Moses, esteemed most excellent in prophecy, was thought (as I have said) to have enjoyed immediately colloquio Dei. He stood upon the highest degree of jacob's ladder, and therefore needed not angels ascending and descending. I shall here again make use of that lemma, with which I concluded the last article of my discourse: 
† I may here seasonably add to what I before quoted out of Jews, the opinion of Mahumedans. They tell us that God speaketh to man three ways, viz per inspirationem, aut compellando ex occulto, aut per missionem legati. He revealed (say they) to Abraham that he should sacrifice his son. He spoke after the second way to Moses. So he speaketh to angels. Sic quoque alloquetur Deꝰ aliquando piam animam, videlicet vel in morte vel in resurrectione, vel in ingressu in paradisum. God spoke to Christ (say they) as to other prophets (Moses excepted) by an angel vide plura apud Levin. Warner. incompend. hist. eorum quae Muhammedani de Christo, & praecipuis aliquot religionis Christianae capitib. tradiderunt, p. 8, 19 My Thesis (viz. That Christ according to his humane nature was immediately illuminated) is confirmed by Jews and Mahumedans contradicting it.  Christ's humane nature was inspired with the spirit of prophecy, (both substance and circumstances attended) in its perfection.  
Sixthly, the soul of Christ was never, whilst it received divine revelation, in an ecstasy; Christ according to his humane nature had in this respect great advantage of other prophets. Ecstasis according to Lactanctius, est affectus eorum, qui ment sunt emotâ. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hypocrates and Galen is the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This kind of ecstasy by Aristotle is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by Plutarch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2. An ecstasy is taken for a peremptory sequestration from thoughts and deal with the world, for the ravishment of the mind by contemplation of truths revealed to it, Acts 10.10. and 22.17. The soul raised from the body by extraordinary converse and union with God, is ecstatical. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for astonishment through admiration, (Mark 5.42. Luke 5.26.) 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  with Suidas is interpreted by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is amazement or astonishment arising from admiration mingled with fear, almost the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Mark 16.8. 5. Abscessus, discessus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Calidorum fervor nullius rei accessu, sed caloris abscessu refrigescit. 6. Egressio rei è natura propria. so 'tis the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In this sense it's used by theophra. lib. 3. the cause. plant. by Plutarch, sympos. 8. Lactantius his description of ecstasis is as we see too narrow. Some Hebrew Doctors hold, that Prophets suffered an ecstasy in the last acception. See Vorstius upon Maimon. de fundam. leg. c. 7. s. 2. I esteem this opinion altogether unworthy of refutation. Montanus by words, or gestures, or both, affirmed that Prophets were wont to be driven into ecstasies of the first and fifth kind mentioned; that they were driven into fury, and bereaved of the use of reason. The former of these opinions is refuted by Miltiades quoted by Apolinarius, and out of Apolinarius by 
* Hist. Eccles. lib. 5. cap. 17.  Eusebius: both of them by Hierome in his preface to his Comments upon Esay, and Cunaeus de repub. Judaeor. lib. 3. cap. 7. That God pro lumine adempto (if we understand the light of reason) scire futura daret, implieth a contradiction. If any affirm that God's Prophets uttered predictions, which by reason of ecstasies into which they were transported, they were less able than others to understand: I add, that what is reckoned the first among God's gifts bestowed upon his Ministers, should prejudice the receivers. I cannot suspect that God's prophets were not sui compotes. One main reason for which God all-sufficient by himself, useth instruments, is that he may honour his creatures by making them his Ministers. I readily believe that it is otherwise with the devils agents. How savagely he dealeth with them we may gather from Clem. Alex. in Admonit. ad Gentes, (edit. Paris. Anno 1641. p. 58.) Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. 5. c. 16. demonstr. Evang. lib. 5. prooem. Neither ought we to measure God's prophets who were sanctified persons, by unrighteous men to whom upon certain occasions he communicated himself. Dicitur in V. T. Propheta qui furore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 correptus eructat verba quae ipse non intelligit, ad laudem Dei pertinentia, quamvis non fundat oracula de futuris. Talis Saul qui primo libro Samuelis cap. 19.24. prophetans abjecto paludimento, humi volutabatur: quae quidem erat insania quaedam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ad avertendum ejus cogitationem à Davide, quem quaerebat ad necem. Molin. in his Vates, lib. 1. c. 4. See also John 11.50, 51. Caiaphas' understood not his prophecy. Peter and Paul fell into ecstasies of the second kind, Acts 10.10. and 22.17. God's prophets (I conceive) were oft astonished through admiration and fear, (single, or both together) whilst God revealed himself to them, especially if by instruments perceivable by the ear or eye, Moses hide his face: for he was afraid to look upon God, Exod. 3.6. The women to whom an Angel appeared at Christ's sepulchre, were affrighted, Mark 16.5. when the prophet Daniel saw a vision, (Dan. 10.8.) there remained no strength, no comeliness in him. Frail man, ever since Adam's fall, hath been wont to be afraid of messengers from heaven. We hence apprehend that God's prophets sometimes suffered also an ecstasy, or want of vigour in their corporeal faculties. Their senses were undoubtedly weakened together with their bodies. Yet I cannot believe what some Jews affirm, That a prophet, whether receiving a vision or a dream, (they acknowledge no other way to prophecy unless in Moses) was, during the time of his information, 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say Hebrew Doctors. See Abarbinel in his preface to his comments upon Esay.  wholly bereaved of the use of his senses. Besides that fear which naturally accompanies man in statu lapso, another reason may be rendered of that faintness which befalls the body in prophetical revelations. 
‖ Maimon. consenteth, de fundam. leg. cap. 7. s. 3.  The soul neglects those offices which its wont to perform to the body, as occupied by those glorious objects which are offered to the mind. Thence together with God's goodness dilating the mind, as also from the divine revelations, the intellectual faculty of the soul is strengthened: so far what causeth a weakness in the body, is from introducing a deliquium in the understanding. Christ in that according to his humane nature he was pure from guilt, could not be astonished with fear; nor yet, sigh nothing befell him whereof he knew not the reason, with admiration. The inferior part of his soul was so far conformed to the superior, and this to Gods will, that I cannot conceive that he was obnoxious to ecstasies of the second kind. Divine truths were familiar to him: it was as meat and drink to him to do the will of his Father. Forasmuch as he was not touched with fear, nor yet raised above his ordinary temper and capacity, when revelation was suggested to his humane nature, he was illuminated without detriment to the strength of his body and sensitive faculties. That I may conclude this article, each kind of ecstasy in some respect or other denoteth imperfection. Moses is by Jews more exempted from them then the rest of the Prophets. Our Saviour was humbled by his sufferings, but so as he ever remained most eminent in his offices.  
Seventhly, we owe to Christ's merits all revelations of divine truths since Adam's fall, whether before or under the Law. This assertion needeth no explication.  
Our Saviour was anointed a King, a Priest, and a Prophet. Melchisedec was a King and a Priest; Moses, as also David was a King and a Prophet; Elijah a Priest and a Prophet; our Saviour (as 
† Some hold that Melchisedec was a type of Christ according to his three offices.  some conceive) was the first who was anointed King, Priest, and Prophet, was the true 
‖ Trismegistum vero ter maximum nuncuparunt, quoniam & philosophus maximus, & sacerdos maximus, & rex maximus ex licit. Marcil. Ficin. in arg. ad Mercurii Trismegisti Pymand.  Trismegist. He was anointed that he might be fitted to save. He was Christ before he was Jesus. Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed, Joh. 6.27. Christ glorified not himself to be made an high Priest, but he that saith unto him, Thou art my Son, to day I have begotten thee.  
As he saith also in another place, Thou art a Priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec, Heb. 5.5, 6. see also verse 1. and 4. of the same chapter. Christ was authorised by God to save sinners. We have the great seal of heaven for his sufficiency: we may safely rely upon him as our Jesus. This name imports the end of Christ's coming into the world, and what benefit is to be received from him. Thy name is as ointment poured forth, therefore do the virgins love thee, Can. 1.3. Jesus is nothing else but Christus protensus or effusus: Our high priest shed his blood, poured out his soul for us. The ointment wherewith Christ was consecrated, 
* Psal. 133.2.  runneth down to the skirts of his garment, perfumes each member of the Church whereof he is Head. Non modò lux, sed & cibus quoque est nomen Jesus: oleum quoque sine quo aridus est omnis animae cibus: sal est sine cujus conditura insipidum est quicquid proponitur: denique est mel in over, in aure melos, jubilum, & simul medicina (as sweetly Bernard). O salvificum & animarum liquefactivum superdulce nomen Jesus! This 
† Name in these Scriptures is the same that the person named. The number of names together were about an hundred and twenty, Act. 1.15. Whosoever shall break one of these least commandments, & shall teach men so, shall be called the least (that is, shall be the least) in the kingdom of heaven, Matth. 5.19. neither were these phrases peculiar to Hebrews.  name is above every name, Phil. 2.9, 10. There is no other 
† Name in these Scriptures is the same that the person named. The number of names together were about an hundred and twenty, Act. 1.15. Whosoever shall break one of these least commandments, & shall teach men so, shall be called the least (that is, shall be the least) in the kingdom of heaven, Matth. 5.19. neither were these phrases peculiar to Hebrews.  name under heaven given amongst men whereby we must be saved, Acts 4.12.  
That I may omit varios lusus eruditorum ingeniorum, collected by Scultet. (delit. evangel. c. 1.) the reason of the name imposed, expressed Matth. 1.21. leadeth us to the true notation: She shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins. The name in Greek and Latin imitateth the Syriak 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Many ancient writers of note affirm, that S. Matthews Gospel was first written in Hebrew. 
‖ Any language used by Hebrews, may as well be called Hebrew, as Jews Assyrians, because (captivated) for some years they lived some of them in Assyria. Sacred Scriptures are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with Themistius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where he quoteth the beginning of the 21 chapter of Solomon's Proverbs, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I judged this whole period worthy to be exscribed.  It's probable they meant Syriack, the language used by Hebrews in the times of our Saviour and his Apostles. S. Matthews Gospel, and the epistle to the Hebrews were probably first written in Syriack. Tremellius in his preface to the translation of the Syriack Testament, conceiveth that the 
* The postscript to the Gospel of Mark in Erpenius his Arabic edition, telleth us, that S. Mark wrote it in Latin. Many writers, not of vulgar note, testify as much. Concerning the archetypal languages, in which the Gospels of Mark & Luke were written, see learned M. Selden in Eutychii orig. pag. 152, 160, 161, 164.  rest of the Syriack Testament anciently extant, was translated out of the Greek into that language by the Apostles themselves, or their disciples. He useth as an argument for the antiquity of that translation, that the second Epistle of S. Peter, the second and third of John, the epistle of Judas, the Apocalypse, and the history of the accusation of the adulteress, John 8. are wanting in it. I shall not need to object any thing against his reason, besides that he acknowledged those Scriptures omitted in the ancient Syriack translation authentic, and that it is improbable that the penmen of the New Testament, forasmuch as they were the amanuensis of the holy Ghost, completed any their writings, after they were made public, by a second edition. The history of the adulteress in S. John, is surely ex confesso, as ancient as the rest of his Gospel.  
The Gospel according to S. Matthew (saith Theophylact) was translated into Greek by John the Evangelist; by James the brother of our Lord, saith Athanasius; Hierome confesseth he is ignorant who was the Greek interpreter of that Scripture. The Syriack word for Jesus, is originally from the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whose Hophal in writings yet extant (in sacred Scriptures) signifieth servavit, or rather salvavit. Hence Hoshea the name of the son of Nun, who led the children of Israel into the earthly Canaan, and so prefigured Jesus who leadeth true Israelites into the heavenly. His name, 
* Jews feign that jodh was added to the beginning of a masculine name, because it was taken from the end of a feminine (Sarai), solicitous lest the Law should lose one iota.  jodh added, began with the same letter. Sigma in the end of our Saviour's name supposeth for nghajin; a dental for a guttural. In the Caldee word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 terra, we have a guttural for a dental. There's the same way from Thebes to Athens, and from Athens to Thebes. The last letter of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, might perhaps be lost in some Texts of the New Testament, incuria scriptorum. Jews both Talmudists and other, commonly call Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which unless we understand the guttural (which perhaps by reason of difficult expression might be omitted by Greek writers, and Sigma sometimes added as a Greek termination) cannot signify a Saviour. Yet even this word, if we use that kind of Cabbala which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Notaricum, according to which the first or last letters of words are put for whole words, will direct us to our Shiloh. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gen. 49.10. 
† See Archangelus in his Commentary in propositiones Cabalisticas Pici Mirandulani. Morinus in Pentateuch. Samar. Exer. 2. cap 8. Jews wickedly imagine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Rasche Teboth, to signify 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  The three first letters of the three first words make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sentence is expressed in those three words, as well as by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Jews should be no longer his people, or that he should be no longer worshipped by the Jews, Dan. 9.26.  
Jesus is well interpreted by the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which as Tully confesseth, Latino vocabulo uno exprimi non potest. Servat is (as Manutius notes upon that place in Tully) qui nè salus amittatur, aliqua ratione praestat: salutem dat, qui amissam restituit. Antigonus for liberty restored to the Lacedæmonians, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Athenians restored to their laws and freedom by Antigonus and Demetrius his son, entitled them (as I gather from Plutarch in his Demetrius) saviours and gods. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (as we see) is more than servator, to wit such a one as restoreth immunities lost. Christ may be said to be servator daemorum, as preserving them from relapsing into nothing; but deserveth an other name, as he rescueth his elect from the merit of their sins. The Latin Fathers in the Primitive Church, apprehensive of the scantness of the word servator, by a new word salvator, construed Jesus and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I cannot so far by an opinion smile upon Magicians, as to attribute to any name's virtue which may dispossess that strong man the devil; nor yet have I so intemperate an ear, as that I should not esteem the name Jesus sufficiently melodious. Basilides, of all heretics most delighted with gingling words, because the name Jesus seemed to him not glorious enough, called Christ Goalah and Goalnah (from Gaal redemit). We shall abundantly relish the word Jesus, if we apprehend how much we stand in need of a Saviour. It's so big with significancy, that no one Latin word could express it. Several kings of Syria, who had the name Antiochus common to them were distinguished by glorious epithets. One was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a third 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a fourth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a fifth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The glory of all their attributes is comprehended in the name Jesus, and truly agreeth to Christ. Here's a Saviour of sinful men. Had he not been truly great, illustrious, a most indulgent Father; had he not been God, he could not have been such a Saviour. Whereas there's nothing more glorious than temporal deliverances, which earthly monarches can boast of. Joseph who was but one of Christ's shadows, was called by Pharaoh, Tsaphnath Paaneath, according to Onkelus (upon Gen. 41.45.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a man to whom secrets are revealed, after Baal Hatturim, megalloh nistarim, one that revealeth hidden things; according to Jarchey 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that expoundeth hidden things; but according to Hierome the Saviour of the world. The learned Father thus translates the whole verse; Vertítque nomen ejus, & vocavit eum linguâ Aegyptiacâ, Salvatorem mundi. Christ is the Saviour of the world in a spiritual sense, delivereth from spiritual enemies which are of all enemies most potent and most dangerous. That I may proceed to the points before propounded, He who was Christ and Jesus came into the world to save sinners. 1. Christ came into the world. 2. He came to save. 3. He came to save sinners.  
First of the first. Christ came. There's a threefold coming of Christ; one by his spirit, another in the flesh, a third to judgement. Searching what, or what manner of time, the spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow, 1. Pet. 1.11. likewise in the third chapter of the same epistle, verses 18, 19, 20. By his spirit he went and preached unto the spirits in prison in the days of Noah. In the days of Noah he went and preached to the spirits of unrighteous men, which by reason of their disobedience and impenitency are now imprisoned and fettered in chains of darkness. 
‖ The Author of Seder Olam Rabath (cap. 4.) concludeth from this text, that the men of the age before the flood, neither enjoy eternal life, nor yet are condemned to eternal punishment (with what reason I need not explain). His words are these, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Non fruuntur vita in seculo venture, neque condemnati sunt, quia dictum est, Non judicabit spiritus meus in homine in seculum.  My spirit (saith God) shall not strive with man for ever, for that he also is flesh: & his days shall be an hundrrd and twenty years, Gen. 6.3. Onkelus thus paraphraseth upon that place: This evil generation shall not continue (or be established) for ever before me; for that they are flesh and their works evil: a term shall be given them of 120. years, if they will return. The preparing of the ark could not but furnish Noah with occasions of preaching repentance, to those who lived in the age of the flood. Rasi upon Gen. 6. observes as much. Much space (saith he) was allowed to Noah for the work, viz. because the men of the age of the flood, who saw him employed in the building in the 120. years, would inquire the reason thereof, and when he answered that God was about to bring a deluge upon the world, might perhaps repent. Mr. Ainsworth conceiveth that the Chaldee paraphrast understood by the spirit man's natural life and soul, which God would take away by the flood. But the words cited are capable of a better interpretation, import not that he understood any other 
* See Zohar col. 181.  than the spirit of God. By the spirit of God & of Christ in these texts divine power is signified, which enabled Noah a preacher of righteousness, and instructed the prophets who foretold Christ's sufferings, suggested to the Apostles what they should speak, when they were questioned before governor's. All supernaturally illuminated partake of this spirit. This divine power wont to be instilled into prophets, is by the Jews called (Ruach hannebhuah) the spirit of prophecy, and also (Ruach hakk●desh,) the holy Ghost. It proceedeth, as do also the rest of God's works, ad extra, from all the three sacred persons of the undivided Trinity, but in Scriptures is most frequently ascribed to God the Son, who purchased the communication of it to mankind by his sufferings. Christ's prophetical and regal office are founded in his priestly. That any dark souls are illuminated, that any unruly affections are subdued, is to be attributed to Christ's merits. We should remain both in our natural blindness and perverseness, had not Christ died for us. Christ may be said (prodire or advenire) to come into the minds of his ministers the prophets, as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (1. Pet. 3.19.) warranteth. That word, although omitted by the Syriack interpreter, cannot be suspected to be spurious, in that it's unanimously retained by Greek and Latin Fathers. Christ's coming after the manner explained, is frequent, as appears from what hath been spoken.  
His third coming is in the last judgement: For we must all appear before the judgement seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done; whether it be good or bad, 2. Cor. 5.10.  
His second coming was his coming in the flesh. This was twofold. First, by way of preparation or prelude. The second person of the sacred Trinity, now and then long before his hypostatical union with our nature 
* See Jarchi. upon Gen. 19.18.  appeared in the shape of a man, and so (as Calvine elegantly) preluded to his incarnation. Eusebius is large about this subject, Hist. eccles. l. 1. c. 2. The Lord (saith he) appeared to Abraham sitting by the oak of Mamre; Abraham (saith he) sees with his eyes (viz. his bodily eyes) a man, but worshippeth him, and prayeth unto him as God. He discovered also that he knew him, by calling him the judge of the world. S. Austin orat. 41. super Joannem, saith, Abraham saw the day of Christ's eternal emanation, when as he saw three men and worshipped one. 
* See also Chytraeus in Chronolog. sua, ad annum mundi 2205.  Christ was the man who wrestled with Jacob, (Gen. 32.24.) and the prince of the host of the Lord, who appeared to Joshua, (Joshua 5.13.) according to Eusebius in the place quoted.  
We find Gen. 2.7. that the Lord form man of the dust of the ground: and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life: and man became a living soul. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian conceive, that the Son of God assuming for a time the shape of a man's body, took clay in his hands, and form for Adam a body ad exemplar corporeae illius formae quam gestabat; & insufflando in nares corporis ectypi, inspired into it a soul. Here's a praeludium to what he performed after his incarnation to his disciples, He breathed upon his disciples when he gave them the holy Ghost. God the Son, when at any time before his incarnation he appeared in the shape of a man, created (as it is most probable) a body completely, such as is wont to be informed with a reasonable soul, made it for a time his shechinah, and as he withdrew his divine presence, dissolved it into nothing. These apparitions of of God the Son much differed from his incarnation. When he was incarnated, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in these preludes to incarnation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, at leastwise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. When he appeared to Abraham, to Jacob, to Joshuah, the body assumed was his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. the same cannot be affirmed of his body which he took from the Virgin Mary. Christ incarnated dwelled amongst us in a tabernacle or tent, John 1.14. That is, 
* The Evangelist in that phrase, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, probably alludes to the feast of tabernacles, in, or near the time of which celebrated, by consent of many authors of best note, our Saviour was born.  for a short time, but assumed the body conceived by the Virgin, not for some short time but for ever. When Christ's humane nature was shattered in pieces, the soul and body each rent from the other, both remained united to the second person of the sacred Trinity.  
Secondly, He assumed this body into the unity of his person. what we read Coloss. 2.9. doth not discountenance this truth. For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily: that is, he is very God. The Apostle useth an Hebrew idiom. The same word in Hebrew (viz. nghetsem.) signifieth corpus, substantia, and likewise ipsemet ipsummet. The verb is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The humane nature was shechinah, not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the divine: in the foresaid resemblances of incarnation the body assumed was both. You perceive already what was his other coming in the flesh. 'Twas his coming by way of real exhibition. 'Twas the coming of God-man. This coming was twofold, The first was the union of the two natures, The word was made flesh. God became man. He who was from all eternity adorned with infinite and incomprehensible glory, condescended to our rags, induit sordes nostras. Neither did he take upon him our nature by creation, but became one of Adam's posterity. 'Twas requisite that the same who sinned should suffer. 'Twas requisite that he should be the 
* Vide Irenaeum adversus haereses lib. 4. c. 57  Son of man. 
† In sacred Scriptures what agreeth to Christ by reason of his divine nature is predicated of man, and what to him by reason of his humane nature, is predicated of God, such communication of idioms, is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Nicephorus Bishop of Constantinople in an epistle to Leo Bishop of Rome, annexed to the Greek Counsels. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Thus much Zonaras promiseth to the Canons of the Ephesine Synod. This Council 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Niceph. in the epistle to Pope Leo before praised. See also among the Counsels an epistle of Acacius Bishop of Constantinople to Peter Bishop of Antioch. And about these mentioned, and other heresies concerning Christ, an epistle of Faustus Bishop of Apollonius to the same Bishop of Antioch. Peter of Antioch is here censured as unworthy of the epithet Christian, because he affirmed that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and in way of reproach called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Communication of idioms cleared in sacred Scriptures, vindicates Peter Fullo Bishop of Antioch. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also, howsoever it hath been abused, may in regard of its notation, be interpreted (as Hebrews speak) rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (ad laudem) then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (ad contumeliam.) He must needs be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to whom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as construed by Faustus, seems an heretic. The Bishop of Antioch his fault is variously reported in the epistles of other Bishops who wrote to him and against him. In an epistle written by Pamphilus abid. Episcop. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ibid. In an epistle of Quintian Asculan. Episcop. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  He who had ubiquity for his palace, was contented to be enclosed in the virgin's womb. That God should so fare honour man's nature, is a true saying and worthy of acceptation. The other coming of God-man, Immanuel, was his birth. Jesus Christ very God (against 
‖ I mention Arians as most infamous for this heresy, but well know that Arius was not among those who professed themselves Christians, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Theodotus (saith Eusebius Hist. Ecclesiaest. lib. 5. c. 28.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Natalius persuasus erat à Theodoti discipulis, ut accepto salario haeresis hujus vocaretur Episcopus, ità ut denarios centum quinquaginta menstruo tempore acciperet: illis itaque conjunctus per visiones commone fiebat à Domino. Quoniam verò negligentiùs visionibus attendebat, tandem ab angelis flagellatus est, ac totâ nocte haud modicè verberatus. In Eusebius his words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Compare with this sentence, 1. Cor. 5.5. 1. Tim. 1.20. And Hierome, Ambrose, Theodoret, Oecumenius, Theophylact, quoted by Bishop in his perpetual government of Christ's church, chap. 8.  Arians, likewise against 
* Jews denying Jesus Christ to be God, abundantly refute themselves, and one another. See Hebrew comments upon the second Psalm, Galatinus de Arcanis Catholicae veritatis, lib. 3. Empereur in his comment upon Abarbinel upon Esay, in his preface to his translation of Halicoth olam, and upon Jachiades upon Dan. c. 11. v. 38. Mr. Henry smith's treatise entitled God's arrow against Atheists. Sepher Jetzirah as illustrated by Rittangle (one to whom the Hebrew language and Jewish writers are so familiar, that he might seem to have been born a Rabbie.)  Jews and 
‖ The Alcoran acknowledgeth Christ to be God's ambassador, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his Word; the Gospel to be the word of God, but by reasons the same which are used by Jews, insinuateth that a Trinity of persons in the divine essence is impossible. It falsely supposeth that if there be three persons, there must needs be a Trinity of Gods. That article of Christian faith, concerning the Son of God becoming the son of man is misconstrued, Azoar. 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And they say that God assumed a Son. Christians are by Mahumedans called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Associantes (that I may use the words of Erpenius in Histor. Joseph. comma. 106.) Quod Jesum Christum Deum esse dicunt, veróque Deo tanquam diversum, ut faliò illi opinantur, adjungant. Christians affirm not that God became a father by assuming into his nature, the person of God the Son; nor yet that the two natures of the Son of God are distinct persons, nor that God hath more sons then one, unless by adoption, and spiritual generation (by which I mean regeneration). See in the supposed Gregory Thaumaturgus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and σ. with their elucidations: Christ is the Son of God the father; those who are regenerate, although opera trinitatis ad extra sunt indivisa, according to Scripture language, are born of the spirit. The faith embraced by Christians, acknowledgeth for its rule the Gospel, which authors of the Alcoran confess to be divine truth. But moreover should Christians at any time have erred, as affirming that the divine nature was divisible, or divided, at ind●gni ●i qui reprehenderent, who affirm that God when he had formed the body of man of mud, breathed into it part of his own soul. As Christ is God, so he is equal to God the Father. The same indivisible nature cannot agree to several persons according to several degrees. Eusebius doth not contradict what propounded in sacred Scriptures to be believed, as did Arius, but also the light of natural reason. In his Evangelicall demonstration, God the Father is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And cannot (saith Eusebius) assume a body: God the Son is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) compared with God the Father is (saith Eusebius blasphemously) as an ambassador to his prince, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Demonstrat. Evangel. lib. 5 c. 1, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 20. the title of the twenty fifth chapter, cap. 30. lib. sexti prooem. c. 16, 17, 20. That I may omit similitudes by which Field upon the Church, Dr. Andrews in his sermons, and Dr. Jackson (in his knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, chap. 30.) excellently illustrate the union of the two natures in Christ; Gregory Thaumaturg. serm. in Annunciat. Mariae virgins, conceiveth that the Margarite consisting (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) ex duabus naturis, ex fulgure nimirum & aquâ, is a fit resemblance. The Trinity of persons in one undivided nature, whereof each is infinite without infinetenesse multiplied, and duality of natures, whereof one is finite the other infinite, in the same individual person, are mysteries which men and angels ought to believe, and may admire, but cannot comprehend nor perfectly represent by any resemblances.  Mahumedans) very man, (against the Marcionites) God and man together by personal union, (against the Nestorians) came into the world, (that is) was born. This is his advent or coming meant in my text.  
He came into the world, that is, was in lucem editus. This his coming was promised to our first parents in Paradise, prefigured by variety of types, prophesied of by Jacob, (Gen. 49.10.) foreseen by Job, (as may be gathered from Job 19.25.) prophesied of 
* With whom I may join Hermes in his book inscribed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. See Lactantius, lib. de vera sapientia, cap. 6. Marsil. Ficin. Argument. in Merc. Trismegist. Pymand.  by Balaam, (Num. 24.17. promised to David, 2. Sam. 7.16. and 1. Chron. 17.11, 12.) foretold by the 
† See Constantine's oration in Eusebius, after the life of Constantine, cap. 18. and 20. Clemens Alexandrinus Strom. l. 6. Lactantius lib. 4. c. 6. to whom may be added Justine, Athenagoras, Austin, Virgil, Eclog. 4. others. If any surmise that predictions attributed to Sibyls, were feigned by Primitive Christians preposterously ambitious of promoting a good cause, let him see Constantine's oration before praised; his Epistle also to Arius and his sectatours, extant in the acts of the Nicene Council, part. 3.  Sibyls, celebrated by a choir of Angels, honoured by the three Persians, testified by God himself. God is pleased to dwell with man on earth, the heavens cannot contain him, 2. Chron. 6.18. The voice of my beloved! behold he cometh leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the hills, Cant. 2.8. Vultis ipsos ejus saltus agnoscere? (saith 
* In Evangel. Hom. 19  Gregory upon that place) He leapt (saith he) from heaven into the womb, from from the womb into the manger, from the manger to the Cross, from the Cross into the grave, from the sepulchre he returned into heaven. The first of these leaps is by chrysostom called a great stride: by the second of them he reached into the world, according to the mind of my Text▪ He who was 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Nonnus.  eternal was born. This is a true saying. God who is truth itself, prophesied and promised this birth to our first parents in paradise. God out of his transcendent lenity, promised mercy, before he passed sentence upon them. Our Saviour is called the woman's seed, Gen. 3.15. Were 
† Antiquitat. Judaic. l. 1. c. 2  Josephus orthodox in what he reports concerning the serpent which seduced our first parents, 'twere an easy matter for the woman's seed to bruise his head. He mistakes both in natural and theolo-history; in that, as affirming that the serpent before he deceived our first parents, had the faculty of speech, went upon feet, and by reason of that misdemeanour was amersd these abilities, and also had poison as a badge of his enmity towards man put under his tongue, in this, as esteeming what was only the instrument in tempting Eve, the principal cause, and the promise a precept (the observance of which would prove but of shallow advantage) that God's meaning was, that every one, as he met with a serpent, should strike it upon the head, which contained in it somewhat hurtful to mankind. Onkelus attained the mind of the sentence. He thus paraphraseth; I'll put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy son and her son: he shall remember what thou didst to him in the beginning, and thou shalt observe him in the end. The son of the woman, our Saviour, not the Virgin Mary (as Papists blasphemously affirm) broke the serpent's head, the first of the devils works against mankind: the devil by his malicious attempts endeavoureth to hinder the consummation of God's works of mercy, the application of Christ's merits. No one unless the Son of God, as well as the seed of the woman, could be able to bruise the serpent's head. Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name EMMANVEL, Esay 7.14. 
* Here's habitatio Dei cum carne, which the Magicians conceived impossible, Dan. 2.11.  God assumed our nature, and so became Immanuel. Behold, the Lord rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt, etc. Esay 19.1. This swift cloud (in Aquila's translation) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
* Euseb. Demonstr. evang. lib. 6. cap. 20.  is either our Saviour's body or humane nature. The hypostatical union is likewise foretold by Jeremy, together with intimation of our Saviour's birth, chap. 23. v. 5.6. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous branch, and a king shall reign and prosper, and shall execute justice and judgement in the earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely; and this is the name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (viz. Dionysius in an Epistle written to Euphranor and Ammonius against Sabellius) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Athanas. de sentent. Dionysii contra Arianos.  Intimations and characters of his divinity run parallel with those of his humanity, almost throughout histories concerning him in the Gospels. His birth spoke him man, but to be born of a 
† Non audiendus este Kimchius, quatenus indigitari fingit ab Esaia, prophetiae suae c. 7. commate 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Virgin (and as some conceive without pain) together with the star and 
‖ In the exposition of the sixth chapter de Fide attributed to Gregor. Thaumuturg. it's said, he was born (the choir of angels attended) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: that afterward he sat in the midst of Doctors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  choir of Angels, proclaimed him God: His swaddling bands and the manger spoke him man, and one disrespected amongst men; but the shepherds and wisemen worshipping him expressed him God. His baptism administered by John, declared him a man; but the voice from heaven to be God. He was tempted in the wilderness, but overcame; wept for Lazarus, but raised him from the dead; slept upon the seas, but after he was awaked stilled the waves; tempered the clay with spittle, but opened the eyes of one born blind; Lastly, by his death shown himself man, by his resurrection God. Man ought to suffer in that he sinned; 'twas impossible for any merely a creature, to satisfy divine justice. Whatsoever Jews, Mahumedans, heretics and heathens may conceive of Christ, true believers after S. Peter, with much comfort acknowledge him the Son of the living God.  
That Jesus Christ God and man, was born, is (as I have proved) a true saying: it's also worthy of acceptation. The Church in whose person Solomon speaks (Cant. 2.8.) esteems it so. The voice of my beloved! behold! he cometh leaping upon the mountains, skipping upon the hills. She shouts and skips for joy. But neither is rejoicing abstracted from thankfulness: both are requisite. What's worthy of all acceptation, when it meets with ingenuous spirits, produceth thankfulness as well as joyfulness. Those are swine which feed upon acorns, but never look up to the tree. S. Paul expresseth both in the commendation of his doctrine. He thankfully acknowledges how advantageous Christ's coming into the world was to himself the chief of sinners. And certainly that acclamation of the Church is the voice of thankfulness, as well as of rejoicing. Their rejoicing is the echo of their thankfulness. No man (saith our Saviour, Mark 9.39.) can do a miracle by my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. Who rejoice so openly and so emphatically (as the Church in the place quoted in the Canticles) for a benefit received, cannot easily become sons of Belial, withdraw their necks from religion, forget the obligation cast upon them. I may safely add, that the rejoicing expressed by the Church, if it be rightly analysed, will be found to have in it more de amore amicitiae, then concupiscentiae. The godly rejoice more in the advancement of God's free mercy, then in their own salvation. They rather choose to enjoy, then to make use of Christ. I shall show before I proceed to the remainder of my Text, that Christ's coming into the world, abstracted from the end of his coming (expressed in my Text), holds out to us ample matter both of rejoicing and thankfulness. The approach of any good towards us is matter of joy; and if it be freely bestowed upon us, likewise of thankfulness; and so much more of thankfulness, by how much the more freely it comes from the Donour. Grace restored to man (as Thom. Aquin. 2. 2. q. 106. art. 2.) more obligeth to thankfulness, then grace conferred at our creation, quatenus (that I may use his words) magis datur gratis.  
I shall first show, That Christ's coming intimated some good towards us: secondly, That he came freely. The former of these propositions is cleared from the terminus à quo, and the terminus ad quem of his motion, together with the freeness of the motion itself. I must for the present take for a postulatum what I shall hereafter prove, viz. That Christ was not compelled into the world. What besides is repugnant to the freeness of his coming (as moral necessity, by some fond conceived to be cast upon him by man's merits) cannot import that his coming should not be advantageous to us. Christ freely disrobed himself of glory, assumed the rags of our nature, and so disguised visited sinful mankind. That one completely well, much more a great man, a Prince, should bestow a visit upon one sick: That any one should own a friend in great distress, especially one guilty of treason, is wont to be esteemed a great favour. A traitor, if his Sovereign cast a favourable eye upon him, interprets it a pledge of his propitious affections; erects his languishing spirits. Here the Monarch of heaven and earth visiteth mankind in sickness and distress, such as were disaffected towards him, such as were traitors against him. What is the ordinary temper of the world, Cyprian well expresseth in his second Epistle. I have not met with any Author more elegant and copious to this purpose, yet conceive that his expressions settle much below his subject. I shall only give you a taste of him, you have access to the rest at your leisure. Paulisper te crede subduci in montis ardui verticem celsiorem, speculare inde rerum infra te jacentium facies; & oculis in diversa porrectis, ipse à terrenis contactibus liber, fluctuantis mundi turbines intuere. Jam seculi & ipse misereberis, tuíque admonitus & plus in Deum gratus, majori laetitia quod evaseris, gratulaberis. In the same epistle fiunt quae nec illis ipsis possunt placere, qui faciunt. The men of the world were more then vulgarly wicked, when our Saviour came among them. The wickedness of man was great in the earth, and all the imaginations of the thoughts of his heart, were only evil continually. True religion was not where to be found but in Judea, and there only as a few embers in an heap of ashes. How wicked that generation was, besides testimonies in sacred Scriptures, and humane writings, we may in part conjecture from punishments visited upon themselves, and already upon their posterity. But neither is God's indignation yet satisfied. Christ, as if lest at his approach sinful man should be confounded by reason of his own guilt, lays aside his imperial robes, 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc.  appears as a suppliant, rather than one who had potestatem vitae & necis. 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Macar. Homil. 4.  This his coming was his exinanition. He who was in the form of God, thought it no robbery to become equal with God, made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men. Philip. 2.6, 7. This is a good omen. We cannot but suspect his coming besides some good towards us. Christ's coming into the world together with the circumstances of it, insinuate what is clearly expressed, Matth. 20.28. That the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many; His coming, forasmuch as it was not forced, neither  in order to his own ends, must needs be undertaken for the benefit of some others, and of men rather than of angels. He in no sort took the Angels, but he took the seed of Abraham, Heb. 2.16. We have showed that our Saviour's birth containeth in it matter of rejoicing.  
A second scrutiny will discover in it matter of thankfulness. Thankfulness (according to Thomas Aquinas 2. 2. q. 106. art. 2.) is two ways engaged. First, (ex quantitate dati) by the greatness of a gift. Secondly, (ex animo dantis) by the freeness of the donour. The gift itself is naked, unless (as Civilians speak) consensu vestiatur. The benefits about to result from Christ's birth, by the circumstances of his coming, are intimated to be great of the first magnitude. And what good soever acerueth to us by his birth, was conceived in the womb of free mercy. When as sacrifice and offering,  offerings and sin offerings could not appease divine justice, than I said, lo I come, that I should do thy will, O God, Heb. 10.5, 6, 7. He humbled himself and became obedient to the death, even the death of the cross, Phil. 2.8.  
Our Saviour was not merited into the world. 2. not compelled. First, of the first: mankind could not by virtue of merits exact Christ's incarnation and birth. The then present generation did not merit his coming. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et inquiunt (Rabbini nostri,) ait Rabbi Jochanan, Non venit filius David, nisi vel in generatione qua tota est justa, vel in generatione quae tota est impia. [The later part of the disjunction falleth not much short of truth.] See R. D. Kimchi upon Esay, 59.15.  So fare those to whom he came were from meriting his coming, that, some few excepted, they desired him not before he came; welcomed him not into the world, when as he came of his own accord; accepted him not when as he had declared his gracious intentions. I shall afterward ex eadem fidelia prove, that neither such as believed at the time of our Saviour's coming, nor yet the Patriarches could merit his incarnation and birth. First, of the first; 'Tis an axiom in the Civil Law. Quod omnes tangit, ab omnibus debet approbari. But Christ's coming, although it most nearly concerned all the Jews, was so fare from being suffraged by their merits, that it was not voted by their desires. He came unsent for. The Jews some few excepted, and Gentiles generally were affected in like manner with our first parents in Paradise after their fall; readier to run away from God, and to hid themselves from him, then to seek after him. God sought out Adam and Eve, when they endeavoured to shun him, and tendered to them a gracious promise, before they cried mercy. Athanasius in his oration against the Gentiles, illustrates God's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (as discovered by arts of grace now mentioned,) by the similitude of a prince, not permitting his subjects in rebellion, but endeavouring by all acts to reduce them to their duties. The holy Ghost in S. Luke (chap. 15.) useth the similitudes of a woman seeking a lost great, and of a shepherd seeking a sheep that is run astray. A shepherd with a sheep upon his shoulder, engravened upon the communion cup in Primitive times of the Gospel, imported the same notion. Christ took upon him our nature: overtook it, by running after it, as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; also signifies. Those Jews who lived when our Saviour was born, were a generation of vipers, did eat through the bowels of their mother, the more ancient Church. Two tenants they almost generally embraced which could not consist with a desire or yet expectation of such a Saviour. 1. They cried up justification by the works of the Law. They were so fare from seeking after a Physician, that they could not acknowledge themselves diseased. 2. They expected that their Messiah should be an earthly Monarch; that his kingdom should be of this world, that he should by civil power subdue the heathen. These opinions crucify the cross of Christ, are most repugnant to that way which God in his infinite wisdom had contrived for the saving of mankind.  
Secondly, as they sent not for our Saviour before he came, so neither did they courteously entertain him coming of his own accord. He was rejected into a stable 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  at his first entrance. An ample signification of his condescension, as also of the condition of those he came to save! They had sunk themselves below beasts. Besides that it is better to be a beast then to be like one, brute creatures were always subject unto him; men disobeyed him. The whole creation at all times, the fallen angels and men excepted, have been observant of God. R. Jonathan in Maimonides (more Nevoc. part. 2. c. 29.) concluding that the course of nature was settled immediately after the creation, maketh one exception, viz. that God entered into certain conditions with the red sea, that by dividing itself it should open a passage to the Israelites coming out of Egypt. Rabbie Jeremy the son of Eliezer saith, that God did not only make a covenant with the sea, but in like manner with all things which he had created within the six days. This sentence is to be preferred. All creatures void of reason have observed this covenant. All creatures wanting reason have in themselves so much self-denial, that they are ready even against their particular natures, and to their private detriment, to obey God's command. The waters of the red sea stood upon an heap, that the Israelites might be accommodated with a way to escape from the Egyptians. The waters of the river Jordan, that they might open to them a passage into the promised land. The sun stood still that they might conquer the Amalekites; went backward that he might signify time added to Hezekiah's life. The fire spared the three children. Such creatures as have sense, and the faculty of feeling pains if their appetites be not satisfied, have at Gods command used heroical abstinency. The Lions, whose den was made a prison to Daniel, made good what God promiseth, Psal. 34.10. The Lions do lack and suffer hunger; but they that seek the Lord, lack nothing which is good. The Ravens fed Elijah by the broke Cherith, 1. Kings 17.4. When as Jonah commanded to Nineveh, endeavoureth to fly to Tarshish, that is, the contrary way, a Whale brings him back again, lands him on the right shore. Men have frequently neglected their God. When our Saviour came to seek his own, his own received him not. The Son of man hath not whereon to lay his head, Matth. 8.20. That the Messiah when he cometh shall not have whereon to sit, where to rest his body, is affirmed by the Gemarists. Our Saviour may seem to have alluded to such a tradition in the expression quoted.  
Yet there remain other circumstances, which more aggravate Christ's love to mankind; and in that they were foreseen, likewise the freeness of his coming. As he came of his own accord, was not sent for, disrobed himself of majesty, looked upon such as were his enemies, yea rebels against him with a friendly aspect, was not welcomed not courteously entertained at his coming; so neither was he accepted after such time as he had declared his gracious intentions. He came among such as were contumaciously rebellious, so fastened to their lusts, glued to this present evil world, that they would not accept of a Saviour upon most gracious terms offered. When light came into the world, they preferred darkness. The world cannot hate you, but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil, John 7.7. If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you, Joh. 15.18. The Gergesens loved their swine better than a Saviour. The Jews preferred Barrabas before Christ; an enemy to public safety, before one that came to save mankind. As he was vilified throughout his life, so at last by a violent death thrust out of the world. 
* It hath been confessed by ancient Jews, likewise by Talmudists, that the Messiah was to be expected about the end of 4000 years from the Creation. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Traditio domus Eliae: sex mille annos durat mundus. Bis milla annis inanitas & vastitas. Bis item mille annis Lex. Denique bis mille annis dies Messiae. Gemar. Sanhedr. cap. 11. But for our sins (say Talmudists ibid.) which are many, his coming is deferred. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed ob peccata nostra quae multiplicata sunt, abierunt ex eyes (viz. annis) qui abierunt. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Jachiades upon those words, Dan. 12.4. (But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book even to the time of the end) would have us believe, that God sealed up the time of the coming of the Messiah, revealed it to Daniel, as if with Aristotle's Acroamaticks, it should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. He concludeth with truth his animadversions upon that comma: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verùm enim vero Deus non dignabitur clarissima visione, cùm Deus reduce. Zo●nem: tunc intelligemus res ipsu● 〈◊〉 sunt. They shall acknowledge him whom they have pierced for the Messiah. Seasonably add Maimon, in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chap. the last, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nè supputet terminos (viz. temporum) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dixerunt sapientes, expirent animam, qui supputant terminos. R. Jehoshuah the son of Levi, in the Gemara of Sanhedrin, and chapter afore-praised, conceives that God had resolved that men's delinquencies should not retard his gracious intentions, but yet that the coming of the Messiah might be accelerated by their deserts. He thus glosseth upon that of the Prophet Esay, (chap 60.22.) I the Lord will hasten it in its time. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Si mereantur, accelerabo: si non mereantur, tempore suo. Papists entertain this conceit as orthodox. They hold that those who lived before, and those who in the time of our Saviour, by obedience foreseen, and the captivity of the Patriarches in Hades, ex congruo merited the incarnation of God the Son.  Neither such as believed in the age in which our Saviour was born, nor those in times preceding could by their merits procure or hasten his coming. There's (oppositum in apposito) an implicit contradiction, if we say that sick persons by their perfect health merit a visit from a Physician. But neither can the perfect observance of the Law, merit any thing from God.  
As no creature could impose upon God the Son, a Moral, so neither a Physical necessity of coming into the world. Astrologers most blasphemously attribute Christ's birth to the stars. Albumazar affirms, Quoties Saturnus denas sui orbis conversiones perfecerit, hoc est, Expletis annis trecentis, semper quasdam magnas res & admodum insignes evenire. Post Alexandrum enim (saith he) annis trecentis, apparuit Arelasor filius Bel, qui Persas contrivit; & proximé post transactis aliis trecentis annis, apparuit Jesus, Magister & Dux Christianorum. Here's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sufficiently betrayed. He could not (as appears) divine at what time Arelasor foiled the Persians, or when our Saviour was born. He adds 280. years to his true distance from Alexander. Magna Saturni & Jovis conjunctio (say some Astrologers) nascentem orbem initiavit: alia praeparavit diluvium: alia Abraham vel Mose● genuit: alia Jesu adventum praenuntiavit: alia Mahumeti antecessit. Cardan upon Ptolemey's Tetrabible, imputeth Christ's birth, faith with other graces wrought in men's hearts, Christian religion begun, continued, sometimes advanced and propagated, other times depressed and contracted, to the stars. Dum fiunt magnae conjunctiones in primo Trigono, quae durant annis 199. & singulis 20. fiunt annis, nascuntur in orbe inferiori imperia, monarchiae, tranquillitas, pax, ex Solis & Jovis dominio. Item sapientes insignes, sterilitates magnae ob triangulum igneum. Sic incipit Romanorum monarchia sub Julio Caesare in Δ primo, & Jesus Dei lex, & Apostolorum prophetia, & praedicatio, & vitiorum purgatio, idololatriae destructio, & justitiae pietatísque exaltatio, & monarchia sacerdotalis in terra: & per 200. annos donec in primo Δ factae sunt praevaluit monarchia, & lex sancta, pro qua innumeri mortui sunt significante Marte domino Arietis. Thus Haly and Cardan as digested by 
* Astrolog. lib. 2. c. 3. art. 1.  Campenella. Petrus de Aliaco is in points mentioned as blasphemous as these cited, in his concordia Histor. & Astrologiae. That axiom of Pindar, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in that I must be brief in the redargution of these authors, will stand me in good stead. 
† Pererius de divinat. Astrolog. cap. 3. num. 18.  Albumazar foretold that the Christian law should not endure above a thousand four hundred sixty years. Time hath demonstrated him a false prophet. Some have dreamt that Asia and Africa shall be converted to Christian religion by the fiery Trigon, consisting of Aries, Leo, and Sagittarius. Christian religion (say they) began under this Trigon, which also continued 200. years after Christ born therefore from the year 1600. to the year 1800. shall be much propagated under the same triplicity. 
‖ Vide Nunc. prophet. p. 8.  Not attending that in the 16. century, under the watery triplicity, consisting of Cancer, Scorpio, Pisces, Christian religion was more disseminated, if we attend spaces of earth, by Lusitanians, Spaniards, English, and Hollanders, then in the 1500. preceding. 
† See Alsted. Encycl. fol. 1084. col. 1.  Mahumetism which (as Astrologers say) as it began under the watery, shall be abolished under the fiery trigon, gathered strength & vigour in the ninth & tenth centuries, that is, under the fiery triplicity. Besides that I may here seasonably add that rule, much in use with Jews, A testament that faileth in any one point, is authentic in none; experience hath demonstrated Astrologers vain and ridiculous, in the grounds upon which they build those bold assertions produced concerning Christianity. 
* Astrol. lib. 2. cap. 3. art. 4.  Campanella's much more temperate than his predecessors. He takes for an axiom, Leges & imperia quae incipiunt in tarditate anomaliarum, durant temporibus longissimis. He giveth for examples the Babylonian and Roman Empires. He adds, Christus natus est, eligens sibi tempus primi trigoni, omnium optimi & constantiam anomaliarum. Although this Author here tantùm ait, non probat, somewhat came into my mind which may render his conjecture plausible. In the first (1/3) ten degrees of the Persian sphere, is placed 
‖ See learned M. Selden, De Diis Syris, Syntag. 1. cap. 2. (( viz. inscribd) de Teraphim. Joseph. Scal. in sphaeram Barbaricam, M. Manisii.  Virgo pulchra capillitio prolixo, duas spicaes manu gestans, residens in siliquastro, educans puerulum, lactans & cibans eum. We have here according to Albumazar and Friar Bacon after him, a symbol of the nativity of our Saviour. The words cited by the one out of the other, are these. Intentio est quod beatae virgo habet figuram & imaginem infra decem primos gradus virgins, & quod nata fuit quando sol est in virgin, & ità habetur signatum in calendario, & quod nutrit filium suum Christum Jesum in terra Hebraeorum. With whom agreeth the book entitled, Ovid de vetula ad Virginem Mariam, 
O Virgo felix, o virgo significata,  
Per stellas ubi spica nitet.  The sun also (say Astrologers) was in Leo at the birth of Christ, the lion of the tribe of Judah. Should we grant these reports of the nativities of the Virgin Mary and Christ to be true, yet besides that Christian religion (as we have demonstrated) hath been contracted under a fiery, and propagated under a watery triplicity, its clear by undeniable authority, that God doth not always use the stars as mediating causes, nor yet as signs of what he hath decreed in the sublunary world. He created vegetables before the sun and moon (as some conceive) lest any should impute their productions to the influences of those planets.  sponte sol radiat, dies illuminat, fons rigat, nubes irrorat, ità se Spiritus coelestis infundit (as Cyprian sweetly in the epistle quoted) the same may be applied to Christ's coming into the world. That Christ came into the world, is as I have showed, true and acceptable doctrine.  
In the next place, He came to save. 
Ezech. 47.  The waters of the Sanctuary now are up to the knees. We may partly conjecture what were his intentions, by the circumstances of his coming, but in the second proposition have them in some measure expressed. Christ Jesus came into the world that he might become a Saviour. Although my Text seem rather to point at the birth of Christ, than the union of his two natures. God the Son was incarnated that he might save sinners. How thankful heathens have been for temporal deliverances, I have explained upon occasions before offered; and so anticipated what is suitable to the point in hand. I add, that messengers sent by the Athenians to thank Antigonus and Demetrius for their liberty, were by them called (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) by the name wont to be given to those who were sent to inquire of the Oracles. Had Christ come to rescue such as were entire and upright, but enslaved to men; or to satisfy for such as had offended men; or to deliver such as had offended God from temporal punishments; or only to establish the Angels his friends, yet should he have done what all would have looked upon, as much to be esteemed by those whom it might concern. God the Son long before he assumed our nature, went before the Israelites in the wilderness, and brought them into Canaan, Exod. 23.20. Some Jewish Doctors, as Abenezra witnesseth upon this text, say that by Angel here is meant the book of the Law; others understand the Ark of the Covenant: Himself concludeth that the Angel here promised, as a conductor to the Israelites, is the Angel Michael. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) permutation (as Cabalists speak) becomes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Michael. There's only a Metathesis with jod inserted. Abenezra spoke a truth which he comprehended not. The Angel which went before the Israelites is the same with Michael, Revel. 12.7. no other than the Son of God. 
* See Jarchey & Bar. Nachman upon the place.  Other Hebrew Authors infer from that kind of Cabbala, which is called 
† There are three kinds of Cabbala called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 permutatio, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notaricum, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gematria. Gematria (as Elias Levita, and David de Pomis acknowledge) is a Greek word, Geometria; significat autem in arte Cabbalistica, non terrae aut figurarum dimensionem, sed Arithmeticam literarum supputationem, qua dictiones diversae sibi invicem aquivalere probantur.  Gematria, that the Angel here mentioned is (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) metatron. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 metatron (saith Rasi) in Gematrie, is the same that shaddi: the same number is exhibited in the letters of each word, viz. 314. We must in that comma of Exodus before quoted, understand an uncreated Angel. God's name is in him, v. 21. that is, he is God. Nachmanides saith upon the place, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Ipse est Angelus ille redemptor, cui nomen magnum in medio ejus, (scilicet) quoniam in illo dominus petra seculorum, & is est qui dixit, Ego Deus Bethel, (utpote) quod mei sit regis habitare in domo sua. R. Menachem upon the place, saith. His voice is the voice of the living God. God's children owe to Christ, the head of the Church, their temporal deliverances, but are further obliged to him: He came into the world to save sinners.  
So I am fallen upon my third proposition. Major est Dei misericordia quam nostra miseria. The waters of the Sanctuary are now so risen that we may swim in them. Here's the great mystery of godliness, 1. Tim. 3.16. The wits of men and Angels could not have plotted such a way for man's recovery. The devil suspected not that his endeavours against men should by such means be frustrated. 
* I cannot with Clem. Alex. (Paedaegog. lib. 3. c. 1.) so construe that of Heraclitus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.) as to make it signify the hypostatical union of Christ's two natures.  Men may believe but cannot comprehend Christ's two natures so united, as that he who is eternal may be said to be born in time, he who is impassable and immortal to suffer death, etc. There remain two other depths in Christ's coming to save sinners, which render his goodness as admirable as his wisdom. 1. 'Twould be an injury with men (as Salvian well observed) to punish a good son for a bad servant. Here's scarce any difficulty; but I may opportunely suggest, that as Christ's willingness to suffer for us, asserts the justice of God the Father; so it is a remarkable part of his free mercy towards us. Christ of his own accord laid down his life for us. 2. Take into your meditations, who were the objects of Christ's mercy. They were his enemies. It's too frequently a piece of injustice amongst men, to rescue by strong hand and abuse of authority, those from punishment who deserve to suffer. Volenti non fit injuria. God without derogation from his justice freely remits what men had sinned against himself. He declared together with his justice his holiness likewise, in bringing sin to condign punishment; and moreover emphatically his rich goodness, by suffering for sinners and such as were rebels against himself. A young student of History (saith Polybius) universam mundi historiam debet uno intuitu complecti, & velut in corpus redigere. This work is done to our hands in the history of God's mercies and free love towards us. Christ by suffering death for us, did omnem bonitatem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. All other spiritual blessings meet in this as the radii in the centre, and as streams in the fountain: God's pleased to accumulate one mercy upon another. God the Father out of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was pleased to send his Son into the world to die for sinners; and to make this mercy the foundation of others necessary in order to their salvation: To save sinners was the end, the main design of Christ's coming into the world. Calvine chastiseth Servetus affirming that Christ should have come into the world, although man had not sinned. To save sinners was the work for which he came down from heaven. Lord speak the word only, (said the Centurion Matth. 8.8.) and my servant shall be healed. Jesus at a distance by his word cured the bodily infirmity of the Centurion's servant. God by his word created the world. God said, Let there be light; and there was light, etc. Many conceive that God in regard of his holiness could not remit man's sins without satisfaction. All agree, that the way of which he was pleased to make choice for our recovery; was in many respects most convenient. That our spiritual infirmities might be cured, that man might be re-created, 'twas requisite that God should come down from heaven, and that he should not merely speak the word, (be ye saved) but that he should do and suffer many things for us. Our redemption put God to greater expense than did our creation. A sign that we had sunk ourselves below nothing! Vbi virtus (saith Pliny) ibi etiam fortuna. Here are good tidings for those, who were altogether void of virtue: here's salvation for sinners.  
That Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, is a doctrine worthy of all acceptation. 1. This doctrine is acceptable in regard of its author. Should an earthly Prince speak, we should hear him with greedy attention. 2. Acceptable in regard of those by whom it was delivered. It was preached by Angels to Joseph the husband of Mary, and the shepherds; by the Apostles, by Christ himself. 3. Acceptable in that contained in plain terms. Many parts of Philosophy are obscure, and the answers of oracles were oft ambiguous: vitreum vas lambimus, sed pultem non attingimus. This doctrine is so clear, that he that runneth may read and understand. Those who are of weak capacities, are not debarred from it. They may taste how good and gracious the Lord is. But some truths not fundamental have their share in these conditions. 4. This doctrine in regard of its matter, is worthy of all acceptation. This is the very life and soul of the Gospel, the fundamental of fundamentals. That substantial truth which almost all the types in the Law prefigured; that cardinal truth upon which dependeth the rest of the Gospel. This doctrine containeth good tidings of great joy which shall be to all people. Luke 2.10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in my text, is I conceive, the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Here are tidings worthy to be received with full, with complete acceptation. One soul is more precious than the fabric of the world; certainly each man's soul ought to be more dear to him, as the principal part of himself. What will it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Mark 8.36, 37.  
Secondly, as the soul is more precious than all worldly honours, treasures and delight, so salvation is much better than the soul. That which is the happiness, the end of man, must needs be better than man. Grace is better than nature. An habit is extremum potentiae. But our happiness is better than grace. It's better not to be, then to be eternally miserable; and the fruition of God is much above our beings, and means conducing to it. There's a wide hiatus, a vast gulf between the largest of worldly blessings and the narrowest of spiritual conferred upon God's children. Those have an interest in one who knoweth all their wants, who is ready and able to help upon all occasions. The eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous; and his ears are open unto their cry, Psalm 34.15. Should not God see, as well as hear, his children should want many things. We apprehend not all our own wants, and so cannot pray to God for the relief of all. God knoweth what we stand in need of, before we pray unto him, and of his own accord, (without any monitour) is wont to aid us. God's favour likewise is constant. acceptableness with him is, (what Thucydides said of a well composed history) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Our friends upon earth are oft times ignorant of our necessities; oft times impotent, not able to relieve us; sometimes slack, and not forward to help; and very unconstant. Temporal good things are scant cannot fill up the capacities of the soul. Neither is the understanding satisfied with humane knowledge, nor yet the will with worldly enjoyments. Nothing besides God can quiet the mind.  
Thirdly, The recovery of what hath been lost, occasioneth more joy than doth immunity from damage. So much is expressed in three several parables, (Luke 15.) one of the lost sheep, a second of the lost great, a third of the prodigal son. There's joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety nine just persons who need not repentance, Luke 15.7. God's more glorified in the conversion of sinners, than he could have been by man persisting in integre●ity. Converts have much more reason of rejoicing, than they should have had, had they never fallen. We reflect with joy upon evils, which we have escaped. Hac olim m●minisse juvabit. And our joy beareth proportion to our dangers. That our affections might be enlarged in spiritual joy and thankfulness, God hath appointed out of his rich wisdom the Law a Schoolmaster to scourge us to Christ. Dives was right for the substance of his request, containing his affection towards his brethren yet living. A taste of hell much commendeth to us the delights of heaven. S. Paul, as I shown heretofore, is a very pregnant example to this purpose. But moreover the glad tidings preached by S. Paul are worthy to be accepted by all men, as well as to be received with all acceptation. The most righteous among men, Christ himself excepted, stand in need of a Saviour. It's just, (that I may borrow a sentence from Euripides) that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, who do what is not good suffer what is not delightful. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. (saith Herodotus in his Terpsichore) Nullus homo poenam sceleris reus effugit unquam. Forasmuch as we all have sinned, 'tis necessary that we all suffer in our own persons, or some other for us. God the Son took upon him sceleris nostri expiandi parts, was pleased to become our Saviour.  
That Christ came into the world, is a doctrine as true as acceptable. It's an honourable truth, an axiom in faith. The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 express as much; if we admit they are an exegesis of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the epithet of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. For proof of the Thesis, I appeal, 1. To direct and immediate expressions in sacred Scripture. 2. To Christ's sufferings. 3. To means added for the conversion of sinners. 4. To the consciences of sanctified men, those who are most sincere in their lives, and most competent judges. 5. To the prevalency of this doctrine over the power of darkness, over errors and heresies in men's judgements, perverseness in their wills and affections, and corruption in their lives.  
First of the first. Thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins, Matth. 1.21. To save from sin, is to save from sin together with its evil consequents. The Son of man is come to save that which was lost, Matth. 8.11. He came to save those who had gone astray, those that were sons of perdition, and to save them so as they should become lost in their own apprehensions. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world: but that the world through him might be saved, Joh. 3.17. Here's deliverance from the sad effects of sin, viz. riddance from pain, and a restoring to happiness. I may add, that those who receive Christ, obtain a better condition then that which we lost in our first parents; Felix lapsus qui talem ●●ruit Servatorem. Holy Job foresaw this Saviour, I know (saith he) that my Redeemer liveth.  
Secondly, let us take a survey of Christ's sufferings. God the Father covenanted with the Son, that for his sufferings he should see his seed. Christ was the second Adam, by way of representation a public person. S. August. is clear to this purpose: Primus homo Adam sic olim defunctus est (saith he) ut tamen post illum secundus homo sit Christus; cum tot hominum millia inter illum & hunc orta sunt: & ideo manifestum est pertinere ad illum omnem qui ex illa successione propagatus nascitur; sicut ad istum pertinet omnis qui gratiae largitate in illo nascitur. Vnde fit ut totum genus humanum quodammodo sint hominis duo, primus & secundus. Our Saviour is oft called the son of man, that is, of Adam. Ezechiel with the Septuagint is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but Christ is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, the son of the first (Adam) man. He was the next, and only other common person. Had himself been created, or the son of some one besides Adam created, either God through him should have been reconcileable towards some who sinned, not suffering, or some should have wanted access to Christ's merits. Christ, as he was a branch of David, (Jer. 23.5.) and a rod out of the stem of Jesse, (Esay 11.1.) so likewise of Adam. This branch offered up to God sanctifieth the tree. Christ declared abundantly that he came to save sinners, by what he suffered for them. He suffered for us what satisfied divine justice. In burnt-offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hadst no pleasure: Then said I, Lo I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to do thy will, O God, Heb. 10.6, 7. God's will (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) here, as in Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oft, and in Chaldee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is that in which God is well pleased. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 voluntas, signifieth as I have said, (viz. beneplacitum). In Jonathans' Targum (ancienter than any Scriptures whereof S. Paul was the penman) upon Esay, in a sentence for substance of sense the same with what was quoted out of the epistle to the Hebrews. He thus paraphraseth upon Esay 59.16. Et manifestum est coram eo, quod non sit vir cujus opera bona sint. Et notum est coram eo, quod non sit homo qui stet & deprecetur pro eyes: & salvavit eos in brachio fortitudinis suae, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) & in verbo voluntatis suae auxiliatus est eyes. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verbum voluntatis ejus, is no other thing, than his only begotten Son in whom he is well pleased. Christ's sufferings, though but short as considered in themselves, nor longer in his expectation, (he could not despair of victory) received vigour from his divine nature, triumphed over the demerits of sinful men. The sun of righteousness (as Pelbartus allegorising God's covenant signified by the rainbow) falling into a cloud of passion, is our security against a deluge of damnation. Christ, as he came, so he overcame. He lost not his labour: God cannot be frustrated in his undertake. As we may safely believe God in regard of his faithfulness (or truth), so we may safely hope in him in regard of his power and authority to perform what at any time he promiseth. He paid a price sufficient for sins at all times committed, although his merits become efficacious only to those who believe. Sufferings are wont to be esteemed according to the value of persons who undergo them; as what a Magistrate suffereth, much more than what a private person. But neither did our Saviour redeem us at a low rate; He was pleased to demonstrate his love towards us, by sustaining the wrath of God, and shedding his most precious blood for us. Sapph tells us, that love came down from heaven clothed with purple. Sure I am, that he was of that colour before he returned thither. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Christ is the rose of Sharon, Cant. ●. 1. He is ruddy. Cant, 5.10. Who is this that cometh from Edom with 〈◊〉 garments from Bozrah? this that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength? I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save, Esay 63.1.  
Our Saviour's sufferings were much sharpened and embittered by circumstances. 1. He was betrayed of one of his disciples. 2. Valued at the rate of a servant. If the ox gore a servant, or a maid, he shall give unto the master thirty shekels of silver, & the ox shall be stoned, Exod. 21.32 3. He died an accursed death. And being found in fashion in a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, Phil. 2.8. He that is hunged is accursed of God, Deut. 21.23. Gal. 3.13. 4. He was condemned and executed by man whom he came to save. We may here take notice of the omnipotency of divine wisdom, which is wont to abuse men's malicious intentions. men's wicked plots and contrivances improved by God's wise superintendency become ecstatical, produce effects and issues above their own sphere, besides their own nature. God is able and wont to work good out of evil. Hermes tells us, in the fourth of his 100 Aphorisms. that Jupiter configuratus malevolis mutat eorum malitiam in bonum.  
Sacraments used by God's people before & under the Law, looked forward, as these now used by Christians backward to Christ. The Passeover and the Eucharist are pregnant resemblances both of what Christ suffered for us, and likewise of what benefit we receive from him. 
* See Beza upon Acts 15.20. 1. Cor. 10.18. & 21.  Beza is right, as conceiving that the cup of devils, and the table of devils (1. Cor, 10.21.) were an appendix of idololatrical sacrifice, a feast in which idolaters partaked of the altar; and that the cup of the Lord, and the table of the Lord, in regard of analogy was fitly opposed to the cup of devils and the table of devils: yet forasmuch as transubstantiation is impossible, there must needs be much dissimilitude between the sacrificial feasts of heathens, and the Lords Supper, as compared to sacrifices whereof they were appendices. The bread and wine which Christians receive in the Eucharist, are not materially, but only representatively the same thing which was sacrificed for us. The Lord's Supper when first instituted by Christ, resembled what he intended to do for us, and since his passion is a commemorative sign of his sufferings: Christ had not yet offered up himself, when he instituted the Eucharist, & administered it to his disciples. He instructs the then present, and ensuing ages, that no transubstantiation is to be imagined, by enjoining that this service should be performed in remembrance of him, Luke 22.29. 1. Cor. 11.24, 25. Circumcision and baptism set before us what Christ underwent for us, rather as in its effects, then as in itself. That any are circumcised in the inward man. washed from the pollution and guilt of sin, is wholly to be attributed to Christ's merits. In circumcision blood was shed; both blood and water streamed out of our Saviour's side. He is the fountain of all true Sacraments. Moses by Zipporah is called sponsus sanguinum, (Exod. 4.25.) because his life was saved by the circumcision of his son. An husband of blood art thou to me, is translated in Onkelus, For the blood of this circumcision my husband is given me. He paraphraseth thus upon the latter part of the verse following, But for the blood of this circumcision my husband must needs have been killed. The Arabic Interpreter of the Pentateuch, made public by Erpenius, upon that comma in the fourth of Exodus, may be construed by this Latin; Et arripuit Tseforah petram, & abscidit praeputium filii sui, & ostendit inter manus suas, & dixit, Quia sponsus occisus tu mihi. The sense here is the same clearly, that before in the Chaldee. Zipporah circumcised her son, because her husband was but as a dead man, otherwise had been slain.  
Thirdly, Christ hath plentifully demonstrated that he came to save sinners, by means which he useth that he may make them partakers of his merits. He useth, saith Clemens Alexandrinus in his Paedagog. lib. 1. c. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that he may convert them.  
1. He puts them in mind of their faults. This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouths, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is fare from me, Esay 29.13. Matth. 15.8. This engine by Clemens Alexandrinus is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
2. He reprehendeth peremptory sinners, signifieth his displeasure against them and endeavoureth to shame them out of their lewd and vile courses. These reprehensions the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is defined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. They were as fed horses in the morning: every one neighed after his neighbour's wife, Jer. 5.6. We have another example Hos. 4.15, 16, 17.  
3. God expostulates with froward sinners. Expostulation in Greek is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, It's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Expostulatio est quae artificiali auxilio clam peragitur vituperatio, quae ipsa quoque saluti providet, sub integument●. What could have been done more unto my vineyard, that I have not done in it? Esa. 3.4. For why will ye die, O house of Israel? Ezech. 18.3.  
4. In the next place (I shall only suggest hints to your meditations) consider how often God repeats threaten and promises, inculcates rewards and punishments.  
5. God chides sinners as refractory, and perverse to their own destruction. This kind of reprehension is called by the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. woe to the rebellious children (saith the Lord) that take counsel but not of me, that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin, Esay 30.1.  
6. He refuteth sinners. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (redargution of sinners) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. They have forsaken the Lord, they have provoked the Holy one of Israel to anger, Esay 1.4.  
7. I may add his upbraiding of sinners. Then he began to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repent not: Woe unto thee Chorazin, woe unto thee Bethsaida; for if the mighty works which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repent long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon, then for you. And thou Capernaum which art exalted to heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: For if the mighty works which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained unto this day, Matth. 11.20, 21, 22, 23.  
8. Christ lamenteth the death of sinners. Christ lamented for the folly of Jerusalem, which would not take notice of the day of her visitation.  
9 Christ in the Sacraments which he enjoined us, condescendeth to our earthly apprehensions, rendereth his goodness visible, setteth salvation before our eyes.  
10. God writeth his laws in the hearts of his elect, enableth them to perform what he requireth from them, to believe, to repent, to observe in some measure each precept of the Moral Law. The new covenant is founded upon better promises, than was the old, Heb. 8.6. God as the Legislatour of the Moral Law, with the Egyptian taskmasters, required the full tale of brick, but allowed no stubble. He no where promiseth that he would dispense to any in this life (our Saviour excepted) grace enabling to fulfil the Moral Law. Those graces which enable us to observe conditions required in those who shall be saved, are to be referred to Christ's merits. He is the Mediator of this better covenant. Hence it appeareth that he came to save sinners.  
Fourthly, the consciences of God's children attest abundantly the truth of this doctrine. God hath sealed them, and given them the earnest of the spirit in their hearts, 2. Cor. 1.22. and 5.5. Ephes. 1.13. These Scriptures (I conceive) do not only concern the preachers of the Gospel, but exhibit to us the condition likewise of other believers. 1. God immediately inclineth his children to rely upon his goodness and free mercy. 2. He teacheth them to be observant of him, as well as to expect good from him; to observe him in duties of both tables. They have experience of reformation in themselves, which they know to be above the strength of nature. They know it to be as impossible for them so to reform themselves, as for a camel to enter through the eye of a needle. They perhaps also sometimes conceived (their affections rendering their judgements partial) that victory over some lust or other, was above the power of ordinary grace, or at least thought that they should one day perish under this or that corruption. How great a change is wrought in their souls, we may judge from that of the Prophet Esay, chap. 11.6. The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid: and the calf and the young lion, and the fatling together, and a little child shall lead them. We know how hard a task it is to change what's natural. Can the leopard change his spots, or the blackamoor his skin. It's more difficult to change nature itself. Water may for some time lose coldness, a quality natural to it, so as it may retain its nature. God's children are born again by regeneration, and made partakers of a new nature. Grace wrought in the heart is a pledge of salvation, the first fruits of heaven. This gracious reformation whereof Christians have experience, was purchased by Christ's merits. First, it resembles Christ's death and resurrection. We may oft by certain lineaments in children discern their parents. Secondly, the Gospel is the great power of God to conversion. The conversion of souls is above created strength, and God is not wont to cooperate with false means. The Gospel directeth us to Christ, as the fountain of grace and salvation. What Manilius fabulously reporteth of Orpheus, is true of Christ. 
Et sensus scopulis, & sylvis addidit aures,  
Et Diti lacrymas & morti denique finem.  Christ, (that I may omit Sozomen reporting that a tree in Egypt bowed itself in honour to our Saviour there present; which story, or rather fiction, Scultetus also mentioneth, exercit. evangel. l. 1. c. 59) moveth stocks and stones, our stupid and stony hearts. Here's also finis mortis, the death of death. The remnant of the distich quoted out of Manilius (& Diti lacrymas) is capable of such an interpretation as may illustrate another argument propounded, viz. that the prevalency of the Gospel over Satan's kingdom, demonstrates that Christ came into the world to save sinners. That the Gospel hath prevailed over perverseness in men's wills and affections, and corruption in their lives, is evident to the consciences of believers, and oft acknowledged by profane persons. Many who will not themselves have Christ to rule over them (sons of Belial) perceive and confess in others the powers of godliness. Add the demolition of the Jews Ecclesiastical policy, the downfall of heathenish oracles, 
* See Plutarch de oracultrum defectu, in his history about the death of the great Pa●.  the shriekings of damned spirits, the triumphs of the Gospel over heathenism, over errors and heresies in the Primitive Church, and in later times over Popish superstition.  
Use 1. Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. Hence take notice of that great evil which is in sin. As it thrust our first parents out of Paradise, so likewise occasionally brought the Son of God down from heaven.  
2. Learn we also hence how to esteem the Ministers of the Gospel; they preach true and acceptable doctrine. How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the Gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things? Rom. 10.5. Let a man so account of us as the Ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God, 1. Cor. 4.1. Whereas many sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, God is known in Judah. Should God send a famine of the word (which judgement he threatens the Israelites, Amos 8.11.) those Gospel-priviledges would be more precious in our sights, which we now in plentiful measure enjoy, but undervalue. Then might we say, (
* Gen. 42.1, 2.  almost in jacob's language) Why look we one upon another? Behold, we have heard that there is spiritual food in such or such a country, let us remove thither that our souls may live, and not die.  
3. Did Christ Jesus come into the world to save sinners? Let none dare to profane these names in cursing or swearing. Corruptio optimi est pessima. Some learned men have conceived (as Plutarch tells us in his Agis and Cleomenes) that as of oxen being dead and rotten there breed bees, of horses wasps, of ass' beetles; so men's bodies when the marrow melteth and gathereth together, do bring forth serpents. The grace of God, if turned into wantonness, becometh the savour of death unto death. And those sink themselves deep into condemnation, whose sins mention what should induce to repentance.  
4. Neglect not salvation purchased by Christ. O taste and see that the Lord is good, Psal. 34.8. Divine goodness hath condescended so fare, that it is obvious to sense, to the sight in a body assumed, born, conversing with men upon earth, dying, rising from the dead, ascending into heaven; but moreover to the taste (Popish transubstantiation disclaimed) in the Eucharist. But to be affected only with what tickleth our senses, with what pleaseth the fantasy, doth not transcend Popish superstition. We must see God's goodness with our understandings, and taste it with rational affections. I deny not but both seeing and tasting may well agree to the understanding. The intellect as it containeth eminently some one sense, cannot comprehend sufficiently God's clemency. Yet I should choose rather to attribute tasting to the affections. We should at least but Tantalise, if we should see and not taste. We must taste, otherwise we cannot see how gracious the Lord is. We may learn who receive Christ aright, and likewise be incited so to receive him, from John 1.12, 13. But to as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God; even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. Those who receive Christ aright, are not overswayed by natural corruptions, nor yet by the commandments of men; moreover attain somewhat both beyond the reach of nature and education, are by regeneration conformed to Gods will. 
* See Field concerning several degrees of Love, in the Apendix to his third book of the Church, chap. 5  They embrace Christ not only as a Priest offering up himself for their sins, but likewise as a Prophet to direct them, and as a King to rule over them. They are made the sons of God, and heirs of eternal life, and shall for ever enjoy the presence of God. Bonum, honestum, & utile, & jucundum meet together, as we see, in the receiving of Christ. Christ's blood, the true Pactolus (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) floweth with riches. One drop of it is enough to enrich thousands of worlds to all eternity. Uranople (the new Jerusalem) hath its foundations garnished with all manner of precious stones, Apocalyp. 21.19. If heaven upon earth be so glorious, what shall we conceive of heaven in its proper place. As it cannot seem a new thing, that truths so precious should want acceptance, so undoubtedly some time or other each truth will obtain audience. When any of us is in danger of death, or at furthest immediately after death, S. Paul's doctrine will be confessed worthy of all acceptation. All who have heard it, and not received it, will acknowledge themselves fools at the day of judgement.  
5. Let us offer up all possible praise, honour, glory, and thankfulness to the sacred Trinity contriving such a way for our recovery; to God the Father who gave his only begotten Son, in whom he was well pleased, to be a ransom for us; to God the Son who suffered an accursed death for us; to that Spirit which sanctifieth us. Let us propagate our thankfulness into our lives: Let us not think any piece of self-denial, any service too dear for God. Christ hath descended lower for us then 'tis possible for us to debase ourselves for him. The saints upon earth sing a new song in the honour of Christ; Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: For thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation, Rev. 5.9, 10. Heaven answers as by an echo, the music upon earth in the mean time continuing, verse 11, 12. Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing. This song of Angels putteth Christ in the third person. He took not upon him the nature of Angels: He is nearer to us. All creatures come in as the Chorus, v. 13. And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I, saying, Blessing, honour, glory, and power be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever. As man began, so he concludes the song, v. 14. And the four living creatures said, Amen. And the four and twenty Elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.  
Because there are several degrees of thankfulness, I shall add to these examples, some motives, which may quicken us in the duties mentioned.  
1. We are unable in our own persons to fulfil the moral law. Let us exceed the Scribes and Pharisees, who so fare relied upon selfsufficiency, that they conceived the Gospel in regard of themselves impertinent doctrine.  
2. Can we avoid all actual transgressions, yet original sin is able to damn us.  
3. No one merely a creature can supererogate, can spare us any part of his obedience. The blessed Angels, of all creatures most nimble and cheerful in obedience, have oil little enough in their lamps for themselves.  
4. No one merely a creature, nor yet all creatures could by sufferings redeem so much as one soul. They should always be suffering, but never satisfy. If any commend any other way to salvation, (as the fulfilling of the moral Law, the intercession of the Virgin Mary, etc.) besides Christ, that proverb mentioned by Aristotle in his meteorology is verified of him, viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 manus Christi (to wit, nailed to the cross) is the only physic for a sinsick soul. We stand in need (as you see) of Christ's merits: but let us prefer ingenuity before necessity, let us expose our hearts to the wound of a friend. Christ (as Anacreon upon a worse occasion) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Suffer his love to wound your hearts. Meditate returns answerable in some proportion to his sufferings. Let us propagate our thankfulness into our lives; and praise and honour God, by doing his will. So shall his will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Let none who maketh profession of Christianity, carry himself scandalously. Muta nomen, vel age fortiús.  
6. Forasmuch as Christ came into the world to save sinners, and is a sufficient Mediator, able abundantly to save, let us not seek unto any other. Let us not go about to alienate any part of his office, to confer honour, prerogative to him, upon saints, angels, or images. The Scripture speaketh expressly, that in the later times some shall departed from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and the doctrine of daemons, 1. Tim. 4.1. Beza upon the last word of that comma thus commenteth: Notum est quid hoc nomine Platonici presertim intellexerint: sacri verò scriptores noxios illos & impuros spiritus sic vocant. That opus post humum of a late judicious author inscribed, The Apostasy of the later times, well preferreth the signification of that word daemons, which learned Beza seemeth to reject, and fully demonstrates that God's spirit hath forewarned us in the Scripture now quoted, to beware of Mediators and Mediatresses forged by the Papists.  
7. What Christ hath done for us calleth for spiritual rejoicing. And it shall be said in that day, Lo, this is our God, we have waited for him, and he will save us: this is the Lord we have waited for him, we will be glad, and rejoice in his salvation, Esay 25.9. The same motives which I commended to you in the fifth use, will likewise suggest spirits and alacrity in the performance of this duty. The Hollander, when he had obtained from Queen Elizabeth a promise of assistance against the Spaniard, took for a Motto, Luctor & emergo. We may, sigh Christ hath so fare appeared for us, take for our word the name of the altar built by Moses, Exod. 17.15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Lord is my banner. What greater occasion of rejoicing then invincible salvation? God is the tower of the salvations of his anointed. What Christ hath purchased for us is sufficiently fortified and secured. Those cannot be exanimated and disheartened by any evil tidings, and cross events upon earth, whose joy is heavenly.  
8. S. Paul's doctrine chastiseth those who murmur and repine at the salvation of others. 
* Vide Socrat. Hist. Eccles. lib. 7. c. 25.  The Novatians apprehended that some sinners were during their lives, to be debarred from outward communion with the church, whom yet they conceived capable of divine mercy. They either attended not to what our Saviour saith Matth. 12.32. viz. That the sin against the holy Ghost shall neither be pardoned in this world, nor that to come; or else misconstruing S. John. (epist. 1. c. 5.16.) distinguished between that sin which is unto death, and the sin against the holy Ghost. Sure I am that those are not utterly rendered uncapable of sharing with us in outward privileges of the Church, who may for any thing we know, become partakers with us in glory. Howsoever fellow-labourers may murmur against such as enter into the vineyard in the last hour of the day, God is ready at all times to accept all who cleave unto him by serious and unfeigned repentance.  
9 Let us endeavour the conversion of others, pull them out of the fire. Judas 23. God (as ye see) both by example and precept requireth this office from us. (And that I may suggest another incitement) what more rational, then that we should be subservient to Gods ends. Christ came into the world to save sinners, then let us likewise endeavour their salvation.  
10. Let us walk charitably and compassionately towards all such as are capable of salvation, but more largely towards the household of faith, Gal. 6.10. If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone, Matth. 18.15. Who so shall offend one of these little ones, which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea, Matt. 18.6. Besides that men oft times aggravate small faults, with Momus exclaim against the creaking of Venus her pantofle; and sometimes impute crimes to those in whose lives, in whose go there is best harmony; to reprehend openly intimateth a greater disaffection towards the person offending, then towards the offence. Neither is it sufficient, not to be ill affected towards God's children: We must sympathise with our brethren in afflictions. Christ did not only sympathise with, or suffer for his friends, but condescended to an accursed death for his enemies.  
11. Let us do good against evil. Christ came to save enemies. After his example bless them that curse you, perform good offices to those who despitefully use you. Rom. 5.6, 8. 1. Cor. 8.11. 2. Cor. 5.14, 15. Men are wont to esteem those fools, and to brand them with this ignominious name, who do good to their enemies, who when they are reviled reply not again. This part of honesty is accounted folly. Solomon's rule is out of date, viz. When a man is silent, he's to be reputed able to speak. As drunkenness is veiled with the name of good fellowship, covetousness reckoned good husbandry, so pride is ordinarily applauded under the name of animosity and a good spirit. I commend to your meditations, that Christ, when he was condemned, as he was led to be executed opened not his mouth by reviling his persecutors, but by praying that their sin might not be laid to their charge.  
The last part of my text yet remaineth, viz. the Epilogue, whereof I am chief. S. Paul here applieth his doctrine to himself, and omitting other men's faults confesseth himself the greatest of sinners. I shall here only exhort every one to take a survey of himself, and to be a follower of S. Paul in his faith, charity, and humility.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  

¶ An Appendix to the former Treatise.  
I Am come to the end of my stadium, but not of my dolichus. It remaineth after the contents of my Text explained, that I repress some groundless opinions, which vie with S. Paul's doctrine both for truth and acceptableness.  
Those who have affirmed that Aristotle was Christ's prodromus in natural sciences, 
* See Salmeron. tom. 1. p. 380.  as John Baptist was in supernatural mysteries, may be dismissed with laughter.  
I am not able nor willing to give a catalogue of all those empty curiosities, frothy conceits, ecstatical paradoxes, brainsick fancies, Bethlehem rave, which have been obtruded for truths authentic or fundamental. I shall single out some one or two, which may be here seasonably chastised, as not permitting the circumstantials of Christ's coming into the world to retain their due rank and order, but thrusting them forward into equipage with what is most substantial in religion.  
One conceiveth that to misinterpret our Saviour's two genealogies, (one of which, viz. that in Matthew chap. 1. contains his pedigree as he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the son of a kingdom; the other of his natural descent) is, at least in regard of bad consequences, an error not venial. The falsity of this petty conceit is easily deprehended; but also some other may occasion discourse (as much as I may conveniently superadd) more profitable.  
Another will fear, lest the history of Christ's birth, unless the positure of the place in which he was born, in respect of the parts of heaven (or the superior world), its longitude and latitude be duly attested, may in process of time (in men's opinions) vanish into a fiction. Either experience or reason (that I may not object the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of sacred Scripture) might challenge a better opinion concerning succeeding ages. It's well known, that many have given full credit to divine stories, (who never consulted with any map) who knew not in what parts of the world the scenes were situate. Many true believers are uncapable of such knowledge. Sacred Scripture oft wholly omits the circumstance of place.  
I shall not need to repeat here what hath been said before against Astrologers, who have imagined that the time of God the Son incarnated, was determined by the stars. I could wish that none outstripped them in madness and blasphemy. Those conceive, some of them, that God hath designed the stars for harbingers of what he intendeth to bring to pass in the sublunary world; others who ascribe to them efficacy above their sphere of activity, acknowledge that it was conferred upon them by God. To subordinate an eternal God to time, to make omnipotency depend upon times and seasons, to affirm that God could not sooner or later have performed what was requisite for the redemption of sinful men, that he could not but effect what things were done or suffered for us, at what times they were accomplished, fare surpasseth the wildest conceits of vainest Astrologers. No one who is compos sui, will imagine that God more depended upon time for the union of the two natures of Christ, or his suffering death for us, then in the creation of the world. Time had no existence, before the Genesis of the world begun. Time, saith Spensippus, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Stoics it's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after Plato 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Aristotle neither expresseth what thing time is, nor adequately what things are thereby measured, describing it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The rest quoted express not the relative nature, or formality of time. Motions measure themselves, and other motions distinct from them; and beings which were for their kind complete, (or all whose parts coexisted) in the least time, and in the least part of time conceivable as well as those which were extended into succession, were made up of prius and posterius. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Saturn, the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 time, with the Poets is the offspring of heaven; with Eratosthenes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the motion of the sun. I cannot with these confine time to the heavens. I cannot see but that the motion of a sublunary body may measure the duration of things, and consequently be called time, agreeably enough to reason, and some authorities cited. I conceive there was no artificial motion before man was created: but certainly there was natural, at leastwise of the firmament, or of the earth. Whether or no Angels are able to comprehend the durations of things permanent, without some measure applied, or extrinsecall time, I shall not need to determine. Months and years (most properly so called) are the same with the proper motions of the Moon and Sun. We own days (whether natural or artificial) as they denote time, to the motion of the earth; or else to the common, or participated (that I may so speak with Philosophers) motion of the Sun. Time as distinguished from eternity (which limitation I insert, as knowing how largely some late authors have used the word) necessarily succeeded (its existence supposed) in order of nature, somewhat created. It is clear that time depended upon the Creation, not God about to create the world upon time. Old Saturn should now be more aged, had God been pleased to have anticipated the creation. Neither can I see how God is intrinsically more determined to one time (whether imaginary or real) rather then another in creation, and the sending of his Son into the world, then to one person before another in election, and the application of Christ's merits.  
I know also who thought it a crime mortal, not to assent without doubting, that the number of years between man's creation and his redemption, might be infallibly gathered from Scripture. Others deem that events mentioned in sacred Scripture, as the Exodus, and the destruction of the first Temple, the beginning and end of the seventy years' captivity; God the Son incarnated; Christ's nativity, passion, resurrection and ascension, 
‖ See bold Determinations concerning the days of the birth & death of Adam (that I may quote authors not inaccessible) apud Joannem Stadium, Astronom. Histor. pag. 17. & Doctiss. Selden. De Ann. Civ. vet Judaeorum cap. 8. pag. 44.  etc. may be applied to years' months and days on which they came to pass in Cyclicall accounts.  
Chytraeus in a preface to his lectures upon Herodotus and Thucydides, determineth both which were the years and days of Christ's incarnation and passion. As for the year of his birth, he approveth our common account, 
* See Origan. Ephemerid. part. 1. c 1. Lansbergius in the dedication of his three books of sacred Chronol. Joseph. Scalig. in Pro●egom. ad libros de Emend. Temp p. 22. & de emendat Temp. l. 6. Sethus Calvisius Isagoges Chronol. cap. 46. Gerardus Johan. Vossius, de natali anno Christi, p. 11.  which (as it is well known) is rejected by Chronologers of best judgement. We have not a clear computation of the years between our Saviour's birth, and the first assembly at Nice, transmitted to us. Neither is it agreed what time interceded between his birth and passion. He assumed our nature, (if we may beleieve Chytraeus) on the 25. of March, and 34. years after suffered 
† Chrysost. and August. went before him in this opinion. The Tesserescaedecatitae boasted, that they had learned from the acts of Pilate, that Christ suffered on the 25 of March. Epiphanius reporteth that he found an History of the acts of Pilate, which told him that Christ suffered on the 15. of the kalends of April, (that is, on the 18 of March.  on the same day of the month. On the same day (according to this Author) 1509 years backward, (or before his incarnation) the first  was celebrated by the Israelites before their Exodus from Egypt. And our first parents on the same day, 2453 years upward were created. 
‖ Euseb. and many after him in several ages, affirm that Christ risen from the dead on the 25 of March, on which day (they conceive) the world was created, not more to be excused then Chytraeus.  'Tis not difficult to discover how Chronologers, both Jewish and Christian dissent from this Doctor, were it lawful to digress so fare. It's obvious to suspect him, with many others, to be seduced by an ambition of making things answerable in nature, to be likewise suitable to in time. He had an eye upon the correspondency between the first and the second Adam, and between man formed, and reformed. Again between the Paschall Lamb and the Antitype, the Lamb which taketh away the sins of the world. 
* Christ (saith chrysostom) ought necessarily to suffer on the 25th of March, because he was on that day conceived.  Moreover between Christ's coming and the end of his coming, He came to save sinners. He assumed a body, that he might be fitted to suffer for men's iniquities. His conceits were much to be applauded, were they as true as specious. Our Jewish Doctors, as I have learned from Jose Ben Chilpetha, in sedor Olam Rabath, chap. 4. and 7. 
† Seder olam Rabath, (the Jews great Chronicle of the world, from the Creation to the reign of Adrian) is attributed to R. Jose. Ben. Chilpetha, by Alsted. in his Chronologie of Jewish Doctors, by Buxtorf. in his bibliotheca Rabbinica. Mr. Selden, de diu Syru Syntag. 1. c. 2. p. 100 & de jure naturali & gentium, lib. 1. cap. 10. p. 124. videtur seipsum in fine libri prodere. dum inquit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inquit R. Jose (saith Buxtorf.) But R. Jose is frequently quoted in that Chronicle.  (was he, as he is supposed, the author of the treatise) were much tickled with such like fancies. Astrologers also (whom I have already mentioned) who feigned most remarkable events to be nearer one to another, or more remote than true Chronologie permitted, that they might seem introduced and effected by several great conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter. We are wont to be much affected, when we hear that effects which have some famous relation or respect one to another, or are each of them eminent above vulgar events, have fallen out on the same day of the month, especially if they be many years distant. And many study to write what's pleasing more than what's true. 'Tis our comfort that we may believe the second person of the sacred Trinity was incarnated and born, although we know not punctually the time of his birth or incarnation.  

‖ Celebramus tam nos quam Judaei quinquagesimum diem, sed illi in typo; nos autem in veritate, non tam significamus quam agimus. Pentecosten igitur celebrantes, commemoramus quae olim sub Mose in veteri testamento sunt acta, & quae sub Christo facta sunt.  Cyprian (serm. de Spiritu sancto) and many writers after him affirm, that the gift of tongues was dispensed at the feast of Pentecost, that there might be correspondency between the two Testaments. The new Law (the Gospel) 
* Esay. 2.3. Kimchi (upon this comma) affirmeth that the last days perpetually in the old Testament signify the days of the Messiah. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  went out of Zion on the day, on which the old law given on mount Sinai was commemorated. Christ was born about the feast of tabernacles; near the time of the immolation of the Passeover, was offered for us. A fast for entrance into the land of Canaan denied to the Israelites, who provoked God in the wilderness, and desolations of the first and later Temple, is observed by the Jews on the same day, viz. the 9 of Ab, their fifth month. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Seder olam Rabath cap. 30.) that is, (that I may use Genebrards' translation) Auctore R. Jose, devolvitur meritum in diem meriti, & peccatum in diem peccati. Exempli gratiâ. Quando Templum primò destructum est, dies ille erat vespera Sabbati, atque adeò extremum anni septimi (id est, remissionis) erat etiam custodia & hebdomas ipsius Joarib, itémque nonus dies Ab, similiter quando secundo est eversum: atque in utraque eversione Levitae stabant in suis suggestis & dicebant Canticum. Quodnam, obsecro, canticum? Et reddet illis iniqui tatem ipsorum, & in malitia eorum disperdet eos, disperdet eos Dominus Deus noster. On the ninth of Ab these rythmicall verses are wont to be sung in the person of the presbytery.  

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉   

Die nona mensis, hora vespertini temporis,  
Cùm essem in vigilia mea, vigilia Joiarib,  
Introiit hostis, & sacrificia sua obtulit.  
Ingressus est in Sanctuarium injussu Domini.   
The first Temple is said to have been destroyed, when it was fully demolished. They began this work on the seventh day of the fifth month, finished it on the ninth, and burned the materials of the temple on the 
* See Jer. 52.12.  tenth. Chap. 27. of the Jews great Chronicle. What Chytraeus asserted is not hence confirmed. So much will seem clear, unless what ordinary experience refuteth, be thought necessary, viz. that there should be the like correspondency between times, as between events which fall out in them. Contingent attributes have not the like reason to the whole kind, which they have to one, or more individuals. Besides that there is much difficulty about the day of the Jewish month, on which Christ celebrated his last Passeover, and consequently about the day of his Passion, no histories so well inform us concerning the number of years by which the affairs of the Jews and their forefathers were computed from the creation of the first, to the death of the second Adam; and acquaint us with the general rules (which sure were not the same throughout so long time, and so many changes both of their habitation and polity) to which all their years were conformed, and particular occasions, by reason of which their months and years ofttimes varied, as that we may be able to reduce events, described by their times in sacred Scriptures, to their due positures in any cyclical account. Those merit laughter rather than refutation, who conceive that the feasts observed by the Jews, returned annually on the same days of Julian months. 〈…〉 We shall easily believe that the day of Christ's incarnation is unknown if we conceive the day and year of his birth uncertain. Some Chronologers have been confident, that authentic registers without assistance of humane writings, fully declare the distance of time between the creation of the first, and birth of the second Adam. But if we endeavour to give an account of that segment of time, we shall meet with many rubs and difficulties.  

We cannot be certain without revelation, in what quadrant of the year our Saviour was born; but probably may conceive, at, or near the beginning of the Hebrew year, as for reasons alleged by Scaliger, (De emendat. Temp. lib. 6.) so also by the authorities of Jews, who expect the birth of their Messiah in the month Ethanim; and by the testimony of Cyrill. Alexand. witnessing that the Church of Alexandria celebrated the nativity of John the Baptist, on the 28. of Pharmuth, that is, as some compute, on the 23. of April.  Gerardus Joannes Vossius in his Treatise, De mense diéque natali Jesu Christi, reciteth four famous opinions concerning the day on which Christ was born. The ancient Roman Church assign to Christ's nativity, the 8. of the calends of January, that is, the 25. of December: Greek Churches the sixth of January; 
† Eutychius placeth our Saviour's birth in the 29. of Choiac, which answereth to the 25. of December: The Alexandrine Chronicle four days sooner.  some of the Egyptians the 24. or 25. of Parmuthus, others the 25. of Pachon. Many other opinions might be added concerning the day of Christ's birth. Beroaldus, Scaliger, others, confess that their skill is here non-plused, upon the month (at most) conjectured, inscribe their nè plùs ultrà, acknowledge that it's only in God's power to define the day of Christ's nativity. Tacente Scripturâ, taceamus & nos, & Christum Servatorem in tempore natum adoremus, et si in quo temporis puncto natus sit, ignoramus. Scultetus Delit. Evangel. cap. 14. See chronology distracted about this point, ibid.  
The year of the world likewise in which Christ was born, is uncertain: Certè de vero natali Christi anno, tot fere sunt sententiae, quot chronologi. As humane writers are almost every where uncertain, so also much divided about pieces of time, of which they endeavour to give us an account, one from others, and sometimes the same from himself. That the year of Christ's birth may be cleared from Scriptures, first its requisite that it be fixed in daniel's seven. That this may be attained, it's necessary to know how fare his baptism was on this side the beginning of those sevens. At his baptism he began to be about thirty years old, Luke 3.23. There's no no where else throughout the New Testament any expression of his age, which can without the mediation of this, be reduced to any determined year in daniel's weeks. Christ's passion by some thought to precede the end of daniel's sevens exactly three years and an half, cannot be discovered to be any set time distant from his birth, without the intercession of humane authors, or the place quoted in S. Luke. First, the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hath occasioned in some a suspicion, that he was but then in his 29. year. This scruple's easily removed. He began to be, that is, he was; as he began to say the same that he said, Matth. 11.7. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is conveniently omitted by the Syriack Interpreter. The particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more perplexeth, intimateth that he was not just thirty years old, but somewhat more or less. Epiphanius lib. 2. tom. 2. haeres. 51. affirmeth, that Christ at his baptism wanted 60. days to complete the distance from his birth into thirty years. It's further requisite in order to the end mentioned, to know whether or no daniel's sevens succeeded immediately the 70. years' captivity; how wide the chasma, if any. Furthermore, that numbers of parts of time preceding, in which the age of the world is thought to be contained, be clear and remote from all perplexities. I shall demonstrate, but with as much briefness as may be convenient, that there is so large variety of opinions concerning events before and after Christ born, to be applied to certain years in daniel's weeks, 7. 62. 1. and the half week; touching the space of time contained in them, their Epocha, and whether or no they were continuous; moreover such difficulty about other segments of time preceding, that conditions shown to be necessary for the infallible reducing of the year of our Saviour's birth to a determined year from the Creation, must needs all be wanting.  
The two first articles of time, to wit, one from Adam's Creation to the Flood, the second from the Flood to the promise made to Abraham, Gen. 12.3. according to Beroaldus and Broughton, and some other Chronologers, contain 2083. years.  


The vulgar Hebrew.  
Gen. 5.3. From Adam's creation till he begat Seth, years 130.  
Gen. 5.6. Seths' life till he begat Enos 105  
Gen. 5.9. Enos his life till he begat Cainan 90.  
Gen. 5.12.  
Cainan's life till he begat Mahalaleel 70.  
Gen. 5.15.  
Mahalaleels life till he begat Jared 65.  
Gen. 5.18. Jared's life till he begat Enoch 162. Pentateuch. Samarit. − 100  
Gen. 5.21. Enoch's life till he begat Methuselah 65.  
Gen. 5.25. Methuselahs' life till he begat Lamech 187. Pentateuch. Samarit. − 120  
Gen. 5.28. Lameches life till he begat Noah 182. Pentateuch. Samarit. − 129  
Gen. 5.32. The age of Noah when he begat his first son 500  
Gen. 11.10. The age of Shem when he begat Arphaxad 100  
Gen. 11.12. The life of Arphaxad till he begat Salah 35. Pentateuch. Samarit. +100  
Gen. 11.14. The life of Salah till he begat Eber 30. Pentateuch. Samarit. +100  
Gen. 11.16. The life of Eber till he begat Peleg 34. Pentateuch. Samarit. +100  
Gen. 11.18. The life of Peleg till he begat Reu 30. Pentateuch. Samarit. +100  
Gen. 11.20. The life of Reu till he begat Serug 32. Pentateuch. Samarit. +100  
Gen. 11.22. The life of Serug till he begat Nahor 30. Pentateuch. Samarit. +100  
Gen. 11.24. The life of Nahor till he begat Terah 29. Pentateuch. Samarit. +40  
Gen. 11.26. The life of Terah till he begat his eldest son 70. Pentateuch. Samarit. − 60  
Gen. 11.32. Terahs' life after he begat his first son 135. Pentateuch. Samarit. − 60  
For the days of Terah were 205. years.  
The land of Canaan was promised to Abraham after his father's death, as we may clearly gather from Gen. 12. and Acts 7. and immediately after his death, as seems to be intimated by these Scriptures. God at the same time promised that the Messiah should issue from the loins of Abraham, Gen. 12.3. In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.  
The distance between them and Noah's eldest son according to Broughtons' account 002.  
Noah was 500 years old when he begat his first son; 600. years old when the flood of waters came upon the earth, Gen. 7.6.  

† Said Batricid. affirmeth that when the flood came upon the earth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Noah was 600. years old, and that his son Sem was an 100 years old. This Author is wont with more than ordinary facility to be false and fabulous. Ramban observeth (in Parascham 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) that Sem is said to be the brother of Japhet the elder, Gen. 10.21. Sem (saith he) is preferred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by reason of his dignity. So the sons of Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael, 1. Chron. 1.28.  Sem was an 100 years old two years after the flood, Gen. 11.15.  
The total sum is 2083.    
Many difficulties may be objected, which much perplex this computation.  
1. It may be questioned whether or no the lives of the Patriarches are to be reckoned punctually from the times at which they are said to have been begotten. The affirmative part is most probable; otherwise sacred Chronologie (in which I cannot suspect that there is any hiatus) should be discontinuous. I doubt not but authentic Scriptures exhibit to us a continued order of times from Adam's creation to the end of daniel's weeks, & that expressions used by those who were Spiritus sancti amanuenses, were intelligible to all of ordinary judgements who were contemporary, to those also at lest who lived in ages not much remote.  
2. It may be enquired, what to beget signifieth, in the 5. and 11. chapters of Genesis. Adam probably (that I may give an instance) begat Seth according to the sense of the Scriptures, when Seth was born. Besides that what was begotten was then manifested, Marinus in's Arca Noae thus interpreteth the word used in the Original. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 genuit, peperit, parturiit, proprium foeminarum videlicet, quamvis eleganter de viro etiam & aliis rebus dicatur.  
3. The distance between Sem and Noah's eldest son is questioned. Wolphius (de tempore lib. 1. pag. 50.) affirmeth virtually, that three years interceded. Arphaxad (he saith) was born (whence we may take notice that in his opinion likewise to be begotten, was the same that to be born) three years after the beginning of the flood. Noah was 500 years old, when he begat his eldest son, Gen. 5.32. He was 500 years old, and begat Sem, Ham, and Japhet; that is, he begat none of them till he was of such age. They were not any of them in the womb together. Noah was 600. years old when the flood of waters came upon the earth, Gen 7.6. Sem was 100 years old two years after the flood, Gen. 11.10. I conceive with Broughton, that the flood is the same that the beginning of the flood in that Scripture. So Chronologers speaking of years from the Temple, mean from the Temple built, not from the same demolished.  
4. It's altogether improbable that each of the Patriarches mentioned in Gen. 5. and 11. was exactly of that number of years, which is attributed to him when he begat another, or when he died. I cannot doubt but in those chapters quoted, years current are oft reputed years, as well as those which were complete: which granted, the particulars before summed up for the two first articles of time, must needs exceed the distance of the promise from the creation. The like happeneth in the chronology of the Kings of Judah and Israel, but with this difference: 
* See Empereur in his comment upon Jachiades on Daniel, c. 1. v. 1. and David de pomis, there quoted. But I must confess, I cannot perceive that the year● which the Kings of Israel reigned, were more reckoned by the years of the Kings of Judah, than vice versa. See 2. Kings, 12.1. and 14.1. 2. Kings 16.12. 2. Kings 16.1. 2. Kings 18.1. & passim.  Of the years which this or that king was said to reign, both the first and the last were sometimes incomplete, here probably only the last of years attributed to this or that Patriarch, whether for the time from his birth, till he begat a son, or between birth and death.  
5. There's much difference (which I esteem a difficulty insoluble) between the Samaritane, and the vulgar Hebrew Pentateuch. According to the Samaritane. Pentateuch, Jared lived 62. years, and begat Enoch. Gen. 5.18. Jared lived after he begat Enoch, 
* Nè mireris Lector, è Pentateuch● Samaritano citata literis exarari Caldaeis, (seu Hebraeis recenti● 〈◊〉.) ●phus Samaritanis (quibus antè captivitatem Babylon. usa est tota Hebr● 〈◊〉) defici●batur.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 785. years, etc. v. 19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 785. years, etc. v. 19 And all the days of Jared were 847. years, v. 20. And Methuselah lived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 67. years, & begat Lamech, v. 25. And Methuselah lived after he begat Lamech 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 653. years, v. 26. And all the days of Methuselah were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 720. years, v. 27. And Lamech lived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 53. years, and begat a son. v. 28. And Lamech lived after he begat Noah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 600. years, and begat sons and daughters, v. 30. And all the days of Lamech were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 653. years, v. 31. The samaritan Pentateuch addeth to the end the eleventh comma of the eleventh chapter of Genesis (as in usual copies) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And all the days of Sem were 600. years, and he died. The days which Arphaxad, Salah, Eber, Peleg. Reu, Serug, Nahor, lived, are after the same manner distinctly summed up, otherwise then in usual Hebrew. And Arphaxad lived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 135. years, and begat Salah, Gen. 11.12. And Arphaxad lived after he begat Salah, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 303. years, and begat sons & daughters, v. 13. And Salah lived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 130. years, and begat Eber, v. 14. And Salah lived after he begat Eber 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 303. years, and begat sons and daughters, v. 15. And Eber lived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 134. years, and begat Peleg, v. 16. And Eber lived after he begat Peleg 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 270. years, and begat sons and daughters. v. 17. and Peleg lived 130. years, and begat Reu, v. 18. And Peleg lived after he begat Reu, 109. years, and begat sons and daughters. v. 19 And Reu lived 132. years, and begat Serug; after he begat Serug, 107. years, and begat sons and daughters. v. 20. And Serug lived 130 years, and begat Nahor. v. 22. And Serug lived after he begat Nah●r 100 years, and begat sons and daughters. v. 23. And Nahor lived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 79. years, and begat Terah. v. 24. And Nahor lived after he begat Terah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 69 years, and begat sons and daughters, v. 25. And the days of Terah were 145. years, and Terah died in Haran, v. 32. Besides differences between the Samaritane and ordinary Hebrew, about years which other Patriarches lived after they had begotten their immediate successors in the catologues of the generations of Adam and Sem, that about Terah together with those about the years which they lived before they begat, amount to 231. years. The space of time from Adam's creation to the promise made to Abraham, by the Samaritane Pentateuch so much exceedeth that exhibited in the ordinary Hebrew. 2083. and 231. added, complete 2314.  
For the facile understanding of those two columns, in which the common account and the Samaritane are compared together, take these rules.  

* Oughtred clavis Mathematicae, c. 1.  Signum additionis, sive affirmationis, est + plus.  
Signum subductionis, sive negations est − minus.  
6. Cainan mentioned Luke 3.36. as father to Salah and son to Arphaxad, hath 130. years allowed him by the Septuagint, for the space between his birth and the birth of Sala, Gen. 11.13. yet is not mentioned in the usual or Samaritane Hebrew.  
7. Forasmuch as the next article of time containeth exactly 430. years, as is cleared by Exod. 12.41. 
* The greater part of Hebrew commentatours upon Gen. 1.1. and chap. 7.8. Exod. 11.2. Jonathan Ben Uziel upon 1. Kings 8.2. Josephus Archaeologia Judaice, lib. 1. cap. 4. consent that the world was created at, or near the beginning of Autumn. It's sufficiently known, that many other, both ancient & late writers, have entertained the same opinion. See Elias Cuchlerus in his dissertation de Tempore Mundi conditi. In that Treatise he giveth a competent account of them, as also of those who have conceived the world was created in the spring. Besides that those who held the world was created in Autumn, are prevalent in credit, were more able than their Antagonists to decide the controversy in hand, authentic Scriptures countenance their assertion. It's probable the trees in the garden of Eden, were created conformable to the season of the year. We are certified that they bare fruit before the fall of our first parents. This argument (I acknowledge attending to the diversity of conditions of some climates, and some other reasons) only persuadeth, but doth not demonstrate that the world was created in Autumn. The beginning of the year was changed at the Exodus, Exod. 11.2. Had Nisan been the first month of the Hebrews year, before their Egyptian bondage, they of their own accord without any command, would after their deliverance have reassumed it for the first of months, and the first month of their year. Moreover, God enjoined them the observance of Nisan, as a memorial of their deliverance from Egypt. Lastly, the tenth of Tisri was to Israelites the day of atonement for the year past, and the beginning of the year of Jubilee. Levit. 25.9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prim● die Tisri initium anni anni●, & dimissionibus, & Jubileis. Thus the Talmud in Massecheth Rosch Haschanah. Josephus in the place praised, telleth us that Moses for humane affairs retained the ancient order of the year after the Exodus. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Thysius Exercitat. Miscellan. 4. after his second thoughts bids adieu to his opinion that the world was created in the Spring.  if the world was created in Autumn, (which is most probable) we must needs grant that besides complete years, an half year interceded between the beginning of the world and Abraham's peregrination.  
The next joint of time is less knotty, yet not wholly exempted from perplexity. That Law was not given till 430. years after the promise made to Abraham, Gal. 3.17. The Law which was 430. years after cannot disannul the covenant that was confirmed afore of God, in respect of Christ. The 430. years mentioned, Exod. 12.40. are the same with these, only 50. days interceded between the departure of the Israelites from Egypt and the Law given on Sinai, a number not considerable.  
Whereas we read in our English translation for that text of Exodus quoted, the dwelling of the children of Israel, while they dwelled in Egypt, was 430. years, we ought thus (as doth Master Ainsworth) to translate the original: The dwelling of the sons of Israel who dwelled in Egypt was 430. years. Moschabh in this Scripture, signifies peregrination, or abode in strange countries, viz. Canaan and Egypt. The dwelling of the children of Israel, is that peregrine dwelling which concerned the children of Israel. Their fathers, as fare as Abraham, are are to be taken in. We may together with the sons of Israel, as well comprehend their fathers as their sisters. Onkelus in his Chaldee paraphrase, exactly expresseth the Hebrew, but is as unhappily translated into Latin, as the Hebrew into English. The article, which ought to be referred to the children of Israel, is unduly referred to their peregrination, and so their peregrination wholly related to Egypt. The 72. interpreters, (in which, the dwelling of the sons of Israel, which they and their fathers dwelled in the land of Egypt, and the land of Canaan, are 430. years,) apprehended the true sense. These 430. years added to 2083. preceding, (according to M. Broughtons' account,) complete 2513. The 400. years, in which Abraham's seed should be evil entreated, (Gen. 15.13. Acts 7.6. are to be reckoned from the time, in which Ishmael the son of Egyptirn Hagar, began to afflict Isaac. Isaac, when six years old, might understand Ishmael mocking him. We must not conceive that all intermission of afflictions, and Lucida intervalla, are to be excluded from these 400. years. The whole distance between the beginning and the end is to be attended.  
From the children of Israel coming out of Egypt, to the building of the temple, were 480 years. (1. Kings 6.1.) These added to Broughtons' 2513.) preceding, make up 2993. I should omit lesser numbers (mentioned in sacred Scripture) of which the 480. years, (in the first of the sixth of the first of Kings,) are compounded, did not the twentieth verse of the thirteenth of the Acts, suggest a scruple to be removed. In the Scripture the time of Judges, viz. between Joshuah and Samuel, is 450. years. Moses led the Israelites 40. years in the wilderness. Joshua governed the Israelites 17. years after Moses his death. 40. years are given to Saul. Acts 13.21. The time which Samuel judged Israel, is comprehended with the reign of Saul, in that number. David reigned 40. years, 1. Chron. 29.27. And Solomon 4. years before the temple began to be builded. The sum is 141. The time for judges (Abimelech's three years are included) between Joshuah and Samuel is 450. years. These numbers added, make 591. And so exceed that mentioned. 1. Kings 6.1. by 111. years. 
* Beroaldus is of the same opinion with Mr. Broughton. Luther and Beza for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Who desire more variety, may see the ancient Latin translation, the Arabic translated into Latin by Junius, (which omitteth 40. years given to Saul in the verse following, that it may make more room for the 450.) The Arabic Testament set out by Erpenius, expresseth saul's 40. years. See a reading also of the 20. verse of the 13. of the Acts, of which we speak, transcribed by Beza out of a Greek copy printed at Paris, conformed to the ancient Latin.  M. Broughton with admirable subtlety and acuteness, conceives that in the twentieth of the thirteenth of the Acts, where the time for judges is said to be 450. years, the numbers of years for defenders of Israel, and those for offenders are added together.  
The years for offenders are expressed in six texts of the book of Judges; for Chusan, 8. (Judges 3.8.) Eglon, 18. (Judges 3.14.) Sisera, 20. (Judges 4.3.) Midian, 7. (Judg. 6.1.) Ammon, 18. (Judg. 10.8.) Philistines, 40. (Judg. 13.1.) the total sum is 111.  
We find in Judges twelve places for the defenders of Israel. So many particular numbers of years for them, amount to 299; which Elies 40. years make up 339. These added to 111. make up the number  in the Acts. The times of Israel's afflictions mentioned in the book of Judges, are contained (as the learned Author already praised conceius) in times given to defenders. Their Judges came sometimes by the worse. Yet in the 13. of the Acts, after what manner some segments of a line to the whole) are added to the whole time between Joshuah and Samuel. Master Broughtons' wit perhaps in this conceit is to be preferred before his judgement. Some places in Judges seem clearly to intimate, that the times of sufferings were not comprehended in the years attributed to those who judged Israel. Part of the third chapter much patronizeth this opinion. In the 11. verse Othniel died, when the land had enjoyed rest forty years under his government. Then the children of Israel again committed wickedness in the sight of the Lord: and the Lord strengthened. Eglon king of Moab against Israel, because they had committed wickedness before the Lord. And he gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Amalek, and went and smote Israel, and they possessed the city of palm-trees. So the children of Israel served Eglon king of Moab eighteen year●, vers. 12, 13, 14. But when the children of Israel cried unto the Lord, the Lord stirred them up a saviour, Ehud (in the verse following). The children of Israel cried unto the Lord, when they had been vexed 18. years. Ehud saved them not till after they cried unto the Lord. The 80. years mentioned in the 30. verse, cannot contain all the time from Othniels' death to the end of ehud's affairs. 'Tis said that the land had rest 80. years. They wanted rest (which seems to be clear from what hath been quoted) 18. years, immediately succeeding the death of Othneil. Rest here cannot be conceived to be any other thing, than freedom from vexation by enemies. As great a difficulty is suggested by the 8. of the 10. of Judges. 18. years of affliction there mentioned, cannot well be conceived, if we consider the context, to have preceded the death of Jair, who judged Israel 22. years; nor can possibly be reckoned to have fallen out in the time of Jephta, the succeeding Judge, who ruled but six years, and delivered Israel from these afflictions. S. Paul's words taken in that sense which is most plain and simple, may well consist with what we find in 1. Kings 6.1.  
The holy Ghost pleased to register the time of the building of the Temple, takes for an Epoch the deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt, a type of deliverances (in which Christ to be figured by the Temple should be the Ante signanus) from spiritual Egypt's, the power of Satan in Heathens and in Antichrist. That Epocha also was very accommodate, in that the Temple was to God's people a pledge of temporal deliverances. If in the lands of their enemies they should pray toward it, God would hear in heaven, and answer upon earth; would upon their repentance restore them to their country. Times of afflictions which they had suffered, are conveniently omitted in the account, as which would have eclipsed and obscured the lustre, the pomp and glory of present happiness. Tears are wiped from their eyes, and the times of their adversity not remembered.  
Times in which the building of the second Temple was hindered (as Empereur believes upon the ninth of Daniel) are neither part of the 7. nor yet of the 70. weeks mentioned by the Angel Gabriel. 
* See also Ras● upon Ezech. 4.5.  Josephus much countenanceth my conjecture, in his Jewish Antiquities, lib. 8. cap. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Solomon began the building of the Temple in the fourth year of his reign, in the second month which the Macedonians term Artemisius, the Hebrews Jair, 492. years after the Israelites exodus from Egypt. He makes no mention of years for offenders in the book of Judges doubled, viz. comprehended in the years for defenders, moreover superadded. He admitteth into his account the year immediately preceding the 40. of Moses leading the Israelites into the wilderness, (in the end of which the Israelites came out of Egypt) also the fourth of Solomon's kingdom (in the beginning of which the temple began to be builded). No one will condemn his judgement, who hath seen Emperor upon Dan. 1.1. He there approveth this way of computing upon another occasion. Plùs minùs may venially be understood (though not expressed) for years' current, and parts of years completely passed. I am less willing to believe that Josephus erred as adding two years above those due for the space between the deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt, and the building of the Temple, in that he substracteth two years due for time between Adam's creation and the said period. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. He alloweth only 3102. years for time between the first man born of God by creation, and the Temple begun to be builded. Between the Creation and the Temple, if we take in besides the years for those who judged Israel, 111. years for intervals in which the Israelites were oppressed by their enemies, and the year in which the Temple began to be builded, interceded 3104. years. He alloweth for the time between Terahs' death & the building of the Temple 1020. years, between the flood and the temple 1440. For the first one year, for the other, if he mean from the beginning of the rain which caused the deluge, six years short. It necessarily followeth that he must have reckoned 4. years too much between the creation and the flood. I may not here omit, how Josephus in his second book against Apion, is inconsistent with what I have quoted out of his 8. book of antiquities, concerning distance of the building of the Temple from the deliverance of the Israelites out of Egypt. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Solomon builded the Temple 612. years after the Jews came out of Egypt.  
Sulpitius Histor. sacr. lib. 1. starteth another difficulty about the times of Judges. He objecteth an interregnum between Samson and Heli. Ambigit (that I may propound his scruple, as represented by Sigonius) quot anni intercesserint inter Samsonis exitum, & Heli Pontificatum, ac judicatum, quòd id scriptura non prodiderit, ac post Samsonem ●er Israel sine regibus fuisse adjecerit. Sigonius subscribeth this answer: Cum Heli 40. annos judicasse dicitur, primo Samnelis, cap. 4. intelligendum est illos annos complecti, & interregnum ante Heli, & pontificatum ejus. Atque ità Eusebius, & caeteri observarunt. That interregnum (as Sigonius judgeth) was comprehended within the 40. years attributed to Samuel.  
Lastly, The author of Seder Olam Rabath (cap. 12.) substracteth one year from 23. and 22. attributed to Tolah and Jair, (Judges 10.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it was given to each of them, viz. reckoned the last of Tola's 23, and the first of Jair's 22. He substracteth a year likewise from those given to Jephthah and Ibzan, conceiving the last year of Jephthah was the first of Ibzan.  
The Temple began to be builded according to Master Broughtons' account in the 2993. year of the world. Solomon reigned 40. years, 1. Kings 11.42. The kingdom was divided immediately after his death. 1. Kings 12. verses 1, 2, 16, 17, 19, 20. so we have 37. years from the foundation of the Temple to the division of the Kingdom. (The Temple was founded in the beginning of the fourth year of Solomon's reign.) To these 37. years add 390. Ezech. 4.5. 
* Beroaldus is of the same judgement, as computing 408. years, for that article of time between the foundation of the Temple, and 70. years of the Babylonian captivity, which he reckoneth from the first year of Nabuchadnezzar. Lansberg. also consenteth Chronol. sac. l. 2. c. 6 and Capell. Historiae sacrae & Exoticae l. 1.  The sum is 427. the space (as Master Broughton thought) between the foundation of the Temple and the last captivity. These added to the age of the world (as computed by the same author) at the founding of the temple, make up 3420. years. The breach of the covenant made between God and the Israelites at the building of the Temple, as Junius conceives is the epocha of 390. years mentioned by Ezechiel, which he disposeth towards the end of the 27. year of the reign of Solomon. Then (as this author conceives) began that idolatrous rebellion against God, which was both an exemplary and meritorious cause to the ten tribes revolting from the house of David. 
† See Junius upon Ezech. 4.5.  He concludeth these 390. years in the deportation made by Nebuzaradan, Jer. 52.30. that is, in 23. years of Nebuchad-rezzar. The 40. years for the iniquity of the house of Judah, Ezech. 4.6. are according to the same Commentatour, the last of the 390. Josiah's reformation, (he thinks) had not this antidote been interposed, might have occasioned a presumption of God's displeasure removed. Rasi maketh the 390. years discontinuous; the entrance of the Israelites into Canaan the beginning, the deportation of the ten tribes, the clause of them. See variety of opinions about these, and the 40. years for Judah, in Abarbinel upon Ezech. c. 4. Besides the difference mentioned between Junius and Broughton about the Epocha of ezechiel's 390. years, Bullinger reckoneth the duration of the first temple, years 440. 

Gualtherus 435. 
With whom Flinspachius agreeth.   
Mangoldus' 420.  
Bibliander 432.  
Mercator 428.   Others might be added dissenting from these and amongst themselves. Sure authors now quoted, and others as they consented not all of them about the number of years to which ezechiel's 430. days answered, (Ezech. 4.5, 6.) were also much distracted about the Epocha of years there exhibited. It's an hard task to remove this difficulty, neither can I jurare in verba magistrorum, who affirm that the 40. days (Ezech. 4.6.) which Ezechiel was commanded to lie on his right side, signified the same years, that 40. of the 390 days in the verse preceding. These Scriptures nakedly considered, will seem to express the contrary:  
If I anatomize this joint of time which I have now in hand, I shall meet with more perplexities. Solomon reigned after he began to build the Temple, 36. years at least, as may be gathered from 1. Kings 11.42. compared with 1. Kings 6.1. Rehoboam 17. years, 1. Kings 14.21. Abi● 3. years, 1. Kings 15.2. Asa 41. years, 1. Kings 15.10. Jehoshaphat 25. years, 1. Kings 22.42. Jehoram seemeth to have reigned five years, by 1. Kings 22.42. verse 51. of the same chapter, and 2. Kings 1.17. c. 8.25. compared together. Ahaziah one year, 2. Kings 8.26. Ath●liah 7. years, plùs minùs. compare 2. Kings 11.4. with the preceding verses of the same chapter. Joash 40. years, 2. Kings 12.1. Amaziah 29. years, 2. Kings 14.2. There succeeded an anarchy of 13. years, or thereabouts. For in the 15. year of Amaziah King of Judah, Jeroboam the son of Joash King of Israel began to reign, 2. Kings 14.23. Azariah (called likewise Uzziah and Ozias) the next King of Judah after Amaziah, began to reign in the twenty seventh year of Jeroboam, 2. Kings 15.1. Subtract from 27. the compliment of 15. as they are a part of 29. viz. 14. (so many years Amaziah and Jeroboam reigned together) there remain 13. for the space between Amaziahs' death and Azariah's inauguration. Azariah reigned 52. years, 2. Kings 15.2. Jotham 16. years. 2. Kings 15.33. Ahaz 16. years, 2. Kings 16.2. Hezekiah 29. years, 2. Kings 18.2. Manasseh 55. years, 2. Kings 21.1. Amon 2. years, 2. Kings 21.29. Josiah 31. years, 2. Kings 22.1. Jehoahaz 3. months, 2. Kings 23.31. Johoiakim 11. years, 2. Kings 23.36. Jehoiachin 3. months, 2. Kings 24.8. Zedekiah 11. years, 2. Kings 24.18. The sum is 440. years. 6. months. The difference between this and that approved by Beroaldoes and and Broughton, is 13. years and six months. Imperfect years, wherewith Kings of Judah began and ended their reigns, and parcels of time in which some of them reigned together with their fathers, inextricably perplex this way of computation.  
To 3420. years add 50. years, the remnant of the captivity after the burning of the Temple mentioned 2. Chro. 36.19. The summe's 3470.  
Beroaldus and Broughton are of opinion that the 70. years of the Babylonian captivity are to be reckoned from the first year of Nabuchadnezzar King of Babel. Broughton allegeth for proof of his assertion, Jer. 25. v. 1. and 11. These Scriptures evince that God denounced against Judea 70. years' desolation, in the first year of Nebuchadrezzar King of Babylon, but not likewise that the desolation began in the same year. Junius upon 2. Chron. 26.21. conjectureth that the 70. years of captivity began à deportatione Jehoiachinis sive Jechoniae. But neither can so much be evinced from Ezech. 40.1. upon which he relieth for confirmation of his opinion. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The word there used, is not peculiar to that deportation or captivity. That the 70. years are to be reckoned from the burning of the Temple, or some time afterward, seems to be cleared by 2. Chron. 36.21. compared with those verses of Jer. 25. now quoted. To fulfil the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah until the land had enjoyed her Sabbaths; for as long as she lay desolate, she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years. The 70. years' desolation seem only to have been foretold, and threatened in the first year of Nabuchadnezzar, and begun to be fulfilled 
* Scalig. in Prolegom. ad libros de Emendat. Temp. & alibi. Lansbergius Chron. Sacrae l. 2. c. 1. In Seder olam Rabath, c. 29. The 70. years of desolation are bounded by the destruction of Jerusalem and the first Temple, and the building of the second Temple. The Israelites (according to the author of that Chronicle) after they had lived in the kingdom of the Chaldeans 52. years, were restored to their own country. To these 52. years are added 3. years for Cyrus, 14. of Ahassuerus, one whole year for Darius. In the second year of Darius the Temple was builded. The same Epocha is assigned by the Author of the Jews great Chronicle, to the 70. years' desolation, and to daniel's 70. weeks.  at the demolishing of Jerusalem, 
† Wolphius de Tempore, lib. 1. cap. 6.  or when some relics of the Jews went into Egypt, that is, within a years space; or else in the 23. year of Nebuchad-rezzar, when Nebuzaradan carried away captive of the Jews 
‖ Jer. 52.30.  745. persons, (which came to pass within the space of five years at most after the burning of the Temple.)  
Seventy sevens of years mentioned Dan. 9.24. (that is, 490. years) make up the age of the world, (according to Broughtons' computation) 
* Wolphius addeth 31. years, De Tempore lib. 1. c. 6.  3960. years. The last of those, as Broughton, and 
† Ibid.  Wolphius, and 
‖ In his Harmony of the Evangelists, upon Luke 3. v. 21.  M. Lightfoot (with some others) conceive, was the year of our Saviour's passion. His birth, according to M. Broughton, preceded by the space of 33. years and an half. He placeth it in the 
** Scaliger addeth 20. years.  3927. of the world. The time of Christ's death (saith he) shall be after seven seventies. These sevens are divided into three parts: and proper stories joined to the first and the last part: 
† Wolphius is of the same opinion. Hic temporis articulus incipit ab anno primo Cyri, qui Jubilaeus fuit, & desinit in Jubilaeum omnium jubilaeorum laetissimum & celeberrimum, veritatem inquam illius umbrae, in annum passionis Domini. De tempore lib. & cap. citatis. To these add as consenting for the beginning of daniel's sevens, Lansbergius, Empereur, Huit, etc.  Seven of them from Cyrus first year, and permission to return to build Jerusalem, (Esay 44.28. Ezra 4.12.) shall pass before they shall have walled it. Thence are 62. sevens to the last seven, set apart for the Lord his preaching. Of that last seven the first part is passed in silence, as for a preparation: 
‖‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signify, in the latter half of the last week.  that latter half doth Christ bestow in confirming the Testament for many; beginning at his baptism, ending at his death. The Temple was 49. years in building, 
†† Empereur upon the ninth of Daniel, much differeth from Broughton in his account of the seven first weeks, or 49. years, and somewhat concerning the 46. years mentioned John 2.20. A primo anno Cyri, quo per totam regnans Asiam (non tantùm in Persia, vel etiam Chaldea) copiam faciet Judais Templum, etc. aedificandi, usque dum per Xerxem opus impediatur, excurrent anni 46. His fermè aedificabitur Templum; quamuìs intereà varii varia sint molituri. Opus deinde continuè perficietur; sed intermittetur ad annum secundum Darii Nothi: quo resumptum ad fastigium perducetur circa annum illius 6. id est, spatio ad minimum 3. annorum: quos si addas praecedentibus 46. exurgent anni 49. id est, septimanae septem. The seventy weeks (as he thinks) concerned only times in which the city and temple should be builded, and the city inhabited. Times in whi●h the building was intermitted, that is, 107. years, as Joseph Scalig. computeth, De emendat. Temp. lib. 6. were rather to be esteemed an appendix of the captivity, the part of the enlargement.  The 46. John 2.20. are reckoned after the third of Cyrus, in which the building was hindered by Artaxast. Thus fare the author praised. After Junius his account, siege began to be laid to Jerusalem by Vespasian, in the fifth year of the last seven.  
Empereur upon Jachiades is of opinion, that the last week succeeded the thirtieth year of Christ born, in which he was baptised; and that he suffered in the middle of this week; to wit, Christ in the middle of the last seven, should put an end to sacrifice and oblation, by offering himsself once upon the cross for all. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Dan. 9.27.) the half week comprehended three years and an half, or four years and an half (ut medium, sic & dimidium Hebr. late sumitur). he's rather for the greater number. Christ was born in October, suffered about the time of the Passeover. Thence ariseth the half year above three or four whole ones. The last half of the last week reached to the Gospel begun to be preached by the Apostles to the Gentiles. The same author conceius that the seventy weeks were not continuous. So you have also his judgement. M. Mede in his daniel's weeks, maketh the sixth year of Darius Nothus (when the Temple was finished) the Epocha of the seventy weeks, and placeth the destruction of the Temple and city by Titus, in the midst of the last week. Those who reckon by years, when the year designed answereth the event, will not stand upon the completeness of months and days; nor those who reckon any thing by days, upon the completeness of hours and minutes: no more in the angels reckoning here by weeks, if so the number of weeks be complete, are the part of a week to be exacted. If the angel had said, that 490. years were allotted for the holy city, then to make good the prediction, the city must have been destroyed in the lost year. But when he says 70. weeks, 'tis sufficient that the destruction happened in the last week. So you have the judgement of another judicious writer.  
Joseph Scaliger (de emendat. temporum lib. 6.) dissenteth from all other writers whom I have seen upon this subject, as adding the half week, (Dan. 9.27.) to 7.22.1. (or 70. Dan. 9.24.) His seventy weeks and an half, contain 493. years and an half: the beginning of which he reckons from the second year of Darius Nothus, that is, from the 4290. in the Julian period; the end of them in the destruction of Jerusalem, in the 4783. of the Julian account.  
Funcius gins to reckon from the seventh year of Artaxerxes Longimanus, between which and Christ's passion he accounts 490. years.  
Some terminate 70. weeks in the beginning of Herod's kingdom, that is, (according to Scaliger) in the 4675. year of the Julian period, from which the 490. backward, will fall into the 4187. year of the same account, and (according to the same author) into the second of Cambyses. Munster conjectures, that the seventy weeks succeed immediately the 70 years' captivity, and are terminated in the beginning of Herod's kingdom. Herod (as Scaliger computes) reigned 37. years before the nativity of the Messiah. Master Huit in's comment upon Daniel, placeth the beginning of the seventy weeks in the first year of Cyrus, conceius the end of them was the beginning of the Gentiles called, and Jews rejected. Scaliger commemorates other opinions (De emendat. Tempor. lib. 6. in Epilogismo Hebdomadum Danielis) It's controverted as we see, whether Cyrus his edict was the Epocha of daniel's sevens, or some time on this side it, and at what time since Cyrus his decree by those of the later opinion; moreover whether they expired before or after Christ's birth; if after his birth, whether at his passion or afterward; if after his passion, whether at the destruction of Jerusalem, or before it: likewise whether or no the angels prophesy exhibit exactly seventy weeks; by those who defend the affirmative part, whether seventy continuous or interrupted; by those who are for the negative, whether more or less time. Both those who hold that the seventy weeks expired before Christ's birth, and those who place the end of them between Christ's passion, and the destruction of Jerusalem, are divided into several opinions.  

* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 R. Jose numerandas docet hebdomadas 70. ab excidio templi prioris usque ad posterioris (per Romanos) excidium. Seder Olam Rabath, cap. 28. Seder Olam Zuta assigneth the same bounds to daniel's sevens.  'Twas an easy matter to add many other both late and ancient writers, who assign Epocha's and periods to daniel's weeks differing among themselves, and from these mentioned, were not these produced already (authors excellent in parts and learning, moreover who stood upon the shoulders of Rabbins, and Christian writers of the Primitive Church, and Heathens, whose writings may illustrate historical and chronological parcels of sacred Scripture) sufficient to make any one suspect 
* Parùm inter se consentiunt, qui rationem temporum investigatam ediderunt. Quod cum vel Dei nutu, vel viti● vetustatis eveniat, calumniá carere debebit. Sulpitius Severus.  that nothing can be attained beyond conjectures for any event after Christ's birth, terminating all or any known part of daniel's weeks.  
Israelites who lived between the seventy years' captivity and the birth of the Messiah, might receive comfort from daniel's prophecy, although uncertain concerning the distance of events foretold. Although it was not clear to some of them, how long the building of their city and Temple should be interrupted, nor whether or no those times of affliction to be excepted from the seventy weeks, yet might all of them be supported with glad tidings of great joy shortly to be accomplished, & fore-armed against evils that should befall them. Neither do I doubt but that howsoever they were disturbed by their enemies, they kept almost till the destruction of the Temple, an exact account of years passed on this side the angel gabriel's prophecy to Daniel; so that believers among them might be much confirmed in their faith, and comforted by apprehensions of divine providence, as they saw events listed, to issue out at their appointed times. We can easily believe that many of their records did perish in their wars with Vespasian and Titus, before, or with their city. Those who fled to Pella probably neither had leisure or power to secure them. Somewhat might be alleged against each of the accounts (for daniel's sevens) quoted. I entertain as most probable,  
1. That Cyrus his decree concerning the holy city and the Temple to be re-edified, was the beginning 〈◊〉 shiels weeks. Quis audità prophetiâ de edicto, postea Cyri edictum audiens secus cogitasset, quàm hoc in prophetia designatum fuisse? Thus Empereur in his discourse to the Reader, before his Comments on Jachiad. on Daniel. At cujusmodi mandatum Dan. 9.25. denotatur, ab Artaxerxe promulgatum non legitur; verùm de Cyro res in confesso est: similiter Darius Nothus novum edictum non promulgavit, sed Cyri mandatum approbavit & confirmavit atque explicavit, Ezr. 6. coll. cum 1. capite. idem ibid.  
2. That the Holy of holies may seem to have been anointed 
* Our Mediator was then inaugurized, an heavenly Oracle pronouncing him to be the Son, or Mediator, & requiring all to hear him. Huit. upon Daniel 9  at his baptism; consequently when about thirty years old, by Luk 3.23.  
3. That afterward in one week he confirmed the covenant with many; by himself before his death, by his disciples after his resurrection.  
4. That the seven weeks preceded whole 62, and 62 the one week, and that the half week was part of the one.  
5. That the half week was the first part of the one week.  
6. That at the end of this first half of the last week Messiah was 
† That is, was slain. In a Manuscript Syriack translation of Daniel (& some other parts of the Old Testament) a precious 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Public Library of our University at Cambridge, nethketel meschicho velo eith leh Messiah is slain, and there is not to him.  cut off. I cannot apprehend how after 62. weeks, or 69. from the beginning of the seventy weeks, can signify the same, that at the end of the one week, or at the end of the seventy weeks.  
I cannot but observe before I proceed, that the Jews after their seventy years' captivity, have seven seventies of years granted for the enjoying of their own country. God's mercies bear the same proportion to his punishments, which seven a complete number hath to an unite.  
It's a task of vast difficulty (as we see already) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 applicare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. We shall conceive the time of Christ's birth, and the distances of other events (〈…〉 〈…〉 from the creation, yet more uncertain, if it can be proved that the quantity of all or any years between the creation and our Saviour's nativity is unknown to us. Those who have undertaken to measure out to us years mentioned in the Old Testament; or those used afterward by Jews till the destruction of Jerusalem are many of them of such note, and so much descent among themselves, that the authority of each is inconsiderable, compared with other who oppose it. But moreover all of them have builded upon false grounds, if Jews for any part of time mentioned had not certum anni modum, by which in any year present they might form a Calendar of the year following. That the antecedent is true, is averred by a learned writer, the glory of his age M. Selden in his Treatise de anno civili veterum Judaeorum.  
Jews anciently began their civil months, 
* Cap. 1. p. 3.  as they were parts of year's (say the Karites or Scripturary Jews) from the phasis of the moon after a conjunction, if she appeared in the 
† Here understand vesperam tertiam, seu initium tenebrarum, non crepusculum, neque temporis spacium ab occidente sole ad occasus finem. See my Author, cap. 4. pag. 16, 17.  evening beginning the thirtieth day, reckoned from the Neomenia last passed; or (if she was not seen in that evening) together with the sun on the thirtieth day (but so as the whole day should be counted the first of the new month). 
‖ Cap. 12. pag. 61, 62.  If clouds intercepted the moon throughout the thirtieth day, they expected a phasis on the day succeeding, and if the moon was seen on the evening which began this day, or together with the sun near his setting, the 31. day was sanctified; but if together with the sun (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dum fuerit dies maguus) die aperto, viz. two or three hours before sun set, the thirtieth day was to be sanctified. Talmudists, if the moon was seen on the thirtieth day, reckoned that the first of the month; but if on that day there was no phasis, 
† Cap. 3. p. 13.  pro arbitrio, the 30. or 31. after the new moon next preceding.  
If the phasis of the moon, was for many months together intercepted by clouds, 'twas in use according to Karites, to make many (but so as the number should not exceed four,) complete months together. See that oracle of Antiquity before quoted, in the said work, c. 4. p. 18. the reason for which they admit not above four complete months continually succeeding one another, is also there expressed. But according to that sect of jews there might not above three defective months continually succeed one another. See learned M. Selden De Anno Civili veterum Judaeorum, cap. 4. p. 19 yet we are perplexed with more uncertainty by reason of interculated years. The reasons of intercalation were not the same with Talmudists and Karites. Karites conceive no other reason was anciently attended in intercalation, then that the  might be celebrated in the month Abib (that is, tempore maturescentium frugum) according to what commanded Deut. 16.1. Observe the month of Abib, and keep the  unto the Lord thy God: for in the month of Abib the Lord thy God brought thee forth out of Egypt by night. Talmudists conceive that the vernal Equinox was also regarded; that, unless 12. months only being reputed for a year, the vernal Equinox should fall 
* Josephus (Archiologiae Judaiecae l. 3. cap. 10.) affirmeth that on the 14. of Nisan the sun was in Aries. His words intimate that he meant for the whole space of time between the Exodus and the last destruction of Jerusalem. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Others have taken notice of this sentence, Lansbergius Chronol. sacra l●b. 1. c 7. Master Selden de Anno civili veterum Judaeorum, cap. 20. Any one clearly seethe that the Passeover could not precede the vernal Equinox, unless it was celebrated before such time as the sun entered Aries. Forasmuch as the fixed stars have made progress in the Zodiac, or else the sun hath anticipated the vernal intersection, the entrance of the sun into Aries, (Sive hoc nomine indigitetur dodecatemorion intersectioni vernae proximum versus tropicum cancri, vel dodecatemorion ariete signatum) cannot possibly precede the vernal Equinox, Josephus (I conceive) by ●ries meaneth the Dodecatemorion (or 30. degrees) next after the vernal intersection, but in the sentence praised meaneth that the sun on the 14. of Nisan was in Aries according to the opinion of Jews, not attending whether or no it was so in truth. If the sun was in Aries perpetually on the 14. of Nisan (as Josephus affirmeth) the immolation of the , (or 14. of Nisan) could not fall on the day before, much less (what Karites admit of) by some days prevent the vernal Equinox. It followeth also from the same testimony approved that the day, on which the Jews did eat the , (or 15. of Nisan) the vernal Equinox being fastened on the 25. of March, could not fall later than the 26. of April: but part of Nisan might fall within May. Sol in ariete moratur dies 30. b. 15.  on the day after the immolation of the , (viz. the 15. of Nisan) or sooner in the year following, a thirteenth month ought to be added, that so Nisan might be protruded. Quonam (verò) temporis momento aut die in certorum atque in se aequabiliter recurrentium annorum, veluti Egyptiorum aut Julianorum, calculo, aequinoctium vernum seu Tekupham Nisan, sic dictam collocarint Mathematici veterum Judaeorum, non liquet. See my Author, c. 6. p. 24. 
† De Tempore Dominicae passionis.  Gerardas' Joannes Vossius saith, that the jews before Augustus his Empire placed the Vernal Equinox in the third of April. Aliae fuere intercalandi causae, eaeque fermè triplices; ut serotina frugum, agnorum, hadorum maturitas; itinerum ad urbem ducentium incommoda, veluti pontes diffracti, aquarum colluvies, viae canosae; & minimè idoneus fornacum Hierosolymis agnis paschalibus assandis status. chap. 5. of the elaborate work quoted, concerning the Jews civil year. Quin & aliae fuere subinde nec minùs incertae intercalandi causae, pro arbitrio eorum qui huic rei praerant. Ibid.  
According to the scheme of 7. years in the noble treatise before praised, De Anno civili veterum Judaeorum, c. 6. p. 26. (The vernal Equinox is placed ex hypothesi in the 25. day of March in the Julian year, and in the first of 7. years the first day of Nisan answereth to the 23. of March in the Julian account; moreover the sixth year is ex hypothesi intercalated propter serotinam fructuum maturitatem pravisam, itinerum incommoda, fornacum defectus, alia ejusmodi, quorum causâ, pro arbitrio qui rei praecrant, intercalatione annali usi sunt,) the first Passeover (or fourteenth of Nisan) falleth on April 5. the second on March 25. the third on April 12. the fourth on April 1. the fifth on April 21. the sixth on April 10. the seventh on April 20. 
* Yet greater variety is expressed by Mr. Selden De Anno civ. veterum Judaorum, c. 9 p. 51. His words are these. Ex ostensis liquet, ita citra ultraque vagari solitum Nisan mensem, seu anni civilis primum, ut non solum tam Aprilem quam Martium, verum etiam Maium Julianum subinde occuparet. Neomeniam autem ejus die undecimo Martii, juxta jam admissa, nunquam fuisse citeriorem.  So much variety happeneth in so little space. I shall conclude this part of my discourse in the words of my author (in his Preface p. 12. 13.) Frustranea sunt chronologorum maximorum argumenta quibus nimio cum sudore contendunt ex Cycliea seu astronomicâ temporis, apud Judaeos, ratione adeoque ex 14. Innâ in ipsa passione dominica (quasi illâ die 14. à Synodo naturali alilérve astronomice evenisset) vera passionis, paschatum in novo foedere, ac demum nativitatis, retrò putando, tempora ●ruere.  
Why Jews anciently, whether Talmudists or Karites, did not rather expect the phasis on the 29. then on the 30. night after a full month, I cannot divine. Although the phasis, should no gross body be interposed, between man's sight and the place of the moon in the sky, observe not always the same distance from a conjunction, yet there seems to be the same reason of expecting the appearance of the moon in the 29. night after a solid month, and on the 30. after an hollow month. Neither do I comprehend what hindered them, whether after a month of 29. or 30. days from beginning a new month from the first appearance of the moon after a conjunction, although it happened before the 29. day.  
It remaineth that I explain, when Karites conceive the beginning of the month, or Neomenia, began first to be reckoned from the first phasis of the moon after a conjunction; or if the moon was not seen in the night immediately succeeding the 29. of the month, from the beginning of the next following, etc. or yet where Talmudists fix the Epocha of their manner of accounting before mentioned, not much distinct from that of the Karites.  
How fare I may call years mentioned in the old Testament, Jewish, wants general consent. Calvine upon the epistle to the Romans, chap. 2. v. 17. conjectureth that the Israelites some time before Christ's birth, by reason of disturbances from their enemies were disenabled to distinguish exactly their tribes. He adds, Sive igitur in posterum prospicere voluerint, sive accepto jam malo succurrere; puto simul omnes ad nomen ejus tribus se contulisse, in qua religionis puritas diutius steterat, in qua redemptor expectabatur proditurus: siquidem hoc erat in rebus ultimis suffugium, Messiae expectatione se consolari. Josephus in the eleventh of his Antiquities conceives, that the Israelites were called Jews from Judas Macchabeus. But in his second book against Apion, the Israelites who came out of Egypt are called Jews. His 20. books which contain the history of jews and their Ancestors from the creation, are entitled (I know not by whom first) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Talmudists hold that their doctrine concerning months to be inchoated by the phasis, and years to be intercalated, was (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) traditio Mosaica è monte Sinai, and was to be executed by the Sanhedrin in the holy land. Maymon, Halach, Kiddush-hachodesh. c. 5. I find in Seder olam Rabath. c. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (according to Genebrards' translation) Hac illa hora Israelitae coeperunt obligari & astringi ad praecepta de polenta, & de praeputio, & neomeniâ. (He speaketh of the hour next after the Israelites passage over Jordan.) But I conceive that by chodesch he meaneth the month Nisan to be observed as the beginning of the year, rather than the phasis of the moon. By challah he meaneth the feast of unleavened bread. Who desire to be informed, at what time the Talmudists left off their uncertain account, may have recourse to M. Selden, De Anno Civ. vet. Judaeorum, c. 17. p. 80.  
The manuscript Karite used by M. Selden, affirmeth that the Israelites 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the time of the kingdom sanctified their months at the phasis of the moon. This place I find praised in an elegant discourse composed by the owner of that manuscript author. What M. Selden (de anno civili veterum Judaeorum, cap. 4.) quoteth out of the same Karite, importeth that the Karites imagined their lunatic observations as ancient at least as the deluge. Perhaps they thought they were for some time intermitted. The 150. days mentioned Gen. 7.24. and chap. 8.3. they conceive to have for their Epocha the 17. day of the second month (which they suppose to have been Jiar) on which Noah entered into the Ark, and to expire at the end of the seventeenth day of the seventh month, on which the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat. If Jiar and the four month's next following had all been , the sum should have been 151. days. Hence they conclude, that about four  months ought not to be continuous. Besides that 
* The author of Bereshith Rabath, Jarchi, and others (after Eliezer) in Parasch. Noah Seder Olam Rabath, c. 4.  some Jewish writers conceive, that 150. days which the waters are said to have prevailed on the earth, succeeded the 40. days of rain. 
† According to Seder Olam Rabath, c 4. the last day of the 150. in which the waters prevailed, was the last of Jair; and the ark began to rest upon the mountains of Ararat on the 17. of Siwan (which was the 7. month to Casleu, in which the 40. days of rain ended) Nachmanid. in Parasch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tells us that some reckoned the 150. days for the prevailing of the waters to reach to the 17. of Nisan; and the 17. of the 7. month, on which the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat, to be the 17. of Jair, the 7. to Marcheschvan in which the rain began to descend.  Some that space is to be allowed after the 150. days for the abaiting of the waters, before the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat, and though neither of these opinions should be true, 'tis not necessary that the 17. day of the second month, and 17. of the seventh month, should be included in the 150. days; whence will they evince that there were not fewer than four  months continuous: or if they will admit as many  together as are possible by their suppositions concerning the 150. days in which the waters prevailed, how will they prove that the seventh month was hollow, viz. but of 29. days?  
Another place in Eliah Ben Moseh, (quoted by my author so oft already praised, cap. 10. p. 54.) clearly expresseth that Scripturary Jews esteem their way of computing years as ancient Noah. Nullibi reperimus (for this Latin well interpreteth the Original) in Scriptura praeceptam hoc (de sanctificandis Neomeniis) peculiar fuisse terrae Israeliticae. Sed verò manavit â seculis vetussimis adeóque à tempore Noachi & Abrahae Patris nostri (quibus paex) mos ille sanctificandi lunam quocunque locorum. Some perhaps will object against Eliah Ben Moseh, what Josephus saith of Apion, (lib. 2. against him,) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non animadvertit à seipso adductum quo coargueretur. Karites, who are wont to confine themselves rigorously to written truths, are zealous beyond Pharisees for an oral tradition, by which they may parcel out time into months, and years. They are easily reconciled to themselves. It's no unusual thing, that some one objection should hinder a rule from being general. If either sect of jews report truth, 'twas sometimes impossible to make beforehand a Calendar for the year following: neither are we enabled by any histories to reduce days of such uncertain years, as have been mentioned, to their due positures in any equable account.  
Joseph Scaliger (as also many other writers before and since) affirmeth two things, from either of which granted it necessarily followeth that months and years, such as I have described according to the opinions of Talmudists and Karites, were not used in our Saviour's age.  
1. 
* De emendat. temp. l. 2. pag. 105. Lansbergius compendiously shows how the Jewish and Grecian years (in his opinion) differed, Chron. sa●r. l. 1. c. 11.  He contendeth that Jews from what time the Syro-Macedonians became Lords over them till after the destruction of Jerusalem used a cyclicall account, viz. Calippus his period, which consisted of 76. years, 27759. days, 940. Lunations; contained four metonicall cycles, one day subducted. (I shall not need to explain how the Jews according to Scaliger, varied from Calippus in the disposition of full and hollow months, sigh it sufficeth to my purpose to show that Scaliger thought they used a cyclicall account, and what were the reasons of his opinion.)  
2. That translatio feriarum was in use throughout the same segment of time,  
The first assertion he endeavoureth to confirm by the testimonies of Josephus, and R. Adda. This Doctor assigneth to the Jewish year 365. days, 5. hours, scrupl. 997/1080. moment. 48/76. Quid aliud vult (saith Scaliger) quàm periodum Judaicam fuisse annorum 76. R. Adda's period of 76. years, (as 
* De emendat. temp. l. ●. pag. 109 & lib. 4. pag. 279.  Scaliger thought) were the same with so many of Hipparchus his period (which beareth the same proportion to Calippus his period, that Calippus his period to Meton's) that is, Calippus his period, one quadrant of a day subducted. 
‖ Hipparchus intra sexdecem cyclos lunares unum diem de rationibus Calippicis perire sentiebat, Scal. de emen. temp. lib. 4 p. 282.  Hipparchus his period contained 111035. four Calippicall periods 111036. days, sixteen Metonicall periods 111040, days.  
The noble Author praised endeavoureth also to commend his opinion by Josephus his authority. He allegeth, De temp. emendat. lib. 2, p. 106, 107.) that the feriae of the Jewish months, in years to which memorable events are disposed by Josephus, were according to that Historian in several years the same which by his account. I have now summarily represented what is most solid and sincere in Scaligers arguments, for the Calippicall period used by the Jews in our Saviour's time. He mis-applieth significations, whereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are capable.  
In his chapter de anno Judaorum novitio (lib. 2. p. 121.) he intimateth how long he thought the Jews retained the Calippicall period, viz. till the vulgar year of Christ 344. qui erat Seleucidarum 656. & quadragesimus octavus post duas periodos Hipparcheas. Then (he saith) the Jews apprehended their error, viz. that the beginning of the year was protruded the space of two days (besides hours and scruples). He insinuateth that they then reform their account. But we shall easily perceive, if we compare Scaliger with himself, that his judgement was not clear in this particular. The Jews (saith 
* Prolegom. pag. 6.  Scaliger) whilst they used the Calippicall period, in omnibus Neomeniis Lunae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 observabant, non quod eam ex praescripto periodi non indicerent, sed ideò, ut eam sanctificarent. Name & hodie quoque observant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, non ut ex ea neomeniam indicant, sed ut eam sanctificent.  
I cannot but observe that R. Adda contributeth little to the supporting of Scaligers opinion. Scaliger never saw any work of this Author, only learned from * R. Hay a Spaniard, his judgement concerning the solar year. Besides that, the Talmudists conceive that the Jews were not where bound to observe the phasis of the moon in order to the beginning of their months, but in the holy land; nor there longer than there remained a Sanhedrin among them, it implieth no contradiction that those should express their opinions concerning solar years, who for the epochaes of the month attended to the phasis, and and whose civil years were not solar.  
The Talmudists also witness, that the Jews by their intercalations, provided that their feasts should return each of them about the same time of the solar year.  
Scaliger acknowledgeth that 76 years, such as are defined by R. Adda, were by a quadrante of a day, less than Calippus his period. R. Adas last fraction might possibly intimate no more than that he described a year as part of a quadrant of Hipparchus his period. R. Ada seemeth rather to have suggested a new way of computation to the Jews, then to have reported what was their manner of account. His endeavour afterward took effect. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hillel princeps Filius Juda Principis ordinavit computum secundum Tekupham Rab. Ada, donec veniat Messias filius David. Fuit antem seculo Abai & Rabath. Atque ideo ità scripsit Rabbi Simeon Duran in expositione exhortationum: fuítque anno 670. contractuum. Thus Rabbi Abraham Zacuth in Sepher Juchasin, fol. 90.  
Take notice also that R. Adda's year, if we may believe R. Hay, differed a little from the year defined by Hipparchus.  
Josephus his testimonies cited by Scaliger, at most only persuade, do not prove what he thence concluded. Feasts might sometimes fall out on the same days of weeks or months, according to an uncertain, as according to a cyclicall account. He substracteth a year from 27. assigned by Josephus to the space between Jerusalem taken by Pompey, and afterwards by Sosius. Perhaps should any conceive it operae pretium, he might find more instances dissonant, than Scaliger produceth as agreeable to his supposed Jewish cyclicall computation. But moreover any indifferent judge will readily give sentence, that Scaliger, unless he was resolved to dissemble his skill in history, divined that the Jews, before the destruction of Jerusalem used the Calyppicall period. I shall not need after Petavius, to explain what violence he offered to Josephus. Most certain it is that Scaligers invention much out-pased his judgement. He might by his skill in languages have much advanced the Literarie Republic, had he not more seriously affected to show himself witty, then judicious. His doctrine de emendatione temporum, is almost wholly fictitious, and founded upon the confines of nothing.  
What Scaliger allegeth for the translation of Jewish feasts, may be pretermitted without detriment to the defence of his opinion. Petavius likewise here is easily victorious. Scaligers second book de emendat. Temp. is the seat of his discourse about this subject. But in his 
* Pag. 642.  seventh book he thus expresseth himself; Non omnis feria novilunii erit idonea ad KEVIA, unde in sequentem aut tertiam diem diffunditur: quod dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Quamobrem illae dies vocantur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiphanio, capite 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Epiphanius telleth us, in the place quoted by Scaliger, that the Jews in the year of our Saviour's passion, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. He meant 
* See also Petitus, E●log. Chronol. l. 1. cap. 8.  (if we may rely upon Petavius his judgement) that some of the Jews (the Scribes and Pharisees) protruded the Passeover a day beyond the time at which it ought to have been celebrated according to their account, because so it would be 
† Epiphanius reporteth that the Jews celebrated the Passeover before the Vernal equinox. Aherravit Epiphanius qu●m longissimè à ver● vi● quando existimavit Christi aetate Judaeos usurpasse illam octa eteridem, qua nonnisi anno Christi Dionysiano ducentesimo septimo instituta est & publicata cum ●ype Tekupharum R. Samuelis Jarchinai. Obtinuítque ad tempora Constantini Magni. Observat enim Constantinus in epistola ad Ecclesias, Judeos bi● in uno anno Pascha celebrasse, quia nempe quartadecima ante vertebat aequinoctium, à quo primus numerabatur anni mensis ex instituto non minùs Mosis & veterum Judaeorum quàm Nicaenorum Patruus, etc. Petit. Eclog Chron. lib. 1. cap. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  nearer the Equinox. He doth not intimate that they translated it, because the feria, upon which it fell according to their account, was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I shall briefly produce others who side with Scaliger, before I relinquish this occasion of discourse.  
Gerardus joannes Vossius (de tempore Dominicae passionis, num. 13.) after mention made of that opinion which referreth the distance between our Saviour's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the Passeover celebrated by the Jews the same year, to the Jews illegal translation of feasts, thus goeth on; Firmantur haec e Seder Olam, ubi legas exstructo templo secundo, à R. Eliezero, & aequalibus, esse constitutum, nè secundo, quarto, vel sexto die ageretur Pascha.  
Vossius here attributeth to Seder Olam, what is not exstant in any book of that name. I find in Munster's Calendarium Hebraicum (cap. de observatione primi mensis scilicet Tisri) and in his Comment upon Matthew 26. a sentence in Hebrew, containing the history touching the Jewish translations of feasts, which Vossius ascribes to Seder Olam. It is translated by Munster into this Latin, Sic statuerunt magistri nostri Sanhedrin, Magnates seculi; In domo Sanctuarii 2 d●, cùm extructa & consummata esset, apparuit cathedra ignea parata, & super eam Rex seculi, majestate sublimis, stans scilicet inter porticum, & accipientes coronam, apprehendent ésque sigillum secretum, statuerunt & fecerunt ordinem seculi: traditúmque est in manum Rabbi Eliezer qui major omnibus caeteris fuit, & ordinavit 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  non fieri festum Sortis feria 2. 4. 7. neque 
* Understand the 15. of Nisan. Vossius in the tractate lately quoted, & some other late writers misapply it to the 14. Some Authors say Nisan for Pesach. The Neomenia of Nisan is never Bad●.  Pascha feriâ 2. 4. 6. neque Pentecosten feria 3. 5. 7. neque caput anni feriâ 1. 4. 6. neque diem expiationis feria 1. 3. 6. in aeternum.  
Such translations of feasts likewise are approved in the Treatise de invent. Neomeniar. & Tecuph. (translated by Munster) and by R. Nachshon's Canon's Festivitatum.  
Maimon. in his Tractate entitled Kiddusch hachodesh, saith that the Jews fix not the Neomenia (viz. of Tisri) in (Adu) the 1. 4. or 6. feria, because their account is accommodated to the conjunctions of the sun and moon, according to their middle motion. The same author affirmeth, that they had respect to the true motion of the moon, both before and for some time after the destruction of Jerusalem.  
Philo lib. 3. de vita Mosis, saith of Moses, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Primum mensem facit initium verni aequinoctii. If the first neomenia of the year were in a rigorous sense, the beginning of the equinox, the 15. of Nisan, whilst the vernal equinox was placed in the 25. of March, could not fall later than the 8. of April; which in part destroys such an uncertain account as hath been attributed to the Jews. Moreover, the neomenia of Nisan should be excepted from that account. But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot so well signify both a month, and the new moon, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebrew, which is derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 renovare. Again, if we admit that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath both those significations, it's not necessary that Philo should intent the latter. He might perhaps mean in the sentence praised, that the first month of the Jewish civil year, according to some part or other indifferently in the beginning, or middle, or end of it, was quotannis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Moreover, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (forasmuch as the inequality of day and night for some time after the Tecupha of Nisan was not sensible) and likewise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may admit of latitude, 
* The Jews (as some affirm) in our Saviour's age reputed the 25. of March the vernal equinox. Sed aequinoctium vernum medium, anno Ch●isti nati primo Dyonysiano (qui 10. erat cycli solaris) incepit Martii die 12. scr. 3. & Hierosolymis minute. 47. post horam septimam pomeridianam.  so that th' one shall not necessarily be confined to the space of 24. hours, nor the other to the point which inchoateth that time.  
Another sentence quoted out of Philo in the Treatise so oft mentioned, de anno civili veterum Judaeorum, c. 20. assureth us that Philo thought (as do the Talmudists and Karites) that the phasis was observed by the Jews, in order to the beginning of their civil month. The words are these; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Neomeniâ incipit sol splendore sensibili lunam illustrare, ipsa verò proprium decus tum patefacit spectantibus. The Neomenia here described had place if the Moon appeared (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) in tempore suo.  
What Anatolius 
* Apud Euseb. Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. 7. cap. 32.  testifieth concerning the Passeover (viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. in primo anno (Pascha) novilunium primi mensis occupat: quod est circuli decennovennalis principium, etc.) seemeth to be inconsistent with the testimony of the Talmudists & Karites.  
Galatinus (de Arcanis catholicae veritatis l. 4. c. 14.) speaking of the Hebrews, but to whom Nisan was the first month of the year (which he feigneth to be the same with our March) and consequently on this side the delivery from Egypt, saith: Etsi menses lunares habeant, tertius tamen quisque annus apud eos tredecim menses sive lunationes habet, caeterorum verò unusquisque duodecim duntaxat continet menses. Ita ut per embolismos temporum adaequationes ipsi facientes, per annos solares quemadmodum & nos, tempora metiantur. This Author as he affirmeth without reason, may be dismissed without refutation.  
Wolphius de Tempore lib. 1. c. 3. telleth us, but falsely, that the author of Seder Olam reckoneth for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the moon 24. hours, and fixeth the Jewish Neomenia in the beginning of the nineteenth.  
There's neither in Seder Olam Rabath, nor in Seder Olam Zuta any shadow of such a kabbala. He was deceived (I conjecture) by taking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
* Some have conceived that Munster compiled the Hebrew of that treatise; but in Epist. nuncupator. before his Hebrew Calendar, he seemeth to intimate that it had some other author. His words are these: Deinde ascripsimus Hebraicè & Latinè tractatum, qui apud Hebraeos de neomeni●s & aequinoctiis inscribitur, etc.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 liber de inventione neomeniarum & tecupharum, to be part of Seder Olam. Munster (in his Calendarium Hebraicum) hath annexed this Treatise to Seder Olam Zuta, & R. Abraham Levita's Sepher Hakkabbala. I find in it (p. 88 according to the edition at Basil. Ann. 1527.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quemadmodum inquiunt capite primo, Rosch Hasshana, 24. horis luna absconditur, 18. vetus, & 6. nova. Scaliger (the Emend. temp. p. 636.) well conjectureth the occasion of this Canon. His words are these: Sed observandum, si novilunium attigerit horas 18. praecise, aut amplius, transferendam esse feriam. Caussa in promptu est, 18. horae Computi Judaici sunt 24. horae astronomicè, hoc est, à meridie. Nam primum novilunium, uti diximus, 
† De Computo Judaeorum novitio loquitur.  Judaicè est 
‖ Novilunium Tobu fer. 2. h. 5. scr. 204.  hor. 5. 204. ab occasu solis, astronomicè, 11. 204. à meridie. Hoc ne doctiores quidem Judaei adverterunt: cujus rei ignoratione illud oraculum sciverunt. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Viginti quatuor horis luna latet, id est, silet. Sex novella fit, & decem octo fit vetus.  
The Author of the book quoted, De inventione neomeniarum & tecupharum, reckoneth (as I have said) for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the moon 24. hours, and the Neomenia in the beginning of the nineteenth. According to this author the civil year used by the Israelites in Canaan, and their forefathers from the creation, consisted of 12. lunary months▪ but in the third or second, a full month was intercalated. In ordinary years (that is, such as were 
* Triplex est genus anni, ordinaerius, cavus, sive defectivus, plenus, vel abundans. Horum quisque communis est, vel embolismaeus. Annum fecit abundantem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Marchescbuan; deficientem● seu cavum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Cisteu.  neither abundant nor deficient) the 1, 3. 5. 7. 9 11. months were full; the rest hollow. An hour contained 1080. (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) parts; a day 24. hours, and began à sexta hora post meridiem; a month d. 29. h. 12. scrup. 
† Epilogismus Syzygiae Judaicae, dierum 29. horarun 12. moment. 793. quae quid●m 793. momenta sunt scrupula sexagenaria 44′. 3″. 20‴. At verus Epilogismus astronomicus hor. 12. 44′. 3″. 11‴. Differentia, scrup, 0′. 0″. 9‴. quae quidem tertia in Syzygias unius cycli solidi ducta fiunt scrup. 0′. 35″. 15‴. Scalig. de Emendat. temp. pag. 640.  793. a year which had neither month nor day inserted, d. 354. h. 8. scrup. 876. For the extent of this month he appealeth to R. Simeon, the son of Gamaliel. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dixit princeps 
‖ Abarbinel (in Parasch. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) attributeth to Gamaliel what here is given to Simeon, deriveth from him this kabbala.  Simeon filius Gamalielis: Sic accepi à domo patris patris mei, quod non renovatur Luna spatio minori 29. diebus, & dimidio & duabus horae partibus, & 73. chelakim.  
The Solar year exceedeth the common ordinary Lunar year by d. 10. h. 21. scrup. 204. had 365. days, 6. hours. That the motions of the sun and moon might be reconciled, seven years in the enneadecaeteris (or cycle of 19 years) were embolismaei, viz. the 3. 6. 8. 11. 14. 17. 19  
For the combination of months to be intercalated he quoteth R. Gamaliel in the talmudical Tractate; Concerning the beginning of the year, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et tradiderunt in Massecheth de principio ani annos embolismaeos: inquit, R. Gamaliel: tres, tres, duo, tres, tres, duo. The author of the book de Neomeniis & Tecuphis (now quoted,) observeth, that at the end of the cycle there remained 1. hour, 485. chelakim of the excess of solar years. In years which have a month inserted, Adar is doubled: The first hath 30. the other 29. days.  
I cannot but take occasion here to correct an error, which hath been propagated by this author. He concludeth that no month but the last could be doubled in anno embolismaeo without violation of the Scripture; because the months there have their order assigned them, (he maketh particular mention of Adar, viz. it is said to be the twelfth month) yet acknowledgeth that the first Adar is the month intercalated. The last Adar hath been mistaken by some late Writers for the month intercalated. Neither may I omit that the Author praised is inconsistent with himself, as in several places defining the extent of the intercalated month to be 29. days, 12. hours, 795. scruples, (which is the quantity of common months) yet elsewhere making it 30. days. This perplexity is not peculiar to this author. It's agreed that the intercalated Adar had 30. days, yet 29. days and 12. hours substracted seven times from the excess of the Solar enneadecaeteris compared with the Lunar, leaveth but one hour and 485. scruples. What more was requisite to the filling up of 7. intercalated months, was subducted (I conjecture) from the hours and parts of hours by which lunary years exceeded 354. days.  
The 12. hours of each lunary month above 29. days, multiplied by 12. make 6. days, which are disposed of each year 
* The 30. day of a full month is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The beginning of an hollow month hath two days, the 30. of the month preceding, and the day following. Abarbinel upon Exod. 12. saith of the month mentioned 1. Sam. 20.17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fuerunt in illo mense dies bini capitis mensis secundùm consuetudinem nostram (id est, hodiernam.) I cannot doubt, comparing this sentence with Jonathan Ben Uziels paraphrase, and R. Isaiah's marginal Comment upon the 1. Sam. 20.27. but that Abarbinels two days of the Beginning of the month, were the last of a full month, and the first of an hollow month.  in 6. full months. The scruples of a month besides complete days and hours, viz. 793. multiplied by 12. make 9516. that is, 8. hours, 876. scruples. Some tell us that days were intercalated severally in second months of years, viz. Marcheschvans, accordingly as 8. hours, 876. scruples, by which ordinary lunar years exceed each of them 354. days, to be digested into several years, required. But part of them, (as I said) seem to have completed intercalated months. According to the author before quoted, Marcheschvan, which is naturally an hollow month, is sometimes made full, and Cisleu which is naturally a full month, is sometimes made hollow, by reason of translation of feasts.  
What some other writers deliver about the Epocha of the Jewish month, by itself much perplexed, is extricated from difficulty by what I have produced out of the book de Neomeniis & Tecuphis. Among several Hebrew and Latin authors, who express themselves in this point alike, I shall make choice of Abarbinel for an instance, but shall explain likewise what he thought concerning times before the Exodus.  
He affirmeth (in Parasch. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) that each nation before the Exodus determined the beginnings of their months by computation, not by the phasis.  
2. That the Israelites and their forefathers before the Exodus, used the civil months and years of the nations amongst whom they conversed.  
3. That God on mount Sinai determined, what months, and years, and neomenia's the Israelites should afterward observe.  
4. He seemeth to conceive that neither they, nor any nation had exactly the same in any times preceding.  
5. That the Israelites were determined to a set computation of days, and hours, and scruples, according to which they ordered their months, and years, but yet that the phasis was not neglected. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Non dubium est, quin tunc temporis monstrata fuerit Mosi via sanctificationis neomenia ad phasin, & via sanctificationis ejus secundùm rationem computi, & regulae ad deducendum illam ex iis, quia lex nostra ligata est in traditione Mosis è Sinai. The hour or time which he pointeth at in these words (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) was that in which God first commanded that Nisan should be the beginning of months. So much is clear from what immediately precedeth; but also toward the end of his Comment upon Exodus 12.2. he affirmeth that the account to be used by the Israelites, was delivered to Moses by word of mouth, that he might transmit it to the great Sanhedrin, and that it began to be observed in Egypt. It's manifest he thought the same account was again enjoined on mount Sinai. Five months (saith he) are perpetually full (each of them of 30. days,) five perpetually hollow (each of them of 29. days) and two months, viz. Marcheschvan and Cisleu sometimes have each of them 30. days, sometimes each of them but 29. days. He affirmeth that the neomenia (or beginning of the month) was fastened by computation from the days of Moses to Antigonus; and that Antigonus his two scholars Sadoc and Baitus (ringleaders to the sect of the Sadduces, whom that faction of the Jews, which are now called Karites, succeed in most of their opinions) first taught that the beginning of the month ought to be ratified by the phasis. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et coguntur sapientes (istius) seculi retractare verba sua. What I have quoted, intimateth that Sadoc and Baitus prevail, that the phasis should be generally received for the epocha of the civil year.  
R. Gamaliel (he saith) had shapes of moons upon his wall, in order to the instruction of his scholars, and the sectatours of Sadoc and Baitus. The times of Jewish festivals (according to the same author) were determined by by the Sanhedrin; but according to computation, not according to the phasis. Whereas the appearance of the moon is obvious to the sense of any private persons, he conceiveth this office of defining the time of the neomenia, and the ordering of the year, to have been so mysterious, that a 
* vide p. 39  schechina was necessary for the direction of the judges. He insinuateth that the Karites violate that precept which forbiddeth to add any thing to the Law. They begin their months, 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nixi traditione (hominis) privati, vel privatorum.  according to some private tradition, by the phasis (I represent Abarbinels' sense) without warrant from the written or traditional Law, and dimetrally against a Kabbala which Moses received on mount Sinai. He condemneth their other customs about the ordering of their months or years; that they sanctify the neomenia when there is no phasis, that when the moon appeareth not for four months together, 
† According to Eliah Ben Mosch, the Karites grant that four full months may be continuous.  they make three of them full, and one hollow, that they admit not of any other reasons of months to be intercalated, besides that Nisan may fall in Abib.  
What I have quoted out of Abarbinel, assureth us that he believed not that the phasis was the beginning of the Hebrew civil month, unless accidentally, to wit, as it happened in that time which began the civil month according to computation. I shall now extricate his doctrine from a grand difficulty, which unless it meet with candid interpreters, will be construed into a contradiction.  
The question is this: How can 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consist with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? How can the neomenia be sanctified both by the phasis, and by computation in the same civil account?  
Answ. The word kiddusch in the sentence quoted out of Abarbinel, hath two significations. As it hath respect to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Phasis, it importeth 
* Judei hodierni lunâ statim visâ adhihibent hanc benedictionis formulam: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Idem faciunt & Muhammedani, quamuìs neomenias ex scripto indicere soleant.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 benediction; but as it's related to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est praeparare & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sixio neomeniae quaedam mensis est praeparatio: sed & kiddusch, quòd benedictio, seu consecratio, cum sanctione & initiatione non rarò conjuncta sit, transitu facili & hanc & illam scorsum denotat.  is the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sanction. In 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Adam blessed the moon when he first saw it; but the month began six hours sooner. The determination of the Neomenia to this or that time (called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) by Abarbinel is referred to computation: but he seemeth to have thought that the month was consecrated at the Phasis, if the moon appeared in due time.  
The knot may be otherwise loosed, perhaps more agreeably to Abarbinel's mind. He might by Kiddusch Hachodesch nghal pi● hareijah, mean only that the epocha of their civil month was so ordered by computation, that it was wont to fall out at, or near the time of the Phasis. He saith that in saul's time, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those who hold that the Jewish month anciently began with the 19 hour after a conjunction, sometimes say that it began at the Phasis, meaning that it began much nearer to the Phasis, then to the conjunction.  
I shall now explain how these authors may be reconciled to themselves, who make the Hebrew months of the same quantity with Synodical, yet affirm that in common ordinary years (that is, such as were neither embolismaei, nor abundantes, nor deficientes) they were alternatively full and hollow. They speak of the Hebrew months according to a double acception; viz. as they import distances which the Hebrews conceived equal with those of conjunctions next one another; or as they denote months founded in such as were for their quantity the same with synodical. This sort may properly, and the first sort tropically, according to the opinions of the same authors, be said to have been the ancient Hebrew months. The first kind of months are the adequate matter of the other, which were alternatively full and hollow, from the aera of such account.  
The Hebrews (as the same authors conceive) endeavoured that their civil months and years should maintain correspondency between the motions of the sun and moon. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secretum computi (for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intercalatio, here by a Synecdoche is the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 computum) which the Hebrew Doctors so much mention, especially aimed at this mark. 'Twas requisite that they took notice of the motions of each luminary, that they might fitly digest them into their civil months and years.  
Epiphanius in his 51. Heresy (entitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) reporteth that the Jews in our Saviour's time used a double cycle, a lesser of 14. years, a greater of 85. years. Simple years, that is, such as had nothing intercalated, contained each of them 354. days, and four hours, such as were 1/3. of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In each Tessaradecaeteris five months were intercalated.  
The greater cycle according to the Chetib in Epiphanius, contained 85 years. One month, (besides the five of each lesser cycle) was intercalated in the 85. year. Their civil years ought to reconcile the motions of the sun and moon, as fare as they conceived it possible, within the compass of the greater cycle. Some perhaps attending that cyril maketh mention of a cycle of 84 years used by some Christians, or regarding the proportion between 84 and 14 (the number of years in Epiphanius his lesser cycle) which is exactly sextuple, have derogated a year from Epiphanius his greater Jewish cycle. The Jews (saith Epiphanius) in 85 years intercalated 31 months, 
* Petitus thus readeth the end of Epiphanius his paragraph touching the Jewish cycles.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. eleven hours here are 11/12. of a day. Their intercalations, according to Epiphanius, in their greater cycle exceeded a due measure by the space of two days and two hours. The Neomenia of Nisan in the 86th. year, was protruded two days by the default of their cycle. But the 27 days and 22 hours might be completed into a month, by the excess of Lunary years above 354. days, 8. hours. The measure of the Lunar year according to our Hebrew Doctors is 354. days, 8. hours, 876. scruples. Those who had the managing of the Jewish account, might conceal from the vulgar the 876 scruples which were to 354. days, 8. hours, the compliment in the lunar year, yet opportunely intercalate them.  
Epiphanius (in Haeres. Audianorum) attributeth to the Jews beyond the destruction of Jerusalem, a cycle of eight years.  
Africanus in Hierome (upon Dan. 9) and in Eusebius, Demonstrat. Evangel. lib. 8. assigneth to the Jews for the same times, a cycle containing the same number of years.  
To explain the measure of years exhibited by Africanus, or Epiphanius, will nothing promove my purpose.  
There's much controversy (as I have showed) about the account which was used by the Israelites, between the Exodus and the destruction of Jerusalem.  
The Talmudists uncertain account is exhibited in R. Jehudas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but how long, and when it was used, are not there expressed. These circumstances are determined by Maimon. in the Tractate Kiddusch Hachodesch. The place is noted by 
† See Scalig. in Canon. Isagog. l. 3. c. 6. Petavius de doctrina temp. lib. 2. & in Epiphan. ad Haeres. Alogor. Samuel. Petit. Eclog. Chronolog. l. 1. c. 3. & 8.  Petavius, and others who have been conversant in this subject. Maimonies suffrage for the uncertain account, addeth (I confess) nothing to the authority of the Talmud, if his information was from thence wholly propagated to him. Scaliger believeth that the phasis, as oft as it was had when it was expected, was the epocha of the jewish month, from the Exodus till the aera contractuum.  
Abarbinels' opinion (as it's clear from what I cited out of him) is almost diametrally opposite. Some Hebrew writers hold, that the Israelites used a cyclicall account (the same which they now use, or one a little differing) throughout the whole time which they inhabited the holy land.  

‖ Tractat. de variis annorum formis cap. 16.  Lydiat objecteth against Epiphanius, his falsification about the Roman Consuls, and that in Haeres. 70. (viz. Audianorum) he speaketh of the Paschall cycle of Christians, as if generally it had been Octaeteris. Epiphanius might fare more venially attribute any cycles to the Jews who lived in our Saviour's time, which were forged by some private person, and never publicly used by that nation.  
I may add, that Epiphanius might perhaps pronounce of the Jews who lived before the destruction of Jerusalem, 
† Vide Samuel. Petitum Eglog. Chronol. lib. 1. cap. 14. Lydyat Tract. de variis annorum formis, cap. 16.  by the practices of some of that nation in the present age. He lived after Hillels edition of the Jewish account. Hillels account if the hours and scruples by which Lunar years exceed 354. days, wont to be inserted before they exceeded a day, in some intercalated month, or in Marcheshvan, be reserved (part of a day excepted, which might be disposed of before or after the month intercalated in the end of 85. years) till they become a month, differeth only in some inconsiderable circumstances from that of Epiphanius. The Jewish account explained by Munster in his Calendarium Hebraicum, and by Scaliger de emendat. Temp. lib. 7. is Hillels. Scaliger (the emend. temp. lib. 2.) is angry with those who make it as ancient as the Creation. There's frequent mention of this account in the Hebrew Doctors. Some seem to believe that it began in Paradise: others are misconstrued into the same error by late writers. R. Abraham Zacuth informeth us, that Hillel composed it. Former ages made way for it. Hillel (as the same author witnesseth) ordinavit computum secundam tecupham Rabbi Adae: And Ada imitated Samuel Jarchinai, (and 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hipparchus ille Astrologus summus celeberrimus speculatus est Epilogismos antiquos ab annis propemodum quadringentis super defectibus lunae: terminavitque horas, scrupula, momenta, & minutias: adeò ut summa rationum ejus conveniens sit rationibus doctorum nostrorum felicis memoria in modo mensis Lunaris, qui est 29. 12. 793. Some of the Jews ancienter than Jarchinai, approved this measure of the Lunar month.  Jarchinai probably some more ancient.) They differed not considerably from one another. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Horam & quadraginta octoginta quinque scrupula excurrentia in omni cyclo è sententia Samuelis, ut constat omnibus autoribus computi, is Rab. Adda illam horam, & quadraginta octoginta quinque scrupula distribuit per scientiam fractionis Arithmeticae in omnes septuaginta sex tecuphas, quae sunt in cyclo; adeò ut unumquodque scrupulum diviserit in septuaginta sex scrupula secunda, quae vocavit momenta, & singulis cycli tecuphis competunt viginti scrupula, momenta quadraginta quinque. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secundum rationes Rab. Adda desinunt anni solis cum aennis lunae in singulis cyclis aequatione absoluta, sine accessione aut decessione, vel unius momenti.  
The years in which seven months within each lunar cycle were intercalated, were according to R. Adda the 2. 5. 7. 10. 13. 15. 18. The account which the Jews now use, was attributed to R. Hillel, because he altered R. Adda's astronomical computation in some circumstances.  
Hillel endeavoured to reconcile R. Jaichinai and R. Adda, 
† See Scalig. in Canon. Isagog. lib. 3. c. 6. Petit. Eclog. Chronol. l. 1. c. 15. & 16.  The Jews, before it was decreed by their great Senate, that R. Hillels account should be generally used until the days of the Messiah, some of them computed their affairs by R. Sam. Jarchina's astronomical account, 
† See Scalig. in Canon. Isagog. lib. 3. c. 6. Petit. Eclog. Chronol. l. 1. c. 15. & 16.  others by R. Adda's: some retained the uncertain account used before the destruction of Jerusalem. R. Hillel went in the middle way between Jarchinai and Adda, yet was not able to reduce the Jews to uniformity.  
Jose Ben Chilpetha in Seder Olam Rabath, Nachman in Bereshith Rabath, and Jarchi upon the history of the deluge, affirm that months in the Primitive world were one full, another hollow. Each of these quoteth R. Eliezer for his opinion. R. Jose, and Rabath Bar Nachman were ancienter than Hillel, the Founder of that account which the Jews now use. Hillel (in that place of Juchasin which I before quoted) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fuit anno 670. contractuum. Hic annus (saith Scaliger) erat 358. Christi, annis 14. post ordinationem, quae incidit in annum 
* So we must read him. 354. is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 typographicum.  344. We can easily believe that the author of Bereshith Rabath, etc. was ancienter than Hillel, though they were for some time contemporary; and that Nachman had written at least Bereshith Rabath before the publishing of Hillels cycle. R. Abraham Zacuth affirmeth that Hillel lived in the time of Abhai and Rabath. Rabath is Bar Nachman, and Abhai one who was educated by him, and adopted his son. R. Bar Nachman (according to Buxtorf and Alstede) flourished about the year of Christ 300. R. Jose and Nachmanides, etc. sigh there's no ground for their opinion in sacred Scriptures seem to have attributed to the times before the exodus, such civil months, and such a form of years, as themselves esteemed most absolute; or else to have thought some astronomical account approved in later times to have been propagated from the civil use of times most ancient. It's probable enough that some later writers, whether Jews or of any other nation, might understand what maxims were delivered by authors more ancient touching the Hebrews astronomical or civil account of present ages, to be spoken of the civil account of ages preceding. Any one perceiveth that the Astronomical account, whether public or private might as easily be mistaken for the Civil of the same age.  
Besides that there's no vestigium in Rosch Hasschanah of that conceit concerning the beginning of the 19 hour after a conjunction, nor yet of the Canon touching the number of months intercalated in the cycle of 19 years, it's obvious to perceive from what hath been spoken, that the same might be propagated from authors of undeniable credit, and ancienter than R. Jehudah, who compiled the Mischna, yet not infer that the Phasis was not the Epocha of the Jews civil month.  
That I may further explain what I have spoken touching the occasions of false opinions about the ancient Jewish year, I shall add somewhat concerning several accounts coexsistent.  

† Eclog. Chronol. l. 1. c. 4. & 14.  Petitus affirmeth that the Jews had besides their account by the Phasis, a cycle of 8. years, such an one as suffered not the Passeover to prevent the Equinox, which they retained till the 207. year of the Christian Aera; that then an Octaeteris of a new stamp succeeded, which could not so well tueri fines anni. Epiphanius (he saith) was deceived, as suppossing the latter cycle to be the same which was observed in the year of Christ's passion. Epiphanius besides the double cycle which be attributeth to the Jews in his 51. Heresy, maketh mention of an Octaeteris in the Heresy of the Audians, according to which the Passeover sometimes happened twice within the compass of a year, that is, no vernal equinox interceding. That the Jews erred this error about the time of the Nicene Council, is witnessed in an epistle 
‖ Apud Theod. Hist. Eccles. lib. 1. c. 10.  written by Constantine to the Bishops who were absent from the Assembly at Nice. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This place and that in Epiphanius (Hares. 70.) were not happily interpreted by Scaliger, who taketh occasion hence to conjecture that the Jews when their plenilunium Paschale came before the vernal intersection, kept two Passovers in two months which were continuous, viz. one in the first, another in the second month.  
According to Epiphanius, our Saviour's last Passeover fell into the last year, (to wit, the 85.) of the Jews greater cycle. And he with the vulgar Jews, kept the Passeover according to the cycle of 8. years; but the Scribes and Pharisees who were (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) according to their og do contapentaeteris, in which they intercalated two days supra rationes lunares. The more mysterious account was not imparted to the common people. the Scribes and Pharisees also added to the two days mentioned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
I cannot consent to Epiphanius, that in times so ancient the feast of the Passeover anteverted the vernal equinox. That according to the doctrine of the Karites, it was provided by intercalations that the Passeover should fall in Abib, is confirmed by Eliah Ben Moseh, and 
* Upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Abarbinel. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (Euseb. hist. Eccles. l. 7. c. 32.) sunt etiam quaedam velut regulae ac praeceptiones in libro qui inscribitur Enoch, quae declarant primum mensem apud Hebraeos circiter aequinoctium esse. The Talmudists deny that the equinox was later than the 15. of Nisan. Josephus affirmeth (Archaeolog. Judaicae lib. 3. cap. 10.) that on the 14. of Nisan the sun was in Aries. The Agathobuli, instructers of Aristobulus, one of the Septuagint (in Anatolius praised by 
‖ Hist. Eccles. l. 7. c. 32.  Eusebius) transmitted to posterity this Canon, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
To these add Aristobulus and Anatolius. According to these witnesses, the sacrificing of the Passeover, or 14. of Nisan was not regularly sooner than the vernal equinox. Many learned Authors have concluded (but by what Logic I cannot divine) from that place in Josephus and this in Eusebius now cited, that the 14. of Nisan ought to fall upon the vernal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Had I the faculty of wondering. I might here take occasion to exercise it. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is the sum of those authorities. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Aristobulus his testimony is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1/12 of the Zodiac, viz. Aries or Libra. By the suffrages of this author and Josephus, the Passeover was celebrated whilst the sun was in Aries. Anatolius affirmeth that in the first year of the enneadecaeteris, the Passeover was celebrated on the first day of the first month. Perhaps he conceived that to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which had day and night equal. If so, yet his expression implieth that the Passeover might fall out otherwise in other years of the cycle. As the testimonies produced by Anatolius, limit not the immolation of the Passeover to that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Spring, which had day and night equal, so neither do they exclude it thence. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be interpreted by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. They seem to mean that the sun was in Aries at the immolation of the Passeover. The intention of the Passeover is resembled by the time, at which it was observed.  

* Exod. 12.18. Levit. 23.5. Numb. 28.17.  Some texts of sacred Scripture in which it is said, On the fourteenth day of the first month at even, is the Lords Passeover, were perhaps to Josephus, the Agathobuli, Aristobulus, etc. an occasion of attributing to the 14. of Nisan, what the Talmudists say of the 15. viz. that it cannot be sooner than the vernal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 
* In Haeres. Audianorum, seu 70.  Epiphanius himself informeth us, that the Christians in the Primitive times judged that the Passeover ought not to be kept before the equinox. They conceived that the equinoctial was (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, seu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) by divine appointment the partition of years. They supposed that the Passeover ought to be celebrated in the first month. But moreover their reason doth not conclude those who are southern to the equator. If the entrance of the sun into Aries, be the natural beginning of the year to us, than the entrance of the sun into Libra to them.  
Petavius in several parts of his works expresseth himself to be of opinion, that the Jews whilst they inhabited their own country, regarded a cyclicall account; yet approveth Maimonides his doctrine touching the uncertainty of the Jewish civil months. The Synedrium (as Maimonides teacheth us in his Jad Chazaka, in the Tractate Kiddusch Hachodesch) if there came no witnesses of the Phasis on the 30. day, (reckoned from the last neomenia,) by intercalating a day made the month full, or of 30. days, and decreed that the 31. day should be the epocha of the next month; but if after four or five days, or at the end of the month (Nisan and Tisri being excepted) it were confirmed to them by sufficient testimonies, that the moon had been seen at her time (viz. on the 30. night) they began to reckon the 30. day the beginning of the month. Petavius upon Epiphan. (ad haeres. Alogor. p. 183. & 186.) imputeth the Scribes and Pharisees celebration of the Passeover after our Saviour's with his disciples, to the Senate's ill managing of their uncertain account. What Petavius seemeth to suspect in particular, viz. that the month was new moulded, the epocha being cast backward to the 30. day, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quia venerunt testes longinqui, ac se lunam suo tempore prospexisse confirmaverunt; should rather (as we easily discern) have occasioned the Sanhedrins, observing of the Passeover before our Saviour, than (what he conceiveth) vice versâ. He supposeth that our Saviour judged it more convenient, that the epocha of the month, though for want of information it was unduly fixed, should be rata & grata, rather than the erratum should cause a new edition of the month.  
Petitus conceiveth, that the Jews before the Halosis of jerusalem had a cycle of eight years, and in the same times their account according to the phasis. The Talmud and Maimonides represent them so well skilled in Astronomy, that they could disprove false witnesses of the phasis, who failed in circumstances, the positure and figure of the moon, and likewise by intercalations accommodate their uncertain months to the motions of the sun and moon.  
What Petitus (occasioned by Epiphanius his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the year of our Saviour's Passion) quoteth out of the third chapter of that famous Tractate in Maimon. his Jad, Kiddusch Hachodesch, suggesteth an account of the difference between Christ and the Pharisees about the time of the Passeover, much to be preferred before that given by Petavius. The words are these: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sense of the place is sufficiently expressed by Petitus in these words, Non defuerunt tamenè veteribus Magistris, qui docerent, si opus esset mense dierum triginta, judicum consessum, quamvis testes dicerent se vidisse primam lunae visionem nocte tricesima, non tamen retexuisse mensem, neque Neomeniam statuisse eo die tricesimo, qui intercalatus fuerat. Some of the Hebrew Doctors affirm, that the great Consistory, although they were certified that the moon was seen on the 30 day, sometimes for necessary reasons permitted the Calends of the month to remain as before their information. It's not improbable that by such a method they should provide that the Passeover prevented not the equinox. Gerardus Joannes Vossius (in his Treatise De Tempore Dominicae Passionis, so oft cited) thinketh that our Saviour approved not this reason of a day to be embolised. Abarbinel (in his Comments upon Exod. 12.2. so oft quoted) telleth us. That the embolisations of years, & sanctions of the beginnings of months, are prerogative to the great Senate, and that what they do, is according to the Law, and what the Law saith, 
* Deut. 12.32.  Thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it, is not spoken but as before the vulgar, that they innovate not above their understanding, nor exalt their wisdom above their skill in the precept, as do the Karites; but that we should hearken to the Prophets, and Priests, and Judges, as who are helped by a Schechina. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
The sentence meriteth to be made public. The Schoolmen say; God can dispense with the materiality of any precept in the Decalogue, the three first excepted.  
The Israelites understood by the Prophet Moses, that God had signed them a dispensation for the spoiling of the Egyptians. God by his Prophets and Apostles added other sacred Scriptures to the Pentateuch. These were enabled by a Schechina. The high Priests gave answers by Urim and Thummim. I cannot doubt but God oft by a Schechina taught the Senators judgement. But neither can I believe that divine assistance and infallibility were entailed upon the Sanhedrin. We are sufficiently informed that it was otherwise in our Saviour's time. It's credible enough that our Saviour, if the moon appeared at her time, and the time of her appearance ought to be counted the beginning of the month, would give notice of the Phasis. The Sanhedrin perhaps near the time of our Saviour's passion, might refuse due testimonies of the moon's appearance on the 30. day; or else judge it necessary that a day should be inserted.  
Lastly, the Karites (as Abarbinel witnesseth) have a cycle of 19 years, to which by embolismes they conform their uncertain account.  
I may here opportunely give notice, that Maimon. in his interpretation of the first Perech of Rosch Hasschana in part excepteth Elul and Tisri from the rules of their uncertain account. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
Thus the Mischna of Rosch Hasschana. Messengers were sent out from Jerusalem (the seat of the great Senate) to give notice of the neomenia of Elul to those who were distant, that they might observe the beginning of the year at due time. Maimonides commenteth upon this part of the text in these words: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et dixerunt, propter Elul ratione principii anni, quia Elul secundum multitudinem viginti & novem dierum; & unde cognoverunt initium mensis Elul, inde cognoverunt initium anni in numero (seu computo) annorum. The modus of the month Elul was certain, (viz. 29. days) and consequently determined the beginning of the month following.  
It may be objected that messengers were sent to give notice of the neomenia of Tisri, that the solemnities of that month might be observed in their due times, Maimonie's comment upon the talmudical tradition, will extricate us from the difficulty. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et egrediuntur propter Tisri, ut notum faciant initium anni verum, quia fieri non potest Elul triginta dierum. The beginning of the year (as we see) was twofold; one (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) in computo annorum; another (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) in veritate. The 30. day from the Neomenia of Elul, if the moon than appeared, was the beginning of the year, both berobh hasschanim, and beemeth: otherwise only berobh hasschanim, and the next beemeth. When these beginnings of the year fell on several days, the feasts in Tisri (the Rosch hasschana itself must needs be excepted) were reckoned from the later, which was in truth the beginning of that month, not from the other which was the first of Tisri by dispensation, in regard of the Jews distant from Jerusalem. It was provided by this dispensation, that the beginning of the year might be celebrated by all the Jews on the same day. We see that Messengers were requisite for the ordering of the festivals in Tisri, besides those who gave notice of the neomenia of Elul. It's clear from what hath been said, that one and thirty days might possibly intercede between Elul and Marcheschvan, to wit, when the Phasis was neither the Epocha of Tisri nor of Marcheschvan.  
If such an uncertain computation as hath been spoken of, obtained for any segment of time, we cannot by knowing the number of Jewish years, comprehend the distance of events between which it interceded. Scaliger, though he affirms that the Jews used the Syro-Macedonian months and years, after the Seleucidae had power over them, till the 344. year at least of the Christian Aera (and so contradicteth Maimonie before quoted); 
* De emend. Temp. lib. 2. pag. 105.  denieth not but that in times more ancient, Epocha's of months, were perhaps such as are exhibited in the Talmud, and in Maimonides.  
Such an account should derogate much less from the certainty of Chronology, were it confined to the times on this side the Nabonassarean epocha, (which according to Ptolemy, preceded the death of Alexander the great, 4●4. years, Augustus Cesar, 719.) then if it be cast backward into ages nearer the creation. Ptolemies history of Astronomical observations compared with the times of events upon earth, and the histories written by Diodorus and Josephus, (and downward from Gyges' king of the Lydians) Herodotus, Thucydides, and Xenophon, inform us better in order to the applying of some things which came to pass between the beginning of the reign of Nabonassar & our Saviour's nativity, mentioned in authentic or Ecclesiastical scriptures, to years, months, and days in periodical accounts, then do any humane writers about times preceding.  
I may here seasonably take occasion to demonstrate▪ that knowledge of the positures of the stars at any distance backward from the present instant, together with the history of Astronomical observations, cannot enable us to assign to all remarkable events, their distances from the time present, or from the creation. Scarce any events mentioned in Scripture above Nabonassar's Epocha, are characterised in ancient writers by perfect conjunctions, or any aspects of any stars, or by the observation of either of the equinoxes, or solstices, or by eclipses. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 attributed to times nearer the present age, are reported to us some of them (that I may not suspect the skill or credit of those who profess themselves to have observed any of them) by those only who by many centuries succeeded the events to which they are applied, and to whom they were perhaps transmitted only by unwritten traditions.  
Moreover, sit● remarkable accidents are by ancient historians, whether sacred or humane, almost wholly referred to civil years, months, and days (few of them, if any, apprehended the true measure of the solar year) we cannot measure their distances from the creation, or from any time downward, unless civil times interceding be known to us, as well as the motions of celestial bodies, and events or parts of civil times thereby characterised.  
Were we sure that any event fell out, when the sun or when the moon was eclipsed, we might probably discover a false distance assigned it from the time present, or if the space of time on this side the event be certain, from any time beyond it, but cannot by mere skill in the circumvolutions of the stars attain to so much as a probability of the truth. Our discovery of a false distance given (as I said) is but probable. It's possible that the whole space between two eclipses of either of the Luminaries may be unduly added, or substracted; likewise that a time may be assigned to the eclipse and to the event thereby characterised, in which an eclipse was possible, but not necessary.  
That I may return whence I have digressed, Scaliger changeth his note, Canon. Isagog. lib. 3. cap. 6. Et certè major pars priscorum Judaeorum (in ea sententia est, quòd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sanctificabant neomeniam secundum visionem; & testibus jurantibus se vidisse lunam corniculatam, statim judices clamabant (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) sanctificata est, sanctificata est (neomenia). Sanctificare (neomeniam) is here with Scaliger the same that sancire, as it's clear from what followeth.  
Saul and Jonathan and David (1. Sam. 20.) knew that the next day should be the new moon, yet could not divine that the moon should appear in the night following. Their knowledge might be merely conjectural; or they might be certain that the morrow should be the new moon, because their expectation of the phasis was frustrated in the night preceding.  
My purpose is satisfied, if (as Abarbinel seemeth to acknowledge) the sanction of the Neomenia by the Phasis began to be used publicly in the times of Sadoc and Baitus. But moreover, those authors who affirm that the Jews always used a cyclicall account, are so many, and so much differ in their opinions, that although the uncertain account testified by the Talmudists and Karites, was quite expunged, we should remain doubtful about sacred Chonology.  
I cannot believe that the phasis of the moon was, as the Karites affirm, the epocha of the month in the age of the flood; nor with Eliah Ben Moseh one of that sect, that Nisan was then the first of months; nor yet that the measure of years mentioned in Genesis, is sufficiently known to us. Honore, existimatione, authoritate, utì & vetustate Talmudicos Karitis nunquam non praecelluisse satis est receptum. Thus M. Selden in his Preface to his Treatise de anno Civili veterum Judaeorum. The Talmudists extend not their uncertain account into times beyond the Law given on Sinai. Eliah ben Moseh (the manuscript Karite used by M. Selden) 
* Selden de Ann. Civil. vet. Judaeor. cap. 2.  flourished sub annum 240 chiliadis Judaicae sextae, id est, Christi 1480. I shall show what Talmudists much ancienter conceived, and what may be gathered from sacred Scripture concerning months and years which preceded the deliverance of the Israelites from their Egyptian bondage. I shall speak briefly, first of the Rosch Hasschana; secondly, of months; lastly of years. The Neomenia of Tisri, if we stand to the traditions of the Hebrew Doctors, will seem to have been in the primitive times of the world, for all affairs whether sacred or civil: the Rosch Hasschana. Tisri is voted the first month by a prevailing faction of suffrages, whether we attend number or value. Among the Jews who wrote in Greek, Philo and Josephus, and among the ancient Rabbins 
† Sec Seder O. lamb Rabath cap. 4. Abarbinel upon the history of the flood.  Eliezer and Jehosuah are divided about this question.  
Josephus and R. Eliezer affirm, that Tisri was the first month of the year, till the institution of the Passeover. To these may be added Jonathan Ben Uziel who was more ancient, and the author of Mechilta, who was later than Philo, Josephus, and Eliezer. Jonathan Ben Uziel thus paraphraseth upon 1. Kings 8.2. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ex quo data est lex & scriptum est de Nisan, quòd ille caput mensium, vocatus est Tisri (mensis) septimus. Thus R. S. Jarchi upon 1. Kings 8.2.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et congregati sunt ad Regem Solomonem, omnes viri Israelitae in mense Ethanim, quem vocabant mensem primum, infestivitate: sed nunc ille mensis est septimus.  
The Latin translation of the Chaldee paraphrase in the Spanish Bibles, and Buxtorf's rabbinical Lexicon (upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) omit the article prefixed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and interpret part of Jonathans' sentence by in mense quem veteres vocabant mensem primum, etc. The sense for substance is the same, but I should rather construe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as before, if the prefix be added, 
* It's added likewise by Rasi, & R.D. Kimchi according to Bomberge and Buxtorfe.  as in Bombergs and Buxturf's editions of Jonathan Ben Uziel. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signify indifferently, in mense quem veteres, or in mense Ethanim. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is interpreted by fortis: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is pluralis emphaticus, the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and the prefix may be a note of the genitive case, as well as a relative.  
R. D. Kimchi upon that text in the first of Kings now quoted, suggesteth five reasons of moment for which the month that in Solomon's time was the seventh, is called Ethanim, two of which speak out that the seventh was the first till the Israelites were brought out of Egypt. 1. The fruits which are gathered in Tisri, strengthen man. 2. There are in that month solemnitates honorabiles & fortes, seu celebres. 3. Thsre's strength and validity in the authority by which the festivals of that month were enjoined. 4. The strong ones of the world, our first parents were in that month created. 5. Then were laid the strong foundations of the earth. This Doctor in the same place observeth, that the Israelites only were commanded to celebrate Nisan as the first month of the year. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quia sic dixit illis Deus benedictus: M●nsis hic vobis (●rit) principium mensium, vobis omnino, quia caeteris nationibus non est mensis primus. Nam Tisri (illis) est primus. In the Chaldee paraphrase upon the Pentateuch known by the name of Jonathan Ben Vziel, the seventh month (Gen. 8.4.) in which the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat, is (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) the month of Nisan. I should have omitted this testimony, 
* See Elias Levita in his Preface to his Methurgeman  were it not much suspected that Jonathan Ben Vziel, whose suffrage I before cited, paraphrased not upon the Law.  
Eliezers' judgement touching the most ancient beginning of the year, is quoted and approved in Bereshit Rabath by Rasi, Abarbinel, and others. Nachmanides likewise upon the history of the flood, saith, the world was created in Tisri; and that the year began in Tisri till Israel came out of Egypt.  
Rambam in his Perusch of Rosch Hasschana, upon those words in the first Chapter of that Tractate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Primo die▪ Tisri initium anni annis, hath this gloss, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first of Tisri (according to the Talmud explained by Maimon.) is the beginning of years by which we number the age of the world.  
Those who make Tisri the most ancient beginning of the year, 
‖ See pag. 122, 123. Babilonia in which our first parents are supposed to have been created, so little varieth from Canaan in longitude and latitude, that they have almost the same autumn. But moreover the greater part of the testimonies produced, depend not upon the situation of Eden. They affirm that the world was created in or near that season which was autumn to Chaldea, Canaan, Egypt, and other countries not much distant from these. I may add to the testimonies before cited, the opinion of the ancient Egyptians. They affirm that the world was created in Libra. In istis enim posterioribus partibus (viz. Librae) terra dicitur esse composita, ut Barbarica ratio confirmat. Pirmicus lib. 7 cap. 3.  are countenanced by those reasons which contend that the world was created in Autumn, and by Exod. 23.16. (and 34.22.) where the feast of in-gathering (which was wont to be celebrated in Tisri) is said to be in the end of the year. The year which ended in autumn, necessarily began in autumn. But 
* De variis annorum formis, cap. 2.  Lydiat (I confess) prevaileth so fare with me, that I conceive neither the time in which the world was created, nor yet the most ancient beginning of the year to be fully cleared by sacred Scripture.  
The sentence before praised which I find in Eusebius, quoted out of Enoch (viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) determineth not whether the first month of the Hebrews year, was near the Autumnal or Vernal Equinox. But unless the vernal equinox be intimated by Enoch, the place is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the purpose for which it is alleged. 
* For larger satisfaction see Sixtus Senensis Bibliothecae Sanctae l. 2. p. 84. & 85. Petrus Gassendus de vita Peireskii, lib. 5. p. 169.  The work ascribed to Enoch the Patriarch (quoted by S. Judas) which seemeth to be here pointed at, (besides that it was esteemed spurious by the Jews, and the Doctors of the Primitive Christian Church) cannot pretend beyond a prophecy for the time of the Israelites after the Exodus. We receive as most probable, that Tisri in those times was the beginning of the Civil, Nisan of the Ecclesiastical year.  
It remains that I relate what the Talmudists deliver concerning months, for the times before the deliverance from Egypt.  
Aben Ezra upon Exod. 12. telleth us that we find in in Scripture only three names of months, Zif, Ethanim, Bul, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) in the holy language (or Hebrew) that the rest are (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) in the language of the Chaldeans; and occur only in Zachary, Daniel, Ezra, and Hester (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) who were in the captivity. That month which was the first of the year before the deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt, (afterwards called Tisri) is named Ethanim, 1. Kings 8.2. that which was the second (since called Marcheschvan) is Bul, 1. Kings 6.38. And the eighth (now called Jiar) is Zif, 1. King. 6.1. Some (I know) have thought that Abib was the proper name of a month; but Aben Ezra dissenteth from them in the place quoted, and justly, unless R. D. Kimchi in's Sepher haschoraschim, and Elias Levita in's Methurgeman, be defective in their explications of the word Abib. The word must needs be otherwise construed, in Leu. 2.14. we have mention of a second month; Gen. 7.11. and 8.14. of a seventh month, Gen. 8.4. of a tenth, v. 5. of a first month, v. 13. Moses in his Chronology of the flood, probably was directed to write in the dialect of the age in which the flood happened. It's impossible to prove that in those times months were otherwise distinguished, then by numbers expressing their order.  
The Talmudists, some of them, so express that the observing of the phasis was enjoined at what time the Passeover was instituted, or afterward on mount Sinai, as that they intimate it was not in use in times more ancient. (I shall not here repeat what testimonies I before quoted to this purpose.) Baal Hatturim upon Exod. 12. observeth, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, is near to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it shall be the first month of the year to you, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quia non consecrant [neomenias ad phasin] nisi in Synedrio magno. Some Hebrew Doctors by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Exod. 12, 2. understand the moon newly appearing after a conjunction. God, say they, shown Moses the new moon in the firmament, and commanded that the phasis should be reckoned (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) the beginning of each month. Rasi upon the comma quoted, maketh mention of this conceit, but rejecteth it. Rambam in his comment upon the second chapter of Rosch Hasschana believeth it.  
Abarbinel telleth us (in Parasch. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) that every nation before the deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt, numbered months and years; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et notum est, quod non fiebat hoc ab iis figendo neomenias ad phasim lunae, sed ad suos uniuscujusque gentis epilogismos.  
We cannot conclude from the notation of Chodesch, ●he word by which a month is signified in the history of the flood, that the first phasis of the moon after a conjunction was in times so ancient, the beginning of the civil month. There's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 renovatio in the beginnings of the months of peragration, and of consecution. The quantity of the months mentioned in the history of the deluge is variously defined among the Talmudists.  
R.S. Jarchi consenteth with 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Eliezer, that months in the age of the flood were alternatim full and hollow▪ viz. (that I may with Hebrew authors call the months by those names which they obtained not till many generations after) Tisri had 30 days, Marcheschvan 29, Casleu 30. Tebat 29, etc. To these add Sedar Olam Rabath. The computation of months & days mentioned in the history of the flood, is the same in the fourth chapter of that chronicle, and with Rasi. With Abarbinel the 150. days, in which the waters prevailed upon the earth, are the whole distance between the beginning of the rain, and the ark resting upon the mountains of Ararat, and (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) five perfect months. He must necessarily mean by five perfect months, the extent of five perfect months; he could not but take notice, that one fifth part of the time between the beginning of the rain, and the resting of the ark consisted, according to his own supposition, of two pieces of months added together, viz. part of Marcheschvan, and part of Nisan. He conceived not (as 'tis manifest from what I lately cited out of his comment upon Exodus) with the Karites, that the four months between the second and the seventh, obtained each of them 30 days, by reason of the phasis intercepted, but that the modus of the civil month in the age of the deluge was 30. days.  
Nachmanides in Parasc. Noah. differeth from some Hebrew Doctors, whose opinion he there citeth, about the distance between the beginning of the rain, and the ark resting upon the mountains of Ararat; but together with those and Abarbinel, extendeth the 150. days of the prevailing of the waters, from the beginning of the rain, to the 17 of Nisan.  
It's clear, that had the civil months in the age of the flood been conformed as near as 'twas possible, to the distances between conjunctions, Eliezer and Rasi, etc. were much to be preferred before these last quoted. The twelve hours by which (besides minutes) the month of consecution (or space between two conjunctions) exceedeth 29 days, multiplied by 12. make six days, which according to these authors, were digested each year into so many full months. But it's sufficiently known, that the civil months of most nations anciently, as do the Julian one excepted, exceeded the space between conjunctions.  
The notation of Chodesch, the word by which a month is signified in the history of the flood, no more intimateth that the civil month in Noah's time, was rigorously conformed to 
* Naturalis mensis est duplex, aut enim lunaris, aut solaris: rursus lunaris t●iplicis generis: aut quatenus luna ab eadem puncto z●d●aci profecta, ad idem revertitur; qui dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ●tem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod intervallum minus est, quam viginti octo dierum, majus quàm viginti septem. Secundum genus est ejusdem syderis à sole profecti, ad eundem reditus Haec dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tertii generis mensis est secundus dies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, quae dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Scalig. de emendat. temporum lib. 1. pag. 9  any kind of natural month, then doth the derivation of the word month, that our months now used are such.  
About months there are (as I have showed) three opinions, into which the Hebrew Doctors are parted, one of the Karites, and two of the Talmudists.  
The Karites who would obtrude upon the times before the Exodus, their uncertain account are overpowred, and born down by the authority of the Talmudists. This other sect of Jews hold part of them, that months were alternatively full and hollow; other of them, that each month had 30 days. Among those who embraced the former opinion, the author of Seder Olam Rabath, and jarchis reckon the 17. day of Marcheschvan the first, and the 27. of Casleu the last day of the forty in which the rain descended; the 28. of Casleu the first, and the 29. (or last day) of Jiar the last day of the 150. in which the waters prevailed upon the earth; and the 17. of Siwan (which is the seventh month to Casleu in which the rain ceased) the day on which the ark began to rest on the mountains of Ararat; and the tenth month, on the first day of which the mountains appeared, to be Abbess, the tenth to Marcheschvan in which the rain began to descend. The first of Siwan, on which the waters began to decrease, is computed the first of the forty days, after which Noah opened the window of the ark.  
Some writers, who believe that the months in Noah's time were one full, and another hollow throughout the year, conceive that the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat on the 17. of Nisan, and lest there should want room for the 150. days, affirm that the year of the flood was embolismaeus.  
Those who hold that in the year of the deluge, Casleu Tebat, Sebat, and Adar (were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) had each of them 30. days, and at least seem all of them to have thought each month in the age of the flood and times adjoining, to have been of the same measure, entertained several opinions concerning the time of the resting of the ark.  

* Augustine, and Bede, and many other Christians▪ affirm that the month in which he ark rested, was the seventh of the deluge, not of the year; and that hereby an eternal sabbath is shadowed out unto us. The ark (with S. Peter) is a type of the Church, which according to an ancient Cabbala (whether derived from some divine revelation; or only from some private spirit, I know not) shall about the beginning of the 7. chiliade be completely received into eternal rest. Nachmanides and Abarbinel affirm, that it rested upon the mountains of Ararat on the seventeenth of Nisan.  Some quoted by Nachmanides prefer the 17. of Jiar. They allow a month for the abating of the waters after the end of 150. days in which the waters prevailed upon the earth. There's yet place for another opinion, viz. that there was a double Adar in the time of the deluge, and the 150. days expired the space of a full month before the 17. of Nisan. Those who held that months then in the age of the flood were throughout common years one full and the next hollow, cannot unless they intercalate a month between Marcheschvan and Nisan, with any face of reason affirm that the ark rested on the 17. of Nisan upon the mountains of Ararat. The space between the beginning of the rain, and the resting of the ark, unless a month extraordinary intercede, cannot possibly according to their supposition, amount to so much as 148. days. Casleu should contain 30. days, Tebat 29, Sebat 30. Adar 29. to which must be added, should the rain have begun together with the 17. of the second month, 
* Some Jews affirm that the rain begun in the day time.  (which some deny) 13. days of Marcheschvan. The sum is 131. 16 days of Nisan added, produce 147. Former ages have not sufficiently informed us whether or no any days or months were intercalated before the beginning of the year was altered, much less that this or that kind of embolisation was then used. I should believe, were it cleared that there was intercalation in those times, that there was a Weelul rather than a Weadar. The author of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus reasoneth, that when Nisan was the first month of the year, no month but Adar ought to be doubled by intercalation. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. Non autem embolisant nisi Adar: cujus rationem inveni, quod scilicet impossibile sit alium mensem in anno superaddere praeter Adar, quem faciunt Adar secundum: Nam Nisan est caput anni a quo computamus menses, cùm scriptum sit, Primus ille est vobis: & de Sivan dicitur, In mense tertio: & de Tisri dicitur, In mense septimo: & de Tebat dicitur, In mense decimo: & de Adar dicitur, in mense duodecimo, qui est mensis Adar. Quod si duplicarent mensem alium, non satisfieret Scripturae.  
The Hebrew author de neomeniis & tecuphis, translated into Latin by Munster, sub titulo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translationes & sanctiones, hath this sentence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dicimus autem à diebus Ezrae & deinceps, non inveniri Elul embolisatum. But he meaneth, I conceive, a day was not inserted in Elul, but in Marcheschvan, when an accession of a day was made to the ordinary year by reason of translations of feasts, which being granted, his sentence implieth not that Elul was doubled in times more ancient. The Chaldeans, as Scaliger affirmeth De Emend. Temp. l. 2. after they had received the calippicall period, as oft as a month was to be inserted, had Elul alterum in the end of their year. Scaliger (in the book now praised) speaking of the year of the ancient Hebrews, which began in Autumn, saith, Fine anni, ut solet, intercalabatur mensis.  
Other arguments are obvious against those who hold that an Adar was intercalated in the year of the deluge.  
1. Their opinion hath no foundation in sacred history, nor yet in humane of any antiquity.  
2. Were it granted that the ordinary civil year in Noah's time consisted of 354. days, no one can attain by mere conjectures whether or no they conformed their civil years to solar years, much less what kind of intercalation, if any, was then used. The excess of the solar year might several ways be digested into their civil account.  
Those who repute the month in which the ark rested on Ararat, the seventh to the beginning or end of the rain, not to the beginning of the year, are sufficiently refuted by Abarbinel. He well observeth (upon the Paraschah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) that the Scripture saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the waters prevailed 150. days, not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the waters yet prevailed 150. days. He useth another reason not to be pretermitted, which he thus expresseth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quis auscultabit huic sententiae scil. Quod commemorentur in eadem parascha mensis secundus, & septimus, & decimus, & primus, & secundus, neque referantur ad idem notum initium.  
Abarbinel judgeth those, as altogether irrational, not to be heard, who reckon not a second, and seventh, and tenth, and a first, and a second month, mentioned in the same paraschah, from the same beginning He meaneth, that months mentioned in the same paraschah, and described by their order, have all of them the same individual Epocha, or Epochas ejusdem rationis. Those five months mentioned in the 7. and 8. chapter of Genesis, are all to be reckoned from the beginning of the year, but three of them are described by their posture in the 600. the other two by their order in the 601. year of Noah's life. Sacred Chronology contained in the history of the deluge, is much disordered, if the beginning of Siwan be made (as in Seder Olam Rabath) the epocha of the 40 days, at the end of which Noah opened the window of the ark, or if part of them be disposed before the first of the tenth month.  
I cannot but much prefer that opinion, which maketh the measure of the civil month in Noah's time 30. days. Nothing is repugnant to it in the history of the flood. According to such computation, although no month were intercalated between the second and the seventh, the resting of the ark should not be protruded by the 150 days in which the waters prevailed, beyond the 17. of Nisan.  
The Karites who make the second month (which they conceive to have been Jiar) hollow, include in the 150. days of rain, both the whole 17. of the second, and likewise of the 7. month. But the ark rested on the 17. of the 7. month, yet not till after the space of 150. days in which the waters prevailed. It may be objected, that Luk. 2.21. eight days are said to be accomplished, which were not completely passed, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcision of the child. He was circumcised on the eighth day. Eight days may be said to be accomplished, or the number of eight days to be filled up, whether the eighth day be current or completed.  
1. Had the same phrase been used, Gen. 8.3. had it been said, When 150 days were accomplished, the waters were abated, the words might possibly, but should not necessarily signify, that the waters were abated before the end of 150 days.  
2. We ought rather to conceive, that the waters were not abated till the end of 150 days. Such constructions of the place should be as consistent with other sacred Scriptures, and humane history, and the light of natural reason, as that other, whereof the words should be capable; and more proper and usual. 'Twas otherwise in that place of Luke now cited. God had determined circumcision to the eighth day. Christ came to fulfil the Law. We read of no necessity by which his circumcision should be deferred.  
In the interpretation of Scripture, that sense is to be preferred, caeteris paribus, which is most proper and usual.  
3. The words Gen. 8.3. are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the end of an hundred and fifty days. The particle preposed is a partition between the 150. days, and the times in which the waters were so much abated, that the ark might rest upon the mountains of Ararat. Scaliger (De Emend. Temp. l. 5.) assigneth to the months in the time of the deluge, the same quantity. The common year in Noah's time, contained as we see 360. days.  
According to Scaliger, the days by which the solar year exceedeth annum aequabilem, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, consisting of 360 days, (which the Hebrews call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 annum dierum) when they became 30, were intercalated at the end of the year. Moreover, for quadrants of days in solar years above 365 complete days, a month was intercalated after 120 years.  
I cannot assent to Lydyat, endeavouring to demonstrate the measure of the year used in times ancienter than the confusion of languages, à priori. I cannot see why I should believe, that the long-lived Patriarches used the most exact form of civil years, rather than that they were complete in all arts and sciences.  
Neither can I conceive that Scaliger's doctrine concerning intercalations used in those ancient times, is confirmed unto us by due testimonies.  
We are uncertain (as I have proved) both concerning the number of years between the creation of the first, and the birth of the second Adam, and likewise concerning the measures of years by which the affairs of the Israelites and their forefathers were computed in that segment of time. Incerta haec si quis postulat ratione certâ facere, nihilo plus agate, quàm si det operam ut cum ratione insaviat. My labour will not be thought needless, unless by such as are ignorant, or else attend not that many have arrogated a kind of certainty to chronology in those parts, which I have demonstrated to be most uncertain, and that others have been so fond as to believe them. Sacred Chronology enableth us not to assign to the events registered in the Scriptures, their true positures in the age of the world. Humane Chronology leaveth us much more perplexed and doubtful. Besides that it is not agreed by writers of good note, what is the distance of any other ancient remarkable epocha from the creation, or from any time near us, scarce about the distance of any epocha from another, whether on this side or beyond it; famous events are variously disposed in time reckoned from each Aera. Learned Master Broughton hath plentifully discovered, that there is much difference among the Greek writers in chronicling things according to the Olympiads. The Roman Consuls are diversely listed in the Capitoline and Sicilian Calendars; and Epiphanius departeth from both. The Jews are divided about the account used by their forefathers in the land of Canaan, and some of them derive their present account from our first parents. It's sufficiently cleared, that Chronology (besides that detriment which it sustaineth by reason of the Jews uncertain account) compared with other parts of the Encyclopaedia, laboureth with a triple disadvantage.  
1. It dependeth much upon humane authority. 2. Upon expressions which without new revelation cannot be understood. 3. It containeth contradictions, neither part of which can without a miracle be disproven. The first and second difficulty are frequent (I confess) in other parcels of history (usually so called) the third is almost peculiar to Chronology; many parts of learning are wholly exempted from them all. Some, left they should not be ●●pu●ed to know somewhat unknown to others, profess skill beyond the periphery of possible knowledge. Among all the sects of students, Chronologers and Astrologers are most frequently guilty of this flushed boasting. I affect not to be a sceptic in Chronologie. I acknowledge that there is singular use of this piece of history; but would have those who profess skill in it, contained within due bounds, nor dare to attempt any thing beyond sobriety.  
Chronology in its full dimensions, sigh God who is adequately perfection itself, knoweth the moments of all changes, the birth and age of each being, all opinions and expressions concerning these circumstances; cannot but be in itself desirable; yet because (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Man's life is short, and art long, (I may add) and our proficiency in knowledge but slow, aught to give place to some other studies. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and vice versâ, a lesser good hath in it rationem mali. The history of things applied to times (in which they began, endured, ended) hath not immediate influence into our spiritual or temporal affairs; yet is to be preferred before other studies, more directly useful in our lives, when it ushereth in any knowledge more advantageous than improvements yet wanting, which may be obtained without it.  
1. To attain skiil in the greatest part of the Encyclopaedia, viz. in the fundamental points of Divinity, Languages, Grammar, Rhetoric, Arithmetic, Music, Geometry, Metaphysics, Moral Philosophy, the greatest part of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy, dependeth nothing at all upon Chronology.  
2. We can easily believe that there is truth in contingent axioms contained in sacred Scriptures, although we attend not to the times in which things came to pass.  
3. We can as easily believe humane writers relating what came to pass, as reporting the time in which it came to pass.  
4. Some knowledge of things applied to certain times (or places) neither immediately nor remotely conferreth any thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
I readily acknowledge that some parts of Chronologie confer much to the knowledge of things which are applied to time, and of things distinct from them. Astronomy relieth much upon the records of the times in which Astronomical observations were made. Natural Philosophy and Astrology may be advanced by the times of the events upon earth; compared with the positures of the heavens. A rule cannot be founded upon a single observation. Histories which are conversant about the same times, mutually explain one another. The Chronology in heathens, if we deal with infidels may con●●liate credit to the sacred Scriptures. We are much enabled to judge of testimonies concerning the customs and events of former ages, by knowing in what riches the authors lived. Lastly, God's providence is much illustrated by Chronology, as it informeth us that sin hath sometimes been punished whilst it was in act, or immediately after; and that God's servants have been delivered in times of their greatest straits and necessities. These advantages we may receive in some measure from such chronology as former ages have transmitted to us, howsoever perplexed and imperfect. Of such I spoke before, not of Chronology in the abstract, nor according to such actuated perfection as it was capable of. Historiographers oft vary in their reports, and sometimes are so counterpoised, that it's difficult to pronounce any party victorious. Caeteris paribus, the more ancient are to be preferred before later, who were more intelligent before such as were less skilful; those who wrote without prejudice, before such whose affections were engaged; the more honest, before such as were less conscientious, & a greater number before a less. Advantages are sometimes so distributed, that the controversy cannot be determined. But what's averred only by one author, much more what by many, if it neither be repugnant to any artificial reason, nor yet contradicted by any testimony, may justly challenge our assent. The concurrence of some events and order of others are confirmed unto us by full consent of witnesses. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Natural Philosophy may for the most part be approved or disproven by new experience.  
It's already confessed that Chronology abstracted from its usefulness (which may fitly be termed Chronologie spoliata) is an ornament to the understanding; moreover, that Chronology is helpful to the judgement; memory and reminiscencie likewise receive much aid from the circumstances of time and place, but almost equal from these true and feigned.  
I have showed the use of Chronology, and where those who study to apply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, must write their nè plùs ultrae.  
It's clear that learning might have been much advanced above her present 〈◊〉, had some of most able parts been contented with truth, and not preferred their divinations and fictions.  
FINIS.   

Inserenda.  
Pag. 51. lin. 14. after immediately from God, (add) or an Angel;  
Pag. 53. lin. 4.— by himself, (add) or by an Angel,  
Pag. 122. lin. 16.— complete 2314. The Samaritane (as we see) differeth from the Jews Pentateuch. Scaliger divined not right in his seventh book De Emendat. Temperum. His words are these: Tantum abest, ut aliquid assuerint (Samaritani) Pentateuche, ut totidem literis quot Judaei, scriptum habeant. Petrus Gassendus 
De vita Peiriskii. l. 2. pag. 113.  telleth us, (what I could not but suspect from the sentence now quoted) that Scaliger never saw the Samaritane Pentateuch. The Samaritans Chronicle no more derogateth from their Pentateuch, by commending to us a differing account of the years of the Patriarches, then do some Hebrew and other Chronologers (who descent among themselves, and from the Scripture,) from the authority of the Pentateuch transmitted to us by the Jews.  
Pag. 129. lin. 23.— make up 3420 years. But one year must be substracted, in that the year in which the Temple began to be builded, is given to the segment of time preceding, and also to that between the foundation of the Temple, and the destruction of Jerusalem. I cannot divine under what pretence M. Broughton could admit that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into his Chronology.  
Pag. 152. In margin ad sententiam istam. For the extent of this month he appealeth to R. Simeon, the son of Gamaliel.  
Scriptor Hebraeus anonymus, (quem Latinitate donatum unà cum Messahalâ de elementis & orbibus coelestibus, etc. edidit Hillerus Mathematum Noribergae professor, aerae Christi anno 1549.) hanc mensis Lunaris quantitatem acceptam refert cuidam sapienti, qui dicebat se eam accepisse à quodam antiquo, qui fuit de domo David. Cisleu ibid. Lerusleph appellatur, & Siwan Vuan, deinde secundus Adar intercalaris indigitatur.  
Pag. 154. lin. 31. Quod si quis vocabulo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 radices computorum significari mavelit, non admodum repugno: sed nisi Abarbinel ad pauca respexerit, saltem minùs Grammaticè quàm par erat, conceptus suos expresserit, altera praeferenda videtur interpretatio.  
Pag. 161. lin. 17.— vel unius momenti. The Anonymous Hebrew writer before quoted, thus speaketh in the Latin translation set out by Hillerus: Veruntamen remanebunt nobis semper in omnibus novendecim annis; inter solares & lunares una hora; & 485 minuta, secundum intentionem gentium & plebiscita earum. Sed secundum intentionem certam, qua est apud nos; inter annos solares & lunares exacto decemnovenali annorum circulo; nulla reliqua est differentia: sed perpetuo redeunt ad idem transacti circuli punctum, & revertitur computatio ad primum principium. He confirmeth in these words, that the lunar enneadecaeteris which exceedeth 19 Julian years by one hour & 485 scruples, was transmitted from the Heathens to the Jews, and that the Jews had another enneadecacteris (which he seemeth to prefer) invented by some one of their own nation, that made equal the motions of the two luminaries.  
Two other periods of the anonymous Hebrew writer now praised, might have been digested into the Treatise next preceding, which are these: Prima conjunctio super quam componuntur computationes ad extrahendum omnes con●unctionet, est conjunctio anni imaginati, de quo non habemus nisi sex dies. Sicut legitur, Dixerunt nostri antiqui in vigesimo quinto die mensis Elul, creatus fuit mundus.   

Corrigenda.  
Pag. 5. lin. 7. lege. ingenuous, p. 29. in marg. lin. 6. pro first lege fift. pag. 38. l. 22. cloud. p. 41. l. ult. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 44. l. penult. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, lin. ult. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 45. l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 48. l. 27. simple. p. 58. l. 21. pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repone 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 60. l. 2. lege 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 62. l. 4. Lactantius. l. 19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 63. l. 22. paluda. mento. p. 73. l. antepenult 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In notis ad pag. cand. p●o Apollonius repone Apol●onias. p. 74. l. 36. insere only between not and contradict. p. 75. l. 2. lege twenty fifth. p. 76. Theologicall. p. 77 in marg. l. 8. lege 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 13. est. p. 80. l. 17. pro besides repone betides. p. 81. l. 32. acts. p 82. l. 2. engraved. in marg. pag. ejusd. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 86. l. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 86. in marg. Barnes Nachman. p. 93. l. 4. integrity. l. 23. Terpsichore. l. 29. after That Christ came into the world, adae to save sinners. p. 99 l. 10. lege 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 112. l. ult. deal to. p 114. l 9 lege 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 116. l. 11. & 12. Pharmuthus. p. 118. in stead of Whence some errors in Chronology are occasioned, inscribe this title, The uncertainty of Chronology. l. 30. pro them repone Sem. p. 120. in marg. l. antepenult. lege Chaldaeis. p. 121. l. 2. deal 785. years, etc. v. 19 l. 14. lege to the end of the eleventh comma. p. 124. l 17. Egyptian. l. 30. in that Scripture. p. 127. l. 19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 128. l. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 129. l. 33. in the 23. year of Nebuchad-rezzar. in marg. l. 5. 480. p. 134. insere between lin. 32. and 33. as he computeth. p. 141. Karaeorum sententia de veteribus gen●s suae neomeniis, ad paginae hujusce calcem imperfectè tradita. emendetur per ea quae praecedunt paginâ 138. p. 142. l 23. lege Maimon. Halach. Kiddusch Hachodesch. p. 143. l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l, 18. above. p. 144 l. 5. pax. p. ejusd. l. 14. pro objection repone exception. p. 145. in marg. l. 6. sexdecim. p. 147. l. 19 out-paced. p. 149. l 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 152 l. 22. anni. p. 153. l. 8. 793. p. 155. l. 11. post 29 days, add sometimes one of them 30, the other 29 days. p. 156. l. 1. & 2. diametrally. p. 155. l. 4. pro or lege and. p 160. l. 22. secundum. p. 171. l. 24. after beyond it, add duly characterized by some Astronomical observation. pag. 172. l. 31. lege Eliah Ben Mosch (who was the author of the manuscript used. p. 173. l 19 pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repone 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 175. l. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 183. l▪ 15. pro rain repone the prevailing of the waters.