THE PERIOD OF THE PERSIAN Monarchy. Wherein sundry places of Ezra, Nehemiah and Daniel are cleared: Extracted, contracted, and englished, much of it out of Doctor Raynolds, by the late learned and godly Man WILLIAM PEMBLE, of Magdalen Hall in Oxford. Published and enlarged since his death by his friend, RICHARD CAPEL. Postquam gens Iudaea coepit non habere prophetas, proculduhio deterior facta est; eo scilicet tempore quo sciperabat instaurato templo post captivitatem, quae fuit in Babylonia, futuram esse meliorem. Aug de Ciu. Dei l. 18. c. 45. LONDON Printed by R. T. for john Bartlet at the sign of the guilt Cup in Cheapside in the Goldsmiths Row. 1631. To the Reader. COurteous Reader, The thing I must desire of thee, is, that as thou goest along, thou wouldst first read the Texts of Scripture, and the heads which are in the margin, else many things will be but cloudy and dark; the rather, because in some places the sentences are not so fitly distinguished as it were to be wished; as (for instance) may appear in page 56. the 5. chap. ver. 19 & chap. 13. ●er. 15. Wherefore I entreat the Reader still to have his eye on the margin, and view first the contexts there, and then the explication will come to his hand with more clearness and perspicuity. Also I am to beg of the Reader, that he will with his pen (ere he read this Tract) mend the faults here noted, many whereof maimne the sense and lose the meaning, (occasioned by the Transcribers mistaking in the copying of it out) smaller matters, as mispointing and the like, I forbear to trouble you with, as coming of themselves to every man's observation. RICH. CAPEL. In the Margin. PAg. 26 line 1. read, vid. 23. quaest. p. 32. l. 17 r. abstenti. l. 21. r. appartati dal sacerdotio. ibid. l. ult. r. §. 1. p. 34. l. ult. r. Dtus. in ●. Pet. p. 35. l. 26. add in marg. jer. 3.16. p 36 l 5. r. quartò. p. 40. l. 13. r. lun. in 1. King. ibid. l. 18.19. r. facelle ammarstrar. ibid. l. 26. r. haure●be. l. 27. r. bench. l. 28. r. pure. p. 41. l. 2. add in marg. Piscat. in 1. Reg 3.1. p. 44. l. 16. r. predecessori. l. 18. r. habbiaro, put in, i. e. the iniquities of our predecessors which we have imitated. p. 50. l. 16. r. but new, respectu actus revelandi. p. 57 l. 7. r. cap. 12. p. 62. ac. l. 17. add in marg. Perk. Cas. Consc. l. 1. c. 12. §. 2. q. 3. Deodat. Ital. annot. on Dan. 4.25. p. 63. at l. 12. add in marg. Act. 12.22.23. joseph. Antiq. l. 19 c. 7. Euseb. Hist. l. 2. c. 10. p. 67. at l. 30. add in marg. Walae de 4. praecepto. p. 130. p. 78. l 1. r. the marginal note thus: The very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in diverse ancient writers is taken metaphorically applied to the mind, and not only for civil freedom: in the compound ever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: in the abstract 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Meanness, Base, Baseness: See plenty of instances in Scapula & Stephanus. p. 88 l. 26. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In the Book. PAg. 5. l. 2. à fine, for the Magus, read this Magus. p. 13. l: ult. blot out the in both places. p. 17. l. 4. afters (that) put in times. p. 21. l. 27. à fine after the word Wall, add (But before the building of the Street and Wall) above, etc. p. 33. l. 33. r. the old Testament was almost complete. p. 35. l. 9 blot out the. p. 37. l. 7. for that, r. their. p. 41. l. 6. r. Deut. 7. 4. p. 43. l. 3. for be, r. do. p. 47. l. 4. r. have been used. p. 54. l. 21. r. that that which David. p. 56. l. 28. begin a new Section with the words, The last, etc. p. 56. l. 26. r. their fal●e, or foolish. p. 64. l. 28. r. in their office. p. 69 l. 2. r. it is because. p. 69. l. 18. r. as from this. p. 73. l. 16. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 75. l. 2. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 11. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 77. l 9 r. The freemen, except such and such freemen. p. 78. l. 23. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 79. l. 30. for others, r. other. p. 8●. l. 33. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 8●. l. 2. 31. for wherefore r. where, for our Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate, [the Nobles of judah.] p. 83. l. 28. for doth, r. did. p. 83. l. 33. r. Freemen, long before when it first, etc. A CHRONOLOGIE OF THE PERSIAN MONARCHY. CHAP. I. CYRUS took Babylon about the 20th year of his reign, ●un●cius in Chronol. comm. lib. 2. and was after Emperor of that Monarchy Years. 9 Months. 2 Cambyses his son, called, Dan. 10.13. Prince of the Kingdom of Persia, because he did rule at home, as Prorex, during his father's warlike expeditions abroad. Whiles his father lived, he hindered the work of the Temple. But that he reigned with his father 2 years at least, and that those two years should bepart of those seven which Herodotus gives him, cannot be proved. They may rather be part of those nine years, that Sulpicius Severus, or of those more that Ctefias and Alexandrinus ascribe unto him. He slew his Brother, and not long after died of a wound he gave himself by chance, having reigned after the death of his Father Years. 7 Months. 5 3 Darius Hystaspis (Cambyses dying without issue) was chosen Emperor by the 7 Princes of Persia. He reigned over the Monarchy 36 4 Xerxes the son of Darius by Atossa the daughter of Cyrus, succeeded his Father in the Empire. He had an elder Brother Artobarzanes, or Artemenes, who gave way to Xerxes his younger brother. This X●rxes was Assuerus the mighty Emperor, who married Ester the jew. He reigned after the decease of his Father, and two years together with his Father, after the manner of the Persians, as Viceroy 20 and above somewhat. 5 Artaxerxes Longimanus, Nehemiah his Lord and Master, the son of Xerxes by Queen Ester, being much what about 14 years of age, Ezra. 6.11.14. Nehem. 2.4. succeeded his Father (Artabazanus, who affected the Crown, and held up some 7 months being slain) and reigned. They that give him but 40, do disjoin those odd months, that Xerxes and Zogdianus reigned. Ptolemy and Clemens Alexandrinus join them with Artaxerxes years, and so give him [41.] 41 6 Darius Nothus, so called, because he was Artaxerxes his Bastard, succeeded his Father. Artaxerxes had a young son called Xerxes, who, some fortnight after his Father's death was slain, and deprived of his life and right by Zogdianus, or Secundanus his bastard Brother, who took the Crown, but held it not above 7 Months. For being slain also, this Darius called before Ochus, a bastard also, took the Empire, and was called Darius, and held it (some give Artaxerxes his Father 41 years, some 46 years: but the most and best agree upon 40 years.) This Darius Nothus his bastard son had the honour to have the holy City builded and finished in his days. He reigned in all Years. 19 Months. 6 7 Artaxerxes Mnemon. In his days flourished the Prophet Malachi. Cyrus' his brother, called Cyrus the younger, took arms against him with the loss of his own life. Whose expedition is described by that famous Xenophon. This Artaxerxes reigned 43 8 Ochus, called Darius Artaxerxes Ochus. He reigned 23 9 Arses the son of Ochus was slain by Bagoas an Eunuch, Diodor. Sicu●. lib. 17. who killed first Ochus his Father. Arses reigned 3 Broughton leaves out the 20 years of Ochus, and makes Ochus and Arses to be but one man: and thrusting out Arses, gives unto Ochus his three years and no more. He was deceived by the Florentine Printer of Clemens Alexandrinus, printing for [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 20, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. put by the Library) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Years. Months. 10 Darius Codomannes his son succeeded him: and in the 6 year of his reign he was beaten by Alexander Magnus, and slain by Bessus Governor of Bactrya, one of Alexander's Princes and Captains, and so an end of the Persian Monarchy. He reigned 6 The whole time of the Persian Monarchy was a matter of 228 years. Cyrus began to reign in Persia the 55 Olympiad. Darius' the last was subdued by Alexander the 112 Olympiad. So betwixt Cyrus and Darius there fell in 57 Olympiads, & each Olympiad had the term of 4 years: so we find 228 complete years, only adding the imperfect years of the 112 Olympiad: in which Olympiad Darius was slain. Some petty differences there are about small matters in judicious 2 chiefly about some pieces of years. Chronologers, (chiefly about Cyrus his time, after he was Emperor: for some give him but 3 or 4 years at the most.) But in the sum of the matter, the chiefest agree upon this reckoning, and give to the Persian Monarchy about 228 years. CHAP. II. An Explanation of the former Kings of the Persian Monarchy out of Daniel. Dan. 11.2. There shall stand up yet 3. Kings in P●rsia: and the 4. shall be far●e richer than they all. And by ●is strength through ●is rubes, he shall stir up all against the Realm of G●aecia. Sigh the former voice shows this was in the f●rst year of Darius the Mede: and therefore, whereas it is said, There shall stand up [yet] three Kings: the sense is, That from, or after Darius the Mede there shall be three Kings in Per●ia. viz. Cyrus, Cambyses, Darius Hystaspis; and then the fourth is plainly Xerxes, as appears by that of his gr●at riches, and his huge and mighty preparations made to invade Greece. Now sith 'tis as clear as day, that the fourth was Xerxes, the other 3 can be no other than Cyrus, Cambyses and Darius Hystaspis. The only Objection that can be made, is of a Magus, named Smerdis, who took upon him to be the son of Cyrus, and usurped the Throne after Cambyses, Herod●t. in Thaliâ. against whom he conspired. But the answer is, that the Holy Ghost doth not hold him worth the naming, and he bears no place in the holy writ amongst the Kings of Persia: whether it be for that his time was short; for e●e he saw 7 moneth●, the Nobles conspired against him, and suppressed him: or whether he being a conspirator is rather to be called a Tyrant than a King. 'tis out of question the Holy Ghost doth pass the Magus or Sm●rdis over. Some do take the odd months, that this Smerdis usurped, and add them to the time of Cambyses; and so give him somewhat a longer time of reign than I have done: but so small a difference is not worth the speaking of. 2. Chron. 36. ᵃ 20 And they were servants to him and to his ᵇ sons. (a Nabuchadnezzar. ᵇ His son Euilmerodach: 2. Reg. 25.27. His nephew Belshazzar. Dan. 5.1.) And all nations shall fear him, and his son, and his son's son, until the time of his Lord come, when many nations and great Kings shall serve themselves of him. 2. Chron. 36.21. To fulfil the Word of the Lord spoken by ᶜ jeremiah, until the land had her fill of Sabbaths: for all the days that she lay desolate she kept Sabbath ᵈ 70 years. ᶜ jer. 25.11. And this whole land shall be desolate, and an astonishment, and these Nations shall serve the King of Babel. 70. years. and jer. 19.10. ᵈ beginning when Iehoiaki● or jeconiah was carried away captive, ending at the first year of Cyrus and Darius the Mede Kings of Persia. That they began at jeconiahs' captivity, is proved by Ezek. 40.1. In the five and twentieth year of our being in captivity, in the beginning of the year, in the 10th day of the month, in the 14th year after the City was smitten. etc. Now Ezekiel, for the most part, reckons the year from the first of jeconiahs' captivity. As Ezech. 1.2. And more plainly out of jeremiah, cap. 29.2.10. where writing to those that were carried away with jeconiah, he tells them, that they shall be 70 years in captivity from the time of their carrying away; as may appear, if the Chapter be rightly considered of. 2. Chron. 36.22.23. But in the first year of ᶜ Cyrus King of Persia, etc. Thus saith Cyrus' King of Persia. ᶜ Together with Darius the Mede, whom Cyrus had of his own accord admitted into the government of the Empire with himself, as Dan. 5.31. Darius of the Medes took the Kingdom being 62. years old. and, Daniel 9.1. In the first year of Darius the son of Ahash●erosh of the seed of the Medes, which was made King of the realm of the Chaldeans▪ For Cyrus, led with ambition, went about wars in other Countries: and therefore Darius had the title of the King▪ though Cyrus were King in ●ffect. Ezra. 1.1. Now in the first ᶠ year of ᶠ Cyrus King of Persia, that the Word of the Lord by the mouth of jeremiah might be accomplished, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus K. of Persia, and he made a proclamation throughout all his Kingdom, etc. ᶠ When he first reigned over Babylon: for otherwise he reigned 30. years in Persia, and in the 28th. of his reign of Persia was this captivity of the jews ended. Ezra. 2.2. Which came with ᵍ Zerubbabel, to wit, jeshua, Nehemiah, etc. ᵍ Zerubbabel was chief Captain. jeshua or jehoshua son of jehozadak high Priest, Hag. 1.1. But Nehemiah a man of great authority went not now, but came 64. or 54. years after. Ezra. 3.1. And when the 7. month was come, and the children of Israel were in their Cities, the people assembled themselves as one man unto jerusalem. From the first day of the 7. month they offered burnt offerings. ʰ And Cambyses his son. synecdochicè. Ezra. 3.8. In the second year of their coming unto the house of God in jerusalem, etc. they began to set forward the work of the house of God: and v. 9 they laid the foundation. Ezra. 4.5. And they hired counsellors against them to hinder their device all the days of ˡ Cyrus K. of Persia, even a inclusiuè accipiendum more Heb. until the reign of Darius K. of Persia. ˡ The son of Hystaspes, the third King from Cyrus, who either for to curry favour with the people, or for the love of Atossa, Cyrus his daughter (whom after he had gotten the Kingdom he married) did carefully ratify every thing that Cyrus had done, that hereby he might establish himself; and therefore in his time also those crafty underminers of the jews prosperity did prevail. 6 And in the day's o● ᵏ Ahash●erosh (in the beginning of his reign) wrote they an accusation against the Inhabitants of judah and jerusalem. ᵏ That is of Xerxes called Ahashuerosh or Assuerus, (q. d.) an hereditary Prince, both because he was borne after that Darius was King, as also because he first was borne of A●ossa Cyrus his daughter, and so seemed by subrogation and representation to succeed his b vid. Herod. principium polym●iae. grandfather Cyrus. 7 And in the days of ˡ A●tash ashte (Mithridate Tabeël, and the rest of the companions, etc.) wrote unto the King, for the staying of the building of the Temple. ˡ Or Artaxerxes, he namely that was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Longimanus, the son of Xerxes by Amestris the daughter of Otan, (as Herod. Polym●.) whom Ctesias calleth Amistris, or Amystres, the daughter of Onopha; That is to say, by Ester the daughter of Abi●hail, Ester 2.15. Ezra. 5.24. Then ᵐ ceased the work of the house of God, which was at jerusalem, and did stay unto the second year of ⁿ Darius' King of Persia. ᵐ About 41. years, for Artaxerxes Longimanus reigned 40. whereunto must be added the first year of Darius. ⁿ Namely, Darius Nothus (for a bastard was he) who before he was King was called Ochus. Ezra. 5.1. Then Haggai, a Prophet, and Zechariah the son of Iddo prophesied unto the jews, that were in judah and jerusalem. Haggai. 1.1. ●n the 2. year of King Darius, in the 6. month, in the 1. day of the month, came the Word of the Lord by the ministry of Haggai the Prophet, unto Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, a Prince of judah, and to jehoshua, the son of jehozadach, the high Priest. chap. 2. In the 7. month, and 21. day of the month, came the Word. v. 4. Who is left a●ong you, that saw this house in her first glory? how do you see it now? Is it not in your eyes in comparison of that, Zech. 4.9. as nothing? The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house, Zech. 1.1. and his hands shall also finish it, etc. In the 8. month of the second year of Darius, came the Word of the Lord unto Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, the ●onne of Iddo, the Prophet. And v. 7. In the eleventh month, etc. Zechar. 7.1. And in the 4. year of King Darius, the Word of the Lord came unto Zechariah. ᵒ This and the verses following are spoken by way of prevention, to comfort the jews, dismayed at the consideration of the meanness & simpleness of this house, in comparison of that which Solomon built; purposedly done by the Prophet, because about 106. years before this time, the very like grief possessed the hearts of good men. Ezr. 3.12. Not that any of them that saw the first Temple were now alive, but by an usual Hebrew manner of speaking; Quasi dicas, Say that any of them were now alive, how would they weep? Yet for all that, saith the Lord, Go ye on: For the glory of the second house shall exceed that of the first. For those in Ezr. 3.12. were then said to be old. Ezra. 6.10. That they may offer sweet odo●●s unto the God of heaven, & pray for q the King's life, and for his ʳ sons. ᵖ (viz.) Darius' Nothus which made this decree. ʳ Namely Arsaca, afterwards called Artaxerxes, Cyrus Artossa and Oxendrae perhaps, if he were borne at that time. Now this the King did more earnestly require, because some other of his children had soon died. Ctesias. Ezra. 6.14. So the Elders of the jews builded, & they prospered by the prophesying of Naggai the Prophet, and Zechariah the son of Iddo, and they builded and finished it by the appointment of the God of heaven, and by the commandment of ˢ Cyrus, and ᵗ Darius, and ᵘ Artashashte Kings of Persia. v. 15. And this house was finished in the 3. day of the month Adar, which was the 6. year of the reign of K. Darius, and the 42. after their return. ˢ (viz.) Cyrus' the great, who first gave commandment for the return. ᵗ (viz.) Darius' Nothus, ᵛ Or Artaxerxes, namely Artaxerxes Mnemon, who reigned together with his father Darius Nothus. And therefore it is, that Plutarch gives him 62. years' reign. because from the beginning he was made Coemperour with his father, by reason of the wars against Secundianus and other chief men of the Kingdom. Ezra. 6.23. And they kept the feast of unleavened bread 7. days with joy for the Lord had made them glad, and turned the heart of the K. of ˣ Ashur unto them, to encourage them in the work of the house of God, even the God of Israël. ˣ Darius Nothus, who dividing his Kingdom with his son Arsaca or Artaxerxes, committed to his sons charge the more Southern parts of the Kingdom, and reserved to himself such Countries as lay more Northerly, as more befitting his age & experience in those quarters. For whilst his father Artaxerxes Longimanus lived, he was made Governor of Hyrcania, where also he married Parysatis. Now the Country's subject unto the Persian King, are bounded within the two Seas Hyrcanum & Persicum. a Plin. lib 6. cap 13. All that tract bounding Northward on the Caspian or Hyrcanian Sea is called Assyria. The other lying Southward toward Mare Rubrum and Sinus Persicus is called b Herodot. in Melpo●ene. Persia. But special mention is made here of the King of Ashur, because that these jews, which went with Ezra in the second return from captivity, did come out of those high & Northern Countries; the former that returned under Zerubbabel, out of the Southern Countries. That this is so, appears in the 8. Chapt. Ezra. 7.1. Now after these things, in the ʸ reign of Arthashash●● K. of Persia, was Ezra, the son of Seraj●h, etc. And ●e came to jerusalem (with o●her of the jews) in the 5. month: which was the 7 z year of the K. ver. 9 For upon the first day of the first month, he began to go up from Babel: and on the first day of the fifth month, came ●e to jerusalem, according to the good hand of his God, that was upon him. Nehemiah. 1.1. The words of Nehemiah, the son of Hacha●iah, in the month ᵇ Chisten, etc. in the 20. year, etc. v. 2. came Hanani, one of my Brethren, etc. v. 3. And they said to me, The residue, etc. ʸ (i. e.) Of Artaxerxes Muemon, when after his father's decease, he alone ruled the Empire. ᶻ After he began to reign alone. ᵃ Artaxerxes Muemon, Darius, saith the Geneva. ᵇ The third month of the year, according to the Chaldean calculation, which Nehemiah follows. Nehem. 2.1. Now in the month ᶜ Nisa●, in the 20. year of K. ᵈ Artashashte, the wine stood before him, and I took up the cup, and gave it to the King. ᶜ The 7. month by the Chaldean account. ᵈ Artaxerxes Muemon. Darius Hystaspis, saith the Geneva. Nehem 5.14. And from the time, that the K. gave me charge to be Governor in the land of judah: from the 20. year, even to the 32. year, that is, 12 years, I and my Brethren have not eaten the bread of the Governor. Notwithstanding the Wall was finished on the 25. day of Elul, in ᵉ 52. days. When the Wall was builded, 7.1. etc. ᵉ That is, the Locks, Gates and Bars were set up fifty two days, after the stone wall was built. vers. 1. Now the City was large and great: 4. but the people were few therein: and the houses were not builded. And ᶠ jeshua begat joiakim, joiakim also begat Eliashib, Nehem. 12.10. and Eliashib begat joiada, and Io●ada begat jonathan, and jonathan begat jaddua. In the days of Eliashib, joiada, and johanan, and jaddua, 22. were the chief Fathers of the Levites, written in the reign of Dar●us the Persian. ᶠ The succession of the high Priests from the captivity to the translation of the Persian Monarchy to Alexander the Great, whom as joseph. Antiq. jud. lib. 11. cap. 7. & 8. reports jaddua did meet as he came towards jerusalem. Now none ought to wonder, that Nehemiah should record this; for from the beginning of Artaxerxes Muemon, whom Nehemiah attended, until Alexander Magnus, are not threescore years. ᵍ The last King of Persia, called also Codomannus, Him Alexander overthrew. Nehemiah lived till the time of Darius the Persian. Nehem. 12.22. Nehem. 6.15. Therefore the Altar erected by the Israelites, Ezr. 33. not long after their return, even while Cyrus yet reigned, could not be built by Nehemiah, unless we say that Nehemiah lived above 200. years; which is not credible: For so many years at least were between Cyrus and Darius the last, whom Alexander overcame. CHAP. III. Doubts removed, which seemed to prove the Persian Monarchy much shorter than the former account. Answer 1. ARGUMENT. I. From the story of Mordecay, who, they say, was carried captive with jeconiah from jerusalem. THat Mordecay was not carried captive from jerusalem with jeconiah: That place, Ester 2.5. [Who was carried away] is necessarily to be referred to Kish, Mordecay's great grandfather. 1 The accent Tipcha proves nothing. 2 Nor the Conjunction Copulative [&] And be nourished Hadassa. 3 No more doth the history or narration of Kish, put between, in vers. 6. 4 If Mordecay, named, Ester 2.2 were the same that is mentioned in Ester; yet it follows not, that he was carried captive with I●coniah from jerusalem: For Zerubbabel himself, with whom he is mentioned, was not carried captive with I●coniah, but was begotten in the captivity by Pedajah, the son of Salathiel; Mat. 1.12. ●onne by law though not by nature of jaconiah. Again Mordecay mentioned in Ezra 2. returned into judaea, as is manifested by Nehem. 7.7. but Mordecay in Ester went not into judaea at all. Arguments to prove it, are, 1 The Pronoune relative must be referred to the next going before it, and not to that which is further off, as 1. Chron. 2.7. 2 To what other end should mention be made of Kish, unless to show by his carrying away captive, how Mordecay a jew, borne of him, became citizen of Susa? Certainly he is not named to distinguish him from the other Mordecay, which is one rule why men's fathers and grandfathers are named in Scripture. 3 This confirms the truth of God's promise, which he made to those that were carried away captive with jeconiah, jer. 24.6. That they should return, be built up, planted, and not rooted out, etc. And therefore were commanded to marry and beget children. jer. 29.6. Whereby it appears that the promise was made unto their posterity also. The performance whereof by this story of Ester is excellently declared. 4. From the time. For if Mordecay were carried away captive with jeconiah, then was he above a hundred years old in the 12th. of Assuerus, according to Broughton. For by 2 Kings, 24.16. we may judge him to be at the least 20· years old, when he was carried Captive. From the 8th. of Nabuchadnezzar, in which jeconiah was captived, to the first of Cyrus are 63. years. From the first of Cyrus, to the 12. of Assuerus, are 20. years. All make 103. at least 100 At which age Mordecay was altogether unfit to perform offices and services in Court, As Barzillay at a less age. 2. Sam. 19.36. But reckon we the times of Cyrus and Cambyses aright; and make (as the truth is,) Assuerus to be Xerxes: and there are betwixt Cyrus the first, and Xerxes the twelfth 60. years. So Mordecay shall have lived about 140. years in the twelfth of Xerxes, being then too, of strong and able body, and likely to live longer. As may appear, Ester 10.2, 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Answer 2. ARGUM. 2. Nehemiah is named among those that returned in the first year of Cyrus from Babylon. Ezra. 2. ●. And this Nehemiah lived till the end of the Persian Monarchy. Nehem. 12. therefore (saith Mr Broughton) the Persian Monarchy cannot be held to stand 200 years. There be two Nehemiahs'. One mentioned, Ezra 2. Another who returned in the 20. year of Artaxerxes Mnemon: and lived till the reign of Darius the Persian. Answer 3. ARGUM. 3. Ezra is called son of Serajah. Ezra. 7.1. Now Serajah was slain before the destruction of jerusalem, 2. King. 25.21. Therefore Ezra must needs be borne at that time: who also lived until the later times of the Persian Monarchy: therefore either the Persian Monarchy must endure but 130 years: or else Ezra must live above 200, which is not likely. There is Ambiguity in the word Son, which M. Broughton takes properly; as if Ezra had been immediately the son of Serajah: whereas indeed he was so Serajahs' son, as the jews used to call their posterity, even to the fifth descent, Sons. And Zerubbabel is usually called the son of Shealti●l, whereas he was but his nephew. Answer. 4. ARGUM. 4. Is from the 70 weeks of Daniel, which they say do begin at the 1. year of Cyrus, and end with Christ, and are precisely 490 years: and therefore the Persian Monarchy, cannot be, no not 200 years. For then from the first of King Cyrus will arise more than 490. years to the death of Christ. When daniel's 70. weeks begin, is uncertain. Some will have them begin in the first year of Cyrus: some in the second of Darius▪ Nothus: others in the twentieth of Artaxerxes Mnemon. A man may follow his judgement: for neither the one nor the other is defined in the Text, Dan. 9.25. but is absolutely put [from the outgoing of the Word] which we know went forth in three Kings reigns. But for the end and period of them, it must necessarily be at the death of Christ: and not as some will have it, at the destruction of jerusalem by the Romans. It's plain, Dan. 9.24. But to grant this Proposition true, though uncertain, that daniel's seventy Weeks begin at the first year of Cyrus, yet doth not this follow thereupon, That from the first year of Cyrus are precisely 490. years: for Numbers are either taken, Properly, when they note that which naturally they signify: Improperly or figuratively, when they signify either more or less, in regard of the circumstance of the matter, and the speakers intention. So is Two and Three taken properly, Matth. 16.21. & 27.23. & 20.19. Improperly, Hos. 6.2. Seven properly, 1. King. 18. Figuratively, Luc. 17.4. Matth. 18.22. Ten properly, Exod. 34.28. figuratively, Numb. 14.22. Twelve properly, Mat. 10.2. figuratively, Apoc. 7. Thousands, figuratively, Dan. 7.10. So that often in Scriptures Numbers finite are put for infinite, certain for uncertain, perfect for imperfect, round and gross for corrupt. 2. Chr. 26.21. For the land rested (or kept Sabbath) all the days of her desolation, to fulfil 70 years. These 70. years begin at the time of the first Captivity, in the reign of joakim. Now from this time till the eleventh year of Zedekiah, when he was captived & the Temple and City burnt, the Land cannot be said to keep Sabbaths', because the Inhabitants were not yet carried away: and therefore it was but a part of these 70. years that she rested. Not precisely. judg. 11.26. Israel dwelled in Heshbon, Aroër, and Arnon, 300. years. For reckon from their first inhabiting of those Cities, and we find it but 260. years, or thereabouts: unless we add the 40 years from coming up out of Egypt. But it ought to be understood synecdochicè and figuratè. Apoc. 11.12.13. Three years and a half, etc. Often mention is made of three years and a half, of 42 months, (which make so many years) of 1260. days, which also make so many years: In all which we must needs understand a certain number to be put for an uncertain, that is, for the whole time that runs on from the passion of Christ till the end of the World. Let us consider the drift and scope of the Angel's speech. Daniel he understands by books, that the 70. years of Captivity were now even at an end: Hereupon he prayeth that God would be merciful to the people and holy City. An Angel is sent to him, and talks unto him, not of the 70. years of Captivity to be ended under Cyrus, but of seventy times seven years, of most glorious deliverance from the slavery of Hell and the Devil, to be purchased by Christ. As if the Angel had thus said: Thou Daniel thinkest of 70. years, at the end whereof thy people is to have a deliverance from carnal servitude under Babylon, and a restauration of an earthly jerusalem: but I give thee to understand of a far more glorious liberty and freedom from Satan's slavery, to be purchased by Christ for thy people after 70. times 7. years. Do not thou think of 70. years, which are now even gone and passed, but of 70 times 7 years, which when they are come to end, thy people and city for whom thou prayest, shall obtain this great blessing. Wherefore this is spoken in allusion to the 70 years of Captivity, to show that God's mercy should exceed his judgements seventy times, which from that should endure seventy times seven year, till the coming of Christ, and afterwards for ever. It is therefore a prophetical prediction, and not an historical relation: and the circumscription of time is used only for memory sake; that after these many years, they should be sure to obtain such a deliverance, as, than which, they could desire nothing more. Not precisely. Gen. 15.13. Know for a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs 400. years, and they shall serve them. For from the time that God spoke unto Abraham (whence the years must necessarily begin) unto the coming of the children of Israel out of Egypt, are 430. years, as Moses witnesses, Exo. 12. If we say that they begin at the fifth year of Isaac; yet from the time that God spoke, unto that, are about twenty years. From that to the departure of the Israelites, Matth. 1.17. From Abraham to David, are 14. Generations: from David to the captivity of Babylon, 14. Generations: from the Capt. of Babylon unto Christ, 14. Generations. whole 400. Wherefore, from the time that God spoke this, till the departure from Egypt, are four hundred synecdochicè; above four hundred precisely. What! precisely fourteen in all? No. From David to the Captivity of Babylon, were twenty seven, as Mr Broughton confesseth. In the other two were indeed fourteen. Full and whole? By no means. Mat. 12.14. So shall the Son of Man be three days, and 3. nights in the heart of the earth. For Christ was buried on the Evening of the sixth day, the same day he died. The seventh day he rested in the grave, upon the eight day early he rose again. So that he was but two whole days in the grave, and scarce that neither. Now the Day and the Night make one Day, Gen. 1. And therefore because Christ rested in the Sepulchre part of three days, he is said by a synecdoche to be three days and three nights in the heart of the Earth. If the Angel had said, The seventy years of your Captivity in Babylon: But after 80. times seventy years, Christ shallbe slain, and so you shall obtain a more glorious freedom; Then had the Angel spoken precisely: for, from that time to the death of Christ, was precisely five hundred sixty years. But so the force & efficacy of the Type had been obscured. To which the Angel would allude by the name of seventy times seven years. Antiochus his persecution continued three years and a half precisely, Dan. 7. Now Antiochus was a Type of Satan. And therefore the Time, times, and half a Time, forty two months, 1260. days, all making up the same number of years, are uttered by S. john, Apoc. 11.12, 13. in allusion to Antiochus persecution. For by this he comforteth the Woman, that is, the Church, persecuted by the Dragon Satan; That this persecution should last but a little while, even as that of Antiochus; not properly, but figuratively: for Satan persecuteth the Church unto the end of the world. That the seventy weeks are not to be understood precisely, but by a synecdoche, is thus proved. Seventy weeks are determined upon thy People, saith Gabriel, Dan. 9 ver. 24. That these are whole and full so many, is proved by their partition. For there are seven weeks from the going forth of the Commandment, ver. 25. and sixty three weeks when the street and wall shall be builded; and again, after threescore and two weeks, Christ shall be slain. But not presently after those sixty nine weeks; but in the middle of the last week. ver. 27. Where it is said, And he shall confirm the Covenant with money for one week: and in the Middle of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease. Then thus the Reason stands: If Christ died in the midst of the last week; then from the first year of Cyrus to the death of Christ, are not precisely 490. yeared, but 486. and a half. The reason of the consequence is plain: For if Christ died in the midst of the last week, i.e. the seventieth week, then to the death of Christ from Cyrus the first, are but sixty nine weeks and a half. Now sixty nine weeks cum dimidio, make but four hundred eighty six years cum dimidio; whereas seventy whole weeks make four hundred ninety years. But Christ died in the midst of the last week. This is manifest: For Christ then died, when sacrifice and oblation ceased. This is proved by the ninth and tenth to the Hebrews. But sacrifice and oblation ceased in the midst of the last week. This Daniel expressly saith, Cap. 9 ver. 27. Therefore from the first year of Cyrus to the death of Christ, are not four hundred ninety years precisely: And by consequent, the seventy weeks are to be understood figuratè and synecdochicè: not praecisè and tropriè. Christ was baptised about three years and a half before he died, and then (saith Funccius) was sacrifice & oblation abolished out of the place. Mat. 3. ult. This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased. And therefore God was pleased afterward with no other sacrifice, but the immaculate Lamb Christ. But for answer: So God was only pleased with the sacrifice of Christ before his Baptism. For he was a perpetual sacrifice from the beginning: and the other sacrifices pleased him only as Types and shadows of Christ's sacrifice of himself. Secondly, Moses sacrifices and such Types of Christ were acceptable unto God after his Baptism: which is plain, Matth. 8.3. where Christ after his Baptism bids the Leper offer the gift, that Moses commanded. Which was, Levit. 14.10. two Lambs and an Ewe Lamb, for a trespass offering and a burnt offering. Answer Object. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be translated Dimidio, not Medio. So that Christ shall be said to abolish sacrifice and offering, not in the middle of the Week, but in half of the Week: and this half must be the last half, and not the first. Though the word signify both ways, a Exod 12. Medio noctis Exod 24.16. dimidium sangui●is. yet here it must be translated middle, not half: 1. By the consent of the Learned: 2. By this reason out of the Text. Christ is here said, to Cause to cease, or to abolish sacrifice and oblations in the midst of the 70th.. week. Now this Action is not actio maneus, and continuata, but citò transiens. For it is meant of the death of Christ. Unless therefore we will make Christ's death to be a continued action, and say, that Christ died in the half of the Seventy Seven; i.e. his crucifying and death continued for the space of 3. years and a half (than which, what more absurd?) we must needs grant, that he died in the middle. Had it been said, that Christ should preach the Gospel in half the last 7. it had been truly; because it was a continued action. Not only in this last week, but in some of the former is this Synecdoche to be understood. For the 70. weeks are divided into 3. parts: ver. 25. Kno● therefore, and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to bring again the people, and to build jerusalem shall be seven Weeks (there is the first part) and threescore and two Weeks, (there is the second) and the Wall, and the Street shall be built again, in a troublous time. After threescore and two weeks Christ shall be slain. v. 27. And he shall confirm the Cov●nant for many one Week (there is the third part:) and in the midst of the Week, he shall abolish sacrifice and oblation. The Reason is this then: Seven Weeks are said to pass before the building of the street and wall; above 49. were passed. And therefore by these 7. Weeks more years are meant▪ than are precisely set down. The Minor is proved by the story of Scripture. For (Ezr. 4) the building both of the Temple and City, as appears by the Letter of S●imshag, was hindered all the days of Cyrus, till the second year of Darius. And from the 2. year of Darius, along unto the 20. of Artaxerxes, who succeeded him, was it still hindered, as appears, Nehem. 1.1. The Wall was built afterward, Cap. 4.6. The Street, Cap. 7. Whereby it is manifest, if we reckon the years from Cyrus the first, to Artaxerxes the 20. that the Wall and Street could not be builded in the first 7. Weeks. Therefore those words [In the other] are falsely shuffled into the Text. Eusebius, junius, and Tremellius say, That the Temple was built in the first 7. Weeks. CHAP. IU Observations and explanations on some places of Ezra, and Nehemiah. THe resolution is; That we must read on: Some do question, whether it be their part to read on in the Book of Ezra, in their private going over the Scripture: sith many places are nothing but names, and as they conceive, of no great use to us. for that nothing b In sacris Libris nihil contemnatur, aut obiter praetereatur: etiamsi nomina recenseantur. Chrysost. hom. 21. & 24. super Gen. Et in Rom. 16. Ser. 31. is to be contemned in these holy writings; no nor to be skipped over. Say it be but the repeating, and cataloguing only of names. There is no Book, no Chapter, no line in the Word of God, but is profitable, given by inspiration of God, and written for our learning. And if we understand it not in some places; yet those places have in them an immanent power to edify: though as yet it be not transient, conveying the profit of it to us, till in some measure we do understand it. 2. The way to come to the understanding of them, is, not to pass those places over; but to read them. And when we are busy in reading places which we conceive not, c Chrysost. Serm. 3. de Lazaro. God opens the heart, and sends us in, the interpretation, as he did Philip to the Eunuch, Act. 8. 3. There is much to be had out of the Genealogies, to a wise, and diligent Reader. We learn the increase, or decrease of the Church, the strange holding out of some Families, as the Servants of Solomon, and the Gibeonites, called in these Books, the Nethinims: They were made drawers of water to the Temple, as a kind of punishment. God made this cross, a mercy. Their employment so near the house of God, gave them fit occasion to be partakers of the things of God. And the Lord, we see, did wonderfully honour them. The nearer they were to the Church, the nearer to God. In a word, he sees little, that sees not many things of excellent use, to be gathered out of Chapters full of names. 4. Say, that as yet we can pick nothing out of some such Chapters; yet must we not step over them in our course of reading them: but we are in any hand to take them along in our reading, if it be but to show our obedience to God in reading over all his sacred word. Object. But doth not Paul, Tim. 1.4. warn Timothy, that he should not give heed to fables, and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than ediying? Resp. He doth. But he means Genealogies that were fabulous, not such as do edify: Now all the Scripture tends to edifying. Cajetan notes, that he means by endless Genealogies, such as are not in the word, which gender questions, that the Scripture doth not end and determine. d August. contra Adversarios Le●gis & Prophet. lib. 2. cap. 1. tom. 6. No question, the Apostle finds fault with such fabulous genealogies, as in those days were too common among the jews, & after were written in the Books of Talmud. S. Paul e Aquinas in 1. Tim. 1.4. 1. Tim. 4.7. calls them old wives tales. And when men begin to be giddy, and to be sick of foolish pride, they study much in doting pedigrees. Paul to Timothy and Titus both, means such genealogies as do move & not end questions. Which minister questions (saith Paul to Timothy) not which end questions. What questions? Tit. 3.9. foolish questions. And for those genealogies which had any pith in them, they became also uncertain and endless, when Herod had burnt up the Records, as josephus' notes. Now f Chrysost. Hom. 23. in Act. Questionum nullus finis. of such questions there is no end: And we may all observe, that to be full of impertinent questions, comes from a weak understanding: as we see in children, who will even tyre one with babbling questions. So the Apostles in their ruder time, before the passion of Christ, and after too, before the coming down of the holy Ghost, were ask questions sometime not so profitable, as, When the day of judgement should be? But when they were filled with the gifts of the holy Ghost, Acts 2. we hear no more of such questions. No, no: They than found fault with such curiosity. The same holy Father doth observe, that Thomas, judas, and Peter were full of questions. But john, whom Christ loved, and who might have been most bold with him, was very sparing that way. In a word, the Genealogies of the word are of great use, and do satisfy the doubts of men, and not move questions that can have no end. This was not in his first year of his Kingdom of Persia, Cap. 1. v. 1. Now in the first year of Cyrus' King of Persia, that the Word of the Lord by the mouth of jeremiah might be fulfilled: the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus' King of Persia, that he made proclamation throughout all his kingdom. but of his Monarchy, when he had conquered Babylon. Now how long he reigned after his Conquest, precisely we cannot say. Dan. 10.1. we read of The third year of Cyrus, and some Chronologers think he lived not much above five or six years longer. 'tis said, The Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus. There be that say, that, Cyrus was converted, because he is called The Lords anointed, and his Servant. But Saul was the anointed of the Lord: yet none of the best men, or of the best Kings: He that doth look over the stories of Cyrus; shall find that he lived and died a mere Heathen. And the Prophet Isay, cap. 45.4. saith in the name of God, That Cyrus had not known him. And therefore, it was in respect of his office, and the work the Lord did design him to; though he never were really anointed with oil, as Saul and David were. I say, in regard of his place, and this great work of the Lord in his hand, he was called, The anointed of the Lord. Out of which we may see, that the Lord doth many times do great and famous matters for his Church, by the hands of wicked men. And their divinity is not sound, who hold the contrary Tenet. It was the mighty work of God to bring this wise and great Prince in the very first entrance into his Monarchy, before things were fully settled, to dismiss so great & so g In respect of their custom & Religion. united a people, as the jews were, into their own Country with such a fair and ample patent as he did; they being held among the Barbarians, a People given much to insurrection: But God must and will have his ways take place. There is no resisting of his will by any: The will of men must go after his decree. Which decrees of God, manifested no less than 170. years before, did not leave this fact of Cyrus' contingent, but made it necessary. They write, that he was made to see the Prophecy of Isaiah, where he finding his very name, so long before he was borne, was thereby moved to this great work. That might be a persuasion: but the cause, we see, was; because the Lord by a potent work of his spirit stirred up the heart of Cyrus to send forth so gracious an Edict. And yet we must not think, that this his being made acquainted with the will of God's decrees, gave to this his Act the Nature of Obedience; Obedience being properly an act of ours, when we do obey the will of God's command; he by it imposing on us and requiring of us, the work as a duty. In the first of Kings 11. jeroboam had it cleared to him, that Gods will was, he should be King over the ten Tribes: yet because it was a will of God's decree, not of his command, as of a duty to be done by him, he goes among Divines for an intruder, and an usurper, in and for that fact of his. h Vid. 23.9.5. cap. 45. in annot. 'Tis Obedience, when we obey a divine precept: but not ever when we follow a divine instinct. i Davenant. in Col. 1. v. 2. p. 15.16. 'Tis a work belonging immediately and only to God to work effectually on the Will, and thus to stir up the heart of a man. King's hearts are in God's hands. This shows us, Ver. 7. Also Cyrus the King brought forth the Vessels of the house of the Lord: which Nabuchadnezzar had brought forth out of jerusalem, and had put them in the house of his God. that nothing that is once appointed by God in his worship, say it be after used in Idolatrous worship, as these vessels were, can be defiled. but it may & must return to 'tis ancient use: and be had in the worship of God again. Whereas we read, 2. Kings, 24.13. that Nabuchadnezzar did cut in pieces all the Vessels of gold, which Solomon K. of Israel had made, in the Temple of the Lord: The meaning is, That he did k Heb. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 truncavit. curtail, as it were, the Temple. Ver. 8. Even those did Cyrus' King of Persia bring forth by the hand of Mithridath the Treasurer: and numbered them unto Shazbazzar the Prince of judah. For 'tis plain, he did reserve those Vessels whole. For Belshazzar did after drink in them, Dan. 5.2. And here we find, that they were restored, and brought back to the house of God again. This Shazbazzar, the Prince of judah was Zerubbabel, called so in Chaldaea▪ junius denies it: but our English Annotations, and that of Deodat's, in the Italian, do with more likelihood affirm it. He was by the King ordained head & Conductor of those of his Nation, who would be willing to return. Thus God kept the signory, and the chief staff of Authority in the line of judah. No length nor change of time can eat out, and break off the decrees of God. CHAP. V. This Chapter contains a list of such as returned to jerusalem, Ezra 2. at the first going up; and chiefly, of those, who offered presents for the re-edifying of the Temple of the Lord. IN the numbers you may find some differences from that Catalogue we have, Neh. 7. As for example: Here, v. 5. the Sons of Arah are said to be 775. There, v. 10.652. Reconcile the places thus: 775. gave their names in Babylon, that they would return: only 652. mentioned in Nehemiah, came up into Iuda●a; the rest changing their minds, or dying by the way. And where Nehemiah hath more, it might be by joining with them in the way. Question is made, whether only they of judah and Benjamin returned? The a Sanctius in Zachar. 8. & 13. §. 32. Answer that is made, I think, is sound: That sith in Ezr. 2. the sum of the Principals of the whole Body, that returned, besides their followers, were 42360. But now reckon we the numbers of judah and Benjamin by the pole, which are punctually set down, Ezr. 2. and they come short of the total sum, a matter of 12000. Now these 12000. are those of other 10. Tribes, besides judah, and Benjamin. We read, that so many went over of other Tribes to Rehoboam, that, (as 'tis said) His Crown was strengthened by them. and many of Israel came over to Asa: and in Hezekiah's days, sundry of Ashur, Zabulon, and Manasse joined themselves with judah. And who can doubt, but that in Captivity, being Countrymen in foreign parts, much of the 10. Tribes incorporated themselves into the two Tribes? And no other but this is the meaning of that fifth ver. of the first chap. of Ez. Then rose up the chief of the Fathers of judah and Benjamin, with all them whose spirit God had raised to go up: That is (saith Deodate) all those of other Tribes; according as we read, 1. Chron. 9.3. In jerusalem dwelled of the children of judah, and of the children of Benjamin, and of the children of Ephraim, and Manasse, who, no question, in the Captivity for very conscience and Religion, joined themselves to judah. By Province, Ver. 1. Now these are the children of the Province, that went up out of the Captivity. our English Annotations means judaea: but junius, and Deodate do seem to me with more reason, to understand by Province, Babylonia, that is, saith junius, those who enrolled their names in Babylonia; called here a Province, saith the Italian, because the other Israëlites were dispersed in sundry other provinces. Zerubbabel was son of * Mat. 1.12. Salathiel, Ver. 2. Which came up with Zerubbabel, jesuah, and Nehemiah, Serviah, Reelajob, Mordecay, Bilsha●. etc. Of Zerubbbael. borne in Babylon, and accordingly he had a Babylonian m Chrysost. Hom. 7. in Mat. 2. name. He was a Chief in the first year of Cyrus: and we find in sacred Story, that he lived to see the building of the Temple, about the 6. year of n Scaliger de emendat. temporum, lib. 6. Darius Nothus. Now say he was but 14. o Great men under some tutors are put in places of employment young. Asclepiades held, men began about that age to be wise, And the Civil law saith, that men at 14. are fit for action, Vid. Tertul. de animâ, cap. 38. Zach. 4.9. years of age, the first of Cyrus, yet to Darius Nothus is a matter of 100 years, as appears by the Chronologie. Hence we see, that the Lord gave him a life much longer than ordinary. We read nothing when he died after the edifying of the Temple. This clears that in Zacharie 4.9. The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands also shall finish it. The very phrase doth tell us, that the Lord did draw out his life of purpose, that he might live to make up that goodly work. Like as Moses, Deut. ult. had a longer life than usual given him, that he might bring the People of God out of Egypt. In that place of Zechary the Lord doth promise Zerubbabel some singular matter, in that the Prophet affirmeth, that the hands of Zerubbabel that laid the foundation, the same hand shall finish it; meaning, an exceeding long life. Thus we see how God doth cause some to live to be wondrous old, above others, because he hath something to be done by them. Then age is a crown indeed, when it is thus found in the ways of Righteousness. Neither hath it a good savour, for men to say of an old Zerubbabel when he is going hence, What matter is it to hear of such an aged man dying, or dead? What? doth not the Lord threaten it as a curse, that he will take away? whom? the youth? No, the prudent and the ancient, Isa. 3.2. This Nehemiah was not Nehemiah the famous, Vers. 2. Of Nehemiah. but another of the same name; as there were sundry of the same name: One, Ezr. 3. Another, Ezr. 8.10. For this Nehemiah came up with Zerubbabel in the first of Cyrus: and Nehemiah the great lived till the time of Darius the last, beaten by Alexander; which is two hundred years and upwards. Now that in those days Nehemiah should live above 200. years, sounds not likely. Nehemiah was the penner of the book called Nehemiah, & in the book mention is made of jaddua the Priest; of whom we read in josephus, that he did meet Alexander the great in his Formalities, and stayed him from doing hurt to the City, and the Temple. Again we read, that Nehemiah was cupbearer to p Scal. de emend. lib. 6. Wolph. in ●it. lib. Nehem. c. 12. Dion. Carthus. in Ezr. 2. Artaxerxes, and the Persians used to have young men for their Gentlemen about them. But this Nehemiah, coming up the first year of King Cyrus, must needs be stricken in years, in Artaxerxes time. He was not Mordecay, Vers. 2. Of Mordecay. ester's Uncle: but another of the same name. For this Mordecay came up with Zerubbabel. Now if ester's Mordecay had returned with Zerubbabel, he would not have dwelled at Susis, and trained up Ester among the Heathen, but rather in the holy Land, among the people of God. And 'tis plain, that this Mordecay did return into judaea, Neh. 7.7. But that ever ester's Uncle came into judaea, is unlikely. We must know, that it was a common thing among the jews, to have more names than one, or two. Which we must consider, lest it breed mistakes in reading the Scriptures. * Vers. 61. And the children of the Priests, the children of Habaja●, the children of Roz, the children of Barzillai, which took a wife of the daughters of Barzillai, the Gileadite, and was called after their name. In the Captivity, the Priests being in a strange Land, were not to offer any other sacrifices, except it were spiritual sacrifices of praise: Whereupon there being not that commodity made of it, as was used to arise out of their slain sacrifices; some Priests, who had married themselves into the Noble Family of Barzillai, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vers. 62. These sought their Register amongst those that were reckoned by Genealogy: but they were not found, therefore they were, as polluted, put from the Priesthood. took scorn to be in the Register of the Priests in the time of the Captivity of Babylon, and took the name of Barzillai after the Family of their wives. Now after the return from the Captivity, the Priesthood growing into fame, gain, and request again, and there being holy things to eat of, these degenerate Priests would fain have taken place among the Priests of the Lord; but the Magistrate would not suffer them: because, when time was, they did scorn the Priesthood, the Priesthood should now scorn them. A just reward of God and man for such proud and insolent kind of people. 'Tis common when men by their wit go about to get a Name, that they lose their Name. After the flood they would needs build a tower to get a Name to themselves, and not to God: and it is their reproach to this day. And this was all the use that those Creatures made of the late deluge, the greatest judgement of God that ever was. Vers. 63. And the Tirshatha said unto them, that they should not eat of the most holy things, till there stood up a Priest with Urim & Thummim. [The Tirshatha] It is a name of office, viz. The Governor or Deputy of the King: We see he was a man of power that could keep those great men from the Priesthood, and forbid them to eat of the most holy things. By Tirshatha I conceive the same; who, cap. 1.8. was called Shazbazzar: as Daniel was called Balshazzar: An use among the Chaldees to change the name of the jews. Now Shazbazzar was Z●robbabel, as we have showed before. [Till there arose up a Priest with Urim and Thummim] viz. to ask the Lords advice and counsel. By Priest, is meant the high Priest, for he had the Urim and Thummim, and none but he. So when Saul murdered the Priests of the Lord, Abtathar fled to t 1. Sam. 23 6. David with the Ephod (saith the text) that is, with the Ephod of the high Priest; and presently David began to inquire by the Ephod of the Lord. A great providence of God for the comfort of his poor servant David! And hence it is that we read, that the Lord answered not Saul by v 1. Sam. 28.6. Urim and Thummim: for it was now with David; not with Saul. This Vrim & Thummim was either lost or burned together with many other things, when that the Chaldees took the City of jerusalem, & was never found again. How then doth he here say, Until there stand up a Priest with Urim and Thummim? 1 It may be that Zerubbabel did not know but that Vrim and Thummim might by the providence of God be had again. 2 Until. that is, Never. An usual Phrase in Scripture, (q. d.) You shall never come to the Priesthood again, except God shall reveal his mind to be otherwise by Urim and Thummim which will never be. [Until] is thus taken in the word in many places. 1 No. Was it not a great decay to Religion, that Vrim and Thummim were lost? Did not the Church now want a rule of certainty? For the word of God was ever the lively Oracle, the Rule of Rules, that was the sacred Canon, now the Scripture. For the old Testament was complete, and when there was so much of the word written, there was the less use of Urim & Thummim. And therefore after the loss of Urim and Thummim, the Church was to keep the closer to the Law of Moses: as Malachy, who lived after the loss of Urim, and wrote last of all the Prophets, Mal. 4.4. did command. Mal. 4.4. Remember the Law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in H●reb, for all Israel, with the statutes and judgements. 2 For aught I see, the Vrim and Thummim was not to decide matters of doctrine, but events and facts and successes in war and peace, as we see in David often. vid. Numb. 27.18. 1. Sam. 23.5.9. & 30.7.8. And this was in x joseph. Antiq. lib. 3. cap. 9 extraordinary cases: In things ordinary, the Prince was to have the Law before hisface, Deut. 17. jos. 1. but in extraordinary Accidents, he was to seek answer from God by the Urim and the Thummim of the Priest. 3 The Church was in as good case for certainty in things of salvation, under the second Temple, when the Vrim and Thummim was not, as under the first Temple when it was. That of Rabbi Talmud in jon. cap. 1. fol. 21. that not only Vrim and Thummim, Henry Ainsworth in Exod. 28.30. seems to like too well this rabbinical Blasphemy, as he doth in his annot, dote on the Rabbins too often. but the holy Ghost was wanting in the second Temple, is blasphemous. For had not Christ and his Apostles the holy Ghost? and did not they live under the second Temple? Nay: Is not more, and more full revelation promised in the second Temple, than in the first? Hag. 1.8. & Cap. 2.4.10. 4 Besides, after Urim and Thummim was gone they had some Prophets; as Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachy. I confess that Prophets by office and commission ended in Malachy, Yet y Drus. 2. Pet. 1.21. there be that hold, that after him there were now & then some Prophets only by the Spirit. I know there was a great silence of Prophets after Malachy, to prepare the people for to expect the coming of that great Prophet. For though it were vox populi, and a tradition among the Priests z john. 1.20.21. & 7.40.41. and Levites, that the great Prophet was one distinct from the Christ the Messias: yet I doubt not, but the Church did understand Moses the great Prophet prophesied of, to be no other than the expected Messias: And therefore the damp that was of Prophets after Malachy, turned to the good of the godly. It taught them, that Christ jesus was now at hand. And upon his coming, we find that the Lord stirred up two Prophets in a line, a Maldonat. in joh. 1.21. Zacharie the father, and john the Baptist his son, to point out him; Prophets by grace, rather than by office. And so I may say, that the want of Urim and Thummim did teach the Church, that they were shortly now to expect the true Urim and Thummim, Christ jesus, the high Priest of their profession. And besides, it should have taught them to cleave the more to the written Oracles of God. This, jeremy seems to me to show in the loss of the Ark: viz. That that loss should be no loss. The people of God should not care to look after the Ark any more: but set their hearts on the true Ark Christ jesus, the Ark of Arkes. This then the Church got by it: That by the want of Urim they learned, that the Ceremonies were in going, and the Messias in coming; that salvation was not to be placed in the ordinances of Moses, since Vrim and Thummim itself was utterly gone. Lastly, we see that the Church did stand and was the pillar of truth without Urim and Thummim. The b Bellarm. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 3. cap. 4 §. quartà probatur. Argument is loose, that is made to prove the infallibility of the great Bishop of Rome from the Urim and Thummim of the high Priest: For beside that the Argument may follow from the c Heb. 4.14. & 8.1. levitical high Priest to Christ our high Priest, of whom that high Priest was a Type, and not of the Pope; yet we see that the Church stood to the word, when there was no Urim & Thummim, from the taking of jerusalem to the coming of Christ jesus; for in that interim the high Priest had no Urim and Thummim. And for that slender voice called Bath-col, mentioned by Tremelius in Act. 12.22. which Henry d on Exod. 28.30. Ainsworth would have to make some supply for the defect of Urim; it hath no ground: and is to be turned back to the foolish Rabbins from whom it came. And therefore the Law and the Prophets was the standard, and not the Urim and Thummim. I doubt not but the people had by some means perfect notice of the Revelation made to the Priest, and they were absolutely to stand to the Oracles given by Urim and Thummim from the mouth of God: Yet me thinks, 'tis hard to prove that the Priest did use it for matters of Religion and doctrine, and not only for matters of fact and event: Next, that the Priest had answer when he would, though he himself were never so wicked: or lastly, That the sins of the people did not hinder the giving of the Oracle sometime. 'Tis enough that for some 550. years the high Priest was destitute of Urim and Thummim; and yet I hope the Lord did not leave his people without a sure and certain rule of faith and direction of life, which is the holy Word of God. And Malachy doth tell us, that though the Priests lips by that place and office should have preserved knowledge; yet often they did not: And though, while Urim lasted, it never gave any false or fallacious answers; yet many times, what for the sins of the Priest, and what for the sins of the people, the Lord refused to give any answer at all; and the answers that were given, were rather in matters of e Numb. 17.21. 1. Sam. 23.11, 12. & 30.7, 8. fact than of doctrine and of faith. The argument is too weak, that the Cardinal doth draw from the jewish Church, to prove that the Pope hath the deciding Spirit and Voice in matters of Faith; sith from the destruction of jerusalem to Messiah the Prince (a space of some 550. years) there was no Oracle by Urim and Thummim, no f Psal. 74.9. We see not our signs: there is no more any Prophet. succession of Prophets, nor but a few Prophets at all from Malachy till Zachary the father and john Baptist the son: No miracles, except the Pool of Bethesda, granted to the jews to strengthen them in the true worship of God under the persecution of Antiochus, till the days of Zachary and john Baptist and the Lord jesus. And yet the providence of God did not leave the Church for all that time without sufficient and ample means of their salvation. In a word, the loss of Urim and Thummim, the Ark, and other Ceremonials, taught them to look off from the shadows, and to look for the Truth, the Lord jesus. CHAP. VI Chap. 4. v. 5. They hired counsellors against them, to frustrate their purpose all the days of Cyrus K. of Persia, even until the reign of Darius K. of Persia. Question is made who this Darius King of Persia was, which of the Darij. CYrus after the Edict made in behalf of the jews, was called abroad to the wars. He left his son Cambyses the power of a King at home; and Cambyses hindered the execution of his father's Proclamation. 1 Not Darius Medus, as Bengorion saith; for he was predecessor to Cyrus. Now it is plain by this Text, that our Darius succeeded Cyrus; And by the tenor of this fourth Chapter we find that the building was letted the days of Cyrus, Assuerus, Artaxerxes, even until the second year of this Darius: therefore our Darius was not only after Cyrus, but after Assuerus and Artaxerxes also. 2 Not Darius Hystaspis, as a joseph. antiq. lib. 11. cap. 3. josephus thought: For, Ezr. 4.6, 7. there is mention of Assuerus and Artaxerxes, who went betwixt Cyrus and our Darius. But Darius Hystaspis was the immediate successor of Cambyses, and Cambyses succeeded Cyrus his father: therefore our Dariuses cannot be Darius Hystaspis. For betwixt Cyrus and our Darius, Ezra mentions two: but betwixt Cyrus and Darius Hystaspis there was but only Cambyses. As for the Magus, he is not in account among the Kings of Persia; either for that he was a tyrant, or else for that he stood but seven months. 3 Therefore this our Darius was Darius Notbus, the son of Axtaxerxes Longimanus, named Ezra 4.7. the father of Artaxerxes Mnemon. CHAP. VII. HEre are six generations left out betwixt Merajoth and that Azariah, Chap. 7. v. 3. The son of Amaziah, the son of Azariah, the son of Merajoth. who was the Priest, as it is 1. Chron. 6. viz. Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok, Ahimaaz, Azariah, jothanan. These were omitted here for brevity sake, because haste is made, to show only, that Ezra came from Aaron, to honour Ezra, and to give him the more authority. And likely it is, that those are passed over who were borne in the time of the Babylonian Captivity: and those set upon record here, as though they had been the very next, whose memory was fresh and most famous, as being Priests about the time the Temple was ruinated. We may say, That he doth set down by name the Catalogue of those his Ancestors only, who flourished during the standing of the Temple. And 'tis a truth, that Ezra was not the immediate, but the mediate son of Serajah: and so Ezra useth the word Son in a many of places. CHAP. VIII. Cap. 10.11. Now therefore make confession unto the Lord God of your Fathers, & do his pleasure, and separate yourselves from the people of the land, and from the strange wives. THe question is, Whether in case a man marry an Amorite, now an infidel; he be to put her away by virtue of this Law? No, by no means: He must keep her, if she will stay with him: as Paul shows, 1. Cor. 7.12. And Peter infers 1. Pet. 3.1. Where he shows, that Christian wives must by their conversation labour to win their husbands, that obey not the Word, (that is) that are Heathens. Therefore they are not bound to part a believing man from an unbelieving wife, Cap. 9.1. Now when these things were done, the Princes came unto me, saying; The people of Israel, and the Priests, and the Levites have not separated themselves from the people of the land, doing according to the abominations even of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the jebusites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites, ver. 2. For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands; yea the hand of the Princes and Rulers hath been chief in this trespass. Cap. 10.44. All these had taken strange wives, and some of them had wives, by whom they had children. a believing wife from an unbelieving and infidel husband. We must say then, that this Law in h Chytraeus in Levit. 18.28. qu. ●. c. etiam citantur. Ezra was a part of Moses policy, which did bind them then, but not us now. Next I say, It did not bind them simply neither: but in case such wives were not Proselytes; but did remain in their superstition. For Salmon did marry Rahab a convert Canaanite, and did well in it: But these in Ezra did persist in their infidelity and superstition. And if Pharaohs daughter were a Proselyte, Solomon did not sin against i Piscator 1. King. 3.1. Solomon's first wife was an Egyptian; but a proselyte. 1. King. 3.1, 2, 3. è verisimile che prima la faccile an marsirat ne●la vera rel●gione è ren unciare all sue idolatry: i. e. 'Tis like he caused her to be instructed in the true religion, and to renounce her Idolatry. Deodat. Italian. Altra ment haualbe peccato contra alla Leg. Deut. 7.3.4. i e. Else he had sinned against the Law. Ibid. La quale benchi reguardi principalment à popoli Cananei male dettis, ha puri una ragione generale del periculo de esser indotro ad Idololatria. i e. Though the place in Deut. 7.6. be chiefly meant of the Canaanites; yet it hath a general reason from the danger of being drawn to Idolatry: Deodat. ibid. that Law of Moses then: much less was he bound to put her away. He is deceived, The Question is, whether in case a man marry an Amorite, now an Infidel, he be to put her away by virtue of this Law? who writes that Solomon did not ill in it, not on this ground, because she was a Proselyte; but because she was none of those seven cursed Nations, named, Deut. 4.7. This evasion is not currant: For though those seven be only named, yet other the like are meant; And Ezra 9.1. the Egyptians are set down by name and the Moabite: Yet Boaz did his duty in marrying of Ruth the Moabitesse, she being now in faith and religion united to the people of God. The sum is: that it was a Law of Moses binding during the time of his policy; That if an Israelite should marry an Infidel, remaining an Infidel, she was to be put away, and it seems her children too: which Law is not in force now: Christians are not bound to it; but do sin if they divorce such wives (very Infidels) that are willing to live with their Christian husbands. CHAP. IX. THis shows that Nehemiah was the penner of this Book. Nehem. 1. v. 1. The words of Nehemiah, the son of Hacheliah, etc. And therefore it is a mistake in k Genebrard. lib. 2. The Engl. Argument on the Book of Nehemiah. those, who make Ezra to be the writer of this Book of Nehemiah. And this appears further, in that he speaketh often of himself in the first person (ay Nehemiah) and not in the third person. For though some, that are makers of a Book do sometimes speak of themselves in the third person (as Matthew and john do in their Gospels, and Moses in his history) [Matthew said, john said, Moses spoke] yet he that is not the author of a Book never speaks of himself in that Book, in the first person; as in this Book often Nehemiah doth. Neither is it any argument that Ezra wrote it, because in the Hebrew editions, it is called Ezra; sith the hebrews did this to tell up the just number of twenty four Books of the old Testament. Both the Books of Samuel stand under his name; yet Samuel was not the writer of all, but part was written by l Sixtus Senensis Bibl. lib. 1. Samuel, some by Nathan, and some by Gad. Vers. 6. Both I and my Fathers have sinned. The conclusion is clear, That we ought to confess the sins of our fathers: but first, m Vid. Fewerbornij disputat. An Deus posteros puniat ob Majorum suorum flagiti●? not to have a pardon for them, when they are dead and gone. 2 Nor that God pardons us their sins, The n Ezek. 18. soul only that sinneth, that shall dye. No guilt necessarily passeth from the father to the son; but that of Adam, together with the sin. There is but one only Original sin. The son is not guilty of the father's sin, any further than he doth make it his own sin also, by some consent; either affirmative, by doing or liking what his father hath done in point of sin; being glad of the broth wherein the abominable thing was sodden, & so subscribes to it, by a tacit and interpretative consent: Or 2 Negative, when we do not descent. A child is bound to humble himself for his father's sins upward, as far as ordinarily he may come to the certain knowledge of them; which sometimes is, to the third and fourth generation. Now if he be not humble and take them to heart, there is a secret consent; because he doth not by this act of humbling show his dissent: And had such a child the occasions and tentations his forefathers had; he would do as they did. And thus he sets his father's sins on his score; and makes them his own. According to that of Daniel to Belshazzar, cap. 5. ver. 22. And thou his son, O Belshazzar, hast not humbled thine heart, though thou knewest all this. viz. Nebuchadnezzars' sin and punishment. In the Legal Covenant of works, the guilt, together with the fault and corruption, did convey itself to the Posterity. Original sin descends by force of that Covenant: And that Commination to visit the sins of the Fathers, hath an eye to the Covenant of the Law. But now in the Evangelicall Covenant of grace, the sin, and the wrath of God, goes no further than the very persons offending: Only God doth sometimes make the father's sins an occasion, never a cause of punishing the child with some greater measure of punishment▪ should personal sins in the guilt, descend from fathers to the children: we should have more Original sins than one. When then in the Word they o Levit. 26.40. were commanded to confess, together with their own sins, the sins of their forefathers: it was not that their forefathers sins, that went no further any way than their forefathers persons, should be remitted to their forefathers being dead, or to them being alive, but that such sins, which they themselves had also in their own proper persons by occasion of the example of their forefathers committed by act or some consent, might be forgiven unto them. So Psal. 79.8. [Remember not,] against whom? Our forefathers? No: But, Remember not [aghasted us former p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iniquitates praecedentium. Rainold. (which we and our Fathers have committed) genev. ●ote. [Le. iniquita depassatis Ital.] i. e. de nostri maggiori, è predecessoni, le quali no● halliamo, seguitate. Deodat. iniquities; that is, such sins as we have committed through the example of our forefathers, at least have one way or another made our own. The Translation reads it [former Iniquities.] Word for word it is in the original, [The Iniquities of those that were before us:] i. e. of our Ancestors. CHAP. X. Cap. 2. v. 8. And a letter unto Asaph the keeper of the Kings ●orest, that he may give me timber to make beams for the gates of the Palace, which appertains to the House, and for the Wall of the City, and for the house that THat is; * I shall ●●ter into. For the house that he himself was to have, being made governor by the King. It appears by Ezr. 6.15. and Nohem. 2.1. that the Temple was built before the walls of the City. The walls of the City were first broken down, and last built up; and that 14. years after the Temple. And one reason hereof is given: for that before in all the former edicts made in behalf of the jews by Cyrus or any other, there was no word as touching the re-edifying of the City, but only to build again the Temple. Paraeus rather is in the truth, who holds, that Cyrus did by edict give leave to build the City: Orat. the 70. hebdom. Dan. but by reason of so great resistance, they could do little or nothing to the City. And therefore Nehemiah gets Letters Patents to build the City, and the walls of the City. And the truth is; That the jews after their return, grew secure and careless, fell to r Vid. Calvin. in Zach. cap. 1. v. 3. marrying strange wives, and other disorders, till the Lord stirred up the spirit and zeal of our Nehemiah, and he never gave over till he had finished the work. So much good may one man of place, power, and zeal, and courage do for the Church. Neither was the Lord wanting to him in his blessed enterprise; But he sent in Haggai and Zachariah, a pair of noble Prophets to encourage the people in the work of the Lord: Neither will the Lord be wanting to any of us in things that are good, if we be not wanting to him and ourselves. As if he should say; Vers. 11. Should such a man as I fly? and who is there that being as I am, would go into the Temple to save his life? I will not go● in. It is not for me that have a calling from God to do what I do, which calling is a sufficient testimony of his assistance and protection, for fear to leave the work begun, and so to discover disobedience and diffidence toward God. junius is of opinion, that he being a stranger, (i. e.) not a Priest, was not by law to go into the Temple: As 'tis Numb. 3.38. But I rather follow Deodate, who seems to like better to say, That he would not flee to the Temple, because it was for malefactors, who used to take sanctuary there to shift for their lives. Exod. 21.14. 1. King. 1.51. & 2.28. S●majah, who persuaded him to run to the Temple, was a Priest, and he did put a colour of retired Religion on it too. So that even Priests were found ready to hinder the building of the Wals. But Nehemiah did look to God and not to Man, and therefore in the next verse he saith: He perceived that God had not sent him, for that he went about to draw him from his vocation, which had a sure foundation. We must not suffer, no not Divines themselves, to turn us out of our callings, places, and duties. CHAP. XI. Chap. 8.1. And all the people gathered themselves together as one man into the street that was before the water-gate: and they spoke unto Ezra the Scribe, to bring the Book of the Law of Moses, which the Lord had commanded to Israel. HEre we see how forward the people were: they called upon Ezra; and Ezra thought it not much to be stirred up by the people to do his duty. The wind of God's spirit bloweth where it lifteth, and sometimes beginneth with the common people. The duty that they pressed Ezra unto, was a plain Text, Deut. 33.10, 11. where God commanded in the feast of Tabernacles, that the Law should be read unto the people. Where the people have Scripture for it, they must say to Archippus, Do thy duty. Ver. 8. So they read in the Book in the Law of God distinctly, and gat● t●e sense, 〈◊〉 caused them to understand the reading. The people were too many to be taught by one: and therefore they made sundry companies and congregations, and had many Doctors of the Law to teach them. Therefore it is said: [They read] in the Book. And having read, they gave the sense, and made the people to understand thereading. The meaning is, That by s Nehem. 8.8. comparing places of the word of God, they did clearly expound to them the meaning. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. ●a●ant intelligenciam per ipsam Scripturam, They g●ve, the sense by the Scripture itself. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 testimoniis, by conferring of places. Aug. lib. q. 83. quaest. 69. tom. 4. Bretewood in his Inquiries, Chap. 9 Reading & expounding, or preaching, have used of old to go together. So in the case of Philip and the Eunuch. And Act. 13.15. After the lecture of the Law & Prophets, the Rulers of the Synagogue sent unto them, saying: Men & brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on. We see more Scriptures were read than were presently expounded: yet when reading of the word was, there used to be expounding of some portion. 'tis a poor conceit to say, That before the Captivity there was nothing but bare reading; but after, when the people had lost much of their Language and did hardly understand the Tongue, that then literal expounding came in by learned men that had the skill of the Tongue: As Schoolmasters do, when they construe lessons to their boys in Grammar Schools. As though [giving of the sense] had been nothing but a grammatical interpretation of the word. Preaching is ancienter than so. Noah was a Preacher of righteousness: And Acts 15.21. Moses of old time hath in every City them that preach him; seeing he is read in the Synagogue every Sabbath day. Moses of old, (i. e.) from the first time, Vid. Syrum Paraphrastem. from the very beginning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ab aetatibus antiquis. A phrase never used of the Ages, only since the Captivity. And that it is said, Moses, and not Moses and the Prophets, as Acts 13.15. it seems to me to note the times of Moses Law before the Prophets were. The word translated Reading, is u Vid. Pagnin. jon. 3.4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which doth properly signify an Assembly, or Convocation: and here the Scripture is named by that name, to show us, That the holy Scripture ought to be read in the Congregation and Assembly. 2. Chron. 17.9. jehosaphat sent Levites and Priests, who taught in judah, and had the Book of the Law of the Lord with them, and went about throughout all the Cities of judah, and taught the people. This teaching was our preaching, not only construing the words to the people; for in those days the commo● people had not lost any of the language, but understood the Hebrew perfectly. Take it then for a truth, That before and after the Captivity, the Church of the jews had their Teachers who did expound and preach unto them the meaning of the Scriptures: And Ezra with the rest here are said to interpret, not the words, but the meaning. They gave the sense, that is, not the literal sense of the Hebrew words, which the jews understood full well, but the spiritual sense. I cannot believe that the jews in Captivity lost the use of their native Tongue; and I think it not credible, that the jews in the space of seventy years should so forget their native Tongue, they being a people so scrupulous as they were, to have no more commerce with strangers than needs must. And lastly Haggai, Zachary and Malachy, who lived and wrote after the Captivity, did speak and write to the people in the pure Hebrew Language: Which they would not have done, but that the people understood the Language. The Hebrews were in Egypt 220. in Chaldea but 70. In Egypt they were held to greater bondage l Daniel styles the Chaldaean Monarchy Golden, by reason of the kind and free usage the people of God found in their captivity there. than in Babylon; yet they brought with them the purity of the Language out of Egypt. What? kept it 220. years in Egypt and not 70. years in Babel? Daniel indeed hath a tincture of Chaldee writing in the Captivity, and he being in Chaldaea. CHAP. XII. That is, Cap. 9.8. And foundest his heart, (i. e. abraham's) faithful before thee, and madest a Covenant with him. he gave him a faithful heart first, and then finds his heart faithful, not by nature, but by grace; and makes a Covenant with him: So * Epist. 107. Augustine▪ Pravenit hominis voluntatem, nec eam cujusquam invenit in cord, sed facit. God doth at first, not find, but make our wills and hearts good. So Aquinas, y Aquin. 1.2. q. 114. art. 5. ad. 2. Non ●●men ita quòd prius dig●i fuerint, sed quia ipse per grat iam eos facit dignos: qui stolus pote facere mundum de immundo conceptum semine. God is said to give grace to the worthy: not that they are worthy before he gives them grace; but because he by grace maketh them worthy: who only can cleanse that which is unclean. He than doth abuse plain places of Scripture, Vers. 20. Thou gavest also thy good spirit to instruct them. who doth hold, that the spirit teacheth not, but stirs up motions to learn. It doth both. It follows not to infer: that if we say, the Spirit teacheth, we must grant anabaptistical Revelations. Did we say, that the Spirit did teach by rote, without the book, that were to join with the Anabaptists: but to hold that the Spirit teacheth by the word, is to speak with the Scripture, Ephes. 1.17. The Spirit is called the Spirit of Revelation in the knowledge of him. 1. Cor. 2.13. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth; but which the holy Ghost teacheth. That men pretend the Spirit, is no Argument against the teaching of the Spirit: for men do as much pretend the Church, and do father their fancies on the Church. As for inward teaching without the word we leave that to the Anabaptists, and to the Papist, who doth affix and appropriate an infallible teaching to the private spirit of the Pope▪ Which spirit, the Papist in the Pope, and the Anabaptist in his Enthusiast, make the Standard of all truth, and superior to the word. But to say that the Spirit teacheth in and by the word, by z vid. Doughty, of Divine mysteries: p. 24. Inspirations (saith he) examined by the touch of sacred writ, may be a rule: but I mean not new revelations, respectu doctrinae revelatae, but new, enlightening both the Organ, and Object. enlightening us, and casting a clearing light on the word also, is that which here we read in Nehemiah, and hath gone for good and sound doctrine, till of late it hath been otherwise taught without ground. CHAP. XIII. Cap. 8 v. 9 Then Nehemiah, which is Tirshasha, and Ezra the Priest and Scribe. TIrshasha is a Persian word, and signifieth a man in high Office about the Prince; and such an one was Nehemiah. Other there were that did bear the like office: as Nehem. 7.70. 'tis said; The Tirshasha gave to the Treasure a thousand drams of gold. But this Tirshasha is some other officer, and not our Nehemiah. We see the great goodness of God, who did prefer to great place and favour some of his servants, about Heathen Princes: And it is a comfort, that if God send us or ours into the Countries or Courts of Pagans, yet he can prefer us then, and preserve us there. Nehemiah is very great, and holds his goodness. And Daniel with the rest were in as high place of dignity and command as ever they could have been, had the Court and Commonwealth of Israel stood. Doubt nothing: as long as we follow God: God can keep us to our consciences, and our consciences to him in Babylon itself. Let us teach our posterity to pray and believe: and though they have not one penny in their purses, yet faith and prayer will carry them all the world over. And if God in his providence make them great in a land of Persians, in the houses or Courts of Pagans; faith will keep them good. This Feast of Booths, Vers. 17. And all the Congregation of them that were come again out of the Captivity made Booths, and sat under the Booths. For since the time of joshuah the son of Nun unto this day, had not the children of Isra●el done so: and there was very great joy. was a Feast of 7. days: and it had these uses. 1 That all Generations might by it understand, that when Israël came out of Egypt, the Lord made them to dwell in Booths. 2 To remember their misery past. 3 To look for redemption by the death of Christ. And therefore Zacharie makes the signification of this holy feast to be to show us, That the memory of Christ redeeming us by his death, Zach. 14.16, 17, 28, 19 is to be kept with all manner of spiritual joy. 4 Of thankfulness for their fruits; it being kept at this time. Vers. 18. And he read in the Book of the Law of God every day, from the first day unto the last: and they kept the feast 7. days: and on the 8. day a solemn Assembly according to the manner. But was this Feast disused since Iosua's time? What? for a matter of 1000 years; such a Feast as this, so expressly commanded by God, so utterly omitted in the times of so many godly Princes and Priests? I think not; rather that it had not been kept with such devotion and celebration from josuah till now: (which I think is the reason why mention is here made of the Feast of Booths.) For here we find, v. 18. That all the 7. days, day after day, the Book of the Law of God was read, and they had Congregations to that purpose each day, and then they had a solemn Assembly on the 8. day according to the manner. By which word we see, that the manner had been to have a solemn assembly on the 8. day. But it seems, the manner had not been to have Assemblies and reading from the first day to the last day; no not from Iosua's time, as it was now: So that in Iosuah's time, they did use to read the Law in such order and manner, as they did now. In Levit. 23.35.36. there is required a holy Convocation, only the first day and the last 8. day. Did they more now in this Feast, than the very Law itself required? If they did, they must have warrant from the Spirit of God by some revelation made to Nehemiah, Ezra, or some other for it; which appears not: or else, who required this at their hands, to do more than God commanded? And therefore I leave I●nius and Deodate in this, and do rather think, that in the Feast of Booths, by the very Law, reading of the Word was a Deut. 31.11. required all the days, though that the first & last were days of restraint, more solemn Convocations and great holy-days, in which they might do no work, as they might in the interim days. And so john 3.7. the last is called the great day of the Feast. I think there had been an omission of (such) reading of the Law, viz. day after day, which was required by the institution in the Law, & had been in use till Iosuah's time, but was discontinued from his time till now; and now was brought into use again. The manner had been continued to read on the 8. day, the solemn day: but now it was done every day of the Feast of Tabernacles. And therefore mention is made of the solemnising of this Feast of Booths in this place; to show that there was a great reformation of a disuse, which crept in anon upon Iosuah's days, and had continued in the Church in very godly times now 1000 years. We see that a neglect in Divine worship may continue long in the Church, in the times of the best men. 2 Though it have lasted ever so long, yet it is our duty to do what we can to set it right again at the last. This Feast was celebrated in Booths made of the boughs of green trees, in remembrance of God's favours to them in the wilderness; at which time they had their dwelling in Booths. The chief sort of Trees are named: and for Palms, 'tis observed that they carried them in their hands; It being an old wont, that branches of Palms were carried as signs of b Pausanias' in Areadicis. Plutarch. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 4. c. 5. victory and great joy. Hereby, saith Henry A●sworth on Levit. 23.40. we may see the reason, why at Christ's coming to Ierusal●m (though at another time of the year) the people and children strawed the way with branches of trees, and took branches of Palmtrees, and went forth to meet him, and cried Hosanna: Mat. 21.8.9. Io●. 12.13. For all the Legal Feasts (saith he) had their accomplishment in him, and to him the honour and solemnity of every Feast did by right appertain. So he. But what if these did it only to testify their joy and exultation? it being a custom in all nations to show their joy with boughs: And they being to entertain Christ, a King, did it with garments and boughs; such things as came next to hand. Besides, the boughs in the Feast of the jews, were more for their remembrance of dwelling in Booths in the wilderness, than for joy. Again, this was not at the Feast of Tabernacles and Booths, that Christ came to jerusalem; and were it not better to say, That these jews old and young did what they did by some instinct from heaven, than only to imitate a custom of a Feast performed at another time of the year, that all might understand that which David had prophesied of the Messias to come, was now fulfilled in Christ? For certain, neither humane counsel, nor imitation of a custom, but only a divine inspirement could make infants to do as here in Matthew we read that they did. Matth. 21.15, 16. CHAP. XIIII. Cap. 11. COmpare the eleventh Chapter with 1. Chron. 9.2. and you shall find that the number is greater in the Chronicles, than here. The answer is; that here only those are reckoned who inhabited jerusalem by lot: But in the Chronicles we have those also recorded, who went willingly and of their own accord, & therefore the sum is greater. CHAP. XV. BY son is here meant the Nephew of jojada, Cap. 13.28. And one of the sons of jehojada, the son of Eliash●b the high Priest, was the son in law of Sanballat the Horonite: but I chased him from me. the brother of jaddua the high Priest: his name was Manasses an Apostata: he did marry the daughter of Sanballat the Horonite, i. e. a Moabite * Esai. 15.5. jer. 48.3. of Horonajim: And because he could not continue in the Priesthood by reason he had a strange wife; he was minded to turn away his wife, that he might not be turned out of his Office. Now to keep him to his wife, Sanballat undertook to build a Temple, every way as stately and as goodly as that at jerusalem: and, that it might have the more honour, on Mount c judg. 9.7. joseph. lib. 11. cap. ult. Antiq. Gerazim, hard by the City Sichem, and that Manasses should be chief Priest of the Temple. Which Sanballat, having first got leave of Alexander, did perform; and from this beginning came that famous schism as touching the place where sacrifices were to be offered, betwixt the Samaritans and the jews. joh. 4.20. Before God had pointed out a place, they did worship on high places where they pleased: but, when once the Lord had chosen Mount Moriah, and set his Name there, it was unlawful to sacrifice any where but there. And though before, Abraham and jacob and others did please God with the high places; yet afterwards, the Kings of Israel are shent for that they did not demolish the high places. Yet still for other kinds of Worship which were not tied to one place, as sacrifices were, the jews and d Luc. 6.12. Rainold. praelect. 186. Christ himself (the policy of the jews being not buried) did use many times to go up to a mountain, an high place to pray. But sacrifices, they were only at jerusalem; and whereas the Samaritans did pretend the Fathers, meaning by [Fathers] jacob, and perhaps Abraham too; yet it was but a pretence; For they came not of jacob but of the e 2. King. 17. race of the Assyrians: neither was the Temple on Mount Gerazim ancienterthan the time of this Manasses. And this Manasses marrying the daughter of Sanballat the Moabite, a great man in place and power, bred this schism. jacob did set up an Altar near Sichem; Gen. 33.18.20. but it was before God had confined his worship and sacrifices to one place. As for a Temple, there was none besides that at jerusalem, till Sanballat on this occasion did build one: which Temple remains in the East unto this day. e A me & à vobis recedant, qui dicunt, Nolumus esse meliores quam Paties nostri. Bern. ep. 93. Chrysost. 1. Cor. 2. Hom. 8. in Morali. They use to brag most of antiquity that have least cause, and have no better arguments for themselves than to follow their false and foolish Ancestors. The last clears all the rest: * Remember me, O my God, for good. Cap. 5.19. Think upon me, my God, for good, according to all that I have done for this people. Cap. 13.15. Remember me O my God concerning this, & wipe not out my good deeds that I have done for the house of my God, and for the officers thereof. He produceth his good deeds as testimonies of his sincerity, and of that willing mind that was in him to do God service: which will of his notwithstanding came from God, not from himself. He prays the Lord not to charge his sin upon him committed in other matters: and in the good he did, he begs of God that he would regard only his sincerity, and think upon him in mercy. He brags not, but prays; Vers. 22. Remember me, O my God, concerning this also; and spare me according to the greatness of thy mercy. produceth the good which through the grace of God he had done, yet claims nothing as due in justice, but sues to God to remember him in mercy & goodness. No thought of merit, where the suit is, to be spared according to the greatness of God's mercy. CHAP. XVI. An Appendix. SAint f De Civit. Dei: lib. 18. cap. 48. Cyril. lib. 5. in Genesin. Ambros. l. 3. cap. 10. Augustine by the later house understands the Church of the Christians, Haggai. 2.9. The glory of the later house shall be greater than the former, saith the Lord of Hosts: and in this place I will give peace, saith the Lord of Hosts. whereof the later house was a Type: but this needs not; sith it holds true in the history and the letter. For the later Temple built by Zerubbabel did come to greater glory, than ever that had which was built by Solomon. As for the opinion of g Lib. 15. cap. 14. josephus, that Herod did demolish Zerubbabels', and build another in the place of it; it is exploded: And the truth is; That h Sanct. in Hag. c. 2.10. Herod did not build a new, but beautify the old. In outward glory the former Temple did excel the last beyond comparison. Besides the excessive deal of gold that was in the former, 1. King. 6. there were five things in the Temple of Solomon, which were not in that of Zerubbabel. 1 The Cloud, an Emblem of God's presence. 2 Fire, which consumed the sacrifice. 3 Urim & Thummim. Though i Antiq. lib. 3. cap. 9 josephus say it lasted till 200. years before his time: but he is out in this. 4 The Ark. 5 The succession of Prophets, which went on under the former house without any great interruption. Some little pause there was sometimes: but God used to stir up Prophet upon Prophet. In the Captivity, Ezekiel prophesied till about the 14. year of that Captivity when the City was smitten: Ezek. 40.1. After we read not of any till towards the return. Then stood forth k These were but few: and they were rather writing than preaching Prophets. Daniel, Haggai, Zacharie, who were whiles the Temple was in building; Malachi, when it was new built: As we see by his reproving of that sin in corrupting the holy seed, by marrying stranger's. ( * Bibl. sanct. 1.1. Sixt●s Senē●is cannot prove his opinion, who placeth him as low as about 500 years afore Christ,) & therefore Malachy doth close up all▪ by referring the Church to the written Law. Signs and miracles did wear out, and prophecies were no more. Now this great eclipse was to tell the Church, that the great Prophet was to be expected, john 3. in whom all prophecies, signs, miracles were to meet. Besides those that were burnt, many of the things of the Temple were carried away in the first deportation under Io●akim; many in the second under jeconiah, and the clean riddance was made in the third under Zedekiah. 2. Chron. 3.18. 2. King. 24.13. jer. 25.19. & 27.19, 21. The Scripture nameth those of Brass and the lesser, much more than those of Gold and the greater. For it appears by Ezekiel 9.3. That the Ark was not carried away with jeconiah, but under Zedekiah. For in that place we find, that the Prophet had revealed unto him, that the time was now at hand, when the Ark and the Cherubius should be destroyed, and the whole City made a prey. Now Ezekiel wrote in the 5. year of jehoiakim, and lived until the twenty fifth. And we find, that shortly after in the days of Zedekiah all was lost and gone. 2. King. 24.15. The Tabernacle and Altar of incense were carried away before. For among the Treasures of the Lord● house there spoken of, were the Tabernacle and the golden Altar. Now in that there were so many ornaments of note and use in the former Temple, that were not in the later; we conclude, That Solomon's Temple did far surpass Zerubbabels' in outward glory. And therefore, whereas the Prophet doth preach here; That the second house shall put down the first house in glory, and they by experience should find no such matter in regard of outward pomp: (whether they respected frame and building, or furniture) they were then to look to the person of the Messiah, who should and did honour the second house with his bodily presence: which made it glorious spiritually; and shed his blood to reconcile all to himself, during the state of the later Temple. And therefore it is in our Text; And I will give peace, meaning inward spiritual peace; Peace in heaven, Luc. 19.38. Luc. 2.14. Eph. 2.14. peace on earth: Christ jesus being our peace. Though this second Temple was built by Zerubbabel; yet it was called commonly Solomon's Temple. I am sure that a Porch was usually called Solomon's Porch: joh. 10.23. Acts. 3.11. & 5.12. whether because Solomon built this Porch long after the finishing of the Temple; and others doing the like, this was for distinction called Solomon's Porch: or rather (sith question may be made of the truth of that story in josephus) because it was by Zerubbabel built in the very same place, De bell. judaic. c. 6. l. 6. and right after the same form that solomon's was; Deodat. annot. on Ital. Transl. that therefore it kept the old name. The gate of this Porch was called Beautiful: and the Prince did only enter in thereat, and not the people; Ezek. 44.3. for the people entered in at the North gate, Ezek. 46.9. and at the South. CHAP. XVII. Dan. c. 1.8. WHy defile himself? Dan. cap. 1. v. 8. But Daniel had determined in his heart, that he would not defile himself with the King's meat: nor with the wine which he drank. Because, Deut. 14.3. Dan. 5.4. 1. It was often such as was against the Law of God. Rom. 14.21. 2 Used so, as would defile them, being against the word of God. 1. Cor. 10.20. Dan. 1.7, 8. 3. Daniel saw, that the King's love and provisions were not single and sincere; but that he meant his own profit: which his fellows also Ananias, Mishael and Azari●s saw. Dan. 1.12. The King's drift in training them up, that they might stand before him, was, that they should attend him as Courtiers in his Palace: And (they being of the blood royal, and seed of the Nobility) that he might thereby better assure the Land of judah. Vers. 4.19. Vers. 3. But did not Daniel afterwards eat? He did, when he was in his greatness, and could command what sort of diet he himself pleased; such as neither in nature nor use was against the levitical Law of God. The jews were not bound to the judicial Law indeed; but only within the Kingdoms of Israel: For Daniel and Mordecay were great Officers and Magistrates in foreign parts; and no question, they did minister justice according to the national laws and customs of those Countries, and not according to the levitical and judicial Laws of Moses: But yet the jews were most strictly tied all the world over to an exact observation of the Ceremonial and levitical Laws of God: and therefore Daniel, though out of his Country, durst not eat, lest he should defile himself by transgressing the Ceremonial Law. * Cap. 2.46, 47. Then the King Nabuchadnezzar fell upon his face, and bowed himself unto Daniel, and commanded that they should offer meat offerings and sweet odours unto him. Also the King answered Daniel, and said; Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of Gods and a Lord of Kings, and a revealer of secrets, seeing thou couldst reveals this secret. Nabuchadnezzar being amazed with the work of Daniel, went about, in his person and by his command to make a god of him. Had he only bowed to him in reverence, in that affection which may well be towards a Prophet of the Lord, (as Alexander did to the high k joseph. antiq. l. 11. cap. 8. Gen. 13.29.41. 2. Sam. 10. Priest, and is indeed lawful to be done,) Daniel might have accepted it: But the King went too too far; and that act of his to command meat offerings & sweet odours to be offered to him, was flagrant Idolatry: and therefore it could not stand with the piety of Daniel, who would not so much as eat of the King's meat, to give the least entertainment to any such Idolatry. And though it be not expressed in so many words, yet it is plain enough; that Daniel did reprove this fact of the King, and thereupon was nothing done. And the words themselves in Nebuchadnezzars' reply give us this meaning. The King answered unto Daniel (saith the text): therefore Daniel had spoken his l Lyran. Peter. Sanctius ad locum Tremel. Deodat. è ●ostris. Gal. 4.14. Acts. 10.25. & 14.13. & 28.6. mind to the King, though the words be left out (Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of Gods) This shows, that Daniel had informed, that there was but One only God, and that Divine worship was due to that One God only. We may receive Prophets and Preachers as Angels: but we must not receive them as Gods. Dan. 4.53. The same hour was the thing fulfilled upon Nebuchad●ezzar: and he was driven from men, and did eat grass as Oxen: and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till his hairs were grown like feathers, and his ●ailes like birds claws. Some have said that Nabuchadnezzar was metamorphosed into a very beast: but it is the truer opinion to say, that his malady was in mind not in body. God struck him with a kind of melancholy madness: Insomuch that he lost all judgement, sense, and use of reason; living and doing like a beast of the field. His life was a wild kind of life, out of the communion of men. And they may as well say, he was turned into an Eagle, because it is said, that his hairs were grown like Eagles, as to affirm that he was changed into an Ox, because he is said to eat grass like Oxen. The conclusion would as well be, that he was converted into Oxen; because as our Translation reads it according to the original, it is not said [as an ox] but [as the oxen] in the plural number. Pride hath been punished with the heaviest hand of God: The Angels through Pride lost their habitation, and are now in Hell. It was Pride that made of an Angel a Devil, turned them out of Heaven into Hell. Adam through Pride lost himself, and all his posterity, as far as lay in him, was cast out and kept out of Paradise; and was the cause of all the sins and sorrows, that have been, are, or shall be in the world. Nabuchadnezzar a mighty Monarch, for his Pride made for seven years a wild man, lost the use of reason and lived like a beast: and 'tis worse to be like a beast than to be a beast (saith the Philosopher.) And Herod another King, as proud as he, for his very pride in admitting only of the Acclamation (It is the voice of God, and not of man) he did not procure it: behold he is, for suffering divine honour to be given to him, & affecting to be a lousy God, eaten up of worms. The God of glory hath ever resisted the proud afar off: whatever he gives to any, he will not give his glory to another. When Satan came once to look after divine honour, Mat. 4. Christ puts him off with a short answer; Avoid Satan. CHAP. XVIII. A chief sin, Nehem. 13.17. Then I contended with the Nobles of judah, and said unto them. What evil thing is this that ye do, and profane the Sabbath? for which the children of judah were carried into Captivity, was, as ye see, because their fathers had profaned the Sabbath; God's judgements ever following this sin, as the shadow doth the body. And see! the hand of God was scarce off them; but this people are mad after their profits, and do abuse the Sabbath as bad, if not worse than ever. So, almost impossible it is for a man to cast out of his heart and life, sins that bring in profit▪ which, Vers. 18. Did not your Father's th●e? and did not our God bring all this evil upon us and upon this City? yet ye bring more wrath upon Israel, by profaning the Sabbath. Nehemiah coming with authority from the great King, as a Lord Deputy, makes use of his Commission to redress. This was so grand an affront to the Ordinances of God; suffer this, and suffer all: and therefore we find him here round with them. And he works upon them first with words, and if that would not do, than he threatens blows; and found success. Here we see, that as Nehemiah a Civil Magistrate; Vers. 19 And it came to pass, that when the gates of jerusalem began to be dark before the Sabba●h, I commanded, that the gates should be shut, and charged, that they should not be opened till after the Sabbath. And some of my servants set I at the gates, that there should no burden be brought in on the Sabbath day. so Civil Magistrates now may and must take strict courses for the settling and keeping in order of the Service of God. They do them the greatest wrong, who would turn them over to the second Table. The Kings of Israel were most curious of all in matters of God's worship: and can we find, that ever they went or sent to jerusalem to know the pleasure of the high Priest? And in their steps did the Kings of Christendom tread for many Ages: Begin with Constantine and down to Charles the Great, and some years after. The Emperors have ever took it, and used it, as the chiefest flower in their Crown, and the principal Verb in the Office; to carry the sway in disposing of the things belonging to the managing of the worship of God; Vers. 20. So the Merchants and sellers of all kind of ware lodged without jerusalem once or twice. Vers. 21. Then I testified against them, and said unto them: Why lodge ye about the Wall? If ye do so again, I will lay hands on you. From that time forth came they no more on the Sabbath. And that without once looking after any power in or from the Bishop of Rome. The matter we look after is, That by this of Nehemiah we see, that it was not held by him a lawful thing for them then to work; or for him to suffer them to work on the Sabbath in times of harvest. Their treading of winepresses doth evince, that the time was harvest time; in that the work was an harvest work. A custom they had got to keep a shambles, a fair on that day, and to labour at their harvest. Nehemiah saw that Religion would soon die, if thus they might go on. And therefore he gave not over, till he had made them give over. Authority in the hands of a resolute man is of great force and use. As touching harvest-worke, in my mind, the question were at an end, if we did but distinguish betwixt ordinary and usual Cases; (and then, as we have most reason to serve God in harvest, and most need of rest, we and our people, when we use to labour most; common understanding will grant, that then there lies a probition against labour.) And extraordinary and unusual occasions. And so who doubts, but it is lawful then to labour? Indeed when the case stands in aequilibrio; and one is as like as the other; and no man can say, but the precious fruits of the earth are as like to be saved as spoilt: here my opinion is, That we are to put the matter into the hands of God. But when the case stands so, that either we must work, or there is a moral certainty, that the fruits of the harvest will receive a sensible hurt, to the prejudice of our life or livelihood; here I conceive it to be a duty to work: Here, I say, we break the Sabbath, except we break it. Christ saith, That the Priests labouring in the Temple, Matth. 12.5. did profane the Sabbath: m Marc. 2.27 Vid. Maldonat. and yet were guiltless. How so? profane and yet guiltless? Because those their Temple-workes (had it not been on such occasions) would have been a profanation of the Sabbath. The sense of a Law, is the Law: and in the sense of the Law, the labour of the Priests was an hallowing of the Sabbath: But in the mere Letter; (which the Pharisees, with whom Christ did dispute, did follow) it was, to see to, a profanation of the Sabbath: but in the true meaning they did sanctify, and not profane it. Right so: In case of necessity, we profane the Sabbath, except we profane it: we perish, except we perish. For necessity herein hath no law: and it doth add a new relation to the work we do; no new Ens, but a Modus Entis. And there is not the greatest toil in the world; but in this sense, it is a keeping of the n Vid. Bound. lib. 1. pag. 217. Walae. de 4. precept. p. 129. Sabbath holy. For the Sabbath was made for man (i. e.) not only for the very being of Man; but for his well-being. And therefore whatsoever by necessity, without fraud or covin, is to be done on that day for the comfort of man, that now is turned into a very Sabbath-worke. I bind not man in a Mathematical manner to points of Physical necessity. And therefore, if it stand for the conveniency of Man, and there were nothing to the o When thou canst not do it before, nor well defer it after the Sabbath. So Zauch. in 4. praec. contrary (à parte ante, nor à parte post,) I mean, that it might not have been done as well before, or deferred till after the Sabbath: so I call it a necessary Worke. Christ cured some upon the p Matth. 12.1. It appears by Luc. 6.1. that it was the 7. day of unleavened bread: which was a Ceremonial Sabbath: But yet by Christ's justifying of them from the Priests profaning the weekly Sabbath guiltlessely, it is plain, that the reason of both sorts of Sabbaths in this was alike. Luk. 13.15. Sabbath day, whose life lay not upon it, but that they might have stayed till the morrow: And the Disciples in that of plucking the Ears of Corn (wherein they are justified by Christ) were not in that extremity, but they might have put it off, till they came to Town: and therefore they were to do many corporal works on the Sabbath, and were yet guiltless; nay guilty even of breaking the Sabbath, except they did do them. And as the Sabbath was made for man; so for the creature too, for the Ox, the Ass, etc. And therefore when the creature, that is, a necessary creature, is in danger of receiving any notorious damage, that may make it unserviceable for man, did they break the Sabbath if they did work to save it? No, The Sabbath was broken, except they did work: Neither is it any thing to say, we must rather let our hay and corn fall into, and lie in the suddes, and accept therein the chastisement of our sins. What? and perhaps famish? And must we suffer our Ox to stick in the mire, as a rod from God? What? not lift the poor Ox out? And yet a man that is rich feels no loss in an Ass or a sheep: Luk. 14.5. Matth. 12.11. In mercy then to the poor creature we must let all lie and see it done. It is a conclusion held on all hands, That an house on fire is warrant enough for a whole Parish to lay about them on the Sabbath day, to quench it. And is not water as unmerciful an element as fire? Yea to preserve life, man did q josh. 6.4. 1. King. 20.29. Zanch. in 4. praec. Danae. eth. Christ. lib. 2. cap. 10. Walae. in 4. precept. p. 115. fight and r 2. King 19.1. Thom. ●●. 2 ae. q. 122. art. 4. flee on the Sabbath day; and did well. Then we conclude, That in mercy to the creature, (to preserve it) in mercy to ourselves, (to preserve that which doth preserve us in good liking) and in both (to show our obedience to God) work at any bodily work we must on the Sabbath; and are free. Nehemiahs' case lay not in such exigents: and therefore Nehemiah did like himself, in reproving and reforming. Nothing is to be concluded against what I have said, out of that in Exodus, That in harvest, they were to cease on the seventh day. I have read an answer, That this was a privilege of that Nation, that they had a Wri● of protection against all Inundations: As God undertook for them during their journey up to the anniversary Feasts, to keep all well and safe at home the while; So the promise of the former and latter rain in season, was a peculiar to the Israelites. But what needs this, sith a reconciliation is at hand; that this prohibition is to be construed with the exception still of necessity? s Tremel. in Mark. 2.1. Tremellius, a jew by nature, is of the mind, that by very Talmud, dangers of life, though not evident, were cause enough for a jew to work upon the Sabbath day. And t Lyra in Exod. 20. Lyra another Christian of the same Nation, writing on the very words of the Law, is plain, that for all the words of the Law, it was lawful to do those works which could not well be deferred to the next day, nor done the day before. He saith not, which could not simply be deferred; but, which could not well be deferred: His meaning is in v In Casualibus. casualties, as he himself calls them. A main observation out of the words of Nehemiah is, touching the persons with whom Nehemiah is said here to contest. Our last and best Translation reads it, Nobles: I have read, that it were fitter to translate it, Freemen. And this is, to bear out an Opinion, that even among the jews a servant did not sin in working on the Sabbath day, in case his Master command him: As though Nehemiah had contested with all and with only Freemen: and that therefore the servants were in no blame. x Manual. cap. 13. n. 7. Navarrus to help this his Opinion, puts in two Clauses of exception: One is, That the servant is to hear one Mass: the other; that the Master do not enjoin him work on the holy day in contempt: If he do, than the servant is rather to dye the death, than to work at his Master's command. CHAP. XIX. A word of the Argument, and then more at large of the proof of the Argument. Say, the word did signify Masters (which it doth not;) yet I deny the Argument: He contested with the Masters; therefore the Masters only were in fault. And the reason why I deny it; because I find it granted, that the servants would have rested with thanks, if they had not been constrained to work. What needs then to urge the servants to do that, which of themselves they would fain do? The Masters were chief in fault: therefore he contests with them. The Masters had in their power to reform all: therefore Nehemiah, like a wise and just Prince deals with them. He was a Magistrate, and his business being not for correction of what was done, but for reformation, that they might do so no more; whom in reason should he speak unto, but the Superiors? mend them, mend all. The servants would come in of themselves: if they would not, the Masters had power to force them to it whether they would or not. Me thinks then, it is an argument to be pitied, to fall from the pen of any learned man, and from this to conclude, That the Servants did not sin, because in that sabbatical reformation Nehemiah did contest with the Masters, and not with them by name. But what if we prove out of this very Chapter, That Nehemiah did contest with all, Servants and all? Look but into the 15. verse, and there we read, that Nehemiah saw some treading winepresses on the Sabbath day (and these are confessed to be Servants) and bringing in sheaves, and lading Asses, as also wine, grapes, and figs, and all manner of burdens which they brought into jerusalem on the Sabbath day. All these, or the most of these, I am sure, were Servants: For who used to bear burdens, but the Servants? And were not these in fault? Else, why did Nehemiah contest with them? He was to deal wisely and justly. The Text saith, That he testified against them: and therefore not only the work was done by them; but a y There was not only Voluntas facti, sed peccati. sin was committed by them. As good an Argument as the former might have arose to infer, That only Servants were in the sin, because he testified againsts the Servants, and not the Masters by name. But the thing we look is not to be denied: and that is, Because here, ver. 15. Nehemiah testified against the Servants that did bear burdens, that therefore They did sin. For we have it confessed, that they would not have trodden the winepresses, nor carried the burdens, except their Masters had commanded them. And therefore, albeit their Masters did charge them to do it: just and wise Nehemiah did testify against those Servants, for those works on the Sabbath day; which works they did in obedience to their Masters. And out of this, he that hath half an eye may see, that the Servants did sin. He did look besides the Book then, who did and durst write, That Nehemiah did not reprove the Servants, by whose employment and labour these things were done: For, the Text is express, That Nehemiah did testify first against them; The Servants that did tread the Presses, and bear the Burdens, ver. 15. and then the Nobles, ver. 17. Once more from the very Text in hand, I prove That Servants, as servants, were in the same sin with their Masters; though not in the same point and degree of sinning. I say in the sin as sin, to shut out all cavil. For 'tis a very riddle to me in a matter so express and evident, a servant should concur to the fact, and not to the fault. I mean so far as to make them guilty as well as the master, though not so much as the Master. Thus I argue. Those, whom Nehemiah did contest against, ver. 21. were in a sin (else he dealt, nor justly, nor wisely to contend with them.) But besides the Merchants, those were sellers of all kinds of ware: I think, the most of them, I am sure many, were servants. For who be they that in all trades, places, markets, fairs, sell? What? Not the servants as well as the Master? Therefore they did sin. Again, Those whom Nehemiah threatened to lay hands on, were in a sin in Nehemiah's opinion; else neither his wisdom, nor justice would, that he should lay them up. But he said, he would lay hands on the sellers of all kinds of ware, who lodged about the Walls of jerusalem. And amongst these sellers, there must needs be many servants. Neither doth Nehemiah threaten some, but all (indefinitely) the Sellers: for sellers of all kinds of ware, is all one with all sellers of wares. The terms are aequipollent: And therefore servants were in fault. Now how poor and weak this kind of disputing is, we will show out of Nehemiah 5. v. 7. There Nehemiah is said to rebuke the z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nobles and a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rulers, for that they did exact usury of their Brethren. The word englished Nobles is by the Septuagint (who being jews, are said to know best the sense of their own Language) I say, the word is by them translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [men of renown] and it must mean such, because in order they are before Magistrates. Well then; Can any man once imagine, that men of fame and renown only did put their money to hire? And yet we see Nehemiah then and there is said to contest with the Nobles and Rulers only by name. Is it not now a simple piece of Logic, thus to argue? Nehemiah contested with the Nobles and Rulers only for Usury: therefore Usury was a fin only in Nobles and Rulers; or that none were Usurers then but the Nobles and Rulers. Do but read Nehemiah 13.10. and there we find the portions of the Levites had not been given them. By whom? By the b Vatablus in locum. Israelites: They, to save their purses brought in nothing. Whom doth Nehemiah reprove? The words be vers. 11. that he contended with the c i. e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rulers. The proper sense of the word, is a Ruler in Heb. & in the Chaldee also. as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dan. 2.48. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dan. 3.2. A Governor, and nothing but a Governor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Princep● Magnus: A Great Prince. Pag●ine. Rulers. Did none refuse to pay their portions but the Rulers? Yes, the whole body of the people: The corruption was general. The Levites and the Singers were made to fight so low, that they were fled: the exigent was such, that they must fly or famish. Which could not have been, if none had been delinquents but the Rulers. He that runs may read this to be so, vers. 12. Then brought all judah (viz. after Nehemiah had made the reformation) mark, [Alderman judah] then brought the tith of the corn: And therefore all judah sinned in not bringing the Portions of the Levites and Singers. [All judah.] Out of the text itself I prove, that such a conclusion as this holds not. Nehemiah reproved the Rulers only; therefore the Rulers only were in transgression: For the words, as they lie, show us that all judah offended: And yet Nehemiah calls only the Magistrates to coram: And why? they had power in their hands to reform this in all. So here he contended with the Nobles. I say then, as the truth is, that Nehemiah dealt only with the great Ones, because they were chief in the sin to suffer it; and it was in their power and place to reform it: That so he and they joining together to bring about the full reformation, the Lord might have his Sabbaths again. Having cleared, as I take it, the weakness of the Argument, we are now to show, that the proof is of no force. CHAP. XX. IT is laid in the sense of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which our Translation Englisheth Nobles, and that rightly. The Word naturally doth signify a Grandeè, a Chief as head over the rest in Power, or Authority, or both. One that with his Countenance is able to do much upon the rest, whether they be servants or not. No man hath reason to say the contrary, sith it doth radically signify some great Men, whether Magistrate or Magistrate's fellow. The Hebrew word which indeed doth signify, and is commonly used to signify a Freeman, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Which is up and down translated a Freeman, in all versions that I know. But our word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comes from a root, which signifies d Schindl. Penteglot. c▪ ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quòd aulici Proceres olim candidis vestirentur: quod de josepho legimus. Gen. 41.42. & de Mordochaeo. Est. 8.15. White. Because States used to be clad in White in those times and places. But the Septuagint, who were natural jews render it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is properly Freemen. The thing I am to prove then, is. That the S●ptuagint understood by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Men of Quaelity, Neh. 4. v. 14, 19 The words be [I said to the Nobles and Rulers and to the rest of the People.] The word translated Nobles is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: and so rendered it must be. For read it Freemen, and what a poor sense do we put upon the holy Text. I said to the Freemen, and Rulers, and to the rest of the People. What, Freemen put before Rulers. Again, Freemen opposed to the rest of the People. Were not the Commons many of them Freemen now? Nay. The word People is so far from being restrained to Mean, only Servants; that Servants are rather excluded than otherwise: not meant at all, rather than only meant. Nehemiah had neither need, nor cause to speak to the Servants, whose Masters had power over them, to bring them in to his Will. How then doth the Text oppose them to Freemen, and make them as two several distinct Branches? But what say the 70 here? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. Honourable Men. And therefore the 70 themselves took Nobles, Honourable, to be the meaning of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The like we have, Neh. 5.7. Where Nehemiah dealt in the matter of e Not that Nobles were all Usurers: but because it was their sin to see it and suffer, and in their power to redress it. Neither can it be thought that all the Freemen were Usurers: and therefore to render it Freemen cannot hold▪ Usury. What be the words. I rebuked, saith he, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Nobles and Rulers, saith our Engglish. Me thinks it makes the holy Ghost to speak backward to English it thus. I rebuked the Freemen and Rulers. And here we have the 70 for us. Again, they translate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, honourable. A third place we find, Neh. 6.17. The Nobles of judah sent many letters to Tobija. It makes a kind of Nonsense of it to read it. The Freemen of judah sent many letters. The word is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And must we make them a Popular State, and turn their Commonwealth into a Democracy, that Letters must be written in the name of every Freeman. And here, as before the Septuagint have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. No no, They were the Nobles that wrote, whose Letters were like to carry some stroke with Tobijah. And can it sink into any Man's head, that all or most of the Freemen must meet many times, to write many letters to Tobijah. Thus we see, how often in this very book of Nehemiah, which best of all opens itself, the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used, where it can possibly (both by the Scripture and by the Translation of the 70.) signify nothing but Nobles. And were not the Septuagint jews? Did not they best know how to give the right meaning of their own Language? Now, what say we to other places of Scripture! We read Esay. 34.12. They shall call the Nobles to the Kingdom. The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Read the word Freemen: it is ridiculous. They shall call the Freemen to the Kingdom. And here, once more, the Septuagint are for us. The Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. Princes, great officers, men of place, power: and the like we find, jer. 27.20. The words be. Nabuchadnezzar carried away with King jeconiah all the Nobles. The original is, [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] What? did he carry away all the Freemen? No such matter. He left all the Freemen, or all almost behind him. They were not carried away in the deportation of jeconiah. But the Nobles he did all, or as good as all. But we must consult with the Septuagint. There it is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Potentates. And one place more, if you will in jer. 39.6. Where we read, That after Nabuchadnezzar, had slain the sons of King Zedekiah: the Text saith, That the King of Babel slew all the Nobles of judah. The Original hath [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉]. Translate it Freemen, and there is as little truth, as good sense in it. For he did not then kill all the Freemen of judah. So to English it, is to father untruth's upon the book of God. We must not leave out the Septuagint. They must be heard by all means. And how do they Greek it here? Why [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] Prince's again. By all these places we see how little truth there is in such bold assertions as these, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth properly signify Freemen. That the Septuagint, who were Jews by Nature, and could best say what is the signification of the words in their own Language, do so understand it. Which we see, is neither so, nor so. But if a 1000 Septuagints had said that Freemen is the proper and natural signification of the word (sith we see the contrary in almost all the places of the Bible where the Word is used:) we must crave pardon, if we be hard of belief in the point. But do not the 70 here, in the very place, Nehemiah 13.17. translate the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? They do. Doth not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, naturally and Grammatically signify Freemen? It doth. And did not the 70 know what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meant? They did. What will you do now? No hurt done. I mean not: nor need to disable the Version of the 70 (as a great f Hie●onym. in Isay. 10. & passim.▪ Hebrician and Divine both doth. Nor am I about to say, That the Edition that we now have, is so vitiate, that one would think it were not the same, but some impostor rather.) Yet g De Verbo De● lib. 2. c. 6. Bellarmine is so bold with the 70. 'tis enough to carry it on our side, that in so many places (as above) the 70 themselves construe the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by such Greek words as never can signify a Freeman, as such: but ever A man of Eminency & Port. And now, whereas in our place, the Septuagint do translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The meaning is, not to note out free Men simply: but such Freemen as were also Men of Note and Quality above the rest. And let the reason of this Metaphorical use of the word be. Because such Men should be of a free and generous spirit. Or else. Because Rulers were taken and chosen (when chosen) never out of Servants: but of such, whose houses were free in Israel. We will not look after other Authors: but (to leave this place till anon) prove out of some other places of Scripture, That the 70 cannot still mean Freemen, when they do translate [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Which they do, but rare and seldom. To begin with 1 Kings 21.8. Where we find, That jezabel wrote Letters in ahab's name to the Elders, and to the Nobles that were in his City, The Hebrew word translated by our English Nobles, is our word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where it is by the 70 done into Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Now by the very Text it appears, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot be translated a Freeman. For it is not to be imagined that jezabel did write and direct her Letters to the Elders and Freemen of that City. What had the Freemen to do with her practice? She had a bloody secret in hand, which she neither would, nor need to impart to every Freeman. But the Rulers and Nobles, they were the men, that were only fit to be entrusted with her feat, and able to satisfy her wicked turn. Her drift was to put off the matter with a fair colour, and to cover it from the eyes of the Commons. Which she could not do nor meant to do, if so be she had written to the Freemen in the King's Name. Except such and such Freemen that were fit for her design, were not to be made acquainted with that horrid plot? What? writeth that to the Freemen, which by all means her desire was to secret from the Freemen. And she might well think, That all the Freemen would not have come in to her mind to massacre a man and his family, for nothing but his conscience. And therefore I take it a clear case. That by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here are meant Nobles and not Freemen. And yet the 70. have it in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Therefore in this place they do not think that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies Freemen. Nor do they by their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intent to express Freemen (quà tales) but great men. And the same is also proved by Eccles. h Eccl. 10.17. Vulgar, Nobiles. Vat ab. Filius Nobilium. So Paguine, Tremel. Clarissimi. Piscator. Cuius Rex natus est viris illustribus His Scholion. Heb. Cuius Rex filius Candidorum est. Hebraei 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 candidos seu albos intelligunt viros principes, claros, & illusties: vel quòd gererent candidas vest●s, vel quòd nomine ●apientiae, & virtutis illustres & clari essent. 10.17. Blessed (saith the holy Ghost there) art thou Land, when thy King is the son of Nobles.] The Hebrew is our word in question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. In the Septuagint it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. What English is this? Blessed is the Land when the King is the son of Freemen. A wise blessedness. And translations agree in the best Linguists, to give the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, such words in Latin, as can bear no good English except by such a word as Nobles, Illustrious, Renowned. And in these places, 'tis not to be denied, That when the 70. translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do in the Grammatical signification of it properly signify any Freemen as Freemen: yet) the 70. do by it understand a Potent, a Man of place, and account. As it is plain and proved to be plain by the places before cited, which are all the places I know, (except this in Nehemiah now in question) where in the 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is done into the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And the reason was, The very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in divers ancient Writers is taken metaphorically, applied to the mind, and not only for civil freedom in the compound, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: in the abstract 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, mean, base baseness. See plenty of instances, out of Greek Authors, in Scapula, and Stephanus. as I said, because such should be of a free and noble mind. And doth not this make it plain. That whenever the 70. are to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is radically and properly a Freeman as a Freeman simply, as opposite to a Bondman, there they ever use to translate it by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: but when they are to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 usually they do give it a word in Greek which signifies a Gentleman, or rather one a size above a Gentleman. And in these few places where they put it into the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (as in those places I have set down & in this of Nehemiah) the scope of the places do show, that they mean to note thereby nothing less than nakedly a Freeman. And if challenging were so fit among Scholars, me thinks I might put any man to prove, That in any place where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in the Original, or where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is made by the 70. the translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: that then and there in any one place it must yea, or may be rendered a Freeman, Quatenùs a Freeman contradistinct to a servant. The brief of all is in two words. In other places where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is made by the 70. the translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it cannot signify Freemen: and therefore it doth not follow that it must here, in our place of Nehemiah. And now at last to come to the very place, I say that here it doth not signify a Freeman, and therefore the 70. who being Jews borne knew best to translate their own Language, do not here (translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) mean thereby a Freeman: but a man of Note and Name. 'tis a poor piece of Learning then to say, that it doth properly signify, a Freeman, when there is no one place in all the Bible, where it must, say I? nay) where it may handsomely be translated Freeman. And for this place I dare appeal to all Interpreters, where ever any did translate it by a word that is ever used in any Tongue to signify a Freeman. Only excepted this questioned translation of the 70. now in hand. When I say all: I mean all i Hieron. Optimates. Vulg. Optimates. Beda. Optimates. Pagn. Optimates. Pagn. in Thesauro, Magnate●. S. hindl. Primates. Buxd. Clarissimi. Tremel. Clarissimi. Interlin Heroes. French. les gouverneurs. Spanish, a los sennores English translat. Geneva. Rulers. last, Noble●. Ital gli huomini, Notabili▪ I have seen, and by them I judge the same of all the rest, I have not seen. Divers words they have: but all the wit in the world cannot express what they all mean in a more full formal, and significant term than Noble, which is our last English. To say all in a word, the 70. translate commonly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which of force signify Nobles: and in two or three places (where they render it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they must and did mean Nobles. And so do the circumstances of this very place (Nehe. 13.17.) evince it to be understood here. Consider but that the same form and manner of chiding and reproving which he follows here, he used before, Verse. 11. Where he saith, he contended with the Rulers about the abuse of the Levits portion. But there the men reproved were great men. For the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is there in the 70. k Vid Arist. polit. l. ●. cap. ult. who having occasion to treat of some Magistrates saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that is nor can be nothing but Ruler's. In regard of their place of office, he calls them there Rulers. In regard of their Birth or others Titles and dignities he calls them here (Vers. 17.) Nobles: in both, the same rank of men. But because the Septuagints translation of the word in this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is by some made such a matter: We will therefore show, it is not for nothing, that we af●firmed the 70. to mean by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, A man of a free and noble spirit. Consider we then that [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] properly & originally doth signify Ingenuous men. Now an ingenuous man is defined in l Institut. juris. lib. 1. tit▪ 4. Law to be borne not made a Freeman. Yet a common use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Scriptures is to signify Princes, Potentates, Rulers, Nobles. The 70. who being ●ewes best knew the use of their own mother Tongue, do m Pro. 19.6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. King. Psal. 118.9. & 47.10.83.12.113.7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Princes. 1. Sam. 2.8 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Powers. Prov. 8.16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Tyrants or Kings. The word tyrant was anciently of a good meaning. Scapula. often translate it by words, which do and in very grammatical etymology must signify Rulers. And the n Beza in Luc. 22.25. jansen. concordant. cap. 133. learned are in the right, when they teach us, That Luke (22.25) by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Benefactors bountiful doth express the Hebrew [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] and that S. Luke doth import men of authority and place. Two of the Ptolomej Kings of Egypt, took to them this Title to be called Ptolomeus Euergetes. And why? But because Princes and Grandees should be men of a bountiful mind, and of a free and most ingenuous spirit. And o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Arist. pol. l. 3. cap. 11. Qui magistratum ambieb●̄t Boni dicebantur, quia munus non ni●i a Bonis administrari vel ambiri fas erat Seneca. lib. 1. ep. 3. Sic. qui publica curabant Optimates, quia non nisi Optimis committi debebant publica negotia. Aristotle saith, That Kings were created from their Beneficence. And gives this reason. For that good men are highly esteemed for their virtue. As then the Hebrew and Greek words, which signify properly ingenuous, free, munificent, are used for Princes as common as may be, because such men should have such conditions; and he wrongs the Text, that shall translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ingenuous: may I not in like manner say. That the 70. in our place useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which thematically & properly signifies Freeman for a Nobleman, because men, of quality such, should be endued with such qualities. The very same we see in the word p 1 King. 21.8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. i e. To the Elders, meaning the chief Magistrates and Masters of the City, & passim. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whose immediate and literal signification is an elderly man, a Senior. Yet how often in the old Testament is it used to signify a Ruler in the State? And all over the new Testament for a Ruler and Rector in the Church. And why? Because men are not usually so fit to be put in place in either, till they come to some years. The reason we have in the q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eth. lib. 1. c. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Polit. lib. 7. cap. 9▪ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ibid. Philosopher. Because a man is not fit for a Counsellor in the state, till he be of some good experience, which a junior cannot have: Nor in the Church, till he be of composed manners, which is not found every day among the younger sort. Old in time and old in manners usually go together. To come to the point then. Sith most an end the 70. do translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by words expressing Nobleses; And sith in those few places, where the 70. do make use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Circumstances of the place do carry it, That simply Freemen as Freemen cannot be meant; but Noblemen, because they should be men of free minds (as the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ are translated in like sort from the literal sense to signify men of place and quality;) And sith all translations I think, I am sure all that I have seen, do in the national and learned versions and translations turn it by words expressing Nobleses, Lords, Worthies, Heroical persons, Potentates, Illustrious and the like; Sith I say all these proofs meet, as most pregnant to evince the true and full signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be Nobles; the conclusion is ours: That Nehemiah did contest not with all the Freemen; but with the Nobles, as men that were in place and power to redress the Profanation of the Sabbath day. CHAP. XXI. THe Argument to prove the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signify Freemen, from the use of the Chaldee word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was not worth the printing. What? doth not that Chaldee come by etymology from the Hebrew word, and doth the Chaldee usually signify Freemen? and yet do you say, the Argument thence is of no force? No. Of none at all. For to pass it over, that the Chaldee edition is but a Paraphrase, no punctual Translation; neither is it, as it is, so exact; (so saith r De Verb. Dei li. 2. cap. 3. Bellarmine) neither is it s Aquila is thought to flourish unde● Adrian the Emperor after Christ. s Onkelos, but forty years before the birth of Christ. ancient enough to carry a conclusion for the use of a word (for in so many hundred of years as the Chaldee is later than Nehemiah, 'tis usual for significations of words to change; 'tis Use rather than Grammar that brings in significations of words. ( t Horat in art poëticâ. Use is Norma Loquendi.) To pass over all this, what if the Chaldee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be used to signify Nobles, as well as the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? Where is all this boasting then? Look but in Dan●el 7.9. (and Daniel lived about the days of Nehemiah) and there only, that I know, we have the Chaldee wo●d. It is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it signifies and is translated White, just as the Hebrew word. And Nobles using to apparel themselves in white, thence they were both in the Chaldee and Hebrw words called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Neither do we speak at random. For u in radice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schindler, (as great a Linguist as Christendom hath known, dispraise to none) doth assure us, That the Chaldee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signify men of place; & he doth express the meaning of the Chaldee by three Latin words, Principes, Magnates, Primates, all which signify great men. And if the Chaldee Paraphrase may be heard for good; then look jer. 27.20. wherefore our Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (which we translate Nobles of judah,) The Chaldee hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, The Princes. Both come to one. Therefore the Chaldee himself being judge, the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not Freemen; but Princes. But doth not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Chaldee properly signify a Freeman? It doth. Is it not derived by Etymology from the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? I think so; I grant it: and yet all this comes not home to the point. For words have the signification from the common use, and the Chaldee coming in long after, had some alteration from the grammatical signification. And that I do not only say, but prove. For because the Chaldee doth not use to express the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Chaldee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,) but to show a difference, the Chaldee paraphrase is constant in using to render the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is indeed precisely a Freeman, by the Chaldee word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which was in the Language when the paraphrase wrote Freemen. As Ez. 21.2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebrew; in the Chaldee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e. the son of the Freeman. Sith then the Chaldee doth not express 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ●ut by some other word signifying Nobles x Chaldaeus passim pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 habet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●ilius liberorum. So Pagni●. in Thes. in radice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he doth ever use to translate by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; therefore I conclude, that in the judgement of the Chaldee paraphrast himself, our word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signify Nobles, and not Freemen. To argue from the signification, of a word, that it now hath to prove the signification it had 400, or 500 years ago, is of no force; sith the use of words do come and go, almost as fast as the fashion of Clothes. As it follows not that because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signify a Tyrant now, that therefore it doth never signify a King. Times do change, and words do alter with Time, both in pronunciation and signification. And so I think that the Chaldee, which in the Paraphrast his days did signify Freemen long before, when it came first out of the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, did signify Nobles. Howsoever men please to think of that Conjecture, I have my desire in that the Chaldee himself doth not translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifying Freemen; though radically 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth derive itself from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they do construe by words signifying Nobleses. Say then that Nehemiah had not testified against the Servants, which the Text flatly saith he did, and say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did signify Masters, which we have proved to be very false: yet thus to dispute; He contested with the Masters, Ergo, the Masters were only in the sin: And, The Servants did not sin, because not contested with: This I say is such an Enthymeme, that a Freshman newly come from turning over Brierwoods' Notes, can tell how at the first sight with reason to deny the Consequence. For Nehemiah did reprove the Nobles, because they were in greatest fault to suffer it. And in their hands it lay much to reform it. And Nehemiah would not be said in it, but threatens them all, rich and poor, mighty and mean, bond and free, Master and Man, one with another. And he had his Will. God gave him good success. For the Text saith, That they went away, and from that time forth, they came no more on the Sabbath day. And what a mercy were it, if the Lord would be pleased so to order the hearts, pens, and tongues of the Learned, that from henceforth, they would give over and speak, and write no more against the Sabbath Day. FINIS. q i e. genealogizatorum. r i.e. kept from the Priesthood. Heb. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & elongati sunt: so Steph. Polluti à sacerdotio. i.e. ut polluti abstrusi sunt à Sacerdotio. junius. Apportati del Sacerdotio co●●e person non consecrate, Deodat. Gen. 11.4. s What Vrim and Thummim was, Vid. Phag. in Exod. 18. & Delr. disquisit. Magicas. l. 4. q. 2. §. 4. q 1. King. 5.6.