And this is more conformable unto the Pagan history and Gentile account hereof, unto whom Noah was Saturn, whose symbol was a ship, as relating unto the Ark, and who is said to have divided the world between his three sons. Ham is conceived to be Jupiter, who was the youngest son: worshipped by the name of Hamon, which was the Egyptian and African name for Jupiter, who is said to have cut off the genitals of his father, derived from the history of HamGen. 9. 22. , who beheld the nakednes of his,and by no hard mistakeReading Veiaggod et abscidit, for Veiegged et nunciavit. might be confirmed from the Text, as Bochartus Bochartus de Geographia sacrâ. hath well observed.

CHAPTER VI
That the Tower of Babel was erected against a second Deluge.

An opinion there is of some generality, that our fathers after the flood attempted the Tower of Babel to secure themselves against a second Deluge. Which however affirmed by Josephus and others, hath seemed improbable unto many who have discoursed hereon. For (beside that they could not be ignorant of the Promise of God never to drown the world again, and had the Rain-bow before their eyes to put them in mind thereof) it is improbable from the nature of the Deluge; which being not possibly causable from natural showers above, or watery eruptions below, but requiring a supernatural hand, and such as all acknowledg irresistible; must needs disparage their knowledg and judgment in so succesless attempts.

Again, They must probably hear, and some might know, that the waters of the flood ascended fifteen cubits above the highest mountains. Now, if as some define, the perpendicular altitude of the highest mountains be four miles; or as others, but fifteen furlongs, it is not easily conceived how such a structure could be effected. Although we allowed the description of Herodotus concerning the Tower of Belus; whose lowest story was in height and bredth one furlong, and seven more built upon it; abating that of the Annian Berosus, the traditional relation of Jerom, and fabulous account of the Jews. Probable it is that what they attempted was feasible, otherwise they had been amply fooled in fruitless success of their labours, nor needed God to have hindred them, saying, Nothing will be restrained from them, which they begin to do.

It was improbable from the place, that is a plain in the land of Shinar. And if the situation of Babylon were such at first as it was in the days of Herodotus, it was rather a feat of amenity and pleasure, than conducing unto this intention. It being in a very great plain, and so improper a place to provide against a general Deluge by Towers and eminent structures, that they were fain to make provisions against particular and annual inundations by ditches and trenches, after the manner of Egypt. And therefore Sir Walter Raleigh accordingly objecteth: If the Nations which followed Nimrod, still doubted the surprise of a second flood, according to the opinions of the ancient Hebrews, it soundeth ill to the ear of Reason, that they would have spent many years in that low and overflown valley of Mesopotamia. And therefore in this situation, they chose a place more likely to have secured them from the worlds destruction by fire, then another Deluge of water: and as Pierius observeth, some have conceived that this was their intention.

Lastly, The reason is delivered in the Text. Let us build us a City and a Tower, whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the whole earth; as we have already began to wander over a part. These were the open ends proposed unto the people; but the secret design of Nimrod was to settle unto himself a place of dominion, and rule over his Brethren, as it after succeeded, according to the delivery of the Text, the beginning of his kingdom was Babel.

CHAPTER VII
Of the Mandrakes of Leah.

We shall not omit the Mandrakes of Leah, according to the History of Genesis. And Reuben went out in the daies of Wheat-harvest, and found Mandrakes in the field, and brought them unto his mother Leah; then Rachel said unto Leah, give me, I pray thee, of thy sons Mandrakes: and she said unto her, is it a small matter that thou hast taken my husband, and wouldest thou take my sons Mandrakes also? and Rachel said, Therefore he shall lie with thee this night for thy sons Mandrakes. From whence hath arisen a common conceit, that Rachel requested these plants as a medicine of fecundation, or whereby she might become fruitfull. Which notwithstanding is very questionable, and of incertain truth.

For first from the comparison of one Text with another, whether the Mandrakes here mentioned, be the same plant which holds that name with us, there is some cause to doubt. The word is used in another place of Scripture,Cant. 7. when the Church inviting her beloved into the fields, among the delightfull fruits of Grapes and Pomegranates, it is said, The Mandrakes give a smell, and at our gates are all manner of pleasant fruits. Now instead of a smell of Delight, our Mandrakes afford a papaverous and unpleasant odor, whether in the leaf or apple, as is discoverable in their simplicity or mixture. The same is also dubious from the different interpretations: for though the Septuagint and Josephus do render it the Apples of Mandrakes in this Text, yet in the other of the Canticles, the Chaldy Paraphrase termeth it Balsame. R. Solomon, as Drusius observeth, conceives it to be that plant the Arabians named Jesemin. Oleaster, and Georgius Venetus, the Lilly, and that the word Dudaim may comprehend any plant that hath a good smell, resembleth a womans breast, and flourisheth in wheat harvest. Tremelius interprets the same for any amiable flowers of a pleasant and delightfull odor: but the Geneva Translators have been more wary then any: for although they retain the word Mandrake in the Text, they in effect retract it in the Margin: wherein is set down the word in the original is Dudaim, which is a kind of fruit or Flower unknown.

Nor shall we wonder at the dissent of exposition, and difficulty of definition concerning this Text, if we perpend how variously the vegetables of Scripture are expounded, and how hard it is in many places to make out the species determined. Thus are we at variance concerning the plant that covered Jonas; which though the Septuagint doth render Colocynthis, the Spanish Calabaca, and ours accordingly a Gourd: yet the vulgar translates it Hedera or Ivy; and as Grotius observeth, Jerom thus translated it, not as the same plant, but best apprehended thereby. The Italian of Diodati, and that of Tremelius have named it Ricinus, and so hath ours in the Margin, for palma Christi is the same with Ricinus. The Geneva Translators have herein been also circumspect, for they have retained the Original word Kikaion, and ours hath also affixed the same unto the Margin.

Nor are they indeed alwayes the same plants which are delivered under the same name, and appellations commonly received amongst us. So when it is said of Solomon, that he writ of plants from the Cedar of Lebanus, unto the Hysop that groweth upon the wall, that is, from the greatest unto the smallest, it cannot be well conceived our common Hysop; for neither is that the least of vegetables, nor observed to grow upon wals; but rather as Lemnius well conceiveth, some kind of the capillaries, which are very small plants, and only grow upon wals and stony places. Nor are the four species in the holy oyntment, Cinnamon, Myrrhe, Calamus and Cassia, nor the other in the holy perfume, Frankincense, Stacte, Onycha and Galbanum, so agreeably expounded unto those in use with us, as not to leave considerable doubts behind them. Nor must that perhaps be taken for a simple unguent, which Matthew only termeth a precious oyntment; but rather a composition as Mark and John imply by pistick Nard,V. Mathioli. Epist. that is faithfully dispensed, and may be that famous composition described by Dioscorides, made of oyl of Ben, Malabathrum, Juncus Odoratus, Costus, Amomum, Myrrhe, Balsam and Nard; which Galen affirmeth to have been in use with the delicate Dames of Rome; and that the best thereof was made at Laodicea; from whence by Merchants it was conveyed unto other parts. But how to make out that Translation concerning the Tithe of Mint, Anise and Cumin, we are still to seek; for we find not a word in the Text that can properly be rendred Anise; the Greek being ἄνηθον, which the Latines call Anethum, and is properly Englished Dill. Lastly, What meteor that was, that fed the Israelites so many years, they must rise again to inform us. Nor do they make it out,V. Doctissimum Chrysostom. Magnenum de Manna. who will have it the same with our Manna; nor will any one kind thereof, or hardly all kinds we read of, be able to answer the qualities thereof, delivered in the Scripture; that is, to fall upon the ground, to breed worms, to melt with the Sun, to taste like fresh oyl, to be grounded in Mils, to be like Coriander seed, and of the colour of Bdellium.

Again, It is not deducible from the Text or concurrent sentence of Comments, that Rachel had any such intention, and most do rest in the determination of Austin, that she desired them for rarity, pulchritude or suavity. Nor is it probable she would have resigned her bed unto Leah, when at the same time she had obtained a medicine to fructifie her self. And therefore Drusius who hath expresly and favourable treated hereof, is so far from conceding this intention, that he plainly concludeth, Hoc quo modo illis in mentem venerit conjicere nequeo; how this conceit fell into mens minds, it cannot fall into mine; for the Scripture delivereth it not, nor can it be clearly deduced from the Text.

Thirdly, If Rachel had any such intention, yet had they no such effect, for she conceived not many years after of Joseph; whereas in the mean time Leah had three children, Isachar, Zebulon and Dinah.

Lastly, Although at that time they failed of this effect, yet is it mainly questionable whether they had any such vertue either in the opinions of those times, or in their proper nature. That the opinion was popular in the land of Canaan, it is improbable, and had Leah understood thus much, she would not surely have parted with fruits of such a faculty; especially unto Rachel, who was no friend unto her. As for its proper nature, the Ancients have generally esteemed in Narcotick or stupefactive, and it is to be found in the list of poysons, set down by Dioscorides, Galen, Ætius, Ægineta, and several Antidotes delivered by them against it. It was I confess from good Antiquity, and in the days of Theophrastus accounted a philtre, or plant that conciliates affection; and so delivered by Dioscorides. And this intent might seem most probable, had they not been the wives of holy Jacob: had Rachel presented them unto him, and not requested them for her self.

Now what Dioscorides affirmeth in favour of this effect, that the grains of the apples of Mandrakes mundifie the matrix, and applied with Sulphur, stop the fluxes of women, he overthrows again by qualities destructive unto conception; affirming also that the juice thereof purgeth upward like Hellebore; and applied in pessaries provokes the menstruous flows, and procures abortion. Petrus Hispanus, or Pope John the twentieth speaks more directly in his Thesaurus pauperum: wherein among the receits of fecundation, he experimentally commendeth the wine of Mandrakes given with Triphera magna. But the soul of the medicine may lie in Triphera magna, an excellent composition, and for this effect commended by Nicolaus. And whereas Levinus Lemnius that eminent Physitian doth also concede this effect, it is from manifest causes and qualities elemental occasionally producing the same. For he imputeth the same unto the coldness of that simple, and is of opinion that in hot climates, and where the uterine parts exceed in heat, by the coldness hereof they may be reduced into a conceptive constitution, and Crasis accommodable unto generation; whereby indeed we will not deny the due and frequent use may proceed unto some effect, from whence notwithstanding we cannot infer a fertilitating condition or property of fecundation. For in this way all vegetables do make fruitful according unto the complexion of the Matrix; if that excel in heat, plants exceeding in cold do rectifie it; if it be cold, simples that are hot reduce it; if dry moist, if moist dry correct it; in which division all plants are comprehended. But to distinguish thus much is a point of Art, and beyond the Method of Rachels or feminine Physick. Again, Whereas it may be thought that Mandrakes may fecundate, since Poppy hath obtained the Epithite of fruitful, and that fertility was Hieroglyphically described by Venus with an head of Poppy in her hand; the reason hereof was the multitude of seed within it self, and no such multiplying in humane generation. And lastly, whereas they may seem to have this quality, since Opium it self is conceived to extimulate unto venery, and for that intent is sometimes used by Turks, Persians, and most oriental Nations; although Winclerus doth seem to favour the conceit, yet Amatus Lusitanus, and Rodericus à Castro are against it; Garcias ab horto refutes it from experiment; and they speak probably who affirm the intent and effect of eating Opium, Opium, of what effect in venery. it not so much to invigorate themselves in coition, as to prolong the Act, and spin out the motions of carnality.

CHAPTER VIII
Of the three Kings of Collein.

A common conceit there is of the three Kings of Collein, conceived to be the wise men that travelled unto our Saviour by the direction of the Star, Wherein (omitting the large Discourses of Baronius, Pineda and Montacutius,) that they might be Kings, beside the Ancient Tradition and Authority of many Fathers, the Scripture also implieth. The Gentiles shall come to thy light, and Kings to the brightness of thy rising. The Kings of Tharsis and the Isles, the Kings of Arabia and Saba shall offer gifts, which places most Christians and many Rabbins interpret of the Messiah. Not that they are to be conceived potent monarchs, or mighty Kings; but Toparks, Kings of Cities or narrow Territories; such as were the Kings of Sodom and Gomorrah, the Kings of Jericho and Ai, the one and thirty which Joshuah subdued, and such as some conceive the Friends of Job to have been.

But although we grant they were Kings, yet can we not be assured they were three. For the Scripture maketh no mention of any number; and the numbers of their presents, Gold, Myrrhe and Frankincense, concludeth not the number of their persons; for these were the commodities of their Country, and such as probably the Queen of Sheba in one person had brought before unto Solomon. So did not the sons of Jacob divide the present unto Joseph, but are conceived to carry one for them all, according to the expression of their Father—Take of the best fruits of the land in your vessels, and carry down the man a present. And therefore their number being uncertain, what credit is to be given unto their names, Gasper, Melchior, Balthazar, what to the charm thereof against the falling sickness,Gaspar fert myrrham, etc. or what unto their habits, complexions, and corporal accidents, we must rely on their uncertain story, and received pourtraits of Collein.

Lastly, Although we grant them Kings, and three in number, yet could we not conceive that they were Kings of Collein. For though Collein were the chief City of the Ubii, then called Ubiopolis, and afterwards Agrippina, yet will no History inform us there were three Kings thereof. Beside, these being rulers in their Countries, and returning home, would have probably converted their subjects: but according unto Munster, their conversion was not wrought until seventy years after by Maternus a disciple of Peter. And lastly, it is said that the wise men came from the East; but Collein is seated West-ward from Jerusalem; for Collein hath of longitude thirty four degrees, but Jerusalem seventy two.

The ground of all was this. These wise men or Kings, were probably of Arabia, and descended from Abraham by Keturah, who apprehending the mystery of this Star, either by the Spirit of God, the prophesie of Balaam, the prophesie which Suetonius mentions, received and constantly believed through all the East, that out of Jury one should come that should rule the whole world: or the divulged expectation of the Jews from the expiring prediction of Daniel: were by the same conducted unto Judea, returned unto their Country, and were after baptized by Thomas. From whence about three hundred years after, by Helena the Empress their bodies were translated to Constantinople. From thence by Eustatius unto Millane, and at last by Renatus the Bishop unto Collein: where they are believed at present to remain, their monuments shewn unto strangers, and having lost their Arabian titles, are crowned Kings of Collein.

CHAPTER IX
Of the food of John Baptist, Locusts and Wild-honey.

Concerning the food of John Baptist in the wilderness, Locusts and Wild-honey, lest popular opiniatrity should arise, we will deliver the chief opinions. The first conceiveth the Locusts here mentioned to be that fruit which the Greeks name κεράτιον mentioned by Luke in the diet of the Prodigal son, the Latins Siliqua, and some Panis Sancti Johannis; included in a broad Cod, and indeed a taste almost as pleasant as Honey. But this opinion doth not so truly impugn that of the Locusts: and might rather call into controversie the meaning of Wild-honey.

The second affirmeth that they were the tops or tender crops of trees: for so Locusta also signifieth: which conceit is plausible in Latin, but will not hold in Greek, wherein the word is ἀκρίς, except for ἀκρίδες, we read ἀκρόδυα, or ἀκρέμονες, which signifie the extremities of trees, of which belief have divers been: more confidently Isidore Peleusiota, who in his Epistles plainly affirmeth they think unlearnedly who are of another belief. And this so wrought upon Baronius, that he concludeth in neutrality; Hæc cum scribat Isidorus definiendum nobis non est et totum relinquimus lectoris arbitrio; nam constat Græcam dictionem ἀκρίδες, et Locustam, insecti genus, et arborum summitates significare. Sed fallitur, saith Montacutius, nam constat contrarium, Ἀκρίδα apud nullum authorem classicum Ἀκρόδρυα significare. But above all Paracelsus with most animosity promoteth this opinion, and in his book de melle, spareth not his Friend Erasmus. Hoc à nonnullis ita explicatur ut dicant Locastus aut cicadas Johanni pro cibo fuisse; sed hi stultitiam dissimulare non possunt, veluti Jeronimus, Erasmus, et alii Prophetæ Neoterici in Latinitate immortui.

A third affirmeth that they were properly Locusts: that is, a sheath-winged and six-footed insect, such as is our Grashopper. And this opinion seems more probable than the other. For beside the authority of Origen, Jerom, Chrysostom, Hillary and Ambrose to confirm it: this is the proper signification of the word, thus used in Scripture by the Septuagint, Greek vocabularies thus expound it. Suidas on the word Ακρὶς observes it to be that animal whereon the Baptist fed in the desert; in this sense the word is used by Aristotle, Dioscorides, Galen, and several humane Authors. And lastly, there is no absurdity in this interpretation, or any solid reason why we should decline it, it being a food permitted unto the Jews, whereof four kinds are reckoned up among clean meats. Beside, not only the Jews, but many other Nations long before and since, have made an usual food thereof. That the Æthiopians, Mauritanians and Arabians did commonly eat them, is testified by Diodorus, Strabo, Solinus, Ælian and Pliny: that they still feed on them is confirmed by Leo, Cadamustus and others. John therefore as our Saviour saith, came neither eating nor drinking: that is, far from the diet of Jerusalem and other Riotous places: but fared coursly and poorly according unto the apparel he wore, that is of Camels hair: the place of his abode, the wilderness; and the doctrin he preached, humiliation and repentance.

CHAPTER X
That John the Evangelist should not die.

The conceit of the long-living, or rather not dying of John the Evangelist, although it seem inconsiderable, and not much weightier than that of Joseph the wandring Jew: yet being deduced from Scripture, and abetted by Authors of all times, it shall not escape our enquiry. It is drawn from the speech of our Saviour unto Peter after the prediction of his Martyrdom; Peter saith unto Jesus. John 21. Lord what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry until I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me; then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that this disciple should not die.

Now the belief hereof hath been received either grosly and in the general, that is not distinguishing the manner or particular way of this continuation, in which sense probably the grosser and undiscerning party received it. Or more distinctly apprehending the manner of his immortality; that is, that John should never properly die, but be translated into Paradise, there to remain with Enoch and Elias until about the coming of Christ; and should be slain with them under Antichrist, according to that of the Apocalyps. I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesie a thousand two hundred and threescore days cloathed in sack-cloth, and when they shall have finished their Testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit, shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them. Hereof, as Baronius observeth, within three hundred years after Christ, Hippolytus the Martyr was the first assertor, but hath been maintained by Metaphrastes, by Freculphus, but especially by Georgius Trapezuntius, who hath expresly treated upon this Text, and although he lived but in the last Century, did still affirm that John was not yet dead.

The same is also hinted by the learned Italian Poet Dante, who in his Poetical survey of Paradise, meeting with the soul of St. John, and desiring to see his body; received answer from him that his body was in earth, and there should remain with other bodys, until the number of the blessed were accomplished.

As for the gross opinion that he should not die, it is sufficiently refuted by that which first occasioned it, that is the Scripture it self, and no further off than the very subsequent verse: Yet Jesus said unto him, he should not die, but if I will that he tarry till I come, What is that to thee? And this was written by John himself, whom the opinion concerned; and as is conceived many years after, when Peter had suffered and fulfilled the prophesie of Christ.

For the particular conceit, the foundation is weak, nor can it be made out from the Text alledged in the Apocalyps: for beside that therein two persons are only named, no mention is made of John, a third Actor in this Tragedy. The death of St. John Evangelist, where and when. The same is also overthrown by History, which recordeth not only the death of John, but assigneth the place of his burial, that is Ephesus, a City in Asia minor, whither after he had been banished into Patmos by Domitian, he returned in the reign of Nerva, there deceased, and was buried in the days of Trajan. And this is testified by Jerom,De Scriptor. Ecclesiast. by Tertullian, De Anima. by Chrysostom and Eusebius, in whose days his Sepulchre was to be seen; and by a more ancient Testimony alleadged also by him, that is of Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus, not many successions after John; whose words are these in an Epistle unto Victor Bishop of Rome, Johannes ille qui supra pectus Domini recumbebat, Doctor optimus, apud Ephesum dormivit; many of the like nature are noted by Baronius, Jansenius, Estius, Lipellous, and others.

Now the main and primitive ground of this error, was a gross mistake in the words of Christ, and a false apprehension of his meaning; understanding that positively which was but conditionally expressed, or receiving that affirmatively which was but concessively delivered. For the words of our Saviour run in a doubtful strain, rather reprehending than satisfying the curiosity of Peter; as though he should have said, Thou hast thy own doom, why enquirest thou after thy Brothers? What relief unto thy affliction, will be the society of anothers? Why pryest thou into the secrets of Gods will? If he stay until I come, what concerneth it thee, who shalt be sure to suffer before that time? And such an answer probably he returned, because he fore-knew John should not suffer a violent death, but go unto his grave in peace. Which had Peter assuredly known, it might have cast some water on his flames, and smothered those fires which kindled after unto the honour of his Master.

Now why among all the rest John only escaped the death of a Martyr, the reason is given; because all others fled away or withdrew themselves at his death, and he alone of the Twelve beheld his passion on the Cross. Wherein notwithstanding, the affliction that he suffered could not amount unto less than Martyrdom: for if the naked relation, at least the intentive consideration of that Passion, be able still, and at this disadvantage of time, to rend the hearts of pious Contemplators; surely the near and sensible vision thereof must needs occasion Agonies beyond the comprehension of flesh; and the trajections of such an object more sharply pierce the Martyred soul of John, than afterward did the nails the crucified body of Peter.

Again, They were mistaken in the Emphatical apprehension, placing the consideration upon the words, If I will: whereas it properly lay in these, when I come. Which had they apprehended as some have since, that is, not for his ultimate and last return, but his coming in Judgment and destruction upon the Jews; or such a coming, as it might be said, that that generation should not pass before it was fulfilled; they needed not, much less need we suppose such diuturnity. For after the death of Peter, John lived to behold the same fulfilled by Vespasian: nor had he then his Nunc dimittis, or went out like unto Simeon; but old in accomplisht obscurities, and having seen the expire of Daniels prediction, as some conceive, he accomplished his Revelation.

But besides this original and primary foundation, divers others have made impressions according unto different ages and persons by whom they were received. For some established the conceit in the disciples and brethren, which were contemporary unto him, or lived about the same time with him; and this was first the extraordinary affection our Saviour bare unto this disciple, who hath the honour to be called the disciple whom Jesus loved. Now from hence they might be apt to believe their Master would dispense with his death, or suffer him to live to see him return in glory, who was the only Apostle that beheld him to die in dishonour. Another was the belief and opinion of those times, that Christ would suddenly come; for they held not generally the same opinion with their successors, or as descending ages after so many Centuries; but conceived his coming would not be long after his passion, according unto several expressions of our Saviour grosly understood, and as we find the same opinion not long after reprehended by St. Paul: Thes. 2. and thus conceiving his coming would not be long, they might be induced to believe his favorite should live unto it. Saint John, how long surviving our B. Saviour. Lastly, the long life of John might much advantage this opinion; for he survived the other twelve, he was aged 22 years when he was called by Christ, and 25 that is the age of Priesthood at his death, and lived 93 years, that is 68 after his Saviour, and died not before the second year of Trajan. Now having out lived all his fellows, the world was confirmed he might live still, and even unto the coming of his Master.

The grounds which promoted it in succeeding ages, were especially two. The first his escape of martyrdom: for whereas all the rest suffered some kind of forcible death, we have no history that he suffered any; and men might think he was not capable thereof: For as History informeth, by the command of Domitian he was cast into a Caldron of burning oyl, and came out again unsinged. Now future ages apprehending he suffered no violent death, and finding also the means that tended thereto could take no place, they might be confirmed in their opinion that death had no power over him, that he might live always who could not be destroyed by fire, and was able to resist the fury of that element which nothing shall resist. The second was a corruption crept into the Latin Text, reading for Si, Sic eum manere volo; whereby the answer of our Saviour becometh positive, or that he will have it so; which way of reading was much received in former ages, and is still retained in the vulgar Translation; but in the Greek and original the word is ἐάν, signifying Si or if, which is very different from οὕτως, and cannot be translated for it: and answerable hereunto is the translation of Junius, and that also annexed unto the Greek by the authority of Sixtus Quintus.

The third confirmed it in ages farther descending, and proved a powerfull argument unto all others following; because in his tomb at Ephesus there was no corps or relique thereof to be found; whereupon arose divers doubts, and many suspitious conceptions; some believing he was not buried, some that he was buried but risen again, others that he descended alive into his tomb, and from thence departed after. But all these proceeded upon unveritable grounds, as Baronius hath observed; who alledgeth a letter of Celestine Bishop of Rome, unto the Council of Ephesus, wherein he declareth the reliques of John were highly honoured by that City; and by a passage also of Chrysostome in the Homilies of the Apostles, That John being dead, did cures in Ephesus, as though he were still alive. And so I observe that Esthius discussing this point concludeth hereupon, Quod corpus ejus nunquam reperiatur, hoc non dicerent si veterum scripta diligenter perlustrassent.

Now that the first ages after Christ, those succeeding, or any other should proceed into opinions so far divided from reason, as to think of immortality after the fall of Adam, or conceit a man in these later times should out-live our fathers in the first; although it seem very strange, yet is it not incredible. For the credulity of men hath been deluded into the like conceits; and as Ireneus and Tertullian mention, one Menander a Samaritan obtained belief in this very point; whose doctrin it was, that death should have no power on his disciples, and such as received his baptism should receive immortality therewith. Twas surely an apprehension very strange; nor usually falling either from the absurdities of Melancholy or vanities of ambition. Some indeed have been so affectedly vain, as to counterfeit Immortality, and have stoln their death, in a hope to be esteemed immortal; and others have conceived themselves dead; but surely few or none have fallen upon so bold an errour, as not to think that they could die at all. The reason of those mighty ones, whose ambition could suffer them to be called gods, would never be flattered into immortality; but the proudest thereof have by the daily dictates of corruption convinced the impropriety of that appellation. And surely although delusion may run high, and possible it is that for a while a man may forget his nature, yet cannot this be durable. For the inconcealable imperfections of our selves, or their daily examples in others, will hourly prompt us our corruption, and loudly tell us we are the sons of earth.

CHAPTER XI
More compendiously of some others.

Many others there are which we resign unto Divinity, and perhaps deserve not controversie. Whether David were punished only for pride of heart in numbring the people, as most do hold, or whether as Josephus and many maintain, he suffered also for not performing the Commandment of God concerning capitation; that when the people were numbred, for every head they should pay unto God a shekell, we shall not here contend. Surely, if it were not the occasion of this plague, we must acknowledge the omission thereof was threatned with that punishment, according to the words of the Law. Exod. 30. When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the Lord, that there be no plague amongst them. Now how deeply hereby God was defrauded in the time of David, and opulent State of Israel, will easily appear by the sums of former lustrations. For in the first, Exod. 38. the silver of them that were numbred was an hundred Talents, and a thousand seven hundred three-score and fifteen shekels; a Bekah for every man, that is, half a shekel, after the shekel of the sanctuary; for every one from twenty years old and upwards, for six hundred thousand, and three thousand and five hundred and fifty men. Answerable whereto we read in Josephus, Vespasian ordered that every man of the Jews should bring into the Capital two dragms; which amounts unto fifteen pence, or a quarter of an ounce of silver with us: and is equivalent unto a Bekah, or half a shekel of the Sanctuary. What the Attick dragm is. What the didrachmum and the stater, Mat. 17. 27. For an Attick dragm is seven pence halfpeny or a quarter of a shekel, and a didrachmum or double dragm, is the word for Tribute money, or half a shekel; and a stater the money found in the fishes mouth was two Didrachmums, or an whole shekel, and tribute sufficient for our Saviour and for Peter.

We will not question the Metamorphosis of Lots wife, or whether she were transformed into a real statua of Salt: though some conceive that expression Metaphorical, and no more thereby then a lasting and durable column, according to the nature of Salt, which admitteth no corruption: in which sense the Covenant of God is termed a Covenant of Salt; and it is also said, God gave the Kingdom unto David for ever, or by a Covenant of Salt.

That Absalom was hanged by the hair of the head, and not caught up by the neck, as Josephus conceiveth, and the common argument against long hair affirmeth, we are not ready to deny. Although I confess a great and learned party there are of another opinion; although if he had his Morion or Helmet on, I could not well conceive it; although the translation of Jerom or Tremelius do not prove it, and our own seems rather to overthrow it.

That Judas hanged himself, much more, that he perished thereby, we shall not raise a doubt. Although Jansenius discoursing the point, produceth the testimony of Theophylact and Euthimius, that he died not by the Gallows, but under a cart wheel, and Baronius also delivereth, this was the opinion of the Greeks, and derived as high as Papias, one of the Disciples of John. Although also how hardly the expression of Matthew is reconcilable unto that of Peter, and that he plainly hanged himself, with that, that falling head-long he burst asunder in the midst, with many other, the learned Grotius plainly doth acknowledge. And lastly, Although as he also urgeth, the word ἀπήγξατο in Matthew, doth not only signifie suspension or pendulous illaqueation, as the common picture discribeth it, but also suffocation, strangulation or interception of breath, which may arise from grief, despair, and deep dejection of spirit,Strangulat inclusus dolor. in which sense it is used in the History of Tobit concerning Sara, ἐλυπήθη σφόδρα ὥστε ἀπάγξασθαι. Ita tristata est ut strangulatione premeretur, saith Junius; and so might it happen from the horrour of mind unto Judas. So do many of the Hebrews affirm, that Achitophel was also strangled, that is, not from the rope, but passion. For the Hebrew and Arabick word in the Text, not only signifies suspension, but indignation, as Grotius hath also observed.

Many more there are of indifferent truths, whose dubious expositions worthy Divines and Preachers do often draw into wholesome and sober uses whereof we shall not speak; with industry we decline such Paradoxes, and peaceably submit unto their received acceptions.

CHAPTER XII
Of the Cessation of Oracles.

That Oracles ceased or grew mute at the coming of Christ, is best understood in a qualified sense, and not without all latitude, as though precisely there were none after, nor any decay before. For (what we must confess unto relations of Antiquity) some pre-decay is observable from that of Cicero, urged by Baronius; Cur isto modo jam oracula Delphis non eduntur, non modo nostra ætate, sed jam diu, ut nihil possit esse contemptius. That during his life they were not altogether dumb, is deduceable from Suetonius in the life of Tiberius, who attempting to subvert the Oracles adjoyning unto Rome, was deterred by the Lots or chances which were delivered at Preneste. After his death we meet with many; Suetonius reports, that the Oracle of Antium forewarned Caligula to beware of Cassius, who was one that conspired his death. Plutarch enquiring why the Oracles of Greece ceased, excepteth that of Lebadia: and in the same place Demetrius affirmeth the Oracles of Mopsus and Amphilochus were much frequented in his days. In brief, Histories are frequent in examples, and there want not some even to the reign of Julian.

What therefore may consist with history, by cessation of Oracles with Montacutius we may understand their intercision, not abscission or consummate desolation; their rare delivery, not total dereliction, and yet in regard of divers Oracles, we may speak strictly, and say there was a proper cessation. Thus may we reconcile the accounts of times, and allow those few and broken divinations, whereof we read in story and undeniable Authors. For that they received this blow from Christ, and no other causes alledged by the heathens, from oraculous confession they cannot deny; whereof upon record there are some very remarkable. The first that Oracle of Delphos delivered unto Augustus.

A second recorded by Plutarch, of a voice that was heard to cry unto Mariners at the sea, Great Pan is dead; which is a relation very remarkable, and may be read in his defect of Oracles. A third reported by Eusebius in the life of his magnified Constantine, that about that time Apollo mourned, declaring his Oracles were false and that the righteous upon earth did hinder him from speaking truth. And a fourth related by Theodoret, and delivered by Apollo Daphneus unto Julian upon his Persian expedition, that he should remove the bodies about him before he could return an answer, and not long after his Temple was burnt with lightning.

All which were evident and convincing acknowledgements of that Power which shut his lips, and restrained that delusion which had reigned so many Centuries. But as his malice is vigilant, and the sins of men do still continue a toleration of his mischiefs, he resteth not, nor will he ever cease to circumvent the sons of the first deceived. The devils retreat when expelled the Oracles. And therefore expelled from Oracles and solemn Temples of delusion, he runs into corners, exercising minor trumperies, and acting his deceits in Witches, Magicians, Diviners, and such inferiour seducers. And yet (what is deplorable) while we apply our selves thereto, and affirming that God hath left to speak by his Prophets, expect in doubtfull matters a resolution from such spirits, while we say the devil is mute, yet confess that these can speak; while we deny the substance, yet practise the effect and in the denied solemnity maintain the equivalent efficacy; in vain we cry that Oracles are down; Apollos Altar still doth smoak; nor is the fire of Delphos out unto this day.

Impertinent it is unto our intention to speak in general of Oracles, and many have well performed it. The plainest of others was that of Apollo Delphicus recorded by Herodotus, and delivered unto Crœsus; who as a trial of their omniscience sent unto distant Oracles; and so contrived with the Messengers, that though in several places, yet at the same time they should demand what Crœsus was then a doing. Among all others the Oracle of Delphos only hit it, returning answer, he was boyling a Lamb with a Tortoise, in a brazen vessel, with a cover of the same metal. The stile is haughty in Greek, though somewhat lower in Latine.