Arrow Against the Separationists, Admonition · Chapter 7
CHAP. VII.
YOur ſeventh errour and ſcandall in alledging the Rabbines is; that you approve and juſtify their preſumptuous expoſitions of Moſes, which they vainely and boldly affirme vvithout the vvarrāt of the ſcripture. It was great preſumption in you to ſay that many legal rites could not be well vnderſtood without their help: yea although their expoſitions had bene good and ſound: for other men endued with the ſpirit of vviſedome might have brought in like maner as good and ſound expoſitions as they: but when you juſtify their rotten and vnſound traditions, this is an other evill. To give inſtance in ſuch an expoſition as you do much inſiſt vponupon, and deſcribe largely with tables, as being a flouriſhing ornament of your annotations; Touching the names of the tribes engraven vponupon the ſtones, according to their birthes; you expound it kAnnot. on Exo. 28.10.or generations by their mothers: firſt all Leahs Children, (as Moſes himſelf reckoneth them Exo. 1. verſ. 2.3.) and then the other mothers Children and Rachels laſt: as ſhall after be more fully ſhewed, in their ſeveral ſtones; verſ. 17, &c. This is a mere preſuming to vnderſtand above that vvhichwhich is vvritten, contrary to that reverence and ſobriety vvhichwhich God requires: for 1, who hath told you or what Bath-kol hath rung it in your eares, that all Leahs Children were firſt in the ſtones according to their naming in Exod. 1. rather then according to the reckoning which Moſes himſelf makes of them by their birthes Gen. 29. & 30. Secondly, if you will have all Leahs Children togather, though ſome of them by birth vvere yonger then the ſonnes of the handmayds, as in Exod 1. VVhy do you not in like maner ſet Benjamin before the ſonnes of the handmayds as in the ſame place is done Exod. 1.3.4. which gives as much vvarrant for one as for the other?
Symeon foreign
Jhudah foreign
Zebulun foreign
Dan foreign
Aſher foreign
Benjamin foreign
foreign Reuben
foreign Levi
foreign Jſſachar
foreign Naphtali
foreign Gad
foreign Ihoſeph
Firſt, it is compoſed of many preſumptions without warrāt of ſcripture: and namely, theſe, 1. That Ioſephs name in this place ſhould be vvritten with H, and withall ſuch a diſtribution of their names that ech of the ſtones might have juſt 25 letters vponupon them: a cabaliſticall fancy: 2, that Symeon was written on the left ſhoulder as in the table: and not with Reuben on the ſame ſtone: as alſo the ſeparating of Ioſeph and Benidmin & not ſetting them on the ſame ſtone: and ſome other of them in like maner alſo: 3. The vnequall ſetting of the handmayds Children in the middes neither perfectly according to the time of their birth whiles Iſſachar and Zebulunare ſet before Dan and Naphtan nor according to the dignity of the Mothers, while Rachels ſonnes are placed after the handmayds: 4, the placing of Naphtali before Dan his elder brother, being both ſonnes of the ſame mother, of Bilhah the handmayde: In all theſe your Rambam lCol. 2.18hath vniuſtly advanced himſelf in thoſe things which he never ſaw, raſhly puft vp of the minde of his fleſh, & was not taught of God in the ſcriptures. Such curious and light bladders of preſumption blowne vp with the breath of blinde and infidel Rabbines ought not to be admitted of you, neither are they to be tolerated of any Chriſtians.
Gad foreign
Aſher foreign
Jſſachar foreign
Zebulun foreign
Ioſeph foreign
Beniamin foreign
foreign Reuben
foreign Symeon
foreign Levi
foreign Jhudah
foreign Dan
foreign Naphtali
This expoſition of R. Solomon though it have a vaine reſpect to the equal number of letters on ech ſtone, yet is it far more agreeable to the ſimplicity of the ſcriptures then that of Maimony, being free from thoſe 4. vnwarrantable preſumptions delivered by him. VVhy do you take the worſe and leave the better? 2. R. Moſes Kotſenſis oSepher mitſvoth haggadol. trac. veſſels of ſanct. praecept. affirmat. 173.alſo as he relates the expoſition of Maimony, ſo doth he alſo ſet downe the interpretation of R. Solomon and doth not determine the ordering of the ſtones by Maimony to be more juſt and vvarrantable, then the order declared by Iarchi. 3. VVhen there is ſpeech in the Thalmud of the diſtribution of the 12. tribes, 6 vponupon mount Gerizim to bleſſe and 6 vponupon mount Ebal to curſe: it is thus recorded there pThalmud in Sotah cap. 7. f. 36.R. Cahana ſaith, as they are divided here, ſo were they divided in the ſtones of the Ephod, &c. Now the diviſion of them vponupon the two mountaines was thus: on Gerizim ſtood, qDeut. 27 12.13.Simeon, Levi, Iudah, Iſſachar, Ioſeph, Beniamin: on Ebal ſtood, Reuben, Gad, Aſher, Zebulun, Dan & Naphtali: This order of the two …les contradicts your order of the two ſtones: Againe in the ſame next of the Thalmud it is noted that the names of he tribes vponupon the ſecond ſtone were according to their birthes, but not on the firſt, becauſe Iudah was there placed formoſt. Thus they expounded Exod. 28.18. referring thoſe vvords, according to their birthes, vntounto the latter clauſe of the verſe onelyonly, and not vntounto the former part. rThalmud. in Sotah c. 7. Fol. 36. A. B.4, in the ſame … tractate it is recorded that R. Hamina the ſonne of Gamaliel ſayd, the names of the tribes are not diſtributed in the ſt… of the Ephod accor…g to the order of the diſtribution in the book of numbers, but according to the order in the book of Exod. to wit, the ſonnes of Loah according to their order: the ſonnes of Rachel one of this ſide an other of that: and the ſonnes of the handmaydes in the middes. This teſtimonie is very corruptly and imperfectly ſAdvertiſement. of corruptiōs N. 1.alledged by Mr. Br…n, and yet after he hath perverted the ſame, he ſaith vainely, this note of the Thalmud endeth this …ſie: and again in the margine he poynts at it and calles it, an exquiſite note for a tranſlatour: vvhereas if there be any weight in that teſtimonie (as there is not, it being a mere preſumptiō) hē doth it plainely refute both his opiniō, & yours that without judgement follow him too much, in this matter of ordering the ſtones: for if the ſonnes of the handmaydes were placed in the middes betwixt the ſonnes of Rachel as in Exo. 1.…5. on this maner, Beniamin, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Aſcher, Ioſeph, as R. Hanina would have, then are both your deſcriptions falſe, being different from this order.
5. R. Iohana… in that gloſſe vponupon the Thalmud which hath this title affixed, *Lex fux. gloſſ. on Sota vbi ſupra.Thorah or, ſaith, Beniamin was half vponupon this ſide, to wit, vponupon the ſecond ſtone, where the names were written according to the order an mount Ebal, Ben; and vponupon the firſt ſtone, jamin. In the gloſſe vponupon the otherſide of the Thalmud, it is againe noted how Iehud… was placed firſt among the ſtones. 6. For a further proof of the lightnes and inſufficiently of theſe Rabbinicall expoſitions and preſumptions, conſider but the vanities that are recorded in the ſame leafe of the Thalmud above noted: ſpeaking of the tDeut, 27.5.7.altar vponupon the ſtones vvhereof God had commanded them to vvrite his law, they record, that the law was written vponupon the ſtones of the altar in 70. languages as it is ſayd, well and plainely, &c. They ſay there alſo, The hornet paſſed not over with them: but is it not vvritten, uExo. 23.I vvill ſend the hornet before thee? R. Simeon ben Lakiſh ſaith, at the brink of Iorden the hornet ſtood and ſprinkled bitternes or gall vponupon them, and blinded their eyes above, and made them eunuches below, as it is ſayd, xAmos. 2.I deſtroyed the Amorites before them, whoſe height was like the height of Cedars, and he vvas ſtrong as the okes: notvvithſtanding I deſtroyed his fruit from above and his root from beneath. R. Papa ſaith, there vvere tvvo hornets one for Moſes and one for Ioſhuah; that of Moſes paſſed not over, but that of Ioſhua did go over. There alſo they write how the Angel Gabriel taught the 70. languages vntounto Ioſeph: with other ſuch like fictions. Let ſober men take heed how they build any of their opinions vponupon ſuch preſumptuous expoſitours as theſe be: let not men ſeek for order among the ſonnes of confuſion that dwell in the ſhadow of death, where there is no order, but their light is as darknes itſelf.
AGaine, touching the order of the Tribes names vponupon the ſtones of the Breaſt-plate, you note thus. yAnhor. on Exo. 28.21.And here the Greek tranſlation addeth, according to their generatiōs (or birthes) as was expreſsed in the tenth verſe, and is here againe implyed. For in the ſame order that they were graven vponupon the Berylles, were they here ſet and graven vponupon twelve ſeverall ſtones: as they are here ſet down in the Page following.
| VponUpon the | 1 Sardine. | was graven | 1 Reuben. | Sonns of Lea. |
| 2 Topaze. | 2 Symeon. | |||
| 3 Smaragd. | 3 Levi. | |||
| 4 Chalcedonie. | 4 Iudah. | |||
| 5 Saphir. | 5 Iſſachar. | |||
| 6 Sardonyx. | 6 Zabulon. | |||
| 7 Hyacinth. | 7 Dan. | Of Bilha, Rachels mayd | ||
| 8 Chryſopraſe. | 8 Naphtali. | |||
| 9 Amethyſt. | 9 Gad. | Of Zelpha, Leahs mayd | ||
| 10 Chryſolite. | 10 Aſer. | |||
| 11 Beryll. | 11. Ioſeph. | Of Rachel. | ||
| 12. Iaſper | 12 Beniamin |
Herevnto I anſwer, 1. The names of the tribes are often deſcribed vntounto vsus expreſſely and plainely: many times zGen. 29. with 30. ch. & 35.23.…6. & 45.8.—24. & 49.3-27 Exod. 1.2.3, &c.before and many times aNumb. 1.5.—42. & 2.3.—29. & 7.12.—78. & 10.14.—27. & 13.5.—16. & 26.5.48. Deut. 27.12.13. & 33.6-24. 1 Chro. 2.1.2. Rev. 7.5-8after this place in Exodus, but never according to this order which you imagine here: alwayes ſome difference is obſerved more or leſſe. And what preſumption is this, without warrant of ſcripture revealed to apply the names vntounto the ſtones, contrary vntounto the order of reckoning the tribes in every place? vvhat modeſt Chriſtian dare imitate you herein?
2. VVhereas you tell vsus that the Greek tranſlation addeth, according to their generations: I have ſhewed before that the greek tranſlation which you alledge ſo oft in vaine, is a moſt corrupt, and forged thing abounding with many vnlawfull & preſumptuous additions, ſubtractions and alterations of the holy text, and therfore we ought not to build expoſitions ſo boldly vponupon the credit and authority of ſuch a falſe and deceavable tranſlation.
3. Suppoſe it had bene expreſſed in the text, that the names of the tribes: had bene engraven vponupon theſe ſtones according to their generations: yet doth it not follow that they ſhould be engraven according to the order, which you do here ſo peremptorily avouch and demonſtrate in this table; for if the order according to the time of their birth be preciſely followed, then are they to be reckoned as in Gen. 29, & 30, and then ſhould the Children of the handmayds be ſet before Iſſachar & Zabulon, contrary to this your order: if the time of their birthes be followed in ſome part and meaſure, yet ſo as reſpect be had vntounto the dignity of Leah and Rachel above their maydes, then might the order of Gen. 35, or Gen. 46, have bene followed: which both are alſo contrary vntounto this your order; neither of them leaving Beniamin to the laſt place, as you doe. Chriſtian humilitye and ſhamefaſtnes ſhould have taught you to have ſuſpended your judgement herein, & not to have intruded your ſelf into ſuch things as God hath not manifeſted vntounto you.
But for the eſtabliſhing of this your aſſertion, you tell vsus inthe ſame bAnnot. on Exo. 28.21.place, that This order of names is before ſhewed out of the Ieruſalemy Thargum: The teſtimony of this Thargum you propound vntounto vsus and very carefully ſet before our eyes cIbid. on verſ. 17.18 19. & 20.foure ſeverall times according to the four parts of it: you minſe it as if it were Manna or ſome angells food to feaſt vsus therewith and to inſtruct vsus concerning the four rewes of ſtones; And this is that teſtimony which Mr. Broughton alſo hath in like maner dAdvertiſement of corruptiōs N. 1.alledged to the ſame purpoſe.
Herevnto I anſwer, 1. The teſtimony of this fabulous writing is of no worth, being full of vnwarrantable preſumptions, fables, errours and moſt groſſe abſurdities. In the firſt ſection of Geneſis, this Thargum ſaith, that Two thouſand yeares before the world was created, God created the law, and prepared Hell and the garden of Eden, &c. On Exod. 1. this Thargum ſaith of Shiphrah the midwife, that ſhe was Iochebed; and of Puah, that ſhe vvas Miriam; that theſe women fearing God got them a good name in the reſt of the generations, and built them houſes, the houſe of the Levites, and the houſe of the great Prieſthood: This Ieruſalem paraphraſt on Gen. 32. confirmes the fable of Eſaw his biting Iaakob by the neck, as was noted before, and ſaith that both wept, Eſaw becauſe his teeth vvere ſet on edge, and Iaakob becauſe his neck was become Marble. This ſame Thargum on Deut. 33. telleth vsus, how the glory of God vvas revealed on Mount Seir to give the law to the ſonnes of Eſaw: but when they found written therein ye ſhall not kill, they vvould not receave it. That then this glory ſhined on the mount of the border, to deliver this law vntounto the ſonns of Iſmael: but vvhē they found vvritten therein ye ſhall not ſteale, they would not receive it. That then the glory of God returned and vvas revealed on mount Sinai with millions of holy Angels: That then Iſrael ſayd, whatſoever the vvord of the Lord ſaith, we vvill do it and will receyve it, &c. And with a multitude of ſuch like fabulous matters is that Thargum full ſtuffed: when you feed your readers with allegations of ſuch authors, you may fill their bellies with gravel and aſhes, and choake them in ſtead of nouriſhingthem. And a heap of ſuch vanities are in the ſame, which ſhew the vnſoundnes thereof.
2. Even in that very place which you alledge is there apparant and manifeſt errour in expounding the ſtones of the breaſt plate: and to omit others, this is to be obſerved in the two laſt ſtones, which this Thargum tranſlates, Bedoicha & margalitha; Bdelium & a pearle: and herein contradicteth your tranſlation: By this Thargum, Beniamins name ſhould not be engraven vponupon the Iaſper, as you would have it: If you think the Thargum to be erroneous in this poynt, why do you follow the preſumption of it in an other which is vttred as it vvere vvith the ſame breath in the expoſition of the ſame verſe touching order of the names?
3. Againſt this Thargum Ieruſalemy, I may oppoſe the Thalmud Ieruſalemy: though neither of them be indeed of any worth, yet of you they are much eſteemed and oft alledged; and of the Iewes this Thalmud is the more reſpected. In eThalmud Ieruſalemy in Sotah Fol. 21. B.it, among the opinions of other Rabbines, according to that vvhichwhich I noted before out of the Babylonian Thalmud, the opinion of R. Zabida is recorded, touching the names in the Ephod, that the firſt were not written according to the order (of their birth) becauſe Iehudah was King, but the later were written according to the order. And ſo if, (as you affirme) the ſame order of engraving was obſerved both on the two ſhoulder ſtones and on the 12 in the breaſtplate, then this Thalmud Ieruſalemy affordes vsus an order contrary to you and to your Thargum Ieruſalemy.
Againe, for confirmation of the order deſcribed by you; you alledge that fAnnot. on Exo. 28 21.the ſame is alſo expreſsed by the Chaldee paraphraſt on Song. 5.14. where ſpeaking of the 12 tribes engraved on 12 precious ſtones, he nameth them thus: 1, Reuben, 2 Symeon, 3 Levi, 4 Iudah, 5 Iſsachar, 6 Zabulon, 7 Dan, 8 Naphtali, 9 Gad, 10 Aſher, 11 Ioſeph, 12 Beniamin: who were like to the 12. celeſtiall ſignes, bright as lamps, and poliſhed in their works like yvorie, and ſhining like Saphirs. I anſwer;
1. This Chaldee paraphraſe of R. Ioſeph Caecus (as it is commonlytaken,) I have “Pag. 390.already ſhewed to be moſt fabulous ſuperſtitious and erroneous, a fit match to be alledged as witneſſe with your Thargum Ieruſalemy; neither of them being of any credit: vponupon the words of the former Chapter, Song. 4.6 vntill the day break and ſhadowes flee away, &c. this paraphraſt ſpeakes like a charmer or Magician ſhewing vsus a diſtinction of devilles, making ſome to be night ſpirits, ſome morning ſprights, and ſome noone ſprights: as alſo away of putting them to flight by the ſmel of the perfume in the ſanctuary: not much vnlike to the gTobit. 6.9. & 8.2.3.chaſing away of the feēd Aſmodeus by the perfume of the heart and liver of a fiſh. The expoſitions which this paraphraſt gives on ech chapter of this Song, are a pregnant proofe of the authors inſufficiency to be allowed as a witneſs in theſe controverſies.
2. To go no further then this paraphraſe on this verſe which you alledge; vve may here obſerve how he erreth in the expoſition of the ſtones, in making the ſeventh to be a Beryll & the eight a ſaphir, manifeſtly contrary to the text, & contrary to you alſo: Had you fully ſet downe your allegation, as you do a part thereof; had you noted how this paraphraſt tranſlates the ſtones, ſo as you do his naming of the tribes, then the reader might eaſily have perceived either your authors errour, or els the refutation of yourſelf by his words cited in this place. But you did wiſely to leave out that which is againſt yourſelf.
3. This paraphraſt in this ſame place alledged, ſaith that the names of the three Fathers of the world, Abraham, Iſaac and Iaakob were engraven togather with the twelve tribes: Thus alſo it is recorded in both the hThalmud Babylon. in joma, c. 7. Fol. 73. Thalmud Ieruſalemy in joma Fol. 44.Thalmud, viz. for ſo much as the letters Tſadi & Koph were not found in the names of the 12 tribes in the breaſtplate, therfore as R. Samuel ſaith, the names of Abraham, Iſaac, and Iaakob were written above the names of the tribes in the breaſt plate; and becauſe there wants alſo the letter Teth in thoſe 12 names, therfore as R. Acha ſaith there was written vnderunder them, ſchibte jeſchurun: or as R. Moſes Mikkotſi iSepher mitſvoth haggadol precept. affirm. 173.noteth, ſchibte jah: And ſo by this meanes they would have allthe letters of the whole Hebrew Alphabet conteyned in the breaſtplate; to the end that any anſwer of God by vrim and Thummim might be delivered in the letters of the breaſtplate and ſo read and vnderſtood. Seing theſe be their bold aſſertiōs, who would not be afraid to take the teſtimony of theſe preſumptuous Rabbines? And much more ought every miniſter of Chriſt to be aſhamed to alledge their teſtimonies in his expounding of the ſcriptures, whiles with one breath they do at the ſame time ſend forth ſuch vnſound fancies.
4. Even as you yourſelf alledge & repeate the words of this paraphraſt: his vanitie appeares further in this, that by way of myſterie theſe twelve ſtones are compared to the Zodiack, like vntounto the twelve celeſtiall ſignes, &c. which kIoſephus antiq. Iudaic. lib. 3. c. 9.others yet have ſet downe more fully, deſcribing the the fabrick of the world by the high Prieſts attire; The 4 elements they ſhew thus: the earth by the ſylk, ſea by the purple, ayre by the blew, fire by the ſkarlet colour; the ſun & moone by the 2 ſtones on the ſhoulders: the 12 ſignes of the Zodiack by the 12. ſtones in the breaſtplate: the thūders & lightnings by the ſoūd of the belles & pomegranates: the higheſt heavens by the holy crowne, &c. So your Maimony lMo. nebuch, chel. 2 perek. 11 & Chel. 3 per. 5.expounds many places of ſcripture. And the vanity of theſe preſumptuous ſpeculations is ſuch that if there were nothing els it might juſtly deterre vsus from building our expoſitions vpō their traditions, as you do. To give one inſtance more hereof in ſtead of many, and this touching theſe garments and ornaments of the high prieſt: R. Simon ſayth, “Thalmud Ieruſalem, in Ioma. Fol. 44. col. 2, & 3.As the offrings did ſerve to make reconciliatiō for ſins, ſo the garments alſo: That the Coate made attonemēt for thē that had worne linſey-woolſey: Some ſay, it made attonement for them that ſhed blood, becauſe it is written, they dipped the coat in blood: (Gen. 37.31.) That the Dinnen Breeches did reconcile thoſe that had vncovered the ſhame, &c. That the Miter reconciled the proud in ſpirit. That the Girdle did make reconciliation for theeves; and as ſome ſay for the frowardnes of heart: That the Breaſtplate of judgement did expiate them that had perverted judgement:That the Ephod did expiate their ſin that had committed Idolatry: Their proofe is becauſe it is ſayd, without Ephod and without Teraphim (Hoſ. 4.4.) That the Belles of the Robe did make attonement for an evill tongue: That the Golden plate vponupon the forehead of the high-prieſt did reconcile the blaſphemers: and their proofe is becauſe it is ſayd, the ſtone sticked in his forehead (1. Sa. 17 49.) ſome ſay it did reconcile the impudent that had an hard face, their proofe is becauſe it is ſayd, thou haddest a whores forehead (Ier. 3.3.) Others of them, as “In Akedath Iſaak, portâ. 51.Ben Arama out of vajikra rabba, do record this ſame myſterie: But let thoſe that ſeek the meaning of the holy Ghoſt, leave theſe things to the Rabbines, & let Iewiſh fables alone.
5. Againſt this Chaldee paraphraſt may be oppoſed an other Chaldee paraphraſt vponupon the law going vnderunder the name of Ionathan, who though he be vaine, yet is he not worſe then this; but he is one of the authors whom you yourſelf do //Annot. on Exo. 3.14.alledge in the expoſition of Moſes, and he (as is mAdvertiſem. of corrup. N. 3.confeſſed) placeth the names of the tribes vponupon the ſtones in an other order then you would have them: ſo that one of the Chaldee paraphraſts ſpeaks as much againſt you, as th'other doth for you Let them both alone and ſeek better vvarrant for your expoſitions of the holy ſcripture.
In concluſion of this poynt touching the order of the ſtones, you ſay, nAnnot. on Exo. 28.21.The ſame order we ſhewed alſo from Maimony, to be vponupon the two Berylls verſe 10, except the tranſplacing of Bilhahs ſonnes. To this I anſwer, 1. the preſumption of Maimony in this matter is already manifeſted before. 2. even this very exception ſerves for the refutation both of you and your Maimony for what warrant is there to make this exception, and to aſſigne a different order and place to the ſonnes of Bilhah vponupon the ſhoulders and vponupon the breaſt of Aaron? what reaſon have you to follow ſuch as without warrant do thus place and tranſplace the tribes according to their fancie?
A Fruit of this your preſumptuous intruſion touching the order of the names in the ſtones, is your errour about the tranſlation of the ſtones themſelves; and in ſpeciall that you interpret oAnnot. on Exo. 28.18.jahalom to be the ſardonyx, which ſhould have bene tranſlated the Adamant or Diamonde, according to the example of the beſt tranſlatours both new and old: For
1. The Adamant is knowne and found to be the hardeſt of all ſtones, reſiſting the power pPlinie, hiſtor. nat. lib. 37, c. 4.both of yron and fire, neither brokē by the one nor moltē by the other: & therevpō in Greek named Adamas of the invincible force of it, not eaſily ſubdued. Herevnto agreeth the hebrew name jahalom, comming of the word to ſtrike with the hammer: ſhewing that this ſtone is as the hammer of other ſtones, breaking them, but not broken by them: Herevnto agreeth the Chaldee name, qOnkelos on Exo. 28 18. Ionathan on Ezek. 28.13.Sabhalom, ſo called of enduring the ſtrokes of the Hammer. Herevnto agreeth the arabique name, al mas which rOn Exo. 28.18.Aben Ezra and from him ſIn lib. radic. on jahalom.Kimchi do note to be given vntounto jahalom, becauſe it breaketh all other ſtones and boreth through the Bdelium, &c. The Adamant is alſo in the Arabique named tpentaglot. val. ſhind. in Dum.Diama of Dum a word that notes durablenes and continuance: The Perſian Thargum likewiſe gives ſuch a name vntounto this ſtone, as ſhewes the ſame nature of it: and calleth it uOn Exod. 28.18.loguard having affinity with the word garad which ſignifyeth Scalpere to cut or grave: and according to this Pliny ſaith of the Adamants; vNatur. hiſtor. lib. 37. c. 4.expetuntur a ſcalptoribus, &c. They are deſired of engravers, &c. It ſeemes that of this ſtone they have their ſcalpra or ſcalpella, inſtruments of cutting and engraving. Now ſeing the name Iahalom doth ſo fitly agree vntounto the nature of the Adamant, it is againſt al reaſon to leave and change the fitteſt name, and in your tranſlation to give a new name without the force and help of any new argument.
VVhereas you ſay of the Sardonyx that wOn Exo. 28.18.It is a very hard ſtone like the Adamantor Diamond: and Mr. Broughton alſo ſaith, that it is the hardeſt next the Diamond, and fit for the notation of jahalom; I aſk for your proofc herein: where is your vvarrant that the Sardonyx is a very hard ſtone like the Adamant? It is vvonder you would not expreſſe it, if you had any. And beſides, if it were as you ſay, that the Sardonyx were like vntounto or next vntounto the Adamant in hardnes: yet hereby you confeſſe that the Adamant excelleth in hardnes: and all reaſon requires that the thing which is moſt excellent in his kinde ſhould beate the name or denomination above the reſt, vnleſs ſome other neceſſary proofe vvere brought to the contrary.
2. Seing the maner of the holy Ghoſt is to deſcribe & commend vntounto vsus the vvorth of excellent things by xProv. 3.15. & 8.11 & 20.15. & 31.10. Mat. 7.6.comparing them vntounto precious ſtones and pearles: and in this place Exod. 28. the Lord vvould ſhew vntounto vsus the deare & precious account that he makes of his Children by engraving their names in theſe gemmes and ſetting them vponupon the breaſt of his ſonne figured by the high prieſt: ſeing alſo that the Diamond is yPliny, Natur. hiſt. l. 37. c. 4.eſteemed of greateſt price, not onelyonly among gemmes, but above other humane things; for this cauſe, you ought not to have changed the common interpretation, by leaving out the moſt precious Adamant ſerving moſt fitly to expreſſe the meaning of the Lord, vnleſſe you could have brought vntounto vsus ſome rare and ſtrong argument for your ſo doing. He that doth vnjuſtly take out the more precious ſtone, and inſtead thereof put in a baſer into the breaſtplate, doth thereby in ſome meaſure obſcure and darken the counſell of the Lord, and hide the brightnes of his grace.
3. Seing the counſell of God in appoynting this breaſtplate to be made, vvas (as in the reſt of the tabernacle-vvorks to ſhevv his vviſedome and glory by giving gifts vntounto men, & by zExod. 31.1-6.putting vviſedome into the hearts of all that were vviſe-hearted; and in ſpeciall, (as is of purpoſe largely deſcribed) by calling Bezaleel and filling him with the ſpirit of God, in wiſedome and in vnderſtanding, and in knowledge in all workmanſhip: and yet more particularly by reaching him the art to work in gold, to ingrave in ſtone and to filler ſet the precious ſtones in gold: ſeing the Adamant is more hard to be engraven then other ſtones, & that therfore the wiſedome of God in teaching them to ſet this ſtone in thebreaſtplate, might appeare rather more, then in ſetting of the other ſtones: for this cauſe, men ought not vvithout ſure ground to remoove this ſtone out of the breaſt-plate, leaſt they be found guilty of cutting off one ſpeciall meanes and occaſion of ſhewing and manifeſting Gods wiſedome and glory ſeing in all his works the Lord vſeth to ſeek ſuch occaſions. Pliny aVbi ſupra.conſidering the hardnes of the Adamant, and withall the meanes that were found out to break the ſame by ſteeping it in the freſh and warme blood of a Goate, breakes out into admiration concerning this experiment, and acknowledgeth all ſuch inventions to be the gift of ſome divine power or godhead teaching men ſuch wiſedome and ſkill. VVhether this invention of preparing the Adamant to be engraven by the meanes of goates blood, was found out in the dayes of Bezaleel at the making of the breaſtplate: or whether any other way proportionable vntounto this was then vſed, it is vncertaine: Alwayes we are ſure, that ſuch rare invention and ſkill vvas vſed by the help of Gods ſpirit, as might juſtly moove men to break out into Admiration, and vvith Pliny to acknowledge the wiſedome of a divine power teaching the ſame. Herevnto ſhould men attend, and take heed of denying any meanes or occaſion that might ſerve to manifeſt and demonſtrate this glory of God.
4. VVhen as you diſpute againſt Mr. Brought on touching ſylk or vvool in the high Prieſts Ephod: you alledge for yourſelf againſt him, the judgements and interprerations of divers learned men, as namely, of bAnſw. to Mr. Broug. Pag. 3.Tremellius, Iunius, Marcus Marinus in Arca Noa, Munſterus, Vatablus, Pelicanus, Lyra, Arias Montanus, Forſterus, Avenarius: If the judgement and interpretations of theſe men, vvere at that time of any weight for you againſt him, thē are they now at this time alſo of weight againſt both you and him, touching the precious ſtones in the high Prieſts Ephod: for there is never a one of theſe your ten authors but they are againſt you in this matter: none of them interpret jahalom to be a Sardonyx as you do: ech of them allowes a place for the Adamant or Diamond, in the Ephod. And beſides theſe, there are yet more then ten other witneſſes, which do all of them contradict your tranſlation of this ſtone; Iohan. Buxtorfius, Mercerus, Pagninus, David de Pomis, Reuchlinus, Valentinus Schindlerus, Ioſephus, Hierome, Calvine, and even that Greek tranſlation which you do ſo oftē alledge, though it have not the name of the Adamāt yet it hath not the Sardonyx: and to theſe may be added the teſtimony of other tranſlatours in the Engliſh, Dutch, French Bibles & many others: and not one of them but they are in their tranſlations & expoſitions of this word witneſſes againſt you. It ſeemes you have taken the Adamant from the breaſtplate of the highprieſt that you might ſet it in your owne breaſt, or in your owne forehead, and ſo by vertue thereof hardened your face not onelyonly againſt all reaſon and judgement of the learned in this controverſy, but againſt all the Churches of Chriſt by oppoſing them: By the vertue of this invincible & hard Adamant in your forehead you ſtand out againſt all the churches of God, and renounce the fellowſhip of every one of them.
But as Mr. Smith once vvrote for his ſeparation, that cParallels p. 34.35.having Iohn the divine for him, he reſpected not vvhat all other divines could ſay againſt him: ſo you alſo flying vntounto the Revelation of Iohn, for vvarrant of your tranſlation, do tell vsus, that dAnnot. on Exod. 28.18.jahalom, in Rev. 21.20. is named in Greek Sardonyx. And this alſo M. Broughton hath eAdvertiſ. of corrupt. M. 2.told vsus before you. In an other place you you ſay, fAnſwer to Mr. Brough. p. 37.you followed the tranſlation of Iohn the Apoſtle Rev. 21 of whom you were perſwaded in generall, before you knew the particulars, that he tranſlated all the ſtones from Aarons breaſt to the heavenly Ieruſalem. That you might moſt ſafely follow him (you ſay) none of grace will deny. I anſwer; Though none of grace will deny that you ought to follow the Apoſtle, yet many of grace and learning will deny that you do follow him: your bare perſwaſion and therevpon your bold aſſertion that Iohn did tranſlate all the 12. ſtones from Aarons breaſt, and that he named Iahalom in Greek Sardonyx, is no vvarant for any of grace to follow you herein. VVhere is your proof or ſhew of proofthat Iohn did ſo tranſlate all the ſtones, as you ſpeake? your bare perſwaſions and aſſertions that he did ſo do not help you, but make you more guilty of preſumption, in obtruding your conceits vponupon the holy Ghoſt and taking the name of God in vaine. VVe ſee the names of the tribes themſelves are reckoned vp by the gRev. 7.5.….8.holy Ghoſt in the Revelation with omiſſion of Dan, otherwiſe then they are reckoned in any place of the old teſtament: and how know you then, or how can any affirme that the very ſame ſtones mentioned Exod. 28. are all without exception and omiſſion of any reckoned vp in Rev. 21. as by your tranſlation and annotations you make the ſimple to beleeve?
Through this your preſumption in expounding the ſtones of the breaſtplate it comes to paſſe that you deale not ſo ſoundly in your controverſy about the ſupremacy of Peter, as otherwiſe you might have done: vvhen you vvould ſhew the vanity of the popiſh argument, taken from this, that Peter was named firſt among the Apoſtles, you declare it thus: hAnſw. to Ioh. Ainſw p. 73.The firſt foundation of the wall of the heavenly Ieruſalem, was a Iaſper, the ſtone of Beniamin, th' Apoſtle Pauls tribe: will you grant me hence to conclude that S. Paul was head of the Catholique Church? In theſe words you give advantage to your adverſary, for thus might he anſwer you. 1, it is preſumption to ſay that the Iaſper vvas Beniamins ſtone: your allegation of Exo. 28. is but an abuſe of ſcripture: you might as well have ſayd that the Iaſper was the ſtone of Aſcher or Naphtalt; being alike vncertaine. 2. though the Iaſper had bene the ſtone of Beniamin in Exod. 28. yet could it not be the ſtone of Paul in Rev. 21.19. becauſe thoſe 12. ſtones had the names of the iRev. 21.14.lambes twelve Apoſtles, of which number Paul vvas kMat. 10.1-5. & Act. 1.26 1 Cor. 15.5.8.none, but was diſtinguiſhed and reckoned apart from the twelve: vvhatſoever therfore may be ſayd for peter in other places, paul could not ſtep in to plead for any head ſhip above the reſt from that place. 3. Suppoſe the ſtones in Rev. 21. had bene all of them, the very ſame that vvere mentioned in Exo. 28. yet could not the Apoſtles be diſtinguiſhedthereby or claime for preheminence in reſpect of the tribe, becauſe divers of them were of the ſame tribe being brethren, as Peter & Andrew: Iames and Iohn; Iames and Iude; and for ſome of the reſt they were happily of the ſame tribes with theſe: and therfore of neceſſity ſundry of them muſt have their names vvritten not vponupon the ſtone of that tribe whereof they deſcended by birth, but on ſome other: and thus your inſtance faileth in the very ground thereof, and therfore cannot juſtly ſerve for ſuch a declaration of your reproof of their argument, as you intend thereby.
Laſtly, to conclude this poynt: to ſhew the folly of the Rabbines, and how vaine their teſtimony in theſe things is, obſerve their ſuperſtition and contradiction about an other of Aarons ornaments: for example, The Rabbines as is lDruſius comment, ad loca diff. Exo. p. 217 cap. 52.obſerved, have three opinions, touching the golden plate, viz. 1. R. Eleazar ſhewes how the words engraven vponupon the ſame vvere vvritten in one line, on this maner, Holines to Iehovah 2. R. Levi, thought if they were engravē in two lines thē the word Holines was written in the line below, & To Iehovah in the line above. 3, others as in Moſes Mikkotſi thinking they were engraven in two lines would have Holines to in the vnderunder line: & Iehovah above. Touching this plate, you obſerve out of Maimony, mAnnot. on Exo. 28 36.the letters were ſo gravē that they ſtood out above the rest of the plate & were not cut inward: which is a mere preſumption and rather refuted by the ſignification of the word there vſed to expreſſe that ingraving then approved by the ſame. And whither may men be led if they will hearken vntounto theſe preſumptions as you have done touching the order of the ſtones in the Breaſtplate? Let the example of Druſius be a warning to you and others, that they take not ſo much heed vntounto Iewiſh fables: This learned man, by his too great regard of the Rabbines in their vvritings, was coloured with divers of their abſurd opinions: taking ſome of them for a certaine truth, and brought alſo to doubt and fluctuate about others: for example; whereas the Rabbines write that Eſaws Angel wreſtled with Iaakob for the bleſſingand nR. David Kimchi in Hoſ. 12.wept becauſe he could not prevayle, Druſius writes, oPraeterit. lib. 4. in Ioh. 11. verſ. 35.if an Angel once wept, what marvel that Ieſus ſhould weep? and that the Angel did weep which wreſtled with Iaakob, it is certaine from Hoſ. 12.4. Whereas the ſuperſtitious Rabbines hold it to be a haynous crime & a matter of death for any (except the prieſts) to read or name this word Iehovah as it is written, herein alſo he followes them thus far; that he accounts it pPraeterit. lib. 10 in Apo. 19. verſ. 12.mere ignorance, if not blaſphemy, to hold that it may lawfully be read: and after againe he ſaith qIbid. in append. ad p. 445.he thinkes that no godly man which feares the Lord can with a ſafe conſcience vſe the ſame. In his annotations vponupon thoſe words, a voyce from heaven Mat. 3.17. he ſaith, rPraeterit. lib. 1. p. 6.7it was not ſo much a voyce, as Bath-kol, or an Eccho; and in the ſame place noting out of the Rabbines 4. degrees of prophecy, he obſerves this Bath-kol to be the loweſt degree: and below vrim and Thummim. The ſeven ſpirits mentioned Rev. 1.4. he notes to be ſPraeterit. l. 10. p. 402Angelles: and declares this by the counterfait ſtory of Tobit. c. 12.18. & by the teſtimony of Ionathā ſpeaking of the ſevē arch-Angels that ſtand before God. VponUpon the doctrine of the Rabbines, he profeſſeth that he is tIn loca diffic. Lev. c. 61.doubtfull and wavering in his minde whether Polygamie was forbidden by the law or not. Thus was he caryed, but your danger of being caryed further, is ſo much the greater in reſpect of your preſumptuous eſtate of ſeparatiō wherein you ſtād: in the practiſe & profeſſiō whereof (as if you were a new Prieſt riſen vp with vrim & Thummim to ſhew the errours of theſe laſt dayes) you arrogate vntounto yourſelf alone, above all other miniſters the knowledge of theſe three things, viz. of a true Church: of a true miniſter: and of a true Chriſtian: name one Miniſter of Chiſte in the world, if you can that beſide yourſelf is able to diſcerne of theſe three things: And think ſeriouſly withall in the feare of God, whether you be not in danger of being blowen away with the vvinde of preſumption and errour, for vvant of true humility.