Commentary on Romans, Biblical exegesis 1 · Observations on New Testament
Certaine observations premised of the New Testament in generall.
1. The Argument and matter of the New Testament.
THe New Testament though it had the same Author with the Old, namely CHRIST IESVS, and the same ende and scope to bring vsus vntounto Christ, for the Law was a schoolemaster to the same ende, Gal. 3.19. yet it differeth from the old: 1. in the substance and doctrine, 2. in the ratification, and confirmation, 3. in the rites and manner, 4. in the persons, to whome it was deliuered and committed. 1. Whereas the old Testament promised eternall life vnderunder the condition of perfect obedience of the Law, the Gospel onelyonly requireth the obedience of faith, Rom. 10.5, 6. 2. The old Testament was confirmed by the sprinkling of the blood of beasts, Exod. 24.8. but the New was sealed and ratified by the blood and death of Christ, Hebr. 9.14.17. 3. There were other rites and ceremonies of the old Law, as the sacrifices and oblations, circumcision, the paschal lambe, and such like: Christ hath instituted new Sacraments of the Gospel, Baptisme, and the Eucharist. 4. The old Testament was made onelyonly with the Hebrewes: but the new is commended vntounto the Church of God dispersed ouer the world, and therefore it is called Catholike.
The bookes of the New Testament, are 1. historicall, as of the acts, the sayings and doings of our blessed Sauiour, in the foure Euangelists: or of the Apostles, in the booke of the Acts. 2. or doctrinall, which specially concerne doctrine and instruction, without a continued historicall narration: such are the Epistles of the holy Apostles. 3. or Propheticall, as the booke of the Reuelation: yet though the bookes may be thus diuided in generall, there are both heauenly doctrines intermingled in the historicall bookes, as the heauenly sermons of our blessed Sauiour in the Gospel, and prophesies also are inserted both in the historicall and doctrinall bookes, as that of the destruction of Ierusalem, and the ende of the world, Matth. 24. and of the calling of the Iewes, Rom. 11. of the comming of Antichrist, 2. Thess. 2.
2. Of the language and tongue wherein the New Testament was originally written.
As the Old Testament was written originally in Hebrewe, because it was committed vntounto the Hebrewes, Rom. 3.2. so the New was set forth by the Apostles and Euangelists in the Greeke tongue, which was then generall, and vsed of the most famous nations, because it concerned the Church of God, which was dispersed in all countreys.
There are three other languages, wherein the Newe Testament, or some part thereof was written: first the Gospel of S. Matthewe, is held to hauehave beene written in the vulgar Hebrew tongue, which was then the Syriake, Iren. l. 3. c. 1. Hierom. praefat. in commentar. in Matth. which Athanasius thinketh to hauehave beene translated into Greeke by S. Iames, some thinke by S. Iohn: likewise the Epistle to the Hebrewes is thought by some to hauehave beene first written in the Hebrewe tongue: But neither of these is certaine: 1. It is rather like that S. Matthewe writ his Gospel in Greeke: because he citeth many places of the old Testament according to the Septuagint: as that Isay. 40.3. alleadged, Matth. 3.3. and Psal. 22.18. cited, Matth. 27.35. and the like is to be seene elsewhere. As also Matth. 27.46. these words, Eli, Eli, Lamasabacthani, are interpreted by the Euangelist in the Greeke tongue: which interpretation had beene superfluous if he had written in the Syriake or vulgar Hebrewe tongue: 2. for the same reasons, it is most probable, that the epistle to the Hebrewes was not written in the Hebrew, but in the Greeke tongue originally: because the Apostle followeth the translation of the Septuagint: and c. 7. he interpreteth the word Melchizedek in the Greeke tongue, which signifieth the king of righteousnesse.
An other language, wherein the new Testament is written, is the Syriake: into which tongue the Syrians doe thinke that the Newe Testament was translated by S. Marke: But 1. this is not like, that this Syriake translation should be so auncient: for then these auncient fathers Origen, Clemens Alexandrin, Epiphan. Hierome, Theodoret, Damascene, which were Bishops and Presbiters in Syria, or Egypt, would hauehave made some mention thereof in their writings, which they doe not. 2. And though the Syriake translation could be prooued, to hauehave beene of such antiquitie, yet it must giuegive place vntounto the authenticall Greeke, whereout it was translated.
A third tongue is the Latine, in the which Bellarmine out of Adrianus Finus, lib. 6 flagell. Iudcor. c. 80. and Damasus pontifical. would prooue that S. Marke writ his Gospel first at Rome, and afterward turned it into Greeke at Aquilea: But this is verie improbable. 1. Because the Greeke tongue was then more generally vsed then the Latine, and S. Paul writing to the Romanes, spake in the Greeke tongue for the reason, so also would S. Matthewe hauehave done. 2. If the Greeke were translated out of the Latine, why then doe not the Romanists vse a Latine translation answerable to the Greeke? whereas their vulgar translation much differeth from the Greeke: some where it addeth, as Mark. 1.1. the name (Isaia) the Prophet is inserted: sometime it leaueth out, as Mark. 6.11. all that clause is omitted: verily, verily, I say vntounto you, it shall be easier for Sodome and Gomorrha in the day of iudgement, then for that citie: sometime it choppeth and changeth, as c. 5.1. Garasenes for Gadarens: It remaineth then that the Newe Testament was originally written in the Greeke tongue for the reasons before alleaged.
3. The questions discussed.
Quest. 1. Of the word Testament, what it signifieth, and of what things it must be vnderstood.
1. The Hebrew word berith, signifieth both foreign, a compact or couenant made betweene parties, as Aquila translateth, as Hierome witnesseth, in Malach. 2. and foreign, a testament, or disposition of ones last will, as the word is vsed by the Apostle, Heb. 9.17.
2. Both these acceptions and takings of the word agree vntounto the holy Gospel: first it is a couenant betweene God and his people: the Lord offring reconciliation on his part, and requiring conditions to be performed on our part: as in the Law obedience, and perfect keeping of the lawe, so now the obedience of faith in Christ, our Mediator, and Reconciler: It is also a Testament not with any relation vntounto vsus, but onelyonly in respect of the Testator, and will-maker Christ Iesus, who ratified and confirmed both the Old and New Testament by his death, in the one prefigured and promised, in the other exhibited and performed: the testamentorie tables are the holy Scriptures both of the Old, and Newe Testament: the witnesses are the Prophets and Apostles, the writers also of this Testament: the seales are the Sacraments both of the one and the other.
3. The Old and newe couenant and Testament are one and the same in substance, both in respect of the parties betweene whom the couenant and conuention is made, God, and his Church, and of the ende and scope, which is to bring vsus vntounto the euerlasting inheritance: but the manner of dispensation is diuerse, according to the condition of the times, and the qualitie of the persons.
4. This couenant made betweene God and man some distinguish into the couenant of nature and grace: but euerie couenant now indeede is rather of grace: the naturall couenant made betweene the Creator and Man in Paradise, was violated by his transgression and disobedience: the couenant which now remaineth, is wholly to be ascribed vntounto grace, and it is either of some temporall grace and benefit, and that either generall, as was that which the Lord made with Noah, not to destroy the world any more with waters, Gen. 9. or particular, as was the promise made to Abraham, to inherite the land of Canaan, Gen. 15.18. and that made to Phineas concerning the priesthoode, Numb. 25.12. either of spirituall graces, as of the remission of sinnes, and the inheriting of euerlasting life in Christ.
2. Quest. Of the diuerse significations of the old and newe Testament.
1. The old Testament is 1. either taken for the doctrine of the lawe, which required exact obedience to the commandements, vnderunder the most grieuous commination of malediction vntounto the transgressors: yet couertly was propounded vntounto them the doctrine of repentance and faith in Christ, vnderunder the shadowes and rudiments of the Law, which were imposed vponupon that people, partly to humble them, and to bow downe their stiffe necks, partly to discerne them from other nations, and partly to lead them by the hand as vntounto Christ: so in this sense the old Testament 1. comprehendeth the doctrine of legall obedience, 2. the ceremoniall and ministeriall part of their legall rites and seruice, 3. the externall policie and regiment: in these respects the old Testament is abolished, and the Lord saith he will make a newe couenant with the house of Israel, Ierem. 31.31. 2. the old Testament is taken for the writings and tables of the scriptures: in which sense it is not abolished: one iotte thereof shall not perish, Matth. 5.18.
2. The Newe Testament also is taken diuersely. 1. either for the spirituall doctrine, which requireth obedience of faith in Christ, without any legall obseruations. 2. or for the Sacraments: as Christ calleth the Eucharist the Newe Testament in his blood in the institution of his last supper. 3. or for the writings of the Euangelists, and Apostles: So it is new, 1. because it succeeded the old. 2. because it setteth forth the newe doctrine of faith without legall rites. 3. it hath new sacraments, a new forme of worship, a new kind of Church. 4. it is confirmed after a newe manner, not by the blood of beasts, but by the most holy blood of the Blessed Mediator.
3. Quest. Of the bookes of the newe Testament their number and authoritie.
1. Concerning the number, and authoritie of the bookes of the Newe Testament, there is no question among the Christians, though the obstinate Iewes wilfully refuse them all: they are 27. in number, which Athanasius in Synops. distinguisheth into these fiue orders: 1. the foure Euangelists. 2. the Acts of the Apostles. 3. the 7. Canonicall Epistles: one of S. Iames, 2. of S. Peter, 3. of S. Iohn, and one of S. Iude: 4. the 14. Canonicall epistles of S. Paul. 5. the Propheticall booke of the Reuelation: But all these may be reduced to 3. kinds: the historicall, doctrinall, propheticall bookes: as is before shewed in the argument.
2. But these books of the New Testament were not alwaies receiued with the same approbation. 1. Some were euer held to be of vndoubted authoritie, as the 4. Euangelists, the Acts of the Apostles, the 1. of S. Peter, the 1. of S. Iohn: all S. Pauls Epistles, excepting onelyonly that to the Hebrewes. 2. Some were doubted of by a fewe, but of the most receiued, as the 2. of Peter, the 2. and 3. of Iohn, one of Iames, one of Iude, that to the Hebrewes, and the Apocalypse: But at the length these bookes were receiued and acknowledged for Canonicall by a generall consent: 3. Other bookes besides these, were priuately receiued by some in the Church, and were called Ecclesiasticall, as the Acts of Paul, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Reuelation of Peter, the Gospell according to the Hebrews. 4. Some bookes were foisted in by Heretikes, and more generally reiected of the Church: as the Gospell of Andrew, Thomas, Matthias: the Acts of Peter, Thomas, Matthias, and of the other Apostles: which were iudged to be Apochryphall bookes, and of no authoritie. 1. because in the writings of those, which succeeded the Apostles no mention is made of them. 2. the stile is diuerse from the stile of the Apostles. 3. and the doctrine contained in those bookes dissenting from the doctrine of the Apostles.
3. Beside these two latter sorts of bookes, all the rest are vndoubtedly held to be Canonicall, and of equall authoritie: and therefore that distinction of Sixtus Senensis is to be taken heede of: who calleth some bookes of the New Testament foreign, canonicall of the first sort, some foreign, canonicall of the second sort, which were sometime doubted of: for by this meanes should they not be of equall and the like authoritie: And beside, he saith, that these latter were held by some of the fathers to be Apochryphall bookes, vnderstanding Apochryphal bookes for such, as had an hid and vnknowne author: But indeede the Apochrypha are so called, not for that their author was vnknowne, for then diuerse of the Canonicall bookes should be Apochrypha, but because they were of an hid and obscure authoritie: in which sense none of the fathers euer held any of the Canonical bookes of the New Testament to be Apochrypha.
4. As the Heretikes brought in counterfeit bookes of their owne into the New Testament: so they reiected diuerse parts of the Canonical bookes. 1. Faustus the Manichie held diuerse things to be false in the New Testament: Augustin. lib. 33. cont. Faust. c. 3. 2. The Ebionites receiued none but the Gospel according to Saint Matthew, Iren. l. 1. c. 26. 3. the Marcionites onelyonly allowed S. Lukes Gospel, Epiphan. haeres. 42.4. the Acts of the Apostles, and S. Pauls epistles the Tatiane, and Seueriane heretikes reiected, Euseb. l. 4. c. 29. 5. Marcion and Basilides the epistles to Timothie, Titus, and to the Hebrewes, Hierom. praefat. ad Titum.
4. Places of doctrine in generall.
1. Doct. Of the excellencie of the Newe Testament aboue, and beyond the Old.
1. It excelleth in the the matter and doctrine, the law promiseth life onelyonly to those that keep it, the Gospel vntounto those which beleeue in Christ, Rom. 10.5, 6.
2. In the subiect: the lawe was written in tables of stone: but the Gospel is written by the spirit of God in the fleshie tables of our hearts, 2. Cor. 3.2.
3. In the end: the old Testament was the ministration of death, and the killing letter: the other is the ministration of the spirit which giueth life, 2. Cor, 3.6, 7.
4. In the condition and qualitie: the law imposed the hard yoke, and seruitude of ceremonies, which was impossible to be borne, Act. 15.10. but Christs yoke is easie: Math. 11. which of seruants adopteth vsus to be the sonnes of God, Rom. 8.15.
5. In the minister: Moses was the typical Mediator of the Olde Testament: but Christ the Lord and builder of the house, is the Mediator of the New, Heb. 3.3.
6. In the fruites and effects: the Old Testament could not purge the conscience from sinne: but the sprinkling of the blood of Christ purgeth the conscience from dead workes, Heb. 9.13, 14.
7. In the manner: the old Testament was folded vp in types and figures: as Moses vailed the glorie of his face: but now we see the glorie of the Lord in the Gospell with open face, 2. Cor. 3.18.
8. In the ratification: the old Testament was confirmed with the blood of beasts: the New by the death of Christ, quest. 17.18.
9. In the seales: the old was attended vponupon by bloodie sacrifices, and other such like hard Sacraments, as circumcision, which was painefull to the flesh: the New hath easie and vnbloodie sacraments as the seales, neither so many in number: namely Baptisme and the Eucharist.
10. Another excellencie is in persons, whom this New Testament concerneth: which is not giuen onelyonly to one people, and nation, as the old was: but vntounto the Catholike Church of God dispersed ouer the face of the earth: as the Apostles are commanded to goe and teach all nations, Matth. 28.19.
In these respects, the Apostle thus giueth preheminence to the New Testament before the old: Heb. 8.6. he hath obtained a more excellent office, in as much as he is the Mediator of a better Testament, which is established vponupon better promises: Not that Christ was not Mediator also of the old Testament (for without him neither can there be any Church, nor couenant made with the Church) but because Christ, but shadowed forth in the old Testament, is more fully reuealed, and manifested in the New.
5. Places of confutation.
1. Controv. Against those which thinke it is against the nature of the New Testament to be committed to writing.
Of this opinion are certaine of a fantasticall spirit, which to this purpose abuse that place of Ieremie. 32.33. I will write my lawe in their hearts: and that of S. Paul, 2. Cor 3.3. You are our epistle written not with inke, but with the spirit: whence they would inferre, that the Newe Testament is not to be written, but that it consisteth in reuelation and the instinct of the Spirit.
Contra. 1. If the Newe Testament were not to be extant in writing, then the Apostles had done a superfluous and vnnecessarie worke, in writing the bookes of the Newe Testament, whereunto they were directed by the spirit of God: and S. Iohn is directly commanded to write, Apocal. 14.13. and S. Paul saith, that all Scripture is giuen by inspiration: 2. Tim. 3.16. The spirit of God then mooued them to put in writing these holy bookes of the Newe Testament; which are part of the Scripture.
2. It followeth not because the Lord writeth the Gospel in our hearts by his spirit, that therefore it is not to be written: for by the writing thereof which is preached and read, saith is wrought in the heart by the operation of the spirit: as the Apostle saith, Rom. 10.17. that faith commeth by hearing, and hearing by the word. And againe the Prophet there sheweth a difference betweene the lawe and the Gospell: the law gaue Precepts, but could not incline the heart to obedience: but the Gospel doth not onelyonly command faith, but by the operation of the spirit worketh the same thing which it requireth.
3. In the other place of the Apostle, 1. they would make the Apostle contrarie to himselfe, as though he should speak against the writing of Euangelical precepts, whereas the Apostle did write that very epistle with inke. 2. he speaketh not of the Gospel, but of the Corinthians, whom he calleth his Epistle. 3. and by the latter in that place he vnderstandeth not the writing with inke, or such like, but the externall doctrine without the grace and life of the spirit: such as the doctrine of the Law was.
2. Controv. Against the Romanists, which hold, that the writing of the Gospel, and other Scriptures, is not simply necessarie to saluation.
First, we will examine the arguments which are brought by them to confirme this their vnsound opinion. 1. Bellarmine thus reasoneth: that the Apostles did reach the Church at the first without Scriptures, therefore they are not simply necessarie, but onelyonly for the greater profit of the Church: like as an horse is necessarie for ones iourney, for his more speedie trauaile, but not simply necessarie, because he may go a foot, Bellar. l. 4. de verb. c. 4.
Contra. 1. True it is, that the writing of the Scriptures are not simply necessarie in respect of God, for he by his absolute power could find a way to teach his Church otherwise, but in respect of Gods ordinance, which hath appointed the Scriptures for edifying of his Church, they are necessarie: as bread is necessarie for mans sustentation, though God can nourish and maintaine life without bread. 2. It is not true that the Apostles did teach without Scriptures; for they had the prophetical writings first, and afterward their owne, and while the Apostles themselues were liuing and present, the writing of the Gospel was not so necessarie, as afterward. 3. The writing then of the Gospel was necessarie, 1. both in respect of that age present, for the preuenting and stay of heresies, which might be more strongely resisted and gainesayed, by an euident and extant rule of faith. 2. in regard of those Churches, to whom the Apostles preached not by liuely voice, it was necessarie that they should hauehave some perfect direction by writing. 3. and that the ages also to come might hauehave a rule of their faith.
Arg. 2. The Church may as well now be instructed without the Scriptures, as it was for the space of 2000. yeares before the lawe was written, Bellar. ibid.
Contra. 1. In the first age of the world, the light of nature was not so much obscured, as afterward, when the law was written, and therefore the argument followeth not, the Scriptures were not necessarie then, therefore not now. 2. because the old world wanted the Scriptures to direct them, that was the cause, why they were giuen ouer generally to all kind of prophanenesse: and therefore to preuent the like mischiefe afterward, the Lord thought good to giuegive his written word to his Church.
Argum. 3. The Apostles did preach much more, then they did write, and many things they deliuered to the Church by tradition: so that not the Scriptures by themselues, are a totall rule and direction of the faith, but partiall together with the traditions and ordinances of the Church.
Contra. 1. The Apostles did indeed speake more, then they did or could write, but yet they preached the same things, and deliuered no other precepts concerning faith and manners, but the same, which they committed to writing. 2. many things concerning orders, and especially in particular Churches, the Apostles left by tradition: but no other precepts and rules of faith, then they had written. 3. The Scriptures are no partiall, but a totall and perfect rule of faith: for mensura adaequata esse debet mensurate, the measure must be equall vntounto that which is measured: it must neither be longer nor shorter: if then the Scripture should come short of faith, it were no perfect rule, nay it were no rule at all, Pareus.
Now on the contrarie that the Scriptures are necessarie, thus it is made plaine. 1. From the author: the Prophets and Apostles did write by the instinct of the spirit: but the spirit mooueth not to any vnnecessarie or superfluous worke. 2. from the office of the Apostles, which was to teach all nations, Matth 28.19. which seeing they could not doe in their owne persons, it was necessarie that they should preach vntounto them by their writings. 3. from the ende and vse of the Scriptures. 1. whether for instruction in doctrine: for all Scriptures are written for our learning, Rom. 15.4. or direction vntounto vertuous liuing, or decision of Questions, and confuting of errors, it was necessarie that the Scriptures should be writen to these vses, as the Apostle sheweth, 1. Timoth. 3.16. that the man of God may be perfect. The Scriptures then were necessarie to be extant for the aforesaid purposes: in so much that the Apostle saith, if any Angel from heauen doe preach any other Gospel, &c. let him be accursed: whereupon Chrysostome saith, Paulus etiam Angelis de coelo descendentibus proponit Scripturas, Paul euen propoundeth the Scriptures to the Angels descending from heauen, in Galat. c. 1.
6. Morall observations.
1. Observ. Of the happinesse of these times vnderunder the Gospel, in comparison of the former times vnderunder the Lawe.
In that the Lord hath clearely manifested and opened vntounto his Church by Iesus Christ, the high mysteries, which lay hid before, therein appeareth the singular louelove of God to his Church, and the great preheminence, which the faithfull now hauehave in comparison of the people of God vnderunder the Law: as our Sauiour saith vntounto his Apostles, Blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your eares for they heare, for verily I say vntounto you, that many Prophets, and righteous men hauehave desired to see those things which you see, and could not see them, &c. Matth. 13.16, 17. the vse hereof is to stirre vsus vp vntounto thankefulnesse vntounto God, for this so great merciemercy shewed vntounto his Church.
2. Observ. The dangerous estate of those, which are found to be contemners of the Gospel and Newe Lawe.
The greater light is reuealed, and the more knowledge that men hauehave, the greater obedience doth God looke for at their hand: disobedience then now vntounto the Gospel of truth, is so much more greiuous, then was transgression vnderunder the law, as the times of light and knowledge in brightnesse exceede the dayes of ignorance and blindnesse: thus the Apostle reasoneth, the night is past, and the day is at hand, let vsus therefore cast away the workes of darkenesse, and put on the armour of light, Rom. 13.12. So also Hebr. 2.2. the Apostle saith, if the word spoken by Angels was stedfast, and euerie transgression, &c. receiued a iust recompence of reward: how much more if we neglect so great saluation, &c.