Exposition of Job 8-10, Commentary on Job · Chapter 9 · Verses 32-33

Exposition of Job 8-10 · Commentary on Job · Chapter 9 · Verses 32-33

p. 373JOB Chap. 9. Verſ. 32, 33, &c.

For he is not a man as I am, that I ſhould anſwer him, and we ſhould come together in judgement.

Neither is there any Daies-man betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both.

JOB doth two things in the cloſe of this Chapter.

Firſt, He again renounceth all thought or intendment of anſwering God by any worthineſſe or goodneſſe in himſelf. A point he had often touched before, it being the grand objection, which his friends brought againſt him, as if his ſpirit were heightned up to the preſumption of a triall or conteſt with God himſelf. 'Tis a duty to clear our ſelves moſt, where and in what we are moſt ſuſpected.

This he doth in the 32. and 33. verſes.

He is not a man as I am, that I ſhould anſwer him, and we ſhould come together in judgement.

Neither is there any Daies-man betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both.

In which words Job offers two things to aſſure them that he was farre enough from ſuch an engaging with God.

Firſt, From the diſparity of their condition (verſ. 32.) He is not a man as I am. God is not like me, I am no match for God; and I will not be ſo fool-hardy, as to contend with one, who is infinitely above me.

Secondly, Leſt any ſhould thinke, that though himſelf, hand to hand (as we ſpeak) would not venture upon God, yet he might (poſſibly) get ſome friend or ſecond, to interpoſe and umpire it between them, or to determine whether Gods dealings with him were juſt and equall, or no: And ſo (though not alone, yet) by a friend, or a third party to them both, he would try out the matter. No (ſaith Job in the 33. verſe) Not ſo neither, as I alone p. 374will not undertake him; ſo neither is there any Daies-man betwixt us, that might lay his hand upon us both.

In the two laſt verſes Job makes a petition to the Lord, deſiring a favourable condeſcenſion, that he would be pleaſed to abate of the preſent height and extremity of his pain, and then he hoped yet, that he might anſwer him, though he would not contend with him; anſwer him in reference to his own integrity, about which his friends had charged and wounded him, though not in reference to his own righteouſneſſe, about which the Lord might charge and condemn him, Let him take his rod away from me, and let not his fear terrifie me, then would I speak and not fear him, but it is not ſo with me. He concludes with the difference of his ſtate, from what he deſired of God it might be: And he begins with the difference of his perſon from what God himſelf is. It is not with me as I could wiſh, and God is not ſuch an one, nor can be, as I am, and muſt be.

Verſe 32. For he is not a man as I am, &c.

He doth not ſay, God is not ſuch a man as I am, but God is not a man as I am. One man may ſay unto another man, Thou art not ſuch a man as I am: Every different degree or endowment among men, may bear a man out in ſaying ſo, and pride will prompt a man to ſay ſo, when he is not in degree better, but in kinde worſe then other men. Such was the language of the Phariſee (Luk. 18.11.) God, I thank thee, I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjuſt, adulterers, or even as this Publican: yet no man can ſay to another man, Thou art not a man as I am.

But ſeeing God is not a man at all, what is there in this aſſertion of Job? He is not a man as I am.

The words import a double difference. Firſt, A difference in qualification. Secondly, In nature: here Job chiefly intends the difference of quality (which yet in God is his nature) that he was not wiſe,Non tam eſſentiae ad eſsentiā, quam qualitatis ad qualitatem, i. e. ſuae ad divinam puritatem collatio fit & denotatur. Bold, and juſt, and holy, and pure as God.

Moſes in his ſong (Exod. 15.3.) after the overthrow of the Egyptians in the red ſea, ſpeaks thus, The Lord is a man of warre; that phraſe intends not a humane nature to God; when he ſaith, God is a man of warre; he meaneth only this, God is a great warriour. We call a Ship of warre, A man of warre. As a man of words ſignifies an eloquent man, though with ſome only a talkative man: So a man of warre ſignifies a famous warriour, or one trained p. 375up for warre; in which ſenſe Saul ſaith of Goliah, that he had been a man of warre from his youth (1 Sam. 17.33.) God is a great warriour, the moſt potent Commander, The Generaliſſimo of all the Armies in heaven and earth, The Lord of hoſts is his Name, He is a man of war, though he is not a man.

Further, when Job ſaith, He is not a man as I am, he gives us the reaſon of all he had ſaid before,Ratio eſt omnium ſuperiorum, et ſi juſtus ſim, cum Deo tamen contendens pro ſo…te habeor, quia non eſt par utriuſ que noſtrum conditio. Merc. eſpecially of what he had ſaid immediately before, Though I waſh my ſelf with ſnow-water, and make my hands never ſo clean, yet ſhalt thou plunge me in the ditch, For he is not a man as I am; that is, though I by waſhing my ſelf ſhould thinke I were all white, and not a ſpot to be ſeen upon me (as hypocrites by covering themſelves, thinke they are all hid, and not a ſinne to be found about them) yet he would throw me into the ditch again, as like to like, dirt to dirt, for he is not a man as I am, he hath other eyes, and thoughts, and waies then creatures have.

Secondly, As they contain a reaſon, why the Lord would judge him impure, though he ſhould waſh himſelf with ſnow-water; ſo alſo, why the Lord would afflict him, though he ſhould waſh himſelf with ſnow-water, He is not a man as I am. As if he had ſaid, Should I ſee a man without ſpot or ſpeck, without blame or fault, yet full of wounds and ſtripes, full of troubles and ſorrows: Should I ſee him afflicted, of whom I could not ſay he had ſinned, it were beyond my reaſon. But though I cannot, yet the Lord can ſee reaſon to afflict a man in whom I ſee no iniquity. He knows why and wherefore, he may and doth caſt them into the fire, in whom I can ſee no droſſe. He is not a man as I am. God exceeds man in his actings, as much as he doth in his nature, as he is what man is not, ſo he can doe what man cannot, Every thing is in working, as it is in being. God alwaies works like himſelf, and infinitely above man.

As to the preſent buſineſſe, he works above man chiefly in two things.

Firſt, Man cannot juſtly commence a ſute againſt, or contend with another man, except he be able to charge him with ſome wrong that he hath done him, or lay ſome crime to his charge.

Secondly, A humane Judge cannot condemn or caſt a man, unleſſe he firſt legally convict him of his crime. Thus it is with men in their judiciall proceedings. He that contends muſt know ſome crime; and the Judge paſſes ſentence as he ſees the crime proved p. 376and made good againſt him; but God is not as man, he may proceed to judgement vvithout an accuſation, and he may give judgement before the crime be proved; Job vvas ſmitten vvithout cauſe truly alleadged, much leſſe atteſted. God afflicts that grace may be proved, not becauſe ſin is proved, He is not a man as I am, that I ſhould anſwer him.

Anſwer him.

Respondere, hoc loco, poteſt eſſe verbum forenſ….It is a judiciary vvord, or anſwering in judgement; To juſtifie is a law terme, and ſo is to anſwer; one puts in his bill, and another his anſwer; ſome Courts proceed by bill and anſwer. If the Lord (ſaith Job) ſhould put in his bill againſt me, I would not put in my anſwer, He is not a man as I am, that I ſhould anſwer him.

Or vve may take the word [Anſwer] in generall, for the returning of ſatisfaction to a queſtion. If the Lord demand a reaſon or an account of me, I could not ſatisfie him. Many, vvho can give a reaſon of the hope that is in them, cannot give a reaſon of the ſufferings, which are upon them: But though they know no particular reaſon why they ſuffer, yet they believe it is not without reaſon. Some holy Martyrs have ſaid to their cruell perſecutours, urging them with ſophiſticall Queſtions, We can die, but we cannot dispute. And ſo the Saints, under the moſt difficult providences of God, are reſolved to ſay, We can die under them, but vve vvill not diſpute them. He is not a man that vve ſhould anſwer him in vvhat he ſpeaks or doth.

Hence obſerve,

Firſt, The conſideration, that God is above man, is enough to humble and ſilence man.

No man is proud in the preſence of another vvhom he thinks to be his better. The ſight of greater beauty, keeps down pride of beauty. Pride cannot live in the eye of that which is above the reaſon of it in our ſelves: Yea, he that findes he is but equall, or upon even ground vvith others, can hardly be proud of any thing in himſelf. While vve ſuppoſe our gifts or knowledge, but like thoſe of other men, vve are not lifted up in the opinion of them. Now, If equality check pride, a thought of ſuperiority muſt needs kill it. And if the common ſuperiority of a man kiſs our pride, how much more doth the knowledge of that ſuperexcellent ſuperiority vvhichwhich is in God? Doth not the beauty and dignity p. 377of God, obſcure the luſtre and darken the beauty of all creatures? Is the ſhining of the ſtars any thing, vvhen the Sun appears? Much leſſe is the holines, ſtrength, and goodnes of man any thing, when the goodnes, holines and ſtrength of God ſtand forth or appear: we muſt ſay we are nothing, when we ſee what God is. The ſight of him, in vvhom nothing of our imperfections can be found, cannot but humble us in the ſight of all our perfections. Hence, vvhen the Lord vvould abaſe man, and extoll himſelf, he removes all of man from himſelf (1 Sam. 15.29.) God is not a man that he ſhould repen; Men are full of repentings, and that they are ſo, ſhews them to be men. There is a repentance vvhichwhich is a grace of God, and there is a repentance vvhichwhich is an infirmity in man. By the former, men turn to God from that ſin, in vvhichwhich they vvere, or have done. By the later, men turn both from God and man in what they promiſe or purpoſe, either to be or doe. They are this day of one minde, and to morrow of another; to day they love, and to morrow they hate; now they vvill, and anon they vvill not. They are in and out, no man knows vvhere to finde them; but God is ever the ſame, he changes not. Elihu ſends a challenge to all teachers, in the name of God, Who teacheth like him? (Chap. 36.22.) God himſelf challengeth Job in his own name (Chap. 40.9.) Haſt thou an arm like God? Or canſt thou thunder with a voice like him? To whom will you liken me (ſaith God, vvhen he vvould bring down the pride of the creature) To whom will you liken me, and make me equall, and compare me, that we may be like? (Iſa. 46.5.) Why doe ye exalt your ſelves? Why have ye ſuch high thoughts of your ſelves? Can ye finde out any to compare with me? Or can ye make a parallel of me among all my creatures?

All the unevenneſſe of man towards God, ariſes from preſumptuous thoughts of his evenneſſe with God. Take a taſte in two or three particulars.

Firſt, Man grows into a boldneſſe of ſinning againſt God, becauſe he thinks God is but ſo holy as man is; he conceits that which ſutes his ſpirit, ſutes Gods Spirit alſo: This cauſeth him to doe many things moſt unſutable to the Spirit of God (Pſal. 50.18.) When thou ſaweſt a thief, then thou conſenteſt with him, and thou haſt been partaker with the adulterer: thou giveſt thy mouth to evil, and thy tongue frameth deceit, &c. theſe things haſt thou done. And what encouraged or hardned him to doe theſe things? The p. 378next words give us an account of that, Thou thoughteſt that I was altogether ſuch an one as thy ſelf; that is, thou didſt frame conceptions of me according to the Idaea of thine own brain, or the model of thine own heart. Thou waſt well pleaſed with ſuch filthines and abominations, therfore thou didſt conclude, I would not be diſpleaſed with them. The true reaſon why moſt men make nothing of evil, is, becauſe they make God nothing in goodnes (as to that point) beyond themſelves; this doth not trouble our ſpirits, we ſee no hurt in what we do: Surely then God ſees no hurt in it, neither is his Spirit troubled with our doings.

Secondly, Boldneſſe in pleading with, and complaining againſt God, when he doth what likes not us, ariſes from thoughts that we are like him. None would quarrell what God doth in cutting out and proportioning their own eſtates to them: or in caſting down the humble and meek; in exalting the proud and vile, if they did fully believe God had as much right and reaſon as they ſee he hath power to doe what he doth. Man draws God into his own compaſſe, and then wonders to finde him work ſo out of compaſſe. If I were as God, ſaith one, I would doe thus and thus; ſurely, God is as I am, he hath ſuch thoughts as I have, ſaith another, then why doth he thus? Till we have fully ſtudied this point, That God is not as we are, we ſhall never reſt fully ſatisfied in what God doth, if he doth what we would not.

Thirdly, Unbelief ſprings from the ſame muddy fountain: unbelief of the power of God to deliver us, when we are in outward ſtraits and dangers; and unbelief of the mercy of God to pardon us, when we are in ſpirituall ſtraits and deſertions. What's the reaſon why, vvhen great dangers encompaſſe us, we cannot believe deliverance? Doe vve not make God like to our ſelves? Doe we not ſhorten his hand to our own meaſure, and thinke it cannot be done, becauſe men cannot doe it? And for mercy about the pardon of ſin; man being awakened ſees how he hath provoked God, ſin ſtares upon his face, and he findes out many aggravations upon his ſin: then he begins to collect thus, certainly if a man had ſo provoked his neighbour, he could never pardon or forgive him; Can then ſuch ſins as theſe be forgiven by God? Mans mercy cannot reach ſo high as this, therefore ſurely the mercies of God will not. We have a very gracious promiſe, backt with a caution to prevent theſe jealouſies (Iſa. 55.6, 7.) Let the wicked for ſake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, p. 379and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. Now, as when God cals upon man to obey his will, and doe his Commandments, he is apt to ſay, at leaſt in his heart, the duties are too many, and the burdens too great to be born: So when the Lord calleth upon wicked men, the worſt of wicked men to repent or turn unto him, and he vvill abundantly pardon, or he will multiply to pardon (as it is in the originall) they are ready to object, What? Pardon ſuch as vve are? We are too filthy and vile for waſhing. Surely, he vvill not pardon us. Theſe mercies are too many for us, and theſe favours too great for us to receive. Well (ſaith God) I preconceive your conceits of me, ye are meaſuring me by your ſelves, ye think it cannot be done, becauſe ye cannot doe it; your hearts are too narrow to paſſe by ſo many, ſo great provocations, therefore ye ſay, mine is too narrow alſo. Doe ye thus meaſure me the Lord, O fooliſh people and unwiſe? I would have you know, My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your waies my waies, for as the heavens are higher then the earth, ſo are my waies higher then your waies, and my thoughts then your thoughts, verſ 8, 9. As if he had ſaid, Your thoughts are as much below my mercy, as your waies were below my holineſſe. Ceaſe then from doubting vvhat I have promiſed, as I vvould have you ceaſe from doing vvhat I have forbidden, Your unbelief that I vvill not pardon your ſin, diſhonours me as much as your diſobedience did in committing ſinne. Till vve believe God is holy above us, vve fear not to ſinne; and till vve believe God is mercifull above us, we cannot believe he will pardon our ſin.

Thus we ſee how the lifting up of our ſelves in our thoughts to an equality, or to ſome ſimilitude vvith God, or the drawing down of God to an equality, or ſome ſimilitude vvith our ſelves, is the ground and cauſe of all our unequall carriage towards God, of our boldneſſe in ſinning, of our boldneſſe in pleading with, and complaining againſt him, of our extreme unbelief in the point of deliverance from troubles, or of the pardon of our ſins. Secondly, Obſerve,

There is no compariſon between God and man.

He is not a man as I am. Man is like to man, face anſwers face, and heart anſwers heart, ſtrength anſwers ſtrength, and vvit anſwers vvit. Solomon concludes this (Eccleſ. 6.10.) That which p. 380hath been, is named already, and it is known that it is man. A man it but a man, be he never ſo great in vvorldly vvealth or honour: as he bears the name, ſo he hath the nature of man ſtill; Nor can he contend with him that is mightier then he, i. e. vvith God. If he venture beyond his line, or move out of the ſphear of his activity, if he vvould act more then a man, he ſhall quickly finde that he is but man, He cannot contend with him that is mightier then he. Man vvas indeed made in the likeneſſe of God, Gen. 1.27. In the image of God created he him, yet vve muſt not ſay, God is like man, he is not in our image. God put ſome impreſſions of himſelf upon man, but he took no impreſſions of man upon himſelf. He is not a man as I am. He hath given us ſome of his own excellencies, but he hath not taken upon him any of our vveakneſſes. God hath honoured man to give him ſomewhat of himſelf, but God ſhould diſhonour himſelf to take anything of man. Thus man is in the likeneſſe of God: but God is not in the likeneſſe of man. Take heed of ſuch thoughts. It is as dangerous to frame a likeneſſe or a ſimilitude of God to our hearts, as to frame a likeneſſe or a ſimilitude of God upon a wall (Exod. 15.10.) Who is like unto thee, O Lord, amongst the gods? That is, there is none like unto thee: None amongſt the gods, neither among thoſe who are falſly called gods, the Idols of the Heathen, nor among thoſe who are truly called gods (for God cals them ſo) the Angels in heaven, and Magiſtrates here upon the earth: among theſe truly called gods, there is none like the true God, much leſſe is there any among the meer pure mortals, like unto the immortall God. Who is like unto thee, glorious in holineſſe, fearfull in praiſes, doing wonders? So (Mic. 7.18.) Who is a god like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and paſſeth by the tranſgreſſion of the remnant of his heritage. Who is a god like unto thee? Not only is there no man that can pardon as God, but there is no God that can pardon like God, he puts it upon that, Who is a god like unto thee? Not as if he granted that there were any other gods beſides the Lord, but to meet with the thoughts of men, with thoſe ſinfull principles and conceits, which lodge in man, and make other gods. To ſay of God only this, He is God, is to ſay all; we cannot ſay more good of God, then to call him God; as we cannot ſay more evil of ſin, then to call it ſin; when we have called it ſin, vve have called it all. The Apoſtle (Rom. 7.13.) puts that upon it, as the worſt he could ſay of it, Sinne that it might appear ſinne. We p. 381cannot repreſent it in a worſe likeneſſe then its own. All men ſay they ſin, but ſin appears ſin to very few. And when the Apoſtle would put a diſgracefull title or epethite upon ſin, he inveſts it with its own name, ſinfull ſin. Thus to the point in hand, we cannot call God more, then when we call him God. Nothing can be predicated of him better then himſelf. When God appears to be God, all excellency appears. All men (almoſt) acknowledge God, but God appears to very few. 'Tis but little of God that can be known: and there are not many who know that little; very many know but little of that little, and moſt know nothing of it at all.

Thus alſo to ſay that man is man, is proof and aggravation enough of his depraved condition (Hoſ. 6.7.) They like men have tranſgreſſed the Covenant, they have done like themſelves. When we ſee men vain, and wicked, and ſinfull, and covetous, and earthly, we may ſay of them, they have done like men; and how wonderous and glorious things ſoever God doth, we can but ſay, He hath done like God.

As a conſectary from the whole, take this caution, If God is not a man as we are, then God muſt never be meaſured by the rule and line of man. Man hath not line enough to meaſure God by. The Lord exceeds man in all; he is not only above mans infirmities, but he is above all his perfections. The Lord is not only not weak as man is weak, or unholy as man is unholy, but the Lord is not ſtrong as man is ſtrong, nor holy as man is holy, nor juſt as man is juſt, nor wiſe as man is wiſe: Then, man muſt not venture to judge of the wiſdome of God by his own wiſdome, or of the juſtice, holineſſe and ſtrength of God, by his own ſtrength, holineſſe and juſtice. Man is not able to meaſure God in any of his Attributes; and in three things eſpecially, man ſhould take heed of meaſuring God in his actings.

Firſt, In the great work of election. In this man is very apt to be meddling, and to be meaſuring God by the line of naturall reaſon, or of civil juſtice: the Apoſtles diſpute beats down this preſumption, Rom. 9. We read there how man begins to buſtle and ſtartle at that great concluſion (verſ. 18.) Therefore he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. If it be thus, ſaith he, if every mans ſtate be peremptorily determined by the will of God, if he loves and hates before men have done either good or evil, Why doth he finde fault? for who hath reſiſted his will? What need any trouble themſelves about the p. 382way, when their end is under an unmovable decree? Why ſhould any ſtrive to forſake evil and doe good on earth, ſeeing it was reſolved in heaven what ſhould become of them, before they had done either good or evil? Thus the pride and ignorance of man cavils at the decrees of God. But ſtay (ſaith the Apoſtle) O man, who art thou that replieſt againſt God! He is not a man as thou art: he hath done what he hath done by vertue of his juſt prerogative, and therefore he is not unjuſt in doing it. Beſides, if ye will needs argue from reaſon, then ſee how common reaſon confutes this blaſphemy, Hath not the Potter power over the clay, of the ſame lump to make one veſſell unto honour, and another unto diſhonour? What if God hath done thus, and what if he will doe thus? What haſt thou to doe with it? Know thy place, and keep thy rank; art not thou clay in the hand of the Potter?

Secondly, Meaſure not God by your own line in his providentiall diſpenſations: He may have a method of his own in giving or taking away, in pulling down or building up, in wounding or healing, in abaſing man, or in raiſing him, becauſe all is his own. He who hath a right to all, can wrong none, and he who poſſeſſes all, is debtour to none.

Thirdly, Meaſure not God by your own line in the matter of your ordinary approvings: and that two waies.

Firſt, Doe it not in your approving of things. And

Secondly, Doe it not in your approving of perſons. Take heed firſt of meaſuring God by your ſelves in your approving of things, as if becauſe you approve it, therefore God ſurely doth. This miſconceit hath been the cauſe of almoſt all, and almoſt all the cauſe of all the ſuperſtition, idolatry and will-worſhip that ever was in the world. Man thinks God muſt needs like any thing which is done to his honour; hence becauſe the adorning and adoring of images, bowing to altars, uſing of unwritten Ceremonies are directed to the honour of God, therfore man concludes ſurely God likes them. Whereas nothing pleaſes God, but what himſelf appoints: he is never honoured, but when he is obeyed. As no man hath been his counſellour, to direct him what to doe with us: So no man can be his counſellour, to direct him what to require of us. Not that which we commend is approved, but that which the Lord commends.

Secondly, Take heed of this in your approbation or eſtimation p. 383of perſons, Not be whom you commend is approved, but he whom the Lord commends. We ſhould judge of men as we believe God judges. Or (to come nearer) let no man think himſelf is approved of God, becauſe he is approved by himſelf. Many flatter themſelves in their own eyes, till their iniquity is found to be hatefull (Pſal. 36.2.) Chriſt intimates this, ſpeaking to the Phariſees (Luk. 16.15.) Ye are they that juſtifie your ſelves, ye have high thoughts of your own worth, and glory in your own excellencies, and ye think God hath high thoughts of you, that he glories in you too; but let me tell you, That which is highly eſteemed amongſt men, is an abomination in the ſight of God. We are the men, ſaid the Phariſees, ours are excellent gifts, thus they admired and doted upon themſelves: but the Lord found them out, and what they highly eſteemed, he abominated. Some write and ſubſcribe their own letters teſtimoniall, and can get no hand to them but their own. Not he who commends himſelf is approved, but he whom the Lord commends; ſuch ſhall finde, that their own good word would do them no good, He is not a man as they are. He, ſaith Job, is not a man as I am, that I ſhould anſwer him.

And we ſhould come together in judgement.

It hath been ſhewed what judgement is, at the 19^th verſe of this Chapter, and at the third verſe of the eighth Chapter, therefore I ſhall not now ſtay upon it, only as to the matter in hand; Judgement may be taken three waies.

Firſt, For pleading, which is but preparatory to judgement,1 Diſceptatio & mutur… foreign. rationum. 2 Iuris definitio 3 Exactio caſtigationis & debiti. Merc. the opening and arguing of the caſe or fact under triall.

Secondly, For the deciſion and determination of the caſe according to law, or the award of judgement.

Thirdly, For the inflicting and executing of the ſentence according to the judgement awarded.

Here Job chiefly intends the firſt, He is not a man as I am, that I ſhould anſwer him, and we ſhould come together in judgement, that is, that I ſhould plead, argue and debate my matters with him before any other Judge. God and man cannot come together to be judged; for all man-kinde muſt receive their judgement from God.Ʋt veniamus pariter in judicium. Or nearer the Hebrew (which ſutes the former clauſe better) He is not a man as I am, that we ſhould come alike to judgement; No, we ſhould be very unlike, very unequally matched in judgement. Man and man, who are upon even terms in their nature, may yet p. 384be upon ſuch uneven terms in their condition, that they cannot come alike to judgement. A poor man cannot grapple with a rich man, nor a mean man with the honourable. Now, if they who are of the ſame nature cannot come alike in judgment, becauſe of a diſparity in their condition; How ſhall they who differ not only in condition, but in nature? Can God and man? Can poor wretched and miſerable man, come alike in judgement with the great and glorious God? And ſo the meaning of Job may be thus conceived, If I had only a man (like my ſelf) to deal with, then I would venture a triall with him, at any ſeat of judgement, or Court of Juſtice; but he is not a man as I am, much leſſe ſuch a man as I am. How ſhall I ſet my ſelf with him to be judged, when as himſelf is the Judge of all, and is himſelf judged of none?

Hence obſerve,

Man is not able to contend with God in judgement.

Who is like me, and who will appoint me the time (or (nearer the letter) who will convent me in judgement?) Who is that ſhepherd that will ſtand before me? Iſa. 49.19. Man muſt come before God in judgement, We muſt all appear before the judgement ſeat of Chriſt (2 Cor. 5.10.) None ſhall eſcape his tribunall. But man cannot ſtand before God in judgement. The wicked cannot ſtand at all before him in judgement, becauſe they ſtand upon their own bottom. The righteous dare not ſtand before him in judgement upon their own bottom; if they ſhould, themſelves and their cauſe would quickly fall together.

There are ſeven conſiderations which tell us, that we cannot come together, much leſſe alike together with God in judgment.

1. He is of ſuch ſtrength, that none can wreſt themſelves out of his hand. No power can daunt him.

2. He is of ſuch ſincerity, that bribes cannot corrupt him, nor can gifts put out his eies.

3. He is of ſuch wiſdom, that none can over-reach him, nor can our wit entangle him.

4. He is ſo knowing that none of our ſins and failings, no not the leaſt of them, are ſecrets to, or hidden from him.

5. He is ſo holy, that he cannot bear with the leaſt ſin, and ſo juſt, that he cannot but puniſh it, unleſſe he receive ſatisfaction for it.

p. 3856. He cannot be a party in judgement, for he is the ſupreme Judge, and there is no appealing from his ſentence.

7. He is the laſt, yea an everlaſting Judge, and therefore there is no repealing of his ſentence. Who is able to contend with him, whom no power can daunt, no bribes corrupt, no wit over-reach, who knows all our ſins, and will ſpare none of them, from whoſe ſentence there is no appealing, and whoſe ſentence cannot be repealed? There is no Judge above God, therefore we cannot appeal from him; there is none to come after God, therefore what he hath judged cannot be repealed.

Job having thus waved and profeſſed againſt contending with God in judgement, proceedeth in the thirty third verſe, to ſhew that there is none to whom his caſe might be referred for arbitration. There are two waies by which controverſies are ended.

Firſt, By the legall ſentence of the publike Judge.

Secondly, By the moderation of a private friend. This later Job means, when he ſaith,

Verſe 33. Neither is there any Daies-man betwixt us, that can lay his hand upon us both.

The Septuagint render theſe words as a wiſh, or as a prayer,**foreign Sept. O that there were a Daies-man, or, a Mediatour betwixt God and me, that might lay his hand upon us both. But the originall bears it clearly in the negative, Neither is there any Daies-man betwixt us.

The word which we tranſlate Daies-man, foreign à foreign Arguere Heb. Non eſt arguens inter nos vel increpans.commeth from a root which ſignifieth to argue or reprove, and ſo ſome render it here, Neither is there any Arguer or Reprover, none to ſet the matter right between God and me, none to ſtate the queſtion between us, none to reprove the Lord, if I ſhould ſay, or if by the common rules of juſtice it ſhould appear he hath done me wrong. The word is uſed in that ſenſe (Gen. 31.24.) where Jacob tels his uncle Laban, The Lord rebuked thee yeſternight; the Lord himſelf came as an umpire, as a Daies-man betwixt Jacob and Laban, and rebuked. Laban for his hard and unjuſt thoughts of, and intentions concerning Jacob; Take heed (ſaith God) thou speak not unto Jacob either good or bad, that is, doe not p. 386threaten or perſwade him to return, thou wilt repent it if thou doeſt. Thus alſo the Lord appeared, as a Daies-man between his people of old, and the great ones of the world (Pſal. 105.14.) He ſuffered no man to doe them wrong, yea, he rebuked Kings for their ſakes. God is alwaies able to, and often doth interpoſe for, and vindicate his people from the oppreſſions of men. 'Tis coſtly medling with the Saints. Kings may get a rebuke for it. Yea, Kings may ſmart, and Kingdoms ſhake for it.

Fere omnes interpretes hunc verſum de Mediatore ſeu arbitro, quem juriſconſulti vocant ſequeſtrem, intelligunt, quaſi Iob optaſſet ordinarium Iudicem praecedenti verſiculo, mediatorem vero ſeu arbi trum hoc verſu.What a Daies-man is, is ſo plain and well known by the cuſtom and uſage of moſt places, that it needs little explication. We in our language ſometimes call him an umpire, ſometimes an Arbitratour, ſometimes a Mediatour, ſometimes a Referree; and in ſome Countreys with us, when a queſtion ariſes between neighbours, concerning which they are unwilling to ſpend money and time in ſutes of Law, they ſay, We will referre it unto men; which kinde of ſpeaking ſeems to allude to the title of Magiſtrates and Judges, whom the Scripture calleth gods; and when a buſineſſe is brought before them, it may be ſaid to be referr'd or put to God. In oppoſition to which, when it is taken up by the umpiridge of friends, it is ſaid, To be referred or put to men. We in our Engliſh tongue, call ſuch Daies-men, either becauſe they beſtowed a daies pains upon the ending of a buſineſſe, or becauſe they were obliged to end it by a ſet day; whereas Judges may take more liberty to themſelves. Yet ſome of the Greeks expreſſe all mans judgement by this word,Ideo ſequeſter appellatur quod ejus qui electus ſit, utra que pars fidem ſequatur. Gel. l. 20. c. 10. Sequeſter eſt qui errantibus medius intervenit, qui a…ud Graecos foreign d citur, apud quem pignota deponi ſolent à ſequendo dictas, quod ejus fidem utra que pars ſequatur, Iſidor. l 10. Etymol. Mans-day, becauſe certain daies were appointed for judicature. The Apoſtle Paul uſes the ſame phraſe (1 Cor. 4.3.) in oppoſition to the Lords-day, the great day of judgment, to which he there appeals, from all the daies ſet for mans judgement in this world. The Latins call Daies-men, ſequeſtres; and Critiques tell us, that as the Daies-man is expreſſed by a word in the Hebrew, whoſe root ſignifies to rebuke, becauſe a Daies-man had power to rebuke and reprove him that had done the wrong: So he is called ſequeſter in the Latine, from a word which ſignifies to follow, becauſe of a power committed to him, that which way ſoever he ſhould ſtate and determine the buſineſſe between the parties, they were bound to follow, and ſubmit to his award; or, becauſe he was ſuppoſed a man of ſuch wiſdom, faithfulneſſe and integrity, that both parties might ſafely follow him: Hence he was called ſequeſter, that is, one whom they muſt or might follow, and abide by his ſentence. To p. 387aſſure which the parties uſually ingaged themſelves under penalties (of valuable damage to the buſines in queſtion) to ſtand to his arbitration.

There are five things (by which we may more diſtinctly underſtand Jobs meaning) belonging to a Daies-man, or an Ʋmpire.

1. He muſt be agreed upon and choſen by both parties, for unleſſe he be accepted by both of them, he can have no power to determine for, or againſt either of them.

2. He muſt hear both ſides ſpeak, and alleadge what they can for themſelves, before he determines.

3. He muſt beat out the matter by interrogatories and queſtions; he muſt not ſtay upon the bare narrative of the perſons.

4. He muſt have power to conclude and determine of the differences betwixt them.

5. Both parties muſt be bound, at leaſt by promiſe,Talis judex vocatur compromiſſarius, quaſi ex compromiſſo à litigatoribus ſumpto. to ſtand to the determination which he ſhall make. Such a one is a Daies-man among men: who is alſo called a Compromiſer, and his work, the Compromiſing of a matter, becauſe as he is elected by a the mutuall conſent, ſo confirmed by the mutuall promiſe of thoſe who are at variance, to reconcile them, and take up their differences. Now, ſaith Job, as there is no Judge, ſo there is no Daies-man betwixt me and God.

That might lay his hand upon us both.

Some underſtand the words [upon us both] of Job and his friends, There is not a Daies-man betwixt me and my friends, not one that can judge and conſider of my innocency and their charge, as if he had ſaid, Though I will not plead it out with God, yet I dare referre the controverſie betwixt you and me to an equall umpire, I dare go to the triall of my innocency with you, but I ſee no Daies-man; you are all parties in the buſineſſe, and I know of none that will ſtand between us indifferently and unprejudiced.

But the text refers clearly to God, There is no Daies-man, none to arbitrate the matter between God and me, None to lay his hands upon us both.

To lay on hands is diverſly uſed in Scripture. The hand ſignifies all power: Hence, to lay the hands, is to put forth power: and to do ſo, is taken ſome times in an ill ſenſe, and ſometimes in a good ſenſe.

p. 388Firſt, In an ill ſenſe, and ſo to lay the hands, is to ſtrike or ſmite even to death, Gen. 22.12. Lay not thine hand upon the childe, upon Iſaac, that is, do not ſlay him. We have the ſame expreſſion (Gen. 37.22.) when Reuben pleaded for Joſeph that he ſhould not be murthered, Shed no bloud, but caſt him into this pit, and lay no hand upon him; that is, do not deſtroy him. This laying on of the hands, notes any violent act, either proceeding from holy zeal or juſtice, as in Nehemiah, who threatens the prophaners of the Sabbath, If ye doe ſo again I will lay hands on you; or from malice, as in the chief Prieſts, who ſought to lay hands on Chriſt the Lord of the Sabbath (Luk. 20.19.) And Chriſt propheſying what the condition of his Diſciples and of believers ſhould be, what uſage they ſhould finde in the world, tels them (Mat. 21.12.) They ſhall lay their hands upon you, and perſecute you. Thus Haman thought ſcorn to lay his hands on Mordecai alone (Eſth. 3.6.) He had a deſign to take revenge upon the whole Nation of the Jews.

Secondly, To lay on the hands is taken in a good ſenſe; and ſo I finde it uſed three waies.

1. In benedictions, Mark 10.16. Chriſt took up the young children in his arms, and laid his hands upon them and bleſſed them. As under the Law, Levit. 1.4. and Chap. 4.15. The people or the Elders laying their hands upon the beaſt, which was to be offered in Sacrifice, intimated the laying of all their ſins by faith upon Chriſt, of whom that Sacrifice was a type. So Chriſts laying his hands upon thoſe children, implied the beſtowing and pouring out of mercy upon them, in the pardoning of their ſins, and the furniſhing of them with the graces of his Spirit. The ſame action uſed by the Apoſtles in the name of Chriſt, had the ſame ſignification and effect. When Peter and John came to Samaria, and ſaw what work the Word had made among that people, They laid their hands on them, and they received the holy Ghoſt, Act. 8.17. Paul likewiſe laid his hands on the Diſciples at Epheſus, and they received the holy Ghoſt, Act. 19.6. It was uſed alſo as a ſign of healing, Mark 16.18. They ſhall lay hands on the ſick, and they ſhall recover: And (Mat. 9.18.) the Ruler ſaith unto Chriſt, My daughter is ſick, but come and lay thine hands on her, and ſhe ſhall be healed. Some interpret the Rulers deſire of this ſign, to be as a ſign he had faith, ſo alſo that his faith was weak. The Centurion (concerning whom Chriſt teſtified, I have not p. 389found ſo great faith, no not in Iſrael) deſired Chriſt but to speak the word only, and his ſervant ſhould be healed (Mat. 8.8.) As a word is the proper object of faith, ſo faith acts moſt properly, when it reſts and lives upon a word only. Signs are mercies to the weak, and they are witneſſes of our weakneſſe. Signs are but crouches and spectacles to help the lameneſſe and dimſightedneſſe of faith. But to our text.

2. Laying on of hands was uſed in the ordination or ſolemn ſetting of a man apart unto an office, The children of Iſrael, that is, ſome of the chief of them (under the Ceremoniall Law) laid their hands upon the Levites, Numb. 8.10.) which was either a teſtification that they gave up all carnall and worldly intereſts in them, and bequeathed them wholly unto God, or an approbation of their office, and of the Levites miniſtration in it on their behalf. The ſame Ceremony (for the matter) was continued in the ſending forth of Goſpel-officers. Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecie, with the laying on of the hands of the Preſbytery, was Pauls counſell to Timothy, in reference to himſelf (1 Tim. 4.14.) And in reference to others (1 Tim. 5.22.) Lay hands ſuddenly on no man. And Paul and Barnabas being immediately deſigned by God for a ſpeciall work of the Miniſtery, to which they were called before,Impoſitio man…um poteſtatis ſignum, q.d qui utrum que noſtrū valet mano impoſita co…rcere. Merc. Ponere manum, eſt litem companere & controverſiae authores ad f…edus concorde… que adducere. Pa…fi a…oris eſfigies deſcribitur ad alterutrum litigant um manum alte natim ex…endens ut junctis dex ris pacis foedus iniretur. Q…intil. were ſent away with faſting and praier, and the laying on of hands, Act. 13.3.

3. The hand ſpecially ſignifies civil power, Pſ. 89.25. I will ſet his hand alſo in the ſea and his right-hand in the flouds: that is, I will give him power over them who dwel by the ſeas And then, Laying on of hands, implies the authority which one man hath over another to determine or reſolve a caſe, or to ſettle a buſineſſe between them, and that is the intendment of it here, There is no Daie…-man that might lay his hands upon us both; that is, who may authoritatively decide and make an end of this controverſie. To impoſe the hand was to compoſe the difference. I finde a three-fold poſture of the Daies-man obſerved in the action of his hand.

Firſt, He put forth his hand towards the parties, deſiring them to joyn hands, or (as we ſpeak) to ſhake hands and be friends. Joyning hands ſignifies conſent (Exod. 23.1.) Thou ſhalt not put thy hand with the wicked; that is, thou ſhalt make no agreement with him. Some of the Ancients deſcribe the Pacificatour or Daies-man, having his hands cloſed into the hands of thoſe between whom he was to make peace: Hence they who are unfaithfull p. 390in Covenant, are ſaid to have a lying or a deceitfull right-hand. Quibus nulla foederis ſervati fides mendacem dextram habere dicuntur.The Prophet Iſaiah ſpeaking of a falſe worſhipper, who had engaged his faith to ſerve Idols, concludes, He feedeth of aſhes, a deceived heart hath turned him aſide that he cannot deliver his ſoul, nor ſay, Is there not a lie in my right-hand? (Iſa. 44.20.) or (as others tranſlate) Is there not a lie at my right-hand? noting, that the Idol to which he had given his heart and hand, would deceive him moſt when he truſted moſt to it.

foreign Cum qual…m attentione, ſtudio & induſtria pon…re Arbiter medius inter litigantes benignè manum nunc ſuper hunc nunc ſuper illam ponere ſel…bat, dicen…, Tum hoc hallucinari… tu veno bene egiſti, ſed hoc & hoc ſacere non debuiſti. Bold.Secondly, The Daies-man eying the temper or diſtemper, both of the complainant and defendant, laid his hand gently now upon one, and then upon another, uſing his beſt Rhetorick to perſwade, yea to conjure them to peace and quietneſſe; Sir, ſaid he to one, I beſeech you to accept of theſe terms and conditions, 'tis you that have done the wrong, and treſpaſſed againſt your neighbour; and preſently he beſpake the other, that he would paſſe by the offence, heal the breach, forget the injury, or take reaſonable ſatisfaction for his damage.

Thirdly, The Daies-man giving ſentence, laid his hand upon the head of him whom he found faulty, and to have done the wrong, in token of condemnation. Among the Ceremonies of conſecrating the Leviticall Prieſts, this is given in command (Exod. 29.10.) Thou ſhalt cauſe a bullock to be brought before the Tabernacle of the Congregation: and Aaron and his ſons ſhall put their hands upon the head of the bullock: And in the rules given concerning the burnt offerings of the people, it is directed, that the bringer ſhall lay his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering, &c. (Levit. 1.4.) Now this laying of their hands upon the head of the Sacrifice, implied the laying of their ſins upon the head of the Sacrifice, and that, the laying of their ſins upon the head of Chriſt, on whom the Prophet aſſures us, The Lord laid the iniquity of us all (Iſa. 53.6.) And as the laying on of the hand upon the head of the beaſt tranſfer'd their ſins upon him, ſo likewiſe that ſentence of death and condemnation which was due to their ſin, and was preſently executed by ſlaying of the beaſt: which was a lively type of Chriſt (the Lamb ſlain from the beginning of the world) dying under a ſentence of condemnation in the ſtead of ſinners.

Laſtly, The laying on of the hand, notes the keeping of the parties in compaſſe, for contenders uſe to be very violent one againſt another.

p. 391Thus to the preſent text, The laying on of the hand ſignifies only the compoſing or compounding of a difference. When Job complained or affirmed only, There is no Daies-man betwixt us; his meaning was, that there was no man who could take up the matter betwixt God and him, there was none ſuch to be found,Non poteſt dari Deo mihi que ſimul litigantibus arbiter: quaſi in Deum aequè ac in me poteſtatē exercendo. for he ſpeaks not only (De facto) that there was no Daies-man, but (de impoſſibili) as of a thing which was impoſſible to be; As if he had ſaid, I would gladly referre this matter to arbitration, but the Lord, who is engaged with me, is above the arbitration of men or Angels; Creatures may not meddle with any of his matters further then they are called and I know not of any whom God hath called to, or appointed over this matter.

Hence obſerve,

Firſt, When controverſies ariſe, the rule of love bids us refer our differences to the determination of brethren.

Job ſpeaks according to the uſage of thoſe daies; men did not preſently run to law, and call one another before the Judge, they had daies-men and umpires to determine matters between them. Thus Jacob beſpeaks Laban (Gen. 31.37.) Whereas thou haſt ſearched all my ſtuff, what hast thou found of all thy houſholdſtuff? ſet it here before my brethren and thy brethren, that they may judge betwixt us both. The Apoſtle (1 Cor. 6.1, 5.) is very angry with the Corinthians, becauſe they were ſo haſty to go to Law, Verily there is utterly a fault among you, becauſe you go to law one with another; What is there not a Daies-man among you? Is there not a man among you fit to be an Arbitratour? I ſpeak to your ſhame (ſaith Paul) Is it ſo that there is not a wiſe man among you, no not one that ſhall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. The ſin of theſe Corinthians was the greater, becauſe the Judges were Heathen, yet ſuch contendings bear a proportion of ſinfulneſſe, though Judges be Chriſtians. To bring every matter to the judgment ſeat, when (poſſibly) a brother or a friend might take up the matter, is a tranſgreſſion againſt the law of love. We ſhould rather labour after reconcilements, then ſutes in Law; which are a cauſe, not only of trouble and expence,In proverbio eſt portores eſſe iniquas pacis conditiones opti… a judicis ſententia. but of great breaches and heart-burnings among friends and brethren. We have a proverbiall ſpeech among us, A lean arbitration is better then a fat judgement. It is better to the parties, they ſhall get more by it, the charge of obtaining right by law, many times eating p. 392out all, and ſometimes more then all, alwaies a conſiderable part of that which the law gives us as our right. We uſe to ſay to diſſenters, Be friends, the Law is coſtly. 'Tis very coſtly to moſt mens purſes, and to ſome mens conſciences. 'Tis rare, if a man wrongs not his ſoul by ſeeking the rights of his credit or eſtate.

Secondly, Obſerve, That no creature can umpire the buſineſſe betwixt God and man.

There is a two-fold reaſon of it.

Oportet ut in judice ſit altior ſapien…ia, quae ſit qua… regula, ad quam examinantur dicta utriuſ que partis.Firſt, He that is our umpire is ſuppoſed wiſer then our ſelves. They who cannot agree need more wiſdom then their own to work their agreement. But there is no creature wiſe as God, yea, there is no creature wiſe but God; who is therefore called, The God only wiſe. God is beſt able to judge of his own actions. No man hath been his Counſellour (Rom. 11.34.) much leſſe ſhall any man be his Judge: Men ſometimes abound too much in their own ſenſe, but God muſt abound in his. His will is the rule of all, much more his wiſdom; or rather his wiſdom is the rule of all, becauſe his will is; his will and wiſdom being the ſame, and of the ſame extent, both infinite.

Oportet ut in judice ſit major poteſt as, quae poſſit utram que partem comprimere.Secondly, He that is a Daies-man or Ʋmpire, muſt (according to the rules before ſpoken of) have power to compell the parties to ſubmit or ſtand to what he ſhall determine. But as we cannot lay any reſtraint upon God, from doing what he will; ſo we cannot lay any conſtraint upon him, to do what we will. Who ſhall force the Lord? To whom hath he given an aſſumpſit, or ingaged himſelf under a penalty to perform what he ſhall award? The Lord doth whatſoever he pleaſeth both in heaven and earth, and he will do no more then he pleaſeth. Perſwaſion cannot move him, much leſſe can power compell him. He that is above all in power, cannot be dealt with any way, but by perſwaſion. And he who is above all in wiſdom, cannot be perſwaded by any againſt his own will.

There is indeed a Daies-man betwixt God and man, but God himſelf hath appointed him. God hath referred the differences betwixt himſelf and man, unto Jeſus Chriſt; and (his own good will and free grace moving him thereunto) he ſtands engaged in the bonds of his everlaſting truth and faithfulnes to perform what Jeſus Christ, as Mediatour, ſhould ask for us: unto him we may ſafely commit our cauſe and our ſouls, with that aſſurance of the p. 393Apoſtle (2 Tim. 1.12.) I know whom I have believed, and am perſwaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him againſt that day. Chriſt, God-man is umpire between God and man; what we truſt him with ſhall not miſcarry: he will make our cauſe good, and our perſons acceptable before God at that great day. It is infinite mercy, when we were neither able to mannage our own cauſe, nor to finde out any in heaven or earth who could, that then God himſelf ſhould finde out one, in wiſdom and power like himſelf, one who thought it no robbery to be equall with God to be our Daies-man. Many of the Ancients interpret this Text, either as Jobs deſire and praier, that Chriſt would come in the fleſh, O that there were a days-man betwixt us: or as a prophecy of Jeſus Chriſt, to come as our Daies-man in the fleſh, There is no Daies-man yet, but a Daies-man ſhall come. The ſenſe is pious, but the context will not bear it; In the 16^th Chapter, v. 21. and Chap. 17. v. 3. We ſhall finde Job ſpeaking clearly of the Mediatour Jeſus Chriſt, and of his great work of atonement between God and man. But here he ſeems to keep to the preſent controverſie, about the buſineſſe of affliction, not of ſalvation.

Take two or three conſectaries flowing from the whole matter.

Firſt, Job at the loweſt ſpeaks highly of God, and humbly of himſelf. The greater his afflictions were the purer was his language. He was not able to grapple with God, and there was none to be found who could umpire the matter betwixt them. The will of God is the ſupreme law. What he will do with us, we muſt be content he ſhould. The ſecrets of his providence are beyond our ſearch, and his judgements above our reach.

Secondly, The greatneſſe and tranſcendency of God ſhould keep us low in our own thoughts.

Our knowledge of God is the preſent cure of our own pride. The knowledge of God cauſeth us to know our ſelves, and that which makes us know our ſelves, cannot but make us low in our ſelves. Though a proud man is commonly ſaid, To know himſelf too much, yet the truth is, he doth not know himſelf enough, no, nor at all, as he ſhould know himſelf. Many are proud of, and with their knowledge, yet pride is the daughter of ignorance. Some pride lodges in every mans heart, becauſe more then ſome ignorance doth. Job had ſome of both, in his; why doth he lay the thought of the infinite glory and ſoveraignty of God ſo often to p. 394his heart, but to keep down or to cure the ſwellings of his heart.

Thirdly, It is a fearfull thing to fall into the hands of God.

He is not a man as we are (we are not able to match him) and there is (among men) no Daies-man betwixt us. David made it his election (2 Sam. 24.) To fall into the hands of God, and not into the hands of man. And it is beſt for us to fall into the hands of God (as David put himſelf into his hands) with reſpect to his great mercies. But woe unto u…, if we fall into his hands, as contenders with his great power. Shall we thus provoke the Lord? Are we ſtronger then he? It is our duty, when we do, and our priviledge that we may, caſt our ſelves into the hands of God, when the hand of man oppreſſes us;Satis idoneus eſt patientiae ſequeſter Deus, ſi injuriam depoſueris juxta eum, ultor eſt; ſi damnum, reſtitutor; ſi dolorem, medicus; ſi mortem, reſcuſcitator eſt. Tertul. l. de Patient. for (as one of the Ancients ſpeaks ſweetly and feelingly) If thou doeſt depoſit thy injuries with him, he is able to revenge thee; if thy loſſes, he is able to repair thee; if thy ſickneſſe, he is able to heal thee; and if thy death, he can raiſe thee up and eſtate thee in life again. Thus (I ſay) it is beſt to fall into the hands of God, in expectation of mercy, through the Mediatour, but it is a fearfull thing to fall into the hands of the living God, upon contempt of mercy obtained by the Mediatour: So the Apoſtle argues (Heb. 10.26.) If men ſinne wilfully after they have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more ſacrifice for ſinne, but a certain fearfull looking for of judgement and fiery indignation &c. Thence concluding (verſ. 31.) It is a fearfull thing to fall into the hands of the living God. They who ſleight the bloud of Chriſt, and neglect the great ſalvation tendered to ſinners b… …im, can have no more ſacrifice for ſinne. Wicked men crucifie to …hemſelves the Sonne of God afreſh, and put him to open ſhame (Heb. 6.6.) But God will not crucifie his Sonne, or put him to open ſhame again for them. God will not make another Goſpel for them (as he muſt, if they be ſaved) who contemn this. No, there remains no more ſacrifice for ſinne, theſe men who once (with all man-kinde) fell into the hands of God by tranſgreſſing his Law, are now (under another notion) fallen into his hands, even by the contempt of his Goſpel; and now God ſaith, I will deal with them alone, for they have refuſed the Daies-man whom I ſent, and who was ready to lay his hand upon us both. It had been unconceivably ſad with us all, if, as in the caſe of Jobs temporall loſt eſtate, there was no Daies-man between God and him on earth, ſo in the caſe of our ſpirituall loſt p. 395eſtate, there had been no Daies-man between God and man in heaven: But it will be unconceivably more ſad with thoſe, who having bad the tender of ſuch a Daies-man, ſhall be found contemners of him. Greateſt love neglected, breaks forth and ends in greateſt wrath.