Quest. 11. Of the authoritie of the pro∣phesie of Daniel.
1. The Iewes doe derogate much from the authoritie of this booke, not counting it a∣mong the Propheticall writings, of the which there are three opinions: 1. Some thinke that the Iewes doe not reiect the prophesie of Daniel, but onely count it among the bookes called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, holy writings: for they diuide the olde Testament, into the lawe con∣tained in the fiue bookes of Moses, and the Prophets which are eight, Iosua, the Iudges, Samuel, the Kings, Isaiah, Ieremie, Ezekiel, the twelue Prophets: and into the holy wri∣tings, as they call them, whereof there are nine, Iob, Dauid, the Prouerbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticles,* 1.1 the Chronicles, Daniel, Ezra, Ester. So Pererius praefat. Likewise Hugo Cardi∣nal, who maketh two kind of Prophets, some that had onely gratiam prophecialem, the gift and grace of prophesie: others, which beside the gift were especially called and sent to that ende to prophesie, and in this sense onely the Iewes hold neither Dauid, nor Daniel to be Prophets.
2. Theoderet doth simply reprehend the Iewes for denying Daniel to be a Prophet,* 1.2 and this booke to be any of the propheticall writings: so also Iunius affirmeth, that the Iewes denie this booke to be counted among the Hagiographa, or holy writings.
3. But the truth is, as Polanus setteth it downe, that the Elder Iewes did acknowledge this booke to be authenticall and canonicall, and equall in authoritie to the booke of the Psalmes, the Prouerbs of Salomon, the Lamentations of Ieremie, and diuerse of them haue written commentaries, vpon this booke, as R. Salomon, R. Leui, Ben Gerson, R. Abraham, Aben Ezra, R. Saadia, with others: but the later Rabbines doe denie the booke of Dani∣el to be authenticall, and therefore seldome reade it, as he speaketh of his owne experience, how diuerse Rabbines in Moravia whose helpe he vsed,* 1.3 did confesse, that they seldome did reade the prophesie of Daniel: the occasion whereof he thinketh to be this, because Dani∣el doth so euidently point out the time of the Messiah his comming.
4. But this errour of the Iewes in reiecting this prophesie of Daniel may thus further be refuted. 1. The bookes which are called Hagiographa, holy writings, were of three sorts; either they are taken for those bookes which were laid vp by the Arke, and had the miracu∣lous & extraordinary approbation by the Vrim and Thummim, & other visible demonstrati∣ons: or for such canonicall books, which though they had not that allowance, being written after the captiuitie, when those visible monuments of the Arke, the Vrim and Thummim ceased, yet were written by the spirit of God, and commended to his Church: and third∣ly, those bookes were called holy writings, which were not made of Canonicall authoritie, but onely preferred before other humane writings, and receiued of the Church into some higher order, though not made equall to the the Scriptures. Now though the prophesie of Daniel be not of the first sort, yet that it is authenticall and canonicall of the second, it thus may appeare.
The authoritie then of this booke is set forth by testimony both internall and externall: the externall is either diuine or humane: the diuine, essentiall or accidentall: the humane is either Ecclesiasticall and domesticall, or forraine or prophane: these further shall thus be de∣clared