Polpoikilos sophia, a compleat history or survey of all the dispensations and methods of religion, from the beginning of the world to the consummation of all things, as represented in the Old and New Testament shewing the several reasons and designs of those different administrations, and the wisdom and goodness of God in the government of His church, through all the ages of it : in which also, the opinion of Dr. Spencer concerning the Jewish rites and sacrifices is examin'd, and the certainty of the Christian religion demonstrated against the cavils of the Deists, &c. / by John Edwards ...

CHAP. IV.

The Noachical Oeconomy. The first Positive Law under it was about eating of Flesh. It is proved that this prevail'd not till after the Flood. Objections against it answer'd. The Testimony of Pagans to confirm it. The Rea∣son of the Prohibition. The second Positive Law was concerning not eating Flesh with the Blood. The Reason of it. The third Positive Law was concerning not shedding of Man's Blood. With the Penalty of it. And the Sanction of Magistracy. Servitude not introduced under this Dispensation. The Longevity of the Patriarchs was common to all in those Times. The Months and Years were of the same length then that they are now. They were Solar, not Lunar Years. The Causes of the long Lives of those that lived before the Flood. The Abrahamick Oeconomy. With its several Steps and Advances. The Nature of the Covenant made with Abraham. Now the Faithful were separated and distin∣guish'd from the rest of the World. Why they are called Hebrews. The Nature and Design of Circumcision. Vnder this Dispen∣sation Altars were erected, Tithes paid, &c. Of Polygamy, and Concubines, and other Vsages.

THE Second Patriarchal Dispensation, or the Noa∣chical O••conomy began in Noah's days, and lasted till Abraham. Immediately after the Flood, the Cove∣nant which was made with our first Parents was renew∣ed to Noah: the Law of Grace which had been given to them, was now confirmed to this eminent Person, and to the ••est of Mankind in him: and the ••ow in the Cloud was made a Sign of the Covenant, Gen. 9. 9. It is to be believ'd, that a farther discovery of the M••s∣sias was made to Noah, tho the Sacred History saith no∣thing of it. But this is expresly recorded, that this re∣newing and confirming of the Dispensation of Grace, were accompanied with some positive Institutions and Laws, which were an addition to those that were before given to Adam. These are the things which make the difference between this and the former O••conomy.

The first Positive Law was concerning ••ating of Flesh. Ev••ry moving thing that liveth shall b•• Meat for you, Gen. 9. 3. The discrimination of Meats is taken away, and Flesh is granted to be eaten: and indeed there was a necessity of it at that time, because the Fruits of the Earth were destroy'd by the Flood. Before the Delug•• there was not a liberty given to eat Flesh, for they were limited by that Injunction in Gen. 1. 29. which ap∣points Herbs and Fruits to be their Meat. God said, B••h••ld, I have given you every H••rb bearing S••••d which is upon the Face of all the Earth, and every Tree in th•• which is the Fruit of a Tree yielding Seed, to you i•• shall b•• for Meat. Here is the Lex Cibaria, Man is con∣fined as to his Diet: Herbs and Fruits are appointed his Food, and no other. But now this Restraint is taken off by the same hand that laid it on; and God permit•• Noah and his Posterity to eat Flesh as well as Herbs.

But yet it is a Controversy among Writers, whether eating of Flesh was granted just after the Flood, and

was altogether prohibited before. The Hebrews gene∣rally say, that the People before the Deluge fed only up∣on what the Earth produced, and abstain'd from all living Creatures. Most of the Christian Fathers hold this, and say, it was by Divine Injunction: But1 1.1 Chry∣sostom and2 1.2 Theodoret seem to be of another Judgment. The Moderns are divided; some hold that Flesh was eaten before the Flood, and others not till after it. Luther, Peter Martyr, Fr. Iunius, and Musculus, hold the latter: But Calvin, Rivet, Par••us, and other Reformed Divines, hold the former, viz. that eating of Flesh as well as Herbs was free from the very Crea∣tion. Of this Opinion too are Beverovici•••• the Physi∣cian, Bochart, Voetius, Hottinger, and our Wille••. But I conceive that these worthy Men fail in this Point, and that the other Opinion is to be prefer'd before this, because there is a plain Text of Scripture to back it, (which the other Opinion is destitute of) Every mov∣ing thing that liveth shall be meat for you: even as th•• green Herb (which was the only Food allow'd you be∣fore, Gen. 1. 29.) have I given you all things, Gen. 9. 3. As much as to say, you have as free liberty now, since the Flood, to eat the Flesh of every living Crea∣ture, as you had before the Flood to feed on every sort of Herbs and Fruits, tho you were stinted as to Flesh. This is the clear sense and import of the words; and consequently proves, that eating Flesh before the Flood was unl••wful. I do not say, they never ate Flesh, for it's p••obable they did transgress sometimes, and made bold to taste of that sort of Food; but this is the thing I assert, that ••ating Flesh was forbidden them at that time, and that the Prohibition was not taken off till af∣ter the Flood; and that then first of all it was lawful

to kill Animals in order to the eating of their Flesh; all which appears from clear words of Scripture.

If it be objected that the Antediluvians kept Sheep; and therefore it is to be infer'd thence, that they ••ade use of their Flesh for Food: I answer, That they kept flocks of Sheep; 1. For their Wool and Skins to clothe them. 2. For Sacrifices, which consumed many of their Sheep and other Cattel: And perhaps, 3▪ for Milk, to sustain them (for, as I suggested before, they ventured to transgress sometimes, and to eat something else besides Herbs and Fruits, tho it was against a Com∣mand.) Thus you see the Shepherds Life, or keeping of Sheep, proveth not that they used the Flesh of Sheep for Food. And by what hath been said we know like∣wise how to answer that common Objection, that kil∣ling of Beasts was used by the Patriarchs; therefore eating Flesh was in use. It follows not, because they killed them either for their Skins or Fleece, or to offer them on the Altar. The elder1 1.3 〈◊〉〈◊〉 thinks that tho at all other times they abstain'd from Flesh, yet this was their extraordinary repast at Sacrificing. But I do not see any reason to confirm what he suggests; for tho afterwards it was usual to eat of the Sacrifices, yet it doth not follow thence that this was practis'd before the Flood.

Others argue also from the difference of clean and un∣clean Beasts before the Flood. It is evident, say they, that there was eating of B••asts at that time; else some could not be said to be clean, and others unclean. But I have proved before, that the distinction of clean and unclean Animals which was before the Flood, had respect only to Sacrifices, not to Eating. Notwithstanding then these Objections, I assert, that there was no Sarcophagy before the Flood, at least it was not common; and that

if any presumed to eat Flesh, it was unlawfully done of them.

This Notion the Pagan Poets and Philosophers had 〈◊〉〈◊〉.1 1.4 Virgil intimateth, that eating of Flesh was an impious thing, and not known in the first and pur∣est Ages of the World.2 1.5 Ovid describing those Times, lets us know that they sed on no Flesh, but lived alto∣gether on the Fruits of the Earth.

A•• vetus illa ••tas, cui fecimus aur••a n••men, Foetibus arboreis, & quas hum•••• educat herbi•• Fortunata fuit, nec polluit or a cruore. Tunc & aves tut•• movér•• p••r ••era pennas, Et lepus impavidus mediis erravit in arvis, Nec sua credulitas pisc••m suspender at h••mo. Cuncta, sine in••idiis, nulláam{que} timentia fra••dem, Plená{que} paci•• erant.

Which may be English'd thus;

The Antient Age, which we the Golden call, Was bless'd with H••rbs and Fruits, the only Fare That wholesom is. Those days were not defil'd With bloody Dainties. In those early Times The Fowls in safety flew in th' open Air, The Beasts securely ranged in the Plains, Fishes were not by their Credulity Unwarily betray'd. All Creatures liv'd In a profound security. For why? They neither used nor fear'd Treachery.

This the Pythagoreans testify, who were great Searchers into the Antient and Primitive Practices of the World.

P••rphyrius, who was one of that Sect, asserts that in the Golden Age no Flesh of Beasts was eaten: and he is to be pardoned in what he addeth afterwards in the same1 1.6 Book, that War and Famine first introduced this usage. He was not acquainted with Genesis, he knew not that God's Order to Noa•• after the Flood was, that every living Creature should be Meat for him.

If you enquire into the Reason why God, who had restrain'd Men from eating of Flesh before the Flood, permitted them to do it a••ter it; it is likely he did it because the Earth was corrupted by the Deluge, and by the saltness of the Seas; and so the Plants and Herbs, and all Fruits of the Earth were indamaged: The natu∣ral Virtue of Vegetables was much impaired, and there∣by they could not yield so wholesom and solid a Nou∣rishment as they once did, they were not so sutable to Man's Body as they were before. Hereupon God gave them a Licence to eat Flesh, he indulged this to them out of the Care and Love he bore to them.

The Second Positive Law which Noa•• receiv'd was concerning the not ••ating of Flesh with the Blood. Gen. 9. 4. Flesh with th•• Lif•• th••reof, which is the Blood there∣of, shall ye not ••at. Lud••vic•••• de Die•• is of opinion, that the eating of Creatures that died of themselves is here forbid; but I see no foundation for it. St. Chrys••∣••tom thinks, that eating of things strangled is spoken against here. But this doth not reach the full meaning of this Prohibition: for by this Law it was made un∣lawful to eat any raw Flesh whilst it was yet warm, and had the Blood and Life in it. Thus the Iewish Doctors understood it, and that very rightly, as the fa∣mous 2 1.7 Mr. Selden hath shew'd. This, they say, was

the Seventh Precept given by God to Noah after the Flood. We are sure it was one, for the Holy Ghost by Moses attesteth it here. Tho they had leave to eat Flesh, yet it was with this Exception, that they should not eat it with the Life or Soul, which is the Blood, that is, they were forbid to eat live Flesh with the Blood in it; they were not permitted to eat the Flesh before it was quite dead: or they were not to eat any Limb or Member torn off from an Animal alive. The Reason given, in another place, why they must not ••at Blood, is, because it is the Soul or Life of all Flesh; that is, it is the chief Instrument of Life; and therefore is pro∣perly and significantly used in making Atonement for Souls. Therefore it was designed wholly for Expiation, it was appointed and appropriated to that sacred Use on the Altar: And for this reason it ought not to be used in a common way. Again, God forbad eating of Blood (and that even before the Law) to teach abstaining from Man's Blood. They must eat no Beast's Blood, that they might not thereby learn to delight in Human Blood: as we see (saith1 1.8 an Expositor upon the place) Butchers, who kill Beasts, are generally cruel and bloody to Men; and for that reason the Law suffers them not to be on the Jury of Life and Death2 1.9 The Ath••nians, order'd one to be flead alive because he had serv'd a Ram so.3 1.10 The Areopagite Judges condemn'd a Boy to death, because he put out the eyes of Quails; and this is given as the reason, because it shew'd that the Boy was of a cruel disposition, and would prove very hurtful if he lived. So here it was thought that Blood-eating was a sign of and preparative to inhuman Actions, and accord∣ingly was not allow'd of. Therefore this Precept, of not eating the Flesh of Beasts with the Blood running

about it, was to restrain this Cruelty. The old Giants of the World before the Flood, generally liv'd on the Blood of Beasts, and so learn'd to be cruel and savage to Men; and thence, as Maimonides and Mr. Selden from him conjecture, this Law had its rise: God there∣fore commanded those of Noah's Posterity to re••rain wholly from Blood, that they might not proceed from cruelty to Beasts, to killing of Men. Besides, this may seem partly to be a natural Law, Blood being a gross Meat, and not fit for nourishment.

A Third Law given to Noah was that in Gen. 9. 5, 6. Surely the blood of your lives will I require: at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man, at the hand of every mans brother will I require th•• lif•• of man. Whoso ••••eddeth mans blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the Image of God made 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ma••. There is indeed a Treble Law comprised in these words: 1. They are forbid to shed mans blood. Noa•• and his sons are commanded not to be guilty of Homicid••. Ta∣king away a mans life was unlawful before, as in C ain; but here it is solemnly denounced to be such: and moreover, the Punishment of it is set down. If shed∣ding of mans blood were not here forbidden as unlaw∣ful, it would not be followed with a P••nalty, as you see it is. Which is the second Sanction here, the blood of your lives I will require at the hand of every beast, and at the hand of every man. Whether man or beast pro∣cure the death of a man, their blood shall be re∣quired for it. Death is here made the Penalty of Murder. Yea, the very Beasts that kill'd a man should themselves be kill'd. There was no Law before this for the punishing of Bloodshed. And thirdly, here is also signified the Aut••ority of th•• Ma∣gistrate, whose particular and peculiar work it is to require the life of man at the hand of every mans br••th••r. Whoso sheddeth mans blood, by man shall his blood be shed.

Here the manner of punishing bloodshed is set down, and appointed; it must be done by the Magistrate. A pub∣lick Minister of Justice is here ordered and appointed to punish the guilty: Here is the first Institution of that Political Order. Here is the first injunction for erecting Courts of Judicature.

Some of the1 1.11 Socinian party will allow this to be a Commination, but not a Precept given to Magistrates. But herein they separate what they ought to have united, for these words are both a threatning of Punishment, and also an Order or Warrant given to the Magistrate to execute that Punishment. It is to be done by Man (Adam) which word sometimes is appropriated to one of Eminency and Power, and therefore here not unfitly denotes the Magistrate, the Ruler, him that hath Au∣thority and Power above others. This is the person that is commission'd here not to suffer Bloodshed to go unpunish'd, but to return blood for blood: which is a practice grounded on the Law of Reason and Equity, which in such a case as this requires a just and equal Re∣tribution. But this and other places those of the Rac••∣vian way distort, to serve their own end, viz. to pa∣tronize their opinions concerning Magistrates, who according to them are not to use any Capital Punish∣ment, not to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 War, &c. But any unprejudic'd and considerate person cannot but see that the power of the Sword is here given to the Civil Magistrate. Upon this one Charter depends the Execution of Justice against all Crimes: upon this is founded the power of executing judgment upon Offenders, and of cutting off of Malefac∣tors. So that you see in this forecited place are contain'd two of those Precepts which were said to be given to A∣dam, the Titles whereof were of Iudgments, and of not Shedding of Blood, which both were Laws of Nature im∣printed

in mens breasts; but when after the flood the World began anew, God thought fit to revive the re∣membrance of these Laws, and made them Positiv••, and not before, that we know of.

Some think that under this Dispensation was intro∣duced Slavery; that men were all free before the Flood, and that not long after Servitud•• began, viz. in Canaan the Son of Cham; for which they alledg that Text, Gen. 9. 25. A servant of servant•• shall he b••. Here is the first servant mention'd; and because we read of none before, they conclude that Bondage, which is a great Curse, began in this Cursed Person, the Offspring of cursed C••am. But I cannot so easily assert that Servi∣tud•• had its first rise here; for though Canaan be the first servant mention'd, yet it doth not follow thence that Thraldom had its beginning in him: for silence is no Argument that there was none before. But the main thing which I have to say is this, that if Bondage com∣menc'd in Canaan, it is to be understood not of him∣self, but of his posterity. So that we may truly say, it did not begin in this Disp••nsati••n, but afterwards. And this is plain from the place it self, and the following verses, where 'tis said, Canaan shall be the servant of Sh••m; and he was so when his posterity the Canaanit••s were overcome and subdued by those of the race of Sh••m, viz. the Isra••lites. Then it was that this Curse on Canaan was fulfill'd, and not before. But as to com∣mon Servitude, we read of it long before that time; A••ra••am had m••n-servants and maid-s••rvants, who 〈◊〉〈◊〉 bo••ght with hi•• m••n••y, Gen. 12. 16. & 24. 35. so had Iacob, Gen. 30. 43. & 32. 5. And according to the M••∣saick Law they were permitted, in case of extreme po∣verty, to get money by the sale of their children, Exod. 21. 7. Lev. 39. but when the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 arrived, Liberty was to be proclaim'd, and Servants were set free.

There is nothing more, besides what hath been said, that is considerable in this Disp••nsati••n, unless it be the

Long••vity of those persons who lived both under this and the foregoing Oeconomy. This indeed is very remark∣able; and because it is peculiar to this period of time (for we find that soon after the Deluge the Age of men was abridged, and in a short time terminated as ours doth) I think it will not be foreign to our present de∣sign to give the Reader some account of it; that is, to inquire into the particular causes of the long Lives of the Patriarchs, to assign the reasons why they arrived to six, seven, eight, nine hundred, yea almost a thou∣sand years. So it is expresly recorded in Gen. 5. 3, &c. Adam lived 930 years, Seth 912, Enos 905, Cainan 910, Mahalaleel 895, Iared 962, Methusela•• 969, Lamech 777: and Noah's age is said to be 950 years, Gen. 9. 29. Some indeed labour to perswade us that this Vivacity was peculiar only to those Patriarchs that Moses rehearseth.1 1.12 Maimonides goes this way, and 2 1.13 Aberbanel agrees with him. None of late have en∣deavoured the proof of this more ingeniously than Mr. warren in his Geologia, where he tells us that the fifth Chapter of Genesis is the compleat List of those whose lives were thus lengthened in those first times of the world, because these were very Eminent and Vseful persons above others, men of Extraordinary Piety and Honesty, and therefore fitly design'd by God to live so long in the world to instruct and reform it, and carry on other designs of Providence for that time. But there is no manifest proof of this, yea the contrary is very evi∣dent; for all the days of Enoch (who is mention'd in the same chapter with those long livers before named) 〈◊〉〈◊〉 but three hundred sixty and five, v. 23. and yet he was the most Holy, Religious and Exemplary man of them all, which is meant by his walking with God, which is

applyed only to the most3 1.14 Pious and Vertuous persons. And on the other side, there is no mark of Eminency set on most of those whose long lives are recorded, as Cai∣nan, Mahalal••el, Iared, Mathuselah, &c. This is the Sum total of their lives, that they liv••d so many y••ars, and b••gat s••ns and daught••rs.

So that it is evident hence, that this length of years was not indulg'd to the Ant••diluvian Patriarchs for their singular Vertue and Excellency above others, but that it was common to all, i. ••. to the greatest part of the persons of those times, as they were people of that peculiar Dispensation, wherein God was pleas'd for se∣veral Reasons (which I shall produce afterwards) to pro∣long their days after this manner, And this which Mo∣s••s saith, is back'd and confirm'd by Pagan Testimony, as4 1.15 Ioseph the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 takes notice, who alledges the An∣tientest Authors that have writ concerning the Antiqui∣ties of the Egyptians, Chald••ans, Ph••nicians, Grecians, as witnesses to this part of the Mosaick History. They all ••ver that the measure of the time which the first people of the world lived was exceeding large, and even a∣mounted to a thousand years in some. There is no reason therefore to doubt of what M••ses delivers, or to think that those of this Period who are not mention'd by him, lived not so long as these whose names are enumerated in the 5. Chap. of G••n••sis: for the Mosaick Relation is known and confess'd by all to be brief and concise, and is wont to specifie only a few Instances when the generality is understood.

But others detract from the Mosaick Verity by a more severe way of cavilling, whilst they insinuate a mistake in the Y••ar•• which the Old Testament speaks of. It is not likely, say they, that there should be such a vast

disproportion between the Antediluvians and us, be∣tween their lives and ours. It may be they then reckon'd a shorter time for a year than we do now, and thence it is that they are thought to have lived so much longer than we. The years of Adam's life were Lunar, i. e. they were but Months, saith a1 1.16 Confident man, without as∣signing any reason for what he saith. The like was al∣ledged by2 1.17 Pliny long since, who mentioning some that were said to live seven or eight hundred years, tells us that this proceeded from ignorance of those times, and of the accompt or computation they went by; their Years being some of them but half, others but a quar∣ter of a year. And it is true, I grant, that the Arca∣dian Y••ar was but three months; yea, I shall not deny that the Egyptians Y••ar was no more than the Moons course, i. e. a month: so that we need not wonder at what Diodore of Sicily saith, that some Egyptian peo∣ple lived in a thousand years. And here by the way we may know how to solve those several passages in this Author, and Herodotus, and Pliny, and AElian concer∣ning the vast Antiquity which the Egyptians so much boasted of. We find in these Writers that the Egypti∣an Calculation ran extravagantly high, some making their Kingdom to be above ten thousand, some above twenty thousand years standing. Thus far then I am willing to grant, that the V••lgar Year among the Egyp∣tians of old was but a Month (though if we may credit 3 1.18 Vossi••s, they had other years that were longer; and we learn from a much antienter4 1.19 Author that they had a different computation, and that their Year was not al∣ways alike) but it is groundless and ridiculous to con∣clude hence, that the Years which all other Nations and

People reckon'd by were of this small dimension, and particularly that these Years are meant by Moses when he speaks of the Patriarchs. Yet there are some that have taken up this Conceit, and hold that these Years were but Menstruous, i. ••. they were of no longer du∣ration than the space of the Moon's passing through the twelve Signs, which is done in 28 or 29 days; and hereby they think they give a fair account of the reputed Long••vity of those persons.

But this Opinion is soon baffled by considering these following things; 1. There never was any such Com∣putation of Years in use among the H••br••ws, and those from whom they descended. The Learnedest and Skilfullest Antiquaries, and those who are most conver∣sant in that sort of Knowledg, will assure you of this. 2. Moses himself, who is the person that gives us the Ac∣count of the Lives of the Patriarchs, makes express men∣tion of Months as distinct from Y••ars, G••n. 7. 11. & 8. 13. And if they be really distinct, who can have the confi∣dence to say they are the same? 3. If you carefully per∣use the History of the Flood, that will certainly demon∣strate that the Y••ars in those times contain'd many M••nths in them, as in G••n. 8. 5, 13, 14. where you read not only of the first and sec••nd, but the t••nt•• m••nt•• of that Y••ar in which the Deluge was. And that it may appear that the Months were like ours, we read not only of the seventeenth day of the second Month, Gen. 7. 11. but of the twenty s••venth day of the same Month, G••n. 8. 14. Nay I will prove that the Antediluvians had 30 days in their Months, from those words in Gen. 7. 24. Th•• waters pr••vail'd on the Earth a hundred and fifty days. On the 17th day of the 2d Month Noah entred into the Ark, as we read in Gen. 7. 7, 11. then the Flood began, and it prevail'd till the 17th day of the 7th Month, as we find it in G••n. 8. 4. which space of time is exactly fiv•• m••nths, reckoning 30 days to a Month, for five times thirty is a hundred and fifty. This proves that both their Years and their Months were such

as ours, and that they had the same Computation which we have at this day. And this Calculation continu'd till St. Iohn's time, as we may satisfy our selves from Rev. 11. 2, 3. & 13. 5. where forty two Months are •• thousand two hundred and threescore days. 4. What I assert may be proved from the Absurdity of the contra∣ry Opinion; for if the antient Years were no longer than our Months, then it would follow that some of the Patriarchs begot Children when they were but six or seven Years of Age; which appears undeniably from the History of Moses, for Mahalaleel begat Iared, and Enoch begat Methuselah at the Age of sixty five Years: now if these Years were no other than Months, these Persons were but five years of Age, and a little more, when they begot Children; which is a thing that no Man of sober thoughts will entertain. 5. According to this Calculation the Patriarchs would have been very short-lived. If Years were only so many Revolutions of the Moon, it will follow that some of those Persons mention'd in Gen. 5. lived not so long as we generally do at this day. Nay, Methuselah himself, according to this way of computing, had not arrived to a hundred Years, which is a number that several reach even in this Age of the World. Thus you see what Absurdities ensue up∣on this Opinion.

Some therefore taking notice of these absured Conse∣quences, are forced to abandon this Conceit; but yet they betake themselves to another, which is this. Lu∣nary Years, say they, are so call'd either because they are but one Month, or because they fall short of the Solar Y••ar eleven days, as being reckon'd wholly by the Revolution of th•• Moon. These latter sort of Lu∣nary Years consist of 354 days, whereas the Solar Year contains 365 days in it. It is by those, and not by these that we are to reckon the years of the Patr••∣archs before spoken of, say the present Objectors: and accordingly their Years and ours now in use; are not the

same. I answer, it is true the Antient H••br••ws held the Y••ars in Scripture to be L••nar in this sense now mention'd, and there is good ground for it, because the I••ws began the Month with the New Moon; so that there could be not above nine and twenty days in one of their Months; for the Course of that Planet is finish'd within that time. And it cannot be denied that the old way of computing the Months among the Antient Arabians, Grecians, and R••mans, was from the Phas••s of the Moon, and consequently they reckon'd by these Lunar Years.1 1.20 Ios••ph Scalig••r was the first that denied the Hebr•••• Years to be of this sort, and undertook to prove that they were S••lar, i. ••. that they contain'd 365 Days, and consequently the Months consisted of 30 Days. And herein he was partly in the right; but when he contends that this was the use al∣ways among them, and that they had no other Com∣putation, he goes too far. But2 1.21 Petavius, who de∣signedly handles this Controversy, viz. whether they were Lunar or Solar Years which they reckon'd by of old, and are mention'd in the Old Testament, is more exact when he holds that both the Lunar and S••lar Y••ar were used by the Hebrews: the first was their Civil, the second their Sacred or Ecclesiastical Year. This recon∣ciles all.

But what have the Objectors gain'd by it? They have only brought the Year down from 365 Days to 354 (for this is a Lunar, and the other a Solar Year) and the one is but 11 days shorter than the other. That is all, which is no great matter: It doth not consider∣ably alter the Accompt, and therefore it was to little purpose to alledg it. Besides, this may be said after all, that the Years of the Patriarchs (whom we are

speaking of) and those of the Hebrews or Iews, who observ'd the New Moons, and reckon'd their Months by their Appearances, are not altogether the same; and therefore we can't argue from these latter to the former, especially when I have proved before from the Relation of the Deluge, that the Years and Months were then of the like extent with ours. Therefore we have rea∣son to believe that Moses means Solar Years in Gen. 5. and other places which speak of the Lives of the Men of those first times, and consequently that the Length and Duration of them were such as we have represented them to be: which was the first thing I undertook to prove.

But all this time I have been but clearing the way to what I principally intended, which is this, To search into the Causes of the Long Lives of those that lived before the Flood; for to say with Maimonides, that it was a Miracle that they lived so long, will not, I sup∣pose, be satisfactory to the Curious Reader: Wherefore I will enquire whenc•• it was that they usually lived seven or eight hundred Years, and sometimes almost a thou∣sand, tho we read of none that reach'd to that full num∣ber. This will appear very Reasonable and Account∣able if you consider,

1. That God gave them a longer space of time that they might multiply Mankind, and replenish the Earth, that (as Theodoret saith)1 1.22 their numbers might be in∣creas'd by their Annosity. Their Lives were lengthned out for the sake of Generation. There was a necessity of the prolonging of their Days, that the World might be peopled the sooner, that the Earth might be stock'd with Inhabitants in a short time. And this is a General Reason, you see; and therefore it is not likely that Longevity was the Privilege of a few only in those days,

as1 1.23 Maimonides and som others have thought, but that it was common to the whole race of Men, excepting a few, as Enoch, and two or three more perhaps.

2. As men lived long before the Flood for propagat∣ing of Mankind the more speedily, so their Lives were prolong'd, that they might the better propagate Arts and Sciences for the use of Life, that they might find out and discover things the more successfully, and de∣liver to Posterity the things which they invented. It is 2 1.24 Iosep••'s opinion that God indulg'd the Autediluvians a long Life, that they might study the Stars, and find out the Nature, Motion, and Influence of the Hea∣venly Bodies; for they could not attain to a Certainty and an Experience of these things without this. And he adds that the Great Year comes not about till the period of 600 Years, wherefore it was requisi••e they should live so long at least. But whether we admit of this particular Conceit of his or no, it is certain that Astronomy and other Arts could not be attain'd at first in a short time. Long Observation was necessary for this purpose, frequent and repeated Experiments being the great Basis of most Arts. These therefore could not be accomplish'd and perfected but by a large term of Years. The persons who lived to a great age were able to convey and entail Knowledg more effectually than w•• can now: only this is to be said, that w•• have some o∣ther ways and advantages of promoting Knowledg which they had not.

3. Their long Lives were serviceable to a higher and a nobler purpose, viz. for the retaining and preserving of Religion, and the true Worship of God, in a more intire manner: for 'tis to be remembred that there was no Scriptur•• then, and therefore Religion could not be

more advantageously spread and propagated than by a sa••e Tradition. And that this was especially aim'd at and designed by the Wisdom and Providence of God is e∣vident hence, that as soon as the matchless Treasure of Religion was deliver'd and secured to the World by com∣mitting the Law to writing, the Age of Man was pre∣sently stinted, and reduced to a set Period. This shews that one reason why the Dimensions of Mens Lives were far longer in those days than they were afterwards, was, that Religion might be the more surely kept up, they having no Written Laws at that time. Therefore these Living Laws (for such were the long-lived Patri∣archs) were requisite, whereby the Will of God was communicated with great ease and advantage to all men. This could be done even by Four Persons for the space of 2000 Years and more; for Adam's Auditor was Me∣thuselah, whom Noah succeeded, and taught Shem, and he those of his Age, even till the Year of the World 2160, or thereabouts: So compendious a way this was of instructing the World, and upholding Religion in it. But of this I shall speak afterwards.

4. Another ground of the Long Lives of the Patri∣archs before the Deluge was their Healthful Temper, wherein they much exceeded others that follow'd them. For tho we need not assert (as some have done) that the Earth was not situated before the Flood as it is now, that there were no Summers and Winters, but that there was a perpetual Equinox all over the World; yet this we may with good reason hold that there was a greater Equality of Heat and Cold in those days, and, as the consequent of that, there was a more constant and uniform Temperature of Mens Bodies. For we cannot but think that there was a great change caus'd by that Universal Deluge which cover'd the Earth; this could not but damp and chill the Air, and thereby ex∣ceedingly affect Mens Bodies, and contribute towards the shortning of their Lives. But before this general

Inundation they were healthful, and lived a long time. And this Account which I give lets us see that this was not a peculiar Donation to those Persons only whom Moses mentions, but that it was vouchsafed to all that lived in those early times.

5. I might add, that their Food was purer and whole∣somer than that of the following Ages. The Fruits of the Earth came up more kindly before the Deluge than afterwards; for we cannot but conceive that they were endamaged by the briny Waters of the Seas which were let loose on the Ground. By this means the pro∣ducts of the Earth were not so nutritive as befo••••, not so adjusted to the Constitutions and Tempers of Mens Bodies, and thence the Plenitude of Years was a∣bated.

6. Their Health and Long-living may be ascrib'd to their Temperance and Moderation; for their Diet be∣ing more simple and plain (consisting wholly of Herbs and Plants, and such like Products of the Ground) they were not tempted to that Excess which prevail'd afterwards, when several sorts of curious and delicat•• Dishes were allow'd them. Hereupon follow'd Wan∣tonness, Intemperance, Luxury and Riot; and by these the Hale Temper of Mens Bodies was impair'd, and Diseases bred, and their Days shortned. But as long as they continu'd sober and temperate, they wer•• bless'd with a sound Constitution, they were strong and vigorous, witness what you read in Gen. 5. 32. Noah was fiv•• hundred Y••ars ••ld, and b••gat Shem, Ham and Japhet.

I could adjoin in the next place, that it is very pro∣bable they had greater Skill in Physick than there was afterwards, tho they had seldom occasion to make use of it. The Professors of the Spagyrick Art do indeed tell us that the Longevity of the Patriarchs is to be at∣tributed to their Skill in Chymistry (for it is of that Antiquity they say) but it is to be question'd whether

there was any such thing at that time: we may rather content our selves with this belief, that they understood well the Nature of Herbs and Plants, and had more Time and Opportunity to study their Qualities and O∣perations than Men since have; and thence perhaps they made especial choice of such of them as were great Strengthners of Nature, and upheld the Life of Man.

Again, their quiet and contented way of living con∣tributed much to the lengthning of their Lives. They were generally free from Care and Distraction, they understood not the Intrigues and Perplexities which vain Men are now plagu'd with. In those Golden Times there was more Simplicity and Honesty, Men were satisfied with a little, and could live at a cheap rate. But afterwards the World was disorder'd, Mens Desires and Wishes grew immoderate and extravagant, and their Days were worn out with Troubles and Vexa∣tions. This is the best Account I can give of the Long Lives of the Patriarchs of the first Ages, and of the shorter Term of Years of those that succeeded them.

The Third Patriarchal Dispensation, or the Abra∣hamick Oeconomy, began with Abraham, and continued till the giving of the Law by Moses, which was 430 Years, Ex. 12. 41. Gal. 3. 17. The Person from whom this Period hath its Denomination was a Chald••an by Birth, and lived in Vr, the chief City of Chald••a. In this Idolatrous Country it is probable he was partly in∣fected with the Vic•• of the Place, and thence perhaps he is said to be Vngodly, R••m. 4. 5. But tho he was not wholly free from the impious Practice of Idolatry which then re••gn'd in the World, yet he retain'd his Integrity as to the main, and would not suffer himself to be born down with the wicked Examples of others. Mai∣monides and other Hebrew Writers tell us that he was cast into the Fire by the Chald••ans, because he would

not worship it. So the Trial of his Faith was by Fire, in the most strict and limited Sense of the Apostle's Words, 1 Pet. 1. 7. This we are certain of, that it seemed good to God to call him out of that place of so great Temptation, and to command him to repair to the Land of Canaan. When Noah's Family and Race were corrupted, he made choice of this Person above the rest, and rais'd him up to profess the true Doctrine and Worship. He vouchsa••ed to reveal his Will to him in an extraordinary and peculiar manner, and to make a Covenant with him, and to constitute him the Father of the Faithful: For Idolatry had in∣vaded the holy Race of S••••m, and thereby obliterated the Memory of the Covenant made with Adam, and afterwards with Noah; wherefore it was congruous to the Divine Wisdom to call forth Abraham who was of that Offspring, and to renew the Covenant and Pro∣mise with him, and further to assure him and his Seed of the Blessings that should accrue to them by the com∣ing of the Messias.

It will not be amiss to take notice of the several Steps leading to this. 1. God appear'd to Abraham in Chal∣d••a, hidding him leave that Place, and seek another Coun∣try, and he assured him of his Blessing. G••n. 12. 1, 2, 3. Th•• Lord had said unto Abram, Get there out of thy Country, and from thy Kindre••, and from thy Father's H••us••, unto a Land that I will shew thee. And I will make of thee a great Nation, and I will bless th••••, and make thy Name great, and t••ou shalt be a Blessing. And I will bless them that bl••ss th••••, and curse him that curs••th the••: and in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 shall all the Families of the Earth b•• blessed. 2. Abraham being come into Canaan, God appear'd to him first at Sich••m, and the Promise he then made him was this, Vnto they S••••d will I giv•• this Land, Gen. 12. 7. 3. God appear'd again to him at B••th••l, and renewed his former Promises, telling him that 〈◊〉〈◊〉 w••uld 〈◊〉〈◊〉 his Seed as th•• Dust of th•• Earth,

Gen. 13. 16. 4. He appear'd again to him, incourag∣ing and comforting him when he complain'd for want of an Heir. He promis'd him that he should have a Son, and that his Seed should be multiplied, and re∣peats his Promise also concerning his possessing the Land of Canaan. Only he adds, that his Seed must expect to be strangers in a foreign Land, and to be afflicted 400 Years before they came to settle in the promis'd Coun∣try, Gen. 15. 1 to 17. And at the same time God so∣lemnly made a Covenant with him, saying, Vnto thy Seed have I given this Land, ver. 18. 5. God ap∣pear'd to Abraham yet again, and renewed the former Covenant, saying unto him after this manner, I am th•• Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect. And I will make my Covenant between me and thee, and I will multiply thee exceedingly: and thou shalt be a Fa∣ther of many Nations; and I will establish my Covenant between me and thee, and thy Seed after thee in their Generations, for an everlasting Covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy Seed after thee. Gen. 17. 1, 2, 4, 7. And now it was that his name Abraham was given to him, which signifies the Fath••r of a multitude, i. e. of many Nations; for Hamon, which is the word here con∣tracted, is a Multitude. 6. This Covenant is confirm'd with the Seal of Circumcision: Every Man-child a∣mong you shall be circumcised, Gen. 17. 10.

This is a particular and distinct Account of God's appearing to Abraham, and of his gracious communi∣cating himself to him. It is all in way of Covenant; and accordingly what hath been said, may be reduced to these two things: 1. What God promiseth to do on his part. 2. What Abraham and his Seed were to do on theirs. God promised in general that he would be a God unto him, and to his Seed; yea, he would be an Almighty or Alsufficient God to him; which compre∣hends all that can be said. But particularly, God pro∣mised him these things: 1. To give him (i. ••. his Po∣sterity)

the Land of Canaan in due time. 2. To mul∣tiply his Seed exceedingly, even as the Sta••s of Heaven. 3. To bless all Nations of the Earth in his Seed. And St. Peter in his Sermon (Acts 3. 25, 26.) interprets and explains this Blessing, speaking thus to the Iews, Y•• are the Children of the Prophets, and of the Cove∣nant which God made with our Fathers, saying unto A∣braham, In thy Seed shall all the Kingdoms of the Earth be blessed. Vnto you first, God having raised up his Son Iesus, sent him to bless you in turning away every one of you from his Iniquities. Christ Jesus the Messias is the Blessing that was promis'd by God to Abraham. This we learn also from St. Paul, Gal. 3. 8, 9. The Scripture foreseeing that God would justify the Heathen through Faith, preached bef••re the Gosp••l unto Abraham, saying, In the•• shall all Nations be blessed. So then they which be of Faith, are blessed with faithful Abra∣ham. And in the 14th Verse the Apostle declares, that th•• Blessing of Abraham cam•• on the Gentiles through Iesus Christ. And to make this more evident, he adds, ver. 16. To Abraham and his Seed wer•• th•• Promises mad••. He saith not, Vnto Seeds, as of ma∣ny, but a•• of one, And to thy Seed, which is Christ.

This was the Covenant on God's part: Now let us see what it was on Abraham's part. He and his Seed were oblig'd by this Covenant to behave them∣selves answerably to such bountiful Promises made to them, and such great things as were to be done for them. As the Lord had ingaged to be their God, so they by virtue of this Covenant undertook to be his 〈◊〉〈◊〉, to deport themselves as such in all the actions of their lives, and to do nothing unworthy of this singular Ho∣nour and Favour confer'd on them. All is summ'd up in those words, Walk b••for•• m••, and be thou perfect. To walk before God, is to please him. Enoch walked with God, Gen. 5. 22. which by the S••v••nty Int••rpre∣t••rs is rendred, Enoch pleased God. And accordingly

the Author to the Hebrews saith, that Enoch, before his translation, had this testimony, that he pleased God, Heb. 11. 5. So Noah walked with God, Gen. 6. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ LXX. I will walk before the Lord, Psal. 116. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, say the same In••erpreters. Therefore to walk, and to please God, are joined together by the same inspir'd Writer, in 1 Thess. 4. 1. the latter being the Explication of the former. This is, according to the same Apostle, to walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, Col. 1. 10. Thus Abraham and his Seed, by virtue of this Federal Transaction, were ingaged to walk before God, to serve him in that way which was most acceptable to him. This religious and spiritual walking denoteth (as the bodily one generally doth) continued Motion, Progress, Acquaintance, Converse, 1 1.25 Friendship. And to walk before God, implieth that the Perso••s who do so, consider that they are in God's Presence, and therefore do nothing but what is pleasing to him. The walking before God after this manner, de∣nominates a Man perfect; that is, it is the only Per∣section which he is capable of in this Life.

We see then what it was that made this a peculiar Dispensation. The Law of Grace, or Covenant made with Adam, and confirmed to Noah, was renewed to Abraham with special and peculiar Promises to him and his Seed, with singular Ingagements on their part. Here were new Discoveries and Manifestations concerning the Messias, viz. That he should be of the Seed of Abra∣ham, and consequently of the Nation of the Iews; and that tho he should spring out of the Herbe•• Stock, yet he should be an Universal Saviour, and all Nations should be capable of receiving benefit from him, and of being blessed by him: and that they should all be justified by Faith, as we have ground to infer from what is said of Abraham in Gen. 15. 6. He believed in the Lord, and

he counted it to him f••r Rightcousn••ss; and from the Apostle's Comment on it in Gal. 3. 8, 9.

And then, this is peculiar to this Period, that where∣as hitherto there had been no diff••rence of any Coun∣tries and Nations of Men; now there is a palpable dif∣ference made. For as God chose a Person out from the rest of the World, so he will now make of him a great Nation and People, which shall be differenced from the rest of Mankind. God seeing the World generally run∣ning into Idolatry, and all sorts of Wickedness, set up Abraham's Seed to stem the Torrent of Vice, to keep up Religion pure and entire, and to maintain the true Worship of God upon the Earth. The Church before was not separated, and gathered from the rest of the World, but was in common with it as to Place and Stock till Abraham's time. But now it is distinguish'd from other Nations, and it is confined to one Race of Peo∣ple, among whom there shall constantly be some religi∣ous Men, who are true and living Members of the Church, and of whom at length the Messias, the Lord of Righteousness, shall come according to the Flesh.

This Stock and Posterity of Abraham were called Hebrews; but what occasion'd this Name first of all is disputable. The1 1.26 Iewish Antiquary, and from him several2 1.27 others, have thought that the Hebrews were call'd so from Heber, the Son of Salah, the Father of Peleg. Others think it more reasonable to assert, that they had their Name from Abraham. I do not mean it in St. Augustin's sense, i. e. Hebrai, quasi Abra••••i (which was the Opinion of this Father at first, but af∣terward he retracted it, and adhered to the forementi∣on'd one): But I mean this, that this Name of the

Hebrews (as3 1.28 several have been induced to believe) is derived from Gneber, transiit, viz. from the passing of Abraham and others with him from Vr in Chaldea, through Mesopotamia into Canaan. Thence this Pa∣triarch is called▪ and that emphatically, Abram the Pas∣senger, Hagnibri, Gen. 14. 13. We translate it A∣bram the Hebrew: But the Septuagint, who well un∣derstood the true derivation of the word, render it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Passenger, or the Traveller. The Reader may take his choice of these two Opinions, viz. whe∣ther the Hebrews were call'd so from Heber, or from G••ibri. But, to speak freely, tho I have no Author on my side, I do not see why they might not have their Name from both, i. e. from Heber, and afterwards from Abraham. For 'tis certain that the Iews were the Pro∣geny of that worthy Man Gneber or Heber, and there∣fore from him might originally be call'd, and he may be said to be the Father of the Hebrews. But it is as cer∣tain that Abraham was also the Father of them; and we cannot but acknowledg that his leaving his Coun∣try, and travelling into Canaan (where afterward his Posterity settled) were most famous and remarkable Occurrences, and might deservedly give him the name of Gnibri the Traveller; whence the denomination of the People descended from him is Hebrews. In this Name is recorded the Rise of that Nation, viz. from Mesopotamia, whence the Father of them came. And you may observe that it is particularly and signally men∣tion'd by God himself, Iosh. 24. 2. that he led him o∣ver Euphrates to go to Canaan: and therefore I am in∣clin'd to think that from this Epithet, (tho not whol∣ly) I say, from this Epithet given to Abraham (be∣cause he left his own Country, and passed over E••phra∣tes,

and so came travelling to Palestine) the Posterity of Abraham took their Name, and were call'd Hebrews. Afterwards they were call••d Israelites (from Iacob, whose Name was chang'd into that of Israel); and Iews (from Iudah, Iacob's Son). Some think this last Name did not prevail till the Kingdom, upon Solo∣mon's death, was divided into Iudah and Israel. But I see no footsteps of its prevailing then, for these People are not called Iews but once in the Old Testament be∣fore the Captivity, viz. in King Ahaz's Reign, 2 Kings 16. 6. Which how••ver confutes that of4 1.29 Iosephus, that they were first call'd Iews when they return'd from the Captivity in Babylon.

That they might be known to be a peculiar People, they were distinguish'd from all others by the bloody Badg of Circumcision: which was another thing that contributed towards the making this a new Dispensation. It is true, this Rite was instituted first with relation to Abraham's particular Person; for in my judgment the best Account is given by5 1.30 Iustin Martyr of the primary reason of this practice, viz. because Abraham believ'd in God, even when he was aged and un••••t for Genera∣tion, and when his Wife was decrepid and barren; he then believ'd (I say) that he should be a Father of a Child: for that reason God gave him a Sign of this nature, viz. the Circumcision of the Foreskin of that part of his Body, which then through Age was useless as to Procreation, but through Faith became otherwise. But there are other Reasons (secondary ones, and some of them mystical) which have reference, not only to Abraham, but the People descended from him. 1. Cir∣cumcision was intended and appointed to be a Character of Genealogical Sanctity, a special Mark of distinction

between the People of God and Infidels, between the true Worshippers and Idolaters, between the holy Seed and the Profane; in short, between the Seed of Abra••am and the rest of the World. Therefore all the forty Years the Israelites were in the Desert, they did not make use of this distinguishing Mark, because then they had no converse with other People, and so there was no need of an external Note of distinction to discriminate them from other Nations. 2. Circumcision (as hath been suggested already) was a Sign and Seal of the Co∣venant made with Abraham and his Seed, a confirma∣tion of the Promises made by God to them. Thence it is called by God himself his Covenant, Gen. 17. 9, 10. i. e. the Sign of it, as you read it explain'd in the next Verse, It shall be a Token of the Covenant between you and me. Thus this bloody Rite is call'd the Covenant of Circumcision, Acts 7. 8. and the Sign of Circumci∣sion, Rom. 4. 11. where the Apostle adds this high En∣comium of it, that it is the Seal of the Righteousness of Faith, i. e. of Justification and Pardon of Sin through the free Mercy of God, for the sake of the promi••ed Seed, in whom all the Faithful believe. For this Fe∣deral Mark in that part of his Body, was to remind and assure Abraham, that Christ should be born of his Seed. 3. It was reckon'd by the Hebrew Doctors as a kind of an Oblation and Sacrifice to God, there being a taking of something from the Body, and offering is to God: yea, it was a bloody Sacrifice. 4. Philo asserts, that the cutting off of that part was a1 1.31 sign of the abscission and casting away of superfluous Pleasures and carnal Delights.

Some have thought it was an artificial Restraint of Lust and Lewdness, and in the nature of the thing it self was some check to Lasciviousness. This is but a

Fancy, for it is known that the People of that Nation (and so of others since who use Circumcision) are none of the chastest Men in the World, to say no worse. That is another Rabbinical Notion, that Circumcision was made in that part of their Flesh, to represent they were to be a Holy Seed unto the Lord. But to speak with Sobriety and Reason, Circumcision was appointed for the ends at first mentioned; and lastly, to be a Symbol of the inward and spiritual Circumcision, the Circumcision of the Heart. Accordingly you read in the old Law of circumcising the Foreskin of the Heart, Deut. 10. 16. & 30. 6. and so in Ier. 4. 4. And in the New Testament the Apostle speaks of the Circumcision of the Heart, in the Spirit, Rom. 2. 29. and of putting ••ff the Body of the Sins of the Flesh by th•• Circumcision of Christ, Col. 2. 11. Hence observe why Sin is call'd a Body, because it is represented by the Body or Flesh in Circumcision. When the Flesh of the Foreskin is cut off, the taking away of Sin is signified; Sin is as it were cut off by it. And in the 13th Verse of that Chapter the Apostle speaks thus, You being dead in your sins, and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickned. Sin and the Pr••putium are here put together as the same; and it is plainly signified, that Sin is denoted to be taken away when the Foreskin is cut off. Circumcisi∣on then was design'd as the Symbol of a Holy Nation, a religious and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 People; and thence you read in Scripture, not only of the Circumcision of the Heart, but of the Ears and Lips, to denote the Sanctity which was required in their Words and Convers••, and indeed in their whole Lives.

As to other Religious Rites and Offices, those that were used in the former Oeconomi••s prevailed now al∣so, as* 1.32 Sacrifices, Altars, Priesthood, &c. Tho we

read not of Temples or Tabernacles under the Patriarchal Dispensation; yet now their manner was to erect Altars in those places where God appear'd to them: and these were signalized for the future by dedicating them to the publick Service of God. Here they were wont to as∣semble together, to offer solemn Prayers and Praises to the most High; and they became as it were, Temples and Houses of God, Gen. 28. 17, 22. To the ordinary Sacrifices before used, you will find that Abraham and Iacob added another kind, viz. mere federal ones, which are describ'd in Gen. 15. 9, 18. & 31. 54.

Now also we first hear of Tithes: Abraham paid Tithes of all (i. e. all the Spoils) to Melchisedeck a Priest, Gen. 14. 20. Iacob made this Vow, I will surely give the Tenth of all to thee, i. e. of all that came of his Flock, or of the Fields, Gen. 28. 22. Thus the paying Tithes became a Pledg of Religion, and of subjection to God.

The Patriarchs now also used certain Ceremonial Lus∣trations and Purifications, as may be gathered from Gen. 35. 2, 3. Jacob said unto his Houshold, Be clean, and change your Garments: and let us arise and go up to Bethel. I might add the Ceremony used in Swear∣ing, viz. of putting the hand under the thigh of the Person they swore to, Gen. 24. 2. Also, you may ob∣serve there were at that time Holy Feasts of the remain∣ders of the Sacrifices, Exod. 5. 1. All these were Rites relating to Religion and Worship.

There were other remarkable things in this O••conomy, which are reducible to Religion and Manners. At this time began the Ius Leviri, or right of marrying the Brother's Widow. Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy Brother's Wife, and marry her, and raise up Seed to thy Brother, Gen. 38. 8. The surviving Brother was to marry the Relict of the Brother deceas'd, if he died without Issue. But it took not effect at this time. As to the Degrees of Consanguinity in reference to Mar∣riage,

they were not all of them observ'd, for Abraham married Sarah who was his Niece, for she was his eldest Brother Haran's Daughter, (tho he call'd her his Sister, and labour'd to make it out, saying, She is the Daugh∣ter of my Father, but not of my Mother, Gen. 20. 12. i. e. She was Grand-daugh••••r to his Father; and such were reckon'd by the Hebrews as half Sisters.) Iac••b married his Cousin-German Rachel, the Daughter of his Uncle Laban, Gen. 29. 28.

And as for P••lygamy, which was begun by Lamech many Years before, it was now practis'd by Abraham, Esau, Iacob, and others, tho it was against the Primi∣tive Law and Institution, Gen. 2. 24. The Concubines which they took were a secondary sort of Wives, as the Issue they had by them were a secondary kind of Children, for they had Gifts and Legacies, but no In∣heritance, Gen. 25. 6. But this must be said, and that with evident truth, that Abraham and Iacob's taking of other Wives or Concubines differ'd from the same custom and practice of that time in three things, which much alters the case. 1. They did not this of them∣selves, and so it was not their own act properly. It is expresly said, that Sarah brought her Maid Hagar to Abraham, and gave her to him to be his Wife, Gen. 16. 3. So Iacob, upon the motion and persuation of his Wife Rachel, took his Handmaid to Wife; it is in express terms said, she gave him her to Wife, Gen. 30. 4. So Lea•• did the same with her Maid, vers. 9. 2.1 1.33 Ioseph the learned Jew rightly noteth, that Abra∣ham and Sarah did what they did by the particular di∣rection and approbation of God; for their History in∣forms us, that they were Persons that were under the mo••e immediate guidance of Heaven. 3. It is not un∣likely that the ••oresaid Women moved their Husbands to

this, and that they consented to it on the account of the Promise which God had made concerning the Blessed Seed which should be of their Family; they were impa∣tient of having it fulfill'd some way or other. And par∣ticularly as to Abraham, God having only told him, that he should have a Child, but had not yet said by Sarah, this good Patriarch thought it might be this way fulfill'd, as an'1 1.34 excellent Person suggests.

We read that Whoredom and Adultery were now pu∣nish'd with death: thus Iudah sentenc'd Thamar to be burnt, Gen. 38. 24. Unless with2 1.35 some we shall say, that this was no capital Infliction, but a stigmatizing or branding with a hot Iron. Incest was in those times un∣lawful, for Re••ben is reprehended by his Father for de∣filing his Bed, Gen. 49. 4. and his Birth-right was taken from him, 1 Chron. 5. 1.

The Law of Primogeniture now prevail'd, as appears in the Instances of Esa•• and Reuben, tho by their own fault they divested themselves of that Privilege. These were the several kinds of Positive Laws relating either to Re∣ligion or to Civil Affairs, which were in use among the Patriarchs: (where by the by we may take notice how unskilful3 1.36 Mr. Hobbs was in the Sacred History, when he saith, Abraham had no other Law, except that of Circumcision, whereunto he was obliged but the Laws of Nature.)

This must be added and remembred by us in the last place, that the Precepts and Injunctions which were gi∣ven in the foregoing Dispensation, are suppos'd to be retain'd here. So much concerning the Primitive State of things before the Law of Moses: which was the Patriarchal Dispensation, or the first Dispensation of Grace.

Notes

• 1 1.1

  Homil. in Gen. 27.
• 2 1.2

  In Gen. Quaest. 55.
• 1 1.3

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 Idololat. l. 3. c. 65.
• 1 1.4

  —Et ante

  Impia quàm caesis gens est epulata juven••is. Georg. I. 2.
• 2 1.5

  Metamorph. I. 15.
• 1 1.6

  De Abstinenti••.
• 2 1.7

  De Jur. Nat. & Gent. lib. 7. c. 1.
• 1 1.8

  Mercer. in Gen. 9. 4.
• 2 1.9

  Plutarch.
• 3 1.10

  Quintilian.
• 1 1.11

  Ostorod. Instit. c. 28. Smalc. cont. Frantz. disp. 6.
• 1 1.12

  More Nevoch. par. 2. c. 47.
• 2 1.13

  In Cap. 5. Genes.
• 3 1.14

  Gen. 6. 9. & 12. 4.
• 4 1.15

  Antiq. l. 1. c. 4.
• 1 1.16

  The Trinitar. Scheme of Relig.
• 2 1.17

  Nat. Hist. l. 7. c. 48.
• 3 1.18

  De Idoloat. l. 1. c. 28.
• 4 1.19

  Alex. ab Alexand•• l. 3. c. 24.
• 1 1.20

  De Emendat. temp. l. 2. c. 2 & 3.
• 2 1.21

  De Doctr. ••emp. l. 3 & 4.
• 1 1.22

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Qu. 49. in Gen.
• 1 1.23

  More Nevoch.
• 2 1.24

  Antiqu. l. 1. c. 4, & 8.
• 1 1.25

  Amos 3. 3.
• 1 1.26

  Joseph. Antiq. I. 1. c. 7.
• 2 1.27

  Eusebius, Jerom, Austin, and several of the Rabbins. A∣mong the Moderns, Calvin, Mercer, Cornel. à Lapide, Gene∣brard, Pererius, Broughton, Buxtorf, Bochart, Lightfoot.
• 3 1.28

  Origen, Chrysostom, Arias Montanus, Erpenius, Selden.
• 4 1.29

  Antiq. l. 11. c. 5.
• 5 1.30

  Qu. & Resp. 102. ad Orthodox.
• 1 1.31

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Lib. de Circumcis.
• * 1.32

  Gen. 12. 7, 8. & 13. 4, 18.
• 1 1.33

  Antiq. I. 1. C. 11.
• 1 1.34

  Bishop Patrick Comment. on Gen. 16. 2.
• 2 1.35

  Mr. Selden de jur. Nat. & Gent. I. 7.
• 3 1.36

  De Cive c. 16