The works of the Reverend and learned John Lightfoot D. D., late Master of Katherine Hall in Cambridge such as were, and such as never before were printed : in two volumes : with the authors life and large and useful tables to each volume : also three maps : one of the temple drawn by the author himself, the others of Jervsalem and the Holy Land drawn according to the author's chorography, with a description collected out of his writings.

CAP. XXIV.

VERS. V.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Why seek you the living among the dead?

a 1.1 A Parable. A certain Priest (who had a foolish servant) went some where without the City: the Servant seeking about for his Master; goes into the place of burial, and there calls out to people standing there, did you see my Master here? They say unto him, is not thy Master a Priest? He said yes: Then said they unto him, thou fool, who ever saw a Priest among Tombs? So say Moses and Aaron to Pharoh, thou fool, is it the custom to seek the dead among the living? or perhaps the living among the dead? Our God, is the living God, but the Gods of whom thou speakest, are dead, &c.

VERS. XIII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.

And behold two of them were going, &c.

ONE of these was Cleophas, vers. 18. whom we have shewn to be the very same with Alpheus, in another place; both from the agreement of the Name (for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 writ in Hebrew serves for both names) and also by comparing Joh. XIX. 25. with Mark XV. 47. and Matth. XXVII. 56. that Peter was the other I do not at all question, grounding my confidence upon vers. 34. of this Chapter; and 1 Cor. XV. 5. This Cleo∣phas, or Alpheus we see, is the speaker here, and not Peter, being older than Peter, as being the Father of four of the Apostles.

VERS. XV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Iesus himself drew near and went along with them.

b 1.2 AFter that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked and went into the Country. But what form that was, it would be something bold to de∣termine. But it seems to be different from the form of a Gardiner, and indeed not the form of any Plebeian; but rather of some Scholar, because he instructs them while they were upon the road, and giveth thanks for them when they sate at meat. So Beracoth c 1.3, If

two eat together, the one of them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a learned man, the other of them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an unlearned man; he that is the learned man gives thanks. Hence that passage d 1.4 Janneus the King calls out Simeon ben Shetahh, Vice-President of the Sanhedrin, and a Doctor to say grace af∣ter Supper; and thus he begins: Blessed be God for the meat which Janneus and his guests have eaten; to whom the King, How long wilt thou persist in thy frowardness? Saith the other, Why, what should I have said? Must we bless God for the meat that we have eaten, when as I have eaten none at all?

VERS. XXI.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

We trusted, &c.

WE trusted it had been he that should have redeemed Israel: viz. in the sense that that Nation had, of a Redemption which they hoped for from the Gentile yoke. But the poverty and meanness of Jesus gave them no ground to hope any such thing should be brought about by Arms, as that people had generally dreamed: they hoped however it might have been miraculously accomplished, as their first redemption from Egypt had been.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

To day is the third day, &c.

It is worthy our observation what notice the Rabbins take of the third day e 1.5. Abra∣ham lifted up his eyes the third day, Gen. XXII. 4. It is written, After two days will he receive us, in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight, Hos. VI. 2. It is written, concerning the third day of the Tribes: Joseph said unto them, the third day, Gen. XLII. 18. Concerning the third day also of the spyes: Hide your selves there three days, Jos. II. 16. And it is said of the third day of the promulgation of the Law. And it came to pass on the third day, Exod. XIX. 16. It is written also of the third day of Jonas, Jonas was in the belly of the Fish three days and three nights, Jon. I. 17. It is written also of the third day of those that came up out of the Captivity. And there abode we in Tents three days, Ezra VIII. 15. It is written also of the third day of the resurrecti∣on from the dead. After two days will he receive us, and the third day he will raise us up. It is written also of the third day of Esther. And on the third day Esther put on her Royal apparel, Esther V. 1. The Targumist adds, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 on the third day of the Passover. And that indeed is the day we are at present concerned in, namely, the third day of the Passover. If these things were taken so much notice of concerning the third day, at that time in the Schools and Synagogues (as I see no reason why it should be deny'd) then these words of Cleophas may seem to look a little that way, as speaking according to the vulgar conceptions of the Jews. For whereas it had been plain enough to have said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to day is the third day; but he further adds 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, beside all this, and the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 this too; there seems a peculiar force in that addition, and an emphasis in that word. As if the meaning of it were this: That same Jesus was mighty in word and deed, and shewed himself such an one, that we conceived him the true Messiah, and he that was to redeem Israel: And be∣sides all these things which bear witness for him to be such, this very day bears witness also. For whereas there is so great an observation amongst us concerning the third day; this is the third day since he was Crucified, and there are some Women amongst us, that say they have been told by Angels, that he is risen again.

VERS. XXX.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c.

He took bread and blessed it, &c.

IT is strange that any should expound this breaking of bread, of the Holy Eucharist, when Christ had determined with himself to disappear in the very distribution of the bread, and so interrupt the Supper. And where indeed doth it appear that any of them tasted a bit? For the Supper was ended before it began.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If three eat together they are bound to say grace f 1.6. That is, as it is af∣terwards explained: One of them saith let us bless—but if there be three, and himself, then he saith, bless ye g 1.7. Although I do not believe Christ tyed himself exactly to that custom of sayiny let us bless; nor yet to the common form of blessing before meat, yet is it very probable he did use some form of blessing, and not the words, this is my body.

VERS. XXXII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉;

Did not our heart burn within us.

BEZA saith, In uno exemplari, &c. In one Copy we read it written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; was not our heart hid? Heinsius saith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in optimis codicibus, legitur. It is written hidden in the best Copies. Why then should it not be so in the best Translations too? But this reading favours his Interpretation which amounts to this: were we not fools that we should not know him while he was discoursing us in the way? I had rather expound it by some such parallel places as these: My heart waxed hot within me, while I was musing the fire burned, Psal. XXXIX. 3. His word was in mine heart as a burning fire, Jerem. XX. 9. The meaning is, that their hearts were so affect∣ed and grew so warm, that they could hold no longer, but must break silence and utter themselves. So these, were we not so mightily affected while he talked with us in the way, and while he opened to us the Scriptures, that we were just breaking out into the acknowledgment of him, and ready to have saluted him as our Lord?

That is a far fetcht conceipt in Taanith h 1.8: R Alai bar Barachiah saith, If two disciples of the wise men journey together, and do not maintain some discourse betwixt themselves con∣cerning the Law, they deserve to be burnt: according as it is said, It came to pass, as they still went on and talked, behold a Chariot of fire, and Horses of fire, &c. 2 Kings II.

VERS. XXXIV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

Saying, the Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.

I. THAT these are the words of the Eleven appears from the case in which the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is put. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. They found the Eleven and them that were with them, saying. They having returned from Emmaus found the Eleven and the rest saying to them when they came into their presence; The Lord is risen indeed and hath appeared unto Simon. But do they speak these things amongst themselves as certain and believed? or do they tell them to the two Disciples that were come from Emmaus as things true and unquestionable? It is plain from St. Mark that the Eleven did not believe the Resurrection of our Saviour, till he himself had shewed him∣self in the midst of them i 1.9. They could not therefore say these words, The Lord is risen and hath appeared to Simon; as if they were confidently assured of the truth of them. But when they saw Simon so suddenly and unexpectedly returning, whom they knew to have taken a journey toward Galilee, to try if he could there meet with Jesus, they conclude hence, Oh! surely the Lord is risen, and hath appeared to Simon, other∣wise he would not have returned back so soon.

Which brings to mind that of the Messenger of the death of Maximin k 1.10. The messen∣ger that was sent from Aquileia to Rome, changing his Horses often, came with so great speed, that he got to Rome in four days. It chanced to be a day wherein some games were celebra∣ting, when on a sudden as Balbinus and Gordianus were sitting in the Theatre, the Messen∣ger came in: and before it could be told, all the people cry out, Maximin is slain, and so pre∣vented him in the news he brought, &c.

We cannot well think that any worldly affairs could have called away these two from the Feast before the appointed time, nor indeed from the company of their fellow Dis∣ciples, but something greater, and more urgent than any worldly occasions. And now imagine with what anguish and perplexity poor Peter's thoughts were harrast for having denyed his Master: what emotions of mind he felt, when the Women had told him, that they were commanded by Angels to let Peter particularly know that the Lord was risen, and went before them into Galilee, and they might see him there, Mark XVI. 7. That it seems to me beyond all question that one of these Disciples going toward Emmaus was Peter, who assoon as he had heard this from the Women, taking Alpheus as a companion of his journey, makes toward Galilee, not without communicating before hand to his fellow disciples the design of that progress: They therefore finding him so suddenly and unexpectedly returned, make the conjecture amongst themselves, that certainly the Lord had appeared to him, else he would never have come back so soon. Compare but that of the Apostle, 1 Cor. XV. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. He was seen of Ce∣phas, then of the twelve: and nothing can seem exprest more clearly in the confirmation of this matter.

Object. But it may be objected, that those two returning from Emmaus found the Eleven Apostles gathered and sitting together. Now if Simon was not amongst them, they were not Eleven. Therefore he was not one of those two.

Answ. I. If it should be granted that Peter was there and sate amongst them, yet were they not exactly Eleven then, for Thomas was absent, Joh. XX. 24. 2. When the Eleven are mentioned we must not suppose it exactly meant of the number of Apostles then present, but the present number of the Apostles.

VERS. XXXVII.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

They supposed they had seen a Spirit.

WHereas the Jews distinguished between Angels, and Spirits, and Daemons; Spirits are defined by R. Hoshaiah l 1.11 to be such to whom souls are created, but they have not a body made for those souls. But it is a question whether they included all spirits or souls under this notion, when it is more than probable that apparitions of Ghosts, or de∣ceased persons who once had a body, were reckoned by them under the same title. Nor do I apprehend, the Disciples had any other imagination at this time, than that this was not Christ indeed in his own person, as newly raised from the dead; but a Spectrum only in his shape, himself being still dead. And when the Pharisees speak concerning Paul, Acts XXIII. 9. That if an Angel, or a Spirit hath spoken to him, I would easily believe, they might mean it of the Apparition of some Prophet, or some other departed just person, than of any soul, that had never yet any body created to it. I the rather incline thus to think, because it is so evident that it were needless to prove how deeply impressed that Nation was with an opinion of the Apparitions of departed Ghosts.

VERS. XLIV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

In the Law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms.

IT is a known division of the Old Testament into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Law, the Prophets, and the Holy Writings; by abbrevation 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

I. The Books of the Law, and their order need not be insisted upon, called com∣monly by us, the Pentateuch: but by some of the Rabbins the Heptateuch: and by some Christians the Octateuch: m 1.12 R. Samuel bar Nachman saith, R. Jonathan saith, Wisdom hath hewn out her seven Pillars [Prov. IX. 1.] 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 These are the seven Books of the Law. The Book of Numbers compleats the seven Books of the Law. But are there not but five Books only? Ben Kaphra saith the Book of Numbers is made 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 three Books. From the beginning of the Book to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And it came to pass when the Ark set forward [Chap. X. 35.] is a Book by it self. That verse and the following is a Book by it self: And from thence to the end of the Book, is a Book by it self.

The reason why they accounted this period [Chap. X. 35. 36.] to be one Book by it self, was, partly because it does not seem put there in its proper place: partly because in the beginning of it, it hath the letter Nun inverted thus [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and so after the end of it in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which in both places is set for a boundary and limit, to distinguish that period from the rest of the Book. Whatever therefore goes before, from the beginning of the Book to that period, is reckoned by them for one Book; and whatever follows it, for another Book; and the period it self for a third.

Eulogius speaking concerning Dosthes or Dositheus a famous seducer of the Samaritans, hath this passage, n 1.13 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. He adulterated the Octateuch of Moses with spurious writings, and all kind of corrupt falsifyings. There is mention also of a Book with this title, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 o 1.14 The Christians Book, An Exposition upon the Octateuch. Whe∣ther this was the Octateuch of Moses, it is neither certain, nor much worth our enquiry, for Photius judgeth him a corrupt Author: besides that it may be shewn by and by that there was a twofold Octateuch besides that of Moses. Now if any man should ask how it come to pass that Eulogius (and that probably from the common notion of the thing) should divide the Books of Moses into an Octateuch; I had rather any one else rather than my self should resolve him in it. But if any consent that he owned the Heptateuch we have already mentioned, we should be ready to reckon the last Chapter of Deuter∣onomy for the eighth part.

Aben Ezra will smile here, who in that his obscure and disguised denial of the Books of the Pentateuch, as if they were not writ by the pen of Moses, he instances in that Chapter in the first place, as far as I can guess, as a testimony against it. You have his

words in his Commentary upon the Book of Deuteronomy, a little from the beginning p 1.15 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 But if you understand the mystery of the twelve, &c. i. e. of the twelve Verses of the last Chapter of the Book (for so his own Country-men expound him) thou wilt know the truth, i. e. that Moses did not write the whole Pentateuch; an argument neither worth answering, nor becoming so great a Philosopher. For as it is a ridiculous thing to suppose that Chapter that treats of the death and burial of Moses should be written by himself, so would it not be much less ridiculous to affix that Chap∣ter to any other volume than the Pentateuch. But these things are not the proper sub∣ject for our present handling.

II. There also was an Octatuech of the Prophets too. q 1.16 All the Books of the Prophets are eight, Josuah, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Jeremy, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the twelve. For the Historical Books also, were read in their Synagogues under the notion of the Pro∣phets, as well as the Prophets themselves whose names are set down. You will see the title prefixt to them in the Hebrew Bibles, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the former Prophets, as well as to the others 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the latter Prophets. The Doctors give us the reason why they dispose the Prophets in that order that Jeremiah is named first, Ezekiel next, and Isaiah last, which I have quoted in Notes upon Matth. XXVII. 9. and let not the Reader think it irksome to repeat it here.

r 1.17 Whereas the Book of Kings ends in destruction, and the whole Book of Jeremy treats about destruction; whereas Ezekiel begins with destruction, and ends in consolation: and whereas Isaiah is all in consolation, they joyned destruction with destruction, and consolation with consolation.

III. The third division of the Bible is intitled 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Holy Writings. And here also is found an Octateuch by some body, (as it seems) though I know not where to find it.

Herbanus the Jew s 1.18 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, was a man excellently well instructed in the Law, and holy Books of the Prophets, and the Octateuch, and all the other Writings. What this Octateuch should be, distinct from the Law and the Prophets, and indeed what the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, all the other writings besides should be, is not easily guessed. This Octateuch perhaps may seem to have some reference to the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Hagiographa, or Holy Wri∣tings (for it is probable enough, that speaking of a Jew well skilled in the Holy Scriptures he might design the partition of the Bible, according to the manner of the Jews dividing it) but who then can pick out books that should make it up? Let the Reader pick out the eight, and then I would say that the other four are the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, all the other Writings. But we will not much disquiet our selves about this matter.

It may be asked why these Books should be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Scriptures, when the whole Bible goes under the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the holy Scriptures. Nor can any thingbe more readily answered to this than, that by this title they would keep up their dignity, and just esteem for them. They did not indeed read them in their Synagogues, but that they might acknowledge them of most Holy and Divine Authority 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 out of them they confirm their Traditions, and they expound them mystically: t 1.19 Yea and give them the same title with the rest of the Holy Scriptures.

u 1.20 This is the order 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the Hagiographa, Ruth, the Book of Psalms, Job, the Pro∣verbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticles, the Lamentations, Daniel, the Book of Esther, Ezra, and the Chronicles. It is here disputed, that if Job was in the days of Moses, why then is not his Book put in the first place? the answer is, they do not begin with vengeance, or afflicti∣on, and such is that Book of Job. They reply, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ruth also begins with affliction, viz. with the story of a Famine, and the death of Elimelech's Sons. But that was (say they) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 an affliction that had a joyful ending. So they might have said of the Book and affliction of Job too. We see it is disputed there why the Book of Ruth should be placed the first in that rank, and not the Book of Job. But we might enquire whether the Book of Psalms ought not have been placed the first, rather than the Book of Ruth.

IV. In this passage at present before us who would think otherwise, but that our Sa∣viour alludes to the common and most known partition of the Bible? and although he name the Psalms only, yet that under the title he includes that whole volume. For we must of necessity say, that either he excluded all the Books of that third divi∣sion, excepting the Book of Psalms, which is not probable; or that he included them under the title of the Prophets, which was not customary; or else that under the title of the Psalms he comprehended all the rest. That he did not exclude them, reason will tell us; for in several Books of that division is he himself spoken of as well as in the Psalms; and that he did not include them in the title of the Prophets, reason also will dictate: because we would not suppose him speaking differently from the common and received opinion of that Nation. There is very little question therefore, but the Apostles

might understand him speaking with the vulgar: and by the Psalms to have meant all the Books of that Volume, those especially, wherein any thing was written concerning him∣self. For, let it be granted that Ruth as to the time of the History, and the time of its writing might challenge to its self the first place in order (and it is that kind of pri∣ority the Gemarists are arguing) yet certainly amongst all those Books that mention any thing of Christ, the Book of Psalms deservedly obtains the first place; so far that in the naming of this, the rest may be understood. So St. Matthew Chap. XXVII. 9. under the name of Jeremiah, comprehends that whole Volume of the Prophets, because he was placed the first in that rank which observation we have made in Notes upon that place.

VERS. XLV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

Then opened he their understanding.

WHere it is said that by the imposition of the hands of the Apostles the gift of Tongues and of Prophesie was conferred (they spake with tongues, and they pro∣phesied, Acts XIX. 6.) by Prophesie, nothing may be better understood than this very thing, that the minds of such were opened, that they might understand the Scriptures: and perhaps their speaking with tongues, might look this way, in the first notion of it, viz. that they could understand the original wherein the Scriptures were writ.

VERS. L.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

As far as Bethany.

HOW many difficulties arise here?

I. This very Evangelist (Acts I. 12.) tells us that when the Disciples came back from the place where our Lord ascended, they returned from Mount Olivet, distant from Jerusalem a Sabbath days journey. But now the Town of Bethany was about fifteen furlongs from Jerusalem, Joh. XI. 18. and that is double a Sabbath days journey.

II. Josephus tells us that the Mount of Olives was but five furlongs from the City, and a Sabbath days journey, was seven furlongs and an half. q 1.21 About that time there came to Jerusalem a certain Egyptian, pretending himself a Prophet, and perswading the people that they would go out with him to the Mount of Olives, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; which being situated on the front of the City, is distant five furlongs. These things are all true: 1. That the Mount of Olives lay but five furlongs distance from Jerusalem. 2. That the Town of Bethany was fifteen furlongs. 3. That the Disciples were brought by Christ as far as Bethany. 4. That when they returned from the Mount of Olives, that they travelled more than five furlongs. And, 5. Returning from Bethany they travelled but a Sabbath days journey. All which may be easily reconciled, if we would observe; That the first space from the City toward this Mount was called Bethphage, which I have cleared elsewhere from Talmudick Authors, the Evangelists themselves also confirming it. That part of that Mount was known by that name to the length of about a Sabbath days journey, till it come to that part which was called Bethany. For there was Bethany, a tract of the Mount, and the Town of Bethany. The Town was distant from the City about fifteen furlongs, i. e. two miles, or a double Sabbath days journey: but the first border of this tract (which also bore the name of Bethany) was distant but one mile, or a single Sabbath days journey only.

Our Saviour led out his Disciples, when he was about to ascend, to the very first brink of that Region or tract of Mount Olivet which was called Bethany, and was distant from the City, a Sabbath days journey. And so far from the City it self did that tract extend it self which was called Bethphage: and when he was come to that place where the bounds of Bethphage and Bethany met and toucht one another, he there ascended: in that very place where he got upon the Ass, when he rode into Jerusalem, Mark XI. 1. whereas therefore Josephus saith, that Mount Olivet was but five furlongs from the City, he means the first brink and border of it. But our Evangelist must be understood of the place where Christ Ascended, where the name of Olivet began, as it was distinguished from Bethphage.

And since we have so frequent mention of a Sabbath days Journey, and it is not very forreign from our present purpose to observe something concerning it, let me take notice of these few things:

I. The space 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of a Sabbath days bounds was two thousand cubits. r 1.22 Naomi said to Ruth, we are commanded to observe the Sabbaths, and the Feasts: But we are not to go beyond 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 two thousand cubits. s 1.23 It is ordained by the Scribes that no Man go out of the City beyond two thousand cubits. Instances of this kind are endless. But it

is disputed upon what foundation this constitution of theirs is built. t 1.24 Whence comes it to be thus ordained concerning the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 two thousand cubits? it is founded upon this, Let no man go out of his place on the seventh day, Exod. XVI. 29. u 1.25 Where are these two thousand cubits mentioned? they have their Tradition from hence, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 abide ye every man in his place, Exod. XVI. 29. These are four cubits. Let no man go out of his place. These are two thousand cubits. It is true indeed we cannot gain so much as one cubit out of any of these Scriptures, much less two thousand; however, we may learn from hence the pleasant art they have of working, any thing out of any thing.

Asai ben Akibah saith, they are fetcht from hence in that it is said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 place, place. Here place is said [Let no man go out of his place] and it is said elsewhere, I will appoint thee a place, Exod. XXI. 13. As the place that is said elsewhere, is two thousand cubits, so the place, that is spoken of here, is two thousand cubits. But how do they prove that the place mentioned elsewhere, is two thousand cubits? x 1.26 I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee that kills a man unawares: This teacheth us that the Israelites in the Wilderness (i. e. those that had slain any one) betook themselves to a place of refuge. And whether did they flee? To the Camp of the Levites.

Now therefore, when the Israelites▪ Camp in the Wilderness were distant from the Tabernacle and from the Levite's Camp that was pitcht about the Tabernacle, two thou∣sand cubits, which thing they gather from Jos. III. 4. and whereas it was lawful for them at that distance to approach the Tabernacle on the Sabbath day, hence they argue for the two thousand cubits, as the Sabbath days journey which we are now enquiring in∣to. But by the way let us take notice of the four cubits which they gathered from those words, abide ye every man in his place. Which must be thus understood: If any person through ignorance, or by any accident, had gone beyond the limits of the Sabbath, and afterward came to know his transgression, he was confined within four cubits, so that he must not stir beyond them, till the Sabbath was done and over.

They further instance in another foundation for the two thousand cubits: y 1.27 ye shall mea∣sure from without the City on the East side two thousand cubits, Numb. XXXV. 5. But another Scripture saith, from the wall of the City and outward, ye shall measure a thousand cubits [vers. 4.] the thousand cubits are the suburbs of the City, and the two thousand cubits are the Sabbatical limits. Maimonides z 1.28 very largely discourseth in what manner and by what lines they measured these two thousand cubits from each City: but it makes very little to our purpose. Only let me add this one thing, that if any one was over-taken in his journeying, in the fields, or wilderness, by the night when the Sabbath was coming in, and did not exactly know the space of two thousand cubits, then he might walk 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 two thousand ordinary paces: and these were accounted the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Sabbatical bounds a 1.29

So far from the City was that place of Mount Olivet where Christ Ascended, viz. that part of the Mount where Bethphage ended, and Bethany began. Perhaps the very same place mentioned 2 Sam. XV. 32. or certainly not far off where David in his flight taking leave of the Ark and Sanctuary, looked back, and worshipped God. Where if any one would be at the pains to enquire why the Greek Interpreters retain the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ros, both here and in Chap. XVI. I. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And David came unto Ros. And 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And David passed on a little way from Ros: He will find a knot not easie to be untied. The Talmudists would have it a place of Idolatry, but by a reason very far fetcht indeed b 1.30. The Jewish Commenta∣tors with a some more probability conceive, that it was a place from whence David when he went toward Jerusalem, looking toward the place where the Tabernacle was seated, was wont to worship God.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Sbemoth rab∣ba, fol. 124. 1.
• b 1.2

  Mark XVI. 12.
• c 1.3

  Sol. 45. 2.
• d 1.4

  Bereshith rab∣ba, fol. 101. 3.
• e 1.5

  Bereshith rab∣ba, fol. 62. 2.
• f 1.6

  Beracoth, fol. 45. 1.
• g 1.7

  Ib. fol. 49. 1.
• h 1.8

  Fol. 20. 2.
• i 1.9

  Mark XVI. 11. 13.
• k 1.10

  In Iul. Capi∣tol.
• l 1.11

  Beresh. rabb••, fol. 34. 2.
• m 1.12

  Schabb. fol. 116. 1.
• n 1.13

  Apud Phot. Cod. ccxxx.
• o 1.14

  Cod. xxxvi.
• p 1.15

  Cap. 1.
• q 1.16

  Bava bathra, fol. 14. 2.
• r 1.17

  Bava bathra, ubi supr.
• s 1.18

  Oregent. Dial. at the begin∣ning.
• t 1.19

  Schabb. fol. 116. 2.
• u 1.20

  Bathra. ubi. supr.
• q 1.21

  Antiq. lib. 20. cap. 6.
• r 1.22

  Targ. in Ruth▪ cap. 1. 16.
• s 1.23

  Maimon. Schab. cap. 27.
• t 1.24

  Hieros. Erub∣hin, fol. 21. 4.
• u 1.25

  Bab. Erubhin, fol. 51. 1.
• x 1.26

  Maccoth. fol. 12. 2. & Zeva∣chin. fol. 117. 1.
• y 1.27

  Sotah. fol. 27. 2.
• z 1.28

  Schabb. 28. and Erubhin. cap. 8.
• a 1.29

  Erubh. fol. 42. 1.
• b 1.30

  Sa••••ed. fol. 107. 1