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.

[CHRIST. LXII] [NERO. VIII] PAVL in the Epistle to the Colossians, Chap. 4. 10. intimateth that Mark, who was then with him at Rome, was likely ere long to come to them into the East, and he willeth them to receive him as from him, though there had once been disagreement be∣twixt Mark and him. Whether Timothy's imprisonment delayed Mark's journey, may be some question: for Paul having sent for them two to come to him together, 2 Tim. 4. 11. it is like he could ill part with the one, when the other was made useless to him by re∣straint: and so we have some cause to suppose, that while Timothy was in prison, Mark remained with Paul. However, whensoever it was that he went for the East, we have this reason to think that Paul wrote and sent by him THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS: And that he having delivered it where Paul had appointed him, went away to Peter to Babylon in Chaldaea, because Peter there, mentioneth Mark now with him, 1 Pet. 3. 15. And this Epistle, 2 Pet. 3. 15.

It is observable that these two great Apostles Peter and Paul the several Ministers of the Circumcision and Uncircumcision, had their interchanged agents: Sylvanus or Silas, Pauls Minister, resident with Peter, and imployed by him to carry his first Epistle: 1 Pet. 5. 12. And Mark, Peters Minister, resident with Paul, 2 Tim. 4. 11. Col. 4. 10. and, very probably, imployed by him to carry this Epistle to the Hebrews. And thus in the interchanged agen∣cies of their Ministers, the parties with whom they had to deal, might own the joynt agreement of both the Apostles.

Although we dare not punctually assert either the bearer of this Epistle, or the exact time of its writing, yet that it was written and sent about these times that we are upon, may be observed by these two boundaries that shut it up within some reasonable compass of the time hereabout. First, A parte ante, or that it could not be written much sooner then this, may be concluded by this, that Timothy had gone through his imprisonment and was now inlarged before its writing, Heb. 13. 23. And secondly, A parte post, or that it could not be written much after this time, may be observed from that passage Chap. 12. 4. Ye have not yet resisted unto blood. For presently after this bloody times came on.

That it was written by Paul, hath not only the concurrent consent of all Copies and Translations, but even this proof for it, That none can be named A prisoner, Chap. 10. 34. and in Italy, Chap. 13. 24. and in so near converse with Timothy, Chap. 13. 25. [as the Au∣thor of this Epistle was] so likely as Paul.

His not affixing his name to this, as he had done to his other Epistles, doth no more deny it to be his, then the first Epistle of Johns is denied to be Johns upon the same

account: especially considering that the name of the Apostle of the uncircumcision, would not sound so well before an Epistle to the Circumcised: and yet the more still, be∣cause he sent it by Mark [for so we cannot but suppose] who was a Minister of the Mi∣nister of the Circumcision, and who could easily inform them of the Writer.

Unto what part of the Jewish Nation he sendeth the Epistle under the indorsement To the Hebrews, and why that indorsement To the Hebrews rather then To the Jews, may be a useful and a needful Quaere. It cannot be imagined but that he sendeth it to be delive∣red at a certain place within some reasonable compass, because it was impossible for the bearer, whosoever he was, to deliver it to all the Jews dispersion, and because in Chap. 13. 23. he saith that when Timothy came, he would come with him, and see them. There∣fore the title The Hebrews must determine the place, since there is nothing else to deter∣mine it. A double reason may be given why he so stileth them rather then Jews; name∣ly, either because the name Jew was now beginning to become odious; or rather be∣cause he would point out the Jews that dwelt in Judea, or the Land of Israel. And this sense doth the Holy Ghost put upon the title the Hebrews, Act. 6. 1. where it is said, There was a murmuring of the Hellenists against the Hebrews: By The Hellenists meaning the Jews that dwelt in forreign Countries among the Greeks, and by The Hebrews those that dwelt in Judea. And so it is most proper to understand the inscription of this Epistle, namely that Paul directs, and sends it to the believing Jews of Judea: a people that had been much ingaged to him for his care of their poor, getting collections for them all along his travels, and Mark [whom we suppose the bearer of this Epistle] had come in to his at∣tendance, and to the attendance of his Uncle Barnabas, when they had been in Judea to bring almes unto those Churches, Act. 11. & 12.

It is not to be doubted indeed that he intendeth the discourse and matter of this Epistle to the Jews throughout all their dispersion [and therefore Peter writing to the Jews of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia and Asia, applies it as written to them, 2 Pet. 3. 15.] yet doth he indorse it, and send it chiefly to The Hebrews or the Jews of Judea, the principal seat of the Circumcision, as the properest center whither to di∣rect it, and from whence it might best diffuse in time to the whole circumference of their dispersion.

He hath to deal in it mainly with those things that the Jewish writers commonly call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ordinances affixed to the Land, or such Ceremonious part of their Religion, as while it stood, was confined to the Land, as Temple, Sacrifice, Priest∣hood, &c. Therefore it was most proper to direct his speech in its first bent, to those that dwelt in the Land, and were most near to those things, and who in those Apostati∣zing times that then were, had the nearest occasion and temptation to draw them back from the purity of the Gospel to those rites again.

Unto that doubtfulness that some have taken up about the Original Tongue of this Epistle, as thinking it very improper that he should write in the Greek Tongue to the Hebrews, especially to the Hebrews in Judea, we need no better satisfaction then what the Hebrews themselves, yea the Hebrews of Judea may give to us, I mean the Jerusalem Ge∣marists, from several passages that they have about the Greek language.

In Megillah, fol. 71. col. 2. they say thus, There is a tradition from ben Kaphra, God shall inlarge Japhet, and he shall dwell in the tents of Sem: For they shall speak the language of Japhet in the tents of Sem. The Babylon Gemara on the same Treatise fol. 9. col. 2. re∣solves us, what Tongue of Japhet is meant; for having spoken all along before, of the ex∣cellency and dignity of the Greek Tongue it concludes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The very beauty of Japhet shall be in the tents of Sem.

Our men first named, say further thus: Rabbi Jonathan of Beth Gubrin saith, There are four Languages brave for the world to use, and they are these: The Vulgar, the Roman, the Syrian, and the Hebrew, and some also add the Assyrian: Now the question is, What Tongue he means by the Vulgar? Reason will name the Greek as soon as any; and Midras Tillin, makes it plain that this is meant; for fol. 25. col. 4. speaking of this very passage [but al∣ledging it in somewhat different terms] he nameth the Greek which is not here named. Observe then that the Hebrews call the Greek the Vulgar Tongue.

They proceed, ibid. col. 3. It is a tradition. Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel saith, In books they permitted not, that they should write, but only in Greek. They searched, and found, that the Law cannot be interpreted compleatly but only in the Greek. One once expounded to them, in the Syriack, out of the Greek. R. Jeremiah in the name of R. Chaijah ben Basaith, Aquila the proselyte interpreted the Law, before R. Eliezer and before R. Joshua. And they ex∣tolled him and said, Thou art fairer then the children of men.

And the same Talmud in Sotah fol. 21. col. 2. hath this record. Rabbi Levi went to Cae∣sarea, and heard them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 rehearsing their Phylacteries Hellenistice, or, in the Greek Tongue. A passage very well worth observing: For if in Caesarea were as learned Schools as any were in the Nation; And if their Phylacteries [pickt sentences

out of the Law] might above all things have challenged their rehearsal in the Hebrew Tongue, as their own writers shew, yet they say them over in Greek, Paul might very well write to the Hebrews in Judea in the Greek Tongue, when that Tongue was in so common a use even in an University of Judea it self.

To these testimonies for the Greek Tongue, might be added, that which is spoken in the Treatise Shekalin, per. 3. halac. 2. Upon the three Treasure Chests of the Temple were written Aleph, Beth, Gimel. But Rabbi Ismael saith, It was written upon them in Greek, Alpha, Beta, Gamma: They that hold that this Epistle, and the Gospel of Matthew were written in Hebrew, should consider how that Tongue was now a stranger to all but Scho∣lars, and how God in his providence had dispersed and planted the Greek Tongue throughout all the world, by the conquest of Alexander, and the Grecian Monarchy; and had brought the Old Testament into Greek by the Septuagint.

As this Apostle in all his Epistles useth exceeding much of the Jews Dialect, Language, Learning, allusion and reference to their opinions, traditions and customs; so doth he more singularly in this, and he doth moreover in a more peculiar manner apply himself, to their manner of argumentation and discourse. For his intent is, if he can, to argue them into establishment, against that grievous Apostacy that was now afoot: so many re∣volting from the purity of the Gospel, either to a total betaking themselves to Moses again, or at least mixing the Ceremonious rites of the Law with the profession of the Gospel. Comparing his style here, with the style of discourse and arguing in the Tal∣muds, Zohar and Rabboth, and such like older writings of the Jews, you might easily tell with whom he is dealing though the Epistle were not inscribed in syllables, To the He∣brews: and the very stile of it may argue a Scholar of Gamaliel, but now better taught and better improving his learning then that Master could teach him.

He first begins to prove the Messiah to be God, and Jesus to be he: about the former of which, the Jews mistook, and about the latter they blasphemed. In proving the for∣mer, he among other places of Scripture, produceth that of Psal. 102. 25. Thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, &c. To which a Jew would be ready to answer, I but this is to be understood of God the Father; and how could this ob∣jection be answered? Tes, even by their own concessions, upon which he argueth in this place. For they understood that in Gen. 1. 2. The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters, of the Spirit of Christ, and so do they interpret it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 This is the Spirit of Messias: as their mind is spoken in that point by Zohar, Berishith Rabba, and divers others. If the Spirit of Christ then, was the great agent in the Creation, by their own grant, they could not but grant this allegation to be proper.

He sheweth Christ therefore greater then Angels, as in other regards, so into whose hands was put the world to come, Chap. 2. 5. and here the phrase is used in the Jews dialect, for the Kingdom of Messias, as we mentioned before.

He proveth him a greater Lawgiver then Moses, a greater Priest then Aaron, and a greater King and Priest then Melchisedek: He sheweth all the Levitical Oeconomy but a shadow, and Christ the substance, and the old Covenant to be abolished, by the coming in of a better: By the old or first Covenant meaning the Covenant of peculiarity, or the administration of the Covenant of Grace so, as whereby Israel was made a peculiar and distinct people. This Covenant of peculiarity they brake as soon almost as they had ob∣tained it, by making the golden Calf, and thereupon follows the breaking of the two Tables in sign of it: for though the Law written in the two Tables was Moral, and so concerned all the world, yet their writing in Tables of stone for Israel, and committing them to their keeping, referreth to their peculiarity. To his handling of the fabrick and utensils of the Tabernacle and contents of the Ark, Chap. 9. Talm. Jerus. in Shekalim. fol. 49. col. 3, 4. and Sotah fol. 22. col. 3. may be usefully applied, for illustration. He hinteth the Apostasie now afoot, which was no small induction to him of the writing of this Epistle, and sheweth the desperate danger of it, Chap. 6. 4, 5, &c. and Chap. 10. 26, 27, &c. In which his touching of it, we may see how far some had gone in the Gospel, and yet so miserably far fallen from it, as that some of them had had the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, and yet now sinned willingly and wilfully against it. In describing their guilt, one of his passages that he useth, is but harshly applied by some, Chap. 10. 29. [Hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the Covenant where∣with he was sanctified an unholy thing:] when they say that this horrid Apostate wretch, that treads Christ under foot, was once sanctified by the blood of Christ: whereas the words mean, Christs being sanctified by the blood of the Covenant, according to the same sense that Christ is said to be brought again from the dead, by the blood of the Co∣venant, in this same Epistle, Chap. 13. 20. And the Apostle doth set forth the horrid im∣piety of accounting the blood of the Covenant a common thing, by this, because even the Son of God himself was sanctified by it or set apart as Mediator: And so should I un∣derstand the words, He hath trodden under-foot that Son of God, and counted the blood

of the Covenant by which he the Son of God was sanctified, an unholy thing. He magnifieth faith, against those works that they stood upon and sought to be justified by, and sheweth that this was the all in all with all the holy men both before the Law and under it. When he gives them caution, Lest there be any fornicator or profane person as Esau, &c. Chap. 12. 16. he doth not only speak according to the common tenet of the Nation, that Esau was a fornicator, as see Targ. Jerus. in Gen. 25. but he seemeth to have his eye upon the Nicolaitan doctrine that was now rise, that taught fornication: to which he seemeth also to refer, in those words, Chap. 13. 4. Marriage is honoura∣ble, &c.

And now henceforward you have no more story of this Apostle: what became of him after the writing of this Epistle it is impossible to find out, by any light that the Scrip∣ture holdeth out in this matter. The two last verses but one of this Epistle, trace him as far forward as we can any way else see him, and that is but a little way neither. Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty, with whom if he come shortly I will see you. By which words these things may be conjectured. 1. That after his inlargement out of bonds, he left Rome, and preached in Italy. He mentioneth in his Epistle to the Romans, his de∣sire and intent to go preach in Spain, Rom. 15. 24. but that was so long ago, that he had now found some just cause [so much time intervening] to steer his course another way. For 2. It appears that when he wrote this Epistle to the Hebrews, he intended very short∣ly to set for Judea, if so be he sent the Epistle to the Jews of Judea as hath been shewed most probable he did. So that trace him in his intentions and hopes, and you find him purposing to go to Philippi, Phil. 2. 23, 24. Nay yet further, to Colosse, Philem. ver. 22. Nay yet further into Judea. It is like that the Apostacy and wavering that he heard of in the Eastern Churches, shewed him more need to hasten thither then to go westward. 3. He waited a little to see whether Timothy now inlarged would come to him in that place of Italy where he now was: which if he did, he intended to bring him along with him: but whether they met and travelled together, or what further became of either of them, we shall not go about to trace, lest seeking after them we lose our selves.