Miscellanies of divinitie divided into three books, wherein is explained at large the estate of the soul in her origination, separation, particular judgement, and conduct to eternall blisse or torment. By Edvvard Kellet Doctour in Divinitie, and one of the canons of the Cathedrall Church of Exon.

CHAP. X.

1. Reall truth in the Greek and Latine texts of Act. 7.16. The place expounded thus, The Fathers were not Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; but the twelve sonnes of Jacob.

2. These twelve Fathers were not buried in Abrahe∣mio, but in Sychem.

3. Abraham in this place is not taken properly, but patronymicé.

4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, used by S. Stephen, amphibolous, and ex∣pounded.

5. Two opinions concerning the place of Acts 7.16. pro∣pounded.

6. The last preferred.

I Now return to the old matter and Text, Act. 7.16. Foure propositions there are in the words of S. Stephen, which are all questioned.

First, that the Fathers are said to be carried over into Sychem.

Secondly, that they were laid in the sepul∣chre of Abraham.

Thirdly, that Abraham bought the sepulchre of the sonnes of Hemor.

Fourthly, that this Hemor was the father of Sychem, as our last Translation hath it very truely.

Now let us see what different or contrary propositions are maintained against these; and so labour to reconcile them.

First, that the Fathers were not carried over into Sychem.

Secondly, that they were not laid in the sepulchre of A∣braham.

Thirdly, that Abraham bought the field of Ephron the sonne of Zohar, Gen. 23.8.

Fourthly, that Hemor was the sonne of Sychem, as the Vulgat and Genevean translations have it.

That the first proposition may be reconciled to his oppo∣site, let us examine what is meant by the word Fathers. All the Patriarchs indeed were Fathers, and so called: Abraham is our Father, say the Jews, Joh. 8.39. and, Art thou greater then our Father Jacob? saith the woman to Christ, Joh. 4.12. I am the God of thy Fathers, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Ja∣cob, saith God himself, or an Angel representing him, Act. 7.32. Abraham was a great Father, Ecclus. 44.19. These Patri∣archs were Patres majorum gentium, Fathers of the highest rank: if I may accommodate the Romane distinction unto the Jew∣ish Governours. And whereas David is called, Act. 2.29. ac∣cording both to the Greek and Latine, a Patriarch; there by the Arabick Translatour he is termed Princeps Patrum, The chief or Prince of the Fathers. Yet in the sense of S. Stephen, by the word Fathers, those first or greatest Fathers, and prime Patriarchs are not to be understood: but the Patres minorum gentium, Fathers of a lower degree; onely Joseph and the other sonnes of Jacob, the immediate Fathers and Heads of the twelve Tribes. And this is apparent by the light of the words them∣selves; where there is a wall of separation between the one and the other, Act. 7.15. Jacob died, he and our Fathers: there∣fore there were some who were called Fathers, after Abra∣ham, Isaac, and Jacob. Jacob died, he and our Fathers: Not Abraham and Isaac; for they died before Jacob: but Jacob di∣ed; and who els? He, and our Fathers: What more? He, and our Fathers (when they were dead) were carried to Sychem. But Abraham and Isaac were never carried to Sychem. Again, such Fathers are meant as died in Egypt; (for they that di∣ed in Canaan needed no carrying over to the place where they were) and Jacob went down into Egypt, and died there, he, and our Fathers. But Abraham, though he went down into Egypt, yet died not there; but he went up out of Egypt, he, and his wife, and all that he had, Genes. 13.1. lest you might think, that he by leaving ought behinde might be occasioned to re∣turn into Egypt. And Isaac was never in Egypt; therefore could not die there. Jacob died, and his bones were remo∣ved to the same sepulchre where his father and grandfather lay; which was not in Sychem, but in Hebron: Therefore the word Fathers cannot be fitted in this place to Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob; but to the twelve Patriarchs (as S. Stephen calleth them) the sonnes of Jacob. For both Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Leah, were buried in the cave that is in the field of Machpelah by Hebron, Gen. 49.31.

but Joseph his bones were buried in Sychem, Josh. 24.32. Lastly, the rest of the Fathers the brethren of Joseph were buried in Sychem, as well as Joseph: for S. Hierom proveth it by their sepulchres extant at Sychem, and visited, as their sepulchres, in his dayes; who is to be beleeved, and was an eye-witnesse, saith Beza: So that the first-seeming contradiction is salved up: Joseph and his brethren, the twelve Patriarchs, were those Fathers which died after Jacob, and were trans∣lated into Sychem, and there buried: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were not those Fathers: for onely one of them died in Egypt, and all three were buried by Hebron, and needed not to be, nor were translated to Sychem.

2. The semblance of the second opposite proposition, in∣forceth me to handle this point, Whether the brethren of Joseph, the twelve Patriarchs, were buried in the sepulchre of Abraham at Hebron, which he bought, and where himself was buried. Josephus, Antiq. 2.8. saith, All the sonnes of Jacob were buried in Hebron, except Joseph, who was buried in Sychem. Yea the words of S. Stephen are very punctuall, That the Fathers were laid in the sepulchre which Abraham bought. On the contrary, we proved before, that the sonnes of Jacob were bu∣ried in Sychem. Some do answer, Positi sunt in sepulchro, They were laid in the grave, is to be referred to Jacob onely; and that the Scripture useth the plurall number sometimes, when in exactnesse it belongeth to one onely; positi for positus, more bu∣ried, for one buried. But this is forced, and the great difficul∣tie remaineth, concerning the names of them that sold the ground.

The maker of the School-historie, Carthusian, and Gag∣neius, say, The twelve Patriarchs dying in Egypt, were buried in Sychem, and then translated to Hebron; and the monuments of their sepulchres might be in both places. And so all may be true, what S. Stephen, Josephus, and Hierom say. Of this translation of their bodies (which I approve not) more hereafter.

3. The true way of answering even to this point, will be found in the attoning of the third different proposition. Abra∣ham bought the sepulchre of the sonnes of Hemor, saith S. Stephen: Abraham bought the sepulchre of Ephron the sonne of Zohar, saith Moses, Gen. 23.8. &c. Some say the ground was twice bought, once by Abraham, once by Jacob: others say, the ground and the men had each of them severall names, and that Ephron was called Hemor. Others say, with some likelihood, that the father of Ephron, of whom Abraham bought the ground and the cave, had two names; the one was Zohar, Genes. 23.8. the other Hemor, and so called by S. Stephen. Neither can I say ought against these expositions, save this, That I see no∣thing to prove them but conjecture.

But others, who no way can digest that the twelve Patri∣archs were buried in Sychem, and thence translated to Hebron, but say that their bones, bodies, and sepulchres remained at Sychem, are driven to flie unto this strong hold, That Abra∣ham bought not the sepulchre of the sonnes of Hemor, nor did S. Stephen mean so; but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abraham, is taken patronymicé: for the fathers name is often used for the childe or children; as Israel, Edom, Moab, for their off-spring. So Genes. 11.12. Arphaxad begat Salah: Where Arphaxad is set for his sonne: for Arphaxad begat Cainan, and Cainan begat Salah, Luk. 3.36. Likewise, 1. King. 12.16. What portion have we in David? (say the revolt∣ing Israelites) neither have we inheritance in the sonne of Jesse; to your tents, O Israel: now see to thine own house, David. By Israel he meaneth the people of Israel: or his descendants after ma∣ny generations are called himself, by the name of Israel. By David and the sonne of Jesse, you must not understand the per∣son of David himself, or Solomon his sonne, but Jesse his great grand-childe, David his grand-childe, the sonne of Solomon, Rehoboam; exactly parallelling our instance. Again, Abraham is said to be Levi his father, Heb. 7.10. but Jacob was Levi his immediate father: so even there Abraham in some sort sup∣plieth the room of Jacob; and Abraham is taken for Jacob. Yea, I may boldly and truely proceed yet further, and say, that David is called the father of Ezekiah, Isa. 38.5. though there were twelve generations from David to him: and David is cal∣led the sonne of Abraham, Matth. 1.1. though there were four∣teen generations from Abraham to David, Matth. 1.17. If prede∣cessours so many descents removed be called Fathers; the grand-childe may be called by the grand-fathers name. The summe is, Abraham is not here the proper name of the Father of the faithfull; but it must be expounded of Jacob the grand∣childe of Abraham. For indeed Jacob the grand-childe of A∣braham, bought the ground of the sonnes of Hemor the father of Sychem, Josh. 24.32. To confirm this, that Abraham should be more handsomely taken for his sonnes sonne Jacob, I found it in a margin-note of Drusius, Praeteritor. lib. 5. thus, Abraham, that is, the sonne of Abraham: where he makes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abraham to be the Genitive case, and filius to be understood. So Vatablus doth: and Martinus Cantapretensis is expresse, that Abraham is the Genitive case: and Gasparus Sanctius likes it, who saith, that among the Hebrews the parents names are put in the Oblique case; and in them their sonnes are understood: as Luke 3.24. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Which was the sonne of Matthat, which was the sonne of Levi, which was the sonne of Melchi, which was the sonne of Janna. This is a wittie exposition, and most ex∣cellent, if any copie of the Greek had read it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or any Latine copie had it filius Abraham: for filius Abraham might

extend, not onely to Isaac, but to Jacob himself, and lower; for, in Scripture phrase you shall finde the woman healed by Christ, Luk. 13.16. called a daughter of Abraham: and Christ himself saith to the Jews, Joh. 8.56. Your father Abraham re∣joyced. So much for the reconciling of the second and third Propositions; all being cleared by taking Abraham for a pa∣tronymick, for Jacob.

4. The fourth difference is, That in the Latine translations it is read à filiis Hemor filii Sychem. But Hemor was the fa∣ther of Sychem, Josh. 24.32. as is also proved Judg. 9.28. where Gaal the sonne of Ebed perswaded the Sychemites to serve those that descended from Hamor and Sychem, rather then Abimelech; as Vatablus collecteth. Peter Martyr saith, Gaals argument runneth thus, Serve rather those who were anci∣ent lords of this citie; and if we served not them, shall we serve Abimelech? Where Gaal said, Who is Abimelech? and who is Sychem? The Septuagint have it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Who is the sonne of Sychem? But whether there were at this present in the reigne of Abimelech one Sychem living, and in high account, descended from the ancient Sychem, who was point∣ed at in these words, Who is Sychem? or whether any of Sy∣chem his posteritie (otherwise named) are here called Shechem; or whether Gaal made this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, augmentation, Who is Abi∣melech? yea, Who was Shechem himself (for the word will bear it in the Originall) that we should serve him? Which way soe∣ver it be, the place proveth, that Hamor was the father of Shechem: for so run the words afterwards in the same verse, Serve the men of Hamor the father of Shechem. Again, if the words may be thus translated, Quis est Abimelech, & quae est Shechem? as both the Interlinearie and Tremellius reade it; the sense may be, Abimelech is not so great, and the citie of Shechem is not so dejected, so forgetfull of its old libertie, as to serve Abimelech. Our old Bishops Bibles reade it, What is Abimelech, and what is Sychem? — Serve such as come of Hemor the father of Sychem: and in the margin is set, Ge∣nes. 34.24.

Moreover, Junius in his Arabick translation on the Acts, chap. 7. observeth, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Sychem, is neither in the Ara∣bick, nor Syriack, nor some Greek copies: and Beda in his Commentaries cited by Lorinus saith, that for filii Sychem, it is read in some copies, qui fuit in Sychem, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, who was in, or of Sychem: accordingly Junius in his notes on the Syri∣ack, Act. 7. saith thus, What is read in the Greek, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, may fitly be expounded by an Hebraism; and the name of the Prince of that citie may be understood; as if he had said, Which he bought of the sonnes of Hemor the Prince of Sychem. Beza indeed saith, It may be read with the Vulgat, the sonnes of Sychem; because

the Greek Ellipsis useth to be so supplied: but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may as well be interpreted, Patris Sychem, The father of Sychem. You have the like instance, Luk. 24.10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Marie the mother of James, as the Syriack there expresseth it. Another proof of the like kinde, is Mark 15.40. So I expound it here, The sonnes of Hamor, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the father of Sychem. Thus much for the fourth couplet of Propositions, and the knitting up of that seeming opposition in a reall accordance, That Hemor or Hamor was the father of Sychem, as above all deniall is proved from Josh. 24.32. though the Greek word used by S. Stephen be amphibolous. And now it is time to leave the severall answers to each particular doubt, and to render the sense of the words together.

5. One of these two wayes is (in my opinion) necessarie to be embraced:

First, that the twelve Patriarchs the sonnes of Jacob were carried out of Egypt into Sychem, and afterwards out of Sy∣chem into the sepulchre of Abraham: And then behold these three difficulties: First, their father of whom Abraham bought the ground, must have two names. Secondly, it is hard and harsh to beleeve, that in the removall of the Patriarchs bones the Israelites would carrie them over to Sychem, and so passe by Hebron close to the Abrahemium, or the cave where A∣braham, Isaac, and Jacob, with their wives, were buried; and afterwards remove the bones back again from Sychem unto the sepulchre which Abraham bought, which is sixscore miles (if not more) if we measure from Hebron to Sychem, and so backward from Sychem to Hebron. Calvarie and the citie of Jerusalem lay almost even in the way from Goshen to Sy∣chem, and from Sychem back to Hebron: And on Calvarie or there abouts, certainly they would have deposed their bones, if they desired the translation of them to rise with Christ. Thirdly, this exposition implieth, since Joseph was one of the Fathers, that Joseph was also buried in the sepul∣chre of Abraham; which is disproved by Josh. 24.32. And yet, that we may make this Exposition passable and proba∣ble, let us consider the answers. The first difficultie is clear∣ed by saying, It is an usuall thing in the Scripture for the same man to have two names; as Solomon is called Jedidiah, 2. Sam. 12.25. and the like. To the second difficultie this an∣swer may be shaped, That though we could see no reason, nor could imagine any end, why they should carrie and recarrie these bones; yet reasons and just motives might then lead them, which we now may be ignorant of. But I take it as evi∣dent, that the Israelites sooner and more quickly possessed the tribe of Ephraim, and the citie of Sychem (and therefore there might they leave their bones for a time) then Hebron

or Jerusalem. For Joshuah in his time called a Parliament or a Diet at Sychem, Josh. 24.1. and the Ephraimites peaceably enjoyed their inheritance in Joshuah his dayes, and the Ca∣naanites served under tribute unto them, Josh. 16.10. But after Joshuah his death, they wan Jerusalem and Hebron, Judg. 1.8, 10. and then they might recarry the bones of the Fathers to the Abrahemium by Hebron. The third knot is loosed, if we may say, that all the Fathers were carried into Abrahams cave, who had not a distinct buriall-place of their own, as Jo∣seph had; who accordingly was not buried by Hebron, but by Sychem.

6. The second way of expounding S. Stephen, according as the words lie in the Greek and Latine copies, is this; That the other Patriarchs the sonnes of Jacob were buried by Sychem, as Joseph was; and their bones brought up with his, when the Israelites came out of Egypt, and laid in the sepulchre which Jacob the grandchilde of Abraham bought for a summe of money of the sonnes of Hemor the father of Sychem, as is expresse∣ly said, Josh. 24.32. Which latter way, for the accordance of words and names both in the Old and New Testament, I do most willingly embrace. For it representeth not unto us so many or so great difficulties; yea none at all, since it was not so strange that the word Abraham should be a patro∣nymick, and used for Jacob; especially when Rehoboam is called David, and the sonne of Jesse; and Abraham is said to be the father of Levi, which Jacob was; and the Israelites are termed Joseph, Psal. 81.5. though most of them descended not from him; and they who ascended out of Egypt, issued from Joseph after divers generations. In two of which places most punctually, as well as here, the grandfathers names are put for the grandchildren. Especially let this be throughly considered, that the grandchilde himself is distinctly descri∣bed in other places of the divine storie, to have bought the same ground of the sonnes of Hemor, about Sychem, for an hundred pieces of money, Gen. 33.19. and the grandfather A∣braham not to have bought that, but an other piece of ground, at an other time, in an other place, for * 1.1 foure hundred she∣kels of silver of Ephron the Hittite, neare Hebron, which was farre distant from Sychem. Which sale of Ephron, and pur∣chase of Abraham, is ratified by the witnesse of truth, in the mouth of Jacob himself, and dying Jacob, Genes. 49.29, &c. Therefore though the name of Abraham be read; it may be, it must be a patronymick; and Jacob is called by his grand∣fathers name; and Jacob did what is ascribed to Abraham: for other passages of Scripture do force us to expound it of Jacob.

Thus have I digressed, to satisfie the great doubt which hath tortured the wits both of old and late Writers.

O Lord God, God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, God of our fathers, Father of Jesus Christ our God and Saviour; be pleased, I beseech thee, that these my poore weak labours in points obscure, may receive strength from thy strength, light from thy light; that thy most blessed, holy, and all-wise Word may be a lanthorn and light, not onely to my paths, but to my understanding: that so I may know thee, love thee, and alway cleaving to thee, may be glorified by thee, through Jesus Christ my Redeemer and Advocate. Amen.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Genes. 23.16, &c.