Orbis miraculum, or, The temple of Solomon pourtrayed by Scripture-light wherein all its famous buildings, the pompous worship of the Jewes, with its attending rites and ceremonies, the several officers employed in that work, with their ample revenues, and the spiritual mysteries of the Gospel vailed under all, are treated at large.

The Succession of the High-Priests under the first Temple.

1 Zadok being the first High-Priest in the Temple, and descended of Elea∣zar, the son of Aaron, was instituted and inducted into his Office by King Solomon Himself. After that Abiathar (of the Line of Eli, and Itha∣mar) had been displaced by that Royal King, for taking part with Adonijah in his Conspiracy for the Kingdom. This Zadok was the son of Ahitub, and is corruptly called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by the Alexandrian Chronicle; whose Li∣neal Descent will be more apparent, and manifest by this G••nealogical Scheme hereunto annexed.

• ...Aaron.
  • Eleazar, Josh. 24.33.
    • Phin••has Josh. 22.13, 30.
      • ...Abishua
        • ...Bukki
          • Uzzi, 1 Chron. 6.50.
            • ...Zerahiah
              • ...Merajoth
                • ...Amariah
                  • ...Ahitub
                    • Zadok, 2 Sam. 8.17.
• ...Ithamar.
  • Eli, Contemporary with Samuel; but how many persons were betwixt Him and Ithamar, is not mentio∣ned.
    • ...Hophni.
    • Phinehas. 1 Sam. 4.4.
      • Ahitub 1 Sam. 14.3.
        • Ahijah. 1 Sam. 14.3.
        • Ahimelech, 1 Sam. 22.11.
          • Abiathar, 1 Sam. 22.20. & 23.6.
      • Ichabod, 1 Sam. 4.21.

There be, that interpose betwixt Samuel's Eli, and Ithamar, three persons, viz. Abiezer, Buzi, and Ozi, but upon no warrantable grounds; and there∣fore scarce deserve to be mentioned in this place. Wherefore we shall pro∣ceed to our Temple-Priests.

2 Ahimaaz. the son of Zadok: This person, corruptly called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by the Alexandrian Chronicles, was sent by Joab to carry the tidings of Ab∣salom's death to King David, 2 Sam. 18.19, 23, 27, &c. 2 Sam. 15.27, 36. He is mentioned in the Roll of the High-Priests, recited in the Book of Chronicles, 1 Chron. 6.8. and possibly may be the same person, who mar∣ryed Basmath, one of the Daughters of Solomon; it being familiar for the High-Priests, to link themselves with the Royal Family: as is observable of Jehojadah, in the Reign of Joash, intimating the union of both the King∣ly and Priestly Office in Jesus Christ, who was prefigured by the High-Priests of Israel.

3 Azariah, the son of Ahimaaz, 1 Chron. 6.9.

4 Johanan, the son of Azariah, 1 Chron. 6.9. As to whom, it is concei∣ved, that he might be the same person, who is called by the name of Jona∣than, the son of Abiathar, 2 Sam. 15.36. Where it is to be noted, that both these are omitted in the Catalogues of Josephus, Nicephorus Callistus, Al∣sted, and the Hebrew Chronicle, cited by Petavius, although mentioned by the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in the Alexandrian Chronicle. Nay, none of these 4 first High Priests are found in the Register of Ezra: The reason whereof is conjectured at by Dr. Lightfoot, in his Temple Service to be, because the Service in the Temple began not till the days of Azariah, the son of Joha∣nan; as he expounds that place in the Book of Chronicles, of his executing the Priests Office.

5 Azariah, the son of Johanan, 1 Chron. 6.10. & Ezra 7.3. In the former Text he is said to be the man that executed the Priests Office in the Temple that Solomon built in Jerusalem: which I take to be thus under∣stood,

sc. that he was the first person, who did execute his office in that place onely, whereas his Predecessors had officiated in the days of David and So∣lomon, not onely in the Temple, but also in the Tabernacle at Gibeon, and at Zion. Others apprehend it to be meant of some notable act, which he performed by virtue of his Office, and apply it to that Azariah, who thrust K. Uzziah out of the Temple: But the great distance of times will not give way to that Exposition: Seeing this Azariah, (if the two former be exclu∣ded from the High-Priesthood, as to the chief Office) might in the latter days of Solomon be of age sufficient, after the Decease of his Progenitors, to have performed his Work in the Temple, even in that King's days; and also in the Reign of Rehoboam, and Abijah, (which was but twenty years) and in some part of Asa's Reign. For some do apprehend, that Azariah and Johanan, the third and fourth in this orderly nomination, were of the Line of Ithamar, and as Substitutes to Zadok and Ahimaaz, might assist them, as secondary Priests, in time of sickness and separation from ordinary pollu∣tion, according as it was usual, whereof we have spoken before in the Office of the High Priests. Now whereas they are called Sons in a Lineal Discent, let's remember, that it is usual in Scripture for such persons to be styled by the name of Sonnes, by virtue of some Office wherein men succeed, or attend others. If this be a real truth, then the omission of the two former by Josephus, and others, will claim kindred with our Conjecture; and also help to fortifie it, concerning their not being the chief High-Priests; but as secondary, assistant to, and contemporary with the former. Yet seeing Scripture terms them, as lineally begotten one of another, in an orderly way of Generation, I shall not be peremptory, but leave the Knot to be solved by abler Pens.

6 Amariah, the son of Azariah, 1 Chron. 6.10. Ezra 7.3. who is ex∣presly recorded to have been chief Priest in the dayes of King Jehoshaphat, and to have been over the Jews in all matters of the Lord; which some apprehend to be meant of his being of the Sanhedrin, or Great Council at Jerusalem. Part of his time was spent, probably, under the Reign of Asa likewise, and that he continued in this Kings days for some time. He is the same person, probably, who by Josephus, and Nicephorus, is called Joram, and by the Hebrew Chronicle Jehojarib, though transposed out of his due place, especially since we read of one Jehoram, at the Helm of the Priesthood, in Jehoshaphat's time. Now seeing this Joram is recounted by Josephus, as the fourth from Zadok inclusively, having omitted Johanan, and Azariah the second. The last (if the fore-mentioned Conjecture should prove true concerning Johanan, that he was the son of Abiathar, and that the Line of Ithamar was re-introduced to their former dignity, though not to the su∣preamest place) might then possibly fall in contemporary with Ahimaaz, and Azariah the first. For many times (as we have hinted) we find two High-Priests coupled together, though one of them had the greatest prehe∣minence: whereby Scripture and Josephus might be reduced to a tolerable agreement; especially, since there be some probable apprehensions, that Azariah the second (of that name in the Series of nomination) might have officiated in the latter days of King Solomon, according to the sense of Dr. Lightfoot, in his Temple-Service, Chap. 4. Sect. 2. Pag. 24, 25. line 1, and 37. which assertion would prove very strange, if he were the fourth in or∣der from Zadok, in the beginning of the Temple-Work in Solomon's days; especially since Amariah (who is expresly recorded to have been his Suc∣cessour) is definitively laid down in Scripture (as we have said) in the exe∣cution of his Office, under the Rule and Dominion of Jehoshaphat, the 4th King after Solomon, there being about sixty one years from the last of Solo∣mon's

reign to the first of Jehoshaphat's. To conclude then; whereas it might be objected, that Johanan, and Azariah the second, (who are not pro∣duced by Josephus, and others) are distinctly mentioned in Scripture, as be∣gotten by the precedent, and so to be termed their sons; either we may imagine them to have been but of small duration in a successive Line: or rather that they are so termed onely Jure Officii, being indeed but Surro∣gates to the others (with whom they were co-incident in time) in several necessary cases; seeing it is sufficiently known, that those who were not natural sons, are yet styled by that name, upon account of their succession in the Government: which will evidently appear, by comparing together Matthew and Luke, the two Evangelists, and several other places of Scrip∣ture.

7 Ahitub, the Son of Amariah, 1 Chron. 6.11, 12. & Ezra 7.2. who is called by Josephus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and by Nicephorus plainly 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, who likewise expresly lays down the Character whereby to know him, consonant to the Scripture it self: that this is the very man that lived one hundred and thir∣ty years, and flew Godoliah (that is, in Scripture-Language) Athaliah the Queen: which name and story evidently points at Jehojadah the High-Priest, Uncle to King Joash, and is termed also by Petavius, in his alleadged Chronicle, Jejadah, in distinct words; being the same person, doubtless, who in that confused Chronicle is set the fourth in number, and called Jehoahaz: from whence Josephus his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is corrupted; who for his great care of the Temple, and Worship of God, and the wonderful Reformation, effected in his days, is styled, The Ruler of the House of God.

8 Merajoth, the son of Ahitub: This person, though omitted in the 1 Chron. 6.12. yet is particularly mentioned in 1 Chron. 9.11. and in Nehem. 11.11. Now if Ahitub before spoken of, be indeed that Godly Je∣hojadah, as it seems very probable; then this Merajoth will prove to be the slain Zechariah, or some Elder Brother of his who succeeded Ahitub in the latter days of Joash the King. He is called by Nicephorus the Pa∣triarch, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, who addes, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 slain for his Zeal to God; which shews the corruption of his name for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; who is also called Merajoth, and was the same with Holy Zechary, as is attested by the fore-cited Chronicle, which places Jojadah, and his two Sons Zechariah and Phedajah contemporary with Queen Athaliah, and King Joash. Jose∣phus in his Greek Copy▪ names these three, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nicephorus calls them 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, Jehojadah, and his two sons, Zechary and Phedajah, who were slain at the Commandment of the King. Selden's Copy of the Seder Olam Zuta places Jehosaphat, Je∣hojadah, and Phadea successively: wherein, admitting one transposition, Je∣hojadah being placed first, Jehosaphat, may be put for Zachariah his Son, ex∣presly named in Petavius his Copy, where the name of Jehosaphat is defi∣cient; it being common for one person to have two names among the He∣brews.

9 Zadok, the Son of Merajoth, 1 Chron. 9.11. Nehem. 11.11. This High-Priest is styled by Josephus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: by Nicephorus Callistus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: and by the often-recited Chronicle, in plain terms, Zedekiah, agreeing very near with our Zadok, and is very probably the same man, who was Father in Law to King Uzziah, and did in such an eminent and zealous manner

thrust his Son in Law out of the Temple, when usurping the Priests Of∣fice; and is called in the Text, mentioning that Fact, by his proper name, Azariah the chief Priest: but presently in the beginning of the twenty seventh Chapter is supposed to have his name altered by the Spirit of God and called Zadok▪ from that his courage in an act of exemplary Justice and Righteousness, and accordingly so recorded to after generations, by this name of Zadok, in the Babylonian Registers of Ezra the Scribe. This very Fact is mentioned under the name of a second Azariah in Nicephorus the Patriarch's Catalogue. Who is called by the Alexandrian Chronicle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with the annexion of another called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, telling us that they lived under Athaliah, and Joash; which passage plainly carries in its very Fore∣head, the corruption of that Author, in placing 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here viz. after Zadok, who was the famous Jehojadah, or Ahitub; and likewise in placing Zadok under Athaliah, who was under Ʋzziah.

Before we come to the next, it is to be remembred, that Josephus inter∣serts two more Priests, called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 but by Nicephorus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and by the Chronicle, Joel and Jotham. The first being pla∣ced in the daies of Ʋzziah, the other of King Jotham. But who they were, or where and how to insert them; Scripture yields no light, that I have yet discerned.

10 Ʋriah whom some think to have been of the line of Ithamar, and exalted to this dignity by ungodly Ahaz: who though he be not mentio∣ned in the Genealogies penned by Ezra, being omitted, as some guess, because of his idolatrous obsequiousness to King Ahaz about the Altar of Damascus: yet we have a certain record of his name and time, he being exprest again and again in the book of Kings. With whose Scripture-name Josephus doth clearly agree, calling him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and more particularly Ni∣cephorus, expresly recording that he lived in the daies of Ahaz and He∣zekiah, and is supposed to be mentioned, Esai. 8.2.

11 Azariah another High-Priest succeeds, though not exprest by name in Ezra, or in the book of Chronicles chap. 6, or 9. Yet have we famous mention of him by the Title of chief Priest and Ruler of the house of God, in the daies of Hezekiah of blessed memory, and likewise that he was of the house of Zadock, being in Josephus corruptly called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in Nice∣phorus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Chronicle Ne••iah, which claimes him as contemporary with Hezekiah.

Here in this place, there intervenes another High-Priest cited by Josephus under the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by Nicephorus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: by that Hebrew Chronicle, Osaiah; and in Selden's Copy Hoshaiah, which is probably a grand mistake, interverting the order, and inverting the name of Jehojadah before menti∣oned. For this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 probably is the very same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the sixth in the Alexandrian Chronicle, who is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by Nicephorus Callistus, O∣saiah by the Jewish Chronicle, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by Josephus in the fifth place. All conspiring either with the true or corrupted writing of the name of Jeho∣jadah. Otherwise, concerning this man's line, there being no Scripture-light, to me apparent; I shall remit him to his Authours, till clearer times.

Moreover we must not here forget the two High-Priests inserted by some Authors, as followeth. First by Nicephorus the Patriarch, in his Chronography set forth by Scaliger, An. Do. 1606, together with Euse∣bius his Chronicles, and printed again A. D. 1658. pag. 307. of the greek Copy: and again in another Edition at Paris 1652, wherein he is called Arch-Bishop of Constantinople, pag. 407.

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

1 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Corrupted for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or Shallum the next High-Priest in order.

In the Epitome of Chronicles likewise, being another Tract set out by Scaliger, pag. 240. and supposed by some to be an Alexandrian Chronicle, we read thus.

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

By which Authours some have been imposed upon to apprehend that Somnas or Sobnas, as also Eliakim, were High-Priests in the daies of King Hezekiah: Whereas indeed Eliakim the Son of Hilkiah was no other then the Ruler or Steward of the Kings Houshold, and Shebna the chief Scribe or Recorder, as appeareth by the royall History of the Kings of Judah. Without all doubt both these Writers were deceived by a misapprehensi∣on of the Prophet Isaiah, who mentioning the Robe and the Girdle of Eliakim, might give occasion to conceive of them as High-Priests: Espe∣cially since the Text saith they were o••er the House 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 they miscon∣struing the King's House for the Temple. Concerning which you may be more satisfyed in Seldens discourse De succes. Pontif. Ebrae. c. 5. p. 142. For in one verse of Isaiah the vulgar Latine calling Shebna Praepositus Templi, the Provost or Ruler of the Temple; the sequacious pens of Popish Authours not daring to start from it for fear of the forked curse of the Tridentine convention, have followed this old and blind Error, as is well observed by Dr. Rainolds, in his conference with Hart concerning that inconse∣quent Argument of the Pope's supremacy drawn from one High-Priest set over the Jewish Church, during that oeconomy.

To let then these Popish dreams alone to their wilfully stupified brains, as given up by God to believe lies: we will proceed to the rest of the High-Priests mentioned in Scripture-Records.

12 Shallum, called the son of Zadok in 1 Chron. 6.12. and Ezra. 7.2. and Meshullam in 1 Chron. 9.11. In Josephus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, In Niceph. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. It is probable this man was not the immediate son of Zadok: because A∣zariah before him is said to have been of the House of Zadok: as if he nei∣ther had been the next immediate successor: But might have had Uriah as his Father betwixt him and Zadok, according to the Scripture-History of the sacerdotal function, unles it should refer to Solomon's Zadok. But we sub∣mit the whole to candid Judges, onely remembring that this man is gener∣ally conceived to have spent most of his daies under the reign of King Ma∣nasseh: who little regarded the worship of the Temple: Huldah the Prophe∣tess is call'd the wife of this High Priest by the Alexandrian Chronicle p. 24.

13 Hilkiah the son of Shallum, 1 Chron. 6.13. and 9.11. Ezra. 7.1, 2. Neh. 11.11. This man is famously known to have been in the daies of Josiah, a great coadjutor of his in that honoured and most memorable Re∣formation of God's Worship and solemn Service. Whereto all Compu∣tators do freely give in their Suffrages. Concerning whom Clemens Alex∣andrinus adds further, that he was the Father of the Prophet Jeremy, with which opinion concurs the Alexandrian Chronicle.

14 Azariah the son of Hilkiah, mentioned in Scripture, in 1 Chron. 6.13. and 9.11. Ezra, 7.1. But omitted by the three forecited Cata∣logues: yet having a threefold evidence from Scripture, we have accor∣dingly so fixed him. Yet Josephus in his History of the Jewish Antiqui∣ties bethinking himself, asserts that there were eighteen High-Priests from the building of the Temple to its first dissolution: which number cannot be fetcht out of his Catalogue, unless this Azariah be admitted for one. To whom also, as to the number of eighteen, agrees our common Egesip∣pus,

which goes about the World as his, concerning the destruction of Je∣rusalem.

15 Seraiah the son of Azariah. 1 Chron. 6.14. Ezra, 7.1. He is cal∣led by Nehemiah's Register, the son of Hilkiah, though it seems apparent by the Scriptures affixed to Azariah, that he stood not in so immediate a relation to him. But this place of Nehemiah possibly might give occasion to the three Authors to omit Azariah, whereas this person is called by Jose∣phus and Nicephorus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and is reported to have been slain by the King of Babylon at Riblah.

16 Jehozadak the son of Seraiah, the Father of Jeshua, mentioned by the Prophet Zachary, and Brother of Ezra the Scribe, called by Josephus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by Nicephorus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, was carried captive to Babylon by the ar∣mies of Nebuchadnezar; with whom ends the Line of the Priest's during the first Temple.

So that according to this view of the Succession of the High-Priests in∣tended for the enodation and untying of some former difficulties in the Historicall relation of the Jewish High-Priests in some measure: I humbly conceive, there needs no such vexatious and perplexing figure as a Meta∣thesis to be introduced: seeing the apprehended mislocations (wherein we ought to be extreme sparing of imposing upon any Scripture, without urgent necessity and clear Testimony from other places) may be now more safely laid aside, and the Chronicle vindicated to its purity in a regular pro∣cedure with its names. According to which, having examined severall Authors, the severall High-Priests of the first Temple may tolerably well synchronize with the Kings of Judah in this Method following.

• 1 Zadok
• 2 Ahimaaz
• 3 Azariah with King Solomon.
• & 4 Johanan with King Solomon.

5 Azariah with the latter end of King Solomon's reigne, Rehoboam, A∣bijah, and the beginning of Asa.

6 Amariah contemporary with the greatest part of Asa's reigne, and some part of Jehoshaphat's.

7 Ahitub or Jehojadah, who lived one hundred and thirty years, pro∣bably did concurr with the latter part of Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, Ahaziah, A∣thaliah, and part of his Nephew Joash.

8 Merajoth, so called in the Babylonian Register, but probably the same with Zachariah, in the reigne of Joash.

9 Zadok with Joash, Amaziah, and his Son in Law Ʋzziah.

10 Ʋriah in the latter end of Ʋzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and the begin∣ning of Hezekiah.

11 Azariah during the greatest part of the reigne of Hezekiah.

12 Shallum in the daies of Manasseh.

13 Hilkiah supposed by some to be in the latter part of Manasseh's time, all Amon's, and the most part of Josiah.

14 Azariah in the end of Josiah, Jehoahaz, and Jehoiakim's daies.

15 Seraiah in the time of Jeconiah and Zedekiah, and was then slain at Riblah.

16 Josedek, At the end of Zedekiah's reigne who was carryed captive to Babylon: after that the holy Temple was laid in rubbish. The more compleat Story of which most famous building as to the various accidents which befell it, shall now follow, while it continued under the reigns of the particular Kings of Judah.

Before we conclude this present Chapter, we shall give in an Historicall view of the state of the Temple, during the severall Kings of Judah, accor∣ding to the various changes related in holy Scriptures, under which it la∣boured; together with the year of the World, according to the Annals of the most learned Primate of Ireland.

Notes

• 2 Chron. 1.3.
• 1 Chron. 6.9, 10.
• 2 Chron. 19.11.
• 2 Chron. 17.8.
• Mat. 1.12. Luk. 3.27.
• Niceph. Callist. Eccl. Hist. l. 2. c. 4.
• 1 Chron. 9.11. Neh. 11.11.
• 2 Chr. 26.20.
• 2 King. 16.11, 15, 16.
• 2 Chron. 31.10, 13.
• 2 Kin. 18.18. Isa. 36.22.
• Isai. 22.21.
• Isa. 22.15.
• pag. 78.
• 2 Thes. 2.11.
• 2 Chr. 34.14. 2 Kin. 22.4. & 23.4. Strom. l. 1. p. 240, 241. edit Heins. 1616.
• Lib. 20. c. 8. p. 700. D.
• Neh. 11.11.
• 2 Kin. 25.18, 21.
• 1 Chro. 6.14, 15.