Matthew 22

ANd Jesus answered, and spake again to them by parables, and said:

The kingdom of heaven, is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his Son.

And sent forth his servants, to call them that were bidden to the wedding, and they would not come.

Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold! I have prepared my dinner, my oxen, and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready, come to the marriage.

But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise.

And the remnant took his servants, and intreated them spitefully, and slew them.

But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth, and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burnt up their city.

Then says he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden, were not worthy.

Go ye therefore into the high-ways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.

So those servants went into the high-ways, and gathered together all, as many as they found both bad, and good, and the wedding was furnished with guests.

And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment.

And he says unto him, Friend! how camest thou in hither, not having a wedding garment? And he wasspeechless.

Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

For many are called, but few are chosen. Luke has this Parable, Ch. 14. from v. 16. to 26. which has made Diverse Interpreters think, that Matthew has put it out of its due order, for Luke reports it as spoken long before, and that not in the Temple, but at a Pharisees House where he was at Dinner, and upon occasion of one of them saying, Blessed is he that shall Eat Bread in the Kingdom of God. But I know no reason why we may not allow our Saviour to have used the same Parable twice, in two differing Companies, and upon two different occasions, especially considering there are remarkable differences in Lukes and Matthews Relation. I shall therefore leave the consideration of Luke's Relation, till I come to that Chapter in his Gospel, where I shall meet with it in Course, and consider only what Matthew says. We must remember this is a Parable, not an Historical Narration. The first Verse tells us, Then Iesus answered, and spake again to them in Parables, he answered, that is, He began a Discourse (so the Word very often signifies) our Saviour has neither given us any particular Explication of this Parable, nor any Proparabola or Epiparabola, any Sentence, before, or after the Parable, guiding us as to the Explication, except only that short Sentence, v. 14. For many are called but few are chosen, which rather guideth us in the Explication of the four latter Verses, than of the whole Parable, yet it is not hard for us to find out our Saviours Scope in this Parable. It seemeth to be double. 1. To inform those to whom he spake of the Destruction suddenly coming upon the Jews, for their Rejection of the Gospel, and of the calling of the Gentiles. To let us know that neither amongst the Jews nor Gentiles, all should be saved, whom God called by the External Ministration of the Gospel: But those alone who belonging to the Election of Grace, should be found in the Day of Judgment, having on the Wedding Garment. So then: The Kingdom of Heaven here signifies, The way, or Equity of God in the Dispensation of the Gospel, or the Administration of things in order to the Kingdom of Glory. The King here mentioned, must be he who is the King of Kings. The Marriage for his Son, is the Exhibition of the Covenant of Grace. Which whosoever layeth hold on, Isai. 56.4. is by Faith United to Christ, which Vnion is often expressed in Holy Writ, under the Notion of a Marriage, Psal 45.10, 11. Ephe. 5.23, &c. Or their Vnion with him in Glory, Rev. 19.9. The Persons bidden were the Iews, The Servants that called them to the Wedding, were those that were faithful, amongst their ordinary Teachers, or the Prophets, such as Isaiah and the rest, whom they refused to hearken unto. The other Servants might signifie Iohn the Baptist, and the twelve, and others sent out by Christ, to tell them that Christ was now come, there wanted nothing but their coming to him, and receiving of him. Their making Light of it, going one to his Farm, another to his Merchandise, and others taking the Servants, entreating the Servants spitefully, and slaying them, signifies the Jews general refusal of the Gospel, and the particular Rage, and Malice of some of them, shown in their abusing of the Lords Prophets, and Messengers, and which he knew some of them would further show against Stephen and Iames. The Kings sending forth his Armies, and slaying the Murderers, signifyed the coming of the Roman Armies, and their utter destroying Ierusalem. The sending of the Servants into the High-ways, and inviting all those whom they found to the Wedding, signified the Apostles, going to the Gentiles, and Preaching the Gospel to all Nations. Which much inlarged the Territories of the Church, gathering in many who professed to accept of Christ, but not all in Truth, and Sincerity. The Kings coming to see his Guests, signifyeth Christs coming at the Day of the last Judgment, with his Fan in his Hand, throughly to purge his Floor. His finding one without his Wedding Garment, Signifyeth his finding many Hypocrites at the Day of Judgment. The Guests at Weddings were either wont to put on their best Cloths (as we usually do) or a particular Garment which was then in use, and was worn by them, who were invited to Weddings. By the Wedding Garment here is meant Christ, Rom. 13.14. who is at this Feast, both the Bridegroom, and the Meat at the Feast, and the Wedding Garment also, in Diverse Respects. It is but an Idle Dispute, whether Faith is meant, or Love, neither the one nor the other seperately, but Faith that worketh by Love. Whatsoever God requireth of us, that we may be made meet for the Kingdom of God, without Faith and Holiness none can see God. His being Speechless signifies, That those who have lived under the proffers of Grace and Salvation, and have rejected them, neither believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, nor bringing forth Fruits of Holiness, will be without excuse at the Day of Iudgment. And the Kings Commanding his Servants to Bind him Hand and Foot, &c, signifyeth that all such Persons as live within the Church, under the means of Grace, yet dye impenitent, and unbelievers, having not by a true Faith received Christ as their Saviour, and brought forth the Fruits of true Repentance and Holiness, shall get nothing by their being within the Church, and Externally called, but shall be thrown to Hell as well as others, the pains of which are here expressed by Binding Hand and Foot; lying in outer Darkness, Weeping and Gnashing of Teeth, as in other places by a Worm that shall never dye, and a Fire that shall never go out, all Metaphorical Expressions signifying the Vexations, and Intolerable Punishment of the Damned in Hell. For (says our Saviour) many are called, but few are chosen. We met with this Expression before, Ch. 20.16. where the Sense of it was not so obvious, as it is here. Some by it here understood, a choice unto Life Eternal: Nor without reason, if that be understood, by the Marriage Supper, as it is Rev. 19.9. and it appears to be partly at least the Sense of it here, in that the Person without the Wedding Garment is Doomed to Eternal Misery: If we by the Marriage Supper understand an Vnion with Christ here, or the Benefits flowing from that, we must by Chosen here understand Effectually-called, being made partakers of that special, Distinguishing Grace, which bringeth Salvation. The Gospel is Preached to many, whom God does not favour with his special Grace, so as they receive it, convert and are saved. The former part of this Parable, does hint us the reason why the Jews rejected the offers of Grace and Salvation made to them, viz. The power that the Temptations from the World of Pleasure, Profit, and Honour had upon them. As the latter part also shows us the true reason why any are saved, to be from the free Grace of God, viz. because they are Chosen, chosen to Eternal Life, and particularly favoured to be made partakers of his special, and distinguishing Grace.

Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk. Mark Ch. 12, 13. says, They sent unto him certain of the Pharisees, and of the Herodians, to catch him in his Words. Luke says, Ch. 20.20. They watched him, and sent forth Spies, which should feign themselves just Men, that they might take hold of his Words, that so they might deliver him to the Power and Authority of the Governour. His Life was what they sought for. This they had no Power allowed by the Romans to take away without the Sentence of Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governour. That they might have something to accuse him of before him, which he might condemn him for, they first take Councel. They saw he did nothing worthy of Death: They therefore issue their Councels in a resolution, to send some Persons to discourse with him, under the pretence of Conscientious good Men, to propound some Questions to him, his Answer to which, might give them some opportunity to accuse him of Blasphemy, or Sedition. The men they pitch upon, were some of them Pharisees, some Herodians.

And they sent out unto him their discip es with the Herodians, saying, Master, We know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man, for thou regardest not the person of men.

Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cesar, or not? Mark has the same, Ch. 12.14. So has Luke, Ch. 20. v. 21. There is a great Variety of Opinions, who these Herodians were, we read of them in an early Consultation against Christ, with the Pharisees, Mar. 3.6. Some think, they were Forreigners of other Nations; whom Herod being Tetrarch of Galilee, had brought in from contiguous Pagan Nations, but this is not Probable, for then the Pharisees would have had nothing to do with them. Others think, that they were some of Herods Guard, or Soldiers; but neither is this Probable, considering the issue of their Councels, to send some whom Christ should not know, nor be frighted with. Others (which is more Probable) think they were some of those Iews, who favoured Herods side, and had forgotten the Liberty of their Country, joyning with the Conqueror, and taking his Part. Others think they were Sadduces. Others say, that they were Persons, that were of a Mungrel Religion, made up of Iudaism and Gentilism. Mar. 8.15. Our Saviour bids them beware of the Leaven of the Pharisees, and of Herod; which maketh it Probable, That the Herodians were not only Courtiers, and for the Roman interest, but that they had imbraced some particular Doctrines, much differing from the Pharisees; it is likely, they were Leavened with some of the Doctrine of the Sadduces, denying Angels and Spirits, and the Resurrection. It is plain, that they were some of Herods Faction, what their Principles were as to Religion, is not so plain, nor of much concern to us to know. They begin their Discourse to our Saviour, with a great Complement, Master, a Name the Iews did usually give to those, whom they owned for Teachers. We know that thou art true, one that will tell us the Truth, and speak as thou thinkest to be true: And teachest the way of God in Truth, neither carest thou for any Man, for thou regardest not the Person of Men. Thou wilt speak nothing, out of Fear, nor for any Favour or Affection: But plainly tell us what is Truth, and what God would have us do, in the Cases we offer to thee. In these Words they give us the true Character of a good Teacher, he must be a good Man, True, one that will truly teach Men the way of God, and in the faithful discharge of their Duty, not be afraid of the Face of Men. But herein they condemned themselves, for if our Saviour was so, why did they not believe in him, and obey what he taught them? Tell us therefore what thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give Tribute unto Cesar? Or not? But how came this to be a Case of Conscience? What doubt could there be, whether Men for their Peace, might not lawfully part from their own, especially such a little part of it? Some think, that they spake with Relation to that particular Tribute, which was demanded, which they think, was that half Shekel, Exod. 30.12.15. paid by the Iews every year, which was to go for the Service of the Tabernacle: They say, that the Romans had ordered this Payment to go to the Emperor, and this bred the Question, Whether they might lawfully pay that which was appointed, as a Testimony of their Homage to God, and for the Service of the Temple, to a profane use. I must confess I cannot so freely agree to this, wanting any good proof, that the Romans exacted that Payment for the Emperor, and thinking it a very probable Argument to the contrary, That the Tables of the Money-Changers, who changed the Peoples Money into half Shekels fit for that Payment, was now continued. And if that Payment had been now altered, and turned to the use of the Civil Government, our Saviour's overturning those Tables and driving the Money Changers out, had offered them a fair opportunity, to have charged him with Sedition, which they did not do upon that Account. I rather therefore think the Question propounded concerning the Lawfulness of making any Payments to the Emperor, looking upon him, as an Usurper of Authority, over a free People. That the Iews were very tenacious of their Liberty, appears from Ioh. 8.33. And without doubt, the most of them paid such Taxes, as the Roman Emperor laid upon them, with no very Good Will. Now these Hypocrites turn it into a Case of Conscience; God having made the Iews a free People, whether they should not sin against God, in paying these Civil Taxes to a Pagan Conqueror? There was one Theudas, and Iudas mentioned, Acts 5.36, 37. who made an Insurrection upon it. This was a Question Captio s enough. For if he had said it was Lawful, he had probably incurred the Odium of the People, which was what they desired, for they had apprehended him before this time, but for Fear of them. If he had said, It is not Lawful, they had what they sought for, a fair opportunity for accusing him, and delivering him up to Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governour at this time amongst them.

But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?

Show me the tribute money. And they brought to him a peny.

And he says unto them, Whose is this image, and superscription?

They say unto him Cesars. Then says he unto them, Render therefore unto Cesar, the things that are Cesars, and unto God, the things that are Gods.

When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way. Mark has the same, Ch. 12.15, 16, 17. So has Luke, Ch. 20.23, 24, 25, 26. Our Saviour, says Luke, perceived their Craftiness, how subtilly they went about to entrap him. He calls them to show him the Tribute Money: The Iews had two sorts of Money: Shekels and half Shekels, which was Money proper to them, and Roman Coin, Pence and Sesterces. Their Tribute was paid in this Coin. Accordingly they bring unto him a Penny, a Roman Penny as much in value as seven Pence half Peny in our Coin: Which it seems was the Poll-money, which the Romans exacted of every Head. The Coining of Money was always lookt upon, as an Act of Soveraign Power, hence the Usurpation of it is made so Criminal: Most Princes use to have their Effigies stampt upon their Coin, and some Inscription about it, with their Names, and some Words expressive of their Dominion over such places, where their Coin is Currant: So as the admission of a Princes Coin as Currant amongst a People, was a Testimony of their owning, and subjection to such a Prince. Such an Image and Superscription this piece of Money had: Upon which our Saviour concludes, Render therefore unto Cesar, the things which are Cesars, and unto God, the things that are Gods. Altho Cesar be an Usurper, yet God has given you into his Hands, you have owned him, by accepting his Coin, as Currant amongst you. His right, and Gods right are two distinct things. Religion does not exempt you from your Civil Duties, and Obedience to Princes, in things wherein they have a Power to Command. Princes have Power to impose Tributes upon their Subjects, for the Maintenance, and upholding of the Civil Government. Let Cesar have his due, and let God have his right: You are a Company of Hypocrites, who by this Questeion would make me believe you have a great Zeal for God, and his Rights; and that you would not pay Taxes, that you might assert Gods Right over you, this is your Pretence; but indeed your Design is to try me, if you can persuade me by any Words of mine, to incourage you to any Sedition, or Acts of Disloyalty to your Civil Governors. I see no reason for it, Cesar has his Right, and God has his Rights, you may give them both their Rights, and so you ought to do. Gods Kingdom is of another Nature, than the Kingdoms of the World. His Law forbiddeth no Civil Rights. Thus our Saviour Answers their Question so, as he maketh them to condemn themselves, if owning the Civil Magistrates Power, they did not give him his Rights, and so, as neither Cesar, nor yet the People had any just Cause of Exception against him for his Words. This Answer surprizeth them, they marvel, and go their way, having plaid their Game, and got nothing.

The same day came to him the Sadduces, which say that there is no resurrection & asked him,

Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man dye having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.

Now there was with us seven brethren, and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and having no issue, left his wife unto his brother.

Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh.

And last of all the woman dyed also.

Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. Mark thus repeats the same History, Ch. 12.18, 19, 20. &c. So does Luke, Ch. 20.27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33. Concerning the Sadduces, we have before spoken, they were a Sect amongst the Iews much differing from the Pharisees as may be seen, Acts 23.8. Amongst other Erroneous Tenets, they denied the Resurrection, as may be seen in the Text, as well as this; and (which indeed was their Fundamental Error) they denied Spirits, and consequently the immortality of the Soul in its separate Estate. Their design seemeth not so much to have been, to have drawn out a Discourse from our Saviour; which might have touched his Life, (which was the Pharisees de ign) as to have exposed him, by bringing him to an absurdity. To this purpose they p t a Case to our Saviour upon the Law, Deut. 25.5. where God had ordained, for the Preservation of the Inheritances, of the several Tribes and Families di tinct, That if Brethren dwell together, and one of them died leaving no issue, the Wife of the dead should not M rry unto a stranger, her Husbands Brother should go in unto her, and take her to him to W fe, &c. Now they either knew of, or else supposed a Case of seven Brethren, succe sively Marrying the same Woman; they desire to know, whose Wife of the seven this Woman should be in the Resurrection? Instead of D scovering their acuteness, and putting our Saviour upon a Difficulty, they did but betray their own Ignorance, as to the state of the Resurrection.

This is the first, and great commandement.

Jesus answered, and said unto them, Ye do err not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

For in the resurrection, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. Mark has the same, Ch. 12.24, 25. only he propounds it as a Question: Do ye not therefore err, because you know not the Scriptures? Luke says, Ch. 20.34, 35. And Iesus answering, said unto them, The Children of this World Marry, and are given in Marriage: But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that World, and the Resurrection of the Dead, neither Marry, nor are given in Marriage. Neither can they dye any more, for they are equal to the Angels, and are the Children of God, being the Children of the Resurrection. The Discourse of the Sadduces was bottomed upon this mistake, That there should not only be a Resurrection of Bodies, but of Relations too; and the state of the World to come, should be like the state of this World, in which for the Propagation and Continuance of mankind, Men and Women marry, and are given in Marriage. Now says our Saviour, Your Error is bottomed in your Ignorance, because you know not the Scriptures, (which indeed is the Foundation of all Mens Errors, in matter of Faith,) nor the Power of God. If you knew the Power of God, you would know, that God is able to raise the Dead; to confirm our Faith in the Resurrection; the Scripture every where sendeth us to the Consideration of the Divine Power. Rom. 8.11. Phil. 3.21. If you knew the Scriptures, you would know that God will raise the Dead, and the state of Men in the Resurrection shall not be as in this Life, where Men and Women dye, Daily; and in Case they did not Marry, and give in Marriage, the Generation of Men would quickly be extinct. But (says Luke) They who shall be accounted worthy to obtain that World, and the Resurrection from the Dead. It is manifest by the first Words, that the latter Words are not to be understood of the General Resurrection (to which all shall come worthy, or unworthy) but of the Resurrection unto Life. That Resurrection which is not the mere effect of Divine Providence, necessary in order to the last Judgment, but that Resurrection to Life, which is the Effect of Christs purchase. And this is observable, that the Resurrection from the Dead, will be of so little advantage; nay of such miserable disadvantage to wicked Men, that the Scripture sometimes speaketh of the Resurrection, as if it were peculiar to Saints. 1 Cor. 15.22. Phil. 3.11. So in this Text, hence Luke calls them afterward, the Children of the Resurrection; not that others shall not rise, but the Children of God alone shall be the Favourites of the Resurrection; those who shall rise as Children to an Eternal Inheritance. Concerning the state of Persons in the Resurrection, our Saviour thus describes it: That Men and Women there shall be as the Angels, not in all things, but in the things mentioned, which are two, One of them mentioned by Matthew, both by Luke, 1. They shall not dye any more. 2. They shall not Marry, nor be give in Marriage. The first shows the needlessness of the latter; for one great reason of Marriage, was to supply the Gaps which Death maketh in the World; but Men shall not dye any more, therefore there will be no need of Conjugal Relations amongst Men, more than among Angels. The Children of this World (says Luke) Marry, and are given in Marriage. Marriage was only an institution for this World, and is to continue no longer than this World stands; for the state of Men in another World, will be such as needs it not, being a state of Immortality, so not needing it for Propagation: And a state for Perfection, and so not needing it for mutual help in the Affairs of Mans Life, nor a Remedy against extravagant Lust.

But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken to you by God, saying,

I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine. Mark has the same, Ch. 12.26, 27. So has Luke, Ch. 20.37, 38. only Mark and Luke mention the time when God spake these Words.—In the Bush, that is, when God appeared to Moses in the burning Bush. Exod. 3.6. and Luke addeth, for all Live unto him. Mark also says, Concerning the Dead that they Rise, have you not read in the Book of Moses? Our Saviour in the foregoing Words, had by the by asserted the Doctrine of Angels, here he asserts both the Doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul, and also of the Resurrection of the Body; and tho Cardinal Perron, and Maldonate the Iesuite boldly assert, that the Resurrection of the Body cannot be proved from hence, without taking in the Tradition of the Church; yet, notwithstanding their Confidence, those who have a greater Reverence for our Saviour's Words, think that not only the Immortality of the Soul, but the Resurrection of the Body also, is irrefrag bly proved by this Argument of our Saviours; to make out which, these things are to be observed, 1. God does not say I have been, but I am: He speaketh of the time present, when he spake to Moses, and of the time to come. 2. He does not say, I am the Lord of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, But the God of: Now wherever God stiles himself the God of any People, or Person, it always signifieth, God as a Benefactor, and one that does, and will do good to such a People, or Person. It is a foederal Expression, as where he says to Abraham, Gen. 17.7. I will be a God to thee and thy Seed, that is, of thee, and of thy Seed. 3. Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, does not signifie part of Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, but their entire Persons, which consist of Bodies as well as Souls. 4. God is not the God of the Dead, he does not show kindness to them if they be Dead, and shall Rise no more. 5. In this Life, Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, received no such signal kindness from God, but others might receive as great kindness, as any of them did. Hence now our Lord proveth as the Immortality of their Souls, so the Resurrection also of their Bodies, that God might show himself the God of whole Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob. Gerard says, The Argument of this Text is made clear, by Heb. 11.16. Wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a City. This is that which made God, to be truly called their God; because he has prepared for them a City, which City they could never possess without a Resurrection. It is yet further added by some, That Gods promise to Abraham, of the Land of Canaan, was in these terms, Gen. 13.15. To thee will I give it, and thy Seed for ever: Not only to thy Seed, but to thee; so to Isa c, Gen. 26.3. To Iacob, Gen 35.12. Exod. 6.4.8. Deut. 11.21. The Promises seemed not to be fulfilled, in giving their Posterity the Earthly Canaan, which Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob lived not to enjoy, but to extend, to the Rest prepared for the People of God, the City mentioned by the Apostle, Heb. 11.16. which God had prepared for them, to justifie himself to be their God. Now this could not be prepared for their Souls merely, which were but a part of them, and hardly capable of perfect Happiness, without a Re-union with the Body, there being in it such an innate Desire. Nor was it reasonable, that the Bodies of these Saints having been sharers with their Souls in their Labours, should have no share in their reward from that Covenant; therefore of God with Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, our Saviour firmly proveth their Resurrection. Luke addeth, For all live unto him. Not live unto him only as their End. But in the same Sense, as Paul says, Rom. 6.10. of Christ. In that he liveth, he liveth unto God: That is, with God. So says Luke, Abraham, Isaac, and Iacob, tho Dead at present, live with God, and they, and all the Children of Abraham shall live to God, that is, with God to all Eternity. Matthew addeth, When the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at his Doctrine. Poor People, they had been used to hear Discourses from the Pharisees, about the Traditions of the Elders, Rites, and Ceremonies, washing Hands before Meat, and the necessity of washing Pots, and Cups, and the Sadduces declaiming against the Doctrines of Angels and Spirits, and the Resurrection, they were astonished to hear one instructing them in things concerned their Souls, the Resurrection and Life Eternal, and Confuting their great Teachers, from Books of Scripture owned by themselves; for the Sadduces, tho they had no great regard to the Prophets, yet they owned, and payed a great deference to the Books of Moses.

But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadduces to silence, they were gathered together.

Then one of them which was a lawyer, asked him a qustion, tempting him, and saying,

Master! which is the great commandement in the law?

Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self.

On these two commandements, hang all the law, and the prophets. Mark relateth this History more fully, Ch. 12.28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34. And one of the Scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, which is the first Commandement of all? And Iesus answered him, the first of all the Commandments is, hear O Israel, the Lord thy God is one Lord. And thou shalt love the Lord thy God, with all thy Heart, and with all thy Soul, and with all thy Mind, and with all thy Strength. This is the first Commandement. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy Neighbour as thy self; there is no other Commandement greater than these, And the Scribe said unto him, Well Master thou hast said the Truth, for there is one God, and there is none other but he. And to love him with all the Heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the Soul, and with all the Strength, and to love his Neighbour as himself, is more than all whole Burnt Offerings and Sacrifices. And when Iesus saw that he answered Discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the Kingdom of God. And no Man after that, durst ask him any Question. Luke omitteth this Hi ory, only subjoyneth to our Saviours Answer to the Sadduces, Ch. 20. v. 39, 40. Then certain o the Scribes Answering, said, Master thou hast well said. And after that they durst not ask him any Q estion at all. There are different Opinions of Interpreters, concerning the De sign of this Scribe, called by Matthew a Lawyer, in coming to Christ with this Question Some think that he came upon the same Errand with the others, to entangle him in his Speech. Others, that he came merely out of a desire to be more fully instructed by him, and that Tempting here, signifies no more than Trying him, not for a bad end, but as the Queen of Sheba came to prove Solomon with hard Questions, to have an Experiment of his Wisdom. Our Saviours fair Treating him, and the Commendation he gave him, together with his fair speaking to our Saviour, and Commending his Answer induce me, to think that he came on no ill Design. Besides, that the Opinion of some, that he came hoping to hear our Saviour vilify their Ritual Precepts, in Comparison of the Moral Precepts, seemeth to me not probable, for himself consents to what our Saviour says, and addeth, that To love the Lord our God, &c. is more than all Burnt Offerings and Sacrifices. His Question was, Which is the first and greatest Commandement? Matthew says the great; Mark says, The first: they have both the same Sense, and our Saviour v. 38. puts them together. Iesus says unto him, thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy Heart, and with all thy Soul, and with all thy Mind. Mark adds, with all thy Strength. It is to be found, Deut, 6.5. only there is not with all thy Mind. Luke puts it in, Ch. 10.27. It is but the same thing expressed in Diverse Terms, for with all thy Soul, is Comprehensive of Heart, Mind, and Strength. Mark adds a Preface. Hear O Israel, the Lord thy God is one God, Thou shalt love, &c. those words, only 1. stirred up the Peoples Attention. 2. Showed the reason of the following precept, which is fully expressed in Matthew. If any ask, to which of the Ten Commandements is this to be referred? It is easily answered, that it is the Sum of the four first, which Comprehend our Duty toward God. Our Saviours expressing them by loving God, shows us that the Law of God was not fulfilled, in the Observation of the Letter of those Commandements, but doing these things which God Commands out of a Principle of Love, the highest Degrees of Love to God. They idly Interpret this Precept, who Interpret it only an Obligation upon us, to Love God as much as we are able in our Lapsed State, the fall of Man lost God no right of Commanding, and telling us our Duty. The Law does undoubtedly require of us Love to God in the highest Degree, to showed by the Acts of the whole Man, in obedience to all his Commandments, and that constantly. It is our only Happiness that the Law is in the Hands of a Mediator, who has thus perfectly fulfilled it, for all those who believe in him, Rom. 8.3. and accepteth of us, the Will, for the Deed. Thus the Moral Law is a Scool-Master that leadeth us unto Christ. Our Saviour justly calls this the first and great Commandment. 1. Because God is to be served before our Neighbour. 2. Nor can love to our Neighbour flow from any other true Principle, than that of Love to God, nor is our Neighbour to be loved, but for Gods sake, and in Subordination unto him. And the second is like to it. Commanding Love also; So that as the Apostle says, Love is the fulfilling of the Law. [thy Neighbour] that is, every Man, as thy self, doing as much for him as thou wouldst have him do for thee, and doing no more against him, than thou wouldst willingly he should do against thee. As truly and sincerely, as thy self. On these two Commandements hang all the Law and the Prophets. There is nothing commanded in all the Old Testament but may be reduced to these two Heads. This is the whole Duty of Man there commanded. The whole Book of God is our Rule, and we are obliged to every Precept in it. Moses summed up all in the Ten Commandements, to which truly interpreted all the precepts of Scripture are reducible, Christ here brings the Ten to Two. The Apostle brings all to one, telling us Love is the fulfilling of the Law. There is nothing forbidden in Scripture, but what offends the Royal Law or Love, either to God or Man: There is nothing commanded, but what will fall under it. Mark addeth, that the Scribe applauds our Saviour, as having said the Truth, and Confe sing, that the fulfilling these two Precepts, was more than all Sacrifices and burnt Offerings, in which he agreed with Samuel, who long since told Saul, that to obey was better than Sacrifice, and it needs must be so, seeing that all the true value of Sacrifices, lay in the Obedience, by them given to the Will of God. Christ tells the Scribe, He was not far from the Kingdom of God. He who once rightly understands the Law of God, and has cast off that silly fancy or thinking to please God with Ritual things, has made a great Proficiency under that School-Ma er, who if rightly under ood, will show him the need of another Righteo sness than his own, wherein to appear before God.

While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them,

Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David.

He says untothem, How then does David in spirit call him Lord, saying,

The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 'till I make thine enemies thy foot stool.

If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth, ask him any more questions. Mark has this Story, shortly repeating only the substance of it, Ch. 12.35, 36, 37. adding nothing to it, but concluding. And the common People heard him g adly. Luke repeateth it as shortly, Ch. 20.41, 42, 43 For the right understanding of this Discourse of our Saviour to the Pharisees, we must know, that tho the Pharisees and the Jews in general did expect a Messiah or a Christ, yet they expected no more of him, or in him, than that he should be a Man, the Son of David, descended from his Family according to the promise, Isaiah 9.6. and dreamed only of a Secular Prince, who should deliver them from their Enemies, and restore them to their Ancient Civil Liberties. Christ seeing a pack of them together, took the Liberty, which he had allowed them towards himself, to propo nd a Question or two to them. His question was. What they thought of Christ? Not of himself but of the Messiah whom they expected? whose Son he should be? they say unto him, The Son of David, that is, one who should in a right Line be descended from David. This was a constant, and uncontrouled Tradition amongst them. Hence Mark says, the Question was propounded, How say the Scribes? Luke, how say they, that Christ is, that is, is to be the Son of David! This was a common received Opinion amongst them, which our Saviour by the next Words does not contradict, but only argueth that he must needs be something more: for (says he) How then does David in Spirit call him Lord? Psal. 110, 1. Mark says, David himself said by the Holy Ghost. David was a Prophet, and spake by inspiration from the Holy Ghost. Acts 1.16. & 2.30. Luke says, in the Psalms, whence we may observe, that Psal. 110. was Davids Psalm, not a Psalm composed by some other for David, as some contend, would David have called him Lord, whom he knew to be merely his Son, one that should only descend from him? He would have said, The Lord said to my Son, or will say to my Son. The Lord said, Iehovah said to my Lord: Sit thou on my right Hand. Would David speaking Prophetically by the Holy Ghost concerning the Messiah, had he believed he was to be his Son, and no more, have said, that Iehovah should say unto him, sit on my Right Hand, a place of the highest Honour, Dignity, and Favour, untill I make thy Enemies thy Footstool, that is, for ever, for until does not signifie a Determinate time. See the Notes on Chap. 1.25. If David then call him Lord! How is he then his Son. That is, how is he then no more than his Son, no more than a mere Man: Our Saviour by this Argument does neither go about to prove, that the Christ was not to be the Son of David, nor that he was the Messias himself, but that their expected Messias or Christ, must be more than a mere man, otherwise David would never have called him Lord, nor yet Prophesied, th t Iehovah should call him to Sit at his Right Hand. Matthew concludes with telling us, that as the Sadduces and the Scribes were Non plust before; so now the Pharisees Mouths were also stopped. Mark says, the Common People heard him gladly. Matthew says, No Man was able to answer him a Word, neither durst any man ask him an more questions. Nor shall we hear of their troubling him with disputes any more, they now see Disputing will not do their business, their next Business is to consult how to take away his Life, which is always the Course of Proud, and Malicious Men, given over of God to ruin, to conceal their Convictions, and proceed to Execute their Lusts and Malice, rather than they will not have their Ends. But before they meet with a fit opportunity, we shall have some excellent Discourses from our Saviour, to the Disciples, and the Multitude.