God, and directing them to the ways and means of universal obedience, whereby their days might be multiplied, and on sundry other accounts.

§ 9. For the penalties annexed to the transgression of the law, to which our apostle has special respect in his discourses on this subject, they will require a consideration somewhat larger. These were of two sorts: First, such as God took upon himself to inflict; and, secondly, such as he appointed others to see to the execution of.

The first are of three sorts: First, That eternal punishment which he threatened to them that transgressed, and disannulled his covenant, as this was renewed and ordered in the administration of the law, and the ordinances thereof. This we have manifested elsewhere to be the import of the curse, to which every such transgressor was obnoxious.

Secondly, The punishment which the Jews express by and nn, excision, or cutting off. It is first mentioned, Gen. xvii. 14. in the matter of circumcision. Sometimes emphatically, Num. xv. 31. nn nn, Cutting off that soul shall be cut off from among his people; and frequently afterwards, Exod. xii. 15. 19. ch. xxxi. 14. Lev. vii. 10. ch. xx. 3. 5, 6. It is rendered by the apostle, igoλogubnosta, Acts iii. 23. shall be destroyed from among the people, that is, by the hand of God, as is declared, 1 Cor. x. 10. Heb. xi. 28. Twenty-five times is this punishment threatened in the law, still unto such sins as disannul the covenant, to which our apostle has express respect, ch. ii. 2. as shall be declared on that place.

§ 10. Now this punishment the Jews generally agree to be On 7, by the hand of heaven, or that which God himself would immediately inflict; and it is evidently declared so to be in the interpretation given of it, Lev. xvii. 10. ch. xx. 4—6.

But what this punishment was, or wherein it did consist, neither Jews nor Christians are absolutely agreed: the latter on this subject doing little more than representing the opinions and judgments of the other, which course also we may follow. Some of them say, that untimely death is meant by it; so Abar

קצוד ימי החוטא ומיתתו קודס קצו בעילם .22 .binel on Numb. v It is the cutting off the הזה והוא עצמי ענין המיתה בידי שמים

days of the sinner, and his death before the natural term of it, inflicted by the hand of heaven. This untimely death they reckon to be between the years of twenty and sixty: whence Schindler,

exterminium, cum quis præmatura morte inter vigessimum et sexagessimum annum a Deo e medio tollitur, ita tamen ut relinquat liberos: Cutting off is, when any one is taken away by untimely death, between the twentieth and sixtieth year of his age; yet so, as that he leave children.' That clause or condition, so that yet he leave posterity or children behind him,' is,

6

as far as I can find, no where added by them, nor doth any thing in the Scripture give countenance to it. Yea, many of the Hebrews think, that this punishment consisted in this, that such a one should leave no children behind him, but that either he should be wholly arexvos, without children, or if he had any before his sin, they should all die before him, and so his name and posterity be cut off, which say they, is to be cut off from among his people. So Aben Ezra on Gen. xvii. 14. And this opinion is not without its countenance from the Scripture itself; and therefore Jarchi on the same place, with much probability, puts both these together, He shall be cut off by untimely death, and leave no children behind him to continue his name or remembrance

מי שאון יש לו בנים כשוב כמת אבל מי שיש ,amongst the people as they speak. He that לו בנים כאילו הוא חי ושמו לא נכרת

hath no children is accounted as dead: but he that hath, is as if he lived, and his name is not cut off.

§ 11. They have a third opinion also, that by this cutting off, the death of the soul is intended, especially when the word is ingemminated, Cutting off he shall be cut off, as Numb. xv. 31.

that soul,שתאבד הנפש ולא תהיה היה וקיימת,,So Maimonides

Few

shall perish it shall not live or subsist any more for ever. embrace this opinion, as being contrary to their general persuasion of eternal punishments for the transgressions of the covenant. Wherefore it is disputed against by Abarbinel on Num. xv. who contends that the death of the soul in everlasting separation from God, is intended in this threatening. And both the principal parts of these various opinions, namely, that of immature corporeal death, and eternal punishment, are joined together by Jonathan, in his Targum on Num. xv. 31. He shall be cut off in this world, and that man shall be cut off in the world to come, and bear his sin in the day of judgment.' For my part, as I have shewed that eternal death was contained in the curse of the law, so this special n, or extermination from among the people, seems to me to intend some special judgment of God, in taking away the life of such a person, answering to the infliction of death by the judges and magistrates, when men were known to have incurred such punishment, according to the command of God. And in this there was also an eminent representation of the everlasting cutting off of obstinate and final transgressors of the covenant.

§ 12. Thirdly, In judgments to be brought providentially upon the whole nation by pestilence, famine, sword and captivity, which are at large declared, Lev. xxvi. and Deut. xxviii.

Fourthly, The total rejection of the whole body of the people, in case of unbelief and disobedience, upon the full and perfect revelation that was to be made of the will and mind of God

upon the coming of the Messiah, Deut. xviii. 18. Acts iii. 32. Hos. ii. 23. Isa. x. 22, 23. Rom. ix.

These are the heads of the punishments, which God took upon himself to inflict in an extraordinary manner, on the transgressors of the law, that is, on those who transgressed with a high hand; for his covenant was thus made void as to all the ends of its re-establishment in the administration of the law.

§ 13. The second sort of penalties annexed to the transgression of the law, were such as men, by God's institution and appointment, were enabled to inflict; concerning which we must consider, first, who and what the persons were, who were empowered and authorized to inflict these penalties. Secondly, of what sort these penalties were, and for what transgressions they were necessarily inflicted.

§ 14. The original division of the people, after the days of Jacob, was into a tribes. Of these there were at first twelve, which by the division of the tribe of Joseph into two, were increased to thirteen; but as to possessions in Canaan, they were again reduced to twelve, by the special exemption of the tribe of Levi from inheritances, and their separation to the

בתו. אבות families, or משפחות,worship of God. Secondly

houses of fathers, which for many probable reasons may be supposed to have been seventy, the number of them who went down with Jacob into Egypt, each of which constituted a particular family. And on, particular households, all which are enumerated, Josh. vii. 14. This distribution, and this alone, continued among the people while they were in Egypt, as they had no opportunity of there adopting any civil order, by reason of their oppressions: they therefore contented themselves with that which was natural. Accordingly, there were three sorts of persons that were in some kind of dignity and pre-eminence among the people, although after their oppressions began, these were probably hindered from exercising the authority that belonged to them. First, As to the tribes, there were some who were now, the princes or heads of the tribes, Num. i. 16. Twelve in number according to the number of the tribes. Secondly, For the families, or principal houses of the fathers, there were up, the elders who presided over them. These Moses and Aaron gathered together, at their first coming into Egypt, Exod. iv. 29. And these, as I said before, being the rulers of the first families, were probably in number seventy; from whence afterwards was the constitution of seventy elders for rule, Exod. xxiv. 1. Thirdly, , or priests, it may be in every private household the first born, which are mentioned, and so called before the constitution of the Aaronical. priesthood, Exod. xix. 21. Besides these, there were officers who attended the service of the whole people, as to the execution of

justice and order, called ", Shoterim, which we have rendered by the general name of officers, Exod. v. 14. And they are afterwards distinguished from the elders and judges, Deut. xvi. 18. For there are two sorts of persons mentioned, that were over the people in respect of their works, even in Egypt, an, exactors or taskmasters, and now, officers, Exod. v. 6. The former, or the Nogheshim, the Jews say, were Egyptians, and the latter, or the Shoterim, Israelites, which occasions that distinct expression of them: "Pharaoh commanded the same day the task-masters of the people and their officers;" and ver. 13, 14." And the task-masters hasted them, saying, Fulfil your works, and the officers of the children of Israel were beaten.' And they tell us in Midrash Rabba, on Exod. sect. 1. that one of the Nogheshim was over ten of the Israelitish officers, and that one of these was over ten Israelites; whence was the following division of the people into tens and hundreds, and to this in the same place, they add a trifling story of an exactor killed by Moses.

§ 15. Respecting the authority of these officers, and how it was executed by them in Egypt, there is nothing recorded. Probably, at the beginning of their works and afflictions they were made use of only to answer for the pretended neglects or miscarriages of the multitude of their brethren, as Exod. v. 14.

After their coming up out of Egypt, during their abode in the wilderness, Moses presided with all manner of authority over the people, as their lawgiver, king and judge. He judged and determined all their causes, as is frequently affirmed, and that alone, until by the advice of Jethro, he took others to his assistance, Exod. xv. 16. 25. And there is mention of four particular cases that he determined. One religious, one civil, and two capital relating to religion; in these he made special enquiry of God. The first was about the unclean that would keep the passover, Numb. ix. 7, 8. The second about the daughters of Zelophehad, who claimed their inheritance, Num. xxvii. 4, 5. The third about the blasphemer, Lev. xxiv. The last about him that profaned the Sabbath, Numb. xv. 32-34. In which also, as the Jews say, he set a pattern to future judges, as determining the lesser causes speedily, but those wherein blood was concerned, not without stay and much deJiberation.

§ 16. In the wilderness the people were classed into divisions of thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens, over each of which there were peculiar officers or rulers, chosen from amongst themselves, Exod. xviii. 25. Deut. i. 13, 14. And Moses is said to choose them, because being chosen by the people, he approv ed of them, as the places foregoing compared, do manifest. The greater number of each of these divisions, settling together VOL. I.

in the cities or towns of Canaan, however they might afterward be multiplied or decreased, continued to be called by the names of the thousands of Israel, or Judah. So Bethlehem Ephratah is said to be little among the thousands of Judah, Micah v. 2. For one of those thousands, which had a special head and ruler, and a distinct government, as to their own separate concerns, had settled at Bethlehem, which colony afterwards variously flourished or drew towards a decay.

17. After these things the great court of the Sanhedrim was constituted by the appointment of God. But as we have elsewhere treated of this, and of those lesser courts of justice which were instituted in imitation of it, sufficiently for our purpose, I shall here wholly omit the consideration of it. Neither shall I need to mention the judges raised up in an extraordinary manner by God, for the general rule of the whole people. Nor need we treat of their kings continued by succession in the family of David, because their story in general is sufficiently known, and the particular consideration of their power, with the manner of the administration of it, would draw us too far out of the way of our present design. And these are they to whom the Lord in their several generations committed the execution of those punishments, that he had allotted to the transgression of the law.

§ 18. The penalties themselves with the special causes of them are lastly to be considered. And these in general were of two sorts. First, ecclesiastical: secondly, civil. Ecclesiastical pehalties were the authoritative exclusion of an offending person from the society of the church, and the members of it. That such an exclusion is prescribed in the law in sundry cases, hath in several instances been by others evidenced. Many disputes also have been about it, both concerning the causes of it, the authority whereby it was done, with its ends and effects. But these things are not for our present consideration, as we intend only to represent things as they are in facto instituted or observed.

§ 19. Of this exclusion, the Jews commonly make three degrees, and that not without some countenance from the Scripture. The first they call, Niddui. The second, Cherem; and the third now Shammatha. That which they call Niddui, from 7, to expel, to separate to cast off, is with the most of them the first and lowest degree of this separation and exclusion. And the persons who are to pronounce this sentence and put it into execution, are according to the Jews, any court from the highest Sanhedrim of seventy-one at Jerusalem, to the meanest in their synagogues. Yea, any ruler of a synagogue, or wise man in authority, might according to them, do the same thing. And many ridiculous stories they have about