Matthew 19

ANd it came to pass, that when Jesus had finished these sayings, he departed from Galilee, and came into the coasts of Judea, beyond Jordan.

And great multitudes followed him, and he healed them there. Most Interpreters agree that both Mark Ch. 10.1. & Luk. Ch. 9.51. make mention of the same motion of our Saviour out of Galilee, into the Province of Iudea, which is here expressed, tho Luke and Iohn mention something largely, some things done in the way, of which Matthew speaketh not. He departed from Galilee: Our Saviour had hitherto spent his time mostly in Galilee, the Country of the Iews was divided into three Provinces. Galilee, Samaria, and Iudea: Galilee was the more Northerly part of the Country. And was divided into the upper Galilee, which is also called Galilee of the Gentiles, Mat. 4.15. and the lower Galilee, which was Contiguous to it, but lay more Southerly, and adjoyned to Samaria: Our Saviour dwelt at Nazareth a long time. Corazin, Bethsaida, Capernaum, were all Cities of Galilee. He is now taking his leave of this Province, into which he never returned more. His next way into Iudea, lay through Samaria (for Samaria lay in the middle, betwixt Galilee and Iudea) and through part of it he did go, for Luk. 9.52. some Inhabitants of a Village belonging to the Samaritanes refused to receive him. He came into the Coasts of Iudea beyond Iordan. This Phrase has caused some Difficulty to Interpreters, because Iudea was bounded by Iordan and had no Coasts beyond it. Some say, that the term beyond Iordan must be applyed to, he came, he came beyond Iordan, to the Coasts of Iudea. Others say, that as Men came out of Egypt, the Coasts of Iudea were beyond Iordan, Mat. 4.15. But some think it should be there translated, By Iordan: The word signifies any Border, or side of a Border, Beyond Iordan: Therefore is on the Border of Iordan, and possibly were better translated so, seeing the Word will bear it, and there were no Coasts of Iudea beyond Iordan: It is probable, that our Saviour coming out of Galilee into Samaria, kept on the left hand near to Iordan, till he came into Iudea, which also bordered on that River. Wherever he went great multitudes followed him, but more for Healing their Bodies, or for the Loaves, than for the Feeding, or Healing of their Souls; so different is most peoples Sense of their Bodily and Spiritual wants. He Healed them the Text says, but it says not, They believed in him.

The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? Our Saviour, tho yet at some distance from Ierusa em, yet was come into that Province, where the Pharisees had the greatest Power, and were in greater Numbers: Now they come to him, Tempting him, where the Word Tempting, rather signifies generally making a Tryal of him, than strictly, Solliciting him to sin, they came (as appeareth by their Question) to make a Tryal, whether they could intrap him, and ge any Determination from him of a point, for which they might accuse him. The Question they propound to him is: Whether it be Lawful for a Man to put away his Wife for every Cause? The Word here translated Cause; signifieth not Cause, or Occasion, but Crime also. So it may be translated Crime, but they did not only put away their Wives for Crimes, but upon any occasion, in abuse of that Text. Deut. 24.1. When a Man has taken a Wife and Married her, and it come to pass that she find no Favour in his Eyes, because he has found some uncleanness in her: Which the Pharisees had interpreted, of any kind of Deformity or natural Infirmity, not merely of Moral uncleanness. Had our Saviour now answered, Yes, he had Contradicted what he had formerly delivered, Ch. 5.32. had he denied, they had Trapped him as Contradicting the Law of Moses, Deut. 24.1. (according to their Interpretation of it) So they had had whereof to accuse him.

And he answered, and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he who made them at the beginning, made them male and female.

And said, For this cause, shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they twain shall be one lesh.

Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh, What therefore God has joyned together let no man put asunder. Mark Ch. 10.2, 3, 4. giveth us the same History of this Discourse, differing a little in the Order of the Words; but nothing as to the substance of his Discourse. Our Saviour answereth neither Yea nor Nay to their Discourse but gives them a fair occasion to answer themselves, and Tacitly chargeth them with Ignorance, and Corruption of the Law of God. He re erreth them to the first Institution of Marriage, and for that to the Book of Genesis, Ch. 1.27. & 2.24. It is as much as if our Lord had said: You own the Book of Genesis, as well as the Book of Deutronomy. In the Book of Genesis, you read the first Institution of Marriage, it was instituted by God himself; he made Male and Female, Gen. 1.27. he made the Law of Marriage, Gen. 2.24. that a Man should leave his Father and Mother, and cleave to his Wife, and they should be one Flesh, from whence he concludeth that the Man and Wife are one Flesh in Gods Account; from hence he leaves them to conclude, whether it was probable, that Moses, whom they so reverenced, and who was so Faithful in the House of God, as a Servant, would License them to put asunder, whom God had put together: Or, whether they had not put an Interpretation upon the Law of Moses, which it could not bear, in Consistency with the Law of God. For the Sense of those Words, Gen. 1.27. & Ch. 2.24. See the Notes on those places.

They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorce, and to put her away?

He says unto them, Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. Mark reports this a little differently, Ch. 10.3. As if Christ had first said unto them. What did Moses command you? And they said Moses suffered to write a Bill of Divorcement, and to send her away. And Iesus answered, and said. For the hardness of your Heart, he wrote you this Precept, &c. The substance of our Saviours answer seemeth to be this. Moses gave you no positive Command in the Case, he could not make a Law directly opposite to the Law of my Father. But Moses saw the Wantonness, and Wickedness of your Hearts, that you would turn away your Wives without any just and warrantable Cause, and to restrain your Extravagancies, of Cruelty to your Wives, or disorderly turning them off upon any occasion; he made a Law that none should put away his Wife, but upon a Legal Cognizance of the Cause, and giving her a Bill of Divorce. Indeed possibly this Bill of Divorce was sometimes judicially granted upon irregular Causes, and Moses might connive at it, for the preventing of greater Evils, because you were always an hard Hearted, and Stiff-necked people; and you by your Traditions have expounded that Law, beyond Moses his Intention, and made a Bill of Divorce grantable in Cases which he never thought of, nor intended in that Law. But the measures of Lawfulness, are neither to be taken from Moses his Temporary Toleration and Connivence, nor much less from your Traditions, and Expositions of the Law of Moses, but from the Original Institution of Marriage, and from Gods Original Law relating to it; now God at first made but one Woman for one Man, and so united them, that he stiled them one Flesh: So as he, who puts away his Wife, does as twere divide, and tear his own Flesh piece from piece, which is Barbarous, Inhumane, and unnatural. And the Law of God was not, that a Man should forsake his Wife, when ever he had a mind to it, but that he should rather forsake his Father and Mother than his Wife, that he should cleave to his Wife living, and dwelling with her, as a Man of knowledge, not hating his own Flesh, Loving his Wife, as his own Body, Loving and Cherishing her, Eph. 5.28.29. Now how can this possibly consist with a Mans putting away his Wife, upon every little and trivial Cause of Offence, or dislike unto her.

And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and who so marrieth her that is put away, does commit adultery. We met with the like Determination of our Lords upon this Question, Ch. 5.32. only there it was [instead of committeth Adultery] causeth her to commit Adultery, that is in Case she Married again: Here our Lord says, the like of the Husband, we have the same, Mar. 10, 11. Luk. 16.18. The reason is this, because nothing but Adultery dissolveth the Knot, and band of Marriage. Tho they be thus illegally separated, yet according to the Law of God, they are still Man and Wife: Some have upon these Words made a Question, whether it be Lawful for the Husband, or the Wife separated for Adultery, to Marry again while each other Liveth: As to the party offending, it may be a Question, but as to the innocent Person offended, it is no Question, for the Adultery of the Person offending, has dissolved the Knot of Marriage by the Divine Law. It is true, that the Knot cannot be dissolved, without the Freedom of both Persons, each from another, but yet it seemeth against Reason, that both Persons should have the like Liberty to a second Marriage. For, 1. The Adulteress, is by Gods Law a dead Woman, and so in no Capacity to a second Marriage. 2. It is unreasonable that she should make an Advantage of her own sin, and Error. 3. This might be the occasion of Adultery, to give a wicked Person a legal Liberty to satisfie an Extravagant Lust. But for the innocent Person, it is as unreasonable, that he or she should be punished for the sin of another. But what our Saviour says here, and in the other parallel Texts, is undoubtedly to be understood, of Husbands, and Wives, put away not for Adultery, but for other light and trivial Causes, for which by the Law of God no Divorce is allowed.

His discples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, It is not good to marry. This is a very strange Saying, and discovers us, both the imperfect state of Christ's Disciples, and also the Tyranny of a sinful Practice grown up into a Custom. The Iews had assumed a Liberty of turning their Wives out of Doors, upon every light and trivial Offence, or dislike, the Disciples think; if this Licentiousness may not be allowed, it is not good to Marry. So an Holy Institution of God ordained for the Propagation of mankind, for the restraint of Extravagant Lust, and for the Solace and Comfort of Mans Life, should be despised, rather than those unquiet Lusts, and Corruptions mortified, the Mortification of which, would have made those irregular Separations both needless, and undesirable. Surely they should rather have said: If the Case of a Man be so with his Wife then both Husbands and Wives, had need to learn to deny themselves, to comply each with another, to silence their Brutish, and boisterous Passions, that being the same Flesh, they might also have one and the same Spirit, and not be like a diseased piece of Flesh, where Humours so Quarrel, that one piece need be cut off to preserve the other. But the best of Men have their Infirmities, and as the Hebrews said, Spiritus dei non semper tangit corda prophetarum. The Spirit of God was not always upon the Hearts of the Prophets. So it is as true, Spiritus Dei, non semper & ubi que tangit corda fidelium. All that the Saints say is not Gospel. Their flesh has its turn to speak, as well as the Spirit in them. A sinful Liberty conceded, indulged, or connived at, by the Laws, or by the Rulers of a Church, or Place where we Live, for a long time, is not easily restrained, and even good Men may for a time be carried away with the Error of it, so as they cannot discern it, be Convinced of it, or be brought clearly of it to a Conformity to the Will of God.

But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.

For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mothers womb, And there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: And there be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven sake, He that is able to receive it, let him receive it. Our Saviour knowing the sinful Custom, and Practice of the Jewish Nation now for many years, and giving some allowance for that, and his Disciples infirmities, so he does not answer them severely, as what they said might deserve, but reproves them gently; what he says amounts to thus much, you do not consider what you say. All men without sinning against God, cannot abstain from Marriage. An Ability to live chastly without the use of Marriage, is a peculiar Gift of God, and your saying has no place in Persons, to whom God has not given that Gift, For it is better to Marry than to Burn. There are some whom God by Nature has made unfit for Marriage. There are others whom Men (wickedly) make unfit for it, that they may gratifie their own Jealousie. (Thus several Courtiers were made Eunuchs, and so betrusted with the Care of Princes Wives and Concubines.) And there are some who have made themselves Eunuchs (not castrating themselves, that is wickedness) but abstaining from Marriage, and yet living Chastly (having mortified their Lusts, and brought under their Body) that they might be less incumbred with the Cares of the World, and be more free for the work of the Ministry, or be able more to give up themselves to an Holy Life and spiritual Conversation. But God, who by his Ordinance of Marriage designed to People, and continue the World, has given to Persons different Tempers and Constitutions: So as possibly the most of Men and Women, cannot without making use of Marriage govern their Lusts. As to these, Marriage is not a matter of Choice and Deliberation, and they may, and ought to use it as an appointment of God, for the ends for which he has instituted it. If there be any who can receive this Saying, who can without Marriage bridle his Lust, and so live in a solute and single state, as not to sin against God, by any Extravagancy of Lusts, and impure Desires and Affections, and desire, and shall do so, that he may be more spiritual, and serve God with less distraction, and be a more fit Instrument to promove the Kingdom of God in the World, let him do it.

Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them and pray, and the disciples rebuked them. Mark says, Ch. 10.13. and Luke says, Ch. 18.15. they were brought that he should Touch them. A doubt may from this Text arise in the Readers mind, for what purpose the Parents, or Nurses did bring these young Children to Christ. It was not for Baptism, for he Baptized none himself, Ioh. 4.2. It is not like it was for Healing, for tho our Saviour in such Cases did sometimes Touch, or lay his Hand upon the sick Persons; yet it is not likely, that in that Case the Disciples would have rebuked them, knowing that their Master used to heal such as were brought to him. It must therefore unquestionably be, that he might Bless them, Matthew here says that he might put his Hands on them and pray. The putting of Hands upon Persons, when they Blessed them, or Prayed for a Blessing on Persons, was a very usual Rite and Custom amongst the Iews. Without all Contradiction (says the Apostle, Heb. 7.7. The lesser was Blessed of the greater.) It was a Custom amongst the Iews to bring Persons, to those whom they lookt upon as Excelling in Holiness, to be blessed and commended to God by their Prayers, Gen. 27.4, & 48.14. The Parents, or Nurses of these Children by this Act declared, that they looked upon Christ as some great Prophet, in Favour with God; and whose Prayers could prevail with God, and whose Blessing was considerable as to these little ones. The Disciples rebuked them: as thinking they were too troublesome to their Ma er, and not understanding what Children in Health had to do with their Master, nor perhaps having before seen such a President.

But Jesus said, Suffer little children and forbid them not to come unto me: For of such is the kingdom of heaven.

And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence. Both Mark and Luke, add something to this Story. Mark says, Ch. 10.14. When Iesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said, Suffer the little Children to come to me, and forbid them not; for of such is the Kingdom of God: Verily I say unto you, whosoever shall not receive the Kingdom of God, as a little Child, he shall not enter therein. And he took them up in his Arms, put his Hands upon them and Blessed them. Luke says the same, Ch. 18.15. only he says. He called them unto him, and leaves out what Mark has, v. 16. of Christ taking them up in his Arms, putting his Hands upon them, and Blessing them. From this Text, Divines will prove the Baptism of Children, because theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven; which whether we understand of the Church, and the Dispensation of the Grace of Christ under the Gospel, viz. That the Gospel-Church is made up of Infants, as well as more adult Persons, or that the Grace of Christ under the Gospel, viz. Remission of sins through the Blood of Christ, does belong to some Children, as well as to grown Persons: Or, of the Kingdom of Glory, viz. Children shall go to Heaven, as well as grown Persons. The Argument is well drawn from this Text: Those who have a right to a Member-ship in the Church, are to be Baptized: Or, those who have a right to the Kingdom of Glory may be Baptized. But one or both of these are affirmed in this Text. We must take heed, we do not found Infant-Baptism, upon the Example of Christ in this Text, for it is certain that he did not Baptise these Children, Mark only says, he took them into his Arms, laid his Hands on them, and Blessed them. The Argument for Infant-Baptism, from this Text is founded upon his Words, uttered on this occasion, not upon his Practice. Mark addeth, that our Saviour told them, That unless a Man received the Kingdom of God as a little Child, he could not enter into it. But we opened those words before, Mat. 18.3. where we met with the same in Effect.

And behold one came and said unto him, Good master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? This History is reported by Mark, Ch. 10. from v. 17. to v. 23. and by Luke, Ch. 18. from v. 18. to v. 24. Mark says, When he was gone forth into the way, there came one running and kneeled to him, and asked him: Good Master! What may I do, that I may inherit Eternal Life? Luke says, A certain Ruler asked him: Our Lord was now in his way from Galilee to Iudea, and to Ierusalem. There cometh a Person, a Ruler, whether of some of the Synagogues, or in some place of Civil Magestracy, the Scripture says not. He runs, he kneeleth to him (p ying him at le t a Civil Homage, as to his Superiour) he salutes him with the ordinary Title, they gave to their Teachers: Master, Good Master, he propoundeth a Grave Question to him, what he should do that he might get to Heaven But yet, he does not propound the Question in those terms; but, What good thing should I do, that I may have Eternal Life? It appeareth, by his respe t showed to Christ at his coming, and by the Question proposed, and by his going away sorrowful, when our Saviours Answer did not satisfie him, that he did not come upon any C ptio s design to entrap our Saviour, but out of a Desire to learn; but yet, it appeareth plainly, that he was a Pharisee, or a Disciple of the Pharisees, and though his Life was in his own Hands, that he had a Power in himself to do so e good thing, by which he might merit Eternal Life, or upon the doing of which, he might at least obtain Everlasting Life; tho not as a strict reward for his Work, without any Consideration of a Messias: He grants an Eternal state, he declares his Desire of an Eternal Happiness, he declareth his Readiness to do some Good thing, that he might obtain it.

And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, * that is God: But if thou wilt enter into life keep the commandements. Mark omitteth the latter Clause, and only says, Thou knowest the Commandements: So says Luke, Ch. 18. v. 19, 20. Our Saviours design here was, not to show this young Man by this Answer, the way by which it was possible, that he or any other might come to Heaven, but only to convince him of the Errors of the Pharasaical Doctrine; they would not own Christ to be God, nor to be come forth from God, They taught Eternal Life to be obtainable by the Works of the Law and by a fulfilling of the Law, according to that imperfect Sense which they gave of it, of which we heard much, Ch. 5. Now (says our Saviour.) Seeing you will not own me to be God, nor yet to have come from God, why callest thou me good? There is none Originally, E sentially, and absolutely good, but God: There is none Derivatively good, but he deriveth his Goodness from God. How callest thou me Good, whom thou wilt neither own to be God, nor to derive from God? But if thou wilt enter into Life, keep the Commandements. This was the Doctrine of the Pharisees: That men might keep the Commandements. Says our Saviour, the way to Eternal Life according to your Doctrine, is plain before thee: You say, Men may perfectly keep the Commandements of God. He that does so shall be saved. Therefore keep the Commandements: Not that our Saviour thought he could do it or that there did lye a passable Road to Heaven, that way, bu that he might convince him of his Error, and the need he had a Saviour.

He says unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness.

Honour thy Father, and thy Mother Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self. Mark addeth: Defraud not, Ch. 10.19. but Luke does not put in, Ch. 18.20. Three things we may observe. 1. There are no Commandements mentioned, but those of the second Table. 2. Nor are they reckoned up in Order. 3. The tenth Commandement is expressed by: Thou shalt Love thy Neighbour as thy self: Which elsewhere our Saviour calls the second great Commandement, and makes Comprehensive of all the Commandements of the second Table. We must not from our Saviours order here, in the Enumeration of the Commandements, either conclude, that the Precepts of the second Table, are greater than those of the first, or that it is enough to keep them, in order to Eternal Life: Nor yet, that the fifth Commandement is lesser than the sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, because it is put after them. But, 1. Our Saviour had reckoned up Commandements enough to convince this Man, that he could not by keeping the Commandements hope for Eternal Life. 2. He had reckoned those by some, of which he intended by and by to convince him, that he had not kept the Commandements. 3. And those of the Non-Observation, of which it was most easie to convince him. 4. The Pharisees lookt upon these, as the most Vulgar and easie Commandements. 5. Because Love to our Neighbour, is an excellent Evidence of our Love to God. As concerning the Order, in which they are Enumerated: It was not our Saviours business here to show which was the greatest Commandement, that he has elsewhere determined; calling, Thou shalt Love the Lord thy God with all thy Heart, &c. the first and great Commandement, here he is not Sollicitous about the Order.

The young man says unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up, what lack I yet? Those words, What lack I yet? Are no in Mark or Luke. The young Man understood these Commandements, according to the Pharisees Interpretation of them, who as we heard, Ch. 5. interpreted them only as prohibiting the Overt-Acts, not the inward Lusts and Motions of the Heart, together with the means, or occasions leading to such Acts. Paul says, He had not known Lust, if the Law had not said, Thou shalt not Covet, Rom. 7.7. Men that deceive themselves with false Glosses, and Interpretations may think they keep the Commandements of God and be very confident of a Righteousness in themselves. But it is impo sible others should be so: What l ck I yet? He expected Christ should have set him some new Task and was not aware, that he only wanted a better knowledge and understanding of the Law, to convince him of his mistake.

Jesus says unto him, If thou wilt be perfect Go, and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come, and follow me. Mark repeats it thus, Ch. 10.21. Then Iesus beholding him, loved him. And said unto him, One thing thou lackest. Go thy way, sell, whatsoever thou hast and give to the Poor, and thou shalt have Treasure in Heaven, and come, take up thy Cross, and follow me. Luk. ch. 18.22. repeats it as Matthew, only e begins it with, One thing thou lackest Mark says, that Iesus beholding him loved him, not with a special saving Love, for he sent him away sad, upon his going, he tells his Disc ples, that it was a very hard thing for a Rich man to come to Heaven, he tells him, One thing was wanting to him; but he loved him with such a common Love, as he loveth all his Creatures with, and more especially, such as are better than others All that can be concluded from hence is: Th Acts of moral Righteousness are pleasing to God. He says to him, If thou wilt be perfect: That is, in keeping the Commandements of God. The Papist make a great deal of stir to found upon this Text, their Councels of Perfection. As if Christ here were advising only the young Man, to do something beyond what the Law strictly required, in Order to a more perfect state than others. But that this cannot be the Sense of the Words will appear to him, who will diligently consider, 1. That this had been needless for our Saviour, for directing the young Man to keep the Commandements, in Order to his obtaining Everlasting Life, had sufficiently declared, that the keeping o the Commandements was Perfection enough. 2. He says, One thing is want ing to thee: That is, in Order to thy obtaining Everlasting Life, which had not been true, if our Saviour had granted him to have kept all the Commandements, for he had before let him know, that the keeping them was sufficient. Our Saviour therefore, by this Speech only indeavours to convince him, that he had not all the Commandements. But it may be objected, How ould that be? For there was no Commandement that him to go sell all that he had, and give to the Poor: I answer: There was a Commandement, That he should Love the Lord his God with all his Heart, and Soul, and Strength, which he could not do, unless he had an Heart ready to obey any Command God should lay upon him, which our Saviour puts upon the Tryal, by this special Precept. 2. There was a Commandement, that he should Love his Neighbour as himself, and that he should not Covet. Now not to be ready at the Commandement of God, liberally to relieve the poor Members of Christ, argued a Covetous mind; more in Love with his Estate, than with God: So as though this was not before specially Commanded, yet it was Commanded generally, and that he would have understood, had he rightly understood the Law of God; especially, having such a Promise annexed, as thou shalt have Treasure in Heaven. 3. Nor must all the Command be taken to be included in those Words, Go sell all that thou hast, and give to the Poor, but the following Words must also be taken in. And come, and take up the Cross, and follow me. Perfection here, is not made to lye in a Voluntary Poverty only, but in coming after, and following of Christ with a free taking up of the Cross. In short: No man can be perfect in keeping the Commandements of God. That does not love God with all his Heart, Soul, and Strength: Nor can any Man pretend to this, that has not an Heart ready to obey God in all things, whether more generally, or more specially Commanded. Nor can any man fulfil the Duty of the second Table without first fulfilling the Duties of the first; for if our Love to our Neighbour flow not from a Love to God, it is no Act of Obedience, and Consequently no fulfilling the Law, which is not fulfilled by mere doing the external Duty of it, but by doing what is required in it, out of an Obedience unto God, which cannot be without a first loving God.

But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions. Mark says the same, Ch. 10.22. So does Luke, Ch. 18.23. He was sorry, that he had ever propounded the Question, or that the terms were such, as his covetous Heart could not comply with. He would have had Heaven, if he could have had it cheap: Or it may be, he would have parted with something for it, but to Sell all was an hard Saying! Or he was sorry to see himself so confuted, and convinced, that whatsoever he Dreamed, he had not kept the Commandements, and had not an Heart prepared to obey God in one thing. It is not said, Because he loved his great Possessions, but, for he had great Possessions: Yet the first is intended. It is an hard thing for us to have a great Concern in the World, and not to love it more than God. He went away, he would hear no more of that Discourse: How many would have Heaven, if they might have it upon their own terms? How few are willing to come up to Gods terms? How false and deceitful are our Hearts? They will persuade us we have done all, when indeed we have done nothing, nor are prepared to do any thing in Truth and Sincerity? We are not Perfect, something is wanting to us, till To Will, to do whatsoever God requireth of us, be present with us, tho, when it comes too, we may want strength to perform.

Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, that a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

And again I say unto you, it is easier for a Camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. Mark says, Ch. 10.23. And Iesus looked round about, and said to his Disciples. How hardly shall they that have Riches enter into the Kingdom of God. And the Disciples were astonished at his Words, but Iesus answereth again, and says unto them. Children! How hard is it for them that trust in Riches, to enter into the Kingdom of God? It is easier for a Camel to go through the Eye of a Needle, than for a Rich man to enter into the Kingdom of God. Luke says, Ch. 18.24. And when Iesus saw that he was sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have Riches enter into the Kingdom of God? For it is easier for a Camel to go through a Needles Eye, than for a Rich man to enter into the Kingdom of God. Our Lord, seeing the young Man that came to him so briskly, with such a Zeal for his Soul, and appearing warmth of Desire, to be instructed in the right way to Heaven, and asking for a Task to be set him: First, what good thing he should do in Order to that end, then calling for more; when our Saviour had reckoned up some Commandements to be observed. What lack I yet, Says he? Go away quite dampt and sorrowful, when our Saviour said not to him. Give thy Body to be burned, no nor yet, cut off a right Hand, or Foot, or pluck out a right Eye. Only part with some of thy Circumstances, Sell what thou hast and give to the Poor. A thing he might have done, and have been a Man still perfect; both as to his Essential, and Integral parts. He hence takes occasion to Discourse with his Disciples, the danger of Riches, and the ill influence they have upon mens Souls, with Relation to their Eternal Welfare. Luke and Mark say, he spake it by way of Question. How hardly? Matthew delivereth it as spoken positively. A Rich m n shall hardly enter, &c. The Sense is the same, only the Interrogation seems to aggravate the Difficulty, and to fortifie the Affirmation, as much as to say, A Rich man shall very hardly enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. The Disciples were astonished at this (says Mark) which made our Saviour say it over again, with a little Exposition. How hard is it for them that trust in Riches, to enter into the Kingdom of God? Which Exposition is so far from a Correction, or Abatement of the severity of his former Speech, that some Judge it rather a Confirmation of it, for he goes on with saying: It is easier for a Camel to go through the Eye of a Needle. But why should this astonish the Disciples, who had no reason upon this Account to Fear for themselves, who had forsaken all to follow Christ? Possibly, because it was so contrary to the common Opinion of the World, who did not only as in Malachys time, call the Proud Happy; but thought God had scarce any Favour for any but the Rich: In opposition to which Christ, Luk. 6.20.24. Blesseth the Poor, and pronounceth Woes to the Rich, as having received their Consolation. As to the Words themselves. The design of our Saviour in them, was not to condemn Riches, as in themselves Damnable; nor yet to deny Salvation to all Rich Persons: Our Lord knew, that Abraham, Isaac, Iacob, Iob, were all Rich Persons, and yet in Heaven, so was David and Solomon, &c. He also knew, that Riches are the Gifts of God, Good things, not in themselves Pernicious: His design was only to show, That they are dangerous Temptations, Solliciting and entising our Hearts, into so great a Love of them, and Affection to them, as is not consistent with our Duty, with reference to God; and giving the Heart of Man such Advantages for the Lusts of Pride, Coveteousness, Ambition, Oppression, Luxury, (some or other, of which are Predominate in all Souls) that it is very hard for a Rich man, so far to deny himself, as to do what he must do, if ever he will be saved. For those words in Mark, Them that trust in Riche. I take them rather, to give the reason of the Difficulty, than to be an Abatement of what he had before said. For to trust in Riches, is to place an Happiness in them, to Promise our selves a security from them, so as to be careless of a further H ppiness Psal. 49.6. & 52.7. 1 Tim. 6.17. That which makes it so hard for a Rich man to be saved, is the Difficulty of having Riches, and not placing our Felicity in them, being secure; because of them, and having our Hearts cleave unto them, so as we cannot deny our selves in them, to obey any Command of God: And the suffering them to be Temptations to us, to Pride, Luxury, Ambition, Oppression, Contempt, and Despising of others, Coveteousness, &c. Upon these Accounts our Saviour goeth on and says. It is easier for a Camel to go through the Eye of a Needle, than for a Rich man to enter into the Kingdom of God. Which doubtless was a Proverbial Expression in use, then amongst the Iews, to signifie a thing of great Difficulty, by terms importing impo sibility: Or, else the Phrase may signifie an impossibility, without the extraordinary influence of Divine Grace, as our Saviour seemeth to expound it in the next Verses.

When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, who then can be saved?

But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. Mark says, They were astonished out of Measure saying among themselves, &c. All three Evangelists agree in the same substance of the other Words. But why are the Disciples amazed? Or, why do they say, who then can be saved? Are there not in all places more Poor than Rich Persons: The Disciples might reasonably conclude, that Poor Persons were by their Poverty also exposed to many great and dangerous Temptations, that even they, tho they had not Riches, yet might too much place Felicity in them, and Covet what they had not; and from hence Collect a Difficulty for any to get to Heaven. Our Saviour says unto them, With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. If men indeed were left all to themselves, none would be saved, the Black-a-Moor cannot change his skin, nor the Leopard his Spots. But God can bring men to Heaven, by the mighty Power of his Grace, he can change a Rich mans Heart, and take it off from too much Love of Riches, and make him to despise and contemn his Wealth, and to put his Trust in the living God: Or, a Poor mans Heart, and make him also Poor in Spirit, and Rich in Grace.

Then answered Peter, and said unto him, Behold we have forsaken all, and followed thee, what shall we have therefore?

And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Mark and Luke repeateth the Words of Peter in part, but neither of them have this part of our Lords answer, particularly respecting his Apostles. We heard before, Ch. 4.18.21. of Peter, and Andrew, and Iames, and Iohns forsaking all, and following of Christ, when he called them, the others doubt ss did the same: Peter observing, that our Saviour laid not the stress of Mens Salvation, either upon Riches, or Poverty, but upon the Frame of Mens Spirits, their Humility, Self-denyal, their Obedience to, and readiness to follow him; rejoyneth these Words, and says, We have forsaken all, and followed thee, what shall we have? Some think, that he had an Expectation of something in this Life, according to the Notion which the other Iews had, and it is Apparant, the Disciples had some Tincture of a secular Kingdom, which the Messias should Exercise. But considering our Lords former Discourse, could not be so interpreted, and the Disciples question, Who then can be saved? I cannot agree that. And for the same reason I cannot agree, that the coming of the Son of Man in his Glory, mentioned v. 28. should be understood of his coming in his Mediatory Kingdom, (as some would have it) but of his last coming, which is most properly called, The coming of the Son of Man in his Glory, mentioned, 1 Thes. 4.15, 16, 17. Iud. & 14. and that the thing here Promised to the Apostles, is not a preference in the Church, but a further Degree of Honour, and Glory in the Day of Judgment. You which have followed me in the Regeneration: That is at this time, while I have been by my Doctrine Reforming the World. In the Regeneration of my Church, while I have been putting it into a new State. Some make those Words, In the Regeneration, to refer to the next Words. In the Regeneration: That is, In the day of Iudgment, when Christ shall come in his Glory. The Apostle indeed, Acts 3.21. calleth that day, The time of the Restitution of all things. And the Prophet speaks of it, as the time of the New Heavens, and New Earth, Is. 66.22. So does the Apostle, 2 Pet. 3.13. and Iohn, in Rev. 21.1. It is not much material, to which part we apply the term. You that have followed me: That is, who have followed, and shall go on and follow me, for this Promise cannot belong to Iudas the Son of Perdition: You shall sit upon twelve Thrones. Iudges and Princes use to have Assessors, that sit with them in Judgment. He mentions twelve Thrones, because he had now twelve Disciples, his Apostles, and tho afterward Iudas fell away, yet Mathias succeeded, Acts 1.26. So as the twelve Thrones shall not be empty; but filled up with twelve that followed Christ (for such a one was Mathias Acts 1.21.) Iudging the twelve Tribes of Israel. Tho the Tribes were thirteen, yet they usually went under the Notion of twelve, because Levi was not counted, as having no particular Possession: That is, judging the Iews for their Unbelief, and not reception of me: Judging others also but Judgment shall begin at the House of God. Doubtless this Promise imports, that the Apostles shall have a higher place in Glory at the great Day than ordinary Believers: yet the Apostle says the Saints shall Iudge the World, 1 Cor. 6.2.

And every one, that has forsaken houses or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or, children, or, lands, for my name sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life. Mark says, Ch. 10.29, 30, 31.—For my sake, and the Gospels. And he shall receive an Hundred-fold, now in this time, Houses, and Brethren, and Sisters, and Mothers, and Children, and Lands, with Persec tions, and in the World to come, Life Everlasting, Luke says, Ch. 18.29.—For the Kingdom of Gods sake: Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the World to come Life Everlasting. The words are a liberal Promise, and we must consider, 1. To whom it is made. 2. Of what it is. The former Promise respected the Apo tles, and was special, as appears by the number of twelve Thrones. This respecteth all those, that should forsake any thing. Houses, Brethren, Lands, Sisters, Fathers, Mothers, Wife, Children, for Christ: Which is expre by three Phrases for my Names sake, for the Gospel sake, for the Kingdom of Gods sake. (All of the same import,) rather than they will forsake me, and the Profession of my Gospel, rather than they will sin against God. The Promise is, 1. Of an Hundred-fold in this Life. 2. Of Eternal Life. We must not understand of an Hundred fold in Specie: But in value. Therefore Mark says, he shall receive what he has in this Life with Persecutions: What is therefore this Hundred-fold in this Life? 1. Joy in the Holy Ghost, Peace of Conscience, the Sense of Gods Love: So as with the Apo tles, they shall rejoyce, that they are thought worthy to suffer any thing for the Name of Christ, Acts. 5.41. They shall with Paul and Silas, Acts. 16.25. Sing in the Prison with those, Heb. 10.34. Take joyfully the spoiling of their Goods, knowing they have in Heaven a better, and an induring Substance. This inward Joy and Peace, shall be an Hundred-fold more, than Fathers, and Mothers, or Brethren, or Si ters. 2. Contentment. They shall have a contented frame of Spirit, with the little that is left, tho they have not so much to drink as they had, yet they shall have less thirst, Phil. 4.11, 12. 3. God will stir up the Hearts of others, to supply their Wants, and that supply shall be sweeter to them than their abundance was 4. God sometimes repays them in this Life, as he re ored Iob after his Tryal to greater Riches. But they shall have a certain reward in another World, Eternal Happiness.

But many that are first, shall be last, and the last shall be first. So says Mark, Ch. 10. v. 31. We have much the same Sentence, Luk. 13.30. and Ch. 20.16. The Jews that are counted now the First, nearest to the Kingdom of Heaven, shall have no place there: And the Gentiles lookt upon, as most remote from it, shall be admitted into it. The Pharisees and great Doctors, who think themselves First, that is, nearest the Kingdom of Heaven, shall be last, and those whom they count Last, such as shall have nothing to do with Heaven, shall be counted the First, shall have the preference, the chiefest place in Heaven. It is a general Sentence, and may be applyed variously. But if we consider, what Discourse follows, we shall see reason to interpret it, as an awakening Sentence to the best of Men. It is the Apostles, to those who had forsaken all to follow him, to whom he here says: But many that are First, shall be last, &c. As much as if he had said; you have forsaken all, and followed me, but you had need look, and consider, from what Princ ple, with what Love, and to what end you have done it; you had need keep a watch upon your selves, and see that you hold on, and that you have no Confidence in your selves. For many, That are Frst in Profession: First, in the Opinion of others, First, in their own Opinion, and Confidence, at the day of Judgment, will be found to be the Last in my and my Father's E eem, and reckoning: And many who make not so great a noise, nor have so great a Name, and Repute in the World, and who have the lowest and meane t Opinion of themselves, will be found First, and highest in my Favour. The day of Judgment will frustrate many Expectat ons.