THere are two things for which this History being duely examined doth discouer it selfe worthy to be taxed : The first is the wresting of holy Scriptures against their true sense : The other , the boasting of Iewish Rabbines without any soundnesse or shew of reason : for the Author ( as it seemeth ) bearing no good affection either to Priest , or payment of Tithes , when he would draw a text of Scripture to his purpose , he doth vsually garnish and set it forth with the expositions of the Iewes , and that in generall termes , as though he had them all at his fingers ends , and all of them were on his side , when as notwithstanding it will appeare that sometimes none rightly vnderstood , sometimes insteed of all , only one is cited ; as on that Text , Levit. 27.30 . Also all the tithe of the land , both of the seed of the ground , and of the fruit of the trees is the Lords , it is holy to the Lord . The History saith , cap. 2. pag. 13. The Iewes apply this Scripture to the second Tithe . The Iewes are here propounded in generall , yet there is none quoted but Salomoh Iarchi . Cap. 2. pag. 16. So on Deut. 26.12 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he saith this place of the yeare of tithing is interpreted by the common glosse of the Iewes , by the yeare of one Tithe , &c: and yet none is cited but Salomoh Iarchi ; notwithstanding when Salomoh Iarchi speaks any thing that may seeme to make for the diuine right of tithing , then his testimony is curtol'd & contradicted , as is plaine in the very beginning of the History , Gen. 14.20 . And Abraham gaue him tithe of all , that is ( saith he ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all that he had , as the ordinary glosse of Salomoh Iarchi there interprets . But here he leaues out these words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. because he was the Priest , the whole sentence being thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is ; And Abraham gaue him tithe of all that he had , because he was the Priest ; which later clause containes a reason why Abraham payde the Tithes to Melchisedek , namely because he was the Priest , implying thereby both a right in Melchisedek to receiue them , and a duty in Abraham to pay them ; and so saith R. Bechai on that text : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. According to the opinion of our Ancestors he was a Priest indeed , and therefore Abraham gaue him the Tithe . This is also further confirmed by the like testimony of Ramban , Deut. 14.18 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. And hee was the Priest of the most high God . To shew that Abraham would not giue the Tithe to the Priest of strange gods , but because he knew him that he was the Priest of the most high God , therefore hee gaue him the tithe , for the honor of God . And hereby was signified to Abraham , that there should be the house of God , and thither his posterity should bring the tithe & the therumahs or oblations , and that there they blesse the Lord .

Of what credit this Ramban is , Mercer on Genesis , in the beginning , pag. 3. tells vs in these wordes . R. Mose Ben Nachman , quem Ramban per Nun in fine appellant , qui & Moses Gerundensis , cum alius R. Mose ben Maimon , qui Rambam per Mem in fine vocatur , sit ; qui R. Moses Aegyptius dicitur ; vterque vir insignis . etsi Iudaei vt & caeteri sint cum iudicio legendi . Now this Testimony of Ramban implyes in it these things ,

1 That Abraham was to pay tithe to some one Priest or other .

2 That not onely the Priests of the true God , but also the Priests of strange gods among the Gentiles , did in those times receiue Tithes .

3 That Abraham payde the Tithes to the honour of God .

4 That this payment was a president and type of the future payment of his posterity .

5 That the payment of Tithes was annexed to the place of God's worship .

Aben Ezra on this Text , and also on Gen. 28. ver. 22. writes in a manner to the same effect : and on Gen. 35.1 . he saith of Iacob : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉

i. And in Bethel he performed his vow and gaue the Tithe of his substance for the honour of God to him that was in that generation for to receiue it ; That is , to the Priest ; for in the Apostles language , Heb. 7. a Priest and a receiuer of Tithes are aequipollents . Insteed of saying , Men that die are Priests , he saith , Men that die receiue Tithes . Insteed of saying , He that liues is a Priest , he saith , He that liues takes tithes : as if in his iudgment Tithes and Priesthood were inseparable : And therefore the Emphasis of the phrase he vseth , Heb. 7.6 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; that Melchisedek tithed Abraham , shewes both that he had authority to take Tithes , and seemes also to subiect Abraham to a necessity of being tithed , which is the same that Iarchi meanes in the testimony before cited ; saying that Abraham payde him tithe of all that he had , because he was the Priest . I haue the rather insisted vpon this , that the Historian hath left out and excluded the Priest from receiuing Tithes , because it seemes he doth it of set purpose ; for otherwise to what end doth he set downe those words in the beginning ( And gaue him tithe of all ) in that vncertaine manner , not following any translation , but leauing it doubtfull who should here be the giuer ? or for what cause doth he tell vs afterward . That were it not for the holy exposition in that Epistle to the Hebrewes the relation in Genesis might as well bee vnderstood that on the other side , Melchisedek as a bounteous Ancestor had giuen to Abraham the tenth part of his estate , the text indeed being both in the Hebrew and Septuagints so , that no name immediatly preceding the mention of the gift , it sufficiently thence appeares not who was the giuer . &c.

This supposition is somewhat strange , to which I may answere both for the thing su●posed , and the consequent thereof , that if it were 〈◊〉 ●●lse , we might with him conceiue it to be true ; 〈…〉 Apostle doth assure vs that it is false ; to what end therefore is it related ? for though he goe about to iustifie this assertion in his Review , pag. 450. by the authority of Fathers , & acknowledge no fault at al to be in it : yet how can this satisfie ? is it not a fault to call in question , or make a doubt of that which the holy Scripture hath put out of doubt ? is it not a fault to oppose the imagination of mans braine against the determination of God's truth ?

As for the testimony of S. Hierome , writing not his owne , but the Iewes opinion , and other Fathers here alleadged , it hath already bin sufficiently answered by others , and therefore both in this and many things else , my labour as it hath bin prevented , so it may very well bee spared , for I come but to gleane after others reaping . Neither will I here recite the expositions of the Iewes against this conceit , who generally vnderstand the Text according to the true interpretation thereof in the Epistle to the Hebrewes . But suppose for argument sake that the holy Apostle had not fully cleared this truth ; yet that which the Historian would hereupon inferre , will not follow , viz: That Melchisedek as a bounteous Ancestor , had given to Abraham the tenth part of his estate , or as a portion to one of his posterity , ( as hee speakes in his Review ) but that he gaue the tenth or tithe to Abraham , as a duty still belonging to the Priest ; for in that sense doe those Iewes take it , which were the first authors of this fancie , that Melchisedek payd tithe to Abraham , for they write , that the Priesthood was translated from Melchisedek to Abraham , because that Melchisedek vsed a preposterous order in his blessing , in that he first blessed Abraham , and after blessed God , as it were preferring the seruant before the Master : as R. Bechai and Chaskuni and others relate on Gen. 14.20 . And to this they apply that in Psal. 110.4 . Thou art a Priest for euer . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is , because of the word that Melchisedek did speake , as Rabbi Chimki there interprets it , and Iarchi concerning Abraham , which also they haue from the Talmud in Massech . Nedarim cap. 3. fol. 32. But this is not generally receiued : for Aben-Ezra on Gen. 14 : reiects it , saying , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Melchisedek spake as was fitting , and did well in that he blessed Abraham ; first because he voluntarily offered himselfe to saue those that were led captiue ; and afterward he said : and blessed be God that did helpe him , and gaue his enemies into his hand : & therefore he interprets those words in the Psalme , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. according to the order or custome : or else saith that the letter Caph is here wanting ; i. Thou art a Priest for euer .

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. because thou art as Melchisedek was ; & of him it is written , Gen. 14.18 . & he was a Priest of the most high God : which agrees with the Syriacke translation , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. after the similitude of Melchisedek : as also with the Epistle , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , according to the order of Melchisedek : and in the Arabique , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like Melchisedek .

So then howsoeuer some interpreters may differ , and make needlesse scruples & doubts in their glosses on the Text , yet take it which way you will , this one thing appeares to be the generall consent of the Iewes , that the Tithes still followed the Priesthood .

If any say , the Priesthood is now abolished , and therefore also the Tithes ; the answer is easie & common , that this is true for the Leviticall Priesthood , & the Leviticall payment of Tithe . But the Priesthood after the order of Melchisedek , is not abolished , nor the Tithes to the same belonging , as the Apostle shewes , Heb. 7.8 . And here men that die receiue tithes . but there he receiueth them , of whom it is witnessed , that he liueth .

Besides , the Iewes themselues acknowledge , that he which is a Priest after the order of Melchisedek , hath right to take Tithes , as Melchisedek did : for so are the expresse wordes of Aben-Ezra on Psal. 110.4 . The Lord sware , &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. Thou art a Priest . Euery Priest is a Minister : and so it is said , 2 Samuel . 8.18 . and the sonnes of Dauid were Priests , that is , to serue the Lord : And beholde the meaning is , that Israel shall fight , and thou shalt take the tithe , as Melchisedek tooke it of Abraham .

I am not ignorant that the Iewes diuersly expounding this Psalme , sonne of Abraham , soone of Dauid , sonne of Messiah , teach that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken not only for a Priest , but also for a Prince . But Aben-Ezra here contradicts this ; for though , as he confesseth Esay 43.28 . the Priests are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. the Rulers or Princes of the Sanctuary ; yet he denyeth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth any-where signifie a Prince , as on Gen. 14.18 . and 41.45 , &c. And very plainly on that Text , Esay 61.6 . But yee shall be named the Priests of the Lord , and men shall say vnto you , the ministers of our God . He thus writeth , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. I haue heretofore affirmed , that euery Priest is alwayes taken for a Minister , as here it is witnessed , the Priests the Ministers of our God . And so doth he in this text interpret the word Priest , & not Prince , & saith ; that this Priest shall take tithe as Melchisedek did : Now the reason why the Iewes thus constantly challenge the Tithe as due to the Priest , is ; for that they hold the Tithe to be God's part , and allotted by him vnto the Priest , so doth Ramban expressely teach on Gen. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. Abraham would not take to himselfe so much as a threed or shoo-latchet , but he did separate God's part to giue it to the Priest . And so Esay 5.8 , Woe vnto them that ioyne house to house , &c. Iarchi saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. Ye rob God of his part in tithes . So also he expounds that of Malach. 3.8 . The tithes and offerings whereof ye spoyle the Priests & Levites . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is , the spoyling of me . And in the Talmud Baba Kamah , cap. 7. fol. 69. it is said , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. the tenth or tithe is god's riches : which agrees with that text of Levit. 27.30 . All the tithe of the land , &c. is the Lord's , it is holy to the Lord . Nay the Iewes goe further in this kind , and teach that the Tithe is so the Lords , as that a man hath no right to the nine parts , till he hath giuen God the tenth , as R. Bechai testifieth on Deut. 14.23 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. The tithe of thy corne and of thy wine . If thou pay the tithe ▪ it is thy corne ; if not , it is my corne . If thou pay the tithe , it is thy wine ; if not , it is my wine : for it is said Hose. 2.9 . Therefore I will returne , and take away my corne in the time thereof , and my wine in the season thereof .

That God chose the tenth for his part , Aben-Ezra on Deut. 14. takes vpon him to render a reason for it , which hee draweth from the perfection of number , ten in simple numbers being the highest we can arise vnto , without iteration of numbers vnder it , being as he tearmes it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. The beginning of the second Combination , and the end of the first , whereupon all other numbers doe depend . But I will not stand vpon such nice argumentations , the certainty of the truth & the equity thereof being otherwise cleered . Abarbinell on Levit. 27.30 . teacheth , that the tenth part is consecrate to God in regard of his prouidence and blessing of the fruits of the earth . And to this purpose R. Bechai on Deut. 14.22 . writes thus ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. Thou shalt giue the tithe of all the increase , &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. i. It is the fashion of the world , if a man haue ground , he puts it out to halfes , or for a third or fourth part , but it is not so with the Almighty ; for he casseth the windes , raiseth the Cloudes , sends downe raine , disperseth the deaw , makes fat the fruits of the Earth , and yet requires but one part of ten ; therefore Moses admonisheth Israel diligently to pay the Tithe .

And hence it was , that euen before the Law , they held the payment of Tithes not to be a voluntary oblation , but a necessary duty , and worke of iustice and righteousnesse ; and therefore Ramban on Gen. 14. saith , that the King of Sodom did intreat Abraham to giue him the persons . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. after he saw the bounty of his heart , and his righteousnes , in that he gaue the tithe . By these and such like speeches , together with their reasons before-mentioned , the Iewes ordinarily declare the Tithe to be God's part , and to be payd to the Priest by a perpetuall right . And the force of these reasons stands good , not only for the time vnder the Law , but also for the time both before and after the Law ; for Malach. 3.6 . God changeth not , neither is his arme shortned , or his goodnes to his creatures in blessing the fruits of the Earth diminished . In this therefore the Iewes speake no otherwise concerning Tithes , then the auncient Fathers of the Church and Councills haue spoken in former times : Among the rest

Concilium Lateranense primum , cap. 54. saith thus : Cùm non sit in homine quod semen serenti respondeat , quoniam iuxta verbum Apostoli , 1 Cor. 3.7 . Neque qui plantat est aliquid , neque qui rigat , sed qui incrementum dat Deus : ipsum quidem de mortificato semine plurimum fructum afferente , nimis avarè in decimis quidam defrandare nituntur , &c. And againe in the same place ; Cùm autem in signum vniuersalis dominij quasi quodam titulo speciali sibi dominus decimas reservaverit ; nos &c. thereupon they decree there , ut decimae ante tributa solvantur . So also Concil. Tribur . cap. 13. speakes in right of Tithes . Quid si diceret dominus , nempe meus es homo , mea est terra quam colis , mea semina quae spargis , &c. and in the end giues these reasons for the payment of them : Decimae offerendae sunt à populo , ut hàc ratione Deus placatus , largiùs praestet quae necessaria sunt , & ut ministri Ecclesiae exinde relevati , liberiores fiant ad spiritualis officij expletionem , &c. And this selfe-same reason is vsed by R. Chaskin on Numb. 18.20 .

But I returne againe to the History , where wee may obserue , that as the testimony of Iarchi was before mangled and maymed , by leauing out a principall part of it ; so in the next words his meaning is restrained and perverted ; for whereas Iarchi writes , that Abraham gaue Melchisedek tithe of all that he had , because he was the Priest ; Here now the Historian saith ; But it is hard to conceiue it of any other , all that he had , then all the substance , or all the spoyles that he had by that expedition . And yet on the other side more hard and harsh is the conceit of those , that to spoyle the Church of Tithes , doe teach , that Abraham payd nothing else but only tithe of spoyles . It is the aduise of Salomon , Prov. 20.18 . Establish the thoughts by counsell , and by counsell make warre . And it is not to be thought that the Patriarch Abraham wanted this wisdome , or that he would vndertake a busines of such consequence and importance in any rash or vnadvised manner , but with prouident care & due praeparation . For Luke 14.31 . What King going to make warre against another King , sitteth not downe first , and taketh counsell whether he be able , &c. Nay R. Levi Ben Gershon in his Collections from Iudg. 3. doth propound Abraham for a patterne and an example of warinesse and policy in this kind ; teaching that as it is meet to make warre by counsell , so much more when his enemies are too strong for him , as Abraham did when he went to battell against the foure Kings , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for he diuided himselfe against them by night , that they might not perceiue him . He therefore that was thus carefull and circumspect in his actions , and able also to pursue the enemy with 318 persons , train'd vp in his own house , did no doubt in like sort furnish them euery way , & tooke with him sufficient & necessary prouision for that warre , which either was all spent before Melchisedek met him , or else why should he not pay tithes of that , being his own goods , aswell as of the spoiles , vnlesse he had tithed them before , when as the Text saith , he gaue him tithe of all , especially considering his answer to the King of Sodome , ver. 23. and his practise in the buriall of Sarah , Gen. 23.13 . together with the like practise of Dauid in the 2. of Sam. 24.24 .

That his prouision was so slender , that all was spent before he met Melchisedek , it is not likely ; for it appeares by the circumstances of the Text , that Abraham very speedily preuail'd , and considering the distance of place betwixt Hebron in the land of Iudah , and Damascus out of the land , he obtained the victory ( as the Iewes write ) in an extraordinary and miraculous manner : so saith Ramban on Gen. 14.15 . And therefore ver. 20. Melchisedek said vnto him ; Blessed be the most high God , which hath deliuered thine enemies into thy hand . Againe , hauing speedily vanquisht the enemies , he needed not waste much of his own substance ; for he was now otherwise prouided , hauing to sustaine his soldiers with the spoiles that he had taken , and so he did as it is the Text ver. 24. saue only that which the yong men had eaten . And this practise vpon like occasion was vsuall , as Aben-Ezra signifies on Numb. 31.32 . And the booty being the rest of the prey which the men of war had caught was sixe hundred thousand , and seuenty thousand , and fiue thousand sheep . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. the rest of the prey besides that which they had eaten : for therefore it is called the rest , saith he . Abraham then being furnished with the spoyles , might here well spare his own goods : for certainly in this case the equity of the Apostles rule stands in force : Who goeth a warfare any time at his own cost ? 1 Cor. 9.7 . And therefore the Targum attributed to Ionathan Ben Vziel , if it be of any credit , he gaue him tithe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all that he brought bach again , may comprehend all that Abraham brought backe againe , aswell of his owne goods , as of the spoyles . And the Targum of Onkelus doth restraine nothing , but speakes full as large as the Text , saying ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. And he gaue him a tenth part of all . But let vs goe on with thhe History .

And to free it from doubt , the holy Author of the Epistle to the Hebrewes first vsing the Text of Genesis in these words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the tithe of all , after a few words interposed , explaines it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the tithe of the spoyles , as if he had said , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the tithe of all the spoyles .

This manner of expounding the Text , cannot stand ; for besides the vnsit connection , or rather convulsion of two seuerall texts , to make a new sense against the intendment of the Apostle , and iudgment of all interpreters , his conclusion is not sound : for Abraham did not pay the tithe of all the spoiles ; but only of his owne part of the spoyles : The young men had eaten part of them , before Abraham came to Melchisedek , as I lately mentioned . And if Abraham paide tithe of all the spoyles , then he payde of that which was not his own , which to doe were iniustice ; for Aner , Eshcol , and Mamre , which were confederate with him , Gen. 14.13 . and went with him to warre , had also their share and part in the spoyles . ver. 24.

And hence it is that Iarchi on this text , touching the parting of the spoyle , saith ; that Dauid learned of Abraham , when he said 1 Sam. 30.24 . As his part is that goeth downe to battell , so shall his part be that tarryeth by the stuffe , they shall part alike . And therefore it is further said in that place as he wel obserueth , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. And it was so from that day and before . And he made it a statute and an ordinance ; but it is not said from that day forward , because it was already made a statute in the dayes of Abraham . Therefore it is t ue that Abraham payde tithe of all , & also of the spoiles , but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of all the spoyles ; but generally as Iarchi saith it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all things that he had .

Some are so farre from thinking that Abraham payde tithe of all the spoyles , as that on the contrary they hold , that he payde no tithe of the spoyles at all , because he said to the King of Sodome , that he would not take so much as a threed or shoo-latchet of all that was his . But Ramban answeres this , in the testimony before cited , where he saith , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. i. Abraham would not take to himselfe so much as a shoo-latchet , but he did separate God's part , to giue it to the Priest . But it will be said , by what right did Abraham giue the tenth as God's part out of other mens goods ? To this R. Abuhab makes answer , explaining the exposition of Ramban in these wordes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. i. It may seeme at the first view , that Abraham's intent and will was to take all the substance to himselfe ; and this is that which the Scripture testifieth , that he gaue the tithe , euen as a man giues the tithe of his goods . And so it is said , the King of Sodome came forth to meet him , that is to say , in respect of his substance ; & when he saw that he did not giue it him , nor consent thereto , he intreated him , saying , giue me the persons . But our Rabbine is not cleare or resolute in his exposition ; for behold Abraham said , I will not take of all that is thine so much as a threed or shoo-latchet , &c. for so according to this exposition he should pay tithe of that which was not his owne ; to this therfore our Rabbine saith , that certainly by right it was his , but by reason of his great kindnesse and exceeding bounty , he would not take any thing , for Abraham trusted in his God , that he would giue him substance , and riches , and honor , and therefore would take nothing from him , lest he should say that he made Abraham rich .

The drift therefore of this answer is in effect to shew that Abraham gaue tithe of the spoyles , and yet of his own goods , for that the spoyles were his owne gotten in iust warre , and giuen without any wrong to the King of Sodome ; and whereas Aner , Eshcol , and Mamre retain'd to themselues their part of the spoyles , it shewes that Abraham's giuing of his part , was of his owne voluntary curtesie , and not of any necessity . By this therefore that hath bin alleadged , it is euident , according to the opinion of the Iewes , that Abraham dayde tithe of the spoiles , yet they doe not teach , that he payde tithe only of the spoyles , but the contrary ; for R. Chaskuni saith on Gen. 14 : That the bread and wine which Melchisedek brought forth , was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is , such things as were not tithed , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. To the end that Abraham might set apart the tithe thereof . Therefore in his iudgment something else was then tithed beside spoyles : on those words in Gen. 25 , 27. and Esau was a cunning hunter , Iarchi hath this glosse , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. He was cunning to deceiue and beguile his father with his words , asking him , father how doe they tithe salt ? how doe they tithe straw or chaffe , that his father might thinke that he did accurately study the commandements of the Law . R. Bechai doth also relate this on the same Text. Now these & such like glosses , though in themselues idle and fabulous , yet they make this one thing plaine , that in those times they held tithes due to be payde , and that they were also payde of other things besides spoyles . Aben-Ezra on Gen. 28.22 . expounds the words of Iacob , of all that thou shalt giue me will I giue the tenth to thee . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. of all the goods that thou shalt giue me will I giue the tenth to thee . And why may we not likewise thinke that his grandfather Abraham payde tithe also of all the goods that God did giue him ? either now at this meeting of Melchisedek , or else at other times : when as the Apostle makes the tithing here to countervail the tithing in the Law ? Some say here of Iacob , as R. Bechai on Numb. 18. notes from Pirke R. Eliezer , that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. he gaue also the tenth of his sonnes as holy to the Lord : which beginning with Beniamin , and so numbring them backward , they take to be Levi , euen as in tirhing their sheep , that which goeth last into the Coat , comes first out ; and so saith Abarbinel on Levit. 27.30 . But this is reiected by Aben-Ezra on Gen. 28.22 . saying , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. That Levi should be the tenth , it is a figuratiue exposition , and not according to the letter ; for it is not in the Law , that a man should giue the tenth of his sonnes , but the tenth of bullocks , and of sheep , and of increase . Where he takes this for granted , that such tithes were to be payde by the Patriarches before the Law , as were vsually payde afterward in the time of the Law , otherwise his reason were nothing . In like manner may we say that Abraham payde not onely the tenth of spoyles , for it is not in the Law that a man should giue only the tenth of spoyles , but the tenth of bullocks , and of sheep , and of increase . Again the same Rabbine on Levit. 27. making mention of Abrahams tithing , and Iacob's tithing ; which relation to the manner of tithing vnder the Law , giues vs to vnderstand , that in his conceit both for the things tithed , as also for the yearely payment of them , the order and practise was alike .

But what should I speake of the Rabbines ? doth not the Apostle himself in the Epistle to the Hebrews , comparing Abraham's paying of tithe with the payment to Levi vnder the Law , implye that the payment was alike in both ? for when he saith , Heb. 7.9 . Levi also which receiueth tithes , payde tithes in Abraham . Shall we imagine that Levi receiued tithes of diuerse things according to the Law , but payde tithes in Abraham only of the spoyles ? Or that Melchisedek Priest of the most high God , to whom the Iewes say Tithes were payde , because he was the Priest , was confined and stinted perpetually to take tithe of nothing else but only spoyles ? How will that agree with the scope of the Apostle in that place , who to proue the excellency of Melchisedek's Priesthood , among other reasons draweth one principall argument , amplified with diuerse circumstances à iure decimandi , from the right of tithing . His right therfore in tithing must no way be lesse , but rather greater then Levi's was ; which being proued only by the practise of Abraham's tithing ; the Apostle doubtlesse doth here intend , that such Tithes at the least as Levi receiued , such also he payde in Abraham . But Levi did not receiue Tithes only of the spoiles ; therefore he did not pay Tithes only of the spoiles . Nay I adde further , that Levi did not receiue any Tithe of the spoyles , or any part of the spoyles at all ; for so the Iewes teach from these Texts of Scripture , Deut. 18.1 . The Priests of the Levites , & all the Tribe of Levi , shall haue no part nor inheritance with Israel ; that is , saith Iarchi , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. They shal haue no part in the spoyle , nor inheritance in the land . Likewise Numb. 18.20 . And the Lord said vnto Aaron , thou shalt haue no inheritance in their land , neither shalt thou haue any part among them : where againe is the same glosse of Iarchi , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. They shall haue no part euen in the spoyle . And this is also confirmed by Ramban , and by R. Bechai on the same Text. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. Our Doctors teach . In their land thou shalt haue no inheritance at the time of the diuision of the land , & thou shalt haue no part among them in the spoyle . I am thy part or portion , thou shalt feed at my Table . And whereas Numb. 31.28.29 . a tribute was taken of the prey , one of fiue hundred from the souldiers part , and one of fifty from the peoples , which was giuen to Eleazar and to the Leuites ; Ramban in way of explanation , answereth that doubt in these words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. i. This tribute was offered , because the spoyle came by the executing of God's vengeance vpon a land that was not theirs , Numb. 25.17 . but in the land of Sihon and Og , they gaue not to the Priests and Leuites any thing thereof , for they were admonished to the contrary , where it is said , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. Thou shalt haue no part among them , no not in the spoyle . And R. Bechai doth likewise confirme this writing on the same Text. How then can Abraham's paying of Tithe be compared with that of the Law , if Abraham payde nothing but tithe of spoyles , and in the Law they payde no tithe of spoyles at all ? Or to what end is it said ; Levi that receiued tithes , payde tithes in Abraham , except he payd in Abraham some such tithes as he did receiue ? and if so , then somthing else beside spoyles , for Levi receiued no tithe of spoyles , if we may beleeue the Iewes .

Againe , when the Apostle saith , ver. 8. Here men that die receiue tithes , but here he receiueth them of whom it is witnessed , that he liueth : he speakes in the plurall number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which being in the same manner without change of number applyed to Melchisedek , may seeme to include more then only tithe of spoyles ; for making mention of them in ver. 4. he doth not speake in the plurall number , but only in the singular , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 .

But how shall the Priesthood of Melchisedek bee proued greater then Levi's in regard of the right of tithing , if Melchisedek receiue tithe but once , and of one person , and that only of spoyles , & that also by curtesie , when as Levi receiued them often , and of many persons , & of all things prescribed in the Law , & that by diuine authority ; for ver. 5. they had a commandement to take Tithes . Surely this wil not argue a superiority , but rather an inferiority in Melchisedek's Priesthood in regard of tithing , which is contrary to the drift of the Apostle . Therefore I rather thinke whereas it is said in Heb. 7.2 . first that Abraham gaue tithe of all things , and after gaue also the tithe of the spoyles , ver. 4. That the Apostle here infolds an other argument to proue the greatnesse of Melchisedek's Priesthood aboue the Leviticall , because Abraham did not onely pay to Melchisedek tithe of all things aswell as they did in the Law to Levi , but also gaue the tithe of the spoyles , which the Iewes say was not giuen in the Law . And some inducement for this may be gathered from the words of the Text it selfe ; for in the first place it is said in the Greek , ver. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he diuided the tithe ; and after ver. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he gaue euen of the spoyles ; and so answerable to these are the Syriaque words , first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. he diuided ; then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he gaue : as though his latter had bin more free , & more then was in vse in the Leviticall Law , for no doubt but the Apostle ( brought vp at Gamaliel's feet ) was well acquainted with the manner & practise of the Iewes in the payment of their Tithes .