The Pharisee and the Publican | Page 8

front of all the New Testament.
(2.) The next publican that I find by the Testament of Christ, made
mention of by name, is Levi, another of the apostles of Jesus Christ.
This Levi also, by the Holy Ghost in holy writ, is called by the name of
James: not James the brother of John, for Zebedee was his father; but
James the son of Alpheus. Now I take this Levi also to be another than
Matthew; First, because Matthew is not called the son of Alpheus; and

because Matthew and Levi, or James the son of Alpheus, are distinctly
counted where the names of the apostles are mentioned (Matt. x. 3) for
two distinct persons: and that this Levi, or James the apostle, was a
publican, as was the apostle Matthew, whom we mentioned before, is
evident; for both Mark and Luke do count him such. First, Mark saith,
Christ found him when he called him, as he also found Matthew, sitting
at the receipt of custom; yea, Luke words it thus: "He went forth, and
saw a publican, named Levi, sitting at the receipt of custom, and he
said unto him, Follow me;" Mark ii. 14; Luke v. 27.
Now, that this Levi, or James the son of Alpheus, was a Jew, his name
doth well make manifest. Besides, had there been among the apostles
any more Gentiles save Simon the Canaanite, or if this Levi James had
been here, I think the Holy Ghost would, to distinguish him, have
included him in the same discriminating character as he did the other,
when he called him "Simon the Canaanite;" Matt. x. 4.
Matthew, therefore, and Levi or James, were both publicans, and, as I
think, called both at the same time; were both publican Jews, and made
by grace the apostles of Jesus Christ.
(3.) The next publican that I find by name made mention of in the
Testament of Christ, is one Zaccheus. And he was a publican; yea, for
ought I know, the master of them all. "There was a man," saith Luke,
"named Zaccheus, which was the chief among the publicans, and he
was rich," Luke xix. 2. This man, Christ saith, was a son of Abraham,
that is, as other Jews were; for he spake to stop the mouths of their
Pharisaical cavillations. Besides, the Publican shewed himself to be
such an one, when under a supposition of wronging any man, he had
respect to the Jewish law of restoring four-fold; Exod. xxii. 1; 2 Sam.
xii. 6.
It is further manifest that he was a Jew, because Christ puts him among
the lost; to wit, among the lost sheep of the house of Israel, ver. 10; and
Matt. xv. 24; for Zaccheus was one that might properly be said to be
lost, and that in the Jews' account: lost, I say, and that not only in the
most common sense, by reason of transgression against the law, but for
that he was an apostate Jew, not with reference to heathenish religion,
but as to heathenish, cruel, and barbarous actions; and therefore he was,
as the other, by his brethren, counted as bad as heathens, Gentiles, and
harlots. But salvation is come to this house, saith Christ, and that

notwithstanding his publican practice, forasmuch as he also is the son
of Abraham.
3. Again, Christ, by the parable of the lost sheep, doth plainly intimate,
that the Publican was a Jew. "Then drew near all the publicans and
sinners for to hear him, and the Pharisees and Scribes murmured,
saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them."
But by what answer doth Christ repel their objections? Why, he saith,
"What man of you having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them,
doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that
which is lost until he find it?" Doth he not here, by the lost sheep, mean
the poor publican? plenty of whom, while he preached this sermon,
were there, as objects of the Pharisees' scorn, but of the pity and
compassion of Jesus Christ: he did without doubt mean them. For, pray,
what was the flock, and who Christ's sheep under the law, but the house
and people of Israel? Ezek. xxxiv. 11. So then, who could be the lost
sheep of the house of Israel, but such as were Matthew, James,
Zaccheus, and their companions in their and such like transgressions?
4. Besides, had not the publicans been of the Jews, how easy had it
been for the Pharisees to have objected, that an impertinency was
couched in that most excellent parable of the lost sheep? They might
have said, We are offended, because thou receivest the publicans, and
thou for vindication of thy practice propoundest a