not yet consecrated Priest 2. And for the same reason Aarons rod though it were a testimony that God had chosen Aaron his seed for the priesthood yet it was not this Testimonie for at that time when Aarons rod budded he was the high Priest but at the erection of the Tabernacle Aaron was not yet consecrated 3. Neither was the booke which Moses writ this Testimonie for that is supposed to bee the booke of Deuteronomie which was not yet written and that booke was given by Moses to the Levites by them to be put in the side of the Arke Deut. 31.26 but this Testimonie was put by Moses himselfe in the Arke 4. Therefore this Testimonie was no other than the tables of the Law called the tables of the Testimonie chap. 31.18 and 34.29 which were so named because they testified Gods will unto the people and were witnesses and testimonies of the league and covenant which the Lord made with his people Tostatus quaest 6. QUEST VII Whether the tables of the law were put into any other Arke beside the Arke of the Testament Vers. 20. HE put the Testimonie in the Arke 1. R. Salom. thinketh that the tables of the Law were put into another Arke which Moses made and when the Arke with the Mercie seate was finished then he put them into that for there were seven moneths betweene Moses comming downe with the second tables untill the Tabernacle was erected when and not before Moses put them into the Arke of the most holy place it is not like that all that time the tables were kept without an Arke and Deut. 10.5 Moses saith I made an Arke of Shittim wood and hewed two tables of stone c. There was then one Arke made before Moses hewed the tables of stone 2. But this Arke heere mentioned by Moses was none other than that which was made by Bezaleel for the tables of stone for Moses saith Deut. 10.5 there they be they were at that time long after the erecting of the Tabernacle in the same Arke before mentioned but that was the Arke of the Sanctuarie And during all that time after Moses comming downe the tables of the Law were kept in some convenient place till the Arke was made so that it is not necessarie to imagine any other Arke beside that Tostatus qu. 7. QUEST VIII When the Priests were consecrated whether at the erecting of the Tabernacle or after Vers. 27. ANd burnt incense thereon Moses did supplie the office of the Priests in burning of incense setting up the lampes offering sacrifices upon the brasen altar at the erecting up of the Tabernacle because as yet Aaron and his sonnes were not consecrated 1. Some thinke that their consecration began together with the erecting of the Tabernacle and so continued seven daies and the eigâ—th day their consecration was finished as is set forth Levit. 8.8 and then began the Princes their offerings for twelve daies together Numb 7. and some will have these seven daies to end at the first day of the first moneth of the second yeare some to begin then as Tostat. qu. 2. But neither of these can stand for as soone as Moses had made an end of consecrating the Tabernacle the Princes the same day began to offer Numb 7.2 But they offered not before the people were numbred for they were the Princes over them that were numbred Now these Princes with their people were not numbred before the first day of the second moneth of the second yeare Numb 1.1 therefore the erecting of the Tabernacle was not finished and the Priests consecrated in the space of seven daies immediately before the first day of the first moneth or immediately after 2. R. Salom. hath a conceit that there was a double erecting of the Tabernacle one was every day for seven daies in which time the Priests also had their seven daies of consecration which ended upon the first of the first moneth and then there was another solemne erection of the Tabernacle to continue when the Princes began to offer But this Rabbinicall conceit is confuted before qu. 4. neither did the Princes offer in the first but in the second moneth as is shewed before 3. Some thinke that Aaron was first consecrated before the Tabernacle that he might consecrate it and the other things thereunto belonging But it is evident in the text that Moses is commanded to anoint the Tabernacle himselfe and all things therein Simlerus 4. Yet it is not to be supposed that the whole Tabernacle and all the implements and vessels thereof were sanctified before Aaron and his sonnes were consecrated for immediately after that Moses had made an end of sanctifying the Tabernacle and the instruments therof the very same day began the twelve Princes of the tribes to offer the summe of whose offering for sacrifice was twelve bullockes twelve rammes twelve lambes for a burnt offering twelve hee-goats for a sin offering 24. bullocks 60 rammes 60. lambes 60. hee-goats for peace offerings Numb 7.8.88 all these could not bee sacrificed by Moses alone therefore it cannot be but that Aaron and his sonnes were consecrated before the Princes brought their offerings 5. I incline therefore to Iunius opinion that after Moses had consecrated the Tabernacle with the instruments thereof then last of all hee consecrated the Altar with the instruments thereof and because the Priests office was most exercised about the altar at the same time also their consecration concurred with the sanctifying of the Altar or went immediately before And this may bee gathered that the Altar was last of all consecrated and somewhat after the rest because they are distinguished the anointing of the Tabernacle and all the instruments thereof and the anointing of the Altar with the instruments thereof Numb 7.1 6. Seeing then that the Princes began to offer immediately after the Altar was anointed which was the second day of the second moneth for upon the first day of the moneth the people were numbred Numb 1.1 and they were so numbred before the offerings began Numb 7.2 it is like as Iunius well noteth upon that place that the first moneth was spent in the erecting of the Tabernacle and the consecrating thereof QUEST IX Why the Priests were commanded to wash their hands and their feet Vers. 31. SO Moses and Aaron and his sonnes washed their feet thereat c. 1. The literall reason why they were commanded to wash their hands and their feet was this that seeing it was meet that they which should handle the holy things should approach even with pure hands in respect of outward cleannesse these parts are especially commanded to be washed because the hands with handling touching of things and the feet with walking are most apt of all the parts of the bodie to gather soile 2. There might be uncleannesse also in other parts of the bodie as by nocturnall pollutions by the flux of seed and such like but in these cases the partie was uncleane sometimes onely
And therefore it was the old use in the consecration of Bishops to aske of him that was consecrated vtrum velit Episcopatum whether he would have a Bishoprike who was twice to say nay but if any such desired a Bishopricke induceret illum ad mentiendum he that asked such question should enduce him to lie Thus farre Tostatus proceedeth well 2. But whereas that place of the Apostle will be objected If any man desireth the office of a Bishop he desireth a good worke 1 Tim. 3.1 he answereth he desireth indeed bonum opus a good worke but not bene he desireth it not well whereas the Apostle in these words as Hierom expoundeth them Ad operis desiderium non ad honoris ambitum provocat doth rather provoke and stir up unto the desire of the work not ambitiously to seek the honour c. The Apostle then in these words reprehendeth not but alloweth their desire which affect the callings of the Church rather prodesse quam praesse to profit others than to rule as Augustine saith 3. Wherefore this further may be added that in seeking or desiring the places and offices of the Church there are two extremes to be shunned the one was the fault of former times when they which otherwise were well qualified and enabled for Ecclesiasticall functions did altogether decline them and utterly refused to take that calling upon them as one Ammonius when he should have been ordained a Presbyter cut off one of his eares and threatned if they would not let him alone to cut out his tongue to make himselfe altogether unfit for that calling The other fault is incident to this age ambitiously to sue and seeke for the preferments of the Church such an one was Diatrephes who loved to have preeminence Wherefore that a meane may bee kept in desiring the places in the Church three things must bee considered 1. Hee that hath any mind to an Ecclesiasticall calling must first examine himselfe whether hee bee fitted and enabled with gifts and that in an humble opinion not in a blind selfe-love but such an one as is not furnished with gifts sinneth in putting himselfe forward to that place for the which he is not meet 2. He must propound unto himselfe as the chiefe and principall end the glorie of God and the edifiing of the people and not for maintenance or living sake offer himselfe 3. Hee must take heed that he use no indirect or unlawfull meanes by flatterie or briberie to creepe in and intrude himselfe 4. These conditions being well observed and these times withall considered wherein partly because of the great number and choice to bee had of sufficient men but most of all because vertue and learning is not duely respected and rewarded preferment is not offered unasked and undesired he that desireth a place in the Church as the Apostle saith desireth a good thing and therein is not to be discommended QUEST V. When the Tabernacle began to be set up Vers. 17. THus was the Tabernacle reared up the first day of the first moneth c. 1. Cajetane hereupon noteth that the Tabernacle was set up before one yeare was expired since their comming up out of Egypt whence they departed upon the fifteenth day of the first moneth so that there wanted fifteene daies of a full yeare This collection is verie evident out of the text and therefore Lippoman following the Septuagint had no reason to reject it 2. Simlerus thinketh that the Tabernacle which could not be set up in one day was begun to be set up before and now finished on the first day of the moneth which used to be a solemne day and it is like they kept not that solemnitie untill the Tabernacle was erected But it is evident by the text that Moses began now only to set up the Tabernacle upon the first day of the first moneth because the Lord appointeth that day for Moses to set it up in vers 2. therefore he began not before And the day wherein they began to set it up might be kept as a solemne day as well as the day wherein it was finished yet it may be thought that the feast of the new moone was not yet observed the Priests being not yet consecrated to whose office it belonged to solemnize that day with sacrifices 3. R. Salomon saith there were two erections and setting up of the Tabernacle one was quotidiana every day when it was set up in the morning and taken downe againe at night the other was stabilis erectio the sure or firme erecting of it which continued till the campe removed the first erecting of it began seven daies before but the second solemne and stable erecting was upon the first day of the first moneth Contra. This is the Rabbines owne device that the Tabernacle was every day set up and taken downe againe for it is contrarie to the text which saith that the cloud of the Lord was upon the Tabernacle by day and fire by night vers 37. untill the cloud ascended and then they went forward but if the Tabernacle were taken downe in the night the fire could not rest upon it 4. Calvine taketh this erecting of the Tabernacle for the removing of it from without the campe where it was set up and bringing of it within the host for his opinion is that the Tabernacle was set up before Moses going up the second time into the mount when he removed it without the host chap. 33.7 Contra. But that Tabernacle was not this great Tabernacle but another where Moses used to consult with God as is further shewed in the handling of that place And the great Tabernacle was made after Moses second comming downe as it is set downe in storie which without great necessitie is not to be transposed and as soone as the work was finished they brought it to Moses and then the Lord spake to Moses to set it up 5. Wherefore I encline rather to thinke that Moses according to the Lords commandement began onely upon the first day of the first moneth to set up the Tabernacle and so continued untill he had finished for in one day it was not all set up as it may be gathered chap. 7.1 VVhen Moses had finished the setting up of the Tabernacle hee did not then begin and finish in one day QUEST VI. What Testimonie was put into the Arke Vers. 20. HE tooke and put the testimonie in the Arke c. There were in and beside the Arke these foure things the tables of the Law the pot of Manna Aarons rod and the booke of the Law which Moses writ but none of these are heere understood by this Testimonie but only the tables of the Law 1. The pot of Manna was a testimonie of Gods mercie that he had fed the Israelites with the bread of heaven fortie yeares in the wildernesse but that was not this Testimonie for Aaron is bid to take the pot of Manna and put it there chap. 16.33 who was
〈◊〉 as it is convenient to understand of God who seemeth to repent and change sinâ— motu quod nos sine motu nostri non possumus facere without any motion or passion at all which wee cannot doe without passion Iun. Wee could not understand how the Lord turneth from his wrath unlesse the Scripture should speake to our capacitie Pelarg. 2. So indeed the Lord is immutable and unchangeable in himselfe but Dicit se mutâ—re sententiam non in homines sed in opera quae mutata sunt He is said to change his sentence not toward men but in respect of the workes or things that are changed For God is not angrie with men but with their sins which ceasing to be nequaquam pâ—nit quod mutatum est God punisheth not that which is changed Hierom. God is said to repent cum rem mutet consilium non mutet when he changeth the thing not his counsell Gloss. interlin 3. But it will bee said that God is here changed indeed that whereas hee purposed to destroy Israel at once yet he doth it not at Moses intercession It may bee answered 1. That God here had determined no such thing sed loquebatur per modum optantis but he spake after a wishing manner let me alone Tostat. qu. 20. 2. We must understand that the divine sentence is of two sorts one is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a condition such was the proclamation against Niniveh that within fortie dayes they should be destroyed and the message sent by Isaiah to Ezekiah that he should die for in these sentences there was a secret condition included in the one of the Ninivites repentance in the other of Ezechiahs intercession so there is here a condition understood that the Lord would bee intreated by Moses The other kinde of sentence is absolute without any condition such was the decree for the destruction of the old world by water and of the overthrow of Pharaoh and his host in the red sea Bâ—â—rh QUEST XL. Whether Moses at this time was kept in suspense or indeed obtained pardon for the people Vers. 14. REpented of the evill which he threatned to doe unto his people 1. Some thinke that an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here to be admitted because Moses obtaining nothing at this time but at his second intreatie as is shewed in the end of the chapter Et nullo accepto veniae responso suspensum venisse And that he came downe in suspence having received no answer for any pardon Calvin Gallas But it is not like that Moses would have given over and gone away till he had knowne the Lords minde in part 2. Iunius thinketh that Deus distulit donec Moses vidisset God onely deferred his sentence till Moses had seene what might bee done with the people and consilium fustinuit suspended his counsell But the Text sheweth more that God at Moses request actually repented of the evill which hee had threatned Moses therefore is here put out of doubt for that that the people at this time should not be destroyed 3. Cajetan thinketh that Moses onely intreated quod non tunc fiat punitio quam populus meretur that the people at that time be not punished as they deserved But Moses reasons tend to that end that the people at all should not utterly be destroyed because of Gods promise made to Abraham Isaak and Iacob and so much he obtained 4. But Oleaster goeth somewhat too farre that Moses did not onely intreat God not to punish sed ut cum poenite at voluisse punire but that he would repent him that hee had purposed to punish But that had beene too great boldnesse in Moses to have presumed so farre and it was enough that he by his prayer obtained a pardon of that great punishment 5. Wherefore Moses obtained only by his prayer now at this time that the Lord mitigated his sentence neâ— totum populum per dere velir that he would not destroy the whole people Marbâ—ch and hee only repenteth of the evill which was threatned that is ne totaliter deleret that hee would not wholly destroy them yet God might not withstanding consume them per partes by parts as hee did afterward in the desart for if Moses had obtained an absolute and generall pardon hee needed not have sollicited the Lord againe as he did in the end of the chapter nay he continued his supplication unto God for the people fortie dayes and fortie nights Deut. 9.29 Tostat. qu. 20. QUEST XLI What was written in the tables of stone Vers. 15. THe tables were written c. 1. Some Hebrewes thinke that beside the morall Law which consisted of ten Commandements there was written the exposition as a commentarie of the Law But that is not like 1. Because the Commandements being certaine evident and knowne principles grounded upon the light of nature needed not to receive any exposition by the Law-giver himselfe but afterwâ—rd the same were explaned and amplified by Moses 2. If there had beene any such exposition Moses when hee declared to the people the ten Commandements Deut. 5. would not have omitted them being a part of Gods writing 3. Seeing the tables were to be kept in the Arke never to be brought into the peoples sight it was requisite if there had beene any such exposition that it should have beene set downe in some of Moses bookes that the people might have taken knowledge thereof Tostat. qu. 22. 2. Therefore there was no such exposition nor any other thing written in the tables beside the ten Commandements 1. Not because as some thinke there were yet no other lawes delivered to the people for it is evident that Moses before hee came downe from the mount when the Lord had uttered with his owne voice the ten Commandements received also other lawes judiciall and ceremoniall of the Lord as they are set downe chap. 21 22 23. and writ them in a booke and read them to the people Exod. 24. therefore other lawes were given before to Moses before hee came downe with the tables of stone 2. And the reason which Isidore giveth why the ten Commandements were there only written is both curious and without ground Vt per eundem numerum figura crucis exprimeretur that the figure of the crosse might be thereby expressed for the Roman X signifieth ten and doth also represent the figure of the crosse for neither doth this figure in the Hebrew tongue signifie ten neither was there any such figure written in the tables 3. These reasons rather may be yeelded why the morall precepts only were written in these tables 1. Because these onely the Lord pronounced with his owne mouth the other were delivered by Moses 2. The morall precepts are most evident and manifest as grounded upon the light of nature 3. They were so pronounced as that all the people were witnesses thereof and therefore least exception could be taken unto them Tostat. quaest 21. QUEST XLII Why there were but two
tables neither more nor fewer THe two tables c. The reasons why there were two tables were these 1. Because if all the Commandements had beene written in one table of stone it would have beene too large and so too heavie and cumbersome for Moses to beare whereas being now divided in two they need not bee so great in thicknesse or bredth and so were more portable for Moses that he might carrie them without a miracle which some Hebrewes vnnecessarily conceive for they being tables of stone in forme and fashion made like unto writing tables but larger not thicke or grosse but plaine and of no great thicknesse but so much as might suffice for the depth of the letters might well bee taken up and borne in Moses hand 2. But the speciall reason of this division of the tables into two is to distinguish the Commandements which concerned our dutie toward God and the other towards our neighbour The first being written in one table and the other in the second Tostat. qu. 23. QUEST XLIII How the tables were written on both sides Vers. 15. THey were written on both sides 1. R. Salomon thinketh that each table was so written that the letters might appeare on both sides and so be read indifferently on each side But this opinion is improbable for two unlikely things are here presupposed one that the stone whereof the tables were made was transparent that what was on the one side written might be discerned on the other and beside whereas the letters appearing on the backside must be read backward these letters by another miraculous worke must on both sides appeare all one 2. Lyran. Tostatus and Lippoman thinke that the tables were written each on both sides as in the first table there might be the three first Commandements which Tostatus maketh but two graven on the one side and the fourth on the other so in the second foure on the one side and two on the other which he divideth into three or he thinketh that the same Commandements might be written on the inside and repeated againe on the outside So also Gallasius aversa adversa parte scriptas fuisse that they were written on the neare and ofward side both of them such writing the Greekes call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 written behinde and before But the words of the text will not beare this sense for thus the tables should have been written on their foure sides whereas it is said they were written mishene on the two sides 3. Therefore the meaning is no other but this that these tables were written on the two sides namely the two inward or foresides And so Oleaster noteth by the signification of the word gheber which he pronounceth without any asperation at all eber which signifieth properly not the side but the forepart because so the word ghabar or abar signifieth to goe over or passe on before So also Vatabluâ— translateth ab utraque faecie on both the foresides And thus the writing might better be preserved one table lapping over another like unto a booke Oleaster But this further may be gathered that these tables were written full within that no spare place was left which signified that the Law of God was perfect Et nullum locum nobis relictum aliquid addendi That no place was left for us to adde any thing to his Law Simler QUEST XLIV Why the tables are called the worke of God Vers. 16. ANd these tables were the worke of God and this writing was the writing of God 1. Some Hebrewes thinke because it is said before vers 15. that they were written and here againe mention is made of the writing that the first writing was of the Commandements only the second was the exposition of the Commandements But that there was no such exposition is shewed before quest 41. 2. But in that the tables are said both to be the worke of God and writing of God to signifie that God both prepared those tables and was the writer also he was both artifex tabularum scriptor the workman of the tables and the writer Cajetan The second tables were factâ— opere Mosis made by Moses workmanship and written onely by God Tostat. qu. 23. 3. And whereas they are said to be Gods worke we are not to thinke with some that these tables of stone were of purpose now created of God anew Vocatur factio Dei non creatio sed delatio The worke of God is not said to bee the creation but the fashioning and preparing of them Tostat. 4. And this was not done by the worke of Angels as Tostatus thinketh aut scalpello non calamo or was graven with a knife not written with a pen Cajetan For the Lord needed no such instruments but it was written with the finger of God chap. 31.8 that it as Ambrose expoundeth Spiritu suo dedit legem He gave his Law by his Spirit whereby it is written in the fleshie tables of our hearts See more chap. 31. vers 18. QUEST XLV How many precepts each table contained COncerning the order observed in the writing of the Commandements in the tables there are divers opinions 1. Some thinke that the negative precepts were written in one table and the affirmative in another But this cannot be admitted for these causes 1. There are but two affirmative precepts the fourth concerning the Sabbath and the fifth Honour thy father and mother so it would follow that two precepts should onely be in one table and eight in another and so the one table must needs be very large â—he other very little 2. Thus also the precepts which concerne our dutie toward God and the other belonging to our neighbour should bee mingled together 3. And the greatest inconvenience of all is that the order of the Commandements should be inverted and that they were not written in the same order wherein they were delivered Tostat. qu. 24. 2. Rab. Salâ—mon and so also Iosephus doe thinke that five Commandements were written in the first table and five in the second and to the foure first they joyne the fifth Honour thy father c. in the first table But by this meanes the precepts of divers kindes which command love toward God and our neighbour should be put together which are better distinguished into two tables 3. Tostatus with other doe distinguish the Commandements well in respect of the tables placing in the first those which containe our dutie toward God and in the second those which are to bee practised toward our neighbour but the Commandements he rightly divideth nor making of the two first but one and so counting but three in the first table and dividing the last into two which is but one But these two points are handled before at large that it were superflous to treat of them here againe the first quest â— 10. generall before the Commandements chap. 20. and the second quest 1. upon the 10. Commandement 4. Wherefore the Commandements are thus best
of the people and not his owne 2. Cajetan also hath the like note Dola tibi non mihi ego enim non indigeo tua dolatione Hew to thy selfe not for me for I need none of thy hewing nor yet any of these tables 3. But it is rather a phrase of speech in the Hebrew tongue as Vado tibi ibo mihi Goe thee or I will goe me wherein the English phrase is answerable unto the Hebrew manner of speech And this kinde of speech is often used when no profit is intended as Numb 13.3 the Lord saith to Moses shelach 〈◊〉 Mitte tibi Send thee men to search the land which was not to Moses benefit Oleast So here lecut◠thee is added ex superabundanti of abundance more than needeth Tostat. qu. 2. 4. Lyranus noteth further that because Moses had broken the first tables it was just and right that he should make new QUEST III. Whether the Lord or Moses wrote in these tables and why I Will write 1. God himselfe did write the same words in these tables the ten Commandements which was in the former though Moses prepared them and whereas it is said afterward vers 28. He wrote in the tables it must be referred unto God not unto Moses some make this answer that God did write them because it was done by his authoritie but Moses ministerialiter Moses ministerially But that is not like for whence should Moses have these instruments wherewith he should grave these letters seeing he carried none into the mount Lyranus But to this reason Tostatus who doth often without cause oppose himselfe to Lyranus taketh this exception that as Moses had instruments wherewith to hew out of the rocke the tables so he might have other to grave with Contra. But Moses hewed out the tables after he was gone downe from the Lord before he came up againe and brought them readie hewen and made Moses then had no reason to carry any instruments with him 2. The writing mentioned vers 27. where the Lord saith to Moses Write thou these words is understood of Moses writing not the ten Commandements but the other lawes given in this place in an authenticall booke not in the tables of stone Tostat. Iunius as further is declared in the questions upon the 31. chap. vers 18. 3. In that Moses himselfe hewed these tables Procopius would have Christ the true Lawgiver shadowed forth Qui ipse carnis suae lapicida Who was the preparer and hewer out as it were of his owne flesh But more properly herein Moses resembled Christ that as the first tables being broken the second were prepared by Moses so the law of nature being decaied in man it is repaired in us by Christ and the image of God renued in us Simler Ferus 4. R. Cahadiagon sheweth divers frivolous reasons why these second tables fuerunt digniores primis were more worthie than the first but he is convinced by this that the first were both of Gods making and writing but the latter were onely written by the Lord and prepared by Moses QUEST IV. Whether Moses was to be readie the next morning and why Vers. 2. BE readie in the morning c. 1. Cajetan thinketh that this was not the next morning because the tables could not be hewed and finished in one day but he thinketh onely the time of the day to be noted that he should come up in the morning But beside that the phrase Be readie in the morning or on the morrow alwayes includeth a signification of the next morning following Moses should have beene left in great doubt and suspense when to come up if the Lord had not assigned the time as for the finishing of the worke there is no question but that Moses being thereunto appointed and so enabled of God might dispatch it in a day 2. Therefore Iunius opinion is rather to be received who giveth this sense as though the Lord should thus say to Moses Hodie illas expedi Make them readie to day that you may come up in the morning so also Tostatus who thinketh that when the Lord had thus said to Moses he descended and made readie the tables against the next day 3. By this then it is evident that when the Lord had all that communication with Moses as is set downe chap. 33. that Moses was not gone up to the Lord to the mount the second solemne time as thinketh Tostatus where he continued fortie dayes more for all that while he came not downe See before chap. 33. qu. 55. 4. The morning is prescribed as Lyranus thinketh Quia talis hora est convenientier c. because that houre is more convenient to talke with God as also Quia Deus amat hilarem obedientem servum The Lord loveth cheerfull obedience Ferus and he is bid to come up betimes as Tostatus thinketh that the people should not see what he carried quest 4. But seeing that Moses spent most of the day in hewing the tables it is not like that the people were ignorant what he did and Simlerus thinketh rather that the people saw Moses bearing the tables QUEST V. Why none are suffered to come up now with Moses Vers. 3. LEt no man come up with thee 1. At the first time when Moses went up to receive the Law Aaron Nadab and Abihu went up with him and 70. of the Elders and Ioshua accompanied him still after he had left the other but now none is permitted to come up with him because the Lord intended to shew unto Moses a more glorious sight which he would have none else made partakers of but Moses 2. This was not onely done for more reverence sake because the Lord shewed himselfe there in some visible signe as Lyranus for the Lord at other times as when he gave the Law the first time did shew himselfe by visible signes when yet no such prohibition was given therefore Burgensis noteth that this apparition was majori◠solemnitatis of greater solemnitie than the former and that the Lord did now shew his secrets to Moses which it was not lawfull for any other to see whereupon Moses face shined at his comming downe now and not before therefore curiositatis cohibenda causa to stay their curiositie none are permitted to come up with Moses Simler 3. Here is no mention made of thunder or lightning as in the giving of the Law Hic omnia laet◠sunt All things here are cheerfull because this was a signe of the giving of the Gospell Ferus 4. Another reason hereof that none ascended with Moses was to get him more authoritie with the people when they see that he onely hath accesse unto Gods presence Simler 5. And if Moses had taken some witnesses with him as hee did when hee smote the rocke it had not beene so much an act of faith as an evidence of their sight to acknowledge thus he received the law of God It pleased God therefore dare aliquem locum fidei to give some