Never any man in earth Christ onely excepted kept the Sabbath without sin the Apostle saith He that is entred into his rest hath also ceased from his owne workes as God did from his Heb. 4.10 it is the rest onely of Christ where there shall be cessation from all the workes of sinne But that rest which Adam should have kept in Paradise was not Christs rest therefore he kept no rest there without sin he fell then before the Sabbath 10. That place lastly maketh to this purpose Psal. 49.13 Adam lodged not one night in honour for so are the words if they be properly translated the word is lun which signifieth to lodge or stay all night and thus divers of the Rabbines doe expound this place of Adam Upon these reasons it seemeth most probable that Adam did not continue one night in Paradise but fell in the same day of his creation Of this opinion are Irenaeus Cyrillus Epiphanius Moses Barcephas Philoxenus Ephrem with others rehearsed by Pererius upon this place though he himselfe be of another opinion That objection that so much businesse as the giving of names to the creatures by Adam the temptation of Eva by the Serpent and seduction of Adam by woman could not be dispatched in so small a time of six or seven houres may easily bee answered 1. It is evident by the text that the imposition of names was performed the day of his creation before the woman was made Gen. 2.20 and it asked no long time in regard of the singular wisdome and knowledge of Adam who was able at the first sight of the creatures without any long search or triall of their nature to give them fit names 2. Of Satans nimblenesse in hastening the tentation and insinuating himselfe to the woman there need bee made no doubt the celerity and agility of spirits is great 3. It was the coole of the day about the Eventide when sentence was given against Adam so that in the space of eight or nine houre from his creation to his fall all these matters might easily be done QVEST. XXXIII Whether Adam was cast out Vers. 24. THâ—â— hee cast out man c. 1. Where the Septuagint adde and placed him before Paradise whereupon some writers have descanted of the causes why Adam was placed before Paradise that by the sight thereof he remembring from whence he was fallen might more effectually repent his sinne the originall is otherwise that not Adam but the Cherubims were placed before Paradise 2. Whereas Theodoret thinketh that these Cherubims were not Angels but certaine terrible visions set to feare man from that passage it may be otherwise gathered out of Scripture where wee read that the Cherubims pictured over the Arke were beautifull faces representing Angels and therefore the Prophet compareth the king of Titus glittering in his pretious stones to the Cherub Ezech. 28.14 3. Concerning the fiery shaken sword we refuse 1. either the collection of Tertullian who taketh it for torrida zâ—â—a the parching countrie under the aequinoctiall or of Liranus who would have it to be a certaine wall of fire about Paradise or of Rupertus that understandeth it of purgatorie fire for all these are deceived about the translation the word signifieth not a fiery sword shaken but rather a sharp sword shaken as the Chaldâ— paraphrast readeth which by the shaking seemeth to glitter as the flame of fire or because the word Lahat signifieth to inflame it is not unlike but that some fierie inflammation in the likenesse of a sword might be set as a terrour in that place Iun. 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. Spirits have power to possesse bodies and speake out of them WHereas Satan useth the serpent and out of his trunke frameth a voice we neede not thinke it strange that the Devill hath this power to possesse the bodies of beasts and to speake out of them which though Iulâ—aâ— the Apostata counted a fable Cyrillus learnedly sheweth the like to have beene done out of the heathen writers as how in Homer Achilles horse inspired by Iuno foretelleth his death Pâ—rphyrius writeth that the river Causus saluted Pythagoras saying Ave Pythagora and Phylostratus that a certaine Elme saluted Apollonius Isogonus Cithiensis saith that in Rhodeâ— a certaine bull consecrate to Iupiter did speake The Pagans therefore and Atheists finding the like in their owne writers have no reason to deride this storie of the Devils speaking in the serpent Perer. 2. Doct. Adam and Eva sinned not before they were tempted WHereas Satan was the first that inveigled the woman with ambitious desire saying yee shall bee as Gods vers 5. The opinion of Prosper is discovered not to be sound that our first parents were tickled with pride before the tentation and therefore were permitted of God to fall into it for this difference is made betweene the sinne of man and of the Angels he fell being seduced but the other of their owne pride without a seducer transgressed 3. Doct. Adam if he had not sinned should not have died Vers. 19. DVst thou art and to dust thou shalt returne hence it is gathered that death was not naturall to man but hapned because of sinne contrary to the opinion of Iosephus that thinketh that man should have died though he had not sinned but his life should have beene much longer It was the opinion also of the Pelagians that death was in mans nature and sprang not from sinne Not much differing is the sentence of the Popish writers that man was created mortall by the condition of his nature yet preserved by a supernaturall gift the contrary is evident from hence because it was never said to man before he had sinned that he should returne to dust 4. Doct. The Trinity proved out of the Old Testament Vers. 22. BEhold the man is become as one of us This is an evident place against the Iewes to prove the Trinity for here the Lord speaketh of more than one neither can it be answered that it is but a phrase of speech to use the plurall for the singular for here is more than a phrase this speech could not be true to say one of vs if there were no more than one person in the God-head 5. Doct. Why God suffered Adam to be tempted and fall FUrther whereas the question will be demanded how it stood with Gods justice and holinesse to suffer man to be tempted whom he foresaw should fall Our answer is this 1. we say with the Apostle O the deepenesse of the riches both of the wisdome and knowledge of God! how vnsearchable are his judgements and his waies past finding out Râ—m 11.33 And Augustine maketh the same answer to this question Altitudinem consiliâ—eâ—us penetrare non possum c. I cannot enter into the depth of Gods counsell 2. Yet for as much as God had given man free-will and sufficient strength to resist this tentation if he would it was fit he should be left to
post poenitentiam That he which committed adulterie after publike penance should finally be denied the Communion In Hieromes time it seemeth that adulterie was punished by death who in a certaine epistle maketh mention of a young man qui adulterâ—i insimulatus ad mortem trahitur who being accused of adultery was led forth to death yet Augustine as is shewed before reasoneth against it but of all other Origen writeth most plainly Apud Christianos si adulterium fuerit admissum c. Among Christians if adulterie be committed it is not commanded that the adulterer or adulteresse bee punished with corporall death c. neither therefore was the law cruell then neither now doth the Gospell seeme to bee dissolute but in them both the benignitie of God appeareth yet by a divers dispensation then by the death of the bodie the people was rather purged from their sinnes than condemned but unto us sinne is purged not by corporall punishment but by repentance and it is to be seene unto lest our punishment be greater whose vengeance is laid up for the next world when as they were absolved from their sinne by the paying of the punishment as the Apostle saith how much more punishment is he worthy of that treadeth under foote the Sonne of God Two reasons Origen yeeldeth of this his opinion that there is now a mitigation of the rigour of Moses law because then it served as an expiation of their sinnes prefiguring the death of Christ as S. Paul applieth that sentence Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree which is generally delivered by Moses to the particular death of Christ Galat. 3.13 but now the expiation of sinne is by repentance and remission of sinnes in Christ. Againe now a greater punishment abideth the contemners of the Gospell even eternall in the next world and therefore corporall death is not so much inflicted now for God punisheth not twice for the same thing as Origen in the same place alleageth Yet although we contend that the capitall punishment of Moses law may now be dispensed with in some cases upon the reasons before alleaged this is not either to condemne those Common-wealths which doe reteine still and practise the severity of Moses law against adulterers who therein sinne not but as Ambrose saith of the Apostles that asked for fire to come downe upon the Samaritanes Nec discipuli peccant legem sequentes Yet did not the Disciples offend following the law neither to excuse those places where this sinne is too easily and lightly punished as Erasmus complaineth in his time Nunc adulterium lusus magnatum est Now adulterie is but a sport of great men Where adulterie is not capitally punished yet great severity otherwise should be used as it was decreed in the Elibâ—rin Councell that he which having a wife committed adulterie should be under penance five yeeres can 〈◊〉 He that did sinne that way after should not bee received to the peace of the Church till his dying 〈…〉 that did commit adulterie after penance should never be restored to the communion of the Chuâ—â—â— c. 7. These or such like severe constitutions this wanton and lascivious age hath need of that this overflowing sinne might be kept in with higher bankes than now it is So then I conclude this point with Cyprian who speaking of divers kindes of Ecclesiasticall censure used in divers places thus writeth Manente concordia vinculo actum suum disponit dirigit unusquisque Episcopus c. The bond of amity remaining still every Bishop so directeth and disposeth his owne act that he is thereof to give account unto God The like may bee said of Princes and Magistrates in their dominions and regiments that the difference in publike punishments all intending the glorie of God and the brideling of sinne is no cause to breake peace or breede jelousie betweene Christian states Now for the other part that Moses Judicials doe bind negatively that is where Moses Law inflicteth not death there Christian Magistrates are not to punish with death the reasons are these 1. Because then the regiment of the Gospell should exceed in terror the strictnesse and severitie of Moses Law 2. God is that one Lawgiver that saveth life and destroyeth Iam. 4.12 he gave life and he only hath right to take it away God hath created man in his image Gen. 9.6 which image is expressed in mans soule animating the bodie This image then is not to be defaced and dissolved but by warrant and direction from God therefore the equitie of the Judicials of Moses ought to be a rule either by generall direction or particular president to all Magistrates in what cases and for what sinnes they are to deprive the offendors of their life But here it will be objected that if this be so then all those Common-wealths are in error which punish theft by death which by Moses law is satisfied by making restitution Exod. 22.2 Ans. Even by Moses law some kinde of theft received a capitall punishment as if it were a violent theft as it was lawfull to kill a theefe breaking into the house Exodâ—s 22.2 or a wanton theft as David judged him worthy to dye that having many sheepe of his owne tooke by violence the onely sheepe which his poore neighbour had 2. Sam. 12.5 Likewise publike theft and sacrilege in Achan was punished by death Iosh. 7. But that simple theft when a man stealeth only to satisfie his hungrie soule or to supply his present necessitie should be proceeded against to the losse of life it seemeth hard And as I take it the lawes of this land have used a good consideration herein that such small felons should escape by their booke wherein to my understanding greater clemencie and favour in some Judges were more commendable who require an exactnesse of such simple clerkes unlesse they bee such as are worthy for other former evill demerits to be cut off as rotten members There is a saying in the law Favores sunt ampliandi Where favour is intended it should be the largest way extended It were also to be wished that a greater valuation were yet set than of the usuall rate in such small fellonies when a man is to bee judged for his life By Dioclesians law some kindes of theft are charged with restitution of foure fold by another authentike law the theefe is adjudged to bee beaten with clubbes By the Decrees Qui fecâ—rit furtum capitale c. Hee that committed any capitall theft as in breaking into an house in stealing a beast or some other thing of price if he were a Clergie man he was to be under penance seven yeeres if a lay man five if it were a small theft he was to make restitution and to doe penance one yeere By any of these or the like constitutions sufficient provision might be made against simple theft But it can no wayes be justified that such simple theft should bee more straightly
when he punisheth the hard hearted and incorrigible as is evident in the example of Pharaoh 3. God also teacheth men by his example to be patient and long suffering one toward another 4. This patience of God though some abuse it yet other profit by it and their hard hearts are mollified as though Pharaoh by Gods sparing of him became more obstinate yet Nebuchadnezzar at the length by the Lords lenity and goodnesse and fatherly correction was brought to know himselfe and to confesse the true God 5. And though the evill and wicked should reape no profit by the Lords wonderfull patience yet the elect and such as are ordained to salvation are thereby called and brought unto grace as S. Paul sheweth of himselfe For this cause was I received to mercy that Iesus Christ should first shew on me all long suffering unto the ensample of them which in time to come should beleeve on him 1. Tim. 1.16 QUEST XX. How God is said to harden by the subtraction of his grace BEside there is another way whereby the ancient fathers understood God to be said to harden mens heart namely by the subtraction and withdrawing of his grace as Chrysostome God is said to give over unto a reprobate sense to harden to blind and such like Non quòd hac a Deo fiunt quippe cùm à propria hominis malitia proveniant sed quia Deo justè homines deserente hac illis contingunt Not because these things are done by God which proceed of mans malice but because while God doth justly forsake men these things doe happen unto them So also Augustine ludurare dicitur Deus quem mollire noluerit God is said to harden whom he will not nullifie excacare dicitur quem illuminare nolverit And he is said to blind him whom he will not iluminate Gregorie also upon these words of the Lord to Moses I will harden Pharaohs heart thus writeth Obdurare Deus per posâ—â—iam dicitur quando cor reprobum per gratiam non 〈◊〉 God is said by his justice to harden the heart when he doth not by his grace mollifie a reprobate heart So Thomas Aquinas Excacatio obduratio duo important c. The blinding and hardning of the heart implieth two things one is the internall act of the minde adhering unto evill and being adverse from God and so God is not the cause of the hardnesse of the heart The other is the subtraction of grace whereby it commeth to passe that the â—ind is not illuminate to see God c. and in this respect God is the cause of induration This exposition also is true but it expresseth not all that seemeth to be contained in this phrase that God is said to harden Pharaohs heart QUEST XXI How God is said occasionaliter by ministring the occasion which the wicked abuseth to harden the heart THere is then a sixt way of interpreting these words God is said to harden mans heart occasionaliter by way of occasion when the wicked take occasion by such things as fall out and are done by Gods providence to be more hardned and confirmed in their sinne 1. For as all things as prosperity adversity life death fulnesse want and whatsoever else doe worke together unto good to those that feare God as the Apostle saith Rom. 8. So on the contrary all things fall out for the worst unto the wicked and impenitent so the wonders which God wrought in Egypt served to confirme the Hebrewes in their faith but Pharaoh through his owne malice was thereby hardned 2. The things which the Lord doth whereby the wicked take occasion to be hardned are of three sorts either inwardly in the mind as by stirring their affections as of anger feare hope desire which they by their corruption turne unto evill or else such things as are done about them as admonitions corrections mercies benefits which they also ungratiously abuse or they are things externall or without them as the objects of pleasure honour and such like whereby their hard heart is puffed up and swelleth And all these things being good of themselves they through the hardnesse of their heart pervert unto their destruction as S. Peter speaketh of some which through ignorance and unbeleefe doe pervert the Scriptures 2. Pet. 3.16 And S. Paul sheweth that sinne tooke occasion by the commandement and wrought in him all manner of concupiscence Rom. 7.8.3 Thus Pharaoh was hardned by occasion of Gods workes the plagues and wonders which were shewed in Egypt by the wonders because he saw his Magitians could doe the like by the plagues because they touched not him but happened without they came not all at once but with some respite betweene and because he saw that they continued not long but were soone removed 4. To this purpose Augustine Vt tale cor haberet Pharaoh quòd patientia Dâ—o non mâ—veraâ—ur ad pietatem propriâ— sunt vitii quòd vero facta sunt ea quibus cor suo â—itio jam malâ—gnum divinis jussionibus resisteret c. dispensationis fuit divina In that Pharaoh had such an heart which could not be moved by the patience of God unto piety it was his owne fault but that such things were done whereby his heart being evill of it selfe did resist the commandement of God it was of the divine dispensation quaest 18. iâ— Exod. This exposition also of Augustine may bee received but yet there is somewhat further to be considered in Gods concurring in the hardning of Pharaohs heart QUEST XXII God 〈◊〉 sâ—â—d to harden the heart as the event is taken for the cause THere is further a seventh exposition for in the Scripture that is often taken for the cause of a thing which is but the event of it a Chrysostome noteth upon these words Ioh. 17. None of them perished but the child of perdition that the Scriptures might be fulfilled here the Scripture Quae eventus sunâ— pro causa ponit putteth that for the cause which was the event for Iudas did not perish to that end that the Scripture should be fulfilled but it so fell out that the Scripture in Iudas perishing was fulfilled Damascen giveth the like instance in the 51. Psalme Against thee only have I sinned and done evill in thy sight that thou maist be justified in thy sayings and cleere when thou art judged But David did not sinne to that end that God might be justified God had no need of his sinne to set forth his glory So it fell out that God spared David and by his mercy overcame his sinne yet hee sinned not to that end like as when a man is at his worke and one commeth and so he breaketh off he should say my friend came to day to hinder my worke whereas his friend had no such end in his comming So Iacob said to his sonnes Wherefore dealt yee so evill with me as to tell the man whether yee had yet a brother or no Gen. 43.6 Iacobs sonnes in so telling
desperate state it shall not be amisse first to examine his reasons and then to confirme the truth 1. He urgeth these and such like places That God would have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth And I will not the death of a sinner If mercy be offered to all then the way is open for all to returne unto God Contra. 1. God indeed offereth himselfe unto all and denieth not the externall meanes to any if they had grace to apprehend them The Gospell hath beene preached to all the world and is many times to the impenitent and reprobate so God offereth grace to all but all will not receive it Augustine hereof thus writeth Correctio medecinabiliter omnibus adhibenda est etiam si salus aegrotantis sit incerta c. The wholesome medicine of admonition must be ministred to all though the health of the sicke be uncertaine that if he which is admonished belong to the predestinate it is unto him a wholesome medecine if he doe not it is a penall torment 2. The argument then followeth not God calleth all to repentance therefore all may have grace to repent The Scripture saith many are called but few are chosen Ambrose saith In aliis praevaluisse gratiam in aliis reâ—iluisse naturaâ— That grace prevaileth in some in others their obstinate nature resisteth 2. So long as men are in this life they are in the way and are not deprived of all grace nor utterly forsaken till they come into hell Contr. Everlasting punishment in hell is the end and execution of damnation but men in this life may be in the state of damnation and be utterly forsaken of Gods grace as Saul and Iudas and they whom the Apostle saith God gave them over to a reprobate sense Rom. 1.28 3. If any had beene in this life wholly excluded from grace Pharaoh of all other was most like yet his state was not desperate seeing he was in the same case with Nebuchadnezzar who repented and confessed God Contr. 1. He reasoneth flatly against the Apostle who propoundeth Pharaoh as a vessell of wrath prepared to destruction Rom. 9. Now if there be hope for the vessels of wrath to come to grace then there was hope for Pharaoh The Apostle maketh these two distinct things God hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9.18 As God hardneth not those on whom he hath mercy so neither sheweth he mercy on those whom he hardneth 2. Nebachadnezzar and Pharaoh were most unlike for the one had not so many wonders shewed as had the other neither so often dallied and made shew of repentance as did the other this sheweth their state to be most differing for if Pharaoh had beene no more hardned than Nebuchadnezzar was he would likewise have repented 4. We are to despaire of none in this life therefore it is possible for all to repent Contr. 1. Such as wee see and know commit a sinne unto death which is the irremissible sinne against the holy Ghost which I confesse is a rare thing now to be discerned such wee may despaire of because the Apostle forbiddeth us to pray for them 1. Ioh. 5.16 And those for whom the Lord did forbid Ieremy to pray chap. 7.16 what hope I pray you was there of them 2. Though wee in charity are to hope the best even of the greatest sinners yet this followeth not that all of them may have grace to repent wee judge according to that we see but the Lord seeth the heart and knoweth from the beginning who are his and who are not But on the contrary side that some in this life are so hard hearted that they cannot repent and so are incorrigible and without hope of remission of sinnes it is proved thus 1. Sinne against the holy Ghost is irremissible as our Saviour saith He that blaspphemeth against the holy Ghost shall never have forgivenesse Mark 3.29 Therefore there are some in this life that cannot repent neither can have their sinnes forgiven them And because Bellarmine and Pererius and the rest here answer that the sinne against the holy Ghost is said to be irremissible not because it cannot at all be forgiven but because it is hardly forgiven therefore to prevent this objection that place of the Apostle is also urged that it is impossible for such to be renued by repentance Heb. 6.6 that which is impossible is not only hardly done but not at all 2. The foreknowledge and decree of God concerning the rejection of some is unchangeable and cannot be altered but God hath foreseene some to be damned and decreed them to bee rejected as Iudas is called the childe of perdition Ioh. 17. therefore it is not possible for such to come to repentance to be saved therefore Gregory saith well Qua non sunt praedestinata obtineri non possunt Those things which God hath not predestinate cannot be obtained But God hath not decreed repentance for them that are rejected and reprobate 3. There is no hope of forgivenesse for that sinne for the which it is not lawfull to pray but there is a sinne unto death for the which we are forbidden to pray 1. Ioh. 5.16 Ergo c. Pererius answer here is that by sinne unto death is meant that sinne wherein a man continueth unto death and so dying therein he is not afterward to be prayed for Contr. 1. It would follow by this reason that no sinne of any is to bee prayed for while hee liveth for how doth any know whether a man may continue in a sinne till his dying day 2. The Apostle speaketh of such sinnes which a man seeth his brother to sinne now sinnes are onely seene to be done in this life neither is a mans repentance knowne which God may give him in his very passage out of the world 3. Let them shew us any place in all the Scriptures that authorizeth prayer for the dead if they can wherefore they are not to give a sense of Scripture that cannot be warranted by Scripture 4. The Apostle therefore calleth it a sinne unto death for the which there is no forgivenesse and so is there no sinne but blasphemy against the holy Spirit And thus Ambrose expoundeth it Non potest ibi exoratio esse veniae ubi sacrilegis est plenitudo there can be no intreating of pardon where there is fulnesse of Sacrilege 4. Where there can bee no repentance there can be no remission of sinnes but some have such hard hearts that they cannot repent Rom. 2.4 therefore the sinnes of such are irremissible 5. Hereunto may be added the testimonies of Cyprian Non posse in Ecclesia ei remitti qui in Deum deliquerit that he can find no forgivenesse in the Church that sinneth against God lib. 3. de Quirinum cap. 28. Of Ambrose Cassa erat proditâ—ris poenitentia qui peccavit in spiritum sanctum The betrayers repentance was in vaine having sinned against the spirit of
wicked as Abraham followed after the foure Kings that had taken Lot prisoner and delivered him out of their hands Gen. 14. 3. The manner also must bee considered that although the cause of warre be just yet that it be not rashly set upon but all other meanes must first be tried as Ezekiah before he would by force resist the King of Assyria sought to have pacified him by paying a certaine tribute 2 King 18.14 So the children of Israel before they assaulted their brethren the children of Benjamin by open warre because of the wickednesse of the Gibeonites committed against the Levites wife first required of them that those wicked men might be delivered into their hands which when they wilfully refused then they resolved to set upon them Iudg. 20.13 Ex Simlero 4. Confut. Against the Romanists that make difference betweene counsels and precepts IN the next place the Romanists are to bee dealt withall and here commeth first to be examined that assertion that whereas we affirme that even in this Commandement Thou shalt not kill that dutie of charitie is prescribed even in loving our enemies they affirme that this is no precept which we are bound to keepe but a counsell of perfection and a worke of supererogation Thom. Aquin. 2.2 qu. 25. art 9. Contra. 1. This derogateth from the authoritie of Christ to say that he gave counsell to his Disciples and did not by his authoritie command them 2. Seeing all the duties of charitie are required by the law for love is the fulfilling of the law it followeth that even this dutie also in loving our enemies is enacted by the law and not left free 3. Our Saviour adding further as a reason hereof that ye may bee children of your Father which is in heaven sheweth that wee cannot otherwise bee the true children of our heavenly Father unlesse we be like him herein even in loving of our enemies then it will follow that it is not a counsell of conveniencie but a precept of necessitie Ex Bastingio See more of this popish distinction of counsels and precepts Synops. Centur. 1. err 84. 5. Confut. Against the Popish distinction of mortall and veniall sinnes ANother assertion of the Romanists here to be taxed is that anger si sit talis motus ut deducatur ratio est peccatum mortale c. If it be such a motion as that the reason is drawne to consent it is a mortall sinne Si usque ad consensum non pervertitur ratio est peccatum venidle c. But if reason be not perverted to consent then it is a veniall sinne but if it bee not a mortall or deadly sinne in the nature and kinde thereof as is murther and adulterie then although there be a consent it is no mortall sinne Sic Thom. in opuscul This distinction of sinnes veniall and not veniall in their owne nature in respect of the greatnesse or smalnesse of the sinne is not to bee admitted for these reasons 1. In the respect of the nature of sinne which of it selfe deserveth death Rom. 6.23 The wages of sinne is death and sinne is the transgression of the law 1 Ioh. 3.4 and every transgression of the law is under the curse Galath 3.10 2. In respect of the infinite Majestie of God which to violate can bee no veniall sinne of it selfe considering also the perfect and absolute righteousnesse of God which cannot abide the least blemish or imperfection therefore in regard of the perfect righteousnesse and infinite Majestie of God no sinne committed against God can in it selfe bee veniall 3. And concerning this motion and passion of anger even when it is sudden and unadvised though there bee no further purpose or intendment to hurt it is guiltie of judgement Matth. 5.22 Where by the way it shall not bee amisse to note the difference here betweene Thomas Aquin and Bellarmine for Thomas holdeth this anger here spoken of to bee a deadly sinne in that he saith He that is angrie with his brother shall be guiltie of judgement it must be understood dâ— matu tendente in nocumentum c. of a motion tending to hurt where there is consent and so that motion is deadly sinne Sic Thomas in opuscul Ex Lippoman But Bellarmine affirmeth that this is a veniall sinne and so deserveth not everlasting damnation because hell fire is onely due unto the last to call one foole Bellarm. lib. 1. de purgator cap. 4. Contra. 1. Every mortall sinne deserveth damnation but in Thomas Aquins judgement as is shewed before this anger here spoken of is a mortall sinne Ergo. 2. The naming of hell fire onely in the last place sheweth not a divers kinde of punishment from the rest but a divers degree of punishment for otherwise judgement in Scripture â—s taken for damnation as Psal. 143.2 Enter not into judgement with thy servant for no flesh is righteous in thy sight So Rom. 2.1 In that thou judgest another thou condemnest thy selfe Here to judge and condemne are taken for all one to be culpable then of judgement is to bee guiltie of damnation 4. Yet we admit this distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes if it be understood not in respect of the nature of sinne but of the qualitie of the persons for unto those that beleeve all sinnes are veniall and pardonable through the mercie of God Rom. 8.1 There is no condemnation to those that are in Christ Iesus but to the wicked and unbeleevers all their sinnes are mortall Rom. 6.23 to them the stipend and wages of sinne is death See more also hereof Synops. Papis Centur. 4. err 6. 4. Morall observations 1. Observ. Not to be hastie to anger THou shalt not kill Our blessed Saviour expounding this Commandement Matth. 5.22 sheweth that even hee which is angrie unadvisedly transgresseth this precept which may bee a caveat unto furious cholerike and hastie men that they should bridle their intemperate affections and not give place to rage for as Chrysostome saith Si concedatur licentia irascendi datur causa homicidii faciendi If libertie be granted unto anger even cause many times will bee given of murther But if any man shall say when hee is angrie with a man for railing and reviling that hee is angrie with his sinne let him consider that when he heareth the name of God blasphemed he is not so much moved which sheweth that he is angrie in respect of his owne name and person which is called in question and not simply for the sinne Simler 2. Observ. The challenging of one another into the field forbidden ANd if it be simply unlawfull to kill then let such looke unto it that take it to be their honour and estimation to challenge one another into the field whereupon often ensueth murther for we have otherwise learned in the Scriptures Omnem cupiditatem seipsum ulciscendi vetitam esse That all desire for a man to revenge himselfe is unlawfull Simler For such doe usurpe the Lords office The
who did hold concupiscentiam non esse peccatum that concupiscence is not sinne whose objections were these 1. Object Such things as are naturall are not evill but concupiscence is naturall therefore it is not evill nor consequently sinne Answ. This argument must be answered by a distinction for by naturall here may be understood that which was made naturall in man by creation before his fall and so the proposition is true but the assumption is false for inordinate concupiscence and appetite was not in man before his fall or it is taken for that which is now incident to mans corrupt nature since his fall and so the assumption is true but the proposition false 2. Object Even in our nature as it now standeth corrupt the appetite or desire to such things as tend to the conservation of nature and to decline and shun the contrarie are not evill but such is the concupiscence to meat and drinke and such like Ergo. Answ. 1. Such motions and appetites of themselves are not evill as they are naturall motions but if they be inordinate motions and exceed a just measure they are evill as to have an immoderate desire to meat or drinke For as it was naturall in Eve to desire to eat of the fruit of the tree yet to desire it against the Commandement of God was evill so is it with these naturall motions if they bee immoderate and inordinate they are evill 2. There are other concupiscences beside these which are neither naturall nor tending to the conservation of nature as coveting another mans house or wife c. which can have no such excuse or pretenâ—â— 3. Object That which is not in mans power to avoid is no sinne but not to covet is not in mans power Ergo it is no sinne Answ. 1. The proposition is false for sinne is not measured by the necessitie or libertie of nature but by the disagreement which it hath with the will of God 2. When God first printed the law in mans nature before his fall then were the precepts of God given unto man in his power to keepe though man by his voluntarie corruption hath lost his power and libertie yet God forgoeth not his power and right of commanding 4. But that concupiscence is sinne it is both evident by this law that would not forbid it unlesse it were sinne and by the Apostle who useth the same argument I had not knowne sinne but by the law for I had not knowne lust except the law had said Thou shalt not lust Rom. 7.7 Vrsin 2. Confut. Against the Papists that denie concupiscence to be sinne in the regenerate SEcondly the Papists are herein Semipelagians who generally affirme and hold that concupiscence remaining after baptisme is not properly sinne nor forbidden by commandement Rhemist 〈◊〉 Rom. 6. sect 6. So was it decreed in the Tridentine Synode that concupiscence non est vere proprie peccatum in renatis is not verily and properly a sinne in the regenerate but that it is so called quia ex peccato est in peccatum inclinat because it commeth of sinne and inclineth to sinne Session 1. cap. 1. They object thus 1. Object Sinne maketh men guiltie before God of eternall death but the regenerate are not guiltie of eternall death therefore concupiscence in them is no sinne Answ. 1. By this reason there shall bee no sinne at all in the regenerate for there is no condemnation at all to them that are in Christ Jesus 2. Neither concupiscence nor any sinne else shall condemne the regenerate but that is not because concupiscence is no sinne but that both it and all other sinnes are pardoned in Christ and so not imputed 2. Object Originall sinne is taken away in Baptisme therefore concupiscence in the regenerate is no sinne Answ. Originall sinne is not simply taken away in Baptisme but onely quoad reatum in respect of the guilt and as the Schoolmen say it is taken away formally in Baptisme but not materially There are two things to be considered in originall sinne the disagreement or repugnancie which it hath with the law of God and the guilt of the punishment This latter way originall sinne is remitted and released in Baptisme it shall never be laid unto the charge of the faithfull as S. Paul saith Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods chosen Rom. 8.33 But the other remaineth still in Gods children as S. Paul confesseth of himselfe Rom. 7.23 I see another law in my members rebelling against the law of my minde but yet though it remaine and have a being in the faithfull it doth not reigne in them as the same Apostle exhorteth Rom. 6.12 Let not sinne reigne in your mortall bodie 3. But that concupiscence is sinne in the very regenerate it is evident by this precept Thou shalt not covet which commandement is given generally to all both the regenerate and unregenerate S. Paul also calleth the rebellion of his flesh which he felt in himselfe being now regenerate the law of sinne Rom. 7.23.25 And the Apostle speaketh to men regenerate when he saith Be renewed in the spirit of your minds Ephes. 4.23 which renovation needed not if concupiscence in them were no sinne 4. But that place of Augustine will bee objected Quamvis insint dum sumus in corpore mortis hujus peccati desideria c. Although while we are in the bodie of this death there be in us the desire of sinne yet if we should give assent to none of them non esset unde diceremus c. dimitte debita nostra we should have no cause to say to our heavenly Father Forgive us our debts c. August epist. 200. Answ. 1. Augustine must be understood to speake of actuall sinnes that if so men had grace never to consent to their concupiscence they should not need to pray for remission of such sinnes 2. And who is there that liveth who sometime is not carried away with concupiscence to give assent unto it So that if Augustine should speake generally of all sinne yet his speech being conditionall if we should give assâ—â— to none of them and that condition being kept of none this proveth not concupiscence not to bee sinne See more of this controversie Synops. Centur. 4. err 16. 3. Confut. That no concupiscence is a veniall sinne in it selfe THirdly Thomas Aquin his assertion commeth here to be examined Not a quòd cupiditas tunâ— est peccatum mortale quando sine ratione c. Note that concupiscence is then mortall sinne when as the things of our neighbours are coveted without reason but when they are reasonably desired it is veniall Thomas in opuscul Contra. 1. This distinction of mortall and veniall sinnes being understood in their sense that some sinnes in the condition and qualitie thereof are mortall some veniall is contrarie to the Scripture which maketh death the wages of sinne Rom. 6.23 that is of all but to the faithfull through Gods grace all sinnes are veniall
any man there no word is expressed of the intention as here Contra. 1. By neighbour any man whosoever is understood 2. And expresse mention is made here of the will and intention because it is an explanation of the former law Simler 3. Iunius thinketh that not he onely which killeth sed qui conatus est occidere but went about to kill is comprehended in this law as Deut. 19.19 Ye shall doe unto him as he had thought to doe unto his brother Contra. 1. It seemeth by the generall law vers 12. that this constitution is onely for murther committed and not intended onely for such smiting the law speaketh of whereupon death followeth 2. That law given in instance Deut. 19. is touching false witnesses whose false testimonie breaketh out into action into false witnesse bearing so that there is not an intention onely for the false witnesse by his false testimonie acteth as much as in him lieth to take away the life of his brother that place therefore is impertinent to this purpose I approve here rather the judgement of Cajetane Nec describuntur haec intus in animo sed prodeuntia extra in actiones Neither are these things described onely in the minde but proceeding without into action QUEST XLI Of the difference betweene voluntarie and involuntarie murther and the divers kinds of each HEre then there is a manifest distinction of involuntarie and voluntarie murther or killing grounded upon the law of Moses· 1. Involuntarie killing is of two sorts there are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chances unlooked for and sudden events as when one shooteth an arrow and killeth one unawares as Peleus killed his sonne being in hunting with him There are beside these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 errors and oversights as the father beateth his childe purposing onely to chastise him and hee dieth of that beating a Physition ministreth physick to his patient intending to cure him and doe him good and he dieth of it Borrh. 2. There are likewise two kinds of voluntarie or wilfull murther ex proposito of purpose ex impetu animi in heat or rage These kinde of murthers are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iniquities one may be slaine ex proposito purposely either per insidias by lying in wait when one watcheth for the life of a man and taketh him at advantage as Ioab killed Abner and afterward Amasa they suspecting no such thing so Ismael killed Gedoliah Ierem. 41. Or els per industriam when one of set purpose picketh quarrels and seeketh occasions to provoke a man that he may kill him both these kinds are touched here Tostat. quaest 16. Then one may bee killed in heat and rage when there was no purpose before as Alexander the Great killed Clitus Pelarg. This kinde though not so grievous as the other yet is a kinde of voluntarie killing So there is extant a constitution of Hadrian the Emperour against him qui per lasciviam causam mortis praebuisset which was the cause of anothers death through wantonnesse and riot though there were no enmitie before that such an one should be banished five yeeres Simler QUEST XLII Why the wilfull murtherer was to be taken from the Altar Vers. 14. THou shalt take him from mine Altar 1. This may bee understood either of the Altar of incense which was in the holy place or of the Altar of burnt offring rather which was without the Tabernacle in the Court for thither every one might easily flee that had committed any such offence but to the Arke no escape could be made because there was no entrance thither 2. R. Salomon saith that this is meant even of the Priest that sacrificed at the Altar who after he had finished his service at the Altar might be taken thence and judged by the law as other malefactors and murtherers Which collection of his may be received saving that it is not like they would suffer a murtherous Priest to minister at the Altar 3. But that other conceit of R. Salomon whom Lyranus followeth hath no good ground that he that had killed an Hebrew wilfully might be taken from the Altar as Ioab was but if he had onely killed a Gentile as a Moabite or Ammonite though of set purpose he was not to be taken thence but was privileged by the Altar But the contrarie appeareth that this law forbiddeth all voluntarie and wilfull murther whether of Hebrew or Gentile for it was more to kill a Gentile being free then a Gentile that was a servant or bondman but the master was to die for it if he beat his servant to death so that he died under his hand vers 20. which law must be understood of strangers and aliens that were servants not of Hebrewes for they were not to deale so cruelly with them Levit. 25.38 Iun. much more therefore were they to die if they of purpose killed any free stranger Tostat. 4. If therefore the wilfull murther as well of strangers as Hebrewes be here forbidden then both for the one murther and for the other might they be taken even from the Altar 5. And the reason thereof was this because they which did flee to Gods Altar eum tanquam patronum judicem innocentiae suae implorabani did sue unto God as the patron and Judge of their innocency therefore they therein abusing Gods name were to be expelled thence Gallas QUEST XLIII What manner of smiting of parents is forbidden Vers. 15. HE that smiteth his father and mother c. 1. The very smiting of the father or mother deserveth death although they die not of such smiting Cajetan Iun. as may appeare vers 12. where is directly expressed concerning the smiting of another if hee die then the smiter shall bee put to death Piscator 2. R. Salomon understandeth that this is not meant of every smiting but when upon the smiting â—he effusion of bloud followeth or some scarre or wound is caused But the very smiting of either of the parents sheweth the malice and disobedience of the childe for the which he is worthie to die as Deut. 21.18 the sonne for his stubbornnesse and disobedience was to be stoned to death Indeed for every blow or smiting the childe was not to die if it were done unwittingly or unawares but if it were done of purpose he deserved death 3. And the reason is because of the authoritie of the parents which is the next unto God Simler Deo parentibus non possumus reddere aequalia c. Wee can never make amends unto God and our parents Cajetan As also they seeme not to be worthie of life which are injurious to those by whom they received their life Gallas QUEST XLIV Of the grievous sinne of paricide THough there be no expresse mention here of those that kill their parents yet it followeth necessarily that if it be a sinne worthie of death to smite them much more to kill them 1. This even among the Heathen was counted so hainous a sinne that they thought none
maketh not innocent but in making innocent he will not make innocent 5. Burgensis thus understandeth it that the Lord holdeth not the innocent in the remission of their sinne to be innocent in respect of some punishmet which may remaine But daily experience sheweth the contrary that God multa peccata impunita praeâ—erit doth leave many sinnes unpunished at all neither doth the punishment remaine the sinne being once pardoned Calvin 6. Oleaster giveth this sense Vere innocentem ita percutiet c. Sometime hee will smite or correct the innocent as though he were not innocent as he sheweth by the example of Iob lest God might seeme to be unjust in afflicting the righteous But if God should be said in the same action and at the same time to absolve and not to absolve it would include a contradiction 7. Wherefore the best interpretation is that which the Septuagint follow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the guilty he will not purifie so that here two Hebraismes must be observed first the word is iterated and repeated In absolving I will not absolve to shew the certainty of the thing that is nullo modo absolvam I will by no meanes absolve Iun. Secondly I will not absolve that is punio I doe or will punish Vatabl. And further here must be supplied the word sontem the guiltie I will not absolve Iun. Calvin Gallas Pelarg. As the like place is found Ierem. 46.28 venakeh lo enakeh in setting thee free I will not set thee free that is will not hold thee altogether innocent but will punish thee So also Ierem. 25.19 In being innocent should yee be innocent where the same word is doubled the meaning is they should not be altogether innocent Calvin 8. Calvin also propoundeth another sense because nikkah sometime signifieth to cut off it may be thus interpreted succidendo non succidam in cutting off I will not cut off and so it may be a reason of the former sentence that God will forgive sinnes and not cut off the sinners altogether But he preferreth rather the former interpretation for the other sentence ending with a perfect distinction sheweth that the sentence following hath no dependance of it QUEST XII What the Lord visiteth for in the posteritie of the wicked Vers. 7. VIsiting the iniquity c. 1. Lest God having hitherto proclaimed his mercie might be thought not to regard the sinnes of men the Lord now addeth that he is also a visiter and punisher of sinne upon the wicked and their posterity Ferus 2. And by sinne here is understood neither the act of sinne which cannot be transmitted over unto other but being a transitory thing resteth in the doer nor the fault which only goeth with the act nor the blot which is only in the soule of the sinner and offender nor yet the guilt for if the children were guilty of their fathers sinnes then they should for the same be everlastingly punished therefore by sinne is meant the punishment of sinne which is extended to their posterity Tostat. qu. 8. 3. And God usually punisheth the fathers but unto the fourth generation as the Amorites and Amalekites were punished after 400. yeeres which expired in the fourth generation Gen. 15. vers 13 16. Oleaster QUEST XIII How the children are punished for their fathers sinnes Vers. 7. THe iniquity of the fathers upon the children c. In deciding of this question how the sonnes are punished for their fathers sinnes it must be considered whether the punishment bee inflicted by man or by God 1. If by man the punishment bee imposed it is either in the losse onely of temporall things or in death the children may justly be deprived of temporall things as of possessions privileges honours for the transgression of their parents As by humane Lawes treason against the Prince or Common-wealth is punished with death in the offenders and losse of honours and goods in their posterity But the punishment of death cannot be inflicted upon the children for their fathers offences as a rule is given in Deut. 24.16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children nor the children for the fathers 2. If the punishment be inflicted by the Lord it is either eternall or temporall first eternall punishment is laid upon none but upon the party that sinneth The same soule that sinneth shall dye Eâ—ech 18.4 If it be temporall it consisteth either in the losse of some temporall benefit or of life if the first not onely little ones and infants as the Hebrewes thinke shall suffer for their fathers sinnes but even they which are of yeeres as the Israelites did beare the iniquity of their fathers forty yeeres in the desart and the Jewes great and small were afflicted in the Babylonian captivity but where the punishment of temporall death is decreed by the Lord there onely the infants are punished for their fathers sinnes as the children of the rebellious Cora Dathan and Abiram were swallowed up with their fathers the greater sort also perished in that destruction but then they were such as consented thereunto Tostat. quâ—st 9. So also Achan was stoned with his sonnes and daughters for the sacrilege by him commited where Tostatus thinketh that they were little ones because the greater sort were not privy to his sinne seeing he had hid the stollen things in the ground But it is more like that they were such as might give consent unto the sinne and conceale it and that the things were not hid without their privity Iun. Or for the greater detestation of that fact and the example of others this exemplary punishment might be inflicted upon them Osiander But here two exceptions may be taken unto Tostatus conclusions 1. That he maketh infants liable to those sinnes of the fathers which the Lord saith he will here visit to the third and fourth generation whereas onely those children which continue like haters of God as their fathers were and imitate their impiety are included in this commination as appeareth by that clause inserted in the second Commandement of them that hate me Againe when infants are cut off by death their owne originall sinne is sufficient cause thereof which bringeth death upon them and so infants are taken away not onely to the fourth generation but in other succeeding ages further off 2. He restraineth this generall speech visiting the iniquity of the fathers onely unto temporall punishments beside death whereas the Lords judgements are not to be limited to this or that kinde but sometime by corporall death sometime by other temporall punishments hee doth visit the iniquity of the wicked fathers in their evill posteritie QUEST XIV Why the posteritie of the wicked are punished for their fathers sinnes VNto the third and fourth generation There are foure answers usually made to shew the equity of this that the posterity of the wicked should be punished for their fathers sinnes 1. Because God that gave life may againe without any injustice require it againe Nulli
verse the negative particle lo not must be supplyed which is but once in the beginning of the verse expressed This interpretation we preferre before either that of the Hebrewes 1. who referre this verse to that which followeth and joyne it not with that which goeth before but make this sense that as yet there were no plants or herbs that appeared above the earth but lay yet hid till God sent raine whereby the earth was prepared for the creation of man and the plants watered so R. Sel. But this is a vaine conceit for upon the third day trees were made which appeared above the earth and the earth having beene so lately covered with the waters was yet moist enough 2. Either that of Eugubinus who saith it rained the second day and then the plants were brought forth the third for upon the second day the waters were gathered together from covering the earth so that no raine was then needfull 3. Mercerus distinguisheth the times the 5. verse hee understandeth of the first growing of the plants in the creation which was done without raine or dew but the 6. verse hee referreth to that ordinary course which God appointed afterward by dewes and raines to refresh the earth 4. Musculus will have the 6. verse of the ascending of vapours to be understood of the very time of creation that God used those helps of nature but this were to tye God unto meanes wherefore I take it with Iunius to be an explanation of the former verse that it had neither yet rained nor any mist had ascended when God onely by his word caused the plants to grow out of the earth this is the exposition of R. Saadia which Kimâ—i preferreth before all the rest QVEST. IX Whether Paradise were terrestriall Vers. 8. THe Lord planted a garden eastward in Eden c. Hierome readeth for eastward à principiâ— from the beginning whereas the word is Kedem the East translated by the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that Hieromes conceit that God made Paradise before the heaven and earth tradit in 2. gen is grounded upon the false interpretation of this place and how could Paradise which was upon the earth be planted before the earth was founded 2. Their conceit is removed that imagine Paradise to bee no terrene or corporall place but to be spiritually understood as Philo lib. de mund opâ—fic and Origen whom Epiphanius confuteth by this reason that where there are true rivers as Euphrates which is confessed of all to bee one of the rivers of Paradise where were also very trees and plants there Paradise must bee a terrestriall place epist. ad Ioann Hierosâ—l 3. Neither can the whole earth be taken for Paradise as some have thought because it is said here to bee planted in Eden which was the name of a speciall country Esech 27.23 Harah Canneth Eden are joyned together QVEST. X. Where Paradise was situate LIkewise for the situation of Paradise 1. it was neither in a remote place beyond the Ocean which opinion is attributed to Ephrem 2. nor a place higher than all the earth Damasc. lib. 2. de fid orthodox c. 14. 3. nor next unto heaven as Rupertus de Trinitat c. 37. 4. nor reaching up to the Moone as some other have imagined 5. nor in the aire though not so high as the Moone as Alexander Hales and Tostatus 6 nor under the Equinoctiall Bonavent in 2. senten c. 17. for these rivers Tigris and Euphrates which flowed out of Paradise and the country Eden where Paradise was came not neare the Equinoctiall and they are knowne to be in Asia not in any remote and unknowne countrey in earth not in the aire or next to the Moone All these are ridiculous childish fancies and need no long confutation QVEST. XI Of the tree of life Vers. 9. THe tree of life c. 1. This was a visible tree planted in the midst of Paradise in a visible place not spiritually or allegorically to be understood as Origen thinketh 2. neither is it called the tree of life because it was able to give immortality and to preserve from death for ever as Tostatus or onely because it was able to preserve man from death till such time as hee should bee translated to immortality as Scotus in 2. lib. sent dist 19. qu. 1. and Thomas with others 4. Neither need it bee disputed whether the tree of life had this power to preserve from death by a supernaturall gift as Bonaventure or by a naturall faculty as Hugo Thomas Pererius upon this place 5. For it is evident that this tree had no power to give immortality at all by the taste of the fruit thereof 1. because that no corruptible food can make the body incorruptible but the fruit of this tree could not nourish nature without corruption and alteration and without nourishment it could not give life to the body 2. Againe man had by his creation power given him to dye if he had not sinned wherfore immortality was the gift of his creation not effect of the eating of the tree 3. And if it could have giveÌ„ immortality it must have had a power to preserve from sin for by sinning man became mortall so that if it could not defend him from sin it was no more the tree of life in regard of the effect than any other tree of the garden for if he had not sinned he should not have dyed what fruit soever he had eaten of that only tree of knowledge of good and evill excepted 6. Then our opinion is this that it was called the tree of life not so much for the operation though we confesse it might give strength and vertue also to the body Mercer but chiefly for the signification because it was both a signe of life received from God and a symbole of Christ who is our true life and herein we approve rather the opinion of Augustine Eugubinus in Cosmopeia who thinketh it was called the tree of life not effective but significative not effectually but significatively as a signe of true immortality which he should receive of God if he continue in obedience First it is the tree of life as the other was of knowledge of good and evill which was not so called because it gave knowledge but was a seale unto them of their miserable knowledge which they should get by experience in their transgression Magister lib. 3. distinct 17. therefore the tree of life must be so called because it was a seale and pledge of life secondly thus the Scripture significatively and simbolically expoundeth the tree of life Prov. 5.18 Wisdome which is Christ is a tree of life Revel 2.7 To him that overcommeth will I give to eat of the tree of life see more of this Synops 17. cont err 5. QVEST. XII Of the tree of knowledge of good and evill vers 9. THe tree of knowledge of good and evill First we affirme that this was a visible materiall tree not
neither goe upright before neither at that instant onely when Satan used him but whereas he did extoll himselfe against man he is brought to his first condition and his creeping and feeding of the earth which should not have beene ignominious before is acccursed and made reproachfull now Mercer Calvin QVEST. XXIV Of the enmity betweene the seed of the woman and the Serpent WHere the Lord saith I will put enmity betweene thy seed and her seed 1. This first is truly understood of Christ quia solus ita semen multeris est ut non etiam viri semen sit who was so the seed of the woman as he was not of the man and betweene Christ and Satan the greatest enmity was who consented to him in nothing 2. We may also understand by the seed of the woman all the Elect and by the seed of the Serpent all the wicked who are the sons of the Devill as Christ said to the unbeleeving Jewes Yee are of your father the Devill Ioh. 8.44 betweene whom the Elect and the wicked there shall be perpetuall enmity and therefore Rupertus saith the Scriptures are called the booke of the battells of the Lord Num. 21. which declareth the continuall combate betweene the Church of God and the world 3. Part of this sentence is literally true in the Serpent for as Rupertus noteth if a woman tread upon the Sepent with her bare foot he presently dieth but if he first bite her heele the woman dieth of that poyson But howsoever this be true it is most certaine that betweene man and those venomous creatures there is a naturall hatred that one cannot endure the sight and presence of the other 4. Some doe marvell why the Serpent is not made mute and dumbe seeing Satan abused his tongue and mouth to tempt the woman the Hebrewes thinke that the punishment is included in that dust is appointed to bee his meat for such whose mouthes are filled with earth cannot speake And to this day we see that the punishment remaineth upon the Serpent who maketh no perfect sound as other cattell doe but hisseth onely 5. Satan was accursed before God before nor any hope of recovery remained but now the sentence is declared to the comfort of man and Satans state declared to be irrepairable for his punishment shall endure all the daies of his life that is for ever 6. Some by the heele understand the end or extremity as Onkelos that in the end the Devill as a Serpent shall bite the heele some the inferiour part of the soule some the humanity of Christ which Satan pinched at when Christ was put to death but thereby Christ gave him a deadly blow upon the head But generally it signifieth the weaker parts of Christs body which is the Church that Satan shall bee nibling and biting at the heele as a Serpent doth when hee is overwhelmed and turned upon his backe that is hee shall touch the members of Christ and trie them with many temptations but hee shall not be able to hurt them Mercer 7. By the dust also some understand terrene and earthly things wherein the Devill is conversant being cast downe from heaven some the graves and sepulchers of dead men where the spirits appeare but this clause is properly referred to the Serpent who as he was Satans instrument to cause man to sinne and returne to the dust so that he should feed of the dust QVEST. XXV Of the sorrowes of women Vers. 16. I Will greatly increase thy sorrowes There is a threefold punishment inflicted upon the woman as Rupertus well noteth pro seductione conceptus multiplicitas pro gulae oblectamento vterâ— dolor pro scandalo quod viro exhibuit servitutis poena c. because she was seduced she hath sorrow in conceiving for the delight of her eye the paine of her wombe for the offence in enticing her husband subjection unto him But where the Lord saith I will multiply thy sorrowes and conceptions 1. It is neither with Oleaster to be referred to the bearing of the child so long in the womb for that is agreeable to nature and our Saviour was so borne in his mothers womb and therefore this was no part of the curse 2. Neither doth the curse consist in the multiplicity as Rupertus because many are borne which are ordained to destruction for simply the fruit of the womb is a blessing Psal. 27.3 3. But hereby the many sorrowes are signified which women doe endure in the conception of their children as faintnesse loathing of meat longing for strange things griefe ache unwilsomnesse perill of abortion and such like Secondly whereas women should before have brought forth without pain now their travaile is ful of labour in so much as many have miscarried in the birth of their children as Rachel and it is well observed of Aristotle that no other creature with such difficulty bringeth forth her young as woman doth which is an evident demonstration of this punishment laid upon them Thirdly where it is said the womans desire shall bee to her husband and he shall rule over her 1. It is not understood of the naturall desire the woman hath eftsoone of her husbands company notwithstanding her painfull travaile which is no punishment but a delight unto them 2. But of that subjection whereby by the law of nature practised among Pagans women doe depend upon their husbands The woman should before have beene obedient to man but of a loving society to be made partaker of all his counsells nor of an urging necessity as now whereby the woman in rerespect of her weaknesse both with her will dependeth of her husband for her direction and provision of things necessary and against her will she often endureth the hard yoke of an unequall commander QVEST. XXVI How the earth was cursed unto man Vers. 17. CVrsed be the earth c. 1. It is to be observed that the Serpent is onely pronounced accursed because his state is remedilesse and desperate but neither the man or woman are accursed for whom there is hope 2. The earth is accursed not in it selfe but in respect of the use of man as S. Paul saith that the creatures doe yet groane with us together 3. Some Hebrewes note that some men are exempted from this punishment to eat their bread in the sweat of their browes as Kings and Princes but no women are exempted from their punishment because the woman both sinned her selfe and enticed the man so did not Adam but this sentence is generall against all men that although one particular onely be expressed of the labour and toyle in tilling of the ground yet therein are contained all other the cares and troubles of this life from the which none are free 4. Some Hebrewes thinke that in mans innocencie he should not have travelled so for his bread as in threshing grinding bakâ—ng of it and it may very well bee that although man should not then have lived
exercise his strength as Augustine againe saith Administrat omâ—ia qua creavit ut etiam ipsa proprios motus exercere sinat God doth so governe all things which he created that yet hee suffereth them to exercise their owne motions 3. God might justly suffer this to be done because hee did know how to turne Adams fall unto good Deuâ— permisit hominem tentari quâ—m sciebut esse casurum quid simul videbat eo casu sâ—â—â—ti posse ad misericordiam c. God suffered man to be tempted whom he knew should fall because he saw how to use his fall to declare his mercy and justice while he justly punished some out of the same damned masse and delivered others in mercy Doct. VI. Adam not damned WHereas v. 15. a promise is made concerning Christ that the seede of the woman should breake the serpents head from hence we infer that our first patents though they sinned yet were by faith in the Messiah to come restored and not utterly condemned which was the heresie of the Tatiaâ—es August de haeres c. 23. In the booke of wisdome we read that wisdome preserved the first father of the world and brought him out of his offence c. 10.1 which is agreeable to the Canonicall scripture because Adam is called the sonne of God Luke 3.38 he was not then the child of death and hell everlastingly to perish Doct. VII Wherein Adam transgressed NOw because carnall men doe extenuate Adams sinne that he was cast out of Paradise for eating an apple I will briefly shew the greatnes of our first parents transgression wherein many sins concurred 1. There was in them both incredulitie in not beleeving Gods words to be true 2. Vnthankfulnesse in not being contented with their estate 3. Pride in desiring to be like unto God 4. Wantonnes in sinning without any necessitie having all the trees in the garden beside to eare of 5. There was the sinne of gluttonie in pampering the desire of the belâ—â—e 6. Disobedience in transgressing the commandement 7. Curiositie in coveting to know the operation of the fruit in bringing them to knowledge 8. Presumption in that they presumed of Gods mercie that they should not die though they did eate 9. Then followed the concupiscence and rebellion of the flesh in being ashamed of their nakednesse 10. They excused their sinne 11. They are guiltie of homicide in bringing death not only upon themselves but all their posteritie 12. Beside Eva seduced her husband 13. Adam sinned in his inordinate affection to his wife in listning to her 14. The easines of the commandemeÌ„t maketh the transgression more heinous as Augustine well noteth answering to this question why God forbad them to eate of that tree Si bona est quare non tango si mala est quare in Paradise ideo in Paradiso est quia bona est sed nolâ— tangâ—â— quiâ— obedienteÌ„ te volâ— if it be good why doe I not touch it if it be evill why is it in Paradise therefore it is in paradise because it is good but I will not have thee touch it because I would have thee obedient God could not then make better triall of mans obedience than in forbidding that which was good Places of confutation Confut I. Infidelity not pride the first sinne of our parent 1. THe opinion of the Popish writers is that pride was the first sinne that Eva was tempted unto because Satan saith unto them yee shall bee as gods but it is rather evident that their first sinne was infidelitie first Satan telleth them ye shall not die at all and so perswadeth them not to give credit to the word of God for if they had verely beleeved that to come to passe which was threatned they would never have given any credit to Satan Confut. II. Our parents lost not their faith 2. BEllarmine also holdeth that our first parents in their transgression lost their faith because by the seducement of Satan they beleeved not what God said unto them ye shall not die Ans. 1. It followeth not if in this one act of faith they failed that therefore totally their faith was extinguished he that shal be seduced in one article or point of faith is he presently stripped of all faith 2. It was no formall infidelitie as though wittingly they rejected Gods word but they were materially deceived onely and their sudden violent affection over-shadowed their knowledge judgement 3. So Peter denied Christ through feare and frailtie yet in his judgement he could not so at once cast off all opinion of Christ hâ—s faith was shaken and winnowed but it failed not as our Saviour testifieth of him that he had praied for him that his faith faile not Luke 23.22 and so was the case in our first parents Confut. III. Not Marie but Christ brake the serpents head 3. vers 15. THe vulgar latine translation readeth shee shall breake thy head c. which the Popish writers understand of the virgin Mary as Pererius doubteth not to give this marginal note B. virgo contrivit caput serpentis the blessed Virgin did break the head of the serpent and Bellarmine also justifieth this translation whereas in the original it is his ipsum it in the neuter gender which must be referred to seed the Septuagint and the Chalde read he in the masculine understanding it of Christ for none else but Christ broke the serpents head Confut. IIII. The tree of life could not actually give life but was a symbole of it 4. vers 22. LEst he take of the tree of life and live for ever Bellarmine would proove from hence that this tree by eating the fruit therof might bring true immortalitie Ans. 1. As the Lord saith by way of derision man is become as one of vs to know good and evill So in the same sense is this other part of the sentence uttered that as a man simply thought to get knowledge by eating of the one so he might imagine to obtaine life by the other 2. For if Adam might have lived by eating of this tree now after he had sinned how would that other saying have taken effect in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death Gen. 2.17 These speeches had beene contrarie the one to the other 3. It was therefore the tree of life as the other was of the knowledge of good and evill that is significative non effective not in operation â—ut in signification it was a signe or symbole of life received from God and by Gods gift should have beene â—reserved if a man had not sinned and therefore man beeing deprived of life lost also the signe thereof Places of Exhortation and practice 1. WE have here set forth unto us from v. 1. to v. 7. the degrees of tentation 1. the suggestion of Satan 2. delectation the woman saw the tree was pleasant c. 3. Consent shee tooke of the fruit 4. The effecting of the thing desired shee did
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated him S. tulit tooke him H. B. G. non occidit killed him not Ch. sumpsit received him Tr. heb lachach to take away receive v. 25. an 165. yeares S. an 187. yeares cat v. 26.802 yeares S. 782. yeares cat v. 28. an 178. yeares S. an 182. yeares cat v. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall cause us to rest S. shall comfort us cat heb â—â—ach to rest to refresh v. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the earth S. de terra from off the earth Ch. in the earth H. as touching the earth G. aboue the earth B. propter terram because of the earth Tr. v. 30.565 yeares S. 595. yeare cat v. 31.753 yeares S. 777. yeares cat 3. The Theologicall explication QVEST. I. Booke of generation how to be understood Vers. 1. THis is the booke of the generation 1. Moses setteth downe the genealogy of the fathers before the floud because of Christs line which Luke deriveth from Adam Matthew goeth not beyond Abraham not as some thinke because of the rest of that line beyond Abraham might easily bee supplyed out of Moses books which were then well knowne but for that the most conspicuous and manifest promises of the Messiah were made to Abraham all the generations to Matthew supplying â—â—enty from Adam to Abraham make but 72. but Luke reckoneth 77. The Reason is because Matthew omitteth some of purpose to make the numbers equall which Luke supplyeth and Matthew maketh his account by Salomon Luke by Nathan so that there might bee more persons in the one discent than in the other 2. Moses beginneth now to set downe Adams generation by Seth because Cain was rejected and Abel died without issue 3. It is called a booke that is an ennumeration for so Sepher signifieth a booke because things are rehearsed in it not because as R. Isaac Carus Moses beginneth his booke here and the other 3. chapters should bee as a preface 4. Generation is here taken actively for the posterity of Adam increased by him as in Matthew the booke of the generation of Iesus Christ is taken passively for the generations of whom Christ came 5. And whereas it is added in the day that God created Adam we need neither with Lyranus to understand day generally for time and wee refuse the opinion of the Hebrewes that hold that Adam in the same day of his creation began to have generations for so they fable that Adam and Eve had foure or five children the same day they were created but in the day is to be referred to the latter part of the verse wherein mention is made of Adams creation according to the image of God Mercer QVEST. II. How Adam begat a Sonne in his owne likenesse Vers. 3. ADam begat a sonne in his owne likenesse c. 1. which is neither to be understood of the shape and image of his body for so Cain was in outward shape like to Adam 2. neither is it to be taken for the image of vertue and piety in his soule for Adam had lost that image neither is vertue ingendred by nature and Abel had the image of his fathers vertue before Seth. 3. neither is it so said because the image of mankind was continued and preserved in Seth whereas both Abel died without issue and Cains posterity was extinguished in the floud for this notwithstanding seeing the world was increased by Cain he might be said also to be after Adams image 4. But hereby is signified that originall corruption which is descended unto Adams posterity by naturall propagation which is expressed in the birth of Seth not of Abel because hee had no of-spring nor of Cain because it might appeare that even the righteous seed by nature are subject to this originall depravation and yet Seth was otherwise after the image of Adam than Cain because his seed was sanctified of God who purposed in Seth and his seed to make good the promise made to Adam as touching the seed of the woman that should breake the serpents head Iun. 5. And whereas Adam was an hundred thirty yeere old before he begat Seth wee abhor the lewd fables of the Hebrewes that thinke in this meane space that Adam companied with female spirits or devils and begat male spirits and Eva with male spirits and brought forth masculine or male devils neither doe I thinke with Mercer that in the meane time Adam begat other sonnes and daughters but God by this meanes Adam staying so long without children did try his faith in looking for the promised seed and his patience in seeing the wicked stocke of Cain so mightily to increase Iun. QVEST. III. Wherefore it is added and he died Vers. 5. ALL the dayes that Adam lived c. 1. Neither were these yeares otherwise accounted than by 12. moneths as it may appeare in the story of Noahs floud where mention is made of the 7. moneth and 27. day of the moneth 2. Neither did these righteous fathers onely live thus long by miracle as thinketh R. Moses but it was usuall in those dayes 3. And the conclusion of every ones life is mortuus est he died not as some think because it should appeare that they dyed not in the floud but by their owne naturall death and therefore they say this clause is not added after the floud in the genealogy of the fathers but it is thus said to shew what the condition of all mankind was after Adams fall 4. It is said only of Adam all the dayes that he lived Whereby the Hebrewes inferre that Adam lived a godly life and repented his repentance we doubt not of but not soundly hence gathered Mercer QVEST. IIII. Whether Adam the longest liver NOw whereas Adam lived but 930. yeares Mathuselah 969. yeares v. 27. yet may Adam be well supposed to have beene the longest liver because he was created in a perfect state of body apt to generation which was not then under sixty yeares for none of the Patriarkes began to have children under that age Mahalalel begat at 65. yeares of age v. 15. and none under then adde unto Adams yeares 60. more in what age and state of body he was created and he will bee found to have beene the longest liver of the Patriarkes and to exceed Mathuselahs age 21. yeares QVEST. V. The yeares of the Patriarkes full and complete yeares consisting of twelve moneths COncerning the long life of the aged Patriarkes 1. Neither is the conceit of the Aegyptians to bee received that a man cannot live above an 100. yeares for they say that a mans heart increaseth till he come to 50. every yeare two drachmaes in weight and then decreaseth every yeare as much till he come to an hundred and then for want of heart hee can live no longer For this fancy of theirs is confuted by experience for Pliny maketh mention that in Vespatian the Emperors time there were found in Italy two men of an 105. yeares foure of
multiplyed by 9. which is the height will produce the said number of an 135000. whereas fodder for the cattell occupieth not above 90000 ex Perer. QVEST. VIII Whether the ravenous beasts lived of flesh in the Arke WHereas it is also questioned whether the ravenous beasts were fed with flesh according to their naturall use while they were in the Arke 1. Neither is it like that all the beasts did eat of one common food for the text saith Genes 6.21 take with thee of all meat that is eaten 2. Neither is it like as Origen thinketh of which opinion also is Bucer that Adam brought into the Arke a great number of cattell to be food for the ravenous beasts for there came no more but two of the uncleane and seven of the cleane 3. Neither is it probable that these beasts did not live of flesh but herbs and other fruits of the earth before the floud as I have shewed at large quest 23 in 1. cap. of Genes 4. Wherefore I approve rather Augustines resolution to the which Mercerus subscribeth which is to this effect 1. that these devouring beasts as they doe live of flesh so also they use to eat of the fruits of the earth 2. That it might be revealed to Adam what food besides flesh was convenient and apt for them 3. That hunger will enforce beasts to eat that which otherwise is not usuall 4. But his best answer is quid non suave faceret Deus qui etiam ut sine cibo viverent divina facilitate donaret What could not God make pleasant who could have given them power to have lived without meat much more then could God by his power dispose them to live for that time of other food than flesh QVEST. IX How the yeare is to be counted wherein the floud came Vers. 10. SO it came to passe after seven dayes that the floud was upon the earth in the six hundred yeare of Noahs life in the second moneth c. 1. Noah went seven dayes into the Arke before the floud came not as the Hebrewes conjecture to lament for the death of Mathuselah for it is certaine that Mathuselah died the same yeare the floud came so whether hee died seven dayes or seven weekes before it is uncertaine but it is more like that Noah entred before to dispose of every thing in the Arke before it should be tossed of the waters as also as Ambrose noteth that the rest of the world seeing him enter before there was yet any apparant danger might have beene drawne to repentance 2. Neither was the 600. yeare of Noahs age now onely begun as Lyranus Tostatus with others thinke but complete for otherwise there should not bee 1656. yeares from the creation to the floud neither should Noah have lived 900. and fifty yeares whereof he lived but 350. after the floud if hee had not beene full 600. yeare old before 3. This second moneth was neither the second moneth of the yeare considered a part from Noahs age as Rupertus thinketh for it hath a coherence with the 600. yeare of Noahs life whereof mention is made immediatly before neither is it to be taken for the second of Noahs 600. yeare without respect of the season of that instant yeare as Cajetan seemeth to thinke but it was both the second moneth of the usuall yeare and of Noahs 600 yeare which concurred both together for Noah his 600. yeare was the 1656. yeare of the age of the world from the Creation Mercer QVEST. X. Whether the floud came in the Spring or Autumne THis second moneth some thinke to have beene in the Spring answering to the moneth of May. 1. That it might be the more griefe to the wicked to be taken away from their pleasure as our Saviour sheweth that they were taken away in the middest of their mirth Matth. 24.37 Luther 2. That the floud might not be imputed to any naturall causes but onely to the power of God the waters increasing in the time of Summer which is a season of drought and decreasing in Winter when as the waters naturally increase 3. And againe because the Dove brought the leafe of an Olive in the 11. moneth after the floud beganne some doe gather that the floud came in the Spring Rupertus 4. But better arguments than these may be produced to shew it more probable that the floud came in the Spring because that then the world is supposed to have taken beginning as is before proved Quest. 10. in 1. chap. Gen. and from the creation to the floud are reckoned 1656. even yeares 5. The floud came in the second moneth of the yeare now it cannot be shewed in any place of Scripture where the moneths are accounted in order the first second third but from Nisan which answereth to part of March part of Aprill Moses ordaining this moneth to be the first Exod. 12. doth make no new institution but reneweth the old account which was discontinued in Egypt by reason that the Egyptians indeed beginne their yeare from the moneth Pthoâ— which answereth to our September And this reason from the order and account of the moneths I confesse hath much prevailed with me to thinke it more likely that the floud came in the Spring 6. And if it had beene Autumne when the Cattell came forth of the Arke when the herbs and plants doe fade whence should they have had food till the Spring 7. As also the cattell presently increasing and multiplying after their comming out of the Arke this might seeme rather to fall into the Spring time which is the aptest season for the copulation and ingendring of cattell but most especially of the fowles Of this opinion are most of the Ecclesiasticall Writers though divers of the Hebrewes hold the contrary as Ambrose among the rest thus resolveth Secundum mensem verni temporis fuisse non ambigitur quando augentur nascentia ager parturit c. tunc ergo fecit diluvium quando dolor eorum major foret qui in abundantia puniebantur c. It is not to be doubted but that the second moneth was in the Spring time when things increase and grow the field bringeth forth c. God therefore then sent the floud when their griefe should be the greater to be punished in their abundance The chiefest reason that moved Ambrose thus to thinke was the account of the moneths which alwayes in Scripture are reckoned from the Spring yea that moneth which some would have the beginning of the yeare when the feast of blowing the Trumpets and of Tabernacles was kept is called the seventh moneth Levit. 23.24.34 Of thâ—s opinion also is learned Mercerus that when the second or third moneth is simply named it must be accounted from Nisan which is in the Spring QVEST. XI What is vnderstood by the great deepe and the windowes of heaven Vers. 10. THe fountaines of the great deepe were broken up 1. By the deepe here is not understood the Tartarean waters
Hebrew ach to be read as an adversative as Paulus Burgensis readeth veruntamen notwithstanding as though the sense should be this though yee are permitted to shed the bloud of beasts yet it is unlawfull for you to shed the bloud of man 3. Neither is this another exception concerning mans food as Cajetane that as before the bloud of beasts is excepted so here humane flesh that if it be not lawfull to shed the bloud of man neither is it to eat his flesh which first must be kiâ—led before it be eaten 4. Neither need there to be here understood any sentence as this I will not have you to shed mans bloud and then this to follow as a reason for this prohibition to shed mans bloud followeth directly in the next verse 5. But this word translated for may be read as a causall why God would have them abstaine from all cruelty or savage behaviour in eating of the bloud of beasts that they should have a greater detestation of the spilling or shedding of mans bloud Perer. Mercer QVEST. VII How God will require the bloud of man at the hand of beasts Vers. 5. AT the hand of every beast 1. Rupertus by beast understandeth the Devill that shall answer for the death of mens soules but Moses here directly speaketh of the bodily life which is in the spirits and bloud 2. Neither by beasts here are understood cruell and beastiall men for it followeth afterward aâ— the hands of man will I require it c. 3. Neither doth Moses insinuate the death of martyrs which were exposed to beasts for which the persecutors shall answer for that did cast the Saints before the beasts 4. But here is shadowed forth that Law which was afterward published that even the beast that killeth a man should be stoned Exod. 22. QVEST. VIII How his bloud shall be shed that sheddeth bloud Vers. 6. BY man shall his bloud be shed 1. Some reade in homine and referre it to the first clause Hee that sheddeth mans bloud in man as they which are strangled have their bloud shed as it were in them sic Tostatus but in this sense one kinde of murther onely should be prohibited 2. Some read in homine against man that is in despite of man Cajetan 3. But the best reading is per hominem by man and to referre it to the last clause by man shall his bloud be shed that is by the Magistrate as the Chalde interpreteth by witnesse by the sentence of the Iudge for it should seeme that before the floud there was no law made nor power given to man to punish murther as Adam proceeded not against Cain that killed his brother Abel Mercer 4. And this must be understood not de facto sed de jure merito not of the fact for many times murtherers escape but of the right and due desert of murtherers that they are by Gods Law worthy of death and many times where the law of man faileth that such are not executed Gods vengeance overtaketh them such are either slaine in battell or by the hands of other or by some other meanes as it is in the Psalme men of bloud shall not live halfe their daies Psalm 55.24 Calvin QVEST. IX That mans life should be preserved because of Gods image IN the image of God c. 1. Hence it followeth not as Oleaster collecteth that the image of God is in mans body because the image in the soule cannot be by the killing of the body destroyed for the reason concludeth well though this image of God be not in the body yet because the body is the Tabernacle of the soule and beareth that which beareth the image of God it ought for that cause to be reverenced and yet the image of God though not originally or principally yet by the consequent and effects is expressed and shineth in some sort in mans body in that it is made upright and aspiring to celestiall things and so sutable to the soule and in regard that into the hand of man God hath delivered the rule and dominion of the creatures cap. 1. vers 28. 2. Though the image wherein man was created be much decayed and impaired yet some part thereof remaineth for the which the life of man should be spared and preserved Calvin 3. And if for this reason the life of any man whatsoever should be regarded much more the life of Christians in whom this image is renewed in Christ Muscul. QVEST. X. Of the Raine Bow Vers. 13. I Have set my bow in the cloud c. 1. Neither Ambrose conceit can be admitted who understandeth not here the visible Raine-Bow in the clouds but the invisible power of God whereby he sometime intendeth sometime remitteth his judgements as a bow is bent and unbent againe But this collection is contrary to the text which saith The Bow shall be seene in the cloud vers 14. 2. Neither is their opinion found that thinke there was neither raine noâ— Raine-Bow before the floud for how could the plants and fruits of the earth have beene so many yeares preserved without raine so then the Raine-Bow was before the floud but it beganne onely now to be a signe of this covenant betweene God and man as the Lord chuseth sometime naturall things for signes as Bread and Wine and Water in the Sacraments Mercer 3. Neither is the opinion of some Hebrewes to be admitted that thinke the Raine-Bow to have beene before the floud but then it appeared in the cleare aire now in a cloud for the iris or Bow can have no existence or being but in a dewing or stilling cloud Mercer 4. Neither is Thomas Aquinas judgement and Cajetanus sound which thinke that the Râ—ine-Bow is partly a naturall signe that there shall be no floud because the Raine-bow sheweth not but when the clouds are thinne and dispersed whereas thicke and blacke clouds ingender inundations for the causes of the generall floud were not naturall and God without the clouds by the overflowing onely of the waters could drowne the world and beside if the Rain-bow were a naturall signe then before the floud came it might have prognosticated so much but then it should have beene a lying signe for notwithstanding the Raine bowes often appearing before the deluge as it is like the floud came 5. Though the Raine-bow bee not a naturall signe but voluntary depending upon the will and institution of God yet notwithstanding hath it some agreement with that which it is made a signe of like as baptisme in the flesh hath some resemblance of the soule so the Raine-bow is a fit and convenient signe to portend no inundation likely to follow because it is orâ—inarily a signe either of faire weather or of no long raine And it hath beene observed that a Raine-bow in the morning betokeneth showers in the evening faire weather Beside the Raine-bow is found to be wholesome to plants and herbs that where it lighteth it giveth them a more pleasant
were 4. Iunius placeth it neare unto Jerusalem being the same Valley where Absolon reared his Pillar 2. Sam. 18.18 and hereunto the Septuagint agree which interpret in the Valley of Melchisedeck And it seemeth indeed not to be farre off from Salem which is Jerusalem where Melchisedeck was King because he met Abraham there with bread and wine 5. It was not at this time but afterward called the Kings Dale Vatab. not because the Kings used there to exercise and disport themselves Chald. neither was it so named of some King Calvin but rather it was called the Kings Dale for the excellency of it and therefore is thought to be the same which was called Vallis illustris the famous Valley Perer. QVEST. XVI Who Melchisedeck was Vers. 18 MElchisedeck c. 1. Origen and Dydimus thinke that Melchisedeck was an Angell but the text is contrary that maketh him King of Salem 2. Some thinke that this Melchisedeck was the Holy Ghost which opinion is defended by the Author of the questions of the old and new Testament cha 109. which goe under Augustines name but it is none of Augustines worke for he numbreth the Melchsedechians among the Heretikes here 's 34. and it is an erronious opinion 1. For this Melchisedeck is said to be a Priest to the most high God but every Priest is taken from among men Heb. 5.1 2. If the Holy Ghost was a Priest unto God he therein should be inferiour unto God and so not God for in the God-head there is equality 3. Neither did the Holy Ghost ever descend from heaven to be incarnate but onely the sonne of God Ioh. 3.13 4. And whereas the Apostle saith that Melchisedeck was without father or mother and without beginning of dayes or end of life Heb. 7.3 whence they would enforce that Melchesedeck was not a mortall man but of an immortall nature the Apostle hath there relation onely to the story in this place Melchisedeck is not set forth in story by his kindred his birth and death he had both father and mother was borne and died but there is no mention made of it and so Hierome expoundeth that word used by the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 genealogie is not expressed or mentioned 3. A third opinion there is that Melchisedeck was a King of Canaan and not of Abrahams line of which opinion were Irenaeus Eusebius Caesarion Apollinarius Eustathius as Hierome testifieth and among the new Writers Calvin Iunius Musculus Mercerus Pererius with others 1. Pererius urgeth that place Heb. 7.6 He whose kindred is not counted among them which proveth not that Melchisedeck simply was not of Abrahams kindred but that it was not so expressed in story 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Epiphanius saith so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not rehearsed in genealogie here used by the Apostle is the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without kindred vers 3. 2. And seeing Canaan was under Gods curse and Sem had the chiefe blessing how it is like that one of Canaan should blesse Abraham of Sem. 3. And the Apostle concludeth that Melchisedeck was greater than Abraham because he blessed him but none of the Canaanites which were the cursed seed could be greater than Abraham the father of the faithfull of blessed Sem. 4. The fourth opinion of the rest most probable is that this Melchisedeck was Sem which opinion is strengthned with many arguments 1. Sem onely of all men living was greater than Abraham as Syracides saith Sem and Seth were in great honour among the children of men 49.16 though Arphaxad Selah and Heber yet lived yet Sem was the most honourable in respect of his yeares his knowledge who saw the old world his prerogative in Noahs blessing and whereas Abrahams predecessors were Idolaters none of Sems progenitors are noted that way therefore seeing Melchisedeck was greater than Abraham and none then living was greater than Sem he is most like to be the Melchisedeck 2. That was the place of Sems dwelling whence in time Iapheths sonnes should learne to dwell in the Tabernacle of God so reasoneth Midras but from Sion came forth the law and word from Jerusalem Isay 2.3 at Salem therefore were the tents of Sem. 3. Hierome alleageth this reason used by some that Melchisedeck brought forth bread and wine to Abraham for his repast seeing he owed this duty to his grand-childe Evagr. tom 4. 4. Melancthon thus argueth therefore God brought Abraham to Sem the father of his ancestors to joyne together a notable company of the Church 5. Some use this reason A Kingdome is more ancient than a tyranny but unlesse we make Sem to be Melchisedeck we cannot plainly prove that a King reigned before Nimrod treat of Melchis 6. Melchisedeck is interpreted a King of righteousnesse this Melchisedeck had the knowledge of the true justice and righteousnesse by faith in Christ but in all the Scripture shall we read of none called to the faith but men acquainted with Abrahams house with himselfe or Isaacks line or the children of the East the sonnes of Keturah in the booke of Iob. 7. That this Melchisedeck a King of Canaan should bee Sem agreeth to the prophesie Gen. 9.27 Let Canaan be his servant 8. Also in that he is called a Priest of the most high God This also agreeth to Sem who had that prerogative of Priest-hood not as some Hebrewes thinke by his birth-right for Iapheth was elder but by his fathers blessing Blessed be the God of Sem who was more like to be this great high Priest of Sems God than Sem himselfe 9. Melchisedeck was King of Salem which signifieth peace and indeed this Salem had a speciall prerogative of peace for when the foure Kings smote other parts of the Countrey of Canaan as is set forth in this chapter it is not like that Salem should have beene spared if the King thereof had beene a Canaanite if there had not beene great respect to the person of aged Melchisedeck or Sem. 10. Where Melchisedeck is set forth without father or mother beginning of life or end of dayes this also most fitly agreeth to Sem who was borne before the floud whose father Noah was now dead who lived 600. yeares so that no man living at that time could remember his birth or death or parents 11. Seeing also that Hebers language was preserved in Salem as may appeare by the interpretation of the name of Melchisedeck It is most probable that this King of Salem was of that line who together with the true faith retained that holy language 12. Lastly seeing Melchisedeck was a type of Christ Psal. 10. that came of Sem and no type or figure of Christ is expressed in Scripture but of Sems line none is more like to be this representer and foreshewer of Christs everlasting Priesthood than Sem himselfe then living It is most unlike that any Priest not of Sem should shadow forth the high Priest Christ of Sem
they were mine enemies Psal. 139.21 22. 6. Observ. A good Prince preferreth his subjects lives before wealth Vers. 21. GIve me the persons take the goods c. Herein appeareth first the gratitude of the King of Sodome to Abraham that is contented to leave unto him the goods for his great travell Calvin as also this heathen King sheweth one good part of a just Prince that preferreth the life of his subjects before the substance whereas contrariwise a tyrant esteemeth nothing of mens lives in respect of his covetous desire Perer. as Ahab contrived Naboths death to have his Vineyard CHAP. XV. The Method THis Chapter hath two parts containing two ample and large promises made by the Lord unto Abraham the first is as touching his seed vers 1. to vers 8. The second of the inheritance of his seed vers 8. to the end In the first part there is set forth 1. on Gods behalfe the promise 2. On Abrahams behalfe beleefe vers 6. In the first there is the cause Gods goodnesse towards Abraham vers 1. Then the promise of his seed both to bee of his body which is amplified by the contrary that not Eleazar but one of his owne bowels should bee his heire vers 2 3 4. then the number thereof to be as the starres in multitude In the second part 1. there is the promise in generall for the inheriting of the land vers 7. in particular after what time namely 400. yeares captivity 13. to 17. what Countrey vers 18. to 21. 2. The ratifying of the promise by certaine symbols where we have the prescription of the signes and ceremonies to be used vers 9. the preparing of them by Abraham vers 10 11 12. the application or confirmation it selfe vers 17. God causeth a smoking furnace to passe betweene the peeces c. 2. The divers readings v. 1. In prophesie C. in vision caet I will protect thee H.S. my word is the strength C. I am thy buckler caet v. 2. The sonne of the Steward of my house H. the sonne of the Steward which is in my house C.P. the sonne of Messech borne in my house S. the Steward of mine house G. the childe of the Stewardship of my house B. he to whom I shall leave my house T. meshek a Steward or one that is left and so v. 3. he calleth him the sonne of his house that is borne in his house v. 6. beleeved in the word of the Lord. C. beleeved in the Lord caet v. 7. out of the region of the Chaldees S. from Vr of the Chaldees caet Vrh. signifieth a valley v. 8. O Lord God H.C.P.G.B. O Lord God governour S. Lord Iehovah T. heb Adonai Iehova v. 9. Take unto me H.S. take me G. take B.P. take and offer C.T. heb Lathak take three heiferâ— C. of threâ—â— yeare old caet a dove H.S. a young pigeon B.G. sonne of a pigeon C. the chickin of a pigeon T. gozal a pigeon v. 11. he sate with them S. he drave them away caet nashab to blow away v. 12. an ecstasis or trance S. a heavy sleepe fell upon Abraham caet v. 17. a flame was made S. a darke mist. H.C. twilight B. darke night T. there was darkenesse gâ—atah darknesse night v. 20 giants C.B. Rephanu caeter 3. The Explanation of doubts QVEST. I. How God appeared in vision Vers. 1. THe word of the Lord came to Abraham in a vision c. 1. This vision was neither in the night as the Sept. in some translations read for Abrahams faith is here approved v. 6. but men being asleepe cannot shew their faith Cajetan 2. neither was it by secret inspiration as the interlineary glosse for here divers speeches passe betweene God and Abraham 3. Neither was this vision by an Angell as Oleaster Tostatus for he is called Jehova which name is not given to Angels 4. But this vision was in the day as the Lord used to speake to the Prophets Ramban Chald. and the Lord did produce his conference untill the evening vers 17. when the starres appeared Iun. And God for the better strengthening of Abrahams faith did to his word adjoyne some visible signe of his glory Oecolam 5. And this is the fourth time that God had appeared to Abraham twice in the 12. chapter v. 1.7 againe c. 13 14. and now in this place QVEST. II. How God is said to be Abrahams reward I Am thy buckler c. 1. Two things doe cause feare when either wee are afraid of some evill to happen to vs or that some good which wee desire should bee with-holden from us God biddeth Abraham to feare none of these for hee was both his buckler to keepe him from evill and his great reward to give him all good things Per. 2. Some thinke that Abraham feared lest he had committed some sinne in shedding of bloud in the late battell some lest the enemies might gather their strength againe and come upon him afresh some lest the Cananites might envy him because of his strength some lest this victorie might stand for his reward which God promised But it appeareth that none of these things were the cause of Abrahams feare but he was solicitous and carefull for his succession and might somewhat waver concerning the promise made to his seed because hee had yet no childe Mercer 3. Where he saith I am thy reward it is not to be understood causally and to be referred onely to those temporall rewards which are promised afterward as Cajetane and Mercerus consenting to the hebrewes but substantially of the reward also of everlasting felicitie which was laid up for Abraham with God Iun. 4. So that here God promiseth the two greatest blessings that can bee one in this life of perseverance in that God saith he will be his buckler to protect and preserve him to the end and of eternall felicity in saying I am thine exceeding great reward Perer. QVEST. III. Abraham neither was doubtfull or forgetfull of Gods promise Vers. 2. ABraham said 1 Cajetane well noteth that in other visions Abraham was onely an hearer God the speaker but here Abraham maketh answere to God whereby it appeareth that Abraham did grow in confidence and familiaritie with God 2. Neither doth Abraham complaine that he went childlesse as though he had set light by the Lords liberal offer that he would be his reward but because the spirituall blessing depended of his seed he craveth this as the meanes whereby Gods promise toward him concerning the great reward should be effected Calvin 2. Neither did Abraham doubt or was forgetfull of Gods promise that he would give him seed and unto his seed that land Gen. 13.15 But as yet it was not expressed unto him whether his seed should come out of his owne bowels as here the Lord first promiseth or it might bee a seed or sonne adopted as here hee supposeth that this Eleazer should be his heire sic Eucher Rupert 4. Or that
as Origen hom 8. Genes The Apostle only saith that he considered that God was able to raise him up even from the dead but that God would doe it so presently he knew not neither had it beene such a triall of his faith to sacrifice his sonne if hee had beene sure that his sonne should in that instant have beene restored againe to life 6. I thinke rather that Abraham being generally by faith assured of Gods power yet was ignorant in this particular what would fall out and therefore spake as a man amazed and astonished and yet ignorantly prophesied Prophetavit quod ignoravit Ambr. Iun. QVEST. XI Of Abrahams constancy and Isaacks obedience Vers. 7. MY Father c. 1. Abrahams setled constancy appeareth that notwithstanding these amiable words of his sonne yet cannot be turned from his purpose nomina vâ—tae solent operarigratiam non ministerium necis words of life as to call father sonne doe insinnuate grace and savour they minister occasion of death 2. Isaacks obedience is commended who willingly submitteth himselfe 1. beeing now 25 yeares old and so strong enough to resist his old and weake father yet he yeeldeth himselfe Calvin 2. He was bound not that his resistance should be feared but least any involuntarie motion by the pangs of death might have beene procured Perer. 3. his willingnesse further appeareth in that Isaack maketh no request for his life nemo rogat nemo se excusat neither he entreateth nor his father excuseth this fact Poets doe fable how Iphigenia Agamemnons daughter was sacrificed to the gods for the safety of the whole armie but here we have a true stistory 4. It is most like that Abraham had before declared Gods commandement unto Isaack to the which hee was obedient Iosephus proceedeth further to shew what the communication was betweene them but whence knoweth he that it is out of doubt that Isaack was made acquainted with Gods counsell wherewith hee rested contented Luther QVEST. XII Why the Lord would not have Isaack offered up in sacrifice though he so commanded for the triall of Abrahams faith Vers. 11. THe Angell of the Lord called to him 1. I will omit here to make any long mention of the fables of the Hebrewes how that Sathan appeared in the shape of an old man to Abraham and againe to Sarah and in the likenesse of a young man to Isaack to draw them from obedience to Gods commandement but he prevailed not Muscul. 2. The heathen also by their poeticall fictions 〈◊〉 obscured the credit and truth of this history for as the Angell of God appeared in this last and extreme point to Abraham so they have also counterfeited the apparition of their gods in extreme perils Calvin 3. Thus it pleased God that although Abrahams faith was tried with this hard Commandement that it should not be performed 1. for his owne glory sake lest that Abrahams God might have beene traduced among the heathen as a lover of humane bloud 2. for Abrahams sakes that the Lord might more amply reward him for his faithfull obedience 3. for our sakes that we might have the example of faithfull Abraham to follow 4. and for the generall instruction of Christians that this might bee a lively figure unto them of the sacrifice of Christ both of Gods love in giving him to dye for the world and his obedience in humbling himselfe to the altar of the crosse And therefore Ambrose fitly applyeth those words of Abraham v. 8. God will provide him a lamb for a burnt offering to the sacrifice of Christ which was that alia hostia quam Deus pararet that other offering which God would provide lib. 1 de Abrah c. 8. QVEST. XIII How the Lord saith I know now that thou fearest c. Vers. 12. NOw I know c. 1. Not that God is ignorant of any thing or can have any experimentall knowledge of any thing which hee knew not before for all things are naked in his sight 2. Neither as Augustine expoundeth is God said to know quia fecit ut sibi Abraham innotesceret because he made Abraham to be knowne to himselfe qu. Genes 58. for then he should have rather said Now thou thy selfe knowest c. 3. Some doe take it for the knowledge of approbation I have knowne thee that is approved this fact of thine as it is said Psal. 1. The Lord knoweth the way of the righteous Hillary 4. Some referre it to Gods eternall knowledge I have knowne from the beginning that thou shouldest doe this thing but I appointed it to be done only now but this had beene no commendation to Abraham for thus God may be said to know every thing whether commendable or otherwise T. hom Angel 5. Wherefore the Lord speaketh here humanitus after the phrase of man and by a metaphor Iun. and in effect it is nothing else but that Abraham had now declared and testified his faith by his fruitfull obedience Calvin as Chrysostome saith Nunc omnibus declarasti quomodo Deâ—m syncere colas thou hast made manifest to all that thou sincerely worshippest God hom 47. in Gen. QVEST. XIV Why this fact of Abraham is rather ascribed to feare than love Vers. 12. THat thou fearest God It is so said rather than that thou lovest God 1. because the love of God must be joyned with a reverent feare of God serve the Lord with feare Psal. 4. and the love of God bringeth forth a filiall and dutifull feare as the child that loveth his father will also feare him 2. the feare of God is generally taken not for the particular act of feare but for the whole worship of God as Psal. 25.14 The secrets of the Lord is revealed to those that feare him and so feare in this sense comprehendeth also love 3. because Abraham had now forgotten his naturall love and affection toward his sonne because he feared God this act is more properly ascribed to his religious feare Per. QVEST. XV. This fact of Abraham wherein it excelleth the like among the heathen NOw concerning the excellency of Abrahams fact whereas the heathen objected the like examples among them to obscure this resolution of Abraham as how Codrus of Athens offered himselfe for his people and one Idomeneus King of Creet as he came from the battell of Troy being in a great tempest upon the sea did vow unto Neptune the first thing which came forth to meet him which was his sonne and so he did Marius is mentioned by Cyril against Iulian that sacrificed his sonne so the Scripture recordeth that inhumane facti of the King of Moab that did offer up his sonne in sacrifice 2 King 4. It shall now appeare what great difference there is between these examples and the fact of Abraham both in the difficulty of the object the readinesse of his affection the end also and purpose of the action 1. Abraham offred up his only sonne whom hee dearely loved being the sonne of his old age a vertuous and obedient
we will finde grace with him CHAP. XXIII 1. The Argument and Contents THis Chapter treateth 1. Of the death of Sarah and Abrahams mourning for her vers 1 2. 2. Of Abrahams care for her buriall both of the communication had with the Hittites and of the purchase of the ground at the hands of Ephron vers 12. to 18. Lastly of the funerall it selfe vers 19. 2. The divers readings v. 1. In Ciriah Arbe C.B.G.P. the City Arbee H.S.T. Arbee which is in the vally S. the others have not this clause v. 3. Rose from the office of the funerall ab officio funeris H. from the dead S. from the fight of the dead or corps caeter v. 4. To bury my dead H. to bury my dead from me S. out of my fight or face caeter v. 5. Not so my Lord. S. the rest have it not v. 9. Cave of Machpelah G.B.T.P. double cave caet but it seemeth rather to be the proper name of a place vers 17.19 v. 10. Ephron dwelled H.G. stood in the middest C. sate in the middest caeter jashab signifieth both to dwell and sit he sate at this time in the middest among them v. 13. Because you are with me heare me S. I pray you heare me H. If you will shew me mercy Ch. B.G. if you be that man Tr. 1. If you be the ruler and Lord of the ground If you will give it B.G. heb if then without any other words v. 15. I have heard S. heare me caet v. 16. Which is received for merchandise in every Province G. which is currant among merchants B.G.S.H. which passeth among merchants Tr. 1. The Explanation of doubtfull questions QUEST I. Of the yeares of Sarahs life why noted Vers. 1. ANd Sarah lived an hundred twenty seven yeares c. 1. The Hebrewes note that the death of Sarah is immediately joyned to the birth of Rebecca according to that saying in Ecclesiastes The Sunne riseth and the Sunne setteth Mercer 2. She is the only woman whose whole age is recorded in Scripture 3. Because the words are she lived an hundred years twenty yeares and seven yeares some Hebrewes note by the dividing of the yeares that she was at an hundred yeares as faire as at twenty and as chaste as at seven But this is too curious seeing that the like phrase is used in setting downe Ismaels years Gen. 25.17 in whom the like constancie especially in goodnesse appeared not 4. Isaack was at this time thirty seven yeare old being borne in Sarahs ninety yeare therefore the Hebrewes observe that the letters of the first word vaiihu doe make thirty seven insinuating thereby that these were the best dayes of Sarahs life after the birth of Isaack in whom she joyed 5. But it is not like that Isaack was now thirty sâ—ven yeares old and Sarah died the same time when Isaack was offered up the Devill representing the manner thereof to Sarah as the Jewes fable whereupon shee tooke a conceit and died for whereas Abraham returned from Mount Moriah to Beersheba againe and there dwelled Gen. 22.19 but now he was removed to Hebron where Sarah died there must needs some good space of time come between Isaacks offering up and Sarahs death Perer. 6. Whereas the word is put in the plurall the lives of Sarah we need neither refer it to three lives in man the vegetative sensitive intellectuall life nor to the changes alterations wich seemeth to make one life many but the word is so used according to the phrase of the Hebrew language Calv. QUEST II. The City of Arba whence so called Vers. 2. SArah died in Kiriatharba Which City Arbah which signifieth foure was so called 1. Neither of the foure giants Ahiman Sheshan Talmai Anach Num. 13.23 for these were long after Abrahams time 2. Nor yet of the foure Patriarks Adam Abraham Isaack Iacob there buried for neither can it be proved that Adam was there buried and it was so called before the other were there buried 3. Neither was it so named of the forme and fashion of the City which should consist of foure parts 4. But the Citie bare this name of Arbah the father of Anak Iosu. 14.14 and 15.13 Mercer QUEST III. Of Hebron supposed to be the City of Iohn Baptist. THe same is Hebron 1. This City was not so named of Hebron which came of one of the sonnes of Caleb mentioned 1 Chron. 2.42 for it was so called long before his time 2. It is probable that this City Hebron was the place of Iohn Baptists Nativity for this City did belong to Iudah and was a City of the Priests 1 Chron. 6.55 it was also situate in the hilly Countrey Iosua 14.12 so was the City of Iohn Baptist both a City of Iudah belonging to the Priests where Zachary his father dwelt and had the situation in the hill Countrey Luk. 1.39 3. This Hebron is said to bee in Canaan as it is taken for the name of the whole Countrey for the Canaanites were also one of the seven Nations that inhabâ—ted that Countrey to whom Hebron belonged not but to the Hittites Perer. 4. Hebron signifieth a society or conjuâ—ction for there Abraham and Sarah â—saack Rebecca Iacob Lea lay buried together as honourable couples from hence then it seemeth the name was derived Muscul. QUEST IV. Whence Abraham came to mourne for Sarah Vers. 2. ABraham came to mourne c. 1. Neither is it like that Abraham at this time dwelled in Beersheba and Sarah in Hebron and that he came thence hither to bewaile Sâ—rah for Abraham as he bewailed Sarah being dead so he would not be wanting to her in her life 2. Neither did Abraham come from burying of his father Thare as some thinke whom Pererius would have to die two yeare before but the truth is that he was dead 62. yeares before for Abraham was now 137. yeares old who was borne in the 70. yeare of Tharehs age who lived 205. yeares in all so Abraham was 75. yeares old when his father died Gen. 12.5 to that adde 62. so shall we have Abrahams age of 137. 3. Neither doth this comming of Abraham signifie onely his addressing and preparing of himselfe to mourne Mercer 4. But Abraham commeth from his owne tent into Sarahs to mourne for her for they had their tents and habitations apart as it may appeare Gen. 24.67 Iun. QUEST V. Wherefore Abraham weepeth over the corps of Sarah Vers. 2. TO mourne for Sarah and to weepe for her 1. As Abraham by his weeping shewed his affection so by his mourning voice he set forth the vertues of Sarah and bewailed his losses Perer. 2. He weepeth over the corps not to provoke himselfe to weepe by the sight thereof being of late so much lightned with joy for Isaacks deliverance as some Hebrewes thinke but according to the use which then was and after continued among the Jewes which was to weepe a certaine time at the bodies or graves of the
the Assignes of THOMAS MAN PAVL MAN and IONAH MAN 1632. TO THE MOST HONOVRABLE LORD THE L. DVKE OF LENOX AND TO THE RIGHT Honourable the Earle of Marre Lords of his Majesties most Honourable Privie Counsell Grace mercie and Peace from the Lord JESUS RIght Honourable as the highest Majestie in his wise providence hath united and conjoyned your Honours not onely in one consent and judgement of religion but also in the joynt administration and regiment of this Nation and Kingdome under his excellent Majestie so I thought good to make your Honours with other of your Honourable place united Patrons of these my labours and as he saith non debet charta dividere quos amor mutuus copulavit It was not fit that I should sever you in this my duty who are combined in your mutuall amity Men of noble birth delight much in antiquities and it is their glory to derive their bloud by many descents from their thrice renowned ancestors here I present to your Honourable view that noble and most ancient family of Abraham Isaack and Iacob who were in favour with God and in honour and great reputation with men whose children they are which imitate their piety and obedience that famous Matron Paula whom Hierome so much commendeth was by her father descended of Aeneas and the noble house of the Gracchi by her mother of Agamemnon of whom Hierome made this Epitaph thought her Christian profession more honourable than her noble birth and condition and so I doubt not but that it is also your honourable resolution to say with the Apostle who having rehearsed his great privileges after the flesh his birth parentage and profession thus concludeth I count all these things but losse for the excellent knowledge sake of Christ Iesus for whom I have counted all things as losse and doe judge them as dung that I might winne Christ as Hierome also saith well Summa apud Deum nobilitas clarum esse virtutibus I it is the greatest nobility with God to shine with vertue Here your Honours have the worthy example of the Patriarks to follow the Heathen presidents are but counterfeit and deceitfull they had the shadowes of vertues rather than the substance as Ambrose saith well of Polemo who of a drunken and riotous companion by hearing of Xenocrates became a Philosopher Siresipâ—ir a vino fuit semper tamen temulentus sacrilegio If hee were sober from wine yet hee was drunke with superstition But these holy examples are seasoned with grace and savour of true religion Abraham was famous in Pharaohs Court so was Isaack in Abimelecks and Iacob in another Pharaohs also for their piety and vertue So they which walke in their steps shall be great both with God and man Abraham told Abimelech plainly of the wrongs which his servants had done him Gen. 21.15 so is it the part of good Courtiers to shew unto the King the wrongs and oppressions that are done in the lanâ— to succour the poore to releeve the oppressed to countenance the truth to maintaine justice and equity Iacob being in Bethel saw a ladder which reached to heaven and the Angels ascending and descending upon it whereupon one thus noteth In the house of Bethel there is alwayes both going up and comming downe this I say not that the goers down should dismay you but the climers up incourage you So in the Princes Bethel and Court there be examples of both sorts of some that are declining and sliding backe onely seeking to make themselves great and to bee enriched by the Kings favour some there are though the smallest number which doe ascend upon this ladder not aspiring to their owne honour but using their favour to the glory of God and benefit of his Church Thus I trust your Lordships have learned to scale this ladder of honour to the which you are called to raise up those which are in the dust to set forward the truth to nourish and encourage the Preachers thereof to speake for the innocent to hold out your helpfull hand to the needy so shall your Honours ascend from step to step till you come to the top of the ladder where Christ sitteth who shall cast and tumble downe from thence all unfaithfull Stewards and cut them off to have their portion with hypocrites Matth. 24.51 but shall say unto you and all other that shall serve him faithfully herein in earth It is well done good servant and faithfull thou hast beene faithfull in little I will make thee ruler over much enter into thy masters joy Amen Your Honours ready to be commanded in the Lord ANDREW WILLET THE FIRST BOOKE OF THIS SECOND PART OF GENESIS Containing the Historie concerning the Patriarks ISAACK IACOB Hitherto hath beene continued the holy story of those three great Patriarks Adam before the floud Noah in the floud Abraham after the floud the rest of this Booke of Genesis followeth which setteth forth the life acts and death of the three other fathers Isaack Iacob Ioseph CHAP. XXV 1. The Contents of the Chapter IN this Chapter 1. Concerning Abraham his second mariage is declared with the issue thereof his children and their gifts vers 1. to 6. Then Abrahams yeares death and buriall vers 7. to 11. 2. Concerning Ismael his generations or off-spring are expressed his yeares of life his place of dwelling vers 12. to 20. 3. Of Isaack there is set downe his time of marriage the barrennesse of his wife the remedie by prayer vers 20.21 4. Concerning Esau and Iacob these things are rehearsed 1. Their manner of conception vers 22 23. 2. Of their birth 24. to 27. 3. Their divers education vers 27 28. 4. Esau his prophanenesse in selling his birth-right for a messe of pottage vers 29. to the end 2. The divers readings v. 1. Abraham had taken him another wife H.G. proceeding or adding tooke another wife caeter v. 2. Zambran Ioctan Madal Sebe S. Zimran Iocksan Madan Shuah caeter v. 3. The sonnes of Dedan were in holds tents and Islands â— the sons of Dedan Asshurim Letushim Leumim v. 4. Gephar Apher Raga S. Epha Epher Eldaha caeter v. 6. Sonnes of the Concubine C. of the Concubines caet v. 8. And fainting or wearing away H.S.C.B. he yeelded up the spirit or died T.G.P. jagaug signifieth to faint gavagh expirare to yeeld the spirit which word is here used v. 11. Isaack dwelt by the Well of the living and seeing H.B. the Well of vision S. Where the Angell of life appeared C. Beâ—r-lahairâ— G.P. the fountaine Lahoiro T. v. 12. Which Hagar the Egyptian Sarahs maid bare H. bare to Abraham caet v. 13. These the names of his sonnes H. of the sonnes of Ismael cat v. 13. Nadbehel Massa. S. Adbehel Mibsa cat v. 18. from Havilah to Agara C. from Havila to Sur. cat v. 18. he died in the presence of all his brethren H.B.P. he dwelt S.C. his lot fell T. G. naphal signifieth 〈◊〉 fall
with espousals contract consent of friends as Iacob tooke Lea and Rachel so did he not Zilphah and Bilhah the wife was taken into the house to be the mother of the family and governesse of the house the concubine was a servant still of the family as Hagar was to Sarah the wife was taken as an inseparable companion to the husband during his life the concubine might bee put away as Hagar was from Abraham the wife was chosen whose issue should onely be heires of the house but the sonnes of the concubine inherited not as the sonnes of Gilead said to Iephtah Thou shalt not inherit in our fathers house for thou art the sonne of a strange woman Iud. 12.2 2. Now where all these properties concurred she was properly and truly a concubine such an one was Hagar who was neither contracted to Abraham by any solemne espousals nor yet had the government of the house but was at Sarahs checke neither continued shee all her daies with Abraham nor her sonne admitted to be heire 3. But where all these properties are not seene together but some one of them there sometimes shee that is the wife by a certaine abuse of the word â—s called a concubine as the Levites wife before shee was yet solemnly espoused unto him with consent of her parents is called his concubine Iud. 19.1 for as yet she did commit fornication with him but afterward having her fathers consent he is called his father in law vers 4. so here in this place Keturah is called Abrahams concubine for that her children were not admitted to be heires with Isaack but otherwise she was Abrahams lawfull wife And for the same reason sometimes a concubine is called a wife as Zilpah and Bilhah are said to be Iacobs wives Genesis 37.2 because their children were coheires with the rest and fathers of the tribes 4. There appeareth then great difference betweene Hagar and Keturah Hagar was neither solemnly taken to be Abrahams wife but given him onely for procreation and while Sarah Abrahams lawfull wife was yet living shee remained a bond-woman still and was not made free she was cast out of the house But Keturah was solemnly taken to be Abrahams wife she was a free woman Sarah was now dead she left not Abraham while she lived wherefore Keturah was not properly Abrahams concubine but for that reason onely before alleaged But Hagar was verily his concubine as Leo well determineth Aliud est uxor aliud concubina sicut aliud ancilla aliud libera propter quod Apostolus ad manifestandum haruÌ„ personarum diseretionem testimonium ponit ex Genes c. A wife is one thing a concubine another a free woman is one thing a bond another and therefore the Apostle to shew the difference of these persons doth alleage a testimony out of Genesis where it is said to Abraham Cast out the bond-woman and her sonne for the sonne of the bond-woman shall not be heire with my sonne Isaack Leo epist. 90. c. 4. citatur par 2. c. 32. q. 2. c. 12. concil Triburiens c. 38. QUEST IX Why Abraham sent away the sonnes of Keturah ABraham gave them gifts and sent them away from Isaack c. The reasons of Abrahams so doing are these 1. because that countrey was not like to hold them Abraham knowing that his seed should exceedingly multiply Perer. 2. Abraham did it to take away all occasion of strife that might fall out betweene brethren as for that cause before Abraham and Lot were separated Calvin 3. lest that Isaack and his seed might have beene corrupted by their evill manners and false worship whom Abraham did foresee not to belong to the people of God Perer. 4. The greatest reason of all was because the inheritance of that land was promised to Isaacks seed which he would not have disturbed by his other sonnes Muscul. Mercer QUEST X. What East countrey Abraham sent Keturahs sonnes into SEnt them Eastward to the East countrey c. 1. Not Eastward in respect of Isaacks dwelling for some part of the land of Canaan was so towards the East 2. nor yet Eastward in respect of the situation of the world for so India is counted in the East whither indeed Hierome thinketh that they were sent but it is not like that Abraham would send his sonnes so farre off 3. They were then sent into the East countrey in respect of Palestina as into Syria Arabia where the Ismaelites Idumeans and Midianites inhabited which countries in the Scripture are usually called by the name of the East as Iacob going into Mesopotamia is said to goe into the East country Gen. 29.1 Balaam came from Aram out of the mountaines of the East Num. 23.7 Iob also is said to have beene the greatest of all the men of the East Iob 1.3 4. Into these East countries they were sent not because the people there were addicted to art magicke whereunto Abraham saw his sonnes inclined as the Cabalists coniecture but it is like that those countries to the which he sent them were as yet vacant and unpeopled Mercer QUEST XI Of the computation of the yeares of Abrahams life Vers. 7. THis is the age of Abrahams life 175. yeares Pererius upon this place gathering into a summe the storie of Abrahams life falleth into many apparent errours in Chronology which briefly shall be noted 1. He saith that Abraham was borne in the seventy yeares of his father Terahs age whereas it is cleare seeing Araham in his fathers two hundred and five yeare was seventy five yeares old Gen. 11.32 12.4 that he was borne in the hundred and thirty yeare of his fathers age 2. As one absurdity being granted many follow and one errour breedeth many so upon this false ground he buildeth other uncertaine conclusions as that Abraham was borne after the flood 292. yeares whereas he was borne 60. yeares after an 352. after the flood for so long after is the 130. yeare of Terahs age 3. He saith that Noah died in the 58. yeare of Abrahams age whereas Noah died 2. yeares before Abraham was borne 4. Further he affirmeth Terah Abrahams father to have died in the 135. yeare of Abrahams life whereas he must end his life sixty yeares before in the seventy five of Abrahams age for so old was Abraham when he went out of Charran whence he departed not till the death of Terah Act. 7.4 5. He proceedeth further in this his new coyned Chronologie that Abraham died in the 467. yeare after the flood and 2123. yeares after the creation whereas it was the 527. yeare after the flood and 2183 yeares from the beginning of the world wherein Abraham left his life 6. Further he saith that Abraham left Sâ—m alive behinde him whereas it is certainly gathered that Sâ—m died 25. yeares before in the 15â— yeare of Abrahams life and 502. yeares after the flood Genes 11.11 QUEST XII How Abraham yeelded up his Spirit Vers. 8. HE yeelded up the
spirit and died c. 1. Though the word gavâ— rather so signifieth expirare to give up the ghost than deficere to faint Hieromes reason is not so good quia non coâ—venit Abraha deficere it was not fitting that Abraham should faint and decrease for no morall decreasing or fainting is here spoken of but onely naturall 2. Neither is this word which signifieth to yeeld up the Spirit used onely of the just as Rabbi Salomon and Lyranâ—â— for the same is uttered of the old world Gen. 7.21 all the flesh yeelded the breath and of Ismael vers 17. of this chapter 3. Neither is Oleasters reason sufficient why we should read rather he fainted than yeelded up the spirit because it followeth he died and so the same thing would be twice expressed for this expiring or yeelding up of the spirit sheweth the facility and easinesse of his death as the word following betokeneth the thing that he dyed so this declareth the manner not that he dyed without any sicknesse or griefe as Aben Ezra for the faithfull are not exempted from the common condition of mankind Vatah. but it sheweth that he willingly rendred up his soule into the hands of God Calvin 4. Cajetanes collection is not here to be refused that three things are set downe by Moses concerning Abrahams departure 1. that he dyed that is was dissolved which belongeth unto the whole man as consisting of body and soule 2. that hee was buried which concerneth his body 3. that he was gathered unto his people in respect of his soule which was joyned to the blessed company of the Saints Cajet in hunc lâ—â—um QUEST XIII How Abraham died in a good age and full of yeares IN a good age satisfied or full of daies 1. In that Abraham is said to have died in a good old age whereas many before him were of longer life and much elder of whom this phrase is not used Philo gathereth that it was not the old age of his body but his perfection of vertue that made a good old age Disce soli viro bonâ— contingere senectutem bonam Know that onely a good old age happened to a good man sic etiam Calvin 2. Hee was full because daies is not added in the originall the Hebrewes gather that he was full not onely of daies but of all other blessings ex Mercer and he was satisfied with daies as not desirous to have his life prolonged Calvin Thus even some among the Heathen were satâ—â—e with daies as Cicero writeth of Cato that he should say Siquis deus mihi largiatur â—t ex hac atate repusrascam in cunis vagiam valde recâ—sem that if God should grant me to become a childe againe and to cry in the cradle I would refuse it Cicer. de senectus Therefore Abraham was in another sort full of daies because his daies were full of vertue hee had not spent his life in vaine but as Apelles the cunning painter was wont to say nullus dies sine linea no day without a line and Titus the Emperour if any day had passed wherein he had not done some good would say to his friends Diemperdidi I have lost a day so no doubt Abraham did passe over his time in fruitfull workes Perer. QUEST XIV How the sinner is said to die before his time ABraham then received a great blessing of God in living both long and well and dying in his time not as the Preacher saith of the wicked man lest thou die in tempore non tuo in a time not thine Ecclesiast 7.19 which is so spoken 1. Not that a man can die before the time appointed of God for a mans daies are determined with God Iob 14.5 2. Nor yet so onely because the wicked is never prepared or fit for death both because he is destitute of vertue as also hee expecteth not death in which respects in some sense he may be said to die not in his time being neither ripe for it in vertue nor looking for it 4. But the sinner is said to die before his time when the naturall course of his life which he in the judgement of man though not in the determination of God might have lived is by some violent and extraordinary kinde of death shortned and cut off as Nadab and Abihu for offering in strange fire were thus before their time consumed with a fire sent from God Levit. 10. ex Perer. QUEST XV. What it is to be gathered to his people Vers. 8. ANd was gathered to his people 1. This people are not the sunne moone and starres or the invisible idaea or formes according to the which these sensible things were made or the foure elements of the which the bodies of men are compounded as Philo imagineth these are but Platonicall conceits and who seeth not how unproperly the name of people agreeth to any of these 2. Neither with Augustine by people doe we understand the society and company of Angels for Ismael also is said vers 17. to be gathered to his people 3. Neither can it bee applied to Limbus patrum where all the just men were from the beginning of the world as Lyranus Rupertus unlesse they will say that Ismael also went into the place of just men who was also gathered to his people and whereas they make Limbuâ— patrum a member of hell a place of darknesse Abraham went not thither seeing Abrahams besome was a place of rest and joy where the Angels were for they carried Lazarus soule thither But these blessed spirits are Angels of light and not of darknesse 4. We also refuse Burgensis conceit who noteth a difference of phrase in the old and new testament when the Scripture speaketh of the dead they are said that die in the new testament to die in the Lord which phrase is not used of any in the old testament because they were not admitted ad beatificam Dei visioneâ—â— to the blessed presence and sight of God Contr. Indeed I grant that after the manifestation of the Messiah to the world the Scripture speaketh more clearely of the faithfull departed in the new testament because the Messiah was then come but not for any such cause pretended for even the soules of the faithfull departed in the old testament did enjoy the presence of God as David saith I shall behold thy face in righteousnesse and when I awake be satisfied with thine image Psal. 17.15 he doubted not but that his soule first apart should see God and then both body and soule in the resurrection and the Scripture speaketh evidently that Abraham Isaack and Iacob did live with God for of them God is called who is not the God of the dead but of the living Matth. 22.32 5. Neither this phrase to be gathered to his people doth only signifie to be in the state of the dead and equivalent to that phrase to sleepe with their fathers which is spoken of the wicked as well as of the righteous as idolatrous
accident gave him a name Edom Calvin this action was governed by Gods providence and the prophecie began now to take place the elder shall serve the younger QUEST XL. Whether Iacob offended in causing Esau to sell his birthright Vers. 31. SEll me now thy birthright 1. Iacob may be thought to have dealt cruelly with Esau and uncharitably that would give him no releefe being ready to die but upon such hard conditions but the answer is that Esau coveted Iacobs pottage not of necessity for there was other meat in the house whereby he might have satisfied his hunger but of an unsatiable greedinesse 2. But Iacob was too covetous to cause Esau to sell for so small a trifle so rich a thing as his birthright which included many priviledges as the priority and government of his brethren a double portion to the rest the priesthood and right to sacrifice Exod. 19.22 and 24.5 and beside was a type and figure of everlasting life Vatabl. here the answer is not as the Hebrewes thinke that Iacob gave a greater summe and this to be onely as an earnest for no such thing appeareth in the Scripture but the true answer is this that Iacob knew by the instruction of his mother that the birthright by Gods appointment belonged unto him and therefore as a wise man he taketh this occasion to recover his right from him that was an usurper of it 3. But seeing this birthright was a sacred thing for otherwise Esau should not be counted a profane person for selling it how could Iacob buy it without sinne Answer Iacob intelligitur suam vexationem redemisse Iacob did but redeeme his owne vexation he buyeth not a thing which was not belonging to him but onely recovereth that which was his owne and this is not simoniacal in sacred things for a man to redeeme his quietnesse and peaceable possession 4. But seeing Esau sinned in selling his birthright how could Iacob be without sinne yes Iacob offended not being hereunto no doubt stirred and incited by the spirit of God and sparing from his owne belly to obtaine such a blessing preferring things spirituall before temporall but Esau sinned in setting so light by the blessing of God as shall appeare in the next question Mer. yet this extraordinary fact of Iacob is not to be drawne into imitation QUEST XLI Whether before the law the first borne did alwaies exercise priesthood BUt whether the priesthood did goe with the birthright and that the first borne did execute the priests office it is questioned among the learned for the solution whereof 1. I neither thinke with the Hebrewes that the first borne of the family alwayes had the preheminence of the priesthood for Abel the younger brother offered sacrifice as well as Cain 2. Neither with Oleaster that this was never practised whose opinion is that the priesthood was not due to the first borne before the law of Moses in hunc loc for the contrary is evident Exod. 24.5 3. Neither do I wholly assent to Hierome who thinketh that omnes primogeniti ex stirpe Noe that all the first borne of Noahs stocke were priests epist. 126. ad Evag. for then Iapheth rather then Sem should have had that prerogative for hee was elder than Sem being borne in the 500. yeare of Noahs age Gen. 5.32 Sem two yeare after Gen. 11.10 yet Sem was the Priest of the most high God supposed to be Melchisedeck and Noah saith Blessed be the Lord God of Sem Gen. 9.26 4. Neither doth the Apostle call Esau prophane only as Pererius thinketh because he sold the Priesthood annexed to the birth-right for it was a holy thing in respect of the spirituall blessing annexed unto it In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed Gen. 22.18 5. This then is our opinion rather that before Moses the father of the house was the Priest for the family as wee read that Iob every day offered sacrifice for his sonnes but after the father was deceased then the first borne succeeded both in the inheritance and priesthood and so after Isaacks decease the birth-right should also have conveyed with it the Priesthood Mercer But that ordinance that the first borne should exercise the Priesthood and offer sacrifice though he were not the father of the family is no older than Moses Exod. 19.22.24.5 Who then were sanctified and set apart unto God Exod. 13.2 QUEST XXXVII How many wayes Esau offended in selling his birth-right Vers. 32. LOe I am almost dead c. Esau diversly offended in selling his birth-right 1. Because he esteemeth his birth-right only by the present commodity and pleasure of this life for whether he meane in respect of his daily danger in hunting he was subject to death as Iun. Or generally speake of his mortality as Mercer Or which is most like of his present faintnesse Calvin Hee onely limiteth his birth-right to this life as though it could not profit him afterward whereupon the Hebrewes gather that hee denied the resurrection 2. Esau offended in his intemperancy and ravenous desire that preferred his belly before so great and rich a birth-right 3. In that for so meane a value hee would forgoe such an inheritance for whereas Aben Ezra would excuse the matter because Isaack was now become very poore and therefore Esau set the lesse by his patrimony it hath no ground at all for whereas Abraham was very rich and left all to Isaack and God blessed Isaack beside how is it like that Isaack in so short a time could bee wasted 4. Another sinne was Esau his profanenesse noted by the Apostle Heb. 12.16 that parted with a spiritual blessing for a temporal and momentany pleasure 5. His unthankfulnesse to God appeareth in that he no more regarded the dignity of the first borne given unto him 6. His obstinacy in that he repented not his folly but after he had done went away carelesse and therefore it is said Esau contemned his birth-right vers 34. 7. His falshood and persidious nature appeareth who though hee had passed over his birth-right to Iacob with an oath yet seemed to make but a scoffe of it and purposed not in his heart to performe it Perer. 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. Of the immortality of the soule Vers. 8. WAs gathered to his people Theodoret from hence well concludeth the immortality of the soule and the hope of the resurrection for if men wholly perish and did not passe to another life Moses would not have said He was gathered to his people qu. 109. in Genes our Saviour also useth the like argument to prove that Abraham was alive to God because the Lord calleth himselfe the God of Isaack Abraham and Iacob God is not the God of the dead but the living Matth. 22.23 2 Doct. Order of time not alwayes observed in the sacred histories Vers. 20. ISaack was 40. yeare old c. Whereas Moses setteth downe the death of Abraham and of Ismael before he describeth
the Prophet expoundeth this place of Gods eternall love and hatred of Iacob and Esau 2. That is the proper sense of the place from the which an argument is framed and a conclusion inferred but out of this spirituall sense concerning everlasting election the Apostle reasoneth and concludeth election to be only of grace not by workes Ergo it is the proper sense 6. Places of Morall observation 1. Observ. The reconciliation of brethren Vers. 9. HIs sonne Isaack and Ismael buried him They which were separated during their fathers life are now united and reconciled in his death which teacheth us that brethren which have beene long at variance should yet when the time of mourning for their father commeth returne in affection Muscul. Not as Esau that intended when his father was dead to execute his malice toward his brother Gen. 27.41 2. Observ. To continue and persevere in prayer Vers. 21. ISaack prayed to the Lord for his wife It seemeth seeing Rebeccah continued barren twenty yeares for Isaack was maried at 40. and was 60. yeares old when Esau and Iacob were borne that Isaack continued many yeares in prayer and waited from moneth to moneth from yeare to yeare till the Lord had condescended to his prayer whereby wee are taught that wee should not give over in our prayers neither limit God to heare us within a time but still patiently expect his gracious pleasure as the Apostle exhorteth that wee should pray continually 1 Thes. 5.17 Mercer 3. Observ. Gods will many times revealed to the weaker sort Vers. 28. ISaack loved Esau c. Rebeccah was better affected toward the chosen seed than Isaack waâ—â— so was Sarahs heart toward Isaack but Abraham loved Ismael whereby wee see that manâ— times God revealeth his will to the more infirme sex and as S. Paul saith chuseth the weake things of 〈◊〉 world to confound the strong 1 Cor. 1.17 Muscul. 4. Observ. Of frugality in meats and drinkes Vers. 29. NOw Iacob sod pottage c. By this we may see how frugall and sparing the diet of those godly Patriarkes was Iacob here contented himselfe with lentill pottage These lentils came from Egypt and was the usuall food in Alexandria for young and old which was commonly vendible in their Tabernes Gell. lib. 17. c. 18. from thence the use of lentils became very common in other countries the Philosopher Taurus used to sup with them and Zeno the Stoike prescribed to his schollers how they should seeth and dresse their lentils with the twelfth part of Coriander seed Athen. lib. 4. The like frugality and parsimony was used in famous countries among the Gentiles The Arcadians lived of akornes the Argives of apples the Athenians of figs the Tyrinthians of peares the Indians of canes the Carmanes of palmes the Sauromatians of millet the Persians nasturtio of cresses These examples ought to make Christians ashamed who use to pamper their bellies and feed their fansies with curious delights and exquisite dainties Perer. S. Paul giveth a rule for this meats for the belly the belly for meats God shall destroy both it and them 1 Cor. 6.13 that therefore men should not bee so carefull to feed and fill their bellies with dainty fare and costly meats seeing they both must fall to corruption 5. Observ. Against prophane persons that sell heaven for earthly pleasures Vers. 33. HE sold his birth-right Esau that for a messe of red pottage did part with his birth-right is a president and patterne of all those which for the momentany pleasures and profit of this life doe sell and lose their hope of eternall life Mercer As that rich glutton Luke 16. which purchased his ease and pleasure in this life with the everlasting paine and torment of his soule afterward for this cause is Esau called a prophane person Heb. 12.16 which for one portion of meat sold his birth-right CHAP. XXVI 1. The Argument or Contents FIrst in this Chapter is shewed the occasion of Isaacks going to Gerar which was by reason of the famine vers 1. And Gods Commandement vers 2 3. with the renewing of the promise made to Abraham 4 5. Secondly this Chapter treateth of Isaacks abode and dwelling in Gerar with such things as there happened 1. The question that arose about his wife vers 7â— to 12. 2. The envy of the Philistims against Isaack because hee prospered and waxed rich vers 13. to 18. 3. The contention betweene Isaacks servants and the Philistims concerning certaine fountaines vers 18. to vers 23. Thirdly there is declared the departure of Isaack from Gerar to dwell in Beersheba and the covenant there made betweene him and Abimelech vers 23. to the end 2. The divers readings v. 3. 18. my word shall be an helpe unto thee C. I will be with thee and blesse thee caeter v. 10. one of my stocke might have slept S. C. one of my people might have lion caet heb shacabh thou mightst have brought upon us ignorance S. this sinne caet v. 11. he that toucheth this mans wife H. this man or his wife caet v. 12. he found barly increased an hundred fold S. he found an hundreth fold caet v. 14. much tillage georgia S. a great family or houshold caet guabudah signifieth both v. 17. in the brooke of Gerar. H.C. in the valley of Gerar. caet nachal signifieth both a valley is more proper because they digged there v. 20 21 22. Heseck Sitâ—ah Rehoboth G.T.P. contention enmity roomth H.S.C.B. v. 25. there Isaacks servants digged a well in the valley of Gerar. S. v. 26. accompanied with his friend C. with Ahuzzah his friend caet v. 28. let the oath be confirmed that was betweene our fathers C. let there be now an oath betweene us caeter v. 33. he called it abundance H. an oath S. he called Shibah caet v. 35. they were rebellious against Isaack and Rebeckah C.B. they offended or were a griefe of minde caet heb bitternesse of Spirit 3. The Explanation of doubtfull questions QVEST. I. Whether this Abimelech were the same with whom Abraham had to deale Vers. 1. ANd there was a famine in the land c. 1. This other famine in Abrahams time was that famine mentioned chap. 12. where Abraham went downe into Aegypt Mercer for chap. 20. when Abraham sojourned in Gerar there is no famine spoken of which Pererius supposeth to have beene the cause of Abrahams going thither 2. This Abimelech might be either the same with whom Abraham had to deale who might bee now not above an hundred yeare old or another King of that name for the Kings of Gerar were called by the name of Abimelech as the Kings of Aegypt Pharaohs Phicol also might be the name of office or the same man might serve the father and sonne Mercer 3. Therefore we need not with Augustine quaest 75. in Genes to thinke this story to have beene done long before and to be set downe by way of recapitulation for it seemeth that Abraham was
but whatsoever he hath decreed concerning any mans salvation shall stand Calvin For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance Rom. 11.29 Yet must not this doctrine make us secure to sinne presumptuously trusting to Gods election but as the Apostle saith We must worke out our salvation with feare and trembling lest we be circumvented of Sathan and prevented of that which we vainly hoped for Confut. Against the errour of the Novatians THis example of Ruben notwirhstanding his fall restored to his patriarchal dignity doth further confute that error of the Novatians who denied pardon to those which were fallen and refused to receive them into their society and congregation Calvin We see that our Saviour Christ when Perer had thrice denied him yet vouchsafed to receive him to mercy and to confirme him in his Apostleship 6. Places of morall observation 1. Observ. Amendment of life delivereth from dangers Vers. 2. THou said Iacob put away the strange Gods c Iacob being in great danger doth purge and cleanse hâ—s houshold so the next way to finde deliverance and to obtaine ptotection from God is to amend our life and to renew our hearts and to turne every man from his evill wayes Perer. Heereupon Balaam gave that wicked counsell to put a stumbling blocke before the Israelites to cause them to sinne that they might run into Gods displeasure and be out of his protection 2. Observ. The people must shew themselves willing to be reformed Vers. 4. THey gave unto Iacob all the strange gods Herein appeareth the singular and prompt obedience of Iacobs houshold who are contented to put away their idols iewels and caterings wherein they had so much before delighted Mercer which â—eacheth that the people should shew themselves ready and willing to be reclaimed from their superstitions and corruptions of life as we read that the souldiers and people came unto Iohn and asked him Master what shall we doe Luk. 3. 3. Observ. God striketh feare into mens hearts Vers. 5. THe feare of God was upon the cities Thus God is able to command the affections of men and to smite them with feare where otherwise there is no apparent cause of feare as here the strong and populous cities of Canaan are afraid of Iacob So Rahab confessed to the spies the feare of you is fallen upon us Iosu. 2.9 Thus God is able to deliver his Church whereas no other meanes are at hand by terrifying the hearts of the enemies thereof 4. Observ. It is lawfull and commendable to mourne moderately for the dead Vers. 8. IAcob and his company made such lamentation for the departure of that godly matron Deborah that he called the place the â—ake of lamentation It is not then unlawfull to mourne for the dead nay it is an uncomly thing to shew drie cheekes in the funeralls of parents wives and children as some doe S. Paul forbiddeth not to mourne for the dead but not as they that have no hope 1. Thessal 4. Muscul. 5. Observ. Our â—oyes in this life are miâ—ed with sorrow Vers. 19. THus died Rachel Iacob doth not so much rejoyce for the birth of Benjamin as he hath occasion of griefe offered for the losse and death of deare Rachel thus the Lord seeth it to be good to temper our joy with sorrow and therein we see the mutable and changeable condition of this life which affordeth no perpetuall and constant joy Perer. And therefore amidst our joyes it is good to arme our selves against sorrow as Iob in the midst of his prosperous estate did looke for adversity saying The thing which I feared is now come upon me Iob 3.25 6. Observ. One affliction followeth after another WE see further that Iacobs life was a continuall warfare still one temptation followed in the necke of another 1. Dinah was ravished 2. Simeon and Levi put the city to the sword 3. Deborah dieth 4. Then Rachel his beloved wife 5. Then Ruben commiteth incest 6. Ioseph is sold into Egypt 7. Isaack dieth 8. Benjamin is also taken from him to goe into Egypt Thus many are the tentations and tribulations wherewith the Lord trieth his children Calvin We learne that while we live here we should prepare our selves for crosses and afflictions and when we are escaped one to looke presently for another This was Iobs case when one messenger followed at the heeles of another bringing him evill tidings Iob 1. 7. Observ. Godly women may die in childbirth Vers. 18. AS shee was about to yeeld up the ghost c. The Hebrewes note three women in Scripture that died in travaile Rachel the wife of Phinehes the sonne of Eli and Michol Davidâ— wife because it is said she had no children till the day of her death but this is a simple conjecture the meaning is that she had no children at all Mercer But we see by this example that even godly women may have Rachels lot to die in travaile and therefore such are not to hee discomforted if it please God that they so end their daies 8. Observ. Great blemishes sometime fall out in the Church of God Vers. 21. RVben lay with his fathers concubine c. It need not then seeme strange if such blemishes fall out sometime in the Church of God and families of Saints as Ruben here committeth incest in Iacobs house and it seemeth Bilha the mother of two tribes in Israel was consenting thereunto so among the Corinthians a young man had his fathers wife 1 Cor. 5.1 Mercer CHAP. XXXVI 1. The Method and Contents IN this chapter the externall state and happinesse of Esau is set forth first by his polygamie and marriage of many wives with the fruits thereof his children and the adjunctes thereunto his riches vers 1. to vers 8. Secondly by his genealogie where his children and nephewes are rehearsed and described 1. By their nativitie of what wives he had them vers 8. to 15. 2. By their dignity vers 15. to 20. Thirdly by the estate of his country where first the old inhabitants the Hâ—rites are described vers 20. to 32. then the new inhabitants the Edomites first governed by Kings vers 31. to 40. then by Dukes againe vers 40. to the end 2. The divers readings v. 2. Eliba Sebagon S. Aâ—libama Sibeon cat v. 5. Ieul Ieglom S. Iehus Iaalon cat v. 6. all the bodies of his house S. the soules of his house caet he went out of the land of Canaan S. into another country H. C. G. P. into a country away B. into the region of Seir T. from his brother Iacob H. from the face of his brother S. B.G.P. because of his brother C. before the comming of his brother T. from the face of his brother heb v. 8. Iacob dwelt in the land where his father dwelt in Canaan S. v. 11. Kâ—nez and Châ—ra H. Kenes cater v. 13. Zaresome S. Zerach Sammah cat v. 14. The sonnes of Libemas the daughter of Enam S. of Aâ—libamah the daughter of Ana
whereas Pererius allegeth that place Psal. 16.10 Thou wilt not leave my soule in hell to shew that sheol is taken for hell it shall not be amisse by the way to examine the sense of this place whereof there are three expositions First some by soule nephesh understand the dead body as it is taken Levit. 21.1 Let none be defiled among the dead the word is nephesh soule Genebrard a popish writer thus confuteth this opinion denying that nephesh is in this place taken for the body but by a metonymie it signifieth the exequies and funerall duties performed to the soule of the dead Contra. Though we also approve not the former exposition of nephesh in this place and that reverend man that so translated Act. 2. hath himselfe in that point altered his translation in his last edition of his annotations upon the new testament yet Genebrard had no reason to deny the word to bee so taken Levit. 21.1 for 1. beside that the Israelites had no such custome to use any suffrages or exequies for the soules of the dead and therefore nephesh can signifie no such thing 2. The defiling was by touching the dead Levit. 22.4 or by going to the dead Levit. 21.11 but the soules of the dead cannot be touched neither could the suffrages for the soules but the presence of the bodies pollute them 3. The Levites are forbidden to defile themselves with the dead saving their fathers and mothers and other of their neare kindred Levit. 22.2 But it is not like that they should have beene forbidden to pray or offer suffrages for any but their owne kindred yea the high Priest is forbidden to defile himselfe for his father and mother vers 10. Let them say also that he was forbidden to pray for the soule of his father and mother if any such thing had beene in use then therefore Genebrards exposition is vaine and without any good ground Secondly Pererius and other of that sort doe take hell here for that locall place and region of soules where they imagine the fathers to have remained before the comming of Christ and Pererius best reason is because the Prophet maketh a manifest distinction betweene the soule and body of Christ and hell and the grave saying Thou shalt not leave my soule in hell nor suffer thy holy one to see corruption Perer. in cap. 13. numer 100. Contra. 1. Here is no distinction of divers parts but an explanation of the same thing in divers words according to the use of Scripture so that what is first said somewhat darkly Thou wilt not leave my soule in grave is afterward more plainly declared that is Thou wilt not suffer thy holy one to see corruption 2. That such locall place of hell cannot be here understood may appeare by these reasons out of the text it selfe 1. That place where Christs soule was not left and it was impossible he should be holden of it God loosed the sorrowes of Act. 2.24 but God loosed not for Christ the sorrowes of hell which he felt not after his passion Ergo Christs soule was not left in hell 2. The not leaving of Christs soule in hell was the cause why his flesh did rest in hope vers 26 27. the not leaving of his soule in the locall place of hell caused not his flesh to rest in hope but the not leaving of it in the grave and the not seeing of corruption for their soules which are left in hell shall also returne to their bodies and bee raised together with them Ergo. 3. That hell where Christs soule is not left is the place where corruption is to be seene for so one clause of the sentence is expounded by the other but in hell there is no corruption Ergo. 4. David when he said Thou shalt not leave my soule in hell spake of Christs resurrection Act. 2.31 but the not leaving of Christs soule in the infernall hell concerneth not the resurrection of Christs body Ergo David meaneth not that hell The third exposition therefore is which I preferre before the rest that Christs soule that is his life or person should not be left in the grave and so this place of the Psalme may bee expounded by the like Psal. 89.48 What man liveth and shall not see death shall hee deliver his soule from the hand of hell or the grave here the Psalmist himselfe expoundeth hell to be death where the soule that is the life lieth as it were hid and buried as Psal. 88.3 My life draweth neare to the grave sic Paul Fag annotat in Chaldaic paraphras in Pentateuch 8. Confut. Iacob goeth mourning to the grave not to hell BUt whereas Pererius yet further in this place concerning Iacobs descending c would have hell and not the grave understood for all goe not downe to the grave and Iacob did thinke that Ioseph was not in the grave being supposed to be torne of wilde beasts the contrary shall now appeare 1. This is a friuolous objection for the grave is not onely a pit or a hole made for the dead but any place where the body falleth to dust and corruption as Iob describeth it chap. 17. vers 13. The grave shall be my house vers 14. I shall say to corruption thou art my father vers 16. They shall lie together in the dust thereof even Ioseph also though he had beene torne of wilde beasts and rotted upon the earth should have had his grave 2. In saying all goe not to the grave he manifestly contradicteth the Scripture as is before alleaged What man shall deliver his soule from the hand of the grave Psal. 89.48 3. Hell in the old Testament is not taken otherwise than for a place of torment and punishment but neither Iacob not Ioseph went to any such place 4. This hell Iacob went unto with his gray head or haires Gen. 42.38 but the grave not hell is the place for gray haires 5. Lastly that sheol here signifieth the grave it is the opinion of Ab. Ezra whom Eugubinus Cajetanus Oleaster Vatablus follow and among the Protestants Fagius Mercer with others 6. Places of morall observation 1. Observ. That parents be not partiall in their loves toward their children Vers. 4. IOsephs brethren hated him because they saw that their father loved him Ambrose noteth this to have beene an over-sight in Iacob for preferring one of the brethren before the rest who if he in Ioseph loved and preferred his vertue should rather have concealed his affection for as hee well saith it is no marvell if brethren fall out for houses and land when Iosephs brethren hated him for a coat Ambr. lib. 2. de Ioseph Wherefore parents may learne how inconvenient a thing it is to bee partiall toward their children and by immoderate love toward some to exasperate and provoke the rest which the Apostle giveth warning of Fathers provoke not your children to wrath Eph. 6.4 2. Observ. A pitifull man will first offer himselfe to them that are in misery
of a brother for the word is used first in this place where it so signifieth from hence then the originall sense of the word must be taken 3. The words of the law are If brethren dwell together now naturall brethren and such as are properly so called are more like to dwell together than kinsmen removed who in a large sense are so called brethren 4. This law is so interpreted in the Gospell where it appeareth by the Sadduces question of seven brethren that successively tooke the one the others wife Matth. 22. that it was so practised 5. It is the opinion of Philo and the Hebrewes as we heard before who are best acquainted with their owne lawes that naturall brethren used so to doe 4. Now the objections on the contrary part are easily answered 1. It is objected that Levit. 18.16 the brother is forbidden to marry his brothers wife Answ. This is a particular exception from that generall law that unlesse in this case onely to raise seed to the brother it was utterly unlawfull to take the brothers widow which was not to uncover her shame but rather to take away her shame in that shee remained childlesse by his brother and it was honourable to the dead in reviving his memory So wee see in other cases that the Lord made some particular exception from his generall lawes As the making of the Cherubims over the Arke was an instance against the second commandement the Israelites robbing of the Egyptians against the eighth commandement Phinehes killing of the adulterer and adulteresse against the sixth commandement 2. Ob. The practice of this law as appeareth Ruth 4. where Boaz not a brother but a kinsman taketh the wife of the dead sheweth the meaning thereof Answ. We deny not but where there was no brother nearer there the next kinsman further off did the duty of the brother and so was it practised upon Ruth 3. Ob. Iohn Baptist simply reproveth Herod because he tooke his brothers wife It is not lawfull for thee saith Iohn to have thy brothers wife Mark 6.18 Answ. It is certaine that Herods brother had issue by his wife Herodias whose daughter danced before Herod and therefore in this case it was not lawfull so that Herod tooke not Herodias for any such purpose to raise seed to his brother but of an immoderate lust 4. Ob. Why then should it not be lawfull still in this case to marry the brothers wife dying without issue Answ. This law of Moses was partly ceremoniall and typicall in preserving the right of the first-borne whereby was prefigured the spirituall birth-right in the Messiah which never should have end partly politicall in maintaining the distinction of families in their tribes whereof the ceremonie is now abolished which onely concerned that people Iun. in Deut. 25. vers 5. QUEST VIII Whether Thamar or Iudahs sinne was greater COncerning this act of incontinencie which Iudah committed with Thamar 1. We refuse the opinion of Rab. Simeon who altogether exempteth Thamar from any fault because she onely desired issue for the hope of the Messiah to be borne of Iudah for this mystery was not as yet revealed Perer. 2. It is certaine that Iudahs sinne was greater than Thamars both in that he brake promise with her concerning Selah as also in that he companied with her not for any issue but carnall lust though he were afterward preferred before his brethren this no more excuseth his fault than if Davids adultery joyned with murther should bee defended because hee was preferred before his brethren of whose seed the Messiah should come 3. Thamars sinne was lesse than Iudahs yet a sinne as Augustine noteth Non eam justificatam sed magis quam se justificatam dicens Iudah saith She was not righteous but more righteous than he lib. 22. cont Faust. cap. 62. Yet her fault is extenuated by these circumstances as Ambrose noteth Non alienum praeripuit thorum She did not usurpe upon anothers bed she stayed till Iudah was a widower she did it not of an inordinate lust Sed successionis gratia concupivit She onely desired to have issue Et ex ea familia quam delegerat And by that family which she had chosen and further after she knew her selfe to be conceived with childe she put on her widowes garments againe and so continued 4. Yet Thamars sin in some respect was greater than Iudahs because she wittingly committed incest with her father in law but Iudah ignorantly Luther Notwithstanding all circumstances considered Iudahs fault was the greater and so he doth justifie her in respect of himselfe 5. But whereas Ambrose further noteth that shee stayed till Selah to whom she was espoused was dead therein is an errour for vers 14. it is given as a reason why Thamar attempted this thing because Selah was now growne and of age and she yet not given unto him he was then at this time alive Beside Selah is numbred among those sons of Iudah that went downe with Iacob into Egypt and onely Er and Onan of Iacobs sonnes are said to have died in the land of Canaan Gen. 46.12 ex Perer. QUEST IX How it came to passe that Iudah discerned not Thamar by her voice Vers. 15. HE judged her to be an whore for she had covered her face c. 1. Not as some reade she had coloured or painted her face whom Aben Ezra doth not without cause reprove 2. Neither is this a reason why Iudah did thinke she was an harlot because she was vailed as Iunius Calvin for harlots use not to be so modest but it is given as a reason why Iudah did not know her Mercer 3. And whereas it may seeme strange that Iudah did not know her by her voice the reason is that being wholly given over to lust and intending no other thing he greatly regarded not the sight of his eyes or hearing of his eares Luther As also it was a just judgement of God upon him to strike him with such a stupidity as not to discerne her Mercer Geneven QUEST X. Whether Iudâ—h were a Iudge Vers. 24. BRing her forth and let her be burnt c. 1. Iudah giveth not sentence against Thamar either as being appointed a Prince and Judge among the Canaanites as Tostatus Cajetanus for it is not like they would suffer a stranger to be a Judge and ruler among them as the Sodomites answer Lot Gen. 19.9 neither as chiefe in the familie had he power of life and death over those of his charge as some thinke for neither doe we reade that any father of families did execute any such justice in their families and Iacob was the chiefe father of these families and therefore it is most like that Iudah giveth advice that Thamar should be brought forth to the place of justice and proceeded against according to the custome and law of that Country Mercer Iun. 2. But whereas she is adjudged to the fire this was not because she was Melchisedecks daughter the Lords
gift requiring this as a reward and recompence for this good tidings But by this he sheweth the certaintie of the Butlers good successe and favour with the King that if he made but mention of him to Pharaoh he might be delivered neither doth he aske this as a reward but taketh this occasion to do himselfe good for it is lawfull for a man to use all honest meanes for his libertie as the Apostle saith Art thou called being a servant care not for it yet if thou canst be free use it rather 1 Cor. 7.21 Calvin 3. It may be that Ioseph was some what too confident upon this meanes as though this were the way that God had appointed for his deliverance and therefore God would exercise Iosephs patience still so that Ioseph failed not in diffidence and distrust in betaking himselfe to the meanes but rather herein that he limiteth Gods providence both for the meanes and the time that even now and by this meanes he hasteth to be delivered Calvin Mercer QUEST IIII. How Ioseph is said to be stollen away Vers. 15. I Was stolen away by theft out of the land of the Hebrewes 1. This theft was not committed by the Ismaelites who bought Ioseph for their money but by his owne bretheren who committed a theft two waies both because they sold a freeman not taken in battel nor brought into bondage which by Moses Law was punished with death Exod. 21.16 and in that they did robbe their father of his child Perer. 2. Hebron is not here meant by the land of the Hebrews as Ramban because that was the principall place of abode for Abraham Isaack and Iacob but the land of Canaan is thus called where the Hebrewes dwelt which Ioseph so calleth rather than Canaan because he abhorred to be counted of that nation Mercer QUEST V. How the chiefe Baker his head is said to be lifted up 〈◊〉 leavied Vers. 19. WIthin three daies Pharaoh shall take thine head from thee or leavie thine head off from thee c. 1. Iunius readeth thus Pharaoh numbering thee shall cause theâ— no more to be numbered and hee referreth it as before to the removing or taking away of his pegge which he taketh for his head out of his hole or place in the table but this seemeth to be too curious 2. Neither with some other doe I thinke that the chiefe Baker was beheaded for the text saith he was hanged upon a tâ—ee which needed not if he were first beheaded 3. Some make the meaning of the phrase to be this that Pharaoh would take away his life from him and the Latines say capite plecti to lose the head that is to be put to death hence they are called capitall crimes that are punished by the losse of the head or life Mercer 4. The most reade shall take thine head from thee but he was hanged not beheaded 5. Some thinke he was first beheaded and then hanged as the manner is yet in some countries Osiand But in that the Butlers head was lift up as well as the Bakers vers 20. this phrase doth not shew his punishment for then the effect vers 20. should not answer to the prophecie 6. Some understand it of his hanging that his head was lift up upon him as our Saviour calleth his hanging upon the crosse his exaltation or lifting up Ioh. 3.14 Pellican But this cannot be the meaning because the same phrase is used both of the Butler and Baker 7. This therefore is the sense that Pharaoh should lift up his head aloft out of prison and cause his name to be rehearsed and so his head to be leavied among the rest of his servants and take cognizance of both their causes but the one he should hang and restore the other So Ioseph doth foretell unto them three things whereof the first the leavying of the head and examining their cause is common to them both the other two things are peculiar to either the Butler shall be restored to his office and minister the cup to the King vers 13. the Baker shall be put from his office and no more reckoned or leavied among the officers and be hanged this then is the true reading of the words Pharaoh shall leavie thine head from upon thee that is that no more leavying or reckoning be made upon thee which words may be supplied by the contrarie vers 13. and the exposition of the praeposition ghal used there to thine office and mâ—ghal from off expressed here doe insinuate as much so also the same word meghaleca from off thee is used in the end of this verse and Deut. 8.4 Thy garments 〈◊〉 not waxe old from off thee that is to be no more upon thee and so to be used by thee QUEST VI. Whether Ioseph used any preamble to his interpretation Vers. 19. THe birds shall eat thy flesh 1. It is like that Ioseph being to deliver so hard an interpretation of the Bakers dreame did use some preface to excuse himselfe as Philo bringeth him in thus speaking Vtinam tale somnium non vidisses c. I would thou hadst either not seene this dreame or not declared it to me and it is not unlike but that Ioseph used some such preparation as Daniel did when he was to expound Nebuchadnezzars dreame The dreame be to them that hate thee and the interpretation thereof to thine enemies Dan. 4.16 2. This hanging of malefactors upon a tree seemeth to have beene an ancient punishment and it was counted a most ignominious death and therefore Saint Paul setteth forth the great humilitie of Christ that humbled himselfe even to the death of the crosse Philip. 2. The Latine translator readeth he shall hang thee on the crosse which kinde of death was used also among the Romanes as Tully saith Facinus est vincire civem Romanum scelus verberare quid dicam in crucem tollerâ— It is a great offence to binde a Citizen of Rome a greater to beat him the greatest to set him on the Crosse Cicer. Verrem 7. 3. Such as were hanged to death among the Israelites by the law were to be taken downe and buried the same day Deut. 21.23 But it seemeth that this use was not observed among the Gentiles but their bodies did hang to be meat to the fowles of the ayre Perer. which may be noted as a great judgement of God when the Lord suffereth his owne image in man to be so defaced and his flesh to be given for meat to the fowles and beasts whose flesh is appointed to be mans food as the Lord threatned against Ieroboam and his house that they which died in the Citie should be eaten of dogges they which died in the fields should be devoured of the fowles of heaven 1 King 14.11 Muscul. QUEST VII Whether lawfull to keepe the memorie of the birth-day Vers. 20. PHaraohs birth-day 1. This was a very ancient custome to celebrate the birth-daies of Kings and Princes both among the Medes and Persians as witnesseth Xenophon
that can save and destroy Iam 4.12 Onely God that gave unto man his life hath power to take it away and therefore otherwise than God hath given direction either by particular precept or generall rule the life of man is not to bee taken away 3. And seeing Magistrates are but Gods Ministers Rom. 13.4 they must execute justice according to his will for it is required of a disposer that he bee found faithfull 1. Cor. 4.2 but Gods will otherwise appeareth not than in his word 4. And seeing whatsoever is not of faith that is firme perswasion is sinne Rom. 14.23 and faith must be grounded upon the word as being wrought by the word Rom 10.17 how can the Magistrate approve his acts of justice as in the sight of God unlesse hee can warrant the same by the word 2. Neither yet can I consent with those which thinke that the punishment inflicted by Moses for the breach of the morall law together with the morall law is imposed upon Christian Magistrates as it is not lawfull to punish adulterie otherwise than by death nor simple theft by death but by restitution Piscator praefation in Exod. for if this were so then the Gospell should overthrow the policie and institution of divers Common-wealths which of a long time have continued but God is the author of peace not of confusion 1. Cor. 14.33 2. Mardoche and Daniel having place of government under the Persian Kings did no doubt minister justice according to the lawes of that countrey 3. Our Saviour Christ commanding to give tribute to Caesar and injoyning obedience to the higher powers which did beare the sword and that for conscience sake Rom. 13. seeme to give approbation to the lawes of nations maintaining right and tending to equity 4. Our Saviour himselfe observed not the judicials belonging to the morall law for whereas he that gathered stickes upon the Sabbath was stoned to death by Moses yet out Saviour excuseth and defendeth his Apostles who did as much as the other in rubbing the eares of corne for their necessity Matth. 12. yea hee giveth a rule that for fornication onely and adulterie it was lawfull for a man to put away his wife Matth. 19. which exception needed not if either in fact then or in right afterward adulterers and adulteresses were to bee punished by death If it be answered that Christ tooke not upon him the office of the Civill Magistrate to impose corporall punishment yet would not our Saviour have defended his Apostles nor yet by silence have left them unreproved for neglect of the law 3. Wherefore the best resolution is that the morall judicials of Moses do partly bind and partly are left free they do not hold affirmatively that we are tied to the same severity of punishment now which was inflicted then but negatively they doe hold that now the punishment of death should not be adjudged where sentence of death is not given by Moses Christian Magistrates ruling now under Christ the Prince of peace Isai. 9. that is of clemencie mercie may abate of the severitie of Moses law mitigate the punishment of death but they cannot adde unto it to make the burthen more heavie to shew more rigour than Moses becommeth not the Gospell to extend more favour is not unbeseeming of these two assertions my reasons are as followeth 1. That which Ambrose urgeth out of the mouth of Luke how our Saviour reproveth his Disciples because they would have had fire come downe upon the Samaritanes upon the which example hee thus inferreth Ostenditur nobis non semper in eos qui peecaverunt vindicandum quia nonnunquam amplius prodest clementia tibi ad patientiam lapso ad correctionem It is shewed us that alwayes vengeance is not to bee taken of those that offend because oftentimes clemencie is more profitable for patience in thee and amendement in the offender And this collection is ratified by the answer of our Saviour in that place The Sonne of man is not come to destroy mens lives but to sâ—ve them Luk. 9.55 2. Augustine urgeth the example of Christ who suffered the woman taken in adâ—â—tery to escape without punishment of death Ioh. 8. Whereupon hee inferreth that the adulter◠〈◊〉 not now to bee put to death but to live rather to be reconciled to her husband or to come 〈…〉 the usuall answer is that our Saviour doth not here abrogate the Law against adultery 〈◊〉 only to meddle with the Magistrates office Piscator Ans. Neither doe wee say that Christ abrogateth that law but leaveth it free and taketh away the necessitie of it And though Christ exercised not the Magistrates office in his owne person yet in this case it had not beene impertinent to have given direction to have her before the Magistrate as in another case he sendeth the leper to the Priest Matth. 8.4 if it had pleased him to impose still the severitie of the law yea our Saviour sheweth by his answer Let him that is amongst you without sinne cast the first stone at her Ioh. 8.7 that hee would not have them such strait executors of the rigour of Moses law upon others but rather to bee severe judges of themselves and with charitable affection to support the frailty of others to the which themselves were subject 3. Further the difference betweene the times of the Law and of the Gospell must be considered then they received the spirit of bondage to feare but now the spirit of adoption Rom. 8.15 then they which came neere the mount where the morall Law was given were stone or stricken thorow with darts whether man or beast Heb. 12.20 but it is not so now then the bloud of Abel cryed for vengeance but the bloud of Christ now calleth for mercie and so speaketh better things than that of Abel Heb. 12.24 Therefore to mitigate the severitie of Moses Law in some cases yet not leaving sinne unpunished nor by connivence cherishing the same it is more sutable to the profession of the Gospell of peace and mercie Wherefore I here say with Chrysostome Vbi paterfamilias largus est dispensator non debet esse tenax Where the master of the house is bountifull the steward must not be sparing Melius est propter misericordiam rationem reddere quà m propter crudelitatem It is better to be called to account for too much pitie than for cruelty 4. The continuall practice of the Church sheweth as much that the rigour of Moses judicials is mitigated S. Paul willeth the incestuous man only to be excommunicate 1. Cor. 5. it seemeth then there was no law in force to put such to death nor in Cyprians time who thus writeth Quidam episcopi in nostro provincia c. Some Bishops in our province have altogether shut up penance against adulterie Nor after that in the time of the Eliberin Councell which was held under the reigne of Constantine where it was decreed can 9. Moechatus
chap. 7. that either it may be understood of Moses and Aaron who were Gods messengers for so Angell signifieth or else they are called Angels of evill i. of poenal not morall evill rather than evill Angels And though they would seeme to gather by those words chap. 12.23 The Lord will not suffer the destroyer to come into your houses that this Angell of himselfe had a desire to invade the people of God and therefore was not a good Angell yet that followeth not but the words rather shew thus much that the Angell being sent forth by the Lord was to doe all things according to his direction to strike where God bid him strike and to forbeare where the Lord purposed to spare 4. Wherefore as the good Angels were the ministers of the former plagues as is shewed before quest 30. in chap. 7. so they are to be held to be the Lords instrument in this Pâ—rer QUEST IV. Whether one Angell or many were used in this destruction ANd for the number of these destroying Angels 1. Though it be said in the singular number chap. 12.23 the destroyer yet it followeth not that one Angell should be the minister for it is usuall in Scripture to put the singular for the plurall 2. Therefore it is more probable that many Angels were imployed in this service not in respect of the multitude that were slaine for in the host of Senacherib one Angell slew 180. thousand nor of the distance of place for one Angell in Davids time smote 70000. in three dayes space from Dan to Beersheba but in regard of the time because all the first borne of Egypt were slaine at midnight about the same time it is like that many Angels in divers places of Egypt were sent of God to strike the first borne Perer. Cajetan QUEST V. Vpon whom this plague in the smiting of the first borne was executed Vers. 5. ALl the first borne in the land of Egypt shall die All the first borne of every house as the chiefe and principall were smitten with death even from the Kings throne unto the sonne of the poore servant that ground at the mill which they used in the day to doe such servile works and in the night time kept them in hold and therefore it is said chap. 12.29 unto the first borne of the captive that was in prison So Samson did grind at the mill being in prison Iudg. 16. 2. Beside all the first borne of their beasts were slaine that is of their domesticall cattell for wilde beasts must be here excepted which were not in their power and such cattell as bring forth many at once where there is no difference betweene the firstlings and the rest Perer. 3. The third effect of this plague was that God did execute his judgements upon the gods and Idols of Egypt chap. 12.12 QUEST VI. Whether in every house the first borne were slaine BUt here this doubt ariseth concerning the first borne because it is said afterward chap. 12.30 that there was no house wherein there was not one dead whether in every house there were a first borne 1. Ab. Ezra thinketh all to be understood for the greater part 2. Simler for the houses of every sort both of high and low as the King and captive are named 3. Hugo S. Victor doth thus interpret it that in every house where was any first borne there was one slaine But it seemeth that no house at all was excepted because all the Israelites were commanded to strike the bloud upon the posts of their dores to escape the plague 4. Therefore Augustine thinketh that God so disposed at this time by his divine providence that every house of the Egyptians had one first borne quest 44. in Exod. But we need not run unto miracles where another exposition may be found 5. Thostatus thinketh that the first borne is here taken for the first borne of the feminine sex as well as of the males whether their parents were alive or dead whether they were the first borne by the husband or wife But the name of first borne is not thus taken in scripture neither yet is it like that any females died but males as it may appeare by the law of the first borne that are made holy unto God upon this occasion because the Lord for Israels sake killed all the first borne of Egypt there onely the males that first open the wombe are set apart chap. 13.12 6. Therefore of all the â—est I preferre the exposition of Iunius that in every house either the first or if there were no first borne the next principall man was taken in stead of the first borne so also Cajetane QUEST VII Why the Lord destroyeth the first borne NOw the first borne were slaine 1. Because they oppressed Israel whom the Lord calleth his first borne Exod. 4. Theodoret. 2. Rather because they put to death the first borne children of Israel yea all the males therefore the Lord doth worthily punish them in their first borne Ferus 3. And this plague was ordained for them more grievous than all the rest for what can come neerer a man than the death of his first borne which also may bee his onely borne as Abraham could not have a greater triall than when he was commanded to sacrifice his onely sonne Isaack that the Egyptians should be forced by this last and greatest plague to let Israel goe Perer. 4. Neither was this unjust in God to take away the life of infants who are not innocent before God and the Lord that gave them life may take it away if it more serve unto his glory And the parents also that had sinned were punished herein by the death of their dearest children being themselves reserved for a greater destruction Simler QUEST VIII Why the first borne of the cattell also are destroyed THe Egyptians cattell also are killed 1. because this losse also was a punishment unto the Egyptians for whose use they served Simler 2. And much of their substance also consisted in cattell Perer. so that both they lost part of their substance and wanted the use of them 3. Beside the Egyptians oppressed the Israelites and wronged them in their cattell Ferus 4. The Hebrewes also thinke this was one speciall cause for that the Egyptians did superstitiously adore divers kinds of cattell and therefore for detestation of their Idolatrie the cattell are punished QUEST IX How the Gods of the Egyptians were judged NOw what gods of Egypt were judged is diversly scanned 1. Some thinke that by gods the Magistrates and Judges are understood Osiander But this was said before that the first borne should be killed even from the Princes throne this was a punishment to Pharaoh and all his great men to have their first borne cut off 2. Some thinke that the Egyptian gods were judged in that their worshippers were punished Borrh. 3. Others that the Temples of the Idols were cast downe Hierom and their Idols throwne downe and beaten to dust as the
And so Augustine giveth the solution of this place Non itaque quod ajit in servitutem redigent eos c. ad quadringentos annos referendum est c. In that it is said they shall hold them in servitude it must not bee referred to the foure hundred yeeres as though they kept them in servitude so many yeeres but the foure hundred yeeres must bee referred to that which is said thy seede shall be a stranger in a land not theirs August quaest 47. in Exod. QUEST LVI That the Israelites dwelt not 430. yeeres in Egypt only SEcondly it is not to be supposed that the Israelites dwelt in Egypt all this space of 430. yeeres which is the opinion of Genebrard who thinketh that this terme taketh beginning from the comming of Iacob into Egypt and expireth with the time of their deliverance and departure thence his reasons are these 1. Because in this place it is so affirmed that the Israelites dwelt so long in Egypt 2. As also that it is not like that in the space of 215. yeeres which is the time according to the common opinion of their abode in Egypt of seventy persons they could increase into so great a multitude Contra. 1. In this place a figurative speech must needes be admitted for wee must understand not only the time of Israels sojourning in Egypt but of their fathers also in the land of Canaan as Augustine saith these words must be expounded Manifestum est computandum esse tempus Patriarcharum Abrahâ— c. It is manifest that the time of the Patriarks Abraham Izhak Iakob must bee accounted when they began to sojourne in the land of Canaan quaest 47. in Exod. But of this more afterward 2. Neither is it impossible or improbable even without a miracle for so many thousands in the space of 215. yeeres to bee multiplied as is shewed before at large quest 5. in chap. 1. And Augustine giveth two reasons thereof Si fâ—cunditas hominis consideretur adjuvante illo qui illos valde voluit multiplicari reperietur non esse mirum The fecundity of men considered God also helping who would have them exceedingly to increase it will bee found not to be strange Now that the Israelites could not continue 430. yeeres in Egypt these two arguments doe evidently convince 1. Whereas Caath was one of those which came with Iacob into Egypt who lived 133. yeeres and his sonne Amram 137. yeeres and Moses his sonne was 80. yeere old at the departure of Israel out of Egypt all these yeeres put together make but 350. from which summe must bee deducted the yeeres wherein they lived together Genebrard answeres that their yeeres are only reckoned after they begat children and that some may be omitted that came betweene as S. Matthew leaveth out in his genealogy three Kings Ahaziah Ioas and Amasiah This answer of Genebrard may easily be taken away for neither is it the use of Scripture when it setteth downe the yeeres of a mans life to name onely the yeeres when he begate children and seeing in that line from Levi to Moses no other persons are elsewhere named that came betweene beside Caath and Amram it is a conjecture without ground to imagine any other But the omission of these three in S. Matthewes genealogy is evident because wee finde them elsewhere in the stories of the Kings to be set downe Perer. 2. S. Paul beginneth these 430. yeeres from the promise and covenant that was made to Abraham Galath 3.17 Therefore Israel stayed not all those yeeres in Egypt Genebrard here answereth that where the Apostle saith the law which was 430. yeeres after this word after is not referred to the covenant but to the law that came 430. yeeres after that is from the departure of the Israelites Contra. But this is a manifest wresting of the Apostles words who of purpose maketh a comparison betweene the law and the covenant of grace shewing that salvation dependeth not of the law but of the grace and promise of God which came 430. yeeres before And whereas the Apostles words in that order which hee set them downe are these This I say that the covenant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confirmed afore of God the Law made after foure hundred and thirty yeeres could not disanull what other sense can be made of these words but that the law was given so many yeeres after the promise for after must of necessity have relation to that which is said to have beene before which was not the departure of the Israelites not here so much as mentioned but the covenant said to be before ratified and confirmed of God Pererius QUEST LVII The Israelites dwelt in Egypt 215. yeeres only FUrther that the Israelites neither stayed in Egypt under 200. yeeres as Chrysostome thinketh nor yet 210. only as the Hebrewes to whom Lyranus and Cajetanus give consent nor yet 230. yeeres as Calvin but 215. yeeres only it may be thus made to appeare First from the first promise made to Abraham unto the going of Israel out of Egypt are 430. yeeres according to the Apostles account of this summe there were 215. yeeres gone before Iacob descended into Egypt Abraham at 75. received the promise 25. yeeres after when Abraham was 100. yeere old was Isaack borne he at 60. begate Iacob Iacob at 130. went downe into Egypt these yeeres put together 25.60.130 make in all 215. yeeres there remaineth then the other halfe of the summe 215. yeeres more for the sojourning of Israel in Egypt Thus Augustine reckoneth approving Eusebius account quaest 47. in Exod. Secondly whereas the yeeres of Coath Amram and Moses when Israel came out of Egypt doe make as is before shewed all together 350. yeeres but from this summe must be subtracted the yeeres wherein they lived together as from Coaths age of 133. yeeres who at 65. yeeres begate Amram as Epiphanius thinketh the residue wherein he lived together with Amram that is 68. yeeres must bee deducted and from Amrams age of 137. who at 70. yeeres begat Moses as Epiphanius the residue must likewise bee defaulked which are 67. yeeres adde unto these yeeres 65. of Coath and 70. yeeres of Amram 80. yeeres of Moses life and wee shall have the said summe of 215. yeeres all the time of the sojourning of Israel in Egypt QUEST LVIII That the Israelites were not in bondage and servitude in Egypt all the foresaid terme of 215. yeeres THis being then made plaine that the Israelites after Iacobs comming downe thither continued in Egypt 215. yeeres yet were they not so long in servitude and bondage 1. Augustine thinketh that they served in Egypt 144. or 145. yeeres for from the whole summe of 215. yeeres hee onely deducteth 71. yeeres of Iosephs life after Israel came into Egypt after whose death hee thinketh their bondage immediately began But that cannot bee for not onely Ioseph but all his brethren also were first dead Exod. 1.6 of the which Levi being about foure yeere elder than
servile and filiall and true feare Impiâ—rum timâ—r servilis non durat diutiâ—â— quà m sensus plagarum The servill feare of the wicked lasteth no longer than the sense and feeling of the plagues as appeareth here in Pharaoh whose heart was hardned againe so soone as the plagues were ended Filialis autem timâ—r fides in medâ—â— niâ—â—is exercetur but a filiall feare and faith is exercised in the 〈◊〉 of afflictions Pellican 2. Doct. Prayer may be made without the voyce Vers. 15. Why criest thou unto me Moses here uttered no voice but sighed unto God and cried in his heart Egit vocis silentio ut corde clamaret Hee in the silence of his voice so wrought that he cried in his heart as Augustine saith quast 52. in Exod. So that the lifting up of the voice is not the most necessarie part of prayer but the sorrow and contrition of the heart and therefore the Lord saith by his Prophet Before they call I will answere Isai. 65.24 Before they call with their voice I will make answere to the secret requests and inward groanes of their heart Piscator 3. Doct. Christ not all one to the beleevers and unbeleevers Vers. 20. IT was both a cloud and darknes A lightsome cloud it was to the Israelites but to the Egyptians a grievous darkenes so our Saviour represented in this cloud is to some the savour of life unto life in the preaching of the Gospell to other the savour of death unto death 2. Cor. 2.16 to the Grecians foolishnes a stumbling-block to the Jewes but to the faithfull the power of God and the wisedome of God 1. Cor. 1.23.24 Simler 4. Doct. A double deliverance by Christ. Vers. 30. THus the Lord saved Israel the same day The Lord had delivered them before but now their deliverance is accomplished and perfected So our Saviour by his death and passion redeemed us as the Israelites were redeemed when they did eate the passeover in Egypt and sprinkled of the bloud upon the doore-posts But Christ by his resurrection did make perfect the worke of our redemption and the triumph over hell and damnation so that as the Psalme saith With him is plentious redemption Psalm 130. Ferus 5. Places of confutation 1. Conf. Against the Porphyrian Atheists Vers. 22. THe waters were a wall unto them on the right hand and on the lâ—ft This doth evidently convince the Atheists and Porphyrians who objected that Moses being a skilfull man in naturall observations did observe the tide of the sea and at a low and ebbing water went over with his people For 1. If Moses had this skill it is like that the Egyptians specially Pharaoh and the wisest of them should not have been ignorant of it who notwithstanding their skill were drowned in the waters 2. When the sea ebbeth the water onely leaveth the shore the channell of the sea is never drie Simler 3. And the sea swelleth rather than ebbeth and falleth at the full of the moone as it was now 4. But this doth evidently bewray their malicious ignorance that the waters stood up as a wall on each hand which the sea useth not to do at an ebbing water Iun. in Analys See more hereof quest 18. before 2. Conf. That Christ was the substance both of the old and new Sacraments Vers. 22. THe children of Israel went thorow the middest of the sea Saint Paul hereupon doth inferre that they were all baptised unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea 1. Cor. 10.2 This their going then thorow the sea was not only a figure of baptisme and a bare signification of that which our Sacraments exhibite as the Rhemists do note 1 Cor. 10. Sect. 2. But the same truth and substance even Christ Jesus was exhibited in their Sacraments as is in ours only the difference is in the manner because we see Christ more clearely then they did whom they saw only as it were in a cloud for the Apostle saith they did eate the same spirituall meate not among themselves as the Rhemists cavill but with us as Augustine well expoundeth Lib. de poenitent cap. 2. And the Apostle himselfe saith that the rocke was Christ Christ then was the same spirituall drinke both to them and us 3. Conf. No beleefe nor confidence to be placed in men Vers. 31. THey beleeved the Lord and his servant Moses The Rhemists urging here the Hebrew phrase which is they beleeved in the Lord and in Moses would inferre that we may beleeve and trust in men and so in the Church and the like place they object 2. Chron. 20.20 Beleeve in his Prophets and yee shall prosper Rom. 10. Contra. 1. The Latine translator in both places readeth Crediderunt Mosi credite Prophetis They beleeved Moses and beleeve his Prophets so that they do heere refuse the Latine text which they only hold to be authenticall 2. It is shewed before quest 30. that these phrases to beleeve in God and to beleeve God are indifferently taken both in the old and new Testament and whereas Moses saith of Abraham heemin baihâ—vah He beleeved in God the Apostle translateth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He beleeved God Rom. 42.3 Therefore Piscators note is not true that the word heemin with beth signifieth to trust or put confidence in but with lamed it signifieth to beleeve and so he saith they are said to put their confidence in God principally but in Moses secondarily as the faithfull servant of God Contra. 1. What differeth now this opinion from the doctrine of the Romanists who do not teach us principally or originally to trust in Saints but as our mediator having dependance of God 2. How can this assertion stand with the Scripture Ierem 17.5 Cursed be the man that trusteth in man 3. Whereas he produceth certaine places where in Scripture they are said to put confidence in man as 2. Cor. 23. This confidence have I in you all that my joy is the joy of you all and chap. 7.16 I rejoyce that I â—ay put my confidence in you in all things the Apostle in these places by confidence understandeth only a firme perswasion that he had of them that they would not deceive his hope and expectation using the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which differ much from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that betokeneth a confidence in one with a dependance upon him for helpe and succour 6. Morall observations 1. Observ. God knoweth the perils and dangers of his servants how to Deliver them Vers. 4. I Will get me honour upon Pharaoh and all his hoast The Lord brought his people into that strait of purpose to get himselfe honour in delivering them out of their distresse and in judging their enemies whereupon it is evident that the dangers which the servants of God fall into come not by chaunce but are brought upon them by Gods providence who knoweth also how to deliver them out of the same as it is in the
offend against this precept Qui Christi cognitione carent quae cognitio non alia re quà m fide in Christum constet Which want the knowledge of Christ which knowledge consisteth in nothing else than in faith in Christ. Marbach Commentar in hunc locum Against this opinion that faith in Christ is not commanded in the Morall law the reasons follow afterward but first the question must further be explaned 1. First then we are to distinguish of faith which is of foure kindes or sorts 1. There is fides initialis or fundamentalis the faith of beginnings or the fundamentall faith whereof the Apostle speaketh Hebr. 11.6 That he which commeth unto God must beleeve that God is c. And this kinde of faith toward God the Apostle referreth to the doctrine of beginnings Heb. 6. 1. This faith apprehendeth onely the being and essence of God to know him to be the only Lord. 2. There is another faith called fides miraculorum the faith of miracles touched by the Apostle 1. Cor 13.2 If I had all faith so that I could remove mountaines 3. There is fides historica an historicall faith which beleeveth all things to bee true that are written in the Scriptures in which sense S Iames saith The Devils beleeve and tremble they beleeve there is a God and that all is true which the Scripture speaketh of God of his justice power punishing of sinners rewarding of the righteous 4. There is beside these a justifying faith whereof S. Paul maketh mention In that I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Sonne of God who hath loved me and given himselfe for me Galath 2.20 This faith is the life of the soule whereby hee which beleeveth is able in particular to apply unto himselfe the merits of Christs death Now this is the difference betweene these foure kindes of faith the first apprehendeth the essence and being of God the second the faith of miracles his power the third which is the historicall faith his truth the fourth namely the justifying faith his mercie The three first to beleeve God to be to beleeve him to bee omnipotent to beleeve him to be just and true are included in the first precept Thou shalt have no other Gods c. but not the last wherein is the errour of the Romanists that make all these kindes of faith the same in substance differing only in property which if it were true then it were possible for them that have the one faith to have the other and so Devils also which in some sort doe beleeve should also be capable of justifying faith But this matter that all these kindes of faith are not the same in substance nor of like nature with the justifying faith is shewed elsewhere whither I referre the Reader 2. Further we are to distinguish of the law for it is taken sometime more largely either for all the Scriptures of the old Testament as Luk 16.17 It is more easie that heaven and earth should passe away than that one title of the law should fall So Ioh. 15.25 It is written in their law they have hated mee without a cause which testimony is found in the Psalmes Psal. 35.19 or else the law is taken for all the bookes of Moses and so the Law and Prophets are named together Matth. 7.12 This is the Law and the Prophets But the law is sometime taken more strictly for the Morall law whereof the Apostle speaketh Rom. 7. I knew not sinne but by the law and so S. Paul opposeth the law of workes to the law of faith Rom. 3.27 Now as the law is taken generally either for all the old Scriptures written by the Prophets or for the writings of Moses it cannot be denied but that faith in Jesus Christ is in this sense both contained and commanded in the law for of Christ the Lord spake by the mouth of his Prophets Luk. 1.70 And Moses wrote of Christ as our Saviour saith Had yee beleeved Moses yee would have beleeved me for Moses wrote of mee Ioh. 5.45 But as the law is taken strictly for the Morall law the law of workes which containeth only the ten words or Commandements so we deny this justifying faith to bee commanded in the law 3. Indirectly or by way of consequent it will not bee denied but that this faith also is implied in the law because we are bound by the law to beleeve the Scriptures and the whole word of God for this is a part of Gods worship to beleeve his word to be true and so some define faith Est certa persuafio qua assentimur omni verbo Dei nobis tradita It is a certaine perswasion whereby wee give assent to all the word of God Vrsin And so by this precept wee are bound to receive all the promises and doctrines concerning Christ delivered in the old and new Testament But directly as a part and branch and so a worke of the law wee deny justifying faith to be in this precept or any other prescribed or commanded The reasons are these 1. The Morall law and the Gospell differ in the very nature and substance for the one is naturally imprinted in the heart of man the other is revealed and wrought by grace The first the Apostle testifieth where he saith The Gentiles which have not the law do by nature the things contained in the law Rom. 2.14 The other also is witnessed by the same Apostle Rom. 2.24 We are justified freely by his grace The argument then may be framed thus The morall law is graft in the heart of man by nature but faith in Christ is not by nature but by grace above nature for if it were naturall all men should have faith which the Apostle denieth 2. Thessal 3.2 Faith then in Christ belongeth not to the law Therefore it is strange that Bellarmine confessing in another place that pracepta decalogi sunt explicationes juris natura that the precepts of the decalogue are the explications of the law of nature Lib. 2. de Imaginib Sanctor cap. 7. could not inferre hereupon that the precepts of faith and of the Gospell are no explications of the law of nature and therefore have no dependance of the morall law Ambrose useth this very argument Nemo sub lâ—ge fidem constituat lex enim intra mensuram ultra mensuram gratia Let no man place faith in the law for the law is within the measure and compasse of nature but grace is beyond measure Ambros. in 12. Luc. 2. The effects of the law of works and the law of faith are divers for the one worketh feare the other love and peace as the Apostle saith Ye have not received the spirit of bondage to feare againe but yee have received the spirit of adoption whereby we crie Abba Father Rom. 8.17 Againe the Apostle saith The letter killeth the Spirit giveth life 2 Cor. 2.6 Thus then the argument standeth the same thing cannot bee the instrument of
contrary things of life and death peace and terror love and feare for a Fountaine cannot make both salt water and sweet Iam. 3.12 But the law is the minister of death of feare and terror Ergo not of life and peace and so consequently not of the faith of the Gospell which bringeth all these 3. The same thing doth not both make the wound and give a plaister to heale it The law doth shew us our sinne faith by grace in Christ healeth it the law reviveth sinne Without the law sinne is dead Rom. 7.8 but we are dead to sinne and alive to God in Iesus Christ our Lord Rom. 6.11 The same cannot make us both to die unto sinne and revive sinne the law doth the one therefore not the other So Augustine saith Ad hoc data est lex ut vulnera ostenderet peccatorum qua gratiae benedictione sanaret Therefore was the law given that it should shew the wounds of our sinnes which it should heale by the benediction of grace August de poenitent medic 4. The Preachers publishers and givers of the law and Gospell are divers The law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ Ioh. 1.17 But if justifying faith were commanded in the law then grace also should come by the ministrie of Moses that gave the law This is Bernards reason who further inferreth thus Venit prâ—inde gratia plenus veritate Dominus noster c. Therefore Christ our Lord came full of grace and truth that what could not bee done by the law might bee fulfilled by grace Serm. parâ— 28. 5. The qualities and conditions of the law and the Gospell are divers the law promiseth life to him that worketh Moses thus describeth the righteousnesse of the law That the man which doth these things shall live thereby Rom. 10.5 But the Gospell requireth not the condition of working but beleeving to him that worketh not but beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Rom. 4.5 If then faith were commanded in the law to beleeve should also be a worke of the law then the Apostles conclusion were in vaine I conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law But if faith be excluded out of the works of the law then it is not commanded or contained in the law for then it should be a worke of the law 2. Further the invocation of Angels and Saints which is commonly practised and stifly maintained in the Church of Rome is another apparent transgression of this first commandement because they give a speciall part of the divine worship which consisteth in prayer and invocation unto the creature First we will see and examine the arguments produced by the Romanists in defence of this superstition and then by other reasons out of the Scriptures convince and confute them The Romanists Arguments answered brought in defence of the invocation of Saints 1. THe Saints doe pray for us therefore we may and ought to pray them The antecedent or first part that the Saints doe pray for us they would prove by these places of Scripture Exod. 32.13 Moses thus saith in his prayer Remember Abraham Izhak and Iakob thy servants c. Ierem. 15.1 Though Moses and Samuel stood before me yet could not my affection be toward this people Baruch 3.4 O Lord God almightie heare now the prayer of the dead Israelites 2 Macchab. 14.15 And Onias spake and said This is a lover of the brethren who prayeth much for the peoplâ— to wit Ieremias the Prophet of the Lord. Answ. 1. As for the testimonies cited out of Baruch and the booke of Macchabees they prove nothing because they are no books of Canonicall Scripture 2. The other testimonies are impertinently alleaged for in the first Moses maketh no mention of the prayers which Abraham Izhak and Iakob should make for the people but of the covenant which the Lord made with them In the other of an hypotheticall and conditionall proposition they make a categoricall and absolute affirmation The text is If Moses and Samuel stood they inferre that Moses and Samuel did stand Simler But it may better be answered that if these were alive among the people to stand before the Lord for them in prayer c. as see the like Ezech. 14.14 Though these three men Noah Daniel and Iob were among them they should deliver but their owne soules by their righteousnesse 3. The Saints doe pray unto God by their generall wishes and desires as wishing that the Kingdome of God were accomplished as Revel 6.10 The soules under the Altar crie with a loud voyce saying How long Lord c. doest thou not judge and avenge our bloud But our particular necessities they are ignorant of and so doe noâ— make particular requests for us therefore the argument followeth not they pray by their generall desires for the Church Ergo they pray for us in particular 4. Seeing that the Romanists doe hold that the Patriarks and Fathers of the old Testament were in Limbo which they make a member or part of hell they doe contradict themselves in making them mediatours and intercessours in heaven 2. Argum. The Angels they say know our affaires and pray for us As Zachar. 1.12 The Angell of Iehovah answered and said O Lord of hosts how long wilt thou bee unmercifull to Ierusalem c. Therefore it is lawfull to pray to the Angels Answ. 1. That the Angels doe report our affaires unto God and so may make relation of our prayers and words also as of our other gests and acts unto God as the Lords messengers and ministers we will not denie but that they make any particular requests for men the Scripture no where speaketh and we are not bound to beleeve the relation of our prayers unto God is one thing and mediation and intercession is another 2. That Angell of Iehovah which prayed for Jerusalem was the Lord Christ who maketh intercession for his Church unto whom the rest of the Angels returne their message vers 11. who is also called Iehovah vers 20. 3. Neither doth it follow if it could bee proved out of Scripture that the Angels prayed foâ— us that we are to pray to them because they are not alwayes present to heare us and we are forbidden in Scripture to worship them Revel 22.9 and therefore to pray unto them which is a part of divine worship 3. Argum. The Saints that are living doe one pray for another much more the Saints being dead because their charitie is more perfect and seeing there is a communion of Saints as of the living so also of the dead which communion being not in faith and hope whereof there is no more use with them that are at rest it remaineth it is in charitie As therefore we may request the living to pray for us so we may pray the dead also to entreate for us Answer 1. The argument followeth not for the Saints alive doe one
but this is understood of Gods judgement before whom all are held as guiltie and who prescribeth no law to himselfe Acacius Contra. But this solution is not sufficient for Ezechiel which saith the same soule that sinneth shall die speaketh also of the judgements of God which should not be inflicted upon the children for the fathers Ex Simler 5. Cajetane giveth this solution Although God in the law command that the sonnes should not bee put to death for the sinnes of the fathers Ipse tamen qui creator conservator Dominus est unicuique nemini facit injuriam c. Yet he that is the Creator preserver and Lord of every mans life doth no man wrong if he temporally chastise the sonnes c. His reason dependeth upon Gods right and power which hee hath over every mans life that as he gave it so he doth no wrong to take it away at his pleasure Contra. But the Lord saith by the Prophet Ezech. 18.32 I desire not the death of him that dieth Now if there were no other cause why the Lord should punish the children of the wicked in taking away their life but the will and pleasure of God the Lord should seeme to desire the death of men contrary to that saying of the Prophet 6. Procopius giveth this exposition that God threatneth to punish the posteritie of the wicked ut parentes à peccandi licentia retraheret to withdraw the fathers from sinning parentes non tam dolent sua morte quà m liberorum prasertim si his fuerint authores mortis Fathers doe not so much grieve for their owne death as for the death of their sonnes especially if they were the cause of it Contra. This is true that the punishment of the children redoundeth to the parents but this is not all that by this meanes the fathers should bee drawne to repentance for although their children be neere them yet they are neerer to themselves and their owne punishment would much more move them 7. There remaine two most usuall expositions the first is that temporally sonnes may be chastned for their fathers but not eternally for aeternaliter quilibet punitur pro malo quod egit c. For eternally every one shall be punished for the evill which he doth himselfe Tostat. quaest 5. So also Thomas Si loquimur de poena qua habet rationem medecina c. If we speake of that punishment which is by way of medicine we may be punished for another Such are all temporall and bodily corrections they are medicinall and tend to the good of the soule and the sonne quantum ad animam non est res patris in respect of his soule is not any thing of his father but in respect of his body Sic Thom. 1.2 quaest 87. artic 8. Contra. Although this exposition be sound and true yet it doth not fully take away the doubt moved before 1. For the Prophet Ezechiel also speaketh of temporall punishment namely of captivitie which the sonne should not beare for the father 2. And this place is rather understood of eternall punishment than temporall which the sinne of Idolatrie deserveth Simler 3. And the phrase here used visiting the iniquitie of the fathers upon the children sheweth that the Lord speaketh rather of penall judgements which should bee inflicted upon the sonnes of the wicked than of medicinall corrections 4. And Augustine further urgeth this reason that if it bee understood of temporall chastisement as of captivitie then non solum odio haebentibus sed diligentibus se redderet peccata c. God should not onely render the sinnes to those that hate him but to those that love him for Daniel and the three children and Ezechiel with other righteous men went into captivitie Sic Augustin quaest 14. quaest veter novum Testament 8. There remaineth the second common and received sense of these words which most of the fathers thus understand that the Lord will visite the iniquitie of the fathers upon the children if they also continue in the wicked race and follow the evill example of their fathers as Hierome Ideo iniquitates eorum portaverunt quia imitatores eorum in nequitia extiterunt Therefore rhey doe beare the iniquitie of their fathers because they did imitate them in their wickednesse Hieron in oration Ierem. Some agreeing in generall with the rest that it is to be expounded of the wicked children of wicked parents yet doe understand it of originall sinne which is properly called the sinne of the fathers because they received it from them which is punished in unregenerate children of the wicked but is pardoned in those that are regenerate To this purpose Gregor lib. 15. Moral cap. 22. Contra. But originall sinne is extended further than to the third and fourth generation which are here mentioned therefore it is not like the Lord meaneth that sinne Ex Simler Some will not have this place at all understood of the sinnes of the fathers but of the children onely qui peccant sicut patres which sinne as their fathers did But as Tostatus well argueth against this assertion This were not to punish the sinnes of the fathers in the children Sed peccatorum filiorum malorum in seipsos but of the wicked sonnes in themselves Tostat. quaest 5. Therefore the former exposition is currant to expound these words of the sinnes of the children which they learned of their fathers Quia patrum extiterunt aemulatores haereditario malo de radice in ramos crescente They are punished because they ded emulate their fathers this hereditarie evill growing from the root into the branches Hieron in Ezech. cap. 18. So also Augustine Ex eo quod addidit qui me oderunt c. In that he addeth which hate me it is understood that they are punished for the sinnes of their fathers Qui in cadem perversitate parentum perseverare voluerunt Which would persevere in the same perversitie of their fathers August cont Adimant cap. 7. Gregor Quisquis parentis iniquitatem non imitatur nequaquam ejus delicto gravatur Hee that imitateth not the iniquitie of his father is not burdened with his sinne lib. 15. moral cap. 22. Chrysostome Si nepos secutus fuerit vias patris avi sui c. If the nephew doe follow the wayes of his father and grandfather thou wilt render unto them to the third and fourth generation Chrysost. homil in Psal. 84. Super illa non in aeternum irasceris c. Severus Therefore it is added Of those that hate me Vt apertum fiat non ob parentum peccata sed ob illorum odium adversus Deum eos puniri That it may bee manifest that they are not punished for their fathers sinne but for their owne hatred against God Ex Lippoman Diodorus In eisdem peccatis persistentes just as poenas exolvetis Persisting in the same sinnes you shall pay just punishment Rabanus Peccata patrum iniquorum non redundant ad filios si eorum imitatores in
The internall freedome and liberty of the Spirit doth not take away externall subjection unto Princes as the Apostle saith Art thou called being a servant care not for it 1. Cor. 7.21 As one may be a servant and yet retaine his Christian liberty so he may also be a subject Bucan 2. The Prophet Esay saith Kings shall bee thy nursing fathers Isay 49.23 shewing that even under Christs kingdome there should be beleeving and faithfull Kings Serigius Paulus the Proconsull was converted by S. Paul and yet he was not charged to leave his calling Basting Act. 13. 3. Confut. Against the Papists that would have the Clergy exempt from the authority of the Magistrate THirdly the Romanists are here confuted which doe exempt their Clergy both their persons lands and possessions from the jurisdiction of the Civill Magistrate Concerning the first it is evident by Saint Pauls doctrine in saying Let every soule be subject to the higher powers Rom. 13.1 that none are to be excepted as Chrysostome saith Etiamsi Apostolus fueris etiamsi Evangelista etiamsi Propheta c. Though thou beest an Apostle an Evangelist or Prophet Hom. 23. ad Roman But the Pope and his Clergy are so farre from yeelding due obedience and subjection unto the Civill power that they have usurped authority over Emperours and Kings and commanded them by whom they should have beene commanded Basting Concerning the immunity of the lands and possessions of the Clergy 1. There is no reason but that they which possesse temporall things should also beare the burden imposed upon temporalties and not lay the burden wholly upon others 2. The Apostles rule is generall Tribute to whom tribute custome to whom custome Rom. 13.7 And our Saviour refused not to pay poll money for himselfe and Peter 3. Whereas it is objected that the lands of the Egyptian Priests were free from the payment and tax of the fifth part the reason is because their lands were not sold to Pharaoh as the peoples were as the text it selfe sheweth Except the land of the Priests only which was not Pharaohs Genes 47.25 And the Priests and Levites in Israel were exempted because they possessed no inheritance among their brethren but lived onely of the Offerings 4. Yet it is not denied but that Ecclesiasticall persons may enjoy such immunities and privileges as are bestowed upon them by the liberality of Christian Princes but they are not to challenge them by any Divine right Buâ—an 4. Morall observations upon the fifth Commandement 1. Observ. Of the duty of children to their parents HOnour thy father c. This strait charge of honouring parents reproveth their ingratitude which are sparing in relieving their parents in their age Calvin saith it is detestabilis barbaries a detestable and more than barbarous rudenesse for a childe to neglect his parents a great impiety it is and too usuall in these dayes Oleaster reporteth out of R. Simeon that God doth preferre the honouring of parents before his owne service I will have mercy and not sacrifice and rewardeth it more for those that honour God he honoureth againe but those which honour their parents he rewardeth with long life which is more than honour But this is somewhat too curious indeed honouring of parents is preferred before the ceremoniall part of Gods service which consisted in sacrifices but not before the morall part as it is set forth in the first Table And the honour which God promiseth is more than long life comprehending the glory of this life and the next But yet the Lord commandeth honouring of parents as a speciall duty for the neglect whereof our Saviour reproveth the Pharisies Mark 7. 2. Observ. Of the care of parents toward their children AGaine on the other side parents are to be carefull to provide for their children and to see to their good education not to provide only for their bodily life for so brute beasts doe for their young ones but especially to see that they be brought up in the knowledge of their heavenly Father which duty S. Paul requireth at parents hands Ephes. 6.4 And Solon made a law that the children should not be bound to relieve their Father that had not brought them up in some good trade The sixth Commandement Thou shalt not kill 1. The questions discussed QUEST I. Why this precept is set before the other that follow 1. AS the former Commandement exacteth and requireth to doe good and to performe our duty unto man so these following concerne our innocency in doing of no hurt unto our neighbours and brethren Pelarg. Lyran. 2. And they are propounded negatively Quia negativa sunt majoris obligationis gravioris transgressionis because negatives doe bind more strongly and the transgression is more grievous for it is a greater sinne to doe evill than not to doe good Tostat. quaest 21. 3. There are two rules and Canons in Scripture upon the which these precepts of the second Table depend the one is Quod tibi fieri non vis alteri ne feceris That which thou wouldest not be done unto thee doe not to another Hic canon omnes tollit injurias This rule taketh away all injuries and wrongs the other is Whatsoever you would that men should doe unto you even so doe you to them Matth. 7.12 Hic canon ad omnem similiter nos cohortatur beneficentiam This rule likewise doth exhort us to all beneficence and doing of good Procopius 4. Now whereas injury is done three wayes unto our neighbour Perversitate operis falsitate sermonis improbitate voluntatis by the perversenesse of the deed falsenesse of speech and badnesse of the minde and the perversenesse of the deed is either offred to ones person or substance and his person is two wayes considered as it is simplex his single person or conjuncta his coupled person in his wife therefore these three Commandements which forbid murder adultery theft are set first Pelarg. 5. And because the greatest hurt which can bee done unto a man is touching his life Quia mors tollit esse simpliciter because death taketh away a mans being simply as other wrongs doe not therefore this precept is set before the other as forbidding the greatest wrong Tostat. QUEST II. Whether it be here forbidden to slay any beasts THou shalt not kill Some have imagined that all kinde of killing is here forbidden yea even of brute beasts But this foolish opinion may be diversly confuted 1. Augustine thus reasoneth If it be not lawfull to slay beasts Cur non etiam herbas why also is it not unlawfull to pull up herbes and plants which although they have no sense yet they are said to live and so also may dye as the Apostle saith That which thou sowest is not quickned except it dye 1. Cor. 15.36 And this indeed was the mad opinion of the Maniches that thought it unlawfull to pull up a plant If then this Thou shalt not kill be not meant of plants because they have no sense
bloud Galas 5. Polluitur foedatur terra yea the land it selfe is polluted and defiled with bloud Numb 35.36 Galas 6. Mans bodie is the temple of the holy Ghost 1 Cor. 6.16 If any then destroy the temple of God him will God destroy 1 Cor. 3.17 7. The murtherer also sinneth against Christ whose member his neighbour is whose life hee hath sought So reasoneth the Apostle but in a divers case that he which causeth the weake brother to perish for whom Christ died sinneth against Christ himselfe 1 Cor. 8.11 QUEST XI How diversly murder is committed THis kinde of externall and actuall murther is committed two wayes either by a man himselfe or by another 1. The first is done two wayes either by the cruell shedding of mans bloud which is the most grievous sinne of all or by neglecting the meanes and not preserving our neighbours life either by helpe or counsell when it is in our power as the rich man suffered Lazarus for want of reliefe to perish at his gate Luk. 16. So the Priest and Levite passed by the man that had beene wounded of the theeves and was left for halfe dead and had no compassion of him Luk. 10. So the Wise-man saith in the Proverbs chap. 24.11 Deliver them that are drawne to death and wilt thou not preserve them that are led to bee slaine Isidore saith Qui incurrit in nudum esurientem c. He that meeteth with a man readie to perish for hunger and cold if he doe not give him meat and raiment homicida tenebitur shall be counted a murtherer So Gloss. interlinear A man committeth murther manu vel mente vel subtrahendo auxilium aut consilium c. with his hand with his heart and when he withdraweth his helpe and counsell 2. A man killeth by another two wayes consensu by giving consent as Saul did when Stephen was put to death keeping their garments that stoned him Act. 7.58 And the people crucified Christ calling unto Pilate Crucifie him Mandato voluntate By willing and commanding ones death as David did contrive Vrias death and Iezabel Naboths Bastingius QUEST XII Of the divers kinds of murder THere are divers kinds of killing 1. There is a lawfull killing or taking away of the life by the Magistrate as either in putting malefactors to death or in just warre where much bloud is shed 2. There is another kinde altogether unlawfull and inexcusable which is called wilfull murther when any of hatred smiteth a man that he die or of purpose lie in wait for him Numb 35.20 So Ioab wilfully killed Abner and Amasa 3. There is a third kinde of involuntarie murther when a man lieth not in wait but God offereth him unto him Exod. 21.13 For though such things seeme to us to fall out by chance yet all things are ordered and disposed by Gods providence and with him nothing happeneth by chance of this kinde there are three sorts 1. When two doe of a sudden having no purpose before fight together and the one killeth the other as striving upon the way or falling out upon any other sudden and unthought of occasion this is called manslaughter as Abner killed Asahel that met him and pursued him in battell this kinde is not so hainous as wilfull murther yet it far exceedeth these other kinds that follow 2. Sometime one is killed by chance which is of two sorts either a chance which falleth out by meere oversight and negligence as if a Physitian through carelesnesse mistake the medicine and so kill his patient which might by his care have beene prevented or it falleth out by meere chance which could not be helped as when one heweth wood and the axe-head flieth off and killeth one that standeth by 3. But that kinde which deserveth most favour and may best be excused is when one is forced to kill another se defendendo by defending of himselfe which was the womans case that with a milstone pashed out cruell Abimelechs braines when he attempted to set fire upon the tower and to burne the woman and all the rest of the people there Iudg. 9. QUEST XIII Magistrates are not guiltie of murder in putting malefactors to death ALl kinde of killing is not then unlawfull whereof there are three sorts there is divina vindicta heroica ordinata divine revenge heroicall ordinarie 1. The divine is which is directly and immediatly commanded by God as Abraham at the Lords bidding would have sacrificed his sonne Abraham non solum non est culpatus crudâ—litatis crimine sed laudatus est pietatis nomine Abraham was not onely 〈◊〉 blamed for his crueltie but commended for his pietie therein So Ioshua had commandement from the Lord to destroy the Canaanites 2. The heroicall kinde of killing is when any being inflamed with the zeale of Gods glorie and extraordinarily stirred by his spirit doe take revenge of the Lords enemies as Sampson upon the Philistims in his death Phineas in zeale killed the adulterer and adulteresse and Samuel hewed Agag the King of Amalek in peeces Marbach 3. The ordinarie killing is by the Magistrate who by direction of the word of God and according to wholesome lawes grounded upon the same doth give sentence of death against malefactors or wageth just battell upon these occasions the Magistrate sinneth not in shedding of bloud The reasons are these 1. Hierome saith Homicidas punire non est sanguinis effusio sed legis ministerium To punish murtherers and other malefactors it is no effusion of bloud but the execution of the law in Ieremiam c. 22. So Gloss. interlinear Index non occidit reum sed lex quae jubet The Judge killeth not the guiltie partie but the law which commandeth 2. Thomas saith Id quod licitum est Deo licitum est ministro ipsius per mandatum ejus That which is lawfull unto God the author of the law is lawfull unto Gods Minister by his Commandement But the Magistrate is Gods Minister Rom. 13.4 2. Places of Doctrine upon the sixth Commandement 1. Doct. Of the generall contents of this Commandement THou shalt not kill This Commandement consisteth 1. Partly in prohibiting all kinde of hurt or wrong to our neighbour either in leaving or forsaking him or in doing him hurt either outwardly by murder rayling reviling or by any injurie whatsoever or inwardly by anger hatred desire of revenge 2. Partly in commanding the preservation of our neighbours life either in not hurting whether provoked or not provoked or in helping either by the depulsion of wrongs and injuries offred or by the collation of benefits 2. Doct. The particular vertues here commanded THe vertues then prescribed in this Commandement are of two sorts either such as doe not hurt or such as are beside helping also Of the first kinde are 1. A particular justice and equitie in all our acts and doings not to hurt or molest any in word or deed by violence fraud or negligence or by any other meanes such an one
4.28 as also in shewing an honest care in preserving and saving the goods of another as Iacob carefully kept Labans sheepe enduring both the frost of the night and the heat of the day Genes 31.40 Contrarie hereunto are 1. unfaithfulnesse in having no care to save the goods of another such a one is the unfaithfull Steward in the Parable that was accused for wasting his masters goods Luk. 16.1 2. Idlenesse and negligence the idle and slothfull S. Paul calleth inordinate walkers and giveth this rule concerning such that hee which would not worke should not â—at 2 Thess. 3.10 Now it will bee here objected that this vertue of Fidelitie belongeth unto the fifth Commandement as it is before rehearsed among the duties there prescribed and therefore appertaineth not to this place The answer is that the same vertue in respect of divers ends and offices by the which vertues are distinguished may bee referred to sundrie Commandements and so the grace and gift of faithfulnesse as it concurreth with obedience and dutie to Superiours belongeth to the fifth precept but as it respecteth the preserving of anothers goods and substance it hath the proper place here 3. Liberalitie is commanded which is a franke and voluntarie collation or bestowing of ones substance upon those which want discerning discreetly to whom where when and how much to give such an one was Iob Who did not eâ—t his morsels alone c. hee did not see any perish for want of cloathing c. Iob 31.17 19. Contrarie hereunto are 1. Sparing niggardlinesse such as was in Nabal that would afford nothing to David in his necessitie 2. And vaine prodigalitie such as was in the prodigall child Luk. 16. 4. Hospitalitie is a kinde of liberalitie which is especially extended to and exercised towards stranger and chiefly such as are exiled and banished out of their owne countrie for the Gospell and the truth sake for this vertue is Lot commended Heb. 13.2 Contrarie hereunto is inhumanitie toward strangers such was the crueltie of the Egyptians toward the Israelites that sojourned among them 5. Frugalitie joyned with parsimonie is a vertue also hitherto belonging which is a thriftie saving of such things as God sendeth and a provident employing of them to some profit whereby one is made more able to give and to shew his liberalitie for frugalitie and parsimonie are the two upholders and maintainers of true liberalitie for without frugalitie liberalitie will degenerate into niggardlinesse and without parsimonie into prodigalitie Of this frugalitie and parsimonie our blessed Saviour gave example when hee commanded after hee had fed the multitudes in the wildernesse that the broken meat should bee reserved and kept Mark 8. Contrarie hereunto are 1. Undiscreet wasting of the goods and unnecessarie liberalitie or rather superfluous prodigalitie as in Herod that promised if it were to the one halfe of his kingdome for a pleasing and wanton dance Mark 6. and the diseased woman had spent all shee had upon Physitians and was never the better Mark 5.26 2. And niggardly sparing when there is necessarie cause of spending as hee that pincheth his owne bellie and defraudeth his owne soule Ecclesiast 4.8 And such an one was that miserable man that Ambrose speaketh of Cui si quando â—vum appositum esset conqueri solebat quod pullus occisus esset Who if an egge were set before him would complaine that a chicken was killed lib. de Naboth cap. 2. hee could not affoord himselfe an egge to eat 3. Places of Controversie 1. Controv. and Confut. Against the Anabaptisticall communitie THou shalt not steale This precept overthroweth that error which first among the Heathen was maintained by Plato that all things among men ought to bee common the same also was held by the Heretickes called Apostolici and in these daies by the Anabaptists for if there were a communitie of goods then no man should have a propertie in any thing and so there could not bee any theft this law then maintaineth every mans peculiar and severall right and interest in that which hee hath First their objections shall bee answered that labour to have a communitie 1. Object The Apostles had all things common in Ierusalem Act. 2.44 Answ. 1. That custome was then both easie because they were few and necessarie for if they had not sold their possessions and so made the use common they by violence should have been stripped of them now there is neither the like facilitie nor necessitie 2. That communion was voluntarie not imposed upon any for it was in their choise whether they would sell their possessions or not as Peter saith to Anâ—â—ias Act. 5.4 After it was sold was it not in thine owne power Vrsin 3. Neither were all things common among them they had some things private and peculiar to themselves as Mary had her proper house and dwelling in the citie Act. 12.12 Simler 4. Beside this was not the generall custome of the whole Church for in Achaia and Macedonia there was gathering made for the Saints at Ierusalem it was then particular for that place and peculiar to that time therefore a generall rule for all times and places cannot bee taken from thence Simler 5. Neither were then things so indifferently common as that every man might take what hee would but the things in common were distributed according as every one had need Act. 5.35 2. Object Christ saith to the young man Mark 10.21 Goe and sell all that thou hast and give to the poore Ergo wee must doe the like Answ. 1. That was a personall precept and belonging to those times So the Apostles did leave their parentâ— and their houses but wee are not commanded now to doe the like Simler 2. Beside our Saviour so said to shew how farre hee came short of the perfection of the law and to humble him that thought so well of himselfe 3. Further our blessed Saviour saith not make thy goods common but give unto the poore which are two divert things Vrsin 3. Object The Apostle saith All things 〈◊〉 yours 1 Cor. 3.21 Ergo all things ought to bee common Answer 1. The Apostles meaning is that all things were ordained for their good whether life or death things present or things to come 2. Hee speaketh not of a common possession of all things in right but that they are common in use they had jus ad rem non jus â—nre right to the thing not in the thing Vrsin Now on the contrary that it is lawfull for Christians to retaine a severall right and propertie in those things which they possesse it may thus appeare 1. The Scripture alloweth contracts as buying and selling as Abraham bought a buriall place of Ephron Gen. 23. David the threshing floore of 〈◊〉 2. Sam. 24. but there can be no such contracts ubi non sunt distincta rerum dominia where there are 〈◊〉 distinct properties in things And if they shall object that these examples of the old Testament belong not unto
which is actâ—â— imperatus the act commanded therefore the externall worke being by this coherence and connexion an act of the internall powers hath some good or evill in it though not so properly as the internall Sic fere Tostat. quast 29. QUEST VI. The law of Moses did not onely restraine the hand but the minde BEside this opinion of the Hebrewes some other doe hold that the law of Moses did onely restraine the hand and not the minde and to this purpose they urge that place Matth. 5.27 where our Saviour saith It was said unto you of old Thou shalt not commit adulterie c. But I say c. So that of old it seemeth the law onely restrained the outward act but Christ doth forbid more even the inward desire c. Contra. 1. Our blessed Saviour secundùm corum opinionem loquebatur speaketh according to their opinion because they thought they were onely obliged and tied to the outward act and therefore he doth deliver the law from their corrupt interpretations he giveth not a new exposition and this appeareth vers 43. Yee have heard that it hath beene said Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate thine enemie but in all the old Testament there is no such precept given by God or libertie for any to hate their enemie our Saviour then meaneth not such sayings as were found in the law but such expositions as they made among themselves Now that even the law of Moses did binde not onely the hand and externall act but the inward will and desire it thus is proved 1. None are said to repent but of that which is evill but they under the law were to repent and to shew themselves contrite even for the internall acts of their minde as Psal. 4.4 Tremble and sinne not examine your heart upon your bed c. Ergo c. 2. It is directly forbidden Levit. 19.17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart which was an internall act and many other such like sinnes of the heart are reproved by the Prophets 3. The law doth not justifie that which is naturally unjust but forbiddeth it now to covet another mans wife is naturally unjust Ergo. For the proposition or first part of the argument if the theft of the Israelites the killing of Isaack intended by Abraham the fornication of Ose chap. 1. be objected these were singulares casus which the the lawgiver commanding thereby declared quod non includerentur sub lege communi that they were not included under the generall law but if this whole law Thou shalt not covet had given a generall libertie for the Jewes to covet anothers wife Non jam declaretur lex sed destrucretur The law should not by this meanes be declared but destroyed For the assumption that it is against the law of nature to covet another mans wife it is evident 1. Because he faileth in the end coveting her onely of lust not for procreation 2. Matrimonie est de jure naturali is grounded even upon the law of nature if then to breake and violate matrimonie bee against the law of nature then to will and purpose so to doe is against nature also yea the will and purpose is rather sinne than the act it selfe for it may fall out that the externall act is sometime without sinne as when a man ignorantly lieth with another woman taking her to bee his wife as Iakob tooke Leah for Rachel but the will and desire is never without sinne Tostat. Burgens addit 7. in cap. 20. would thus excuse this assertion that Moses law prohibebat manum 〈◊〉 anâ—â—â—um did inhibit the hand not the minde not that their meaning is that in no part of Moses law there is any prohibition to be found of the minde for hatred is directly forbidden Levit. 19.17 but that when any externall act is forbidden Non intelligitur ex vi illius praecepti prohiberi actus interior The internall act is not understood to bee forbidden by vertue of that precept as in this precept Thou shalt not kill he is not judged to be guiltie which purposeth to kill and yet killeth not Contra. 1. But our Saviour saith that even this precept is transgressed by the anger and hatred of the heart Matth. 5.22 therefore the law intendeth even by the externall act to forbid the internall also QUEST VII Whether any morall and naturall duties were to be restrained by positive law BUt it will further be objected that the old law was not to give precepts of morall duties 1. The morall precepts are grounded upon the law of nature and such precepts are knowne unto all but the divine law prescribeth such things as otherwise are not neither can bee knowne 2. The keeping of the morall law giveth life Galath 3.12 but the old law was the ministration of death 2 Cor. 3.7 therefore the old law was not to containe morall precepts Contra. 1. The law of God was not onely to give rules of such things as men know by the law of nature but to keepe and preserve them also from errour in those things which they know And therefore because men doe erre and swarve in such things as they know their will and affection not giving way to reason it was fit that a law should be given as well to rectifie their affection as to direct their understanding 2. Beside although these morall duties are grounded upon the law of nature yet seeing the naturall instinct is obscured by mans corruption that dimme light of nature had need of a clearer light by the law to helpe it If man had continued in the perfection of his creation hee should not have needed any other law but seeing mans naturall knowledge is much decaied it was to be revived and renewed by the divine law 3. The rules of direction of mens actions are of foure sorts 1. Some are so well knowne by nature as none can doubt thereof as these that evill is to be shunned and good to be desired that no unjust thing is to bee done of such knowne principles it is not necessarie that any law should bee given 2. Some things may so be searched out by the law of nature as yet that many may erre therein such 〈◊〉 the particular precepts of not committing fornication not coveting anotherâ— wife therefore because many may erre in these duties it was requisite they should bee determined by the law of God 3. Some things are so derived from the law of nature as yet they are onely searched out by those which are wise such are the positive and judiciall lawes of men that wisely can applie the principles of the law of nature to particular circumstances of this kinde are Moses Judicials 4. Some things cannot at all be concluded by naturall reason but altogether depend upon the will of the institutor and law-maker of this kinde were Moses Ceremonials So then for a full answer to the first objection wee say that if morall duties were so generally and perfitly
be servants one unto another For the deciding of this doubt there is a threefold kinde of liberty to be considered a naturall liberty civill and spirituall 1. The naturall liberty I call that wherein Adam was created being subdued to no bondage neither spirituall of sinne nor corporall in any outward subjection to any creature but as he had a freedome of will and was made Lord of his affections within that he needed not to have sinned unlesse he would himselfe so he had the dominion of the creatures given unto him This originall liberty of nature considered servitude and bondage was brought in as a punishment of sinne and so is not simply and of it selfe agreeable to the Law of nature 2. But now since Adams fall there is another kinde of civill liberty and civill servitude opposite unto it Civill liberty is defined to be a naturall faculty for every man to doe as himselfe liketh nisi si quis aut 〈◊〉 aut jure prohibetur unlesse one be hinâ—â—â—d by force or in right for that is no true liberty for a man against right to doe what him liâ—teth serâ—itude contrariwise deâ—â—eth unto a man power vivend◠〈…〉 to live as he would according unto nature Now this servitude simply accordeth not with nature as the Apostle saith If yet thou mayest be free use it rather 1 Cor. 7.21 shewing that every one by nature desireth liberty and freedome But after a sort this servitude is agreeable to nature not simply or of it selfe but as other punishments are said to be naturall as tending to the maintenance of society among men which is properly naturall And if it be objected why since all men are fallen in Adam and so brought into subjection why all likewise become not servants the answer is that two things must be considered in this our corrupt state the one is the Law of corruption brought in by sinne the other the goodnesse of God that although all men are subject by sinne to the same bondage and corruption yet the goodnesse of God qualifieth that slavish condition of nature as that some doe enjoy an outward liberty and freedome like as in the inward faculties of the soule the Lord giveth unto some more light of understanding dexterity of wit profoundnesse of judgement and other naturall gifts than unto others 3. The spirituall liberty is wrought in us by grace in Christ which is from the subjection of sinne and malediction of the Law that our conscience is no more terrified with slavish feare but we are at peace with God and beside by this spirituall liberty the faithfull have restored unto them the dominion over all creatures that though not in externall possession yet in a spirituall right all things are theirs whether the world life death things present or things to come 1 Cor. 3.22 and all things worke to the best to those that love God Rom. â— So these may very well stand together externall servitude and spirituall freedome it is possible for one to bee a freeman to God and yet a servant in the world and another to be a bondman to sinne and yet free in the world for there are divers objects of these two kindes of liberty and bondage the outward freedome respecteth this life and state the free use of riches and pleasures of this life the spirituall and internall freedome hath set before it the salvation of the soule the favour of God and life eternall Christian religion then overthroweth not the diversity of degrees among men But as Christ though he were by his spirituall right free from all taxes and impositions yet lest he should offend payed poll money Matth. 17. so Christians though they are made free by faith in the Sonne yet for the maintenance of peace and love and avoiding of offence in disturbing the temporall State they are bound as well as others to be subject unto the powers of this world Et potestatibus 〈◊〉 nos subjici in eo homine qui elementis ex quibus constat subditus est In respect of that man of ours which is subject to the elements whereof it consisteth Borrh. QUEST XI How these six yeeres are to be accounted Vers. 2. HE shall serve thee six yeeres in the seventh he shall c. Some doe expound this De publico generali anno septimo of the publike and generall seventh yeere some of the private as every mans service began Lippoman But that it is to be understood of the publike yeere of intermission it may be made plaine by these reasons 1. Because whereas every seventh yeere was appointed a yeere of intermission to forbeare tilling of the ground or exacting of debts Levit. 25. Deut. 15. if every man should make a yeere of remission of servants in his owne house and not observe the generall and solemne yeere of intermission this would have brought in and bred a great confusion Tostat. 2. This also appeareth by the analogy of the great yeere of remission which was in the fiftieth yeere for there the buying of possessions or servants was noâ— to be counted from the time of such buying but from the yeere of Jubile for as many yeeres or few remained of the Jubile so was the price to be valued Leviâ— 25. Tostatus 〈◊〉 Lyran. 3. And beside seeing in the seventh yeere there was a 〈…〉 for if a man might exact serâ—ice of his servant and not 〈…〉 more base than their substance which is not to be 〈…〉 then the meaning is not that every 〈◊〉 of the Hebrewes 〈…〉 for it might so full 〈◊〉 that he should serve but one if he were bought immediatly before the yeere of Jubile but that he should not at any time serve above six yeeres Tostat. QUEST XII The reasons why they ought to set their servants free HE shall goe out free for nothing 1. That is he shall pay nothing for his liberty because he is made free by the Law nor yet for any thing else As if the servant had lien sicke any time of the yeeres of his service and his master had beene at cost in healing of him his master in this case was to expect no recompence because his servant was as his possession even as the oxe or asse purchased for his profit and therefore his master was to stand to the losse of it Tostat. qu. 6. 2. And the reasons why this favour was to be shewed unto the Hebrewes being servants were these 1. The Lord saith For they are my servants which I brought out of the land of Egypt Levit. 25.42 that is he doth not only put them in minde of that generall benefit of their deliverance out of the bondage and servitude of Egypt the remembrance whereof ought to make them kinde and mercifull to their servants the Hebrewes which were partaken of the same common deliverance But the Lord likewise pleadeth his right and interest in them saying They are my servants so that although the Lord did somewhat depart from his owne right in
so wicked that would commit paricide and therefore Solon that wise law-maker among the Athenians maketh no mention of paricide nor yet the Romans had any law against such untill the 642. yeare from the building of the Citie which was the 100. yeare before the nativitie of Christ one Publicius Malcolus with the helpe of his servants killed his mother against whom the Citie decreed this punishment that he should be put into a sacke together with a Cocke an Ape a Viper and a Dogge and so cast into the water Tostat. quaest 17. The Egyptians caused such first to be beaten with thornes and then to be burnt with thornes The Macedonians did stone them to death Pelarg. Plato lib. 9. de legibus would have such grievously punished unto death and then to be left unburied 2. It is a like sinne to kill the father as to doe it to the mother yet the father is set before as the more honourable person and fewer examples are extant of those that have killed their fathers than of the other Oedipus is said unwittingly to have killed his father Laius King of Thebes taking him for his enemie But Orestes killed his mother Cliteâ—nestra Agamemnons wife wittingly so did Alcmeon his mother being charged so to doe by his father Amphiaraus being slaine in the Thebane warre to the which his wife perswaded him to goe and therefore being deadly wounded he commanded his sonne to kill her Ninia likewise the sonne of Ninus killed his mother Semiramis after he had carnally knowne her Such beastly examples of paricide Heathen histories afford who not knowing God were without naturall affection and disobedient to parents which were the sinnes of the Heathen Rom. 1.30 Some write that Iudas killed his father and married his mother Tostat. qu. 17. But it is not like that if Iudas had so apparently shewed his wickednesse before that our blessed Saviour would have chosen him to be one of his Apostles QUEST XLV The law of man-stealing expounded Vers. 16. HE that stealeth a man and selleth him or it be found with him c. 1. Some understand if it be found with the buyer that is the man that is stollen be found sold over and delivered to the buyer Oleaster But then there should be a repetition of the same thing for as much was said before and selleth him there cannot be a seller without a buyer 2. Some doe thus expound if it be found that is proved by him that he hath stolen a man So Lyran. Tostat. Vatab Simler and the Latine text expresseth the same sense convictus noxae if he be convicted of the offence But this clause had beene superfluous for this must be understood in all lawes that the offence must be sufficiently proved before it be censured Againe in this sense the law should be imperfect not determining what should become of him that had stolen a man onely and not sold him some say restitution should be made by the like he should give two men for one or give the price of two men But this is no where to be found restitution indeed was to be made in the theft of other things Exod. 22.1 but there was not the like reason for men 3. Therefore the meaning is this that if one steale a man whether he have sold him and delivered him over or if he be found with him as yet unsold in both cases he should suffer death for his malice appeared evidently in the stealing onely that he intended to sell him over Iun. Gallas Osiand So also Lippom. he was to be put to death if the theft were yet found with him propter crudelissimum institutum for his cruell enterprise how much more si desperata fuerit venditi redemptio if being sold he were past redemption 4. By the ancient Romane lawes such men-stealers were condemned to the metal mines by a latter law of Constantine they were to be cast unto the wilde beasts Simler QUEST XLVI The reason why man-stealing was punished by death THe reasons why this kinde of theft in stealing of men was so severely punished with death were these 1. Because man was created according to Gods image therefore in respect of the excellencie and preeminence of the thing that was stolen the punishment ought to be the greater 2. Because by this meanes he that was sold lost his libertie which is as precious as life it selfe and to bring a man into servitude quid aliud quà m sexcentis eum mortibus objicere what was it else than to expose him to an hundred deaths Gallas 3. And beside they could not steale men and sell them to the Israelites but it would bee knowne and therefore it is like that after they had stolen them they sold them over to the Gentiles and so they were in danger that were so sold over to be corrupted in religion and seduced to idolatrie and so drawne away from the service of God and by this meanes be brought into bondage both in soule and bodie Simler The Interlinearie Glosse therefore thus expoundeth diabolo obnoxium fâ—cerit hath sold him that is brought him into the devils service 4. Of this sinne were Iosephs brethren guiltie in selling him over to the idolatrous Egyptians who therein had a vaine perswasion that they were not guiltie of his bloud because they spared his life but in selling him over to bee a slave and that to an idolatrous people as much as in them lay eum è medio sustulerunt they tooke him away as out of the world Gallasius QUEST XLVII What kinde of cursing of parents is here understood Vers. 17. HE that curseth his father or mother c. 1. There are two kinds of cursing one assumpto Dei nomine when Gods name is taken in vaine withall another is without Borrhaius Lippoman thinketh that this is understood of the first kinde But seeing the blaspheming of the name of God deserved death of it selfe Levit. 24. and this law doth properly punish the cursing and blaspheming of the parents it seemeth generally to be intended against all kinde of cursing and wiâ—hing evill unto the parents 2. And it seemeth to be understood of an use and custome of cursing not of every railing word which sometime should bee uttered by the childe in rage and heat for every such word to inflict death upon the childe would be thought too hard sed ille qui assuefactus est maledicere patri maetri c. but he that is accustomed to curse his father and mother and that for small matters deserveth death Tostat. as that law against disobedient children Deut. 21.18 is made against those that are incorrigible and are confirmed in their disobedience and stubbornnesse So also Cajetane As he that smiteth them is worthie of death so he that curseth nisi imperfectio actus excuset puta si non deliberato aut leve verbum c. unlesse the imperfection of the act excuse or he speake a light word of railing c. 3. And as
will as if a man shoot an arrow and kill a woman with child or shee be behind him and he knew it not and hee hurteth her with his heele that she die in this case the man deserved no punishment at all no not so much as a pecuniary mulct to be inflicted which yet is appointed by this law where death followeth not therefore this law meaneth not any such act which is altogether involuntarie Tostat. quaest 24. 2. Neither is this law to be understood of murther altogether voluntarie as if a man of purpose should smite a woman with child and shee die for this was provided for before what punishment should be laid upon him that committed wilfull murther 3. This law therefore is made concerning such violent acts as were of a mixt kinde partly voluntarie partly involuntarie as if a man striving with one and seeing a woman with child within the danger cared not whether shee was hurt or no Tostat. Or if striving with a man he thrust him upon a woman with child Galas Or a woman comming to rescue her husband receiveth hurt by the other that striveth Lyran. In this case if death followed in the woman with child the 〈…〉 to die foâ— it 4. And the reasons are these 1. Because adfuit laedendi animuâ— he that so striveth had a minde and intent to hurt Simler Consilii ratio habenda est his counsell and intention must be considered which was to assault the life of another and by this occasion he killeth one whom he intended not to hurt Iunius Piscator 2. Againe Vxor una carâ— est cum viâ—o quem intendeâ—â— pâ—râ—utere The wife is one flesh with her husband whom he intended to smite Lyran. 3. And beside instance is given of a woman with child who neither could shift for her selfe and a double danger is brought both upon her her child which she went with therefore in this case the law provideth that such oversights should be severely punished Tostat. q. 25. QUEST LVI Whether the death of the infant be punished as well as of the mother Vers. 22. ANd death follow not c. 1. Some thinke that this is to be understood onely of the death of the woman and not of the child Osiander That if the child died and not the woman he was onely to pay a peece of money not to lose his life for it and their reason is because he deserved not so great a punishment that killed an infant in the wombe as he that did stay a perfect man Oleaster who findeth fault with Cajetane for understanding the law indifferently of the woman and her child 2. But Cajetanâ— opinion is to be preferred for like as it is a more heinous thing to kill a man in his owne house than in the way so is it a prodigious thing to suffocate an infant in the mothers wombe qui nondum est in lucem editus which is not yet brought forth into the light of this world Calvin And againe Foetus quamvis in utero inclusus homo est The infant though yet inclosed in the wombe is a man Simler And the child in the wombe is yet a part of the person of the woman so that if there be corruptioâ—â—tius perâ—oâ—a aut partis a destruction of the whole person or of a part Iun. he that so hurteth a woman with child in her owne person or her childs is subject to this law QUEST LVII Whether this law extendeth it selfe to infants which miscarie being not yet perfectly formed NOw it being agreed that this law as well comprehendeth the infant that perisheth as the woman that beareth it yet there remaineth a question whether if the childe in the wombe bee yet imperfect and so not endued with sense and life that in this case though the woman die not but onely lose her birth he that did the hurt is to suffer death 1. Some hold the affirmative that if any child whatsoever by this meanes miscarrie the offender is subject to this law 〈…〉 propâ—â—qua est effectui The iâ—fant being now formed is so neere unto the effect thâ—â— is the life that who causeth the same to miscarrie may be said to have killed a man Gallas And therefore by the Civill law he that of purpose procured the birth to miscarrie if he were a meane person was condemned to the metall mines if a noble person to banishment Cicero also in his oration pro Cluentiâ— reporteth of one Milesia a woman who being hired of the heires in reversion to destroy the infant that shee went with had a capitall puishment therefore inflicted upon her Ex Simlero But these lawes were made against such as did of purpose seeke to destroy infants in the wombe and cause abortion of them here the cause is divers where the fruit of the wombe miscarrieth by some chance 2. Therefore this penaltie was onely by the law inflicted when as the infant perished that was endued with life So Augustine thinketh using this reason Nondum potest dici anima viva in eo corpore quod sensu caret c. The living soule cannot be said to be yet in that bodie which wanteth sense qu. 80. in Exod. And thus the Septuagint interpret If the infant came forth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not yet formed c. which forming of the infant beginneth fortie dayes after the conception as Procopius Cajetane giveth this reason why in such a case when the birth commeth forth imperfect the sentence of death is not inflicted quia homo in potentia non est homo because a man onely in possibilitie is not a man quia tunc non occiditur homo non est homicidium and because then a man is not killed it is no manslaughter Tostat. And the word jeladim sons signifieth as much that the law meaneth formed and perfect infants Simler And it is put in the plurall because a woman may have more infants than one in her wombe at once for otherwise why should one give life for life or soule for soule seeing such imperfect births are not yet endued with life soule As Augustine saith In Adam exemplum datum est c. An evident example is given in Adam quia jam formatum corpus accipit animam that the bodie when it is now fashioned receiveth the soule and not before For after Adams bodie was made the Lord breathed into him the breath of life So August lib. quaest vet nov Testam qu. 23. as he is alleaged Caus. 32. qu. 2. cap. 9. QUEST LVIII Why the action is given unto the husband Vers. 22. ACcording as the womans husband shall appoint him c. 1. Because the injurie is done unto the man in that his issue is cut off and because hee is the head of the woman the law referreth the prosecution of this wrong unto the husband Tostat. 2. But the taxation of the mulct is so referred to the man as yet if he should exceed a just proportion the Judges in
the oxe is specially mentioned because the Hebrewes were most given to keeping of cattell their horse were for the most part brought out of Egypt Simler 2. It is understood to be such a goring and wounding as that death followed upon it for otherwise though one were sore wounded with the push of an oxe if he died not the oxe was not in this case to be stoned Tostat. 3. But that other conceit of Tostatus in this place is not so good secus est si calce petierit c. It is otherwise if the oxe strike with his heele not with his horne in this case the oxe is not to die because it was his fault that stood within the reach of the oxes heele whereas he pursueth after men to gore them with his horne for what saith he then to the horse heele if any were stricken to death therewith was not the horse to be killed by the equitie of this law as Lippoman expoundeth it as well de equo calcitroso of a striking horse as of a pushing oxe If this law provideth for the stroke of the horse heele why not for the oxe hee le also And this is yet more evident Gen. 9.5 that the Lord will require mans bloud at the hand of every beast the heele is as well the oxe hand as his horne By what meanes soever then a beast killeth a man this law was to take place QUEST LXIII Why the oxe that goared was commanded to be stoned to death Vers. 28. THe oxe shall be stoned to death c. 1. Though a bruit beast cannot sinne and therefore this punishment is not inflicted for any sinne committed by the beast yet it is in joyned ad horrorem facti for the horror of the fact Tostat. 2. Quia esset horribilis ad videndum c. Because the sight of such a bloodie beast would be horrible and grievous to men Lyran. 3. And it might be feared lest such a dangerous beast if he should live should kill others also Simler 4. This was also provided for the masters advantage who was bound to make good all losses which should fall out afterward by his beast which used to push Tostat. 5. And by this law men are given to understand that if bruit beasts are not spared much lesse shall they goe unpunished if they shed mans bloud Gallas 6. The equitie also of this law herein appeareth that sicut creati sunt boves in hominum gratiam c. That as oxen were created for mans sake so they should serve for the use of man whether by their life or death Calvin 6. Agreeable to this law of Moses as grounded upon the law of nature were the like constitutions among the Heathen as Solon made a law in Athens that if a dogge had bitten a man hee should be tied in an halter and delivered to him that was hurt So among the Romanes in their 12. tables it was decreed that if a beast had done any hurt Dominus aut litis astimationem solvito aut eam noxa dedito The owner should either pay aâ— was awarded or deliver up his beast to punishment Draco also was the author of this law in Athens that not onely men but beasts yea things without life that had beene the meanes of any mans death should be banished out of the countrie and cast out whereupon the image of Theogenes among the Thrasians falling upon one and killing him was adjudged to be cast into the Sea Simler QUEST LXIV Why the flesh of the oxe was not to be eaten ANd his flesh shall not bee eaten 1. It was neither lawfull for them to eat the flesh themselves nor yet to sell it to the Gentiles as they might doe other things that died alone Deut. 1â— 21 Iun. But the flesh should be cast away as a cursed and abominable thing 2. Not so much because being stoned to death it was as a thing suffocated and so they should have eaten it with the bloud Simler Osiander But tanquam aliquid maledictum c. as a thing accursed they were to abhorre the flesh of such a bloudie beastâ— so that although the owner should slay this murtherous oxe before it were stoned it was not lawâ—ull to eat the flesh thereof Tostat. quaest 30. 3. And this was tum propter horrorem factâ— both for the horror of the fact tum quia per hoc damnificabatâ—â— Dominus bovis and by this meanes also the owner of the oxe was damnified the flesh thereof being unprofitable for any thing that he might be more â—autelâ—â—â— afterward and take better heed to his cattell Lyranus 4. The Hebrewes addâ— further that the very skin of the oxe was not to be used to any purpose but the whole to be cast away as a thing abominable Tostat. quaest 28. QUEST LXV In what case the owner is to die when his oxe goared any to death Vers 29. IF the oxe were wont to push c. Another case is put when the oxe chanceth to doe any hurt with the masters knowledge where divers conditions are required 1. That the oxe used to push before the words are in the originall yesterday and yeâ— yesterday a definite time is put for an indefinite it is noâ— enough if he had once goared before but he must have one it twice at the least as R. Salomon Lyran. He must have beene knowne in former time to have beene used to push 2. This also must have beene notified and signified also to the owner for it may be that the oxe had used formerly to push and the owner knew it not Simler Or if he knew it he might denie it unlesse he had beene admonished by others to take care of his beast Tostat. quaest 28. 3. He or she must be free and not a servant whom the oxe used to push goareth to death for concerning the goaring of servants there followeth another law afterward vers 32. If the oxe goared a man or woman a sonne or daughter that is though they were never so little it was all one Lyran. Some thinke it is understood of the owners owne sonne and daughter Calvin Oleaster But the next law as touching the goaring of servants sheweth that it is rather meant of his neighbours sonne or daughter Hugo de S. Victor But it is rather understood in generall de quo viâ— capite libero of every free bodie great or small man or woman Iun. 4. In this case the owner being warned before of his oxe is to die for it because he did not keepe him in knowing him to be a harmefull beast Quia videtur illud quasi immittere aliorum cervicibus because he seemed of purpose to let him loose to doe mischiefe Simler QUEST LXVI When the owner might redeeme his left with money Vers. 30. IF there be set to him a summe of money 1. R. Salomon thinketh that in this case the next of kin to the partie slaine were to take a peece of money of the owner of the oxe and they
could not refuse but might be compelled to take it and so he taketh here si if for quia because Contra But the very letter of the law is against this exposition for it is expresly said The oxe shall be stoned and the owner shall die also But if the owner might at his libertie redeeme his life with money then he should never be put to death and so that clause of the law should be superfluous Tostat. quaest 29. 2. Neither yet is Tostatus opinion here to be received Quandoque posuit in electione cognatorum c. That the law doth put it in the choice of the kinsmen of the slaine when they would demand the owner to die and when they thought good to set him a summe of money and so hee maketh this a different case from that vers 22. where the Judges were to set the summe of money because it was no capitall offence but here he is to pay whatsoever is required by the adversarie part without any moderation or limitation of the Judges because the offence being capitall cannot be valued or esteemed by any certaine summe of money Tostat. quast 28. Contra. But this is not like that this was left to the choice of the adversaries for either they might set such an unreasonable summe which the owner was not able to pay or else might use partialitie that in the very like case some owner should die when another should escape with his life and so the law should not be equall and indifferent to all 3. Some thinke that it was in the Judges discretion to change the sentence of death into a pecuniary mulct concedit lâ—x quòd possit Iudex decernere c. The law alloweth the Judge to determine c. Cajetan Lippoman thinketh that the adversaries were to make the demand praevia tamen non iniqui Iudiciâ— moderatione c. yet by the moderation of an indifferent Judge going before But if it were altogether arbitrarie in the Judge when a man should die in this case when not to what end saith the law The owner shall die also In that case then there propounded he was certainly to die which sentence by the Judge could not be dispensed with 4. Therefore I thinke rather with Iunius that in this mitigation of the former sentence of death a divers case is put from the former that if the owner of the oxe non satis scivit did not sufficiently know it vel non satis cavit or did not take heed enough thinking he had sufficiently provided for his beast that in this case he might be excused Si simplick as vel incogitantiâ— hominem excusaâ—â—t if the mans simplicitie or forgetfulnesse did excuse him c. so that he were not found to be wilfully negligent and carelesse the Judge might set him at a summe of money Calvin QUEST LXVII What servants this law meaneth Hebrewes or strangers Vers. 32. IF the oxe goare a servant or maid 1. Some thinke this is generally meant of all servants among the Hebrewes where lesse respect is had unto servants than unto free men Vt cura libertatis major vigeret in populo Dei c. That there should be more care had of libertie among the people of God that they come not through their owne default into servitude and bondage Lippoman 2. But it is rather understood of such servants as were Gentiles and strangers and not Hebrewes as may appeare by the former lawes vers 20.26 which are onely referred unto that kinde of servants Iun. For in all kinde of percussions and wrongs offred to the bodie or life the Hebrew servants had the same privilege which free men had Againe Tostatus addeth this reason because if he were an Hebrew servant that was killed the money should not be given to his master but so much onely as his service remaining might be valued at the rest was to goe rather to his children or kindred as put the case that his service were esteemed at foure sicles yearly and there remained but one yeare of his service before the seventh yeare came then his master was to have but foure sicles of the thirtie sicles But because the Gentile servants were their masters perpetuall possession the whole summe which the servant was valued at that perished belonged unto them Tostat. quaest 3. QUEST LXVIII Why a certaine summe of money is set for all servants Vers. 32. HE shall give unto their masters thirtie sicles The common sicle weighed the fourth part of an ounce of silver so that thirtie sicles made seven ounces and an halfe that is so many dolleâ—â— seven crownes starling and an halfe Iun. which is about 37.s. 6.d. of our money Now although there was great difference in the price of servants for the men servants were more worth than the maids and the young and strong than the old and weake yet a certaine rate is set for these reasons 1. Some thinke this proportion and summe is named because out of Cham there issued thirtie generations Gen. 7. from whom servitude tooke beginning But this is but a figurative reason which rather belonged to the ceremoniall than to the politike lawes Tostat. quaest 29. 2. These reasons rather may bee yeelded 1. That whereas the summe for the death of a free man is arbitrarie vers 30. but the certaine quantitie is named for a servant slaine by a beast this was to shew a difference betweene servants and free men Cajetan 2. Quia caedes erat involuntaria c. Because this slaughter was involuntarie and the owners negligence onely is punished therefore one servant is not set at an higher rate than another Simler 3. And beside this moderate and indifferent price is taxed that the owner of the oxe and the master of the servant might as it were divide the losse betweene them that seeing it was done of negligence non multum gravaretur in solvendo Dominus bovis The owner of the oxe should not be burthened with over great payment Tostat. quaest 29. QUEST LXIX What kinde of wells this law meaneth where and by whom digged Vers. 33. WHen a man shall open a well or digge a pit c. 1. Here are two cases put when either one uncovereth a well digged alreadie or diggeth a new well and leaveth it uncovered then he is subject to this law Lyran. For if one made a well and left it covered and another commeth and uncovereth it though he made it not now he is in fault and not the other that made it quia causam immediatam tribuit malo because hee is the immediate cause of the evill or mischiefe that is done Tostat. qu. 30. 2. Rab. Salomon thinketh that if the master commanded another to make a well and leave it uncovered that in this case he is not to make good the losse but he that made it Contra. If he that made it were a servant who could not gainsay his masters commandement in this case the master was rather to be charged with the
all the smaller cattell as well sheepe and goats as lambâ— and 〈◊〉 2. And beside the facility easinesse and readinesse of theft other things are to be respected as the worth and price of the thing stollen and the boldnesse and impudency of the theefe 6. Wherefore these reasons rather may be yeelded 1. Quia frequâ—ntius furtâ— subtraâ—ebantur 〈◊〉 It might be that it was a more frequent and usuall thing to steale oxen among the Hebrewes than sheepes and therefore God would restraine the more usuall theft by the greater punishment Tostat. 2. In hâ—c dominium majus â—adacia major In this theft of oxen the losse was greater to the owner when his exe was stollen and the boldnesse of the theefe greater 〈…〉 esse Such a theefe as should steale oxen had need be bold and cunning because such a theft cannot so easily be hid as of sheepe 3. Ab. Ezra also giveth this reason because when a sheepe is stollen the owner loseth but his sheepe but in the other theft 〈…〉 he loseth his oxe and the labour of his oxe this reason also is approved by Oleaster 〈◊〉 Gallasâ—â—â— But Tostatus taketh this exception that iâ— the losse of the oxeus labour â—e accounted here in the restitution of five-fold why should it not be respected as well when the thing stollen is found with the theefe in which â—ase he was to pay but two-fold qu. 2. The answer here is ready because where the oxe is found though thâ—â—e â—e an intermission of his labour yet there is hope of restitution againe so is there not here the oxe being killed or sold. 7. Iosephus thinketh that this Law extendeth it selfe also to other cattell in the fields as to goats as well as sheepe though they be not here 〈◊〉 But concerning the asse or horse because they are not so easily stollen being kept in the house Tostatus thinketh that the Law of two-fold restitution tooke place as in the stealing of houshold stuffe and other moveable goods But it is more like recording to the rule observed before in other Lawes that by one kinde the rest are understood and these two the oxe and sheepe are given â—n â—ssistance as the most usuall and common beasts unto which all other great and small cattell should be reduced as afterward vers 4. direct mention is made of the asse QUEST III. Of the divers punishment of theft and whether it may be capitall NOw concerning the punishment of theft 1. The licentious liberty of the Lacedemonians is much to be misliked who punished not theft at all because they thought it was a meanes to traine and exercise their people in the practice of warre Gallas for it being a Morall law Thou shalt not steale and so grounded upon the Law of nature it ought not by any contrary custome to be discontinued 2. Neither is that Law of Solâ—â— which the Romans also inserted into their twelve Tables to be altogether approved aâ—â—â—ing opposite to Moses Law for they punished manifest theft with foure-fold when the theefe was taken in the manner whereas Moses setteth it but at two-fold and theft not manifest when the theefe is not found with the thing that was stollen they censured with restitution of two-fold whereas Moses chargeth such offence with foure-fold because such an one as hath sold or killed the stollen good hath added sinne to sinne having no purpose of restitution nor there being any possibility thereof Herein therefore the Law of Moses is more equall than the other 3. The Law also of Draco is too severe which punished theft with death the Scythians did so also but they had some reason for it because they had no houses or places of defence for their cattell so that if theft among them had not beene most severely punished nothing could have beene safe 4. Nor yet am I of their opinion that thinke that lex Mosis non pertinet ad politiam nostram the Law of Moses doth not at all belong to the policie of Common-wealths now Lippom. Non sumus alligati ad leges Iudaicas forenses That we are not bound how to the Jewes Civill lawes at all Osiand but that Magistrates may increase the externall punishment whether by death or otherwise as the circumstance of time quality and condition of the people require Contra. 1. As we are not strictly tied in every point to Moses Judicials so yet the equity thereof remaineth still which chiefly consisteth in this in the due measuring and weighing of the nature of sinnes which are thought to be worthy of death 2. Punishments externall may be increased which concerned either pecuniary mulcts or other bodily chastisement not touching the life as Moses punished theft with foure-fold but afterward the sinne increasing it was set at seven-fold Prov. 7.31 Pelarg. 3. But whereas mans life is only at Gods disposition this may be safely affirmed that no humane Law can take away the life of man for any offence without either generall or particular warrant and direction from Gods Law as is more at large before declared p. 4 5. 5. And yet I cannot consent to those that thinke no theft at all ought to be punished by death for even by Moses Law a violent theft as in breaking up of an house was judged worthy of death it was lawfull to kill such a theefe vers 2. Againe sacrilegious theft was likewise punished in the same manner as Iakob giveth sentence that they should not live that had stollen Labans gods Gen. 31.32 So Achan was put to death for stealing the excommunicate thing Iosh. 7. Theft committed of wantonnesse and without mercie David adjudgeth unto death 2 Sam. 12. vers 6. Chrysostome thinketh that David legem est praetergressus exceeded the Law in that he commandeth beside the restitution of foure-fold the man to be slaine and he calleth it supereffluentem justitiam overabounding justice But the Law of God did beare out David in it for he which did sinne presumptuously and with an high hand that is of malice and obstinacie was to dye for it Numb 15.30 Such was the sinne of the rich man whose case there is propounded which having many sheepe himselfe tooke away the poore mans sheepe by violence and had no pity Further he that did steale a man was to dye for it by the Law of Moses vers 16. So that it is evident even by Moses Judiciall lawes that some kinde of theft deserved death By the Romane Lawes also as is extant in their 12. Tables servants convicted of manifest theft were first beaten and then cast downe headlong from the rocke By the Imperiall lawes a theefe for the first offence was whipped then if he offended againe he lost his eares and the third time he was hanged in Anithent ut nulli Iudici c. for now such a theefe sinneth of obstinacie and malice and contempt against the Lawes and Magistrate and may by the Law of God be worthily put to death Simler So likewise such thefts whereby the
publike peace and safety is violated as in the Campe among souldiers and robbing by the high way where ones life is put in danger All these kindes being more than simple thefts may receive the sentence of death by Moses Law and Magistrates herein may with a good conscience execute the rigour of the Law upon such violent outragious impudent wanton and incorrigible thefts But they are wisely to consider every circumstance and the occasion that draweth one to steale whether he doe it of necessity to releeve his hungry soule or of an evill custome and obstinate minde to maintaine his lewd and unthrifty life In the first case it seemeth to be too sharpe to take away ones life unlesse he be such an one as will take no warning but continueth hardened in his sinne And so for simple and single theft only except it be in stealing of men unlesse it be aggravated by other circumstances concurring 〈◊〉 violence rapine obstinacie custome in sinne and such like neither the Law of Moses prescribeth punishment of death nor yet is it practised by our Lawes which in such cases intend favour by allowing the privilege of the booke See before p. 6. QUEST IV. Why the theefe breaking up might be killed Vers. 6. IF a theefe be found breaking up c. 1. R. Salomon thinketh that this Law which alloweth the theefe found breaking up an house to be slaine is understood not only of theeves that breake in by night but by day also and that clause which followeth When the Sunne riseth upon him they interpret metaphorically that if it be evident and manifest as the light that the theefe came not only to steale but to kill that whether by day or night he may be killed So also the Chalde Interpreter seemeth to follow the same sense Si oculus testium vidit eum If the eye of witnesses saw him that is if it were evident that he came not only as a theefe but to assault Contra. Though this be true that a man might defend himselfe even by day against him that assaulted his life yet this is not the meaning here the words of the Law are literally not metaphorically to be understood 2. The reason of this difference betweene a night theefe and a day theefe is because in the night breaking in it is not knowne whether he came to steale only or to murther but in the day it may easily appeare by his armour and weapons Tostat. Simler Beside in the day he may call for helpe against the theefe which cannot be so well done in the night when he is left without all other remedy but his owne defence Galas Marbach And in the day he may have witnesses of his theft and so convent him before the Magistrate Lippom. 3. The Romane Lawes allow not onely to kill a night theefe but a day theefe also si se tel◠defenderit if he defend himselfe by a weapon Moses Law much disagreeth not for though he that commeth only as a theefe in the day time is not to be killed but to make restitution only yet if he come with weapons as having a murtherers intent now he may be repelled by force even as a night theefe may not now as a theefe but as one which commeth to assault and murther Iunius QUEST V. How it is made lawfull for a private man to kill a theefe Vers. 2. ANd be smitten that he dye no bloud shall be imputed 1. Cajetanus here observeth that this Law simply alloweth not to kill the theefe but if a man smite him in his owne defence not intending to kill him that in this case he shall be free Percussio fuit intenta mors autem per accidens sequnta c. He intended only to smite him but death followed accidentally upon such smiting so also Simler Non probat ut animo occidendi feriatur This Law alloweth not that he should be stricken with a minde to kill him sed indulget affectui c. but it beareth with a mans sudden passion if in defence of himselfe it so fall out that he be killed 2. But this Law seemeth not only to permit one to smite a night theefe but directly to kill him also so it be not with a desire to kill him where he may otherwise escape but to defend him and his from violence which he cannot doe unlesse the theefe be killed Borrh. 3. For seeing both the Law of nature and other Civill lawes doe allow a man to defend himselfe now when the Lawes doe arme a man they seeme publicam personam imponere to impose upon him a publike person so that now he smiteth not as a private man but by authority of the Law and in this case he is tanquam minister vindex Dei as the minister and revenger of God so that he doe it not of a lust and raging desire to be revenged but intending to use a lawfull defence in the safegard of his owne life Gallas And the case is here all one as if a man being set upon by the high way should kill him that maketh the assault upon him Marbach QUEST VI. After what manner the theefe was to be sold. Vers. 3. HE should be sold for his theft c. 1. So was also the Law among the Romans that the debter should be given up in bonds unto his creditor Whereupon Cato was wont to say Fures privates in nexu compedibus vivere publicos in aur◠purpura c. That private theeves lived in chaines and fetters but the publike in gold and purple c. But this custome because it seemed very hard was abrogated by the Law of Arcadius and Honorius Gallas 2. But here it must be considered whether the theefe were an Hebrew or a stranger if an Hebrew how great soever the debt were for his theft he could be but sold over for six yeeres for all Hebrew servants were to goe out free the seventh And as the theft was valued so should he serve more yeeres or fewer But if he were a stranger he might be sold over to serve all his life if the value of the theft were great if it were but small he was but to be sold to serve so many yeeres as might suffice to recompence the theft Tostat. QUEST VII Why the theefe is only punished double with whom the thing stollen is found Vers. 4. HE shall restore double 1. That is one beside that he stole because that is found in his hand which is stollen and so restored Iun. And so must the five oxen be taken which the theefe must make good five with that which was stollen Lippom. 2. Now the reasons why when the thing stollen is found only double must be restored and five or foure-fold when it was killed or sold are these 1. Because he seemeth to be the more cunning theefe when the thing stollen cannot be found 2. Adhuc difficilior ratio in investigando and it is harder to finde out the theft and therefore he is
Canaanites haâ—ing not the true worship of God defiled themselves with these abominations for the which the Lord cast them out Levit. 18.24 Simler QUEST XXXV What is meant by sacrificing to other gods 〈…〉 hearing that the two tribes and an halfe beyond Jordan had erected them an Altar they assembled themselves together against them as jealous lest they purposed to bring in a new worship of God Tostat. 5. And not onely they which committed Idolatrie themselves but they which perswaded others were to be put to death Deut. 13.6 7. QUEST XXXVI Whether Idolatrie now is to be punished by death Vers. 20. SHall be slaine 1. The word is charam that simply signifieth not to cut off but to destroy as an anathema thing accursed and bequeathed to destruction Iun. Pelarg. 2. The Interlinearie Glosse expoundeth it of excommunication and of eternall death but both the practise of those times and the like punishment here â—nflicted upon other capitall crimes sheweth that it must be understood of the losse of the temporall life though beside without their great repentance Idolaters deserve also everlasting death Rev. 22.8 3. Some object that now Idolatrie is not to be punished by death but that such rather that are seduced should be instructed in the true worship of God and in the times of the Gospell it is fit more clemencie and mercie should be shewed than under the rigour of the law Answ. 1. Though Idolaters are to be instructed to reforme their error for the salvation of their soules yet this letteth not but that for so great impietie and for the example of others they should worthily suffer the paines of death 2. And now under the Gospel seeing robberie against the common peace and â—reason against the life and safetie of the Prince and State are judged worthy of death Qui majestatem Dei 〈◊〉 dissime violavit tam leve facinus admisisse putabitur shall he which violateth the Majestie of God most impiously be thought to commit so small an offence Gallas 4. But although as Osiander saith the Magistrate non gladio in idololatriam vindicare teneatur be not now bound to take revenge of Idolatrie by the sword for some difference there is betweene Pagane idolatrie and Popish superstitious Imagerie the one being an absolute deniall of all Christianitie the other a mixing therewith of superstitious vanitie yet by the equitie of this Judiciall law which serveth for the strengthening of a morall precept the like sin of idolatrie may justly receive the like punishment As Cyprian repeating that law Deut. 13.12 Si audieris in una ex civitatibus c. If thou hearest of any of the cities c. that are drawne away to serve other gods that such a city should be destroyed thus further inferreth cujus praecepti memor Mattathias which precept Mattathias remembring killed him that approached to the idolatrous Altar to sacrifice c. Then he further addeth Quod si ante adventum Christi circa Deum colendum et idola spernendâ— haec pracepta servata sunt c. Now if these precepts concerning the worship of God and despising of Idols were kept before the comming of Christ quanto magis post adventum Christi servanda sunt How much more ought they to be kept after the comming of Christ seeing he hath not onely exhorted us in words but in deeds Augustine likewise shewing a difference betweene the schisme of the Donatists and Pagane idolatrie thus concludeth Quis vestrum non laudat leges c. Which of you doth not commend the lawes given by the Emperours against the sacrifices of the Pagans illius quippe impietatis capitale supplicium est c. for the punishment of that impietie is capitall 5. R. Salomon thinketh that if a Jew did sweep an Idol Temple velornaret vel alia similia faceret quae sunt praambula c. or adorne it onely and doe other things which are but preambles to Idolatrie he was not to be punished by death but some other wayes Ex Lyrano But if enticing in words to idolatrie were judged worthy of death Deut. 17.5 much more to entice and draw by fact and example as in adorning and beautifying the Temples of Idols QUEST XXXVII Why idolatrie is judged worthy of death NOw the reasons why idolatry was held by Moses law to be worthy of death were these 1. Quia is cultus diabolo exhibetur qui idolorum author est Because that idolatrous worship is giuen unto the devill who is the author of Idols Gallas 2. Aequum est vita privari eos c. It is just that they should be deprived of life which forsake God the author and fountaine of life Simler To leave the worship of God who is the author of life and to worship the devill the author of death and destruction mille mortibus c doth shew himselfe to be worthy of a thousand deaths Gallas 3. Though euery transgression of the law be in some sort a breach of Gods covenant yet idolatry more specially is said to be a transgression of the covenant of God Deut. 17.2 Because men apparently and professedly thereby forsake the profession solemnely made of their service and obedience vnto the Lord Simler 4. And this severe punishment the Lord appointeth for idolatrie quia inter Aegyptios idololatria assiâ—everant because the Israelites had accustomed themselves unto idolatry among the Egyptians in so much that they Moses yet living set up a golden calfe to worship Simler 5. Because of the ready inclination and propension of mans nature unto idolatry it was fit that it should by some severe punishment be restrained Calvin 6. And two things there are which doe exaggerate the nature of a sinne and aggravate the punishment thereof Res in quibâ—s committitur is in quos committitur c. The things wherein they are commited and they against whom they are committed Borrh. Both which concurre here in the sinne of apostasie and idolatrie For what mattâ—â— can be of greater moment than the service and worship of God and what sin more grievous than that which is committed against God QUEST XXXVIII Of kindnesse how to be shewed toward strangers and why Vers. 21. THou shalt not doe injury to a stranger 1. There are two reasone why men are apt to doe wrong unto strangers a both because they are not allied by affinity or consanguinity and therefore no naturall affection is commonly shewed toward them because they are destitute of friends and patrons and therefore lye more open to wrong Tostatus 2. The stranger must neither bee injured in word nor wronged in deed Simler Neither secretly by fraud nor openly by violence neither must they be hindred by any private man nor publikely prejudiced by lawes made against them Tostat. And it is not enough not to doe them wrong but we must help them and doe them what good we can Gallas 3. And this reason is added because they were strangers in Egypt they did feele
Sabbath formally who doth that which is expressely forbidden to bee done upon that day he materially breaketh it who doth a worke like unto that which is forbidden but yet is permitted by the law As if there were a law that no citizen should sell any thing to a stranger but such as were licensed to do it hee that so selleth being not allowed transgresseth the law formally he that doth it being thereunto licensed doth transgresse onely materially in that he doth the same thing which he committeth that transgresseth the law but not in that manner The same difference there was betweene the workes of the Priests which were allowed by the law upon the Sabbath day and the like workes of those which laboured in the building of the Tabernacle upon that day which were forbidden 3. Another difference is this the sacrifices belonged to the service of God which if they should have been intermitted upon the Sabbath the service of God should therby have been neglected But though the workes about the Tabernacle did cease upon the Sabbath Gods worship was not thereby neglected for they might as well be made upon other daies and so were 4. They were to do no servile works upon the Sabbath but many works necessarie for the building of the Sanctuarie were servile so were not the sacrifices and other duties performed by the Priests upon the Sabbath therefore the one were permitted upon the Sabbath and not the other Tostat. qu. 9. QUEST XIII How the Sabbath is said to bee a signe that the Lord did sanctifie them Vers. 13. IT is a signe betweene me and you that I the Lord do sanctifie you Which words are diversly expounded 1. Some make this the sense It is a signe that I sanctifie you in that I have separated you from other people selected you unto my self Vatab. Lyran. 2. Oleaster thus Sanctitas Sabbatâ— signum est munditia c. The holinesse of the Sabbath is a signe of cleanenesse which I require of you Vt ex dicato tempore Deo credamus magis nos ipsos dicuri Deo c. That by the time dedicated to God wee should know that wee our selves much more should be dedicated Cajetan But more is here signified than so the words implie an actuall sanctification not signified onely 3. Hierom saith it is so said because it was signum veri Sabbati a signe of the true Sabbath wherein wee shall rest from the labours of the world 4. So also Irenam Non sine symbole erant signa the signes were not without some symbole and signification Sabbatâ— perseverantiam totim diâ—i c. The Sabbaths holding our the whole day did signifie our continuance in Gods serâ—â—ce But here the Lord speaketh of an actuall sanctification not of a typicall signification 5. Some say it is so called quia signum erat â—udâ—ris because it was a signe of the Covenant whereby the people did bind themselves to worship the Lord for their God and such signes were all the other ceremonies Marbach But there is a morall consideration in the sanctifying of the Sabbath therefore it was otherwise a signe than the other ceremonies 6. It was then a common signe betweene God and them they holding God to be their God Creator and sanctifier because the Sabbath was a commemoration of the creation and the Lord taking them for his people whom he created redeemed and sanctified Iun. Tostat. 7. Beside the keeping of the Sabbath was a signe of difference between them and all other prophane people of the world who derided the Jewes for their Sabbaths as 〈◊〉 derided them for this Quod septimâ—m partem 〈…〉 Because they lost the seventh part of their age in resting every seventh day Tostat. qu. 10. 8. And specially it was a signe of their sanctification because that day they were sequestred by an holy rest from thinking or studying upon prophane things and in respect of the exercises of religion upon that day whereby they were sanctified sanctificaâ—â—r verbo Dei we are sanctified by the word of God Simler And they did meet together ad confirmandam 〈…〉 to confirme their faith by the sacraments Osiander And because every Sabbath discatiâ— doctrinam meam you learne my doctrine c. Iunius QUEST XIV The reasons why the Sabbath must be observâ—d Vers. 13. FOr it is a signe c. There are here divers reasons yeelded for the observation of the Sabbath 1. The first is à sine from the end it was a signe betweene God and them 2. Ab â—tili it is holy unto you that is ordained for your benefit and commoditie as our blessed Saviour saith Mark 2.27 The Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath Pelarg. So also Cajetan It is holy unto you that is ad vestrum bonum mandatur custodiendum it is appointed to be kept for your good 3. A necessarie from the necessitie of it because if they did not keepe it they should surely die as thrice the punishment of death is here threatned to those that defile the Sabbath and doe any worke therein Pelarg. 4. From the authoritie of the Institutor quia dicatur Domino c. because it is consecrated unto God vers 15. It is the Sabbath of the holy rest unto the Lord therefore it ought to be observed Cajetan 5. A facili from the easinesse of the precept the Lord appointeth but one day for the holy rest whereas he alloweth six for labour Pelargus 6. Ab exemplo Dei from Gods example who created the world in six daies and rested the seventh Pelarg. Simlerus 7. A consequenti from the event or consequent in observing the Sabbath efficient in succedentibus generationibus c. They shall procure that a perpetuall covenant shall be established in their generations betweene the Lord and their posteritie for ever Cajetan QUEST XV. What death is meant in this phrase He shall die the death Vers. 14. SHall die the death Whereas there are divers kinds of death there is everlasting death both of bodie and soule in the next world and the temporall death in this life either of the soule in being deprived of the life of grace or of the bodie either by the hand of God by sudden and extraordinarie death or by the hand of the Magistrate according to these divers kinds of death so is this place diversly interpreted 1. Some referre it to everlasting death and excluding from the societie of Gods servants Iun. 2. Some understand it of being deprived of the life of grace Vita gratiae destituetuâ— hic infuturo seculo c. He shall be destitute of the life of grace both here and in the next world Lippoman 3. Some of being excluded from the people of God no more to be counted an Israelite Eâ— Oleastr 4. Some of the violent death by the Magistrate Osiander Simler 5. Some of extraordinarie death when God cutteth one off and so punisheth him by death unlooked for as God is said
before and this were but one Simler But the contrary appeareth Deut. 9.20 4. Therefore these may be the causes why Moses prayeth againe 1. The Lord granted before that he would not destroy all the people at once sed 〈◊〉 ex inâ—ervallo vel per partes but whether he would doe it in continuance of time and as it wore by peecemeale hee knew not which he prayeth for here Lippom. 2. And there might be other sinnes as well as this for the which the Lord should be angry with them as Deut. 9.18 he saith he prayed and fasted because of all their sins Tostat. 3. And now he prayeth not only for the turning away or judgements but that the Lord would be againe fully reconciled unto his people and restore them to their former state and condition of favour Simler 4. And he prayeth not only for the pardoning of their temporall punishment but against everlasting death which sinne deserveth Osiander QUEST LXXVIII What booke it was out of the which Moses wisheth to be raced Vers. 32. IF thou wilt not race me out of the booke which thou hast written 1. By this booke R. Salomon understandeth the booke of the Law as Deut. 33.4 Moses commanded us a Law hee desireth if the Lord were purposed to destroy the people that his name should not be mentioned in the Law nor he taken to be the Law-giver for to what purpose should he be spoken of as a Law-giver unto that people which was not Contra. But this is not the meaning 1. Because the bookes of the Law were not yet written Moses therefore would not desire to be raced out of a booke which was not 2. Neither would Moses aske that of God which was in his owne power to doe now Moses did write the booke of the Law and he might have left out his owne name if he would 3. Againe Moses setteth against this great benefit the safety of the people the greatest losse which he could have but this had beene no such great losse unto Moses not to have his name remembred in any such written booke 4. Moses here useth a disjunctive speech Doâ— this or else race mee c. but if he meant the racing of his name out of the booke of the Law there had beene no disjunction at all for one had followed upon the other for if Israel had beene destroyed neither should Moses have written the booke of the Law which was only given unto Israel for it had beene in vaine to give Lawes unto a people that were not 5. Moses also speaketh of a booke which God had written now Moses writ the booke of the Law the ten Commandements only were written with Gods hand Tostat. quaest 41. 2. R. Abraham Francus who writeth upon Aben Ezra understandeth the racing out of this booke of the death of the body and he addeth further that there is quaedam rota coelestâ—â— a certaine celestiall wheele wherein are many starres which worke by their influence upon those iâ—â—eriour bodies and by the moving of this wheele death or life is caused so that thus he would interpret Moses speech Cause me by the motion of this wheele to dye But seeing the motion of this wheele which he imagineth is the naturall cause as he supposeth of life and death Moses could not dye naturally before his time came and if now he should have died it had beene not a naturall death but supernaturally caused by God therefore not by the motion of any such wheele Tostat. ibid. 3. Hierom also differeth not much from this former opinion in substance understanding Moses desire of death in this life he wisheth Perire in praesentiam non in perpetnum To perish for the present not for ever But whereas the Lord afterward answereth Moses Whosoever hath sinned will I put out of my booke vers 33. it followeth that they which sinne not that is without repentance are not put out of that booke but all as well the righteous as unrighteous the just and the sinners are subject to this temporall death therefore Moses speaketh not of that 4. Hierom hath beside another opinion for upon that place Psalm 69.28 Let them bee put out of the booke of life neither let them bee written with the righteous he inferreth that God hath two bookes viventium justorum of the living and of the righteous that was the booke of the living In quo ante adventum Dei Prophetae Patriarchae scripti sunt Wherein the Prophets and Patriarkes were written before the comming of God in the flesh the other wherein the faithfull are written whereof our blessed Saviour speaketh Rejoyce because your names are written in the booke of life and of the first Moses saith he speaketh in this place So some doe understand this booke in the same sense with Hierom of the booke of Gods Covenant which hee made with Israel out of the which the Gentiles were excluded of which mention is made Ezech. 13.9 where the Lord saith that the false Prophets shall not be written in the writing of the house of Israel So Moses desireth here not to be counted of the family of Israel wherein all the Prophets and Patriarkes were written But if Israel had now perished the booke of Gods Covenant with Israel likewise should have beene no more remembred therefore it had beene superfluous for Moses to desire to be raced out of that booke And againe the booke of the living mentioned in the Psalme is the same with the booke of life spoken of Apocal. 3.5 I will not put his name out of the booke of life In which booke of life not only the Prophets and Patriarkes before Christ but all the faithfull before and since are written 5. Cajetane understandeth it De libro principatuâ— in hoc mundo Of the booke of principality and preeminence in the world for it is decreed with God as in a booke Quod isto vel illi principentur in hac vita That such or such shall beare rule in this life And so Moses desireth to lose his principality and government which the Lord promised him that hee would make of him a great nation c. But whereas they which sinned only are taken out of this booke of life and yet many wicked and evill men are governours in the world it cannot be meant of any such booke or decree of principalitie or government 6. Oleaster by this booke thinketh to be understood the booke of the acts and doings of the righteous which is mentioned Iosh. 10.13 and 2 Sam. 1.18 But there are many righteous men whose names and acts were not written in that booke which is now thought also to be lost therefore it had beene no great matter for Moses to wish to be put out of that booke 7. Burgensis maketh foure bookes of God 1. One is the booke of life wherein only are written the names of the Elect that are ordained unto life as when souldiers are written in the muster booke which are pressed
this distinction one way they are said simply to be written In quantum praedestinati sunt in noticia Divina as they are ordained to salvation in the knowledge and prescience of God and they that are thus written can never bee blotted out another way they are scripti secundum quid written after a sort not according to the divine prescience or predestination Sed secundum dispositionem in eis actu existentem secundum praesentem justitiam But according to their disposition which is in act in them and according to their present justice and thus are they said to be blotted out not in respect of Gods knowledge as though any thing can fall out against his prescience but in respect of their change from grace into sinne 2. Thomas also to the same purpose some are said to bee blotted out Non secundum rei veritatem sed secundum hominum opinionem Not according to the truth of the thing but in the opinion of men for it is usuall in Scripture ut aliquid dicatur fieri quando innotescit that a thing should be said to be done when it appeareth So some are said to be written in the booke of life quia homines ibi opinantur scriptos propter presentem justitiam because men thinke they are there written in respect of their present justice Then some are there written ex pradestinatione by predestination which can never bee blotted out Some ex gratia in respect of their present grace which they may fall from and so be blotted out And againe in another place he expresseth the same thing in other termes Some are predestinate of God Insâ— ut simpliciter habituri vitam aeternam Simply to have life eternall in themselves and these are so written in the booke of life as they can never be blotted out And some are so written Vt habeant vitam aeternam non in se sed in sua causa To have life eternall not in themselves but in respect of their cause and present state of Justice which when they fall from they are said to be blotted out 3. So before them both Augustine We must not so take it brethren Quod quenquam Deus scribat in librâ— vitae deleat illum That God writeth any in the booke of life and blotteth him out for if a mortall man said that I have written I have written shall we thinke that God writeth and blotteth out Praescius est Deus praedestinavit omnes ante constitutionem mundi regnaturos cum filio God foreseeth all things and he did predestinate all before the making of the world that should reigne with his sonne c. Therefore this is said Secundum spem ipsorum qui ibi se scriptos putabant That some are written which are said to be blotted out in their owne opinion because they thought they were there written so that where it is said let them be blotted out of the booke of life the meaning is ut ipsos constet non illos ibi esse that it may appeare unto them that they are not there To this purpose Augustine as he is alleaged both by Simlerus and Borrhaius 4. Tostatus followeth the same distinction that some are written in the booke of life secundum firmam praedestinationem according to Gods sure predestination some only secundum praesentem justitiam in respect of their present justice these may bee blotted out and not the other but he addeth further that so likewise in the booke of Gods prescience wherein onely they are written whose end is damnation some are written there secundum firmam Dei praescientiam according to Gods firme prescience others secundum praesentem injustitiam according to their present injustice These may be blotted out and not the other And this writing of them in one booke according to their present justice in the other according to their present injustice he calleth the writing foris without the booke the other writing according to Gods predestination and prescience he saith is intus within the booke Then out of these positions he inferreth certaine conclusions 1. That it is possible for one to be written in both these bookes the booke of life and the booke of death together in the one according to Gods predestination or prescience in the other according to their present justice or injustice As he which is predestinate unto life may according to his present state of injustice be written in the booke of death foris without as Paul while he was yet a persecutor and one may be in Gods prescience written in the booke of death and yet according to his present state of grace he may be written in the booke of life as Iudas while yet he continued in Christs obedience and preached the Gospell 2. Yet it is possible for one to be written twice in the same booke both in regard of Gods prescience and his owne state and condition as Moses was thus written in the booke of life and Iudas when he betrayed Christ in the booke of death 3. They which are written in the booke of life according to predestination may be blotted out thence according to their present state and condition as David when he sinned and so in the other booke likewise as Saul while he was yet a vertuous King he was written in the booke of rejection in Gods prescience but blotted out in regard of his present justice 4. But he that is written in the booke of life according unto predestination cannot be written in the booke of death according to Gods prescience and so on the other side because one and the same cannot be foreseene of God both to salvation and condemnation 5. And they which are written according to their present justice in the booke of life cannot at the same time be written in the booke of death according to their present injustice because one cannot at the same time be counted righteous and wicked before God Tostat. qu. 43. But these exceptions may worthily be taken unto Tostatus conclusions 1. Because he maketh a booke of death and speaketh of putting in and blotting out of that booke whereas the Scripture acknowledgeth only a booke of life not any of death for not to be written in the booke of life though they bee not written in any other blacke booke is sufficient unto everlasting perdition 2. He calleth the booke of death the booke of Gods prescience only as though God were not a Judge also in condemning the vessels of wrath into hell and ordaining them justly thereunto as he is in the electing the vessels of honour to salvation 3. It is an errour that God writeth any in either of those bookes on the backside in respect of their present state or condition of justice or injustice for Gods writing there is unchangeable they are there said to be written in regard of their present state secundum spem ipsorum in their owne hope as Augustine or secundum opinionem hominâ—m according to the opinion of
to goe any further he therefore taketh them to bee deceived who thinke diversum aliquid hic notari that some divers thing is here noted than before for in the same sense the Lord is said to goe before them and to goe with them in the middest of them But in that the Lord saith againe vers 17. I will doe this thing also which thou hast said it is evident that Moses added somewhat to his former request and begged somewhat which was not yet granted though Calvin thinketh it is but the repetition of the same thing tollenda dubitationis causa to take from Moses all doubting So also Oleaster 2. Some doe thinke that Moses here asketh a divers thing from that which the Lord granted where there are divers opinions 1. Lyranus taketh it that whereas God promised to goe before Moses he further entreateth that hee would totum populum praecedere goe before not him only but all the people c. But the Lords promise was generall that his presence should goe before not expressing whom and Moses request which the Lord yeeldeth unto wherein hee maketh mention of the people vers 13. sheweth that the Lord so meant that hee would be a guide to all the people 2. Cajetan saith because the Lord had promised only in generall My face shall goe not expressing whether antâ— eos cum eis post eos before them with them or behinde them now he entreateth that hee would goe with him But Moses repeating Gods words doth put to no such limitation only hee saith If thy presence goe not carrie us not hence by which repeating of Gods words Moses knew well enough that God promised to goe before them 3. Rupertus therefore and Tostatus follow this sense that because the Lord by his presence might understand some Angell he presseth God yet further that he would goe himselfe with them But this answer is granted upon the oversight of the Latine translation which readeth here If thou wilt not goe before whereas in the originall it is being well translated If thy presence goe not So that Moses by Gods presence understandeth God himselfe as hee expoundeth vers 16. shall it not bee when thou goest with us 4. Wherefore in this reply Moses partly confirmeth the Lords answer by shewing the inconvenience that would follow that it were better for them to remaine there still than without Gods presence to goe on and offer themselves to infinite danger partly hee intreateth that God would not onely goe before them as he did before others of the Heathen whom he used in his service as he raised and stirred up Cyrus whom he conducted as the Lord saith by his Prophet Thus saith the Lord to Cyrus his anointed whose right hand I have holden to subdue nations before him c. I will goe before thee and make the crooked strait c. But that the Lord would also dwell among them in his Tabernacle as he purposed And therefore the Lord herein condescending to Moses saith afterward vers 17. I will doe this also which thou hast said that is Non solum praibo sed vobiscum ero I will not only go before you but with you also Gallas So Moses also in saying that the people may have preheminence entreateth ut non cesset Deus facere signa coram gentibus that the Lord would not cease still to doe signes and wonders for his people before the nations that they may know that God is among them Ferus Simlerus Osiander For the faithfull are not satisfied nisi Deum totum habeant unlesse they have God wholly and all Ferus QUEST XXXII Why Moses addeth Carrie us not hence seeing even in that place also they had need of Gods protection Vers. 15. CArrie us not hence 1. Calvin so understandeth Moses here as though hee should meane that it were better perire in deserto to perish in the desart than to goe forward without Gods presence But Moses by no meanes would have wished the perishing of the people for whose preservation he intreated so earnestly before wishing himselfe rather to be raced out of Gods booke than them to perish 2. Rupertus draweth it to a mysticall sense Carrie us not hence c. Quid attinet nos vivere c. To what end should we live and beget children unlesse thou come which onely canst regenerate unto life those which are borne to death c. He applyeth it to the comming of the Messiah but the phrase here used Carrie us not hence sheweth that Moses here speaketh of going into the land of Canaan for otherwise the Messiah might have beene given unto them as well in this place as in Canaan 3. His meaning therefore is melius esse iter non ingredi that it were better for them not to goe thence at all unlesse God would be their guide Simler not to stirre one foot from thence 4. Which Moses speaketh not as though they needed not Gods protection and preservation there but because they were subject to many more dangers in walking forward still for they were to passe by the countries of divers nations who would suspect them as having a purpose to invade their land whereas now remaining still they should not be molested of any Tostat. qu. 16. QUEST XXXIII Why it is added People upon the earth Vers. 16. ALL the people that are upon the earth 1. This is not added by way of distinction as though there were any people under the earth they which are gone out of the world are called people as Abraham is said to be gathered unto his people but not properly because they are spirits and not men in hell there can be no people because there is no order nor communitie as where a people is there is a mutuall communitie and they are governed by Law nor yet in heaven is there said to bee a people properly their bodies being laid aside their spirits only there living in bliffe 2. Neither are those which are called Antipodes which dwell on the other side of the earth under but upon the earth as we are 3. Sed positum est ex superabundantia This is added of abundance for more plaine evidence and demonstration Tostat. qu. 16. QUEST XXXIV Whether Moses desired to see the verie divine nature and essence of God Vers. 18. I Beseech thee shew me thy glorie 1. Ferus thinketh that Moses only asked of God to shew him certaine signes and evidences of his glorie quibus omnes homines te agnoscant credant whereby all men may acknowledge thee and beleeve in thee But this had beene a lawfull request and the Lord would not have denied it 2. Some thinke that Moses desired ostendi sibi aspectabilem formam divinae majestatis that there might be shewed unto him some visible forme of the divine Majestie not for his owne satisfaction but to content the rude people that he might make some description thereof unto them who desired to be instructed by some visible demonstration
was frustrate but yet it was a reasonable desire 5. Hierom. also is in the same minde Faciem Dei juxta naturae sua proprietatem nulla videt creatura No creature can see the face of God in the propertie of his owne nature 6. But whereas Iacob saith I have seene God face to face Gen. 32.30 which is here denied unto Moses Thomas Aquinas well interpreteth that place that whereas it is said that Iacob saw God face to face Referendum est non ad ipsam essentiam sed ad figuram in quo representabatur Deus It must be referred not unto the essence of God but unto that figure wherein God was represented c. Otherwise it is not to be doubted but that Moses saw more than Iacob did and there is no question but that this was the most cleere sensible vision of Gods glorie that is to be found in all the old Testament for none of the Fathers saw the Lords back-parts but only Moses Oleast yet neither Iacob there nor Moses here saw the divine essence Nunc majus aliquid prastantius obtinet non tamen ut Deum perfecte videat c. Moses obtained a more excellent thing than Iacob yet not to see God perfectly as he is in himselfe but as the capacitie of humane nature was able to beare Calvin 7. Alcuinus giveth this reason why Moses when it is said the Lord spake with Moses face to face saw not the divine essence for then hee would not have said afterward Ostende mihi teipsum Shew me thy selfe or thy glorie Apparuit ergo ei Deus in ea specie qua voluerat non ipse autem apparuit illi natura propria God therefore appeared unto him in that manner hee would not in his owne nature c. 8. Simlerus addeth further hee saw onely the back-parts of God Non vidit igitur naturam substantiam Therefore he saw not his nature and substance And whereas notwithstanding the Lord is said to have talked with Moses face to face that is only to shew a difference betweene that cleere vision which Moses had and other visions shewed to other Prophets not so cleere Simler 9. Lyranus then here is deceived who affirmeth that though the vision or sight of the divine essence was not now granted to Moses Tamen alias fuit concessa in vita praesenti Yet it was granted at another time in this life present But the reason here used by the Lord that no man can see God and live is generall excluding all men while they live here from the vision of Gods nature and essence And as Tostatus reasoneth Non videtur esse aliud tempus inconvenientius c. There seemeth no time to be more convenient for Moses to see Gods essence in than this when Moses made that request unto God qu. 17. yet Tostatus likewise is deceived who thinketh that Moses at this time did see the divine essence QUEST XLIX Of the meaning of these words No man shall see me and live Vers. 20. THere shall no man see me and live 1. Gregorie Nyssenus giveth this sense of this place not that the sight of that glorious face should be the cause of death Nam quomodo vitae facies causa mortis esse poterit For how should the face of life be the cause of death to those that approach or come neere unto it But to shew because the divine nature exceedeth all knowledge that he which thinketh God to be any of those things which are seene and knowne vitam non habet hath no life Non est ergo vita quod cognoscitur That then is not life which is seene or knowne and so cannot give life c. Hee maketh then in effect this to be the meaning of these words No man shall see me and live thinke not that which thou seest of one to be God able to give life But the Lord speaketh here not of any inward opinion but of the present sight and contemplation of God which Moses decreed and by face he meaneth not any thing beside himselfe that is seene of him but his essence and nature that which himselfe is no man can see that and live 2. Procopius seemeth to approve this sense that they which live here according to the flesh cannot see God but they may see him Non secundum carnem ambulantes Which walke not according to the flesh But Procopius may answer himselfe by a distinction that there is prima Dei facies the first face of God which is his divine essence which is indeed invisible neâ—ini mortalium visa and never seene of any mortall creature there is secunda Dei facies as second face of God which is his grace and favour which is seene by faith of this sight of God our blessed Saviour speaketh Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God c. But the Lord speaketh here of the sight of his first face which is invisible for Moses lived not according to the flesh and yet he is denied this sight and afterward he is granted to see the back-parts which he could not have seene if he had beene carnall not spirituall 3. Rupertus thinketh that as before the Lord spake unto Moses in the person of the people Pro parte electorum In respect of the elect among them I will cause all my good to goe before thee so he speaketh this pro parte reproborum in regard of the reprobate and wicked among them that they should not see Gods glorie and live because they were appointed to die So Rupertus maketh the force of this speech to consist in the word Then thou canst not see my face that is the wicked and unbeleevers among the people But this exposition cannot stand 1. Because the reason is generall No man shall see me and live no man whatsoeveâ— 2. The emphasis lyeth in the word face for his back-parts it is granted Moses to see 3. And the Lord meaneth here Moses person not in him the person of the people as the whole narration following sheweth how the Lord would put Moses in a cleft of a rocke and cover him with his hand while he passed by c. 4. Another exposition is this Qui ex opposito Deum aspicit non vivet He which doth see Gods face as opposite and comming against him shall not live Discat homo Deum sequi Let a man seeke to follow God c. not as it were to meet God in the face or to oppose himselfe against him for vice is opposite to vertue So also Gregor Nyssen 5. Augustine thus interpreteth No man can see God and live Nemo potest eum in hac vita videre vivens sicuti est No man can see him while he liveth in this life as he is So also Lyranus Vatab. Iun. annot But thâ—n this should onely be a repetition of the same thing Thou canst not see my face for no man living can see my face It better containeth
give eare unto us for the prayer of the righteous availeth much if it be fervent Iam. 5.16 4. Observ. Spirituall things first to be begged in our prayers Vers. 18. SHew me thy glorie Ferus here giveth this note Moses ut plurimum spiritualia petit Moses doth for the most part aske spirituall things Which teacheth us that in all our requests wee should principally beg those things at the hands of God which concerne our soules as our blessed Saviour saith First seeke the Kingdome of God and his righteousnesse and all these things shall bee ministred unto you 5. Observ. Against the feare of death Vers. 20. NO man shall see me and live Then after death and this life ended wee shall see God Borrhaius hereupon well noteth Quam preciosa res sit mors animalis hominis c. What a precious thing the death of the bodie is which bringeth us to see God as S. Paul saith I desire to be dissolved and to be with Christ Philip. 1.23 Death then of a faithfull man is not to be feared CHAP. XXXIV 1. The Method and Argument IN this Chapter is set forth the reconciliation it selfe of the Lord with his people consisting of three parts 1. The signes of this reconciliation going before to vers 8. 2. The substance of the reconciliation it selfe to vers 29. 3. The signes which followed after Moses was come downe 1. There are two signes of this reconciliation The first is externall and visible the preparing of the two tables of stone 1. Commanded to be made by the Lord vers 1. 2. With the manner of Moses comming up and the reverent behaviour of the people in the meane time vers 3. 3. And Moses obedience vers 4. The second is spirituall in the proclayming of the Lords name either shewing his substance Iehovah or his properties mercie toward the righteous or vengeance toward the wicked to vers 7. with the effect Moses humbling of himselfe vers 8. 2. The reconciliation consisteth of Moses humble suite to the Lord vers 9. and the Lords gracious answer wherein the Lord sheweth what he will doe for his people v. 10 11. then what he requireth of them where are propounded first morall lawes concerning the avoiding of idolatrie which are 〈◊〉 in number to vers 17. then ceremoniall which are three 1. Of their anniversarie and weekly feasts namely the Sabbath vers 18 21 22 23. 2. Of their first fruits of their cattell vers 19 20. and of their increase vers 29. 3. Of the manner of their sacrifices not to be offered with leaven vers 26. 3. The signes following are two first the bringing of the second tables with their writing by the Lord and Moses preparation thereunto by his fortie dayes fast vers 28 29. The second is the shining of Moses face where is described 1. The manner thereof vers 29. 2. The effects the astonishment of the people vers 30. 3. The remedie which Moses used which was double the inviting and calling of the people to come unto him vers 31 32. and the covering of his face vers 33. when he put it off when he went in to speake with God vers 34. and when hee put it on when he came out unto the people vers 35. 2. The divers readings Vers. 6. Iehovah Iehovah strong I. Iehovah Iehovah God B.G. cum caeter It seemeth rather to be an appellative than a proper name of the Lord here because of the distinction Rebia over Iehovah which separateth it from the sentence following Vers. 7. Not making the wicked innocent B.G.V.I.S. better than leaving one innocent B. or with whom none is by himselfe innocent L. See the reason hereof quest 11. Vers. 10. Behold I will make a covenant before all the people I will doe mervailes I. better than I will make a covenant before all the people and I will worke B.G. cum cater for there is a distinction at covenant and it is in the Hebrew I will worke not and I will worke Vers. 30. His face shined B.G.A.P. or streamed V. was glorious S. the brightnesse thereof was multiplied C. not cornuta erat was hornie L. See afterward the question upon this verse Vers. 33. When Moses had made an end of comming c. hee put a covering I. or So Moses made an end c. and had put a covering c. G. better than when he had made an end c. he put a covering V.L.S.C. it is better translated in the preterpluperfectense for then Moses had most need in respect of the peoples infirmitie to put a vaile upon his face when he spake unto them See the 51. qu. following 3. The questions discussed QUEST I. Wherefore the second tables were given Vers. 1. HEw thee two tables of stone 1. The Lord commandeth two tables of stone to bee prepared that it might bee a signe of his perfect reconciliation with the people in these respects 1. Because by this appeared that the Lord purposed not to destroy them for then he would not have given them a law and this was a signe that God would goe before them and be their guide still because he was their spirituall guide in giving them direction by his law Tostat. qu. 1. 2. And seeing the Arke was appointed to receive and keepe the tables of stone it shewed that the Lord purposed that whatsoever he had before prescribed concerning the making of the Tabernacle should stand Cajetan 3. And that he willeth the like tables in all respects to be made he thereby signifieth that he would have all things to returne to their former state Simler 2. But though God returned in grace unto them yet in that he prepareth not these tables as he did the first but willeth Moses to provide them he would have aliquod pâ—â—na vestigium rostare therein some marks of their punishment to remaine Ac si sanato vulnere manerâ—t â—â—catrix as though the scar remained after the healing of the wound Calvin 3. But the people are not sprinkled againe with bloud as they were at the first as neither now they which fall after Baptisme are baptised againe but it sufficed onely those things to be restored by repentance which were decayed by their transgression Ferus QUEST II. Why the Lord saith to Moses Hew thee HEw thee 1. R. Salomon doth gather hereupon because Moses is bid to hew unto himselfe c. that the Lord shewed a quarrie of Saphir stone whereout Moses hewed the tables and so he is willed to hew unto himselfe two tables of stone that is to his commoditie for Moses he saith became very rich by the fragments that were left in hewing of the tables But seeing no such thing is mentioned in Scripture nor yet by Iosephus who was more ancient than R. Salomon it is rather to be thought to be one of his fables Lyran. and beside they lay an unjust and untrue imputation upon Moses as though he intended and respected his owne profit whereas
the worthinesse of their fathers how then is it a mercie Hereunto it may be thus answered 1. There is no mans righteousnesse which is sufficient for himselfe much lesse is it of such force as to extend to so many generations that God for the fathers righteousnesse should forgive all the sinnes of their posterity they were not Abrahams merits but Gods gracious promise made to Abraham which procured such favour and mercie to his posterity 2. Only the merits of Christ are of such infinite vertue partly in regard of the perfection of his obedience wherein was no defect and partly for the worthinesse of his person being both God and man that the force thereof indureth to all generations But in Christs death there is both merit and mercie to bee considered in that Christs death satisfieth fully for the sinnes of the world it is a worke of merit not of mercy in respect of the Redeemer for the death of Christ being given for our sinnes is aliquid aequâ—valens of like value fully answerable to Gods justice therefore forgivenesse of our sinnes is merited by Christ not purchased of favour But in respect of us it is of mercie both in that God gave his Sonne to dye for us it shewed his mercy and love toward us 1 Ioh. 4.9 And in that Christ would vouchsafe to dye for us being sinners was his great mercie and love Rom. 5.8 And thirdly that he applieth the merit of his death to us and maketh his righteousnesse ours for where no workes are but faith the wages is not counted by debt but of favour as the Apostle sheweth by the contrary That to him that worketh the wages is not counted of favour but by debt Rom. 4.4 Tostat. qu. 7. QUEST XVII After what manner God sheweth mercie to thousands and visiteth iniquitie to the third and fourth generation VPon occasion of these words vers 7. of Gods reserving mercie unto thousands and visiting iniquitie to the third and fourth generation Tostatus inferreth certaine propositions and conclusions which may serve further for the explanation of this verse 1. The promise of shewing mercie to a thousand generations is most certaine and alwayes performed but the other visitation to punish God alwayes executeth not because he is more inclined to mercie than justice 2. The children which suffer for their fathers sinnes may beare the iniquity of many of their predecessors at once as Tostatus reckoneth fifteene persons in foure generations for whose sinnes the childe may suffer as on his fathers side there are his father his grandfather grandmother great grandfather and great grandmother and his belser and beldame these make seven and there are as many on his mothers side all these make 14. persons of his predecessors and ancestors within foure generations and himselfe maketh the fifteenth so likewise the childe may fare well for many of his good predecessours sake but they are not limited to the generations as the other and so cannot be numbred 3. According to the greatnesse of the righteousnesse or iniquity of the fathers so is mercie or judgement extended more or lesse unto their seed mercy may be shewed to a thousand that is many generations and sometime it may be restrained to fewer as the Lord promiseth Iehu that his seed shall sit upon the throne of Israel but unto the fourth generation 2 King 10.30 And so the punishment never exceedeth the fourth generation but it may fall out that it doth not reach so farre according to the quantity of the sinnes of the fathers which the children imitate 4. It is often seene that the children may both be afflicted for the sinnes of their fathers in one respect and in another receive mercie as Rehoboam for Davids sake held the Kingdome of Judah but for the sinne of Salomon and his owne he lost the Kingdome of Israel 5. The more vertuous predecessors one hath the greater mercie shall he receive as the blessing of Abraham Isaack and Iacob were more availeable than if there had beene but one of them and therefore Iacob saith to Ioseph The blessings of thy father shall be stronger than the blessings of mine Elders Gen. 49.26 for he had his fathers blessing and all the rest concurring therewith 6. The more evill predecessors one hath the greater punishment he receiveth his owne sinne also being added to theirs as Salomon for his owne sinne deserved to be deprived of the Kingdome but for his fathers sake he injoyed it still yet he had trouble in his old age But Rehoboam because of Salomons sinne and his owne had a greater punishment the losse of the Kingdome of Israel Tostat. qua st 10. QUEST XVIII Why Moses made haste Vers. 8. THen Moses made haste 1. Some Hebrewes thinke that Moses made this haste when he heard the Lord pronouncing that he would visit the iniquity of the fathers to the third and fourth generation lest the Lord should have proceeded to more generations to the fifth or sixth But it is not like that Moses would interrupt the Lords speech or that he would presume to alter the Lords purpose Tostat. Simler 2. Cajetane thinketh that Moses à principio visionis prostraverit se from the beginning of the vision did prostrate himselfe But how could he have then seene this goodly vision of the Lords back-parts if he had beene prostrate upon the ground 3. But these were the reasons why Moses made haste being stricken with admiration at the presence of God which both by this glorious apparition and by the Lords voice was manifested hee humbleth himselfe Marbach Being thereto invited also suavissima concione by the most sweet and comfortable speech of the Lord Osiander And he maketh haste ne omitâ—eret opportunitatem lest he should omit the opportunity offered for the Lord passed by as in haste Ferus Like as subjects use to offer their petitions to the Prince at his first comming into any City quia suam praesen iam omnibus jucundam esse volunt because they will have their presence comfortable to all Simler QUEST XIX Of Moses prayer the manner thereof and of Moses perswasions vsed in his prayer Vers. 9. I Pray thee c. that the Lord would now goe with us 1. Moses had obtained this before but he still renueth the same petition Timebat enim ne superveniret impedimentum propter pâ—ccitum populi He was afraid lest through the peoples sinne some impediment might fall out to hinder the Lords purpose Lyran. Tostat. And he doth renue his prayer as our blessed Saviour prayed thrice in the garden quia non sufficit semel orasse because it is not sufficient to pray once Lippom. De novo orat c. Hee prayeth also anew because he desired new promiseâ— Ferus 2. Moses useth three perswasions in this his prayer one is from the condition of the people because they were of a stiffe necke and had so much the more need of Gods presence to mollifie them â—un And so Moses returneth that upon God