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
the masculine gender better than to read it in the feminine as V.L.I.A.P. Vers. 18. When they came to Revel their father I.G.B. cum câ—ter not Iethro L. Vers. 22. Here the Latin and Septuagint make mention also of the birth of Eliezar transposing it out of the 18. chapter but no such thing is in the Hebrew Vers. 23. It came to passe after these dayes I.A.P.S. rather than in processe of time G. B. or when many dayes were past V. the sense rather than the words dayes are here put for yeeres for this was 4â— yeeres after 3. The explanation of doubtfull questions QUEST I. Of Amram Moses father Vers. 1. THere went a man of Levi. This was Amram the sonne of Kabath the sonne of Levi who lived 137. yeeres Exod. 6.20 he was borne as Eusebius writeth 14. yeeres before the death of Ioseph that is 55. yeeres after Iacobs going downe into Egypt who saith he begat Moses at 77. yeeres Perer. Moses yet maketh no mention of his parents names lest he should seeme to boast of his parentage Ferus 2. The Hebrewes have here a notable fiction that this Amram lived unto the time of Ahiah the Silomite who was in the dayes of Ieroboam that is above sixe hundred yeeres for from the going of Israel out of Egypt unto the fourth yeere of Salomons reigne are numbred 480. yeeres adde unto these 77. yeeres of Amrams age when he begat Moses and 80. yeeres the age of Moses at the returne of Israel out of Egypt so we shall have above 600. yeeres whereas the Scripture testifieth that he lived but 137. yeeres 3. But that which Ioseph reporteth is more probable that this Amram being a faithfull man praying unto God for his people had a vision wherein hee was bid to bee of good comfort and that the childe whose life was sought should be his sonne who should be preserved from the Egyptians rage and be the deliverer of his people Ioseph lib. 2. cap. 5. but seeing the Scripture maketh no mention we may bee at choise whether we will receive this report QUEST II. Why it is said he went and tooke NOw it is said he went not that he went to any other place or Citie for seeing his wife was of the same familie of Levi it is like that they did dwell not farre asunder 2. Neither it is understood of his returning to his wife from whom he had sequestred himselfe to fasting and prayer as Ferus for this text evidently speaketh of his first taking of her to wife 3. But hereby is shewed his advised purpose and determination in taking her to wife as also some notable thing insinuated to follow as it is said that Ruben went and lay with his fathers concubine Gen. 25. Simler QUEST III. Of Iacobed Moses mother whether she were aunt or cosine German to Amram TOoke to wife a daughter of Levi. This was Iocebed 1. who was not the daughter of Amrams uncle and so cosine Germane to Amram as the Septuagint Latine translator to whom consent Lyranus Montanus Cajetanus Pererius with others for though it should be granted that the Hebrew word Ded doth sometime signifie the uncles sonne as Ierem. 32.12 Hananâ—el is called Ieremies uncles sonne yet the word sonne may be supplied as before vers 8. he is called his uncles sonne yet seeing the Scripture evidently saith that Iocebed was borne unto Levi Numb 26.59 it is without controversie that she was Levies daughter sister to Rahath and Aunt to Amram being his fathers sister Exod. 6.20 2. But yet the Hebrewes are farre wide that would have Iocebed borne about that time that Iacob went downe into Egypt for then she should have beene about 135. yeeres old elder by fortie yeers than Sarah when she bore Isaack and if Moses birth had beene so miraculous the Scripture would not have concealed it ex Perer. And the Scripture beside saith that she was borne to Levi in Egypt Numb 26.59 3. Neither was this Iocebed another of the same name beside the daughter of Levi as some thinke seeing that the she is said to be Dodatho his that is Amrams Aunt Exod. 6.20 4. The sounder opinion then is that this Iocebed was the naturall and proper daughter of Levi the Scripture so testifying and of this opinion are Vatablus Paguine Iunius with the Chalde Paraphrast and Simlerus with others Thostatus conjectureth well that Levi might beget her at 100. as Abraham begat sonnes at 137. after Sarahs death who lived 127 yeeres being 10. yeeres younger than Abraham and Iacob at 107. begat Benjamin And it is not unlike but that Iocebed at 68. yeeres might beare Moses in those dayes women might continue child-bearing till then but howsoever this computation be counted yet it is evident out of Scripture that Iocebed was daughter unto Levi and therefore all disputation to the contrarie is needlesse QUEST IV. Why such mariages were tolerated in those daies NOw though afterward such mariages betweene the aunt and the nephew were forbidden by the Law directly Levit. 19. yet it need not seeme strange that then such mariages were in use even among the faithfull 1. Because as Thostatus saith it was ante legem datam before any law was published As Abraham married his brothers daughter Iacob married two sisters 2. The paucitie and the fewnesse of the righteous seed is to be considered and the confusion of those times which made those things to be tolerated Iun. Annot. 3. They had a desire to match in their owne kindred as Abraham Isaack and Iacob did and by that meanes they joyned often mariage in neere degrees of kindred Simlerus QUEST V. When Amram married his wife COncerning the time when this man of Levi tooke his wife though it be mentioned after Pharaohs cruell edict yet it was done before 1. Because Aaron was elder than Moses by three yeeres Exod. 7.7 and Miriam Moses sister elder than he for she was of discretion to watch what should become of the babe the conservation therefore of these children sheweth that this cruell edict tooke no place then 2. Neither is it likely that it continued long after Moses birth for if all the male children had beene cut off after Moses birth who was 80. yeeres old when Israel came out of Egypt then there should have beene few or none under that age that went out and although by some secret provision some infants might have escaped yet considering the strait and diligent search which was made as the Hebrewes thinke every three moneths such a multitude in all likelihood could not have beene preserved as went out of Egypt therefore it is not unprobable that Iosephus writeth that an Egyptian Priest told Pharaoh that about that time a child should be borne which should bee the ruine of him and his Kingdome and that Pharaoh thereupon did especially at that time give charge to destroy the infants to meet with that childe as Herod did cause to bee put to death all the children
2. But it seemeth that this great defection was about the seventh age for then Lamech of Cains race tooke unto him two wives then the Lord tooke away righteous Henoch that he should bee no longer grieved with the wickednesse of the world Then the world being replenished with great multitudes which are ring-leaders for the most part unto evill as it is written thou shalt not follow a multitude to doe evill began to give themselves to all kinde of wickednesse adultery oppression cruelty multiplicity of wives unlawfull lust even against nature and to fill the earth with uncleannesse 3. And although in this seventh age iniquity was come to the full height yet it began long before even in the dayes of Enos when as the righteous abhorring the great wickednesse of Cains posterity separated themselves and a part beganne to call upon the name of God Iun. 4. The Hebrewes note that at the beginning women were not so multiplied as afterward by whom they tooke occasion to sinne and therefore it is added there were daughters borne unto them c. vers 1. but this clause sheweth not a more speciall multiplying of that kinde but that when the world began to be stored both with men and women then they gave themselves to wantonnesse QVEST. III. The particular sin of the old world here noted Vers. 2. THey saw the daughters of men that they were faire c. 1. Their fault was not onely in that they of the righteous seed matched into Cains stocke Calvin 2. Or that they respected onely beauty having no regard to their piety and vertue Marlorat 3. But they by violence tooke unto them not to their wives but women for so with Mercerus and Iunius I rather interpret the word nashim from all men whatsoever as Iunius readeth both virgines and wives they cared not whom 4. Some Hebrewes here understand also the filthy sinne of buggery that they tooke all they liked even from among the bruit beasts but Moses speaketh onely of the daughters of men QVEST. IV. Who were these sonnes of God Vers. THen the sonnes of God 1. These sonnes of God were not the Angels which some have supposed to have fallen for their intemperancie with women and to have begotten of them spirits as Ioseph Philo Iustine Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullian conjectured who so expoundeth that place of S. Paul that women should be covered because of the Angels lest they should bee tempted with their beauty This opinion is easily confuted 1. Because the world was punished and God was angry not for the sinne of Angels but of men vers 3. My spirit shall not alway strive with man 2. Chrysostome urgeth that place Matth. 22. in the resurrection they neither marry nor are married but are the Angels Ergo Angels are not subject to carnall affections as men are 3. If Angels fell first for the love of women then they sinned not for 1000. yeares after the creation whereas the Scripture sheweth that the Devill was a murtherer and a liar from the beginning Ioh. 8.44 QVEST. V. Devils not corporall nor mortall IT is also absurd and improbable that these were devils which did company with women and of them came Gyants as thinketh Franciscus Georgius who affirmeth devils to have bodies and a generative faculty and to company with women Of the like opinion is Psellus that the devils have bodies and they are nourished by sucking and attraction as spunges and that they are males and females at their pleasures some are of a fiery some ayrie some a watery some of a terrene nature But these are fables and fictions fit rather to be laughed at than worthy to be confuted 1. The Devils are of a spirituall not corporall nature it appeareth by that story Luk. 8. where we reade that in one man there was a legion that is six thousand Devils how could so many spirits if they were corporall be included in one body 2. If they were of a fierie watery or earthly so of an elementall nature they should bee subject to corruption mutability and mortality and so some have imagined also as Plutarch writeth of the death of the great Pan a famous Devill among the Pagans and Cardane reporteth that he heard his Father say who was above thirty years familiar with the Devils that he learned of them that they doe die decay revive againe but this fancie is contrary to the Scripture which testifieth that the Devill hath beene a murtherer from the beginning of the world Ioh. 8 44 Ergo he hath continued from the beginning of the world and how should the soule of man be immortall if these spirits which are of a more subtill nature were mortall 3. Though it were granted that Devills have a kinde of airie bodies yet could they not ingender for the power of generation agreeth onely to perfect bodies which have their materiall and distinct parts and receive nourishment 4. And they being as they say male and female should ingender among themselves in their owne kinde 5. Or if they did company with women they could not beget men but multiply their owne kinde or at the least a mixt kinde as the mule is engendred of an horse and an asse and so some likewise have conceited that the Faunes and Satyres were the off-spring of such generation As Hierom in the life of Antonie reporteth that such an one appeared unto him in the wildernesse with goats feet long crooked nailes and hornes upon his head and spake unto Antonie but either this may be held to be a fable foisted under Hieromes name or if there were any such thing it might be some monster of the wildernesse which the Devill used as his trunke to speake out of QVEST. VI. Spirits doe not generate BUt much more absurd is the opinion of Paulus Burgensis that thinketh these which companied with the daughters of men were spirits called Incubi which doe assume bodies of the aire for a time representing the shape sometime of men sometime of women in the act of generation and then they are called Succubi and thus saith he were the Giants engendred and Tostatus approoving this conceit of Incubi and Succubi seemeth to give credit to that report of Merlin that he was begotten by a spirit In these assertions and uncertaine conjectures of men some what is true some part false 1. True it is that the Devill may appeare in the shape of man or woman and dissemble and counterfeit the act proper to both not that the spirits have any delight in such carnall acts having no true but assumed and counterfeit bodies but they doe it more strongly to delude men and women and entice them to that abominable sinne of the flesh which they know hath corrupted the hearts of many excellent men as of David Salomon 2. Though spirits can take upon them the shape of bodies yet they are but so to the eye they are not true bodies being easily
high Priest as the Hebrewes imagine for he died ten yeares before Iacob was borne who was now above 100. yeare old and therefore Melchisedeck could not have a daughter so young to beare children neither was this punishment arbitrary in Iudah and inflicted without law according to his pleasure Burgens for Iudah had no such authority there nor yet as Lyranus and Tostatus was she worthy of the fire because she had committed not simple fornication but adultery because she was by law obliged to the third brother and so in a manner espoused for it was not adultery for the widow of the brother to marrie with some other than the surviving brother else Naomi would never have advised her daughters in law to get them other husbands in their owne Countrey Ruth 1.9 But I rather thinke that Thamars adultery was in this that she had played the whore whereas Iudah had betrothed and espoused her to Selah and that Iudah who never was minded to give Selah to Thamar fearing lest he might die also as is evident vers 11. was very forward to take this occasion to be rid of Thamar that Selah might not marrie her 3. But herein appeareth Iudahs too much rigour and injustice that before the matter was examined gave sentence and was partiall the truth being knowne in his owne cause and further it was a savage part to put to death a woman great with childe which is contrary both to divine and humane lawes for it is written Deut. 24.16 The fathers shall not bee put to death for the children nor the children for the fathers but if Thamar had now died the infant had died with her The Romans had a law that the execution of a woman with childe should be deferred till she had brought forth the same also was practised among the Athenians Aeltan lib. 5. And therefore Claudius the Emperour is noted for his cruelty that spared not to put to death women with childe Perer. ex Dion lib. 57. QUEST XI Wherefore the Midwife useth a red threed and what colour it was of Vers. 28. THe midwife bound a red threed c. 1. It is so rather to be read than with Oleaster a twine or double threed the word sani here used commeth indeed of sanah that signifieth to double which is rather to be referred to the double die and colour than the double matter Iun. Tostatus also is much deceived here that taketh it not for a red but a blacke colour twice died ex Perer. 3. The Midwife tied this red threed as a marke of the first-borne because he first put forth his hand and the purple colour very well agreeth to the birth-right or eldership Muscul. QUEST XII Whence Pharez was so called and whereof he is a type Vers. 29. HOw hast thou broken thy breach upon thee 1. Hierome is deceived that of this word pharatz that signifieth to breake or divide thinketh the Pharises to have taken denomination whereas they had their name rather of Pharas which signifieth to disperse or separate because they were separate from other in profession of life and their apparell Mercer 2. This story hath bin diversly allegorized by the fathers some by Pharez understand the beleeving Gentiles by Zarah the Israelites and by the red threed their bloudy circumcision sacrifices sic Iren. Cyril Some contrariwise will have Phares to signifie the Jewes Zarah the beleeving Gentiles Chrysost. 3. But this Phares is more fitly a type and figure of Christ who hath broken downe the partition wall and hath broken the power of hell and death Mercer And by this strange and extraordinary birth the Lord would have Iudah and Thamar admonished of the sin which they had committed and to be humbled thereby though he in his mercie had forgiven it Calvin 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. The difference betweene the apparelling of widowes and wives Vers. 14. SHe put her widowes garment off c. It seemeth that it was the use in those dayes for widowes to be knowne from wives by their mourning and grave apparell in which case more is permitted to women that are married whom the Apostle alloweth to adorne themselves with comely and sober apparell without pride or excesse 1 Timoth. 2.9 to please and content their husbands but widowes having no husbands to whose liking they should apparell themselves ought not to decke themselves to please other mens eyes Luther 2. Doct. Friendship ought alwayes to be joyned with pietie Vers. 20. IVdah sent a kid by the hand of his friend This Hâ—rah Iudahs friend did performe an evill office in being as it were a broker for Iudah who should neither have requested any dishonest or uncomely thing of his friend nor the other yeelded unto it love truth and piety ought not to be separated as Saint Iohn saith Whom I love in the truth Epist. 3.1 Muscul. 3. Doct. Adultery in former times punished by death Vers. 24. LEt her bee burnt We see that even among the Canaanites adultery was judged worthy of death for Iudah inventeth no new kinde of punishment but speaketh according to the law and custome of that Countrey So the Lord himselfe said to Abimelech that had taken Sarai unto him Behold thou art but a dead man for this c. Gen. 20.3 Now although this law as peculiar to that Countrey bindeth not now neither in respect of the kinde of death for by Moses law onely the Priests daughter if she played the whore was burned Levit. 21.9 the rest were stoned nor yet in the inequality of the law for the women offending were burned the men escaped as appeareth in Iudah Calvin whereas both adulterers and adulteresses are alike guilty and though then there was greater cause of keeping their seed uncorrupt for preserving of their lives and the distinction of families in which respect it may be thought somewhat of the former rigour and severity may be abated yet this example condemneth the security and connivence of magistrates in these dayes in the punishing of this sinne when as faults of lesse nature are more severely censured than adultery And whereas the president of our Saviour is urged by some for the mitigation of the punishment of adultery because he would not condemne the woman taken in adulterie it doth not serve their turne for this mercie Christ shewed not to cleare or exempt the adulteresse leaving her to the magistrate but partly to shew that he came not to be a judge in such causes as neither in other like businesses as dividing of the inheritance Luk. 12.14 partly by this example he would teach what is to be required in the person of an accuser not to bee guilty of that crime whereof he accuseth others 5. Places of Confutation 1. Confut. That it is not lawfull upon any occasion to marrie the brothers wife Vers. 8. GOe into thy brothers wife Because in this place as also Deut. 25.5 it is permitted to naturall brethren to marry the wives of their brother deceased
infirmity in Ioseph with Calvin 2. Neither with some excuse this fact and say it was iocosum mendacium a pleasant lie or in sport 3. Much lesse was it a purposed lie as though Ioseph should sweare to it by the life of Pharaoh for by that oath hee affirmeth not that they are spies but bindeth them to bring their brother Benjamin 4. Wherefore I thinke rather that Ioseph used here no lie at all 1. But not in that sense as R Salomon taketh it as though Ioseph had called them spies one way because they searched the next way into the land of Egypt out of Canaan and that they understood Ioseph another way for Ioseph expoundeth himselfe that he meaneth spies properly that they came to see the weakenesse of the land 2. Neither doth he speake in the opinion of others that they are counted spies but this thrice urging of that word sheweth that he spake as from his owne judgement 3. Neither doth he speake figuratively turning his finger to himselfe and that they spied out his weakenesse and abused his youth and simplicity when they sold him to the Ismaelites as Rupertus 4. But I rather thinke that Ioseph thrice spake not assertive by way of assertion or affirmation but probative and tentative by way of question to trie them which was no lie nor dissimulation at all as neither was that in our Saviour that to make triall of his disciples humanity made shew as though he would have gone further Luke 24. QUEST VIII Whether Ioseph had before forgotten his dreames Vers. 9. ANd Ioseph remembred the dreames which he dreamed of them 1. Not that Ioseph had either made small account before of his dreames seeing the contrary event in his imprisonment and other afflictions 2. Or that prosperity had made him to forget his former visions 3. But now when he saw his dreames to take effect he doth more lively remember them better understandeth them than before as it is said of the disciples that they understood not those things which were said of Christ at the first but after hee was glorified then they remembred that they were written of him Iohn 12.16 Calvin QUEST IX Whether Ioseph sweareth by the life of Pharaoh or therein did wel Vers. 15. BY the life of Pharaoh you shall not goe hence First some excuse Ioseph here admitting this to be an oath 1. Because in effect he did sweare by God who was the author of Pharaohs health and life 2. Some againe doe extenuate his oath that he sware in effect by nothing as Socrates used to sweare by a goose or dog Zeno by the Caper tree to shew the vanity of the heathen that used to sweare by their Gods but it is not like that Iosâ—ph set so light by the health of Pharaoh as Augustine well noteth an bono fideli servo vilis fuerit salus Pharaonis 3. Some would excuse it because Iâ—sâ—ph was not in good earnest but did all this in a friendly kind of dissimulation but as it is not lawfull to lie in jest so much lesse to sweare in jest Secondly they that denie this to have beene an oath 1. Some say it was but a vehement kind of obtestation as Moses calleth heaven and earth to witnesse Deut. 30.19 and as a man may contest by his faith by his head and such like Calvin But yet this will not helpe for our Saviour condemneth whatsoever in our speech is used beside yea or nay Math. 5. that out of Deut. is a patheticall compellation of the creatures to be witnesse against the people of their ingratitude and disobedience which is much unlike this case here 2. Some hold this speech of Ioseph to be an execration as if he should say he wished Pharaoh no otherwise to live than he would doe as he said Thom. Aquinas But Ioseph was more reverent and respective of Pharaohs health and life 3. Iunius saith it is a constant kinde of affirmation used both among Christians and others and will have it like to those asseverations 1 Sam. 2 2â— O my Lord Anna saith to Eli as thy soule liveth and Abner saith to Saul as thy soule liveth O king I cannot tell 1 Sam. 17.55 and as the use was to sweare by the soule of the Emperour as he alleageth out of Vlpianus But herein I cannot consent unto that learned man for in those phrases they alwayes either protested by themselves in the first person as 2 King 6.31 God do so to mee and more also or by those to whom they speake in the second person as in the examples given in instance and therefore the case is not all one with this And concerning that use to protest by the Emperous soule though it continued under Christian Emperors yet it is certaine that it was taken up before in the time of Idolatry when they ascribed divine honours to their Emperors 4. Wherefore I rather incline to thinke that this kind of speech to say by the life of Pharaoh was used commonly in Egypt as an oath partly of flattery partly of superstition in ascribing too much to their Kings which use they seeme to have derived from the Hebrewes that as they used to sweare vivit dominus the Lord liveth so they Pharaoh liveth and the Hebrewes write that to this day it is a law among the Egyptians that he which falsly sweareth by the kings head in a pecuniarie matter shall be put to death Perer. yea and the imperiall law is that he which did commit perjury swearing per genium Imperatoris by the soule or spirit of the Emperour should be beaten with clubs and it should be written over his head 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sweare not rashly Iun. ex Vlpian But yet Ioseph in this place of purpose sweareth not but by the common use and custome spake as the rest did as it appeareth by his twice using of the same words together like as in our English tongue many suddenly will say Mary having no intent to sweare which notwithstanding at the first I thinke was taken up as an oath by the name of Marie And beside Ioseph doth conforme himselfe of purpose to the Egyptian phrase that his brethren should not suspect him to be an Hebrew which they might easily have done if he had said as the Lord liveth Therefore although Ioseph may be somewhat herein excused yet can he not be cleared or justified but that living among a superstitious people he was somewhat polluted also by their manners Mercer Genevens annot in the great Bible and so Iosephs brethren did take it that he charged them with an oath QUEST X. Whether Ioseph did forsweare himselfe Vers. 16. BY the life of Pharaoh yee are but spies It might seeme that Ioseph here did forsweare himselfe because they were indeed no spies 1. It doth not satisfie to say he did not forsweare because there is no mention made directly of God for though we ought onely to sweare by the name of God yet he that sweareth faâ—sly
Genes â—5 Now Abraham and Ismael had not the same people to goe unto the faithfull cannot be said to be Ismaels people nor the prophane sort to be Abrahams But if the meaning of the phrase were no more than that they were gathered and joyned to the state of the dead the faithfull and prophane sort should all goe to one people wherefore this phrase betokeneth a speciall disposition of the soules of the faithfull after this life in being associated to the company of the just and a laying up of their bodies in assured hope of the resurrection Calvin Muscul. Luther The Apostle also sheweth what it is for the righteous to be gathered to their people Wee are come to the celestiall Ierusalem to the innumerable company of Angels to the congregation of the first borne c. to the spirits of just and perfect men Hebr. 12.22.13 To all these are we joyned by faith while we live and really when we are dead now quoad spem in hope then quoad rem in deed 6. Places of morall use 1. Mor. Fathers must rebuke and chastise their children Vers. 4. THou shalt not be excellent Fathers may learne by Iacobs example to chastise their children for their sinnes as here Ruben is censured for defiling his fathers bed for this cause Heli and his posterity were punished because hee did not reprove his sonnes according to the quality of their offence Perer. 2. Mor. Gods vengeance though it be deferred will certainly come FUrther in that Rubens punishment had beene a long time suspended and deferred almost 40. yeeres after he had committed this uncleane sinne yet at the last it commeth let no sinner flatter himselfe in his impunity for if the long suffering of God draw him not to repentance it shall but increase his punishment as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 2.4 5. 3. Mor. The short pleasures of sinne deprive men of many blessings AGaine as Ruben for a little short pleasure lost his birthright and dignity so many for the vaine and momentany pleasures of this life are deprived of many and great blessings like to Esau that for a messe of pottage did part with his birthright 4. Mor. Contumely against parents never goeth unpunished WE see also what an high offence before God it is to offer any wrong or contumely to our parents such was Cham toward Noah Absalon toward David and here Ruben that polluted his father Iacobs bed 5. Mor. Against unjust and immoderate revenge Vers. 7. CVrsed be their wrath The Lord condemneth all kinde of revenge that proceedeth of wrath especially such as here was committed by Simeon and Levi. 1. It was done by craft and subtility under pretence of friendship 2. Against men unawares suspecting nothing 3. When they were in griefe of body 4. With a pretext and shew of religion 5. The revenge farre exceeded in greatnesse the quality of the offence Such a kinde of revenge is unjust and cruell Wherefore in this case wee should follow the Wise-mans counsell Say not I will recompence evill but wait upon the Lord and he shall save thee Prov. 20.22 Perer. 6. Mor. Every mans portion in the earth assigned of God Vers. 13. AS Zabulun shall dwell by the sea side Hence we learne that the lot of men for their habitation and dwelling in the earth falleth not out unto them by chance but by Gods providence and appointment for as it is in the Psalme The earth is the Lords and the fulnesse thereof Psal. 24.1 therefore every one should be contented with his lot and portion as assigned unto him of God Perer. 7. Mor. The Church shall overcome at last Vers. 19. ANd an host of men shall overcome him but he shall overcome at the last c. So the Church of God though it shall indure much trouble and sorrow in the world yet it shall triumph and have the victory in the end as our Saviour saith to his Apostles In the world yee shall have trouble but be of good comfort I have overcome the world Iohn 16.33 8. Mor. The quiet and peaceable end of the righteous Vers. 33. HE plucked up his feet into the bed Before Iacob had raised up himselfe as well as he could not having his legs hanging out of the bed as Perer. that had beene no fit lying for a man ready to dye but he had stretched out himselfe before as well as he could for reverence unto the word of God which he delivered but now feeling the houre of his death to be instant hee doth gather up his legs after a seemely and quiet manner not strugling or striving against death as many doe but as though death â—ere in his power he doth meekely and gently yeeld himselfe unto it such a peaceable and quiet kinde of departure God often granteth to his children Muscul. Howbeit this is not alwayes so for sometime a wicked man may dye like a lambe still and quiet as the Psalme saith There are no bands in his death Psal. 73.4 and a righteous man may have a strong death by reason of the extremity of his sicknesse and the manner of the disease but yet inwardly he hath a peaceable and quiet soule and therefore Balaam had good reason to pray as he did Let me dye the death of the righteous and let my last end be like his Num. 23.10 CHAP. L. 1. The Method and Argument IN this Chapter is set forth 1. Iosephs piety toward his father Iacob in causing him to be embawmed vers 2 3. in his buriall 1. He procured leave of Pharaoh vers 4 5 6. 2. He did honourably accompany him vers 7 8 9. 3. They mourned for him by the way vers 10 11. 4. Then they buried him as he had commanded 2. His humanity toward his brethren with their message in their fathers name vers 14 15 16. their humility vers 18. Iosephs friendly answer vers 19 20 â—â— 3. Iosephs prosperity in seeing his childrens children v. 23. 4. His faithfull departure buriall and age v. 24 25. 2. The divers readings v. 2. he commanded those which had charge of funerals S. commanded the Physitians câ—t v. 4. spake to potentates of Pharaoh S. spake to Pharaohs house caet v. 8. only their kinred they left their sheepe and oxen c. S. their children or little ones caet v. 10. they came to Goren Atad G. to the corne-floore or field beset with thistles T. to the corne-floore of Athad cat of Achad H. athad signifieth a thistle v. 11. Abel Mizraim G. the mourning of the Egyptians cat v. 13. beside Mamre G. before Mamre B. over against Mamre caet against or before the face of Mamre cat v. 19. feare not can we resist Gods will H. for I am Gods S. for I feare God C. am not I under God G. am I God B. am I in the stead of God T.P. 3. The explanation of doubtfull questions and places QUEST I. Of the divers fashions of buriall Vers. 2. ANd Moses commanded his
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
Laudabile praise worthie si quis salva fide refugiat periâ—ulum instans If one not violating his faith doth shun the instant danger unlesse we will say that Christ when he escaped out of their hands that sought to stone him did it of feare Luke 4. But I rather preferre the 7. exposition before touched QUEST XXII Why Moses sufferings are called by the Apostle the rebukes of Christ. BUt seeing so oft mention hath beene made of that place to the Hebrewes it shall not be amisse briefly to shew the meaning of those other words of the Apostle vers 26. esteeming the rebuke of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt 1. We refuse here the exposition of Lyranus that he calleth the rebukes of Moses the rebukes of Christ because by faith foreseeing what Christ should suffer hee by Christs example was confirmed to endure the like for in this sense they are Moses rebukes rather than Christs 2. Neither are they called Christs rebukes because they were such as Christ commendeth Blessed are they that suffer persecution for righteousnesse sake Matt. 5. 3. or for that Christ was to come of that people and therefore their rebukes are counted the rebukes of Christ Cajetan 4. or because Moses was a figure of Christ and suffered the like rebukes because that as Moses left the Court and palace of Pharaoh to be partaker of the afflictions of his people so Christ descending from heaven tooke upon him our infirmities Oecumenius Theophylact. 5. But they are called Christs rebukes because he suffereth in his members and accounteth their afflictions as his owne in which sense the Apostle saith he fulfilled the rest of the afflictions of Christ in his flesh for his bodies sake which is the Church Col. 1.24 QUEST 23. Why Pharaoh sought to slay Moses Vers. 15. PHaraoh heard of this matter and sought to slay Moses The causes why Pharaoh sought Moses life Iosephus alleageth to be these three 1. Because the Egyptians envied his prosperous successe in the warres against the Ethiopians 2. They feared him as like to be one that aspired to great matters and might seeke some innovation and change in Egypt 3. The Egyptian Priests did prophesie of him that he was like to prove very dangerous to Egypt By these meanes the King was incensed against him But I rather approve that which Philo writeth that Pharaoh was not so much moved against Moses for the death of one Egyptian as for that by this he perceived that Moses was a friend and favourer of the Hebrewes whom he accounted his enemies and an enemie to the Egyptians his subjects and friends Philo lib. 1. de vita Mosis QUEST XXIV The causes why Moses lived in exile and banishment 40. yeares Vers. 15. THerefore Moses fled Zeiglerus thinketh that whereas at the fortieth yeere of Moses age there were 390. yeeres expired since the promise made to Abraham and that tenne yeeres onely remained of the affliction of the people which was to continue 400. yeeres in one place and other Genes 15.13 Moses thought to prevent the time there being but tenne yeeres to come and therefore God punished his presumption with fortie yeeres exile But this cannot stand with the Apostles testimonie of Moses that by faith he forsooke Egypt if it were a worke of faith how could it be a punishment for his presumption Therefore the causes of Moses flight and exile are better touched by Ferus 1. That the people should not depend upon man but trust in God for their deliverance 2. That Moses might be weaned altogether from the pleasures of Egypt and delicate life in Pharaohs Court 3. That he might be taught that the deliverance of Israel should not be by sword or strength but by the spirit of God 4. To punish the peoples ingratitude for not more thankfully accepting of this benefit that God had stirred them up a deliverer for not onely this Hebrew whom Moses rebuked rejected his calling but generally all the people made light of it as S. Stephen sheweth Act. 7.25 QUEST XXV Of Midian what countrie it was and where situate Vers. 15. ANd dwelt in the land of Midian 1. This was the chiefe Citie of the Midianites so called of Midian one of the sonnes of Keturah by Abraham it was situate in Arabia upon the red sea as Iosephus 2. Hierome saith there were two Cities of this name one on the South part of Arabia by the red sea the other by Arnon and Arcopolis the ruines whereof were to be seene in his time 3. The whole Countrie was called Arabia where the Midianites Amalekites Israelites dwelt together Philo. And these Arabians were called Petrei of their metropolis or chiefe Citie Petra Borrh. 4. This Midian was not farre from Mount Sinai for thereabout did Moses keepe his father in lawes sheepe Exod. 3. and thither came Iethro with Moses wife and children and S. Paul placeth Sinai in Arabia Gal. 4. 5. The women of this Countrie joyning with the Moabites inticed the Israelites to commit fornication Numb 25. These Midianites oppressed Israel seven yeeres of whom Gideon slew 135000. Iud. 8. QUEST XXVI Rehuel Iethro Hobab whether the same Vers. 18. ANd when they came to Rehuel their father c. This Rehuel was not the same with Iethro as the Septuagint and Latine translator here read Iethro and as Hierome thinketh they were two names of the same man 2. Neither had he foure names Iethro Rehuel Hobab Keni as Thostatus Lyranus for Hobab was the sonne of Rehuel Numb 10.29 and hee was called Keni of his nation and countrey because he was a Kenite Numb 24.21 Iunius 3 Pererius also is deceived thinking that Hobab was not Moses father in law but his wives brother and his father in lawes sonne because saith he Moses father in law departed from them at Mount Sinai Exod. 18. but Hobab staied with them still and was their guide in the wildernesse Numb 10.31 But Pererius herein erreth also for these two stories of Iethro and Hobab Exod. 18. and Numb 10. must be joyned together they were both one man and hee tooke his leave of Moses as it is shewed Exod. 18. but he returned againe unto them before they departed from Sinai to be their guide as Moses requested Numb 10. and it is like he brought his kindred and family with him because the Kenites are read afterward to have cohabited with Israel Iudg. 1.16.4 Wherefore Rehuel was grandfather unto Moses wife called also their father after the manner of the Hebrewes Iethro and Hobab are the same for they are both said to be the father in law of Moses Exodus 18. and Num. 10.29 and Hobab and Iethro was the sonne of Rehuel ibid. Iun. QUEST XXVII Whether Rehuel were Prince and Priest of Midian Vers. 16. ANd the Prince of Midian c. The Hebrew word is Cohen which signifieth both Prince and Priest and one that is preferred or exalted in any office or authoritie as Davids sonnes are called
said It was necessary that Pharaoh should not hearken unto Moses because the Lord had foretold so much who cannot be deceived But Pharaoh was not forced or compelled thereunto there is then an absolute or violent necessity which forceth and compelleth there is a conditionall and hypotheticall necessity when a thing is said to be necessary another thing presupposed so Pharaohs disobedience and obstinacy was the second way necessary upon the presupposall of Gods prescience but the first way it was not necessary the first necessity is coactive but the second is voluntary the other neither justifieth a man if he doe well being forced noâ— condemneth him if hee doe evill but the second hath place in both both the righteous have praise whose obedience in respect of Gods ordinance is necessary and infallible and the wicked are justly condemned who sinne willingly though Gods prescience considered in some sort also necessarily Borrh. 5. Places of controversie and confutation 1. Confut. Against those that impugne the deity of Christ. Vers. 1. I Have made thee Pharaohs God Hence certaine Heretikes as Nestorius that did separate the humanity of Christ from his divine nature would confirme their heresie that the man Christ was God no otherwise than Moses is called God as Eliphandus a Bishop of Spaine who held that the man Christ was onely the Sonne of God by adoption Contra. 1. The name of God in Scripture is given unto men as Psal. 80. I said ye are Gods but that title is given them in respect of their office but it agreeth unto Christ by nature for here the Lord is said to have appointed Moses God not to have begotten him as Hilarie well noteth neither is he simply called God as Christ is but with an addition Pharaohs God 2. Not onely the name of Elohim God is given unto Christ but Iehovah which is a name not communicable unto any creature but peculiar unto God and if Christ were no otherwise God than Moses was it were Idolatry to worship him Simler 3. Hilarie also sheweth that Christ is said to be five wayes very God which agree unto none but him 1. in name he is simply called God as Iohn 1. The word was God and 1. Epist. Ioh. 5.20 speaking of Jesus Christ he saith the same is very God 2. By his nativity and generation and so he is called the Sonne of God 3. By nature hee is one with God I and the father are one 4. In power all power is given me in heaven and in earth Matth. 20. 5. By his owne profession he professed himselfe to be the Sonne of God and therefore the Jewes went about to kill him because he said that God was his Father Iohn 5.18 Hilar. lib. 7. de trinitat 2. Confut. Against transubstantiation Vers. 13. AArons rod devoured their rods The Papists would establish their transubstantiation by this place for as Aarons rod being turned into a serpent is still called a rod not because it was so now but for that it had beene so so the bread in the Eucharist after it is converted into the body of Christ is called bread still because it was so before Contra. 1. If they could shew Scripture to warrant the conversion of the bread into Christs body as here is an evident text for the turning of the rod into a serpent they should say somewhat but untill they can doe that their error can have no colour from hence 2. Beside Aarons rod is so called not only because it had beene a rod before but it was to returne to be a rod againe but they will not have the body of Christ returne againe to be bread Simler In the questions before handled the 27. and 28. concerning the power of Satan in counterfeiting the spirits of the dead one question of purpose there handled by Pererius touching the apparition of Samuel raised by the Pythonisse 1. Sam. 28. I of purpose there omitted reserving it for this place of confutation 3. Confut. That Samuel himselfe appeared not to Saul but the Devill in his likenesse 1. THe most of that side are of opinion that it was the very soule of Samuel not raised up by the witches enchantments but God interposing himselfe did prevent her superstitious invocations and sent Samuel to declare his judgements to Saul sic Thostatus Cajetanus Pererius and their reasons are these First because the Scripture saith it was Samuel 2. Hee saith as the Lord spake by my hand vers 17. which was true of Samuel not of the Devill in the likenesse of Samuel 3. Hee foretelleth what should happen unto Saul the next day which the Devill could not doe 4. In Ecclesiasticus it is written that Samuel after his sleepe told of the Kings death chap 46.20 Ferer Contr. 1. The Scripture speaketh according as the thing appeared not as it was as Pharaoh in his dreame is said to have seene kine come out of the river Gen. 4.1 2. which were but representations of kine 2. As the Devill tooke upon him Samuels person so he also counterfeiteth his speech it was not true out of the Devils mouth no more was it true Samuel such counterfeit speech became a counterfeit Samuel 3. The Devill might either by certaine conjectures perceiving in what distresse Saul was and that God had forsaken him gesse what the successe of the battell should be or rather God herein might force him to speake the truth as did the false Prophet Balaam Borrh. 4. The authority of the booke of Ecclesiasticus doth not presse us and Augustine doubteth also thereof affirming that it was not in Canone Hebraeorum The Hebrewes received it not into the Canon of Scripture lib. de cura pro mortuis chap. 18. 5. Neither is there the like reason of Gods preventing the witches enchantments and Balaams divinations for that God did to his further glorie to shew his power in making the false Prophet to be an instrument of the trueth but this had beene contrary to Gods owne law who forbiddeth that any should aske counsell of the dead Deut. 18. Borrh. 2. Some doe goe further and thinke that the Devill might have power also to bring up Samuels body as Satan transported Christs body to the top of the pinacle Contra. 1. There is not the like reason betweene the transporting of the bodies of the living and of the dead which are asleepe and at rest 2. Satan had no power over Christs body but hee yeelded himselfe to Satans temptation that hee might overcome him in his owne weapon and this was permitted unto Satan to doe for the glorie of God the comfort of his members the confusion and victory over Satan but if Satan should be suffered to take up the bodies of the Saints neither God should receive honour by it nor the Church profit and beside Satan thereby would strengthen his Kingdome of darkenesse Borrh. 3. Wherefore the sounder judgement is that it was not the spirit of Samuel but of Satan that appeared to Saul who can transforme
so doe so that the Egyptians would pay and recompence them for all their labour and service in their brick-workes in building of them houses and Cities whereupon the Egyptians casting up their account and finding that their wages at a very meane rate would farre exceed the value of their jewels were contented that the Hebrewes should enjoy them Now if this were so then the equity of this fact will easily appeare but because this tradition is uncertaine neither is there thereof any mention made in Scripture it is not to be stood upon a better satisfaction may be found out 3. Therefore first of all this is sufficient to excuse the Israelites that they did herein as they were commanded and whatsoever the Lord biddeth it is no sinne to doe nay it is sinne not to doe it as Augustine well saith Quod sane faciendo Moses usque adeo non peccavit ut non faciendo peccaret Moses in doing so was so farre from sinning that in not doing of it he had sinned thus also answer Calvin Simler Iun. with others 4. But the equity of this fact may further be evident though it sufficeth only to stand upon Gods will which is alwayes just Et rectissimum est quicquid facit and it is most right whatsoever hee doth Calvin or willeth to be done yet divers other reasons may bee yeelded to justifie this fact of the Israelites beside I say the authority of the Lord in commanding which excuseth the Israelites who were bound to be obedient in whatsoever was commanded as Augustine sheweth by this example like as in a common-wealth the minister or executioner of the Judge in putting him to death that is adjudged to dye offendeth not who if he should doe it of himselfe were a man-slayer so saith he Deo jubenti ministerium prabuerunt they did but yeeld their service and ministry to the commandement of God Beside this justification other reasons may be alleaged both on Gods behalfe and on the peoples First on Gods behalfe 1. He is the supreme and chiefe Lord of all and may by his imperiall right not onely give the substance of one to another but remove and dispossesse Kings and transpose Kingdomes from one to another Simler And therefore as Calvin saith Quae Deo placuit ad suos transferri aliena censeri non debent What God thinketh good to convey over unto his are not to be counted as belonging to another 2. The Egyptians abused their gold and other jewels in serving their idols therewith and so as Augustine saith Dei creatura male utentes ad Creatoris injuriam they wickedly abused the creature to the wrong of the Creator and therefore the Lord might most justly deprive them of that which they abused to his dishonour 3. Their intolerable contumacy and disobedience in refusing so often to obey the Lords commandement to let his people goe deserved no lesse than that they should bee punished with the losse of their precious substance seeing the Lord for the like stubbornenesse and obstinacy of the Cananites dispossessed them of their country and gave it to the Israelites Perer. Secondly in respect of the Israelites these reasons also may be rendred 1. The Israelites might detaine these things which the Egyptians gave them as their wages for their long labour and service in Egypt as it is said Wisdom 10.17 she gave the Saints the reward of their labours and as Philo further amplifieth Nec par est jactura libertatis pecuniae there is not the like reason of the losse of liberty and the losse of money the Israelites lost their liberty the Egyptians lost but part of their substance So the Lord promiseth unto Nebuchadnezzar Egypt for the wages of his army for the service they did in subduing of Tyrus Ezech. 29.18 Thus Israel had the substance of the Egyptians given them for their service Iun. 2. Beside the labour and toile of the Israelites in Egypt they were most cruelly oppressed their children most pitifully slaine and murdered therefore this was in stead of some recompence and satisfaction made for the wrongs which they had done them Perer. 3. Philo addeth this reason also Vt in bello victores victos bonis spoliâ—vâ—rant as being conquerers in battell they spoiled their enemies of their substance for they were as conquerers of the Egyptians not by stroke of battell but by the stroke of the Lords hand in these mighty miracles plagues and judgements whereby the stout and stubborne heart of Pharaoh was subdued Simler 4. Irenaeus saith further Debitores erant Hebraeis non solùm rerum sâ—d vitae suae propter patriarchae Iosâ—phi praecedentem benignitatem They were debters to the Hebrewes not only of their substance but of their life also for the former kindnesse and goodnesse of the patriarke Ioseph shewed unto them who delivered the Egyptians and their land from perishing by famine and governed the country 80. yeeres in all justice peace and tranquillity 5. But the best reason on the behalfe of the Israelites is that the Egyptians did voluntarily give them these things as a redemption of their lives and did wage them thereby to bee gone as Iosephus saith they gave them these things quo celeriùs discederent to hasten their departure the sooner this also may be gathered out of the text chap. 11.8 and 12 13. Iun. QUEST XLIV When the Israelites asked the jewels before the last plague or after ANother question is when the Israelites asked these jewels of the Egyptians at the very instant of their departure or before 1. Augustine and Cajetane consenting with him Ferus Pererius all these are of opinion that this was done before the last plague of the first borne Augustines reason is this Quomodo fieri posset ut in tanto luctu ex mortibus suorum commodarent ista filiis Israel How could it be that in so great heavinesse for the death of their children they would lend these things to the Israeliâ—es quaest 45. in Exod. But this might be a reason to make them willing to let them have what they desired to bee rid of them for they were afraid all of them of their lives if the Israelites had stayed still for they said we dye all vers 33. Cajetane would gather that they had borrowed these things before and the Egyptians through griefe forgetting to demand them againe the Israelites also being in haste carried them away because it is said they spoiled the Egyptians that is by carrying away the things which they had formerly borrowed But these words rather make against him for in that the Israelites are said then at their going away to have spoiled the Egyptians it sheweth that then they received the things of them whereof they spoiled them for otherwise they had spoiled them before when they received the things not purposing to restore them againe Ferus reason is because it is not like they would lend the Israelites their jewels at their going away But this doubt is
writer setteth downe that before out of his place which was done after Tostat. He therefore resolveth that Moses did write this propheticè by a propheticall instinct so also Iun. But this may be rather thought to be added by Ioshua or some other of the Prophets afterward as likewise the story of Moses death and buriall Deut. 34. which is not like to have beene penned by himselfe Piscator 2. Till they came to a land inhabited Augustine thus expoundeth Non quia continuò ut venerunt ad terram habitabilem c. Not because as soone as they came to a land inhabited they left eating of Manna Sed quia non ante But because not before But what land inhabited it was is expounded afterward namely the land of Canaan for though the Israelites possessed before the land of the Amorites on the other side of Jordan yet the Manna ceased not till they had passed over Jordan and were entred into the bounds and borders of Canaan which was the promised land that flowed with milke and hony Tostat. quast 15. 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. Of the excellencie and prâ—â—ogative of the Lords day Vers. 5. BVt the sixth day c. it shall be twice so much Origen upon this place well collecteth the prerogative and excellencie of the Lords day beyond the Sabbath of the Jewes proving that the Manna began first to fall upon that day his words are these Si sex diâ—bus continuis ut scriptura dicit collectum est à septima autem die quae est Sabbati cessatum est sine dubio initium ejus à die prima qua est dies Dominica fuit c. If the Manna were gathered six dayes together as the Scripture saith and it ceased upon the seventh which is the Sabbath without doubt it began on the first day which is the Lords day 2. Doct. That it is lawfull to lay up in store so it be done without distrust in Gods providence Vers. 19. LEt no man reserve thereof till the morning Though the Israelites were bound unto this precept because every day they received Manna from heaven and so the Compassions of God were renued every morning as the Prophet Ieremie saith Lament 3.23 yet this taketh not away all store and provision to be laid up aforehand for the sluggard is condemned for his sloth and carelesnesse and is sent by the Wise man to learne of the Ant which gathereth her meat in summer Prov. Our blessed Saviour also commanded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the remainder of the meat to be kept And the reason is not alike for then they received Manna every day and therefore needed not to lay up any thing in store But now the fruits of the earth are onely gathered in summer wherefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the letter of this precept is not to be urged but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sense and morall equitie bindeth us still that we take heed of an immoderate distrustfull care in making provision for the time to come but depend upon Gods fatherly providence Pelarg. 3. Doct. How Manna was a type and figure of Christ. Vers. 31. THey called the name of it Man c. The holy Apostle S. Paul maketh this Manna an evident type of Christ calling it their spirituall meat 1 Cor. 10.3 And in many things the type and figure agreeth unto the bodie and substance 1. In the causes of sending this Manna 2. In the conditionâ— and qualities thereof 3. In the manner of the gathering 4. In the use thereof Ferus First touching the causes 1. The Lord had compassion of his people when they were in want and almost famished in the wildernesse so Christ was given unto us that by faith in his bodie and bloud our hungrie soules should bee nourished Marbach 2. The Lord in sending Manna shewed his power his mercie goodnesse and love to his people and in nothing more appeareth the love of God to us than in sending his onely Sonne into the world to die for us 3. The Lord by sending Manna did prove whether his people would walke in his law or no vers 4. So the Lord maketh triall of the obedience of the world in receiving the law of his Sonne Christ that is the Gospell Ferus Secondly concerning the qualities and properties of Manna 1. It was but a small thing yet had great vertuâ—â— and Christ though in the low degree of a servant was of great power 2. The Manna was white and Christ was pure and unspotted 3. The Manna was ground in the mill or beaten in a morter and Christ was beaten and bruised for us Ferus 4. The Manna came from heaven so the Sonne of God descended and tooke upon him our flesh Simler 5. The Manna was sweet and pleasant as hony so is Christ unto the soule 6. The Manna fell with the dew so Christ brought with him abundance of spirit and grace 7. The Manna fell every day and Christ hath promised to be with his Church unto the end of the world 8. The Manna ceased as soone as they came into the land of Canaan and in the next world there shall be no use of the Word or Sacraments Ferus Thirdly in the gathering of Manna these conditions were observed 1. It was lawfull and free for all men and children male and female young and old master and servant to gather the Manna so there is neither bond nor free male nor female but all are one in Christ Gal. 3.28 Simler 2. They were commanded to gather every day and we must all our life long gather of the heavenly Manna 3. They were to goe out of their tents to gather it and wee must depart from our old conversation Ferus 4. They which gathered much had not the more nor they which gathered little the lesse so both those which are strong and they which are weake in faith are admitted to this Manna Marbach Fourthly for the use both good and bad did eat of the Manna so men of all sorts come unto the Word and Sacraments but not all to the same end for as the Manna putrified to those which kept it contrary to Moses commandement so the Word of God and the Sacraments are the savour of death unto death to those which unworthily receive them Ferus But it will here bee objected if this Manna were spirituall and heavenly food to the Israelites as S. Paul saith how is he reconciled with our Saviour Christ who saith Moses gave you not bread from heaven but my father giveth you true bread from heaven Ioh. 6.32 The answer here is ready that our Saviour speaketh according to their capacity and understanding with whom he there dealeth who had a carnall imagination of Manna and could see therein nothing but corporall food Simler 5. Places of Confutation 1. Conf. Against the carnall presence in the Eucharist Vers. 5. THe people shall goe out and gather Rupertus hath upon these words this glosse applying them to the
God could be made with mens hands 5. Therefore the plurall here is taken for the singular according to the Hebrew phrase Oleaster As so the Lord saith I have made thee Pharaohs god chap. 7.1 where the word is Elohim in the plurall and sometime a word of the plurall number is joyned with an adjective of the singular as Isai. 19.4 I will deliver the Egyptians into the hands adonim kasheh Dominorum duri of Lords hard where the adjective is put in the singular sometime the adjective that is joyned with it is put in the plurall also but the relative in the singular Iosh. 24.19 Elohim kadashim his he is holy gods that is an holy God so likewise sometime Elohim is put with a verbe singular as Gen. 1.1 Bara Elohim creavit Dii God created sometime with a verbe in the plurall as in this place asherjeeben which may goe before us So then Elohim gods in the plurall is here put for the singular Make us a god Tostat. qu. 4. QUEST VIII How the Israelites would have their god to be made to goe before them TO goe before us 1. It is evident by this wherefore they desired a visible god to be made not to that end that they might with greater libertie eat and drinke feast and play before the idoll which they could not doe before the Lord for the Lord did allow them to rejoyce before him in sober and seemely manner Nor yet because they bee like unto other nations to have some visible image to worship but they shew the end thereof that they might have some visible presence to goe before them Tostat. qu. 6. 2. And whereas Moses being absent they might have desired some other guide in his place to direct them they doe not so both because they know none could be given them like unto Moses and if such an one might be found he was subject to the like danger as they imagined Moses to be fallen into they desire rather some visible god to be given unto them Tostat. qu. 8. 3. Neither were they so senselesse to thinke that an idoll made of silver or gold which hath eyes and seeth not eares and heareth not could goe before them 4 And Tostatus conceit is too curious that because they had seene images in Egypt which had as they thought a certaine divine power in them speaking sometimes and making answer unto demands And among the rest the Egyptian God Apis which was like a pide bull did appeare once in a yeare unto them and used to goe before them unto Memphis and all the Egyptians followed after playing upon their harpâ— and other instruments he thinketh that the Israelites desired the like god to bee given them that they might have an image made endued with some divine power to goe before them But they never had seene any image in Egypt made with mens hands to stirre and move and walke before them The Egyptian god Apis was either a very pide pull indeed or the devill in that likenesse therefore they having seene no such president in Egypt it is not like they imagined any such thing 5. Wherefore these Elohim gods which they desire to be made were none other but images as Laban so calleth his little images gods Gen. 31. Gallas This then is the meaning that some image may be made them quae admoneret eos praesentiae divina which should admonish them of the divine presence Osiander And they say in effect but thus much Instituâ— nobis cultum c. Appoint us some kinde of worship that God may be reconciled unto us Vt pergat nos praecedere That he may go forward still before us as he hath begun Ferus So then their meaning is not that the idoll to be made should still goe before them but that God represented and reconciled thereby might goe on still with them QUEST IX Why the people came to Aaron rather than to Hur his fellow governour BUt it will bee here questioned why the people demand this rather of Aaron than of Hur who was joyned with him in the government chap. 24. 1. R. Salom. maketh this the reason because that the people had killed Hur because he resisted them and this he saith was the manner of his death al the people came and spet into his mouth and so choaked him But it is not like if Hur in so good a cause had given his life that it should have beene omitted Phinehes fact in slaying the adulterer and adulteresse is commended and honourable mention is made thereof but Hur had beene more worthie to have beene recorded for not killing but in suffering himselfe rather to bee killed in defence of Gods pure worship Tostat. qu. 3. 2. Neither yet is it to be supposed that Hur was dead for some mention then is like to have beene made of his death being a principall governour and of the peoples lamentation for him 3. Therefore although Hur may bee thought to have yeelded and consented to their motion as well as Aaron as not being a more holy man than hee yet because Aaron was the chiefe and more principall he onely is mentioned Tostat. qu. 3. QUEST X. Whether at this time the Israelites wanted the presence of the cloud FUrther whereas they desire gods to bee made to goe before them it will be here objected that they had the presence of the cloud which went before them and they therefore needed not to have had any other guide 1. Oleaster therefore thinketh that the cloud might at this time be taken out of their fight but this opinion is briefely confuted before quest 4. the cloud did not leave them till they came into the land of Canaan when the manna also ceased Iosh. 5. 2. Some make the blinde curiositie of the people the cause why they regarded not that ordinarie signe of Gods presence but requested some figure and representation of God answerable to their vanitie Calvin So also Chrysostom Adhuc iâ—spicis quod miraris oblitus es largitoris Thou seest daily that which thou wonderest at namely the manna which fell every morning and thou forgettest the giver 3. But this also may bee joyned to the former reason they had staied 40. dayes in a plat and the cloud stirred not they had continued as long in this place about mount Sinai even fortie dayes as they had beene in all the mansion places since their comming out of Egypt and so they might doubt that this cloud should be their direction no longer to goâ— before them into the promised land and therefore they desire another guide QUEST XI Why they say they knew not what was become of Moses Vers. 1. FOr of this Moses c. we know not what is become of him c. 1. R. Salom. thinketh they supposed he had beene dead and that Satan had made such an apparision in the aire as if they had indeed seene a coffin as if Moses had beene dead and his bodie put into it But if they
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