not evill that Adam in abstaining from that which was good might shew his humility to his Creator 2. In that God gave Adam so easie a precept to keep only to refraine to eat of one tree having liberty to use all the rest beside not like in hardnesse and difficulty to the commandement given to Abraham to sacrifice his only sonne herein the transgression and disobedience of Adam appeared to be the greater in transgressing a precept so easie to have beene obeyed This Augustine lib. 14. de civit dei c. 15. Thirdly we answer with Tertullian that this precept though in shew but easie and light yet containeth the very foundation of all precepts and of the whole morall law for therein was contained both his duty toward God in obeying his will and love toward themselves in escaping death which was threatned if they transgressed Tertul. lib. con Iud. So that in this precept Adam might have shewed both his love toward God in his obedience faith in beleeving it should so fall out unto him if he disobeyed as God said hope in expecting a further reward if he had kept the commandement The Hebrewes here are somewhat curious as R. Isaach that if they had tasted only of the fruit and not eaten it they had not transgressed but the commandements of God doe concerne the very thought R. Levi by eating understandeth the apprehension of things spirituall which is here forbidden but we take it rather litterally and historically that God giveth them so easie a precept to try their love and obedience Mercer QVEST. XXVI How a Law is not given to a righteous man BUt the Apostle saith The law is not given to a righteous man but unto the disobedient c. 1 Tim. 1.9 And Adam was now just and righteous and therefore he needed not a law for answer whereunto I say that the law in two respects is said not to be given to a just man 1. in respect of the negative precepts as to abstaine from murther theft adultery but in regard of the affirmative precepts to retaine them in obedience and doing of good workes so the just man had need of a law and so had Adam 2. A just man need not to feare the punishment of the law as S. Paul in another place saith of the Magistrate which is the speaking or living law he is not to be feared for good workes but for evill Rom. 13.4 And in this respect so long as Adam remained in his integrity and justice the punishment in the law concerned him not 3. And a righteous man rather of a voluntary disposition than by compulsion of law yeeldeth his obedience QVEST. XXVII Why God gave a precept to Adam fore-seeing before that he would transgresse it FOurthly A question will here bee moved why the Lord gave this precept to Adam which hee knew hee would not keepe for answer whereunto first wee say that God gave him a precept which was possible to be kept and Adam had power to keep it if he would it was then not Gods fault that gave him free will but his owne that abused that gift Secondly if it be replyed why God did not give him grace and stay him from transgression I answer that God could have given him such grace and to the Angels likewise that they should not have fallen but it was fit that God should leave the creatures to their free will and not hinder the course of nature which hee had made Thirdly though God foresaw mans transgression yet that was no reason to withhold the precept for then God should neither have made the Angels nor man because he saw that some of both should bee reprobates and by the same reason God should not have given his written word because many heretikes doe pervert it to their destruction Fourthly as God foresaw mans transgression so he knew how to turne it to good as in shewing mercy to sinners and in sending Christ to restore what man had lost so that notwithstanding Gods foresight of Adams transgression he was not to forbeare to charge Adam with this commandement in regard of the great good which God also did foresee should ensue QVEST. XXVIII What kind of death was threatned to Adam Vers. 17. IN the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death The first question here moved is what death God threatneth to Adam whether the death only of the body or soule or of both 1. We neither think that the spirituall death of the soule is here only signified whereby the soule is separated by sinne from God which was the opinion of Philo Iudeus lib. 2. de allegor Mosaicis and of Eucherim lib. 1. in Genes for wee see that the Lord himselfe threatned the death of the body to Adam Genes 2.19 Dust thou art and to dust thou shalt returne 2. Neither is the death of the body here onely implyâ—d as some have thought but the death of the soule by sinne also which bringeth forth the death of the body as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 5.13 Death went over all men for as much as all men have sinned There was first sinne in the soule before there followed death in the body 3. Neither doe we think that everlasting death is here excluded as Pererius seemeth to insinuate lib. 4. in Genes qu. 4. of this matter For the Apostle saith We were by nature the children of death as well as others Eph. 1.5 by Adams transgression we were the children of wrath hee therefore much more that made us so and if Adam had not by sinning made himselfe guilty of eternall death why was the promise of the Messiah presently upon his fall made unto him Gen. 1.15 whose office is to redeeme us from sinne and everlasting damnation 4. Wee therefore thinke with Augustine that by death here is understood whatsoever death either of the soule or body temporall or eternall lib. 1. de câ—vâ—â— dei c. 12. for Augustine maketh foure kinds of death the temporall death of the soule when it is for a time separated from God by sin the eternal death of the soule when it is separated from the body the temporall death of the body when it is separated from the soule the eternall death of the body in hell So Adam first died in soule by losing his innocency he died in body returning to dust he was subject also to everlasting death both of body and soule but from that he was redeemed by Christ. 5. Beside under the name of death are comprehended all other miseries calamities and sorrowes which are the forerunners of death so that we may fitly compare death to the center all other miseries as the circle or circumference about the center or as the Scripture resembleth it death is as the burning coale other sorrowes and miseries are as the sparkles that doe rise from the coale Iob 5.7 Man is borne to travaile as the sparkes flye upward QVEST. XXIX When Adam began to die SEcondly it is
Never any man in earth Christ onely excepted kept the Sabbath without sin the Apostle saith He that is entred into his rest hath also ceased from his owne workes as God did from his Heb. 4.10 it is the rest onely of Christ where there shall be cessation from all the workes of sinne But that rest which Adam should have kept in Paradise was not Christs rest therefore he kept no rest there without sin he fell then before the Sabbath 10. That place lastly maketh to this purpose Psal. 49.13 Adam lodged not one night in honour for so are the words if they be properly translated the word is lun which signifieth to lodge or stay all night and thus divers of the Rabbines doe expound this place of Adam Upon these reasons it seemeth most probable that Adam did not continue one night in Paradise but fell in the same day of his creation Of this opinion are Irenaeus Cyrillus Epiphanius Moses Barcephas Philoxenus Ephrem with others rehearsed by Pererius upon this place though he himselfe be of another opinion That objection that so much businesse as the giving of names to the creatures by Adam the temptation of Eva by the Serpent and seduction of Adam by woman could not be dispatched in so small a time of six or seven houres may easily bee answered 1. It is evident by the text that the imposition of names was performed the day of his creation before the woman was made Gen. 2.20 and it asked no long time in regard of the singular wisdome and knowledge of Adam who was able at the first sight of the creatures without any long search or triall of their nature to give them fit names 2. Of Satans nimblenesse in hastening the tentation and insinuating himselfe to the woman there need bee made no doubt the celerity and agility of spirits is great 3. It was the coole of the day about the Eventide when sentence was given against Adam so that in the space of eight or nine houre from his creation to his fall all these matters might easily be done QVEST. XXXIII Whether Adam was cast out Vers. 24. THâ—â— hee cast out man c. 1. Where the Septuagint adde and placed him before Paradise whereupon some writers have descanted of the causes why Adam was placed before Paradise that by the sight thereof he remembring from whence he was fallen might more effectually repent his sinne the originall is otherwise that not Adam but the Cherubims were placed before Paradise 2. Whereas Theodoret thinketh that these Cherubims were not Angels but certaine terrible visions set to feare man from that passage it may be otherwise gathered out of Scripture where wee read that the Cherubims pictured over the Arke were beautifull faces representing Angels and therefore the Prophet compareth the king of Titus glittering in his pretious stones to the Cherub Ezech. 28.14 3. Concerning the fiery shaken sword we refuse 1. either the collection of Tertullian who taketh it for torrida zâ—â—a the parching countrie under the aequinoctiall or of Liranus who would have it to be a certaine wall of fire about Paradise or of Rupertus that understandeth it of purgatorie fire for all these are deceived about the translation the word signifieth not a fiery sword shaken but rather a sharp sword shaken as the Chaldâ— paraphrast readeth which by the shaking seemeth to glitter as the flame of fire or because the word Lahat signifieth to inflame it is not unlike but that some fierie inflammation in the likenesse of a sword might be set as a terrour in that place Iun. 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. Spirits have power to possesse bodies and speake out of them WHereas Satan useth the serpent and out of his trunke frameth a voice we neede not thinke it strange that the Devill hath this power to possesse the bodies of beasts and to speake out of them which though Iulâ—aâ— the Apostata counted a fable Cyrillus learnedly sheweth the like to have beene done out of the heathen writers as how in Homer Achilles horse inspired by Iuno foretelleth his death Pâ—rphyrius writeth that the river Causus saluted Pythagoras saying Ave Pythagora and Phylostratus that a certaine Elme saluted Apollonius Isogonus Cithiensis saith that in Rhodeâ— a certaine bull consecrate to Iupiter did speake The Pagans therefore and Atheists finding the like in their owne writers have no reason to deride this storie of the Devils speaking in the serpent Perer. 2. Doct. Adam and Eva sinned not before they were tempted WHereas Satan was the first that inveigled the woman with ambitious desire saying yee shall bee as Gods vers 5. The opinion of Prosper is discovered not to be sound that our first parents were tickled with pride before the tentation and therefore were permitted of God to fall into it for this difference is made betweene the sinne of man and of the Angels he fell being seduced but the other of their owne pride without a seducer transgressed 3. Doct. Adam if he had not sinned should not have died Vers. 19. DVst thou art and to dust thou shalt returne hence it is gathered that death was not naturall to man but hapned because of sinne contrary to the opinion of Iosephus that thinketh that man should have died though he had not sinned but his life should have beene much longer It was the opinion also of the Pelagians that death was in mans nature and sprang not from sinne Not much differing is the sentence of the Popish writers that man was created mortall by the condition of his nature yet preserved by a supernaturall gift the contrary is evident from hence because it was never said to man before he had sinned that he should returne to dust 4. Doct. The Trinity proved out of the Old Testament Vers. 22. BEhold the man is become as one of us This is an evident place against the Iewes to prove the Trinity for here the Lord speaketh of more than one neither can it be answered that it is but a phrase of speech to use the plurall for the singular for here is more than a phrase this speech could not be true to say one of vs if there were no more than one person in the God-head 5. Doct. Why God suffered Adam to be tempted and fall FUrther whereas the question will be demanded how it stood with Gods justice and holinesse to suffer man to be tempted whom he foresaw should fall Our answer is this 1. we say with the Apostle O the deepenesse of the riches both of the wisdome and knowledge of God! how vnsearchable are his judgements and his waies past finding out Râ—m 11.33 And Augustine maketh the same answer to this question Altitudinem consiliâ—eâ—us penetrare non possum c. I cannot enter into the depth of Gods counsell 2. Yet for as much as God had given man free-will and sufficient strength to resist this tentation if he would it was fit he should be left to
the text saith I haue given you every tree c. For 1. it is evident out of the Scripture that divers kinds of trees were created in Paradise for beauty and ornament which bare no fruit for food as the Cedar and Firre tree Ezek. 31.8 The Cedâ—rs in the garden of God could not hide him no Firre tree was like his branches 2. This generall permission to eat of every tree concludeth not a necessity of fruit-bearing in every tree but a liberty to eat of all which were fit for food excepting only the tree of knowledge of good and evill Gen. 2.17 QVEST. XXXV Whether the flesh of beasts were eaten before the floud LIkewise we refuse the opinion of Beda that neither man nor beast did eat of any flesh but onely of the fruits of the earth before the floud neither doe wee allow the iudgement of Thomas Aquinas who thinketh that the beasts which are now devourers of flesh should have used that kind of food in the state of mans innocency 1. part quaest 96. artic 1. The latter opinion wee reiect because if man had not transgressed there should have beene no death in the world Rom. 5.12 Sinne entred into the world by one man and death by sinne if there should have beene no death in the world because no sin I see not how death should have entred upon other creatures especially this violent death by slaughter as the Apostle also saith Rom. 8.22 That every creature groaneth with us and travelleth in paine together to this present so that this bondage of paine and corruption which maketh man and beast groane together was laid upon them together Neither doe I see how Basils opinion can stand hom 11. in Gen. that man in his innocency though hee should not have used the beasts for food yet might haue slaine them to take knowledge of their inward parts and to helpe his experience that wayes or it should have beene lawfull unto him to kill them in hunting for his delight as Pererius thinketh lib. 4. in Gen. p. 663. for this slaughter and killing of beasts upon what occasion soever whether for food for knowledge or pleasure belongeth unto the bondage of corruption which by sin was brought into the world The other opinion seemeth probable especially because of these two places of Scripture first for that the beasts and fowles lived in the Arke not of flesh but of other food than usuall as Noah is bidden to take of all meat that was eaten Gen. 6.21 for there being only one couple of uncleane beasts and seven couple of cleane preserved in the arke out of these there could not be food of flesh sufficient for the rest and after the cattell went out of the Arke there was no other food for them all flesh being destroyed but onely by the fruits of the earth Secondly the first permission to eat flesh that we reade of was after the floud Gen. 9.3 Everything that moveth and liveth shall be meat for you as the greene herb But these objections may be easily answered To the first we answer 1. that the beasts which did devoure flesh did also feed of herbs and so Noah might provide for them according to their eating 2. Though they did use altogether to live of flesh yet I thinke that for that present time and some while after all beasts might returne to the first food appointed in the creation this being a second creation and renewing of the world so that upon this extraordinary occasion and urgent necessity it cannot be gathered what was the ordinary food of beasts before no more than it can bee inferred that because beasts of contrary natures as the lion and calfe beare and cowe woolfe and lambe leopard and kid did lye together Isay 11.6 that there was no enmity betweene them before To the second place our answer is that there that liberty is onely renewed as is the blessing to increase and multiply vers 1. and the prohibition of shedding mans bloud vers 5. at the hands of a mans brother will I require the life of man for before the floud the bloud of Abel was required at the hands of his brother Caine. Notwithstanding therefore these objections I thinke it more probable that both man and beast after the transgression before the floud did use indifferently both the fruits of the earth and the flesh of beasts for food the grounds of this opinion are these 1. That one beast did not raven upon another in the state of mans innocency two principall reasons may be given one because as yet no death was entred into the world the other for that man bearing perfect rule and dominion over the creatures did keepe them in order but after mans fall both these causes were taken away for not onely death entred upon man but the other creatures were brought into the same bondage and were killed for sacrifice as Abel offered of the fat of the sheep Gen. 4 3. if it were lawfull then to slay beasts why not to eat of their flesh And againe man having lost his soveraignty over the creatures they then began one to rage upon another as not standing now in the like awe and feare of man as before this cause is touched by the Prophet Habbac 1.14 Thou makest man as the fishes of the Sea and as the creeping things that have no rule over them that is which doe one consume and devoure another because they have no governour this rule the beasts fishes and fowles had shaken off immediately upon mans fall and not only after the floud 2. Seeing in the old world two great sinnes abounded carnall lust and concupiscence Gen. 6.2 and tyranny and oppression vers 4. there were gyants or tyrants in the earth and tyranny and oppression brought forth bloudshed for which cause the prohibition of shedding of mans bloud is so straightly forbidden after the floud that God will require it at the hands of every beast and of a mans brother Gen. 9.5 How is it like that they would abstaine from killing of beasts that spared not to spill the bloud of men or from eating of flesh which is more apt to provoke unto lust than the simple fruits of the earth 3. If the flesh of beasts was not eaten before the floud what then became of the increase of cattell how was not the earth over-run with them This reason was given why the Lord would not at once but by little and little destroy the Canaanites before the Israelites lest the beasts of the field should increase upon them Deut. 7.22 because they both helped to destroy the cruell beasts and did eat the uncleane as swine and such other both which by their multitudes otherwise might have beene an annoyance to the Israelites But greater feare was there of overspreading the earth with increase of beasts before the floud if no such provision had beene made to diminish their number 4. But that place most of all confirmeth our opinion
said of all the Patriarkes beside that they begat sonnes and daughters beside those which are expressed no such thing is mentioned of Noah that beside these three he begat sonnes and daughters and the Septuagint read Noah begat three sonnes c. insinuating in so reading their opinion that these were all their sonnes yet it is evident Genes 6.9 That these were all Noahs seed the words are these are the generation of Noah Noah begat three sonnes c. 3. I rather thinke not that either Noah deferred his marriage till hee was 500. yeeres old or that hee being married abstained from the company of his wife all that time but that God so disposed seeing he purposed to save Noah and all his sonnes from the floud that Noah did not so abound with posterity as his fathers before him lest they also should have followed the wickednesse of that age and so perish with the rest the Lord saw that there might bee sufficient for the replenishing of the world againe and it was more to Gods glory to increase the world afterward by so small a number QVEST. VII Wherein Noah was a comfort to his parents 7. Vers. 29. THis same shall comfort us concerning the workes and sorrow of our hands 1. Not because the course of sinne should be stopped and the grievous workes of sinners stayed by the destructions in the floud as Chrysostome 2. Or because Noah found out the use of the plow whereby the earth was tilled with more ease as R. Solomon 3. or for that the use of flesh was graunted to Noah after the floud as some thinke 4. Nor yet onely for that the seminary of the world was preserved in Noahs arke which otherwise should have perished 5. Nor yet onely because God renewed his covenant with Noah promising that the world should never be destroyed with waters againe 6. But the chiefe scope of this prophesie hath relation to Christ in whom we finde true rest to our soules and who hath delivered us from the curse Galath 3.10 who was prefigured in Noah and his baptisme wherein is exhibited the remission of sinnes shadowed forth in Noahs arke as the Apostle sheweth 1 Peter 3.22 4. Places of doctrine 1. Doct. Originall sinne by propagation not imitation 1. vers 3. IN that Adam begat a sonne in the likenesse of his owne image which before is interpreted of originall corruption the heresie of the Pelagians is confuted who denied any such originall sinne or depravation of nature to be in infants by propagation from their parents but that it commeth onely by a corrupt imitation this was the heresie of the old Pelagians who affirmed Peccatum prima transgressionis in alios homines non propagations sed imitatione transisset that the sinne of the first transgression passeth unto other men not by propagation but imitation which heresie seemeth to have beene revived by Catherinus a Popish writer who denieth that the sinne of Adam is propagated or transfused to his posterity But the Scripture evidently overthroweth this assertion David confesseth hee was conceived in sinne Psal. 51.5 the Apostle saith That death went â—ver all in as much as all have sinned children then if they had not sinne should not die and here Seth is begotten in his fathers image 2. Doct. Originall sinne not a substance 2. THeir opinion is confuted that hold originall sinne to be a substance for like as the image of God wherein Adam was created was not the substance of the soule but the quality as the Apostle expoundeth which consist in holinesse and righteousnesse Ephes. 4.24 so the image of Adams corrupt nature consisteth in the contrary qualities of impurity and injustice 3. Doct. The state of originall sinne in soule 3. THe opinion of Papists is refuted who affirme that this originall corruption hath the seat and place in the flesh not in the soule for this image of corruption was in Adams soule and therefore the Apostle saith he renewed in the spirit of our mindes Ephes. 4 24. and put off the old man c. and put on the new which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him Coloss. 3.10 there the corrupt image of Adam succeeded where Gods image is decayed which was in the soule for there the place of knowledge is 5. Places of confutation 1. Confut. Henoch was no licentious liver at any time IN that vers 21. after the generation Henoch is said to walke with God and not before Procopius Gazeus thinketh that Henoch was before a wicked liver but after repented But the contrary is â—vident in that it pleased God with such extraordinarie favour to take Henoch out of the world that he saw no death that he was as a shining starre for vertue and holinesse in that age 2. Confut. Henoch died not WHereas vers 23. it is said all the dayes of Henoch were 365. Albâ—n Ezra with other Hebrewes thinke that Henoch died for if he were still alive these should not be all his dayes Cont. 1. The Scripture maketh mention onely of the yeares of his life upon earth his yeares with God are not to bee accounted among men as the Apostle saith of Christ who in the dayes of his flesh Heb. 5.7 he is now in his flesh in heaven but these are counted the dayes of his flesh when he walked in his flesh among men 2. The Apostle evidently witnesseth that Henoch was taken away that he should not see death Heb. 11.5 he therefore died not 3. Confut. Henoch not alive in his flesh BEcause it is said that God tooke away or translated Henoch the Popish writers doe imagine that Henoch is yet alive in his flesh in Paradise together with Elias Contra. seeing that Elias is said to bee taken up into heaven or that he went into heaven 2 King 2.11 where Henoch also walked with God we cannot beleeve that they entred heaven in their whole humanity but that prerogative was to be reserved for Christ seeing the Apostle saith that he hath prepared a now and living way into the holy place for us by his vaile that is his flesh Heb. 10.20 Christs flesh therefore must make a way into heaven before any mans flesh beside can enter 4. Confut. Henoch not in the terestriall Paradise BUt because they also affirme that Henoch liveth in his flesh not in heaven but in the terestriall Paradise and it is against the faith as some of them say to thinke otherwise the vanity of this opinion shall easily appeare 1. Because the Scripture saith that every thing was destroyed upon the face of the earth and onely eight persons were saved in the Arke therefore Henoch if he had beene upon the earth must have perished 2. The waters prevailed fifteene cubits over the highest mountaine Genes 7.20 therefore the earthly Paradise must needs also have beene ouerflowne and destroyed 3. If they answer that Paradise might be hemmed in with the water which might stand as a wall round about it
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
the yeere past was then gathered and seed time began anew and so it is with us the autumne is counted the beginning of the yeere for matters of husbandry and yet wee in the computation of yeeres begin in the spring at the Annuntiation It is true also that the yeere of Jubile then tooke beginning but it is notwithstanding called not the first but the seuenth moneth Levit. 25.10 the reason is why it began then because all workes of husbandry and labours of servants which then used to begin did cease in the Jubile 2. Concerning the other objection of ripe fruit we shall not need to answer as some doe that the fruit did hang still upon the trees till the autumne or that some trees in Paradise bare fruit in the spring some in the autumne or that they might beare fruit twice in the yeere as Plinie reporteth of India and Solinâ—â—s of the Island Teprobane but I rather thinke this first bearing of fruit being supernaturall that the trees againe bare fruit the same yeere according to their naturall course And this may seeme to bee gathered by S. Iohns allusion to the tree of life that bare fruit every moneth Revel 22.2 that in the beginning trees did beare fruit in the yeere more than once 3. I thinke it therefore more probable that the world was created in the spring for these reasons 1. Ambrose useth this reason upon these words germinet terra let the earth bud forth the bud of the herb Dedit formam fructus c. God gave and prescribed a forme for the fruits to grow ut initio cujusque anni that in the beginning of every yeere herbs should sprout forth This we see to be done only in the spring 2. He useth also another reason Vt ostenderet Scriptura veris tempora in constitutione mundi ait mensis hic vobis initium mensium to shew that it was spring when the world was made the Scripture saith this shall be unto you the beginning of moneths Moses then brought in no new institution but it is more like he revived the old use of beginning the yeere from March which was discontinued in Egypt by another custome of that country 3. Further whereas God blessed the creatures and bid them increase and multiply which blessing presently tooke effect who knoweth not that for most kinds of creatures especially the fish and fowle the fittest time to engender and increase is in the spring And whereas God gave them the greene herb for meat it is not like that presently the greene herb with frost and cold began to wither and decay Adam also was thrust out of Paradise to till the ground but the spring time is apter for tilling than the autumne or winter season 4 Beda beside his owne opinion maketh mention of a synode holden in Palestina by Theophilus Bishop of Cesarea wherein it was agreed that the world was made in the spring and that Christ was crucified the same day that Adam was created at which time he also transgressed that the first Adam herein might be a type of the second 5. This also may be proved by comparing the time of Noahs floud with the time of the creation for seeing there are accounted full yeeres 1656. from the creation to the deluge they must fall out both about the same season But that the floud came in the spring not in the autumne may appeare by divers reasons which I reserve for that place Chap. 8. quest 10. And of this opinion that the world was made in March Pererius nameth many though he dissent from them as Eusebius Cyrillus Hierosolym Athanasius Nazianzen Damascen Ambrose Beda with others About this question there is a great controversie betweene two famous Rabbins R. Iosua who holdeth the world to be made in the spring and R. Eleazer in the autumne but the other opinion is more probable as I have shewed QVEST. XVIII When the Sunne and Moone were created Vers. 14. GOd said let there be lights in the firmament c. 1. These lights then were neither made the first day and but placed now in the firmament as the Hebrewes thinke 2. Neither was the Sunne made the first day the Moone the next the Stars the third as Eugubinus but they were all made upon the fourth day 3. Neither yet doe we thinke that the celestiall bodies were made in order as Basil conceiveth but rather that they were created all at once Mercer 4. And whereas the light created the first day is called Or but the Starres are called meoroth as of the light hence it may appeare that these lightsome bodies were made the receptacles of that light then created which was now increased and united to these lights Mercer rather than to thinke that the element of fire was that first light as Iunius 5. But wee explode those Jewish fantasies that the Sunne and Moone were created of equall light in the beginning but when the Moone envied the light of the Sunne God brought it into subjection and ordered that from thenceforth the Moone should receive light of the Sunne and of the light starre-beames which the Moone was deprived of they say God made the rest of the lesser Starres ex Mercer QVEST. XIX Of the greatnesse of the Sunne and Moone Vers. 16. GOd made two great lights That these two great lights are the Sunne and Moone there is no question and that the Sunne is the greatest of all the celestiall bodies it is also questionlesse Anaxagoras did hold the Sunne much greater than Peloponesus a countrey in Grecia Anaximander to be as big as the earth Plutar. lib. 2. de placitis Philosophor c. 21. but since the Mathematicians have found that the Sunne exceedeth the earth in bignesse 166. times and none of the other Starres which they call of the first magnitude whereof there are 15. to exceed the earth above 18. times The Moone though some among the heathen have judged it bigger than the earth as the Stoikes and equall to the Sunne as Parmenides and some among the Christians have thought it in bignesse next to the Sunne because it is here trained to bee a great light as Basil upon this place and Augustine yet since by more diligent search it is found to be lesse than the earth 39. times and to be the least of all the Starres except Mercurie Moses therefore here speaketh according to the opinion and capacity of the vulgar sort to whose sight the Moone seemeth greatest next to the Sunne because it is nearest of all the Starres to the earth and for that it is greatest in operation and hath the government of the night The reason of the greatnesse of these lights is their farre distance from the earth Empedocles saith the Moone is twice so farre from the Sunne as it is from the earth but the Mathematicians say it is 18. times so farre from the Sunne Eraâ—osthenes affirmeth the Sunne to be 804000000. furlongs distant from the earth
a great distance Tigris by Ninive Euphrates by Babylon and then ioyning together and parting againe doe compasse Mesopotamia so called because it is betweene the rivers These then are the foure heads or streames of Paradise as hath beene shewed QVEST. XVII Whereof Adam was made and of the excellent constitution of his body Vers. 7. THe Lord God made man of the dust of the earth First it is evident that God only made man not the Angels they were not so much as preparers or temperers of the matter whereof man was made as some have thought for God himselfe said Gen. 1.26 Let vs make man 2. Man was made of the dust as the thinner and purer part of the earth not of a slimy matter mixed of earth and water as some thinke and this is evident by this reason Man was made of that element to the which he is last resolved but his body falleth at the last to dust Gen. 3.19 Dust thou art and to dust thou shalt returne Wee deny not but that out of dust God might prepare a second matter compounded of the elements and thereof frame mans body but it is curiosity to inquire after that which is not in Scripture expressed or out of the same by some collection may bee gathered 3. It is also evident that God made mans body of a more excellent constitution than any creature beside and of a fit temper to be a convenient instrument for his soule 1. Mans body hath the preheminence in respect of his upright stature whereas other creatures looke downewards whereby he should be admonished to looke upward toward his Creator and to behold the heavens as also thereby is signified the lofty dominion and command which is given unto man over other creatures 2. The temperature of mans body is most excellent whereas other creatures by reason of their grosse and cold humours doe grow over beasts with haire fowles with feathers fishes with scales 3. The fashion of mans body and the ready use of his members surpasseth all other creatures as God hath given unto man his hands whereby he worketh and perfecteth the invention of many profitable art 4. Though other creatures in the quicknesse of some senses exceed man as the vulture in seeing the dog in smelling the moule in hearing the spider in feeling and in strength many beasts goe beyond man yet herein is mans excellency that he both better discerneth and judgeth of the outward sense and is endued with reason wherby he subdueth all other creatures to his service and so maketh use unto himselfe of their strength sense or what other naturall faculty they have Lastly it was fit that mans body should bee made of an earthly not of an â—ethereall or celestiall matter because he was to live in the earth and for that such a body was fittest to bee capable of sense by the which the soule being sent into the body as a naked table might gather experience and by experience knowledge Perer. QVEST. XVIII In what state or age Adam was created 1· FVrther that Adam was created in a perfect age it is without question because his body was in the first instant apt to generation for the Lord said unto them increase and multiply and immediately after his transgression Cain was begotten Genes 4 1 2. But in what age and stature of body Adam was created it is not so certaine some think that he was made about the yeares of Christs age between 30. and 40. but I rather approve their collection that thinke his body was in the creation of the same growth and perfection wherein those long lived Patriarks were fit for generation which was about 65. yeares for at that â—ge Kenan Henoch begat children and none under those yeares Genes 5.12 whereupon it followeth that 〈◊〉 Adams bodie did shew as it were 50 or 60 yeares in his creation he might well bee thought to bee â—ongest liver of all the Patriarks for he lived after his creation 930 yeares to the which adde 50 yeares â—ll which time his bodie if it had beene borne would haue beene growing to that state wherein he was â—reated and so he shall exceed the age of Methuselah who lived but 969 yeares 3. But that is a ridiculous conceit of Ioannes Lucidus lib. 1. de emendat tempor c. 4. that Adam was the biggest Giant that ever was and Moses Barcepha reporteth the like fansie of some that iudged Adam to be of that bigge stature that 〈◊〉 could wade ouer the Ocean This fansie is grounded vpon the Latin text Iosu. 14.15 the name of Heâ—orn was before Ciriatharbe or citie of Arbah Adam the greatest among the Anakims is there placed and â—hose Anakims say they were Giants Contra. But the text in the Hebrew is thus he was a great man among the Anakims meaning Arba before mentioned the word indeede is Adam which is here no proper name but a common name for a man as it is taken in the Scripture he a great Adam or man among the Anakims if Adam should be taken properly then must they make the Giant Arba and Adam all one which is impossible the one living before the other after the floud QVEST. XIX Whether Adams soule was created after his bodie Verse 7. ANd breathed in his face the breath of life and the man was a living soule 1. We neither thinke that Adams soule was created before his bodie as Plato among the heathen and Origen among the Christians thought that all soules were made together in the beginning and after sent into the bodie 2. Neither that Adams bodie and soule were created in the same instant together as Damascen lib. 2. de fide c. 12. Thomas Aquinae with others are of opinion 3. But wee rather judge with Chrysostome hom 12. that Adams bodie was first framed out of the dust and then God breathed into it life and this opinion is most agreeable to the text that God first made man out of the dust and then breathed the breath of life and so he became a living soule so that he was not a living soule in the first instant of his creation but after God had breathed into him the breath of life such also is the generation of Adams posteritie the bodie is first framed in the wombe and then the soule is infused as David describeth the manner of his conception Psalm 138.15.16 I was made in a secret place and fashioned beneath in the earth thine eyes did seeme when I was yet without forme where David may seeme to allude to Adams creation who properly was framed beneath in the earth and of whom also it may truly bee said that God saw him when hee was yet without forme QVEST. XX. What is meant by breathing the breath of life Vers. 7. THe Lord had formed man c. 1. The word is jatsar which signifieth to fashion or to give shape so the Lord here doth perfect the feature of man 2. He is made
affection upon her being flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones v. 23. 3. Other reasons are given why the woman was taken out of mans side as not out of his head that she should not be proud nor out of his feet as though she were mans vassell but from his side to shew the love and conjunction betweene them Muscul. R. Iosue giveth this reason why she was taken from under the armes that shee might acknowledge her selfe under subjection to man but that is ridiculous which some Hebrewes note that the woman was made of a bone to shew her hard and intollerable nature ex Mercer QVEST. XXXIX Whence the bone was taken whereof the woman was made SEcondly we hold that a curious question which is disputed of the Schoolemen how Eva was fashioned out of a bone whether by multiplication of it as Hugo thinketh or by addition of some new matter taken out of the earth as Tostatus or created of nothing as Thomas that seemeth more probable that God used no other matter in the making of woman but out of the man because the text saith she was taken out of man which had not beene true if shee had beene taken out of any other matter Wee therefore thinke â—he first opinion probable that this was done by multiplying of the matter August Mercer but we must not curiously seeke to finde out a reason of Gods omnipotent power QVEST. XL. How many ribs and whence taken THirdly 1. We neither thinke with Oleaster that God tooke two ribs out of each side of Adam one because the scripture saith v. 21. God tooke one of his ribs 2. Wee also deride that fable of the hebrewes that God made man and woman together but joyned by their sides and after parted and separated them for the text is contrary which saith that God tooke a rib out of Adam to make the woman for the word â—selang properly signifieth a rib and not the side and so R. Iosua taketh it 3. It is also a superfluous question out of what side of Adam Eva was taken whether out of the right or left it is resolved by most out of the left because Adams heart lay there but these are frivolous and needlesse matters QVEST. XLI Whether this rib were a necessary or superfluous rib FOurthly so also is that question unnecessary and more curious than profitable whether this rib were any one of Adams necessary and substantiall parts or one supernumerary and superfluous some think that whereas a man hath now 24. ribbes on each side 12. that this rib was one of them and that God created a new rib in stead thereof but this opinion seemeth to be contrary to the text because it is said God closed up the flesh in stead thereof if flesh were in stead of the rib then another rib was not made in stead thereof Againe God had already done with the creation of Adam v. 7. hee made man of the dust of the earth but if Adam had a rib created afterward then was he not before perfectly created Wherefore it is more like that this rib was above the usuall number of ribs created of purpose by the Lord not as a superfluous or monstrous part but as necessary for the creation of the woman which God intended Mercer Calvin And therefore Cajetanus needed not so to have beene perplexed with this question as not finding a solution thereof to have left the veritie of the story and stye to allegories QVEST. XLII Of the womans soule FIfthly though no mention be here made of the creation of the womans soule yet it may be gathered that she had her soule from God immediately as Adam had because they were both created according to Gods image Gen. 1.27 QVEST. XLIII How God is said to have built the woman Vers. 22. HE made or built a woman and brought c. 1. God is said to have built woman neither because of the frame and fashion of her body which is made broadest and lowest downeward like the building of an house as Rab. Sel. which though it be so that God framed the womans body as fittest for procreation of children yet Moses in thus speaking aimed not at it But by this is meaâ—â— both that man was yet as an unperfect building before woman was made and that by the woman the house and family is builded by procreation of children and thereof the hebrewes call a sonne Ben of Banah to build Mercer 2. Shee is called Ishah woman by a figure called Prolepsis for this name was afterward given her by the man 3. She is said to bee brought to man not as though shee were made in some other place but God doth present her and offer her to man and as it were marrieth and joyneth them together 4. But the Hebrewes have here some ridiculous observations as upon the word Iisgor in the former verse he closed up which is the first word with Samech used hitherto by Moses because Samech answereth to the first letter of Satan in sound which is Shin with a left pricke they note that Satan came into the world and so the occasion of evill by women so likewise out of the word Iebiâ—ah which letters make 24. in number they note that the woman was brought to man with 24. ornaments whereas they cannot deny but that she came naked QVEST. XLIIII How Adam knew the woman to be taken out of him Vers. 23. THe man said this now is bone c. 1. Adam understood this that the woman was taken out of him not so much by the contemplation of the similitude and likenesse of her shape Mercer or that he felt some alteration in his body as though somewhat had beene taken from it Reuchlin but hee had this knowledge especially by divine revelation Calvin 2. Adam looking upon the woman did not presently desire her company but sincerely with a cheerefull minde acknowledgeth how fit a mate God had provided for him Reuchlin 3. This now or for this time which words are not to bee referred with the Hebrewes to the time to come that though at this time a wife was prepared out of man yet it should not be so afterward but it hath relation to the time past that although before among all the creatures he could not find a fit companion yet now hee had obtained one Fagius 4. Hee giveth the woman her name to shew the authority of man over the woman and in the derivation of the word ishah from ish the antiquity of the Hebrew tongue appeareth the like is not to be found in any other language 5. The Hebrewes wel note that ish with Iod signifieth a man without Iod which is the first letter of the name Iehovah it is fire so where God is not the directer of the inward parts there is nothing but fire contention Mercer QVEST. XLV How a man is said to leave father and mother Vers. 24. THerefore shall a man leave c. 1. These are not the
vanish howsoever some in their heat and intemperance are not afraid to call them Sabbatorum errores yea hereticall assertions a new Jubile Saint Sabbath more than either Jewish or Popish institution God grant it bee not laid to their charge that so speake or write and God give them a better mind 2. Doct. The soule is not part of Gods substance SEcondly where it is said God breathed into the face of Adam the breath of life we are not thereby to gather that the soule of man is part of the divine substance to the which opinion Lactantius seemeth to have inclined lib. 2. divinar institution for as the breath is no part of his substance that doth breath so neither is the soule of Gods essence that gave it for then the soule of man if it were of the divine nature it should be immutable and without beginning from all eternity as God is 3. Doct. There is but one soule in a man THirdly from hence it may be concluded that there is but one soule in man and that all the other faculties of sense and powers of nature are but handmaids to the soule waiting upon it and departing with it therefore God is said to have breathed into man the spirit of lâ—â—e that is the reasonable soule because the body no longer doth breath or live than the soule is present We doe therefore refuse Origens conceit upon these words Mat. 24.51 The Lord will divide or cut him off that is the spirit of the wicked shall returne to God and their soule shall goe to hell hee maketh A difference betweene the spirit and soule contrary to the Apostle who saying be ye renewed in the spirit of your soules and minds Eph. 4.24 sheweth 〈◊〉 the spirit belongeth to the mind or soule as the purer part thereof 4. Doct. Paradise was a place not altogether unknowne FOurthly whereas Paradise is described by the countrey of Eden where it was situate and by the knowne rivers of Tigris and Euphrates we inferre that Paradise then was not a place secret and unknowne as Bellarmine supposeth lib. de grat prim hom c. 12. for if it had beene unknowne in those dayes the Lord needed not to set the Cherubims to keepe it with A sword shaken And if it be objected that Paradise was never found out by any the answer is easily made 1. because it was kept by the Angels with great terrour that none durst approach 2. The Infidels and incredulous persons regarded it not 3. The faithfull looked for a much better Paradise in heaven and therefore sought not after it And herein we have the judgement of Pererius against Bellarmine one Jesuit against another lib. 3. in genes qu. 5. de paradis 5. Doct. The terrestriall Paradise is not now extant FIfthly whereas Bellarmine affirmeth that the terrestriall Paradise is yet remaining and that Henoch and Elias are there kept it appeareth by the description of Paradise to bee a meere fable 1. Paradise was planted where the knowne rivers Tigris and Euphrates ran together which is either in Armenia or Mesopotamia or some of those knowne countries then if Paradise were now extant in the world it is like that in all this time it should have beene found out by the inhabitants of those places 2. The floud over-flowed the highest hils 15. cubits Gen. 7.20 then Paradise also was covered with the water where if Henoch then was he must have also perished in the waters being out of Noahs Arke 3. The scripture maketh mention now of no other Paradise but heaven 2 Cor. 12 13. S. Paul calleth it the third heaven Paradise 4. Pererius sheweth Ruperius and Gregory to have beene of this mind that Henoch was not translated to the terrestriall Paradise to the which he subscribeth against Bellarmine 6. Doct. Marriage is not to be prohibited to any SIxthly whereas the Lord saith vers 18. It is not good for man to bee alone wee enforce this text against the popish forced virginity for whereas God saw it was not good neither for Adam then present not for his posterity which should have more need of the remedy to bee alone they contrariwise constraine their Priests and votaries to live alone depriving them of that mutuall helpe and society which God hath appointed for their comfort and to be a remedy against sinne and that this place is understood not of the marriage of Adam only but of all the faithfull Bellarmine confesseth lib. de Matrim cap. 2. 7. Doct. Polygamie condemned SEventhly vers 24. They shall be one flesh and as this place is alleaged Matthew 19. 5. They two shall bee one flesh This place sheweth the corruption of polygamie which is the having of many wives for if God had seene it good for one man to be joyned to two or divers women he would have made at the first to one man more helpes than one 5. Places of confutation 1. Confut. Experimentall knowledge of evill not to be desired 1. THe Maniches objected why did God forbid man to eate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evill would he have him like unto bruit beasts that cannot distinguish betweene good and evill Augustine answereth this experimentall knowledge of evill which Adam got by transgression was not the wisdome of an happie but the experience of a miserable man for Christ knew no sinne by his experience though he knew it by his saplence or wisdome 2. Confut. Why God gave a commandement that man would not keepe 2. WHy did God give a commandement that man should not keepe and why did he not make him so that man should not have fallen Ans. 1. God gave man this precept that hee might shewe his obedience and though he foresawe he would sinne yet he also provided a remedie and redeemer for his sinne 2. Though hee be in a better state that cannot sinne at all yet his state is good and not to be complained of that if he will cannot sinne lib. cont adversar leg c. 14. 3. Confut. against Celsus 3. CElsus derideth this storie of the making of the woman and counteth it a fable Origen answereth if you will not beleeve Moses why doe you credit Hesiod your Poet who hath the like narration how Vulcan made a woman out of clay whom all the gods adored Venus gave her beautie Pallace comelinesse of bodie Mercurius wit whereupon she was called Pandora which opening the lidde or cover of the tunne divided care and griefe unto men that lived without before Origen lib. 4. cont Câ—lsum 4 Confut. Paradise planted in a knowne place 4. THe Papists object thus Bellarmine would proove that Paradise was an unknowne place because it is said the river that went out of Eden did divide it selfe into 4. heads But there is no such river in Mesapotamia Bellar. lib. 1. de grat prim homin c. 12. For further answer to this objection I referre the reader to q. 13. before these 4. streames might be known in former
was the fittest instrument that would soone winde himselfe in and out and creepe away that he should not be seene of Adam 3. In that Moses maketh no mention of the Devill but of the serpent only it was both in regard of the weaknesse and rudenesse of the people who could not well conceive any other but the visible creatures and for that Moses writing a story reporteth things as they appeared as the story of Samuels apparition to Saul calleth it Samuel whereas it was Satan in Samuels shape because it so appeared 4. The Hebrewes here are not to be approved that say the serpent coveted to have company with the woman for that is against the nature of beasts QVEST. IX Of the manner how the woman was tempted of Satan COncerning the tentation of Satan and seduction of the woman 1. he beginneth subtilly hath God indeed said yee shall not eat of every tree whereas God onely forbad them one tree as though God had dealt hardly with them in abridging them of their liberty 2. The woman reporteth not the words of the prohibition truly some thinke that shee added of her owne yee shall not touch it as Ambrose some that she changed the words as Rupertus for the tree of knowledge of good and evill saying the tree in the midst of the garden but certaine it is that she taketh somewhat from Gods words pronouncing doubtfully lest ye die which God had denounced most certainly ye shall dye the death that is surely dye 3. Satan in his reply v. 4 5. heapeth up many lies together 1. that they shall not dye 2. that God did envy their happinesse 3. that knowledge might be had in eating of fruit 4. that they should thereby bee made like unto God Beside Rupertus conceit is here excellent that the Devill in every one of these points speaketh doubtfully as he gave the Oracles of Apollo that every word which he spake might have a double meaning ye shall not die that is not presently the death of the body though presently made subject to morrality your eyes shall bee opened so they were to their confusion knowing good and evill not by a more excellent knowledge but by miserable experience after their transgression ye shall bee as gods either as Angels or like unto us sinfull and wicked spirits 4. The woman seeth the tree to be good for meat there is her voluptuous desire pleasant to the eyes there is her curiosity and to be desired for knowledge there is the vanity of her minde Thus as the Apostle saith whatsoever is in the world is the concupiscence of the flesh the concupiscence of the eye the pride of life 1 Ioh. 2. QVEST. X. Adam tempted and deceived as well as the woman though not in the same degree THe order then and manner of the tentation was this 1. It is evident that neither Adam nor Eva had committed any sin before this congresse with Satan for the Scripture saith that til then they were both naked and were not ashamed Gen. 2.25 So that herein both Rupertus and Ferus are deceived 2. Satan first assaileth the woman both being as the weaker more easie to be seduced as a fit instrument also to entice Adam 3. Adam did not only incline unto her amicabili quadam benevolentia of a loving mind and thereby enticed as Sampson was by Dalilah and Salomon by his wives but it is like he was seduced by the same flattering and false perswasions whereby the woman was first beguiled being carried away with an ambitious desire in knowledge not to be equalized but made like unto God this may appeare out of the 22. verse Behold man is become like unto us to know good and evill where the Lord reproveth also mans affected and curious desire to attaine to a greater perfection Neither doth that place of the Apostle contradict this opinion Adam was not deceived but the woman was deceived and was in the transgression 1 Tim. 2.14 for whether we expound it with Epiphanius and Calvin that the Apostles meaning is the woman was first deceived not the man or with Mercerus that the man was not deceived but entised by the womā or with Hierome that Adam was not deceived by the serpent but by the woman or that Eva did not wittingly deceive Adam as the serpent beguiled Eva whereof the two first expositions being one in effect are most agreeable to the Apostles minde by this text Adam is not wholly exempted from being deceived but only in that manner as Eva was perverted and seduced QVEST. XI Whether Adams sinne was the greatest of all sinnes NOw as touching the greatnesse of Adams sin simply it was not the greatest sin of all committed in the world neither in respect of the kind of the sinne as adultery is greater than fornication for so we hold blasphemy and Idolatry to be greater sins than Adams was neither in respect of the affection of the offender for many are with a more ungodly violent and sinfull desire given over then Adam in this tentation neither was it the greatest in respect of the quality of the sin for it was pardonable in Adam whereas sinne against the holy Ghost is impardonable But yet it may truly bee said to bee the greatest 1. in regard of the fruits and sequele of that sin the contagion and infection of all mankind 2. in respect of Adams person who in his excellent gifts considered might have more easily resisted 3. in regard of the facility of the commandement which required no hard or difficult thing 4. the place also it selfe being considereth namely in Paradise where there was no provocation or allurement unto sinne QVEST. XII Whether Adams or Eves sinne were the greater NOw if Adams sinne be compared with the womans in some things it will be found equall in some things superiour in some inferiour to it 1. Both Adam and Eva sinned in their infidelity in not beleeving the word of God but giving credit to Satans faire promises that they should not dye 2. in their concupiscence in coveting the forbidden fruit 3. in their ambition in desiring a further state of perfection Secondly in respect of Adams person who was appointed to be the womans head and of his gifts of knowledge and wisdome the man was more faulty than the woman Thirdly yet simply the womans sinne was greater because beside other sinnes common unto them this was proper unto her in seducing her husband so that as Augustine well noteth de Genes 11.42 the man sinned onely against God and himselfe the woman against God her selfe and her neighbour beside the woman was first deceived and became the author and beginner of transgression Therefore the opinion of them is not here to bee allowed who doe either aggravate Adams sinne or extenuate the womans of the first sort is the author of the questions upon the old Testament under Augustines name who ascribeth idolatry to Adam quest 83. whereas hee desired not to
become as one of us 1. Not as one of the Angels as Oleaster interpreteth or that the Lord speaketh in the plurall number as is the manner of great persons for this phrase of speech was not used in those dayes neither are the Angels and God alike 2. But by us the Trinity is vnderstood and the rest is uttered ironice by way of derision Adam is rebuked that he came farre short to be as God as Sathan promised him either as God the Father in power or as the sonne in wisedome or as the holy ghost in goodnesse holinesse Verba sunt insultantis as Augustine saith quod non solum factus fuerit qualis esse voluit sed nec illud quod factus fuerat conservavit they are as the words of one that insulteth because he was so farre from being made that which he desired that hee could not keepe that which he was made And as Rupertus non solum nequaquam sicut Deus sed penefactus erat sicut diabolus He was so farre from being as God that he was almost become as the Devill if Gods mercie had not prevented him 3. I rather preferre this sense with Mercerus and Calvin that God speaketh ironically even in Adams hearing then either with Iunius and Paguine to referre these words to the time past when man was in the state of innocencie or to make it an affirmative speech of the time present with Onkelos that Adam now of himselfe knew good and evill as God for then he had gained and not lost by his transgression he knew evill by experience as he did not before but he had no such perfect knowledge as in the Angels therefore the Lord here derideth mans folly and alludeth to the vaine words of Satan who promised they should be as God 4. And where he saith lest he put forth his hands c. by living forever 1. Neither long life is meant 2. Nor that God herein had compassion of man that being brought to so miserable an estate he should not alwayes live in it 3. Neither that if he did eat of the tree of life he should have lived for ever as Calvin thinketh that God vitam conjungit cum externa tessera did joyne life with the outward signe for the tree of it selfe gave not life but was a symbole only of immortality which man should have received of God if he had persevered in his obedience Muscul. 5. But seeing the Lord had deprived man of life he taketh away also the symbole of it and speaketh according to the judgement of man who foolishly might thinke to recover his estate by eating of the tree of life and therefore by putting forth his hand is expressed that voluntary action whereby man of purpose would have eaten of the tree of life to releeve himselfe Mercer 6. Now although it had not beene materiall though Adam before his fall had eaten of the tree of life for it could not have helped him now yet I rather thinke with Ramban that he did not eat of it at all QVEST. XXXII At what time Adam fell Vers. 23. THerefore the Lord sent him forth from the garden of Eden Here a great question is moved how long Adam continued in Paradise and when he was cast out of Paradise Some would have Adam to continue so long in Paradise as Christ lived yeares on earth others the space of forty dayes and that Christ fasted so many dayes for a remedy against Adams intemperancie in Paradise so long others thinke that Adam fell the next day after his creation upon the day of rest as Tostatus but it is not like that God upon that day which was a time of rejoycing would execute judgement nor curse in that day which he blessed some thinke that Adam fell upon the eighth day of his creation that day seven night wherein he was made as Pererius but the most approved opinion is that Adam fell the same day of his creation which seemeth to be most probable for these reasons 1. The Angels that fell presently after their creation sinned as our Saviour saith that the Devill non steâ—it in veritate did not stand or continue in the truth Ioh. 8.44 Hereunto Augustine consenteth Factus coâ—tinuo se à luce veritatis avertit as soone as he was made he presently turned aside from the light of truth unde angelicae vitae dulcedinem non gustavit quam non acceptam fast idivit sed nolendo accipere de seruit amifit so he tasted not the sweetnesse of the angelicall life which he loathed not being received but by disdaining to receive it lost it So it is like that man also eftsoone lost the benefit of the creation 2. Our Saviour saith that the deuill was a murtherer from the beginning Ioh. 8.44 not of the world but of mans creation therefore at the very first he set upon them 3. The subtilty of the Devill doth insinuate as much who would then assault them when they were least able to resist before they by experience were confirmed in their obedience 4. And it was fit that man sinning should be cast out of Paradise before he had fully tasted of the pleasure thereof lest he afterward might have beene tormented with the losse and attempted to returne 5. And it is cleare by the serpents first onset Hath God said ye shall not eat of every tree c. that they had not yet tasted of any fruit but at the very first the forbidden fruit was offered before their appetite had beene served with any other 6. Adam had not yet eaten of the tree of life as is evident vers 21. lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life and therefore Augustine is in an errour that he did eat of other trees and specially of the tree of life but if they had stayed any time in Paradise it is not unlike but they should have tasted of the tree of life it being in the heart of Paradise where Adams chiefe aboad was 7. Likewise seeing presently after the creation they were bidden increase and multiply it is not other like but the man should have knowne his wife in Paradise if they had stayed there so long and so they should have gotten children without sinne To this purpose Augustine saith Quasi in ea â—tate facti credendi sunt ut expectanda esset maturitas pubertatis aut non illud tunc legitimum esset eâ—m primum fieri potuit as though they were created of such an age which was not fit for procreation or that it had not beene lawfull for them to come together as soone as might be 8. What became of Lions and Beares that lived of flesh all this while of Adams being in Paradise they could not fast so long and flesh they did not eat because there was no death before mans fall and they did not feed on grasse for then their nature should not so soone have beene changed to devoure flesh 9.
exercise his strength as Augustine againe saith Administrat omâ—ia qua creavit ut etiam ipsa proprios motus exercere sinat God doth so governe all things which he created that yet hee suffereth them to exercise their owne motions 3. God might justly suffer this to be done because hee did know how to turne Adams fall unto good Deuâ— permisit hominem tentari quâ—m sciebut esse casurum quid simul videbat eo casu sâ—â—â—ti posse ad misericordiam c. God suffered man to be tempted whom he knew should fall because he saw how to use his fall to declare his mercy and justice while he justly punished some out of the same damned masse and delivered others in mercy Doct. VI. Adam not damned WHereas v. 15. a promise is made concerning Christ that the seede of the woman should breake the serpents head from hence we infer that our first patents though they sinned yet were by faith in the Messiah to come restored and not utterly condemned which was the heresie of the Tatiaâ—es August de haeres c. 23. In the booke of wisdome we read that wisdome preserved the first father of the world and brought him out of his offence c. 10.1 which is agreeable to the Canonicall scripture because Adam is called the sonne of God Luke 3.38 he was not then the child of death and hell everlastingly to perish Doct. VII Wherein Adam transgressed NOw because carnall men doe extenuate Adams sinne that he was cast out of Paradise for eating an apple I will briefly shew the greatnes of our first parents transgression wherein many sins concurred 1. There was in them both incredulitie in not beleeving Gods words to be true 2. Vnthankfulnesse in not being contented with their estate 3. Pride in desiring to be like unto God 4. Wantonnes in sinning without any necessitie having all the trees in the garden beside to eare of 5. There was the sinne of gluttonie in pampering the desire of the belâ—â—e 6. Disobedience in transgressing the commandement 7. Curiositie in coveting to know the operation of the fruit in bringing them to knowledge 8. Presumption in that they presumed of Gods mercie that they should not die though they did eate 9. Then followed the concupiscence and rebellion of the flesh in being ashamed of their nakednesse 10. They excused their sinne 11. They are guiltie of homicide in bringing death not only upon themselves but all their posteritie 12. Beside Eva seduced her husband 13. Adam sinned in his inordinate affection to his wife in listning to her 14. The easines of the commandemeÌ„t maketh the transgression more heinous as Augustine well noteth answering to this question why God forbad them to eate of that tree Si bona est quare non tango si mala est quare in Paradise ideo in Paradiso est quia bona est sed nolâ— tangâ—â— quiâ— obedienteÌ„ te volâ— if it be good why doe I not touch it if it be evill why is it in Paradise therefore it is in paradise because it is good but I will not have thee touch it because I would have thee obedient God could not then make better triall of mans obedience than in forbidding that which was good Places of confutation Confut I. Infidelity not pride the first sinne of our parent 1. THe opinion of the Popish writers is that pride was the first sinne that Eva was tempted unto because Satan saith unto them yee shall bee as gods but it is rather evident that their first sinne was infidelitie first Satan telleth them ye shall not die at all and so perswadeth them not to give credit to the word of God for if they had verely beleeved that to come to passe which was threatned they would never have given any credit to Satan Confut. II. Our parents lost not their faith 2. BEllarmine also holdeth that our first parents in their transgression lost their faith because by the seducement of Satan they beleeved not what God said unto them ye shall not die Ans. 1. It followeth not if in this one act of faith they failed that therefore totally their faith was extinguished he that shal be seduced in one article or point of faith is he presently stripped of all faith 2. It was no formall infidelitie as though wittingly they rejected Gods word but they were materially deceived onely and their sudden violent affection over-shadowed their knowledge judgement 3. So Peter denied Christ through feare and frailtie yet in his judgement he could not so at once cast off all opinion of Christ hâ—s faith was shaken and winnowed but it failed not as our Saviour testifieth of him that he had praied for him that his faith faile not Luke 23.22 and so was the case in our first parents Confut. III. Not Marie but Christ brake the serpents head 3. vers 15. THe vulgar latine translation readeth shee shall breake thy head c. which the Popish writers understand of the virgin Mary as Pererius doubteth not to give this marginal note B. virgo contrivit caput serpentis the blessed Virgin did break the head of the serpent and Bellarmine also justifieth this translation whereas in the original it is his ipsum it in the neuter gender which must be referred to seed the Septuagint and the Chalde read he in the masculine understanding it of Christ for none else but Christ broke the serpents head Confut. IIII. The tree of life could not actually give life but was a symbole of it 4. vers 22. LEst he take of the tree of life and live for ever Bellarmine would proove from hence that this tree by eating the fruit therof might bring true immortalitie Ans. 1. As the Lord saith by way of derision man is become as one of vs to know good and evill So in the same sense is this other part of the sentence uttered that as a man simply thought to get knowledge by eating of the one so he might imagine to obtaine life by the other 2. For if Adam might have lived by eating of this tree now after he had sinned how would that other saying have taken effect in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death Gen. 2.17 These speeches had beene contrarie the one to the other 3. It was therefore the tree of life as the other was of the knowledge of good and evill that is significative non effective not in operation â—ut in signification it was a signe or symbole of life received from God and by Gods gift should have beene â—reserved if a man had not sinned and therefore man beeing deprived of life lost also the signe thereof Places of Exhortation and practice 1. WE have here set forth unto us from v. 1. to v. 7. the degrees of tentation 1. the suggestion of Satan 2. delectation the woman saw the tree was pleasant c. 3. Consent shee tooke of the fruit 4. The effecting of the thing desired shee did eate
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated him S. tulit tooke him H. B. G. non occidit killed him not Ch. sumpsit received him Tr. heb lachach to take away receive v. 25. an 165. yeares S. an 187. yeares cat v. 26.802 yeares S. 782. yeares cat v. 28. an 178. yeares S. an 182. yeares cat v. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall cause us to rest S. shall comfort us cat heb â—â—ach to rest to refresh v. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the earth S. de terra from off the earth Ch. in the earth H. as touching the earth G. aboue the earth B. propter terram because of the earth Tr. v. 30.565 yeares S. 595. yeare cat v. 31.753 yeares S. 777. yeares cat 3. The Theologicall explication QVEST. I. Booke of generation how to be understood Vers. 1. THis is the booke of the generation 1. Moses setteth downe the genealogy of the fathers before the floud because of Christs line which Luke deriveth from Adam Matthew goeth not beyond Abraham not as some thinke because of the rest of that line beyond Abraham might easily bee supplyed out of Moses books which were then well knowne but for that the most conspicuous and manifest promises of the Messiah were made to Abraham all the generations to Matthew supplying â—â—enty from Adam to Abraham make but 72. but Luke reckoneth 77. The Reason is because Matthew omitteth some of purpose to make the numbers equall which Luke supplyeth and Matthew maketh his account by Salomon Luke by Nathan so that there might bee more persons in the one discent than in the other 2. Moses beginneth now to set downe Adams generation by Seth because Cain was rejected and Abel died without issue 3. It is called a booke that is an ennumeration for so Sepher signifieth a booke because things are rehearsed in it not because as R. Isaac Carus Moses beginneth his booke here and the other 3. chapters should bee as a preface 4. Generation is here taken actively for the posterity of Adam increased by him as in Matthew the booke of the generation of Iesus Christ is taken passively for the generations of whom Christ came 5. And whereas it is added in the day that God created Adam we need neither with Lyranus to understand day generally for time and wee refuse the opinion of the Hebrewes that hold that Adam in the same day of his creation began to have generations for so they fable that Adam and Eve had foure or five children the same day they were created but in the day is to be referred to the latter part of the verse wherein mention is made of Adams creation according to the image of God Mercer QVEST. II. How Adam begat a Sonne in his owne likenesse Vers. 3. ADam begat a sonne in his owne likenesse c. 1. which is neither to be understood of the shape and image of his body for so Cain was in outward shape like to Adam 2. neither is it to be taken for the image of vertue and piety in his soule for Adam had lost that image neither is vertue ingendred by nature and Abel had the image of his fathers vertue before Seth. 3. neither is it so said because the image of mankind was continued and preserved in Seth whereas both Abel died without issue and Cains posterity was extinguished in the floud for this notwithstanding seeing the world was increased by Cain he might be said also to be after Adams image 4. But hereby is signified that originall corruption which is descended unto Adams posterity by naturall propagation which is expressed in the birth of Seth not of Abel because hee had no of-spring nor of Cain because it might appeare that even the righteous seed by nature are subject to this originall depravation and yet Seth was otherwise after the image of Adam than Cain because his seed was sanctified of God who purposed in Seth and his seed to make good the promise made to Adam as touching the seed of the woman that should breake the serpents head Iun. 5. And whereas Adam was an hundred thirty yeere old before he begat Seth wee abhor the lewd fables of the Hebrewes that thinke in this meane space that Adam companied with female spirits or devils and begat male spirits and Eva with male spirits and brought forth masculine or male devils neither doe I thinke with Mercer that in the meane time Adam begat other sonnes and daughters but God by this meanes Adam staying so long without children did try his faith in looking for the promised seed and his patience in seeing the wicked stocke of Cain so mightily to increase Iun. QVEST. III. Wherefore it is added and he died Vers. 5. ALL the dayes that Adam lived c. 1. Neither were these yeares otherwise accounted than by 12. moneths as it may appeare in the story of Noahs floud where mention is made of the 7. moneth and 27. day of the moneth 2. Neither did these righteous fathers onely live thus long by miracle as thinketh R. Moses but it was usuall in those dayes 3. And the conclusion of every ones life is mortuus est he died not as some think because it should appeare that they dyed not in the floud but by their owne naturall death and therefore they say this clause is not added after the floud in the genealogy of the fathers but it is thus said to shew what the condition of all mankind was after Adams fall 4. It is said only of Adam all the dayes that he lived Whereby the Hebrewes inferre that Adam lived a godly life and repented his repentance we doubt not of but not soundly hence gathered Mercer QVEST. IIII. Whether Adam the longest liver NOw whereas Adam lived but 930. yeares Mathuselah 969. yeares v. 27. yet may Adam be well supposed to have beene the longest liver because he was created in a perfect state of body apt to generation which was not then under sixty yeares for none of the Patriarkes began to have children under that age Mahalalel begat at 65. yeares of age v. 15. and none under then adde unto Adams yeares 60. more in what age and state of body he was created and he will bee found to have beene the longest liver of the Patriarkes and to exceed Mathuselahs age 21. yeares QVEST. V. The yeares of the Patriarkes full and complete yeares consisting of twelve moneths COncerning the long life of the aged Patriarkes 1. Neither is the conceit of the Aegyptians to bee received that a man cannot live above an 100. yeares for they say that a mans heart increaseth till he come to 50. every yeare two drachmaes in weight and then decreaseth every yeare as much till he come to an hundred and then for want of heart hee can live no longer For this fancy of theirs is confuted by experience for Pliny maketh mention that in Vespatian the Emperors time there were found in Italy two men of an 105. yeares foure of an
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
is interpreted to spoile conquer or overcome and so they say that God did here invert or overcome the order of nature in causing the barren to beare But Oukelos Hierome Pagnine Iunius doe better translate Omnipotent God then is called Shaddai that is omnipotent and all-sufficient for his omnipotencie includeth also all-sufficiencie QUEST III. Of the change of the name of Abram to Abraham Vers. 5. NEither shall thy name any more bee called Abram but Abraham 1. Hierome thinketh that the Hebrew letter he is borrowed from the name of God Iehovah added to Abrams name tradit in Genes 2. Ferus maketh this mysticall signification of it that God by giving Abraham a letter of his name doth thereby give even himselfe unto him as also thereby is signified that God should also bee borne of the seed of Abraham and this should bee in the fourth millenary or thousand yeare after the beginning of the world as this letter was added in the fourth place 3. Chrysostome thinketh that Abram signifieth one that passeth over because hee passed over the river mistaking the name Abram and Hebrew for the same whereas the first beginneth with aleph the other with am 4. Philo interpreteth Abram an high father Abraham the high father of the voice and so divideth Ham the syllable added from Hamah that signifieth to make a sound or noise thereby insinuating that Abram of an high father who was given to the contemplation of the starres and high things was now become a perfect wise man for hee is a wise man that is a master of words and guideth his tongue 5. But all these are mens conjectures the Lord himselfe sheweth the reason of this change because the Lord had made him Abh hamon a father of a multitude so that Ham the last syllable of Abrahams name is the first of the word Hamon that signifieth a multitude sic Eugubinus Munster Iun. and hereupon the Hebrewes well observe that God to those which he loved added a letter of his owne name Iehova as the letter He to Abrahams and Sarahs name the letter jod to the name of Iehosuah who was called Hoshea before 6. But yet it appeareth not why the letter Resh remaineth still in the name of Abraham 1. Ab. Ezra thinketh that it is borrowed from abir which signifieth strong and so Abraham betokeneth a strong or mighty father of a multitude 2. Rasi thinketh it is inserted to shew him to bee father of Aram his owne Countrey 3. Some of the Hebrewes thinke that Resh is not taken away though He be added because God doth not use to take from names but to put to them which observation is not true for the Lord taketh away one letter from the name of Sarai namely jod and putteth to He. 4. Mercerus thinketh that Resh is of rabh which signifieth much or great and so maketh this to be the sense of Abrahams name a father of a great multitude 5. But I preferre the common opinion that Resh remaineth of Abram and nothing is changed but onely He added and so Abraham signifieth an high father of a multitude Now whereas it is the opinion of the Hebrewes that it is a sinne and transgression of Gods commandement to call Abraham any more by the name of Abram it appeareth to be otherwise for Nehem 9.7 he is called Abram therefore where the Lord saith thy name shall be no more called Abram it is not so much a commandement as an honourable favour vouchsafed to Abraham in the change of his name Mercer QUEST IV. The reasons why circumcision was instituted Vers. 10. LEt every man childe among you be circumcised Of this institution of circumcision divers reasons are alleaged 1. Philo alleageth foure the fore-skinne was commanded to be cut off for the better preventing of the disease called the carbuncle that the whole body might be kept more pure or cleane and that no soile or filth should be hid under the fore-skinne that they might be more apt to generation that the part circumcised might better expresse the similitude of the heart 2. Moses Aegyptius saith that circumcision helpeth to bridle and restraine inordinate lust and concupiscence of the flesh but the contrary appeareth for no Nation is more given over to carnall lust than the Egyptians Saracens Turks that are circumcised 3. Some thinke circumcision in that part was prescribed for the greater detestation of the superstition of the Egyptians and other Nations that did adore that part and make an Idoll of it under the name of Priapus and did carry it about in open shew in their wicked Idolatrous solemnities But there are better reasons for the institution of circumcision and more fruitfull signification The use then of circumcision is partly politicall partly morall partly theologicall The pollice consisted herein that circumcision at the first was a note of difference and distinction betweene the holy people and all other Nations though afterward other Nations as the Idumeans Arabians Aegyptians tooke up the same rite to be circumcised Thus David called in disdaine Goliah the uncircumcised Philistim as hereby discerned from the people of God 1 Sam. 17.36 Beside by circumcision they were admonished to separate themselves from all other Nations neither to joyne with them in marriage nor to learne their manners Thus the sons of Iacob said to the Sichemites we cannot give our sister to an uncircumcised man Gen. 34.14 For this cause Theodoret noteth that circumcision was neglected all the time of the sojourning of the Israelites in the desart because there was then no feare of conversing with other Nations in those solitary places The morall use of circumcision was to teach the inward mortifying and circumcising of the heart as Irenaeus well observeth out of Deuteronomie chap. 10. vers 16. Circumcise the foreskinne of your heart Ambrose noteth another morall point Vt puderet unumquemque provictioris aeta is labors vel dolorâ— cedere quorum utrumque tenera infantia vicisset that men of yeares should be ashamed to give place to labour or griefe which they overcame in their infancie The Theologicall use of circumcision was partly commemorative of the covenant which God made with Abraham and his seed which served as a sure bond to keepe them in obedience to walke uprightly before God Gen. 17.10 Partly demonstrative in expressing by the part circumcised the instrument of generation that originall contagion which is derived by naturall propagation And so Augustine and Bede doe understand those words vers 14. the uncircumcised man childe shall be cut off because he hath broken my covenant Illud significatur pactum quod cum primo homine iniit Deus that covenant is meant which was made with the first man which transgression even Infants by their originall corruption are guilty of Partly it is figurative both typicall in shadowing forth faith in Christ for remission of sinnes and therefore is called by the Apostle The seale of the righteousnesse of
more truly that in this supposed case it had not beene lawfull for Lots daughters to doe as they did because Veticia est lege naturali talis commixtio such câ—rnall commixtion is forbidden by the law of nature and admitteth no dispensation And againe their owne minde gave them that they did not well the care of conservation of man-kinde belonged to their father and therefore they should have consulted with him they then not consulting with their father feared his consent and so condemned in their conscience their owne act QVEST. XXXI Whether Lot were altogether ignorant what was done to his daughters Vers. 33. HE knew not when she lay downe nor when she rose up 1. It can neither be as the Septuag read he know not when he lay downe or rose up for Lot was not so seâ—slâ—sse not to know what he did when he a woke and rose up 2. Neither is it a thing incredible nescientem coire quempâ—am for a man not knowing in his sleepe to doe the act of generation seeing the Scripture so testifieth here of Lot 3. Neither is Lyranus opinion right that Lot onely was ignorant when his daughters came to him and rose up but he knew whaâ— he did in the act supposing through forgetfulnesse that it might be his wife for Lot if he remembred himselfe when hee awaked what he had done would not have committed the same thing againe 4. Neither is Tostatus conceit out of Thomas probable that Lots daughter conceived by him by nocturnall pollution and shedding of seed not by the act of generation as Thomas reporteth of one that was by that meanes with child by her father who for preserving of her virginity kept her in his owne bed for the text it selfe overthroweth this conceit they consulted to lie with their father or as the Septuagint reade sleepe with him and so they did 5. Therefore Cajetanus opinion is to bee preferredâ— Lot omnino nescivisse universâ—m rem gestam that Lot was ignorant of the whole matter what was done from the first to the last of which opinion Chrysostome was before the reasons are these 1. Chrysostome ea peccata nos condemnant quae scienter facimus those sinnes condemne us which we doe wittingly but the Scripture excuseth this fact of Lot by his ignorance 2. Cajetane saith hoc omne â—pios perfici posse imped to rationis usu that his businesse may be done though the use of reason be hindred as in those that are drunken 3. Pererius addeth that the progressive faculty may be exercised in sleepe as many walke carry things from place to place and doe such like things in their sleepe and of the same sort might this act 〈◊〉 4. The Devill also to helpe forward this worke might worke such a fantasie in Lots minde being asleepe 5. Calvins conjecture is best Non tam vino fuisse obrutum quam propter intemperiem divinitus percussum spiritu stupâ—ris That Lot was not so much oppressed with wine as stricken with a spirit of slumber and senslesnesse from God because of his intemperance to which agreeth that saying of Chrysostome Divina dispensatione factum ut sic illo vino gravaretur ut omnino ignoraret That God so disposed that he should be so overcome of wine that he was utterly ignorant It was not then the operation onely of the wine but Gods worke withall that caused this senslesse ignorance QUEST XXXII The causes why the Lord suffered Lot thus to fall THe causes why Lot was permitted thus to fall are rendred to be these 1. His double incredulity in not giving credit to the Angell promising him safety first in the mountaine and then in Zoar caused him to be punished with these two sinnes of drunkennesse and incontinencie Hierome 2. His drunkennesse made way unto his lust Calvin 3. God hereby sheweth his great goodnesse and singular providence who can turne evill unto good for of Moab one of those incestuous births came Ruth which was married to Booz of whose line came our Saviour after the flesh Perer. 4. God hath set forth this example to make us circumspect Ne abeamus in securitatem that we be not secure Luther If Lot so excellent a man fell into such grievous sinnes of drunkennesse and incest who ought not to be humbled and take heed to his wayes and depend upon God for his direction 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. None perfectly just in this life Vers. 8. BEhold I have two daughters c. Calvin from hence concludeth that no mans works are so perfect but in some things they faile The Scripture calleth Lot a righteous man but secundum quendam modum after a certaine manner as Augustine saith The Scripture noteth six great faults in this righteous man 1. His contention with Abraham Gen. 13. 2. His offering of his daughters to the rage of the Sodomites 3. His incredulity in doubting to be saved in the mountaine 4. His weaknesse of faith in fearing to stay in Zoar which the Lord promised to save for his sake 5. His drunkennesse 6. His incestuous act though involuntary Therefore as Saint Iames saith In many things we offend all Iam. 3.1 so there is none so righteous but in some things he offendeth 2. Doct. The elect Angels ministers of Gods judgements upon the wicked Vers. 13. THe Lord hath sent us to destroy it The good Angels then as they are Ministers of Gods mercies toward the elect Psal. 91.11 He shall give his Angels charge over thee so are they the executors of Gods judgements upon the wicked as upon the host of Senacherib 2 King 19. and here upon the City of Sodome Sometime also the elect Angels doe execute Gods judgements upon his owne people as 2 Sam. 24. when David had numbred his people but this is more rare and then when such judgements tend rather to our good than hurt our correction rather than confusion 3. Doct. No man can deliver himselfe from the bondage of sinne Vers. 16. THe men caught him and his wife by the hands c. As Lot would not have hastened to come out of Sodome if the Angels had not pulled him by the hands so cannot we free our selves from the bondage of sinne nor come forth out of the wickednesse of the world except the Lord doe call us out as our Saviour saith None can come unto me except my father draw him Ioh. 6.44 4. Doct. We must abandon whatsoever belongeth to Babylon Vers. 17. NEither tarry thou in all the plaine Lot is not onely taken forth of Sodome but forbidden to stay in the plaine that belonged thereunto so is it not enough to come forth from the grosse superstition of the Romish Babylon but we must shake off whatsoever hath any affinity or agreement with it sic Muscul. as the Apostle saith Abstaine from all appearance of evill 1 Thess. 5.22 5. Doct. The destruction of the world by fire shall be sudden Vers. 28. HE saw the smoake of the land
it for a recompence for taking Sarah away as the Septuagint read and Chrysostome expoundeth 2. Or to buy Sarah and her maid vailes to hide their beauty that others be not intangled ex Perer. 3. Or that it was a gift of honour to shew that Sarah was both chaste and innocent Latine translat and the great Bible so also Rasi 2. It is not understood of this excuse or dissimulation which Sarah used as though the sense should be this that she might use this vaile or colour of the truth among her ownr for they could not bee deceived but among strangers she should plainly confesse her selfe to be Abrahams wife Lyranus Tâ—status for what needed Sarah to use any such excuse where she was knowne 3. Some doe referre it as well to Abraham as to the gift and to all that now hapned that they were signes of Sarahs chastity Mercer But the better interpretation is to apply it to Abraham that he should be the veile of her eyes 1. That no man knowing her to be Abrahams wife should looke upon her to desire her Aben Ezra Cajeâ—â—n 2. It also putteth Sara in minde of her subjection to Abraham whereof the veile is a signe 1 Cor. 11. â—0 3. Oleaster also further stretcheth it that Abraham was her veile that is her just excuse that she did this for his cause being by him perswaded but the former exposition is the better QUEST XIII How Sarah was reproved SHe was thus reproved 1. The 70. reade speake the truth that is that I am innocent and touched theâ— noâ— but this reading dissenteth from the originall 2. So doth the Latine remember thou art deprehended Lyppoman saith it should be read reprehensam reprehended not deprehensam deprehended 3. Iunius readeth all this is done that thou maist be learned 4. But the better reading is all this was that sheâ— might be reproved or in all this she reproved her selfe so that they seeme to be the words rather of the writer concerning Sarah than of Abimelech to Sarah QUEST XIV Whether Abimelech were smitten with any disease Vers. 17. GOd healed Abimelech c. for the Lord had shut up every wombe 1. Aben Ezra is not right that thinketh that Abimelech himselfe was stricken with no disease but that he is said so to be because his wife and maidens were punished for the text it selfe saith that God healed Abimelech and it is most like that God sent upon him some infirmity in his secrets whereby he was kept from comming neare to Sarah QUEST XV. What the shutting up of the wombe signifieth 2. THe shutting up of the wombe is not to bee understood as Pererius doth of the difficulty of bringing forth for then the children being ready for birth and staying longer than their time should have beene suffocated and the text saith the Lord had shut up every wombe but all were not great with childe at one instant Neither need we with Calvin because in so short a time Sarah being conceived with childe of Isaack and not yet delivered there could be no experience or triall of their sterility and barrennesse to say the history is transposed and was done before for Abraham till now had no occasion to sojourne in Gerar therefore the meaning is that the women were hindred from conception so signifieth the shutting up of the wombe as the opening of the wombe betokeneth aptnes to conceive as we reade Gen. 29.31 The Hebrewes affirme that not onely in the women but the men also all their pores and passages were stopped as well of the mouth to take meat as of other places that expell them and that the hens could not lay their egges but the text beareth it not 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. Adultery a sinne punishable with death Vers. 3. THou art but dead c. God threatneth death to Abimelech conditionally if he did not restore Abrahams wife Iun. whereby we see that in the justice of God adulterie is a sinne to be punished by death as Iudas adjudged Thamar to the fire for whoredome Gen. 38.24 Where the law then is more gentle than to inflict the punishment of death upon adulterers they may thanke the lenity of the Magistrate which useth not that rigour which may well stand with justice 2. Doct. Ignorance excuseth not sinne Vers. 6. I Kept thee that thou shouldest not sinne against mee c. Abimelech then if hee had touched Sarai though he did not know her to be anothers wife had sinned ignorance then excuseth not sinne though it doe some what extenuate and qualifie it Muscul. as it is in the Gospell He that knew not his masters will and yet did commit many things worthy of stripes shall be beaten with few stripes Luk. 12.48 he that sinneth willingly shall receive more stripes and he that falleth of ignorance shall have some also 3. Doct. The whole family blessed because of the Master Vers. 7. THou shalt die the death and all thou hast as the sin of the Master of the house bringeth a judgement upon the whole familie so the Lord also sheweth mercy to the whole house for the masters sake Luk. 19.9 This day is salvation come into this house because he is become the sonne of Abraham 5. Places of confutation 1. Confut. No perfect righteousnesse in this life Vers. 5. WIth an upright minde and innocent hands c. This place is no ground for their opinion that thinke a man in this life may attaine to perfect justice for Abimelech doth not absolutely cleare himselfe from all sinne but onely in this particular in this degree of sinne that he had not committed willingly any act of uncleannesse with Sarah Calvin as the Prophet David useth to plead for himselfe Psal. 7.3 If I have done this thing if there be any wickednesse in my hands c. he onely purgeth himselfe from the suspition of a particular fact 2. Confut. The Scripture sendeth us not to pray to the dead but to be holpen by the prayers of the living Vâ—â—s 7. HE is a Prophet and shall pray for thee c. Neither doth this place make for the invocation of Saints that are departed for God sendeth not Abimelech to Noah or any other departed to pray for him but to Abraham then living Calvin The living then may pray for the living which duty may be mutually performed in charity while one knoweth anothers necessities But for the living to pray to or for the dead which know not their wants and they are already certainly disposed of in an unchangeable state as the living are not it hath no warrant upon any precept or example of Scripture or any sound reason drawne from thence 3. Confut. Against the heresie of the Tritheists Vers. 13. WHen God caused me to wander out of my fathers house c. The word is â—lohim Gods in the plurall number which maketh some to understand the Angels Vatablus Calvin but God and not the Angels first called Abraham from his Country fathers house
the King of Moab by their evill example did sacrifice the King of Edoms son as Burgens for no such thing is expressed in the text 2. Neither was this indignation conceived by the idolatrous Israelites against the rest thinking the King of Moab invincible because of this sacrifice Cajetan for this indignation was kindled not by the Israelites but against them 3. And for the same reason the common exposition seemeth not to be so proper that this indignation and griefe of the Israelites was for the horror and cruelty of this unnaturall fact which they could not endure to behold Tostat. for this indignation or wrath should not have beene against the Israelites but against the King of Moab 4. Therefore it seemeth more agreeable to the text that this wrath was on the Edomites part against the Israelites because it was their quarrell that brought the King of Edom to take part with them against the Moabites upon which occasion this hard hap fell out upon his sonne and upon this division they brake off and left the siege Iunius QUEST XXVI Of Huz Buz Kemuel Chesed the sonnes of Nahor Vers. 21. HVz c. and Buz. Of this Huz was not named the Countrey where Iob dwelt Iob 1.1 but of that Huz rather which was the sonne of Aram Genes 10.22 Hierome 2. Of Buz came the family of the Buzites of the which Elihu was Iob 32.6 3. Kemuel here mentioned was not the father of the Syrians as the Greeke and vulgar Latine read nor yet of Aram Naharaim as Tostatus or Aram Seba as Cajetane for the City of Nahor was in Aram Genes 24.10 This name and Countrey therefore was more ancient than Kemuel Nahors sonne and was rather so called of Aram the sonne of Sem Genes 10.22 4. Neither is Chesed here named the father of the Chaldees which was Abrahams Countrey and could not therefore be founded by his nephew 5. But these sonnes of Nahor were fathers of certaine families in Syria whereof there was some remainder in Constantius Caesars time as may appeare by the names of certaine townes Reman and Buzan remembred by Ammianus Lib. 18. ex Iun. 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. How God is said to tempt Vers. 1. GOd did tempt or prove Abraham c. 1. God is not said here to tempt Abraham metaphoricè metaphorically as he is said to be angry to repent in a figurative speech as Cajetane but God truly and verily tempteth that is proveth and taketh triall of Abrahams faith 2. And God doth it Non ut ipse hominem inveniat sed ut homo se inveniat Not that God need to finde out man but that man may finde out himselfe as Augustine saith 3. God tempteth otherwise than Satan is said to tempt God properly is the author only of good temptations but Satan is the tempter unto evill Evill temptations proceed not from God effective sed permissive by way of action but by way of permission when the Lord withdraweth his sufficient grace and necessary helpe Gods tempting and Satans tempting doe diversly differ 1. In respect of the end Deus tâ—ntat ut doceat Diabolus ut decipiat God tempteth to teach the Devill to deceive as Augustine saith 2. In respect of the persons God tempteth onely the good to make their faith and obedience knowne sometimes the weake are tried that after they have fallen they may repent and be restored sometimes the strong that they may be more and more confirmed But the devill tempteth both good and bad the good to bring them into evill the bad that they forsake not evill 3. The object of good and evill temptations are divers good temptations are especially seene in outward things as in poverty sicknesse persecution and such like evill temptations are exercised in spirituall and inward evils as in evill suggestions ungodly thoughts stirring to evill desires and provoking to sinne Perer. 2. Doct. The grave motions of the spirit of God differ from the furious fansies of those led with an evill spirit Vers. 4. THen the third day c. We see a manifest difference betweene the furious and sudden motions of those which are possessed with an evill spirit such as Saul had who in his rage all at once cast a javelin at his sonne Ionathan to have killed him 1. Sam. 20.33 and the deliberate actions of those which are guided by the good spirit of God as here Abraham not suddenly is moved to sacrifice his son but after three dayes journey having thorowly advised upon it he obediently yeeldeth himselfe to Gods commandement 3. Doct. The obedience of the will is accepted of God for the deed Vers. 12. SEeing for my sake thou hast not spared thine onely sonne God accepteth the resolute purpose and will of Abraham for the done deed An obedient will then is accepted before God as the worke it selfe as the Apostle saith If first there be a willing minde God accepteth it according to that a man hath not according to that he hath not 2 Cor. 8.12 Muscul. 5. Places of confutation 1. Confut. By faith we are assured of our justification Vers. 12. I Know that thou fearest God It is confessed by our adversaries that Abraham at this time was certaine that he was in the state of grace but because it is their opinion that we cannot by faith ordinarily be assured of remission of sinnes they have framed divers answers to this place 1. Thomas Aquinas saith that this assurance that Abraham had was a particular experimentall knowledge that in this worke he feared God Thom. 1.2 qu. 112. ar 3. Cont. Abraham not onely in this particular was assured of Gods favour but was undoubtedly perswaded of the promise in generall concerning the Messiah as the Apostle saith Neither did he doubt of the promise c. but was strengthened in the faith Rom. 4.20 And this is that which our Saviour saith That Abraham desired to see his day he saw it and rejoyced Ioh. 8.56 His assurance which he had of salvation in the Messiah procured unto him this great joy 2. The same Thomas saith Abraham illud cognovit per specialem Dei revelationem That Abraham knew this that he was in the state of grace by Gods speciall revelation Contra. This assurance that Abraham had was not by any particular or extraordinary revelation but by the proper and ordinary operation of faith as the Apostle saith He was strengthened in the faith Rom. 4.20 3. Pererius answereth that this revelation was made to the Patriarks in the old Testament and the Apostles in the new which were as it were the founders of the people of God 10. disput in 22. cap. Gen. Contra. Saint Paul in the matter of faith maketh no such difference betweene the Patriarks and other beleevers as he saith Now it is not written for him onely that it was imputed to him for righteousnesse but also for us c. Rom. 4.23 And the Apostle saith That a crowne of righteousnesse was not onely
a brother for the word is used first in this place where it so signifieth from hence then the originall sense of the word must be taken 3. The words of the law are If brethren dwell together now naturall brethren and such as are properly so called are more like to dwell together than kinsmen removed who in a large sense are so called brethren 4. This law is so interpreted in the Gospell where it appeareth by the Sadduces question of seven brethren that successively tooke the one the others wife Matth. 22. that it was so practised 5. It is the opinion of Philo and the Hebrewes as we heard before who are best acquainted with their owne lawes that naturall brethren used so to doe 4. Now the objections on the contrary part are easily answered 1. It is objected that Levit. 18.16 the brother is forbidden to marry his brothers wife Answ. This is a particular exception from that generall law that unlesse in this case onely to raise seed to the brother it was utterly unlawfull to take the brothers widow which was not to uncover her shame but rather to take away her shame in that shee remained childlesse by his brother and it was honourable to the dead in reviving his memory So wee see in other cases that the Lord made some particular exception from his generall lawes As the making of the Cherubims over the Arke was an instance against the second commandement the Israelites robbing of the Egyptians against the eighth commandement Phinehes killing of the adulterer and adulteresse against the sixth commandement 2. Ob. The practice of this law as appeareth Ruth 4. where Boaz not a brother but a kinsman taketh the wife of the dead sheweth the meaning thereof Answ. We deny not but where there was no brother nearer there the next kinsman further off did the duty of the brother and so was it practised upon Ruth 3. Ob. Iohn Baptist simply reproveth Herod because he tooke his brothers wife It is not lawfull for thee saith Iohn to have thy brothers wife Mark 6.18 Answ. It is certaine that Herods brother had issue by his wife Herodias whose daughter danced before Herod and therefore in this case it was not lawfull so that Herod tooke not Herodias for any such purpose to raise seed to his brother but of an immoderate lust 4. Ob. Why then should it not be lawfull still in this case to marry the brothers wife dying without issue Answ. This law of Moses was partly ceremoniall and typicall in preserving the right of the first-borne whereby was prefigured the spirituall birth-right in the Messiah which never should have end partly politicall in maintaining the distinction of families in their tribes whereof the ceremonie is now abolished which onely concerned that people Iun. in Deut. 25. vers 5. QUEST VIII Whether Thamar or Iudahs sinne was greater COncerning this act of incontinencie which Iudah committed with Thamar 1. We refuse the opinion of Rab. Simeon who altogether exempteth Thamar from any fault because she onely desired issue for the hope of the Messiah to be borne of Iudah for this mystery was not as yet revealed Perer. 2. It is certaine that Iudahs sinne was greater than Thamars both in that he brake promise with her concerning Selah as also in that he companied with her not for any issue but carnall lust though he were afterward preferred before his brethren this no more excuseth his fault than if Davids adultery joyned with murther should bee defended because hee was preferred before his brethren of whose seed the Messiah should come 3. Thamars sinne was lesse than Iudahs yet a sinne as Augustine noteth Non eam justificatam sed magis quam se justificatam dicens Iudah saith She was not righteous but more righteous than he lib. 22. cont Faust. cap. 62. Yet her fault is extenuated by these circumstances as Ambrose noteth Non alienum praeripuit thorum She did not usurpe upon anothers bed she stayed till Iudah was a widower she did it not of an inordinate lust Sed successionis gratia concupivit She onely desired to have issue Et ex ea familia quam delegerat And by that family which she had chosen and further after she knew her selfe to be conceived with childe she put on her widowes garments againe and so continued 4. Yet Thamars sin in some respect was greater than Iudahs because she wittingly committed incest with her father in law but Iudah ignorantly Luther Notwithstanding all circumstances considered Iudahs fault was the greater and so he doth justifie her in respect of himselfe 5. But whereas Ambrose further noteth that shee stayed till Selah to whom she was espoused was dead therein is an errour for vers 14. it is given as a reason why Thamar attempted this thing because Selah was now growne and of age and she yet not given unto him he was then at this time alive Beside Selah is numbred among those sons of Iudah that went downe with Iacob into Egypt and onely Er and Onan of Iacobs sonnes are said to have died in the land of Canaan Gen. 46.12 ex Perer. QUEST IX How it came to passe that Iudah discerned not Thamar by her voice Vers. 15. HE judged her to be an whore for she had covered her face c. 1. Not as some reade she had coloured or painted her face whom Aben Ezra doth not without cause reprove 2. Neither is this a reason why Iudah did thinke she was an harlot because she was vailed as Iunius Calvin for harlots use not to be so modest but it is given as a reason why Iudah did not know her Mercer 3. And whereas it may seeme strange that Iudah did not know her by her voice the reason is that being wholly given over to lust and intending no other thing he greatly regarded not the sight of his eyes or hearing of his eares Luther As also it was a just judgement of God upon him to strike him with such a stupidity as not to discerne her Mercer Geneven QUEST X. Whether Iudâ—h were a Iudge Vers. 24. BRing her forth and let her be burnt c. 1. Iudah giveth not sentence against Thamar either as being appointed a Prince and Judge among the Canaanites as Tostatus Cajetanus for it is not like they would suffer a stranger to be a Judge and ruler among them as the Sodomites answer Lot Gen. 19.9 neither as chiefe in the familie had he power of life and death over those of his charge as some thinke for neither doe we reade that any father of families did execute any such justice in their families and Iacob was the chiefe father of these families and therefore it is most like that Iudah giveth advice that Thamar should be brought forth to the place of justice and proceeded against according to the custome and law of that Country Mercer Iun. 2. But whereas she is adjudged to the fire this was not because she was Melchisedecks daughter the Lords high
18. to 24. then of their conference with their father vers 24. to 30. 2. Iudahs perswasion 1. from the griefe that his father should be brought unto if Benjamin returned not vers 30 31. 3. From his owne perswasion who became surety for him 4. By the oblation and tender of himselfe to remaine a servant in Benjamins place vers 33 34. 2. The divers readings v. 5. In the which he useth to divine H.S.G. the which he useth to consult with the Propheciers B. which he carefully sought for C. by the which he trieth P. or by experience certainly learneth what manner of men ye are T. heb nachash signifieth to divine or play the Augre and to trie by experience v. 15. Are ye ignorant that there is not a man like unto me in the skill of divining H. doe yee not know that a man such as I am will divine S. that such a man as I doe consult with Propheciers B. that such a man as I can divine G. that such a man as I will search it out Carrie it out P. or learne it out by experience sic heb nachash the same word that was used before v. 18. You are my Lord next after Pharaoh H.S. you are aâ— Pharaoh caet v. 21. And I will have care on him S. that I may set mine eyes upon him caet v. 28. And you said a beast hath devoured him H.S. and I said he is surely torne in peeces caet v. 30. His soule is deare unto him as his owne soule C. his life hangeth upon his life B.G.S.H. his soule is tied or bound to his soule T. heb v. 31. Bring the old age of their father with sorrow to hell S. his gray haires with sorrow to hell C.H. his gray head with 〈◊〉 to the grave B.G.T.P. heb sheol the grave 3. The explanation of doubtfull questions QUEST I. Of Iosephs divining in the cup how it is to be taken Vers. 5. IN the which he doth divine and prophecie vers 15. Know you not that such a man as I am can divine and prophecie First some doe expound these words as that Ioseph should be cleared from all blame 1. Theodoret. qu. 104. in Genes saith that Ioseph doth not arrogate the skill of divining to himselfe but saith that such a man as he is could divine as the Septuag read for it was no rare thing in Egypt for great men to use divination but Iosephs steward vers 5. speaketh of his masters skill and use in divining 2. Augustine excuseth this fact of Ioseph Quia magnum aliquid isto ludo significatur because there was some mystery in it qu. 145. in Gen. but if this thing had beene evill in it selfe a mysticall signification cannot make it good 3. Others say that the word divining is here taken generally for any kinde of prediction and so Ioseph indeed had a gift of divining and knowing secrets Thom. Aquin. Perer. But it is evident in the fifth verse where Iosephs steward attributeth to his master the skill of divining in his cup that he speaketh of such a kinde of divining as was used among the Egyptians for it is like that the servant added not that of his owne as Pererius thinketh but that he spake as he was instructed 4. Others answer that Ioseph here affirmeth nothing of himselfe but onely asketh a question by way of interrogation Know ye not But vers 5. the steward doth directly so affirme of his master 5. Some make this to be the meaning that Ioseph by the losse of the cup wherein he did drinke did conjecture that some evill was toward himselfe ex Vatablo but the contrary is evident by Iosephs speech vers 15. What act is this that yee have done that he by divining found out their fault and was not a Prophet against himselfe 6. Some Hebrewes whom Iunius followeth doe thus reade by the which cup hee now findeth by experience what manner of men ye are and so the word nachash is taken for an experimentall knowledge Gen. 30.27 where Laban saith I have perceived or found by experience that God hath blessed me for thy sake But this interpretation I cannot wholly approve for these reasons 1. Because divers words must be supplied not in the text to make the sense perfect as quales sitis what manner of men yee are 2. Because as yet having not found the cup hee had no such experience of them 3. The steward giveth two reasons whereby he doth aggravate their offence in taking away the cup because his master did drinke in it and did divine by it and so the whole verse hangeth together but in the other sense there is no coherence with the rest 4. Although this word be so taken some where else it followeth not it should be so here Secondly as these former doe altogether discharge Ioseph so some doe charge him too farre 1. The Hebrewes thinke that Ioseph indeed by this cup did know every mans age and nativity but it was farre from worthy Ioseph to pollute himselfe with those grosse superstitions of Egypt 2. Some read thus Know ye not that such an one as I am doe consult with Propheciers or Augers Paul Burgens But as it is a fault to professe such divining so is it also no lesse fault to consult with such 3. Some think that Ioseph did in hac simulatione graviâ—er peccare grievously sinne in this dissimulation and did impiously profane the gift of the spirit in professing himselfe a Magitian in stead of Gods Prophet Calvin But in mine opinion this is too hard a censure for whatsoever Ioseph here spake or professed he did it not seriously or as he would be taken and counted but in respect of the vulgar opinion erroniously conceived of him Thirdly therefore I thinke the meane way betweene both to be safest that as I exempt Ioseph from such grievous sinne so I free him not from some infirmity and oversight in this action 1. Yet with Tostatus I thinke not that Ioseph voluit se vere augurem haberi à fratribus would have his brethren indeed take him to be a diviner for seeing he presently purposed to discover himselfe hee would not his brethren should have such a prejudicate opinion of him 2. Neither sufficeth it to say with Augustine Quod non serio sed jocâ— dictum est that this was alleaged in jest not in earnest for this is no excuse for him that doth evill to say Am I not in sport Prov. 29.19 3. Therefore this is the best excuse for Ioseph that he did all this not with a purpose to hurt his brethren but onely to sift them and know their affection toward Benjamin and to take occasion to detaine him longer as also he useth this allegation of his skill in divining neither as out of his owne judgement who abhorred such vanities neither because he would be so counted but according to that opinion which the Egyptians had of him who tooke
punished than adulterie which farre exceedeth the other as the Wise man compareth them together Prov. 6.30.32 that which the spirit of God hath judged to be the weightier sinne by mans ballance cannot be made lighter And hereof Erasmus complaint in his time was just Savitur passim in miseros fures c. Poore theeves are every where streightly handled whereas neither Dracos nor the Romane nor Moses lawes punish theft with death Then hee proceedeth Avaritia nostra facit ut ideo magnum malum existimemus furium quia pecuniam summi boni loco ducimus Our covetousnesse is the cause that we count theft such a great evill because we hold money to be so great a good This may suffice of this question 4. Places of docâ—rine out of the whole booke 1. Doct. Gods election sure and infallible FIrst it is evident by this booke of Exodus wherein is set forth unto us how diversly the people provoked God by their sinnes as their Idolatrie lust murmuring impatience yet God continued their mercifull Lord still that Gods election is immutable and whom he loveth he loveth to the end Ioh. 13.1 Genevens 2. Doct. Which is the best forme of a Common-wealth SEcondly In this booke also is described the best forme of a Common-wealth when as both Prince Nobles and people have their due that forme which is mixed of these three states is the happiest and least subject to change and freest from mutinies So was it in Israel in Moses time in his sole government there was a Monarchie in the 70. Elders assistants an Aristocracie in that out of every tribe the Senatours and Elders were indifferently chosen therein there was a shaddow of the Democraticall state Sâ—mler This mixt forme of government is well seene in our high Court of Parliament where there is a concurrence of three estates 5. Places of confutation 1. Confutation against election by workes FIrst this booke shewing on the one side the ingratitude and disobedience of the people on the other the stedfast love of God toward them affoordeth an evident argument of Gods free election without any respect to workes against those which defend election ex praevisis operibus of workes foreseene before and the Apostle to the same purpose out of this booke alleageth that notable text I will have mercie on him upon whom I will have mercie Rom. 9.15 Borrhaius 2. Confutation against those which say all things were carnall to the fathers FUrther some out of Serveius schoole which have taught that the fathers in the law had only a carnal imagination of terrene things and no knowledge of the Messiah are in this booke confuted for S. Paul sheweth how that in their externall actions and symbols baptisme was shadowed forth and Christ both their spirituall meat and drinke and ours 1. Cor. 10.2.3 And though the Apostles expected a terrene kingdome Act. 1. that they did draw from the error of those times it being a generall received opinion But they themselves before that joyned with Peter in confessing Christ to be the Sonne of God Matth. 16. and afterward they shewed wherein their happinesse consisted in preaching remission of sinnes in Christ. Simler Prologomen 6. Places of morall use 1. Mor. Our spirituall deliverance by Christ shadowed forth FIrst here in the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt is shadowed forth our spirituall deliverance by Christ they under Moses escaped from the tyrannie of Pharaoh and the bondage of Egypt wee by Christ are set free from the spirituall captivitie of sinne and Sathan as the Prophet Zacharie alludeth unto this externall deliverance chap. 10.11 The Scepter of Egypt shall depart away Borrah 2. Mor. Gods chastisements tend not to destruction but to amendment AGaine in that the Lord when the people sinned scourged them and yet not to their destruction but to their amendement it sheweth that both God is not partiall but will punish sinne even in his owne children as also that the afflictions which God layeth upon his children tendeth not to their eversion but is sent rather to worke their conversion Genevens The Apostle saith If ye endure chastening God offereth himselfe unto you as unto sonnes Heb. 12.7 3. Mor. Example of speciall vertues in this booke FUrther in this booke many examples of singular vertues are propounded worthy of imitation of piety in the Midwives of faith in Moses parents of meeknesse in Moses and faithfulnesse toward his people of zeale in the Levites that all flocked to Moses to execute vengeance upon the Idolaters Simler CHAP. I. THis chapter sheweth the occasion which moved the Lord for the cause thereof was in himselfe to procure the deliverance of his people This occasion is of two sorts First the wonderfull increase of the people where is mention made both of their names and number comming downe to Egypt vers 1. to vers 7. then of their increasing in Egypt vers 7. Secondly The other occasion is the affliction of the Israelites which followed upon this their increasing and multiplying where is set downe their consultation with the threefold end thereof vers 10. Then the execution where foure severall afflictions of the Israelites are described 1. Their hard usage under the taskmasters vers 11. 2. Their miserable bondage being at the command in generall of the Egyptians not only for publike but private workes vers 14. 3. The male children are commanded to be slaine where first the charge is given by Pharaoh to the Midwives vers 15.16 Then the execution followeth contrarie to the Kings expectation where three things are declared the reason which induced the Midwives not to obey the Kings cruell edict v. 17. their defence unto the King vers 18.19 the reward of the Midwives vers 20. 4. Then followeth the generall edict for the destroying of all the men children vers 22. 2. The divers readings 5. But Ioseph was in Egypt A.P.V.B.G. cum caeter with Ioseph which was in Egypt T. here which is added the meaning is that Joseph though he were in Egypt must be added to that number to make up 70. 10. That they joyne themselves unto our enemies or fight against us T. better than and fight against us B.G. cum caet for their feare is threefold lest they should run to their enemies rebell or escape out of their service 11. They built for Pharao cities of munition T.S. rather than cities of treasure A.P.C.B.G. or cities of tabernacles L. or cities of store V. the word mischenoth is taken for munition 1. King 9.19 14. With all manner of bondage which they exacted of them by cruelty G.A.P.L. or according S. better than beside all service which c. T. for the preposition eeth signifieth with or to put it in the nominative their bondage wherein they served them was most cruell V.B. the word bepharech signifieth not cruell but by or with cruelty 16. When yee looke into the stooles T. that is whereon the women sate in their travell to see of
might be stirred up to pray to God for their deliverance and to long for the land of Canaan 3. That God might take just occasion to shew his judgements upon Egypt 4. That the Israelites also might be occasioned hereby more justly to shake off the Egyptians cruell yoke 5. That Gods goodnesse and power might be seene in supporting his people and increasing them even in the middest of their affliction 6. That the Israelites remembring their cruell bondage in Egypt should have no mind to goe thither againe For seeing this notwithstanding if some rebellious of them attempted to make them a Captaine and to returne into Egypt Numb 14. what would they have done if they had lived in all fulnesse and pleasure there Perer. QUEST XIV Whether the Mid-wives were Egyptians or Hebrew women 15 MOreover the King of Egypt commanded the Mid-wives of the Hebrew women 1. Those Mid-wives were not Egyptian women as Iosephus thinketh to whom Pererius subscribeth with others as Aretiuâ— Simlerus for they were such as usually ministred to the Hebrew women as the text sheweth before this time and it is not to be thought that the Israelitish women had no Midwives of their owne besides their religion sheweth as much because they served God that they were Hebrew Mid-wives and the derivation of their names doth give conjecture thereof Shiphrah is derived of Shaphar to be bountifull to adorne and Puhah of Pahah to crie out a name fitting a Mid-wife that is best acquainted with the crying of children and whereas Iosephus giveth this reason because the Hebrew women would have beene partiall for kindred saith it may seeme no more unlikely that Pharaoh useth Hebrew women whom he might thinke for the feare of their life would obey his commandement then he did set Hebrew taske-masters over the rest of the Israelites Exod. 5.15 who might have beene thought also no indifferent overseeers I therefore rather thinke with Augustine that those Mid-wives were Hebrew women than Egyptians 2. Yet could they not be Iocabed Moses mother and Miriam Moses sister as some Hebrewes who was too young not above seven yeere elder than Moses to be imployed for a Mid-wife Simler QUEST XV. Why Pharaoh onely giveth his cruell charge to two Mid-wives THese two Mid-wives are named 1. Not as Cajetan because they attended onely upon the nobler sort of the Hebrewes whose children especially Pharaoh intended to cut off for Pharaohs charge is generall to kill all the male children 2. Nay there were many more called as Perer. but these named as the more famous 3. But these were the chiefe and had the charge and command over the rest and from them they are to take their direction Pellican Vatablus and whereas Cajetan denieth that there was any such presidencie or superiority among the Mid-wives it appeareth to be otherwise that among the Grecians there were some to whom the choise care of that businesse was committed as Plutarch testifieth and that publike schooles were kept for that service Iun. in Analys 4. Now it is easie to guesse why the male children were commanded to be put to death rather than the other 1. Because they feared not any rebellion or insurrection by that sex 2. They were fairer than the Egyptian women and so they might keepe them for their lust 3. They were industrious in spinning and needle work and for that cause might be kept for their service Perer. 5. But herein Pharaoh sheweth himselfe more cruell than either Athaliah in putting to death the Kings children or Herod in slaying the infants or then Astâ—ages and Aâ—â—lius that would have destroyed Remus and Romulus for these did not make a generall edict against the children of an whole nation as Pharaoh doth nor yet surprised infants newly borne Borrh. QUEST XVI Whether the Mid-wives made a lie and are therein to be justified Vers. 19. A And the Mid-wives answered Pharaoh because the Hebrew women are not c. The most doe hold that the Midwives doe here make a fained excuse by an officious lie 1. And of them which thus thinke most are of Augustines opinion that the Mid-wives herein offended because no lie being against the truth is just yet God rewarded them not for their dissembling but for their mercy remunerata est benignitas mentis non iniquitas mentientis the benignitâ—e of the mind not the iniquitie of the lie was rewarded so also Simler Borrh. with others and Augustine addeth this reason that if many times the works of the flesh are pardoned for the works of mercy that follow after much more merito misericordiâ— dimittuntur qua propter misericordiam committuntur for mercy sake those things are remitted which because of mercy are committed 2. Others thinke that the Mid-wives were hindred by their lie and that which might have beene eternall in terrenam est compensationem declinata was because of the lie turned into an earthly recompense Gregorie But seeing the feare of God hath not onely the promise of this life but of the next and the Scripture testifieth of these Midwives that they feared God it is spoken without warrant that they were onely temporally blessed 3. Some doe justifie this act of the Mid-wives and seeme to make it meritorious though not of an eternall yet of a temporall reward Thom. Aquin. But to this opinion may be opposed that saying of Aug. Non remunerata est in illis fallacia sed benevolentia Their fallacie was not rewarded in them but their mercie 4. Rupertus doth simply defend this dissimulation and holdeth it to be no sinne because it proceeded of charitie and God rewarded it and as well may Rahab be condemned for making the like excuse Iosh. 2. Cont But these reasons are very weake 1. This excuse proceeded not of charitie but from feare and though it did charitie must be alwayes joyned with veritie otherwise it is inordinate 2. Their mercy onely was commended and their infirmitie by Gods mercy pardoned 3. Not Rahabs infirmitie but her faith is commended if her excuse were untrue 4. But as Rahab may in that place be defended to have made a true excuse speaking of some other men that were departed from her which came to her house so here also the Mid-wives may say true that the Hebrew women having secret notice from the Mid-wives might be delivered in secret before the Mid-wives came Iun. And it is not unlike but as they were chaster than the Egyptian women so God might give them more strength and speedier deliverance Pellican Here it will be objected that it is said the Mid-wives preserved the men children because they feared God vers 17. and therefore it is like they were present Simler But this may be understood of the care that they had of the infants by whose meanes they were preserved Vatab. For otherwise it was not possible that these two in their owne persons could be present at every womans travaile to save the children QUEST XVII How the Lord is said to make
hee were rude in speech yet he was not so in knowledge 2. Cor. 11.6 the power of S. Pauls speech consisted not in eloquence of words but in the wisdome of the spirit so Moses though defective in the manner of elocution yet might speake with gravity and wisdome and so bee powerfull in words 9. Wherefore notwithstanding this or what else is objected the most probable opinion is that Moses had some naturall impediment of speech as appeareth both by his owne excuse by the Lords answer by the coadjutorship of Aaron his brother an eloquent man vers 14. and because Moses after this saith he was a man of uncircumcised lips and whereas he saith here nor since thou hast spoken to thy servant his meaning is that if at this time when God spake unto him who was able to take away all impediment of speech yet his infirmity remained much more was it like afterward to continue Iunius QUEST VIII How God is said to make the deafe and dumbe Vers. 11. WHo hath made the dumb or the deafe 1. Wee refuse here the fables of the Hebrewes that when Pharaoh had appointed one to kill Moses he was striken blind that he could not see Moses and Pharaoh became both deafe and dumbe that though he espied Moses escape yet hee could not speake to have him stayed but it is evident by the story that Moses fled before hee was apprehended The Lord here speaketh in generall not of any one dumbe or deafe but that as hee sendeth these infirmities upon man so also hee is able to heale them 2. And although these infirmities are evill in respect of nature yet God is the author of them because they are good also in respect of the end which is to humble man and bring him to repentance and to set forth the glory of God as our Saviour saith of the blind man that his blindnesse came that the workes of God might be shewed upon him Simler QUEST IX How and wherefore the Lord was present with Moses mouth Vers. 12. I Will be with thy mouth 1. Although Moses was no eloquent man in outward speech as humane eloquence is accounted yet there was in him a grave and divine eloquence such as the Apostles were endued with the Lord promiseth the assistance of his spirit and to bee present with his mouth 2. But the impediment of his tongue the Lord doth not altogether take away both that Gods glory and power might appeare and that Moses should see how needfull the helpe and society of his brother was neither did Moses pray unto God to heale that infirmity but only useth it as an argument to decline his calling Simler QUEST X. Whom Moses meaneth that he would have sent Vers. 13. SEnd by the hand of him whom thou shouldest send 1. Lyranus thinketh that Moses meaneth his brother Aaron who was elder than he and fitter for his eloquent speech but no mention was made yet of Aaron whom Moses knew not to be alive as may be gathered vers 18. till the Lord first spake of him and promised hee should assist him 2. Rabbi Selomo taketh that hee meaneth Iosuah whom God revealed unto him should be the man that was to lead Israel into the promised land But beside that Iosuah is not yet spoken of this request of Moses would have shewed some emulation or envy toward Iosuah 3. Many of the ancient writers as Iustenus Martyr Tertullian Cyprian with others thinke that Moses here speaketh of the Messias that should be sent into the world so also Perer. But this seemeth not to be so fit both for that Moses not being ignorant of the prophesie of Iacob concerning the comming of Shiloh and how the Lord promised that he would raise up a Prophet like unto him Deus 18.18 which is understood of Christ could not yet expect the comming of the Messiah and this request for the comming of the Messiah proceeding of faith would not have provoked the Lords wrath Therefore Eugubinus opinion though Pererius checkt him for it is not herein to be misliked that neither would have those places of Scripture which are understood of the Messiah to bee referred to others for that savoureth of Judaisme nor yet that which is spoken of others to be applied to Christ which also would bewray curiosity and superstition 4. Therefore the plaine meaning of Moses is that wheâ—â—as God might find out many more fit than himselfe he would send by their hand that is ministery so he aimeth not at any one in particular to be sent but any other whosoever QUEST XI Whether Moses sinned in his so often refusall seeing God was angry with him Vers. 14. THen Iehovahs wrath was kindled 1. Neither doe we consent to some Hebrewes that doe aggravate Moses sinne as distrusting Gods word and therefore some say hee was punished in being deprived of the Priesthood which was given to Aaron some in that he was not suffered to enter into the land of Canaan Contr. But neither was the first a punishment for Moses still was the chiefe and gave Aaron direction and it was a comfort to Moses to have such a coadjutor and beside Aaron was the elder to whom the priesthood appertained Neither was Moses offence here the cause why he entred not into the land of Canaan but his disobedience at the waters of strife Simler 2. Neither on the other side is their opinion found that doe justifie Moses herein and commend his humility in refusing so weighty a calling as Gregorie who by Pauls example would have us ready to suffer adversities and by Moses to refuse prosperity And Hierome commendeth Esaâ—es readinesse after his lippes were purified and Moses unwillingnesse being guilty to himselfe of his owne infirmity Contra. 1. In that God was angrie with Moses it is evident he offended 2. And as S. Paul was willing to suffer adversity because it was Gods will the spirit so testified every where of him that bands and persecution did abide him so Moses should not have refused this charge seeing God so often had signified his will unto him 3. And if Esay did well after the Lord had purged his lippes being before unwilling to shew his readinesse then Moses did not well who after the Lord had promised to be with his mouth yet still persisted in his refusall 3. Thostatus granteth that Moses sinned yet it was a veniall and small sinne because wee reade of 〈◊〉 punishment that followed Cajetanus is of the same opinion and his reason is taken from the phrase here used The wrath of God was kindled as when a man is moved suddenly of choller than of set purpose Contra. In some sense we confesse that both this and all other of Moses sinnes and of all the elect are veniall in respect of Gods mercie in Christ that pardoneth them but otherwise in it owne nature neither this nor any other sinne is pardonable for the wages of sinne is death Rom. 6.23 in the justice of God 2.
eares heavy and to shut the eyes Isai. 6.10 all which phrases doe imply an action and operation it is evident that God some wayes concurreth either directly or indirectly negatively or positively by way of working or giving occasion in the hardning of the heart QUEST XV. God otherwise hardeneth then by way of manifestation BUt yet God doth more than by way of manifestation harden the heart as some doe expound it that the Lord hardned Pharaohs heart which interpretation Augustine toucheth quâ—st 18. in Exod. that is by his plagues and judgements declared how hard it was 1. For in this sense God might bee said to commit any other sinnes when he doth manifest them and bring them to light 2. And though this exposition might serve here yet it faileth in other places as Deut. 2. it is said that God hardned the heart of Sehon King of the Amorites and Iosh. 10. that God hardned the hearts of the Canaanites and Rom. 9. God hath mercie on whom he will and whom hee will hee hardneth In these places it cannot be so expounded that God hardned that is declared their hearts to be hard QUEST XVI God hardeneth the heart not only by permission SOme doe expound it by way of permission because those that are hardned God depriveth of his grace and leaveth them to themselves So Damascen Ista non 〈◊〉 Deo agente accipienda sunt sed ut Deo permittente these sayings as God shut up all in unbeleefe and God gave them the spirit of slumber eyes that they should not see are not to be taken as though God did them but permitted them So likewise the ordinarie glosse in 4. Exod. Indurabo cor Pharâ—onis i. indurari permittam I will harden the heart of Pharaoh that is suffer it to be hardned So also Chrysostome Tradidit in reprobum sensum nihil aliud est quam permisit He gave them up to a reprobate sense it is nothing else than that hee permitted it as a Captaine leaving his souldiers in the midst of the battell may be said to deliver them into their enemies hands in Epist ad Roman Cajetane to confirme this interpretation sheweth how sometime in Scripture that is called a precept which is permitted as when Matthew said chap. 19.8 Moses for the hardnesse of your heart suffered you to put away your wives Marke hath Moses for the hardnesse of your heart wrote this precept unto you chap. 10. But although this be most true that God suffereth such to continue in their hardnesse of heart yet this is not all 1. For so the Lord suffereth also other sinnes to be done for there is nothing done in the world nisi omnipotens fieri velit vel sinendo ut fiat vel ipse faciendo unlesse the omnipotent God will have it done either by suffering it to be done or doing it himselfe Then if this were all the Lord might be said as well to steale and such like because he suffereth them to be done 2. Wherefore Augustines judgement is rather here to be received Deum ad indurationem cordis concurrere non modo secundum permissionem vel secundùm patientiam sed etiam secundùm actionem potentiam non sane per quem fiat immediatè duritia ipsius cordis sed per quem multa fiant à quibus peccator vitio suo concipiat duritiam corâ—â—â— That the Lord doth concurre in the hardning of the heart not only by permission or suffering but according to his power and action not by the which immediately the hardnesse of the heart is made but whereby many things are done by the which a sinner by his owne corruption doth conceive the hardnes of heart 3. And concerning the place alleaged out of Marke a precept is not there strictly taken for a commandement but for any order or decree that is written QUEST XVII Whether hardnesse of heart be of God as it is a punishment of sinne SOme doe hold because the induration of the heart is two wayes to be considered as it is a sinne and a punishment of sinne in the first God hath no part but as thereby God punisheth former sinnes so he as a just Judge inflicteth hardnesse of heart as a punishment as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 2.28 As they regarded not to know God so God delivered them up to a reprobate mind And 2. Thess. 2.11 Because they received not the love of the truth God shall send them strong delusions that they should beleeve lies In these places the Apostle sheweth how the Lord punisheth them with blindnesse and hardnesse of heart because of their former sinnes This distinction is approved by Augustine lib. 5. cont Iulianum Isidorus thus concludeth the same point Facit Deus quosdam peccatores sed in quibus talia jam peccata precesserant ut justo judicio ejus mercantur in deterâ—us â—re Therefore God maketh some sinners but in whom such sinnes are found before that by the just judgement of God they deserve to become worse and worse So Cajetane upon these words 2. Sam. 12. Behold I will raise evill upon thee out of thine owne house which was verified in Absolon that rose up against his father thus resolveth Deus non est author peccati ut sic sed ut est poena peccati God is not the author of sinne as it is sinne but as it is the punishment of sinne The same judgement he giveth of Shemei whom David saith the Lord bid curse David that God wrought that Shemei cursed David Non quatenus erat peccatum sed quatenus erat poena peccati Davidis Not as it was sinne but as it was a punishment of the sinne of David So Ioâ—senius Illa Deo tribuuntur non quatenus peccata sunt sed quatenus poena peccati they are ascribed to God noâ— as they are sinnes but as they are the punishment of sinne in chap. 15. Ecclesiastic But Pererius misliking this opinion thus reasoneth against it 1. If God be said to be the Author of the induration of the heart as it is a punishment of sinne then he may aswell be said to be the Author of the other sinnes when as a man falleth into them as a punishment of his former sinnes Contra. As though all such sinnes doe not proceede from the hardnesse of the heart that confirmeth and setleth the sinner in his wickednesse therefore God is not said to be the cause of these sinnes but of the hardnesse of heart which is the cause of those sins Man by continuing in sin hath his heart hardned by the just judgement of God and then out of the hardnesse of his owne heart he bringeth forth other sinnes of himselfe 2. The hardnesse of heart as it is a great and horrible sinne so it is a punishment of former sinnes if God then doe cause it to be a punishment he also causeth it as it is a sinne Contra. In this argument there are ambiguous termes for in the first clause this note of similitude
men to governe under them and yet they must have their owne eares open also to the complaints of their subjects as here Moses hath By this councell of Iethro approved of God and accepted by Moses wee see it both lawfull and necessary for Princes and chiefe Magistrates to have their inferiour and helping Ministers of the Kingdome Oleaster And that we are bound to yeeld obedience both unto the King As to the superiour and unto governours as those which are sent of him for the punishment of evill doers and for the praise of them that doe well 1. Pet. 2.13 14. 5. Places of Confutation 1. Confut. That wife and children are no impediment to the calling of Ministers Vers. 2. THen Iethro tooke Zipporah Moses wife Some hereupon give this note Quòd Moses ex illo tempore quo prophetare incepit uxorem concubitu non cognovit That Moses from that time when he began to prophesie did not know his wife carnally Lippoman ex Epiphan And another saith Moses non accedebat ad uxorem propter frequens colloquium Dei That Moses came not to his wife because he often talked with God Tostat. quast 2. in margine Oleaster also doth collect thus Quam onerosum sit murrimonium hâ—c ostenditur c. Here it is shewed how burdensome marriage is seeing Moses after he had sent his wife away had no great care to fetch her againe Contra. 1. Against Epiphanius may bee opposed the judgement of Chrysostome who concludeth the contrary upon this example of Moses Vis cognoscere quod nihil nocet uxorem habere pueros Moses nonne uxorem habuit liberos Wilt thou know that it hindereth not to have wife and children Moses had both wife and children And then he maketh an eloquent comparison betweene married Moses and unmarried Elias Moses brought Manna from heaven Elias fire Moses divided the sea and Elias was taken up by a fiery chariot into heaven Vidisti Heliam aurigam in aëre vidisti Mosen in mari viatorem Thou hast seene Elias a chariot man in the aire and thou hast seene Moses making a way in the sea did virginity hurt the one or wife and children hinder the other He addeth further Vides quòd Petrus uxorem habuit ne incuses nuptias You see that Peter had a wife because mention is made of his wives mother in the Gospell then blame not marriage By this testimony it plentifully appeareth that Moses after hee was entred into his propheticall office found no impediment by having wife and children and therefore did not abandon their company 2. Concerning Tostatus assertion I answer him out of his owne words for though his marginall note be generally and at large set downe That Moses came not to his wife that is at all yet it is qualified in his text Rarissimè accedebat ad uxorem Hee very seldome came to his wife he did not utterly then forsake her company And that instance which hee giveth of the exception that Aaron and Miriam tooke against Moses because of his wife maketh flat against him Num. 12. For if Moses had not used her still as his wife they could not have pretended nor taken any such occasion to quarrell 3. Oleaster may be answered out of his owne words for in the same place upon Iethros bringing of Moses wife he giveth this note Vbi simul dicemur non esse permittendam uxorem sine viro suo esse Where we are also taught that a wife is not to be permitted to be without her husband But to what end is the cohabitation of the husband and wife else required then that they should the one enjoy the other for otherwise it is all one as if they were apart or asunder 4. Only this example of Moses in sending backe his wife before upon her discontent and absenting himselfe from her for a while sheweth that it is the duty of all that are called To remove from them in a lawfull sort those hinderers preferring the Lords worke before their affection B. Babington As Moses did but for a time leave his wife while he was imployed in that waighty embassage to Pharaoh in Egypt which kinde of sequestration for a time for holy workes the Apostle alloweth not a finall separation but willeth that they come together againe Defraud not one another saith the Apostle except it be with consent for a time that you may give your selves to fasting and prayer and againe come together that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency Likewise this example sheweth That it is a grievous offence for either wives or others to be an hinderance to men in their duties enjoyned them by God B. Babington 2. Confut. Against the heresie of the Manichees of two contrary natures Vers. 19. HEare now my voyce and I will give thee councell c. By this example Hierome confuteth that heresie and wicked opinion of the Manichees that did hold there were two natures contrary the one to the other the good and bad If a good tree saith he never bringeth forth evill fruit Quomodo Moses arbor bona peccaverit ad aquam contradictionis How did Moses a good tree sinne at the waters of strife Aut qua consequentia Iethro socer Moses arbor mala c. dederit Mosi consilium borum Or what consequence is there that Iethro Moses father in law being an evill tree who beleeved not in the God of Israel gave unto Moses good councell Hieromes argument standeth thus the nature of a thing cannot be changed but a good man may be changed to evill and an evill tree to be good therefore it is not of their nature that they are evill that is as their nature was created of God wherefore that a man is evill it is not by his created nature but his corrupted nature that he is good it is not by his corrupted but his corrected nature 3. Confut. Of Cajetane that condemneth the regiment of women Vers. 21. PRovide men of courage c. Cajetane here giveth this corrupt note Viros inquit non mulieres quia regimen mulierum pessimum est Men saith he not women because their government is worst of all so that to speake according to the common course of nature no vertue is said to be in women septim Ethicor. Contra. 1. This is but a bad consequent Women are not to bee elected or chosen to government therefore their government is bad for though women come not by election to the place of government yet either it may fall to them by succession as Zelophechuds inheritance descended to his daughters Numb 27. or they may be extraordinarily designed and appointed to be governours as Deborah Iud. 5. and directers as Huldah the Prophetesse under Iosias 2. Neither doth it follow Women are not fit to be chosen Judges and Officers of a Kingdome therefore they may not be Queenes and Princes these here chosen were elected to be Officers of ministry not of regality and principality 3. As
the law of Christ but that much was permitted and tolerated unto the Jewes onely for the hardnesse of their heart as our blessed Saviour sheweth Matth. 19. 2. Some doe urge the lawes of men and the greater punishments which have beene laid upon women for adulterie rather than upon men and that therefore the sinne of the woman should bee the greater But this sheweth not the greatnesse of the sinne before God but the greater inconvenience that is brought upon the civill and politike state which the lawes of men seeke chiefly to preserve by the adulterie of the woman rather than of the man 3. Some thinke that it is a greater sinne in the man because of his authoritie quia vir caput mulieris because the man is head of the woman and the Apostle biddeth that women if they would learne any thing should aske their husbands at home 1 Cor. 14.35 Est ergo vir doctor mulieris The man then is the womans teacher then as the Priest sinneth more than a lay man because he is his teacher so the man doth more grievously offend than the woman Thomas in opuscul But this proveth not that the sinne of the man simply is greater than the sinne of the woman but in a certaine respect 4. Wherefore the best answer is that the sinne of adulterie in some respects is equall in both sexes and in some other greater both in the one and the other 1. In regard of the law of Matrimonie whereby they have given their faith each to the other the sinne seemeth to be equall for the man hath no more power over himselfe in this behalfe than the woman as S. Paul teacheth 1 Cor. 7.4 and therefore by Moses law as well the adulterer as the adulteresse was to be put to death 2. But in respect of the qualitie and condition of the person because the woman is the weaker vessell and the man is the head of the woman and of the more strength this sinne is greater in the man because hee therein give than evill example to the weaker partie and teacheth her an evill lesson Ecclesiasticus 9.1 3. But the inconveniences considered that follow hereupon as the ignominie and shame of houses the confusion of inheritances and the obtruding of false heires by the adulterie and false play of women their sinne is thought to exceâ—d Simler Which might be the reason also why among the Jewes the men were permitted to have divers wives but not the women to have divers husbands QUEST IX Whether adulterie be now necessarily to be punished by death SOmewhat here would bee inserted concerning the punishment of adulterie by the sentence of death wherein there are these three opinions 1. Some thinke that adulterie ought to be punished capitally according to the judiciall law of Moses and not otherwise Piscaetor giveth divers reasons hereof but two especially I will single out 1. Delicta temporibus naturam suam non mutant Sinnes doe not change their nature in time 2. Deus naturam suam non mutat Neither doth God change his nature so that he hateth sinne no lesse now than in times past neither will he have it lesse punished Praefat. in Exod. Contra. 1. The nature of sinne is the same though the punishment bee altered adulterie is as grievous before God now as it was under the law but the circumstances as of place and person so also of time may give occasion of aggravating or alleviating the punishment Hee that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath was stoned to death Numb 30. because it was necessarie that the law at the beginning being then newly given should bee established by severitie But yet our Saviour excuseth his Apostles for gathering and rubbing eares of corne upon the Sabbath Matth. 12. Saint Peter pronounced the sentence of death upon Aâ—amas and Sapphira for deteining part of that which they had given to the Church for the terror and example of others yet now such dissimulation is not held to be worthie of death 2. Neither is God changed by the changing or mitigating the rigour of the law but he removing the same applieth his law according to the different respect of 〈◊〉 and persons for as well hee might bee said to be changed in the changing of other 〈◊〉 as of the ceremoniall and judicials thereto annexed 4. If all judicials annexed to the Morall law are now to be necessarily retained then the violating of the rest of the Lords day as then of the Sabbath which was in that respect morall should be punished with death and blaspheming and prophaning of the name of God by swearing as Levit. 24.16 which would seeme to be too rigorous 5. And seeing the times of the Gospell are the times of mercie and those under the Law were the times of rigour and severitie to abate somewhat of the rigorous punishments of the Law not leaving sinne unpunished may seeme not unlawfull 2. Another opinion is that adulterie is not at all now to be punished by death for our Saviour would not condemne the woman taken in adulterie Ioh. 8. Contra. 1. Upon that example of Christ it cannot be gathered that it is unlawfull to censure adultery by death for it would follow as well that adultery is not to be punished at all because Christ inflicteth no punishment at all upon her onely this may be inferred that by Christs silence and forbearance it appeareth that the punishment of adultery by death is not necessary for if his will had beene that the rigour of that law should stand in force our Saviour needed not to have feared their trap lest they should have condemned him of rigour and severitie if he had judged her worthie of death and if he had repealed that law they would have accused him as contrarie to Moses 3. This then may bee collected by Christs silence and connivence that it is not necessarie that adulterie should alwayes and in all places be sentenced unto death but rather that it is left indifferent that neither those Churches are to be condemned of too great severitie which follow the president of Moses judicials herein nor yet they are to be accused of too much lenitie which judge adulterie otherwise than by death as they see it best to fit their estate so that the severitie of the punishment be answerable to the quality of the sinne By Moses law they which committed adulterie were to die the death that is if it were duplex adulterium that both the adulterer and adulteresse were married or if the woman were anothers wife Levit. 20.10 otherwise it was not death for a married man beside his wife to have a Concubine or to one wife to take another so shee were not anothers wife What will they thinke now of such single adulterie that would have it revenged by death they have no president in Moses law for the punishing of this kinde of adulterie by death then it is evident that all adulterie by the law of Moses was not adjudged to
either give a simple assent or be as it were tickled with a full desire or doe deliberately purpose of any evill thing then he sinneth So then all those sinnes wherein there is either a full assent or action are forbidden in the former precepts the very first desire and appetite is forbidden here These three degrees then are to be made of sinne appetitus assensio actio the appetite or first desire the perfect assent and the action the first the evill appetite is restrained here Galas Quamvis non plane acquiescamus desiderio si tamen nos titillat sufficit ad reâ—sper agendos Although we doe not yeeld unto the desire if it doe but tickle us with delight it is sufficient to make us guilty Calvin Here then such concupiscence is forbidden as hath some inclination of the will though no full consent Concupiscentiâ— enim nunquam est sine affectu licet non plane succumbat voluntas This concupiscence is not without some affection or desire though the will doe not plainely yeeld So is Chrysostome to bee understood Aliud est concupiscere aliud velle concupiscere passionis est velle arbitrii frequenter enim concâ—piscimuâ— quod nolumus It is one thing to desire another thing to will to desire or covet is of passion to will is of the disposition for we often covet that which we would not c. In Matth. homil 52. He speaketh of a full assent and purpose for otherwise with concupiscence here prohibited there doth alwayes concurre some affection and desire So then it is evident that even those first motions of concupiscence wherein any taketh delight though there be no full purpose are sinne before God and forbidden by this precept for even the Heathen did condemne impiam voluntatem the wicked will and purpose of any as to kill commit adultery and such like but the Law of God is more perfect and spirituall than any humane Law Againe it is not like that S. Paul was so ignorant as to thinke at any time that it was no sinne velle occidere hominem to have a purpose to kill a man or to commit adultery therefore by concupiscence he understandeth some more inward and secret disease which he tooke not to be sinne before it was revealed unto him by the Law Calvin QUEST III. Whether involuntary concupiscence having no consent of the will is here forbidden BUt here it will further be enquired whether even those first evill thoughts which arise in the minde without any inclination of the will at all are counted as sinne before God and so forbidden in this precept Here first wee are to distinguish of concupiscence and desire which is either a good concupiscence or bad the good is of two sorts either perfectly good such as was given unto man in his creation when he should have coveted nothing but that which was good or imperfectly good such as now is in men mixed with many infirmities and inperfections which is either naturall in man as the coveting of meat and drinke and other things necessary for the life of man Basting Or supernaturall wrought in man by grace as is the love and desire of vertue or it is mixt partly naturall partly supernaturall as matrimoniall concupiscence for procreation which both hath a naturall cause or beginning and is likewise guided by grace unto the right end none of these kindes of good and commendable concupiscence are forbidden by this precept The evill concupiscence as Bernard doth well distinguish it is of three sorts 1. Sunt cogitationes â—tiosa ad rem non pertinentes c. There are idle roving and impertinent thoughts which the minde may easily reject 2. Sunt aliae cogitationes violentae magis fortius adharentes There are other violent cogitations which sticke more nearely as the immoderate cogitation of meat and drinke and such things as belong to the necessity of nature 3. Sunt cogitationes fâ—â—tidae immundae quae ad luxuriam invidiam pertinent c. There are filthy and uncleane cogitations which concerne lasciviousnesse envy vaine glory and such like the first kinde is lutum simplex as simple or thin clay that cleaveth not the second is limum viscosum as a tough clay that sticketh fast the third is tanquam immundissimum coenum as most uncleane filthy and stinking mire and mud Bernard serm de tri ge cog na Seneca maketh this distinction of the motions of the minde not much unlike to the former 1. Primus motus non voluntarius c. The first motion is not voluntary as a certaine preparation of the affections 2. Alter cum voluntaâ—e non contumaci another kinde is with the will but the same not obstinate as when it commeth into ones minde to revenge himselfe when he is hurt 3. Tertius motus est impotens c. The third kinde is so impotent and outragious that it will not be ruled by reason as when a man is carried to revenge himselfe out of measure the first of these can be no more ruled by reason than such things as happen to the body as when one yawneth when he seeth another yawne or suddenly winketh when one putteth the fingers toward the eyes Thus Seneca lib. 2. de ira cap. 4. Now the question is whether these motions which Bernard calleth idle and wandring Seneca involuntary are forbidden in this precept Hereof there are three opinions 1. Some thinke that even these first infused motions Etiam citra rationem ullius objecti even without respect had to any certaine object are forbidden here Iun. But it seemeth by the words of the Law Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours house that the concupiscence here prohibited aimeth at a certaine object and is not without some inclination of the affection 2. Others are of the contrary opinion that if a man doe at the very first reject these evill cogitations nullius culpa reus erit he shall be guilty of no fault Galas But seeing that Infants which have no such evill thoughts yet are not cleane before God being conceived and borne in sinne it cannot be but that these evill wandring and idle thoughts should carry some guiltinesse in them 3. Therefore the best solution is that these cogitations which doe vanish â—â—tequam animos afficiant before the minde bee affected be not comprehended in this precept as actuall sinnes for untill the will of man in some degree give assent sinne is in the conception onely not in the birth as S. Iames saith chap. 1. When lust hath conceived it bringeth forth sinne but as the first fruits of originall sinne together with that native corruption they are contrary to this precept wherein I finde also some difference of opinion Iunius seemeth to thinke that not originall sinne it selfe is here understood by concupiscence which is as the habit but only those involuntary motions which are the first act of this evill habit Iun. in Analys But I rather subscribe to Vrsinus that thinketh
up their nakednesse might appeare both before and beneath Tostat. quast 47. 3. Some doe thus moralize this precept that simply it is not forbidden to goe up by steps for afterward there were 15. steps made to goe up to the Altar which Salomon made therefore they would have it to be a figurative speech and the meaning to be this minorem Patre non dicis incarnatum Filium Thou shalt not say that the Sonne being incarnate is lesse than the Father this it is not to goe up by steps unto the Altar Rupert Thom. So also Gloss. interlinear Qui gradus in Trinitate faciunt c. They which make degrees in the Trinity doe ascend by steps unto the Altar But this is somewhat farre fetched neither is there any necessity to leave the literall sense for the reason why afterward steps were made unto the Altar was for that then the use of linnen breeches was common which now was rare and among other Priestly garments the Levites afterward were appointed to put on such linnen breeches when they ministred chap. 28. Vsus femoralium nondum fuit introductus The use of breeches was not yet brought in c. but was afterward enjoyned to the Priests Lyran. And although as some write this fashion of garments to cover the secret parts was first invented by Semiramis the wife of Ninus King of Babylon before Abrahams time yet that custome was not common among the Israelites Tostat. qu. 49. QUEST XXVIII Why they were forbidden to use steps up to the Altar Vers. 26. THat thy filthinesse be not discovered 1. This then was the reason why they should not goe up by steps lest that in the going up by the flying abroad of their garments their secret parts might be discovered for sanctâ—tati pietati decorum honestum conjungi debet unto sanctity and piety must be joyned comelinesse and honesty Gallas for the Ministers of God committing any thing uncomely in Gods service doe therein offend two wayes both shewing their owne evill inclination and beside contumeliam inferunt ordini clericali they bring a contumely and reproach upon the whole order Tostat. quaest 49. Yea among the Gentiles there was a comelinesse and decencie observed in their publike assemblies whereupon that Law was made Inscenam sine subligaculo prodeat nemo Let none come into the stage without his close garments how much more ought all things to bee done with comelinesse and honesty in the sacred assemblies Gallas 2. Another reason was Arrogantia ambitio pâ—mposa graduum qualis apud idololatras tum in usu erat Deo non placuit c. An arrogant and ambitious pompe in stayers such as was in use among the Idolaters was not pleasing unto God Lippoman 3. Likewise this was commanded for the further detestation of idolatry that they should not any wayes resemble or imitate the uncleane and filthy fashions used in the idolatrous service of Priapus when the Priest ascending up aloft by certaine staires used in most beastly manner turning himselfe toward the people to discover and shew unto them his secret parts to stirre them the more unto uncleane and beastly lust Lyran. Tostat. QUEST XXIX Of the abominable Idoll of the Gentiles called Priapus and the filthy usages thereto belonging NOw this filthy and abominable Idoll Priapus which was worshipped among the Gentiles was taken up upon this occasion 1. This Priapus was a young man of Hellespontus who insolita magnitudiâ—e membri genitalis excedebat omnes exceeded all other in the greatnesse of his secret parts and being expelled thence as a corrupter of his country went into Grecia and there by wanton and unchaste women was made much of and afterward they made him one of their gods 2. As was their god such was his sacrifice for they used to offer unto him an Asse and they that came to that abominable sacrifice both men and women used to entermingle themselves in caves and woods and each with other wrought filthinesse and upon this occasion they used to plant woods and groves by their Idols that they might have fitter opportunity to use their beastly lust 3. This Idoll Priapus some thinke was the same which was called Belpheghâ—r and to the abominable sacrifices of this Idoll did the Madianitish women entice the Israelites Numb 25. who afterward fell unto the like Idolatry for Asa his mother Maacha whom hee put downe consecrated a grove to this Idoll Priapus as Hierome translateth the word Mipletzeth which signifieth an horrible or abominable Idoll 1 King 15.12 and he put downe the Sodomites and eâ—feminate persons who as it seemeth were the worshippers of that Idoll for they which were most beastly in their lust thought they were best accepted of their god So they which adored Venus the more they were given to venery the better they thought they served Venus so that the more common the harlots and strumpets were the more they thought they pleased their Goddesse Venus The Lord therefore forbiddeth his people all resemblance or appearance of uncleannesse because he would have them detest and abhorre the abominable fashions of the Heathen Tostat. qu. 50. QUEST XXX Why the secret parts are counted uncomely THy filthinesse or nakednesse c. 1. The secret parts of man are not in their naturall use more uncleane or unseemly than other organicall parts of the body for they have their necessary use both for the avoiding of the superfluous excrements of the body and to serve for generation and procreation and our first parents before they transgressed were naked and yet not ashamed of their nakednesse 2. But after sinne entred then these parts grew to be uncomely because of that inordinate motion and stirring which is in those parts more than in any other for by experience it is found that the eyes hands feet and other parts are more obedient unto reason than those unruly parts and it is harder for one to bridle lust than anger or any other passion 3. And herein appeareth the wisdome of the Creator that hath set these uncomely parts in the middest of the body that they might more easily be covered whereas if they were the extreme parts as where the head hands or feet are they could not be so well hid and beside the mercie of God herein is manifest that our other parts our eyes hands feet should not be so unruly or disordered for then they also should have seemed as uncomely and so penotâ—â— inutiles redderemur wee should have beene altogether unprofitable and unapt to doe any service in the world if our necessary and organicall parts should have had the like opinion of uncomelinesse cleaving unto them 4. Now seeing these parts being comely by nature yet are made uncomely by sinne their beastly errour is to be abhorred which thinke it no more dishonest to use the secret parts of nature openly as well as any other members such were the Cynicall Philosophers which in the market place and in the streets thought
and necessary or just cause doe so require c. otherwise the Law doth forbid all unlawfull swearing as well as the Gospell 3. And the reason why they ought not to sweare by strange gods is ne frequenti juramento iâ—â—â—cantur ad cultâ—â—◠〈◊〉 c. lest that by often swearing they be induced to worship them Glos. interliâ—â—â—â— 4. And as an Hebrew then and so a Christian now was not himselfe so neither were they to compell a Gentile to sweare by them yet as Augustine determineth it is lawfull for a Christian recipere ab eo juramentum in Deo suo c. to receive an oath of a Gentile by his god to confirme some covenant or contract se Gentilis obtularis se facturum if the Gentile doe of himselfe offer it Lyran Tostat. QUEST XXV Whether a Christian may compell a Iew to sweare by his Thorah which containeth the five bookes of Moses VPon this occasion how farre a Christian may compell another of a contrary religion to sweare as a Jew or Turke Tostatus bringeth in divers questions which it shall not be amisse here briefly to touch as first whereas it is an usuall thing with the Jewes at this day to sweare upon their Thorah which is nothing else but a volume containing the five bookes of Moses yet bound up in silke and laid up very curiously in their Synagogue whereout they use to read the lectures of the Law the question is whether it be lawfull for a Christian Judge to urge a Jew to take his oath upon his Thorah for upon the Gospels he will rather dye than take an oath For the resolution of this doubt divers things are to be weighed and considered 1. That there is great difference betweene the Idols and 〈◊〉 gods of the Heathen and the Jewes Thorah for this 〈◊〉 a part of Gods word and containeth nothing but the truth and it is all one as if the Jew did lay his hand upon the Pentateuch or five bookes of Moses as any Christian may take his oath upon the Gospels or any other part of Gods word 2. And like as a Christian laying his hand upon the Gospels doth not 〈◊〉 by the bookâ— for 〈◊〉 were unlawfull in giving the honour due to the Creator unto a creature but hath relation unto God whose verity and truth is contained in that booke So a Jew swearing upon his Thorah yet sweareth by God the Author of the Law and in so doing sinneth not 3. Yet it may so fall out that a Jew may sinne in swearing upon his Thorah as having an opinion that all the contents of that booke as namely the ceremonials are yet in force which are abolished in Christ and yet the Judge may not sinne in requiring the Jew to sweare upon his Thorah for he doth not consider of those things quae sunt in voluntate agentis sed de ipso actis which are in the minde and intent of the doer but of the act it selfe therefore the act of it selfe being lawfull a Jew may be required to doe it Sic Tostat. qu. 14. QUEST XXVI Whether a Iew may be urged to sweare in the name of Christ. BUt as the Jew may be urged to sweare upon his Thorah which they hold to be a booke of truth as Christians doe yet the case is not alike if a Christian should compell a Jew to sweare in the name of Christ for although Christ be in deed and in truth very God yet the Jewes hold him to be worse than any Idoll and therefore the Jew in taking such an oath should doe against his conscience and consequently commit a great sinne or if a Jew should require a Christian to sweare by the name of Christ whom he holdeth to be no God nor yet a good man therein the Jew should also sinne against his conscience for it skilleth not a thing to be so or so indeed dum aliter concipiatur as long as a man otherwise conceiveth and is perswaded in his minde Tostat. qu. 15. QUEST XXVII Whether a Saracene may be urged to sweare upon the Gospels or in the name of Christ. NOw although a Jew cannot be compelled without sinne to sweare in the name of Christ whom he holdeth worse than an Idoll or upon the Gospels which they thinke containe nothing but fables yet the reason standeth otherwise for a Saracene or Turke he may be required to sweare in the name of Christ or upon the Gospels And the reason is because the Saracens have a good opinion of Christ and beleeve that he was sent of God and that he was a great Prophet and a good man and for the most part they doe assent unto the Gospels and beleeve that Christ spake the truth And therefore they in taking such an oath doe not against their conscience and therein sinne not Now if it be objected that the Saracens differ more from the Christians than the Jewes and therefore can no more lawfully take an oath in the name of Christ than the Jewes the answer is that although the Jewes consent with the Christians touching the canonicall bookes of the old Testament as the Saracens doe not yet as touching Christ they doe totally dissent from the Christians and so doe not the Saracens Tostat. qu. 17. QUEST XXVIII Whether a Christian may sweare upon the Iewes Thora BUt it hath beene before shewed that a Jew may be without sinne urged to sweare upon his Thora which is nothing but the Pentateuch containing the five bookes of Moses another question is moved whether a Christian may safely take his oath upon the Jewes Thora And that it is not lawfull so to doe it may be thus objected 1. It is a sinne Iudaizare to Iudaize to doe as the Jewes doe as to be circumcised to observe the Jewish Sabbath and such like But to sweare upon the Thora is to Iudaize that is to doe as the Jewes doe Ergo c. Answ. 1. To Iudaize is not simply to doe that which the Jewes doe but that which they alone doe and none other as to beleeve that which they only beleeve as that the ceremonies of the Law are still in force or to doe that which they only doe as to be circumcised and to abstaine from certaine kinde of meats as Saint Paul chargeth Saint Peter that he compelled the Gentiles Iudaizare to Iudaize concerning their meats for he did eat with the Gentiles before the Jewes came and afterward he withdrew himselfe from them otherwise to beleeve as the Jewes and others also beleeve and to doe likewise as to hold the world to have beene created the Israelites to have beene delivered and all other things in the Scriptures to be true as they are there set downe this is not to Iudaize 2. So because the Thora which is the Pentateuch is not only received of the Jewes but of the beleeving Gentiles and the truth of the Law we subscribe unto as well as the Jewes therefore simply to take an oath upon their Thora
consecration Vers. 35 THou shalt do thus unto Aaron and to his sonnes c. 1. Some are of opinion that all things here prescribed to bee observed and done were de necessitate consecrationis of the necessitie of the consecration and if any thing were omitted the consecration was voide R. Salomon Lyranus But this is not like that if any thing were neglected in the manner of eating in respect of the place persons or time that their consecration should thereby have been void as Levit 10.17 Aaron being in griefe for the sudden death of Nadab and Abihu forgot the sinne offering which they should have eaten and suffered it to be all burnt and this was the eighth day after their consecration Levit. 9.2 when as yet the anointing was fresh upon them and they did not yet come forth of the doores of the Tabernacle Levit. 10.7 And yet notwithstanding this negligence there was no nullitie of Aarons consecration Tostat. quâ—st 18. 2. Therefore Tostatus opinion is rather to be received that some things were of necessitie in the consecration as the washing anointing of the Priests the putting on of the priestly apparell the sprinkling of themselves and their garments some things were only de solennitate belonging to the solemnitie of the consecration as the seething and eating of it in the holy place and eating it the same day it was a sin to omit any of these but thereby their consecration was not made voide QUEST XLI Why the consecration of the Priests continued seven daies Vers. 35. SEven daies shalt thou consecrate them c. 1. This consecration of the Priests was to continue seven daies together that both the Priests hereby might bee confirmed in their vocation and be assured thereof that they were thereunto appointed of God and that the people also might thereby take better notice that they were set apart by the Lord for that holy function Osiander 2. And further hereby thus much was signified that as the Priests seven daies together were consecrated so we per totum vitae curriculum throughout the whole course of our life should be consecrated and addicted to Gods service Simler Marbach 3. Likewise we are hereby admonished Pontificem continuo proficere non posse repente summum fieri c. that the Priest must daily increase and go forward that he cannot be made perfect at once that many gifts and graces are required in him Lippoman 4. It also sheweth that as their consecration was not perfect before the seventh day so we cannot attaine to perfection in this life Osiander QUEST XLII Whether all the sacrifices of the first day were iterated seven daies together or the sacrifice for sin only Vers. 36. ANd shalt offer everie day a calfe 1. Lyranus thinketh that not onely a calfe for a sinne offering was sacrificed everie day but two rammes also so that seven calves were offered and fourteene rammes in these seven daies So also Simler Borrh. Lippom. Pellican But seeing there is no mention made but only of the sinne offering we have no warrant to imagine any other sacrifice to have been iterated but that as belonging to their consecration 2. Iosephus thinketh yet more that all things were iterated every day which were done upon the first day as the anointing of them and the sprinkling of the Priests themselves and their garments But this is not like that their consecration was iterated it was sufficient for them once to be consecrated and seeing the ramme of consecration was killed onely upon the first day with the bloud whereof they were sprinkled they were so sprinkled but upon the first day 3. Tostatus his opinion is that the calfe which was the sacrifice for sinne and the consecration ramme were offered everie day expresse mention is made of the one and the other is implied in these words seven daies shalt thou fill their hands that is put into their hands part of the peace offering to be shaken to fro before the Lord as is prescribed vers 24. Now the ramme of burnt offering needed not to be daily offered during these seven dayes because there were every day morning and evening a lambe offered for a burnt sacrifice Sic Tostat. But this opinion cannot stand 1. Seeing Moses is bid to take two rams chap. 24.2 it is like that either both of them were â—â—nued every day or none 2. And the filling of their hands signifieth nothing else but the consecrating of their Ministery as is before shewed whereof the hand was the organe and instrument it is not literally to be pressed to signifie the putting of the things offered into their hands 4. Therefore according to the words of the text of all the sacrifices appointed for the first day onely the calfe which is the sinne offering is prescribed to be iterated and the reason is because it was to cleanse and purifie the Altar Levit. 8.15 But only in this sacrifice were the hornes of the Altar touched with bloud and so sanctified which was not done in any of the other sacrifices QUEST XLIII To what end the sinne offering was offered every day of the seven Vers. 36. THou shalt offer every day a calfe c. for reconciliation or to make atonement 1. This reconciliation was not only made for the sinne of the Priests as thinketh Tostatus for the hornes of the Altar were laid on with this bloud whereby it was purified Levit. 8.15 2. Neither yet was this sinne offering prescribed only ad expiandum Altare to cleanse the Altar as thinketh Osiander Calvin For he had said before seven dayes shalt thou consecrate them that is the Priests and then it followeth and shalt offer every day c. so that this daily offering for the space of seven dayes belonged unto the consecration of the Priests 3. Therefore the end of this sacrifice for sinne was both to make atonement for Aaron and his sonnes as also to purifie and cleanse the Altar Iunius QUEST XLIV How the Altar was cleansed and why Vers. 36. ANd thou shalt cleanse the Altar 1. After the consecration of the Priests is set forth their Ministery and service both at the Altar of burnt offering and in the golden altar in the next Chapter Here three things are declared concerning the Altar of burnt offering 1. How it should bee purified 2. What should bee offered thereon 3. The profit and benefit that should come thereby the Lord would there come unto them and speake with them vers 42. and dwell among them vers 45. Lyranus 2. Two things are required to the purifying of the Altar it must first be cleansed not that it was polluted of it selfe but to shew that in respect of man omnia corruptione naturae profana ob peccatum c. that all things by the corruption of our nature are profane because of sinne Gallas Marbach As also it was not only cleansed but sanctified and set apart for holy uses that it should not be lawfull to offer their sacrifices elsewhere
adde of their owne 3. Timiditas Aaronis the fearefulnesse of Aaron that durst not resist the people 4. A false opinion in thinking that whatsoever they did with a good intention to be pleasing unto God Ferus 5. Adde hereunto their impatiencie in not induring to stay any longer for Moses as Saul because the Lord answered him not when he would went unto a witch B. Babing QUEST IV. Of the divers faults and infirmities at once here committed by the people THe people gathered themselves together against Aaron c. The people in this their outrage doe offend diversly 1. In their violence the word signifieth super Aaron they came upon Aaron tanquam superiores potentiae as being mightier than he and so pressing upon him 2. They say make us gods Vide insaniam populi See the madnesse of the people as though God can be made with mens hands Ferus 3. There appeared in them levitas inconstantia great levitie and inconstancie that had not long before bound themselves by covenant to obey the Lords Commandements and so soone fall away Marbach 4. Their great forgetfulnesse also bewrayeth it selfe that had heard the Lord with his owne voice thundering out his Commandements whereof one prohibited directly idolatrie and yet they in despite of God do set up an idoll 5. Their ingratitude also is manifest both against God the author of their deliverance and Moses the Minister thereof and of many great works speaking of him contemptuously We know not what is become of this Moses Gallas 6. Their stupiditie was wonderfull that having the cloud before them an evident signe of Gods presence and the manna which fell daily of his providence they setting at nought such excellent signes figuram appetunt quae ipsorum vanitati respondeat desire a figure answerable to their vanitie Calvin Oleaster thinketh the cloud at this time was taken out of their sight but that is not so for it is said chap. 13.22 That he tooke not away the pillar of the cloud by day nor the pillar of fire by night from before the people 7. Thus the people at once sinned diversly 1. They sinne manifestly against the first Commandement 2. They offend in publicam ipsorum fidem against their publike faith given 3. They offend not onely in the outward worke but also impiissima opinione in their wicked opinion thinking hereby to obtaine remission of their sins 4. And they doe not onely transgresse against God but against Moses their deliverer and so they violate both the first and second table Ferus QUEST V. Why the people say unto Aaron Rise Vers. 1. VP or rise 1. Which is not so said as though Aaron did then fit when the people came unto him 2. Neither is it necessarily hence collected Quod matutinâ—s fuit hic concursus c. That this running together was in the morning as Cajetan thinketh and that they did as it were awaken and raise up Aaron 3. But this manner of speaking sheweth their importunitie that they would have him dispatch quickly and with all speed doe as they willed him 4. And beside they seeme to cast some good colour and pretence upon this their haste because they had expected and waited Moses comming downe a great while and therefore they would stay no longer Tostat. qu. 3. 5. Beside they seeme hereby to tax Aarons negligent administration that he was secure and remisse in the government and therefore in this manner rouze him up Osiander 6. This their speech also sheweth that they pressed upon him violently and urged him saying Surge Rise that is Age Goe to Iunius QUEST VI. Of the divers kindes of idolatrie MAke us gods 1. There are divers kindes of idolatrie which may be brought to these foure heads 1. When either that is worshipped for a god which is nothing such were the Idols of the Heathen the imaginations of their owne blinde hearts 2. When the divine honour is given unto any creature as to Angels or Saints 3. When any divine power is ascribed to the images of God or Saints 4. When the true God is worshipped but otherwise than he hath prescribed as Ahaz caused an Altar of a strange fashion to be reared up unto God and such were their traditions of the Pharisies Simler 2. Or idolatrie may be thus distinguished it is committed two wayes 1. When res extra Deum coluntur c. when things beside God are worshipped and that either externally by bowing unto them or inwardly in putting trust and confidence in them 2. Quando Deus aliter colitur quam ipse instituit When God is otherwise worshipped than he appointeth which is also done two wayes either when men devise unto themselves a forme of worship not prescribed such are the Processions Pilgrimages Vigils and such like used in Poperie or when the worship which God instituted alio fine observatur quam est institutus c. be observed upon another end than is appointed as thereby to merit at Gods hand as the hypocrites in Israel thought to please God by the externall act of their sacrifices and so doe now the Romanists by their idolatrous Masse Marbach The idolatrie of the Israelites was of all these sorts communicating with part of each for they outwardly set up an Idoll and inwardly put their confidence in it and did seeme yet in this Idoll to acknowledge God so worshipping him after another mannner than God himselfe had prescribed QUEST VII Why they say Make us gods not god MAke us gods c. The word is put in the plurall Elohim gods 1. Whereupon some of the Fathers doe gather that the Israelites here fell away into the idolatrie of the Gentiles who brought in a multiplicitie of gods But that is not so for they did proclaime an holy day unto Iehovah vers 5. 2. Gloss. interlinear giveth this exposition that although there was but one idoll made yet he that falleth to idolatrie doth fall into all vices tot diis daemonibus quot vitiis servit and so serveth as many gods or devils as vices But it is not put in the plurall number in any such sense because of that which followeth which may goe before us but their vices and corruptions could not be said to goe before them 3. Some referre it to the idols which they desired to have made they would have many but Aaron made but one neither is this like to be the reason for then Aaron should not have contented them In that therefore Aaron satisfied their desire it seemeth he knew their minde that one idoll would serve their turne 4. Some thinke that because Elohim in the plurall is taken for the true God therefore it is so used here Quia uni Deo hunc cultum instituerunt Because they instituted this service to the true God Simlerus But by gods here it is evident they understand not God himselfe for they were not so absurd to thinke that God could be made with mens hands 5. Therefore the plurall
therefore thinketh right that these gates were onely the places of entrance into the great streets which went thorow the camp for the host lay in such order as that they had wayes and streets betweene their tents as wee see now in cities and townes as Iosephus also describeth the situation and disposing of the camp 3. Now Moses stood in the gate or entrance not because the use was to give sentence and judgement in the gates Lyran. Borrh. Or because Moses would have the Levites to give the onset in the beginning of a street and so to go thorow as Tostat. ibid. But this was the reason Moses tabernacle or tent was without the camp and so upon that occasion Moses stood in the entrance of the camp going now to his owne tent Iun. QUEST LXVIII Whether all the Levites were free from consenting unto this idolatrie Vers. 26. ANd all the sonnes of Levi. R. Salom. to whom consenteth Tostatus thinketh Quod nullus de Levitis aliquid peccaverit That none of the Levites sinned in this great transgression because it is said All the sonnes of Levi gathered themselves unto him and if the Levites had sinned â—s other tribes there had beene no more cause to advance them to the Priesthood than other tribes Contra. 1. If that generall particle all bee pressed then it would follow that the children and all came which could not be for they were not able to use swords the meaning then is not that all the Levites came but all which came were Levites Iun. Sa. Or all is taken for many as this speech is usually restrained in Scripture as all nations are said to have come and bought corne in Egypt Gen. 41. 2. The Levites were more of Gods favour and grace than of their desert separated and selected for the Priesthood yet it is evident that this tribe was freer from consenting to this idolatrie than other tribes and for this their courage and readinesse in Gods service they received a blessing 2. Some thinke that even these Levites which armed themselves against their brethren were not altogether immunes à reatu free from this sinne but while they did it for feare levius peccarunt their sin was the lesse and so the mercie of the Lord appeared so much the more not only in pardoning their sin sed gloriam suam eorum manu asserere dignatus est but he vouchsafed by their hand to maintaine his glory Calvin Simler But it is not like that God would use their ministerie in the punishing of others which were guiltie of the same punishment themselves and their owne conscience accusing them they would have had no such courage to revenge the Lords cause upon their brethren it had beene also verie offensive to the guiltie parties to be punished by them which had beene alike guiltie And Moses proclaiming who pertaineth to the Lord let him come to me did meane that they only should come who had beene faithfull unto God and had not consented to that sinne 3. Some Hebrewes doe help the matter thus that because they cannot avoid it but that some of the kindred of the Levites were guiltie of this transgression because they did not spare their owne sonnes vers 29. that because it was lawfull for any of the other tribes to take unto them the wives of Levites their husbands being dead those children which they had by them might be said to be the sons of Levi that is grand children on their mothers side But this shift is taken away because Deut. 33.9 it is said that the Levites knew not their owne father or mother or children therefore they must needs bee understood to be Levites not by marriage or in some removed degree of kindred unto them but the immediate fathers and sonnes of Levites 4. Therefore the best opinion is that all of the tribe of Levi were not free from this sin of idolatrie many of them kept themselves as it is like at home and consented not but that a great sort even of Levi offended it may thus appeare 1. Because both Aaron himselfe was a ring-leader who can by no meanes be excused from this sin Lyranus 2. It could not be avoided but that many of the Levites were drawne away by Aarons example Iun. 3. But yet it is more evident because they consecrated their hands upon their owne sonnes and brethren yea their fathers and mothers that divers of the tribe of Levi fell away with the rest Lyran. Iun. Tostatus here answereth that the name of brethren is taken largely Pro fratribus qui sunt de filiis Israel For their brethren which were of the children of Israel qu. 35. Contra. 1. If it be allowed that the name of brethren is sometime so taken what saith he to the other names of father mother sonne These must be taken for the names of kindred or else we shall never have any certaintie in Scripture when we should by these names understand naturall fathers mothers and children 2. The other words companion and neighbour shew that the first is a name of kindred the first word ach signifieth here a brother in affinitie the second râ—ah a companion and friend the third karob Vicinia ratione conjunctum him that was a neighbour in dwelling and vicinitie or neernesse of place Simlerus 5. It is evident then that some of the Levites were accessarie to this great impietie because they were punished among the rest So that R. Salomon is herein greatly deceived who thinketh that the Levites though they were blame-worthy in not resisting the idolaters yet were not idolaters themselves neither consensu mentis nec facto exteriori in consent of minde nor in any outward fact c. for the Levites had beene unjustly punished if they had beene innocent Nay R. Moses Egyptius goeth further saying that although the Israelites often are found to have committed idolatrie yet Levita nunquam idolatraverunt the Levites never committed idolatrie But the contrarie is evident by Aarons fall for hee apparantly was an idolater in his externall act in building an altar unto the golden Calfe and offering sacrifice before it Paulus Burgensis in his reply proceedeth yet further that when our blessed Saviour was put to death the Levites as they are distinguished from the Priests were not principeâ— in crimine illo pâ—ssimo principall agents in that wicked crime whereas it is evident that the Priests were the chiefe enemies that Christ had the Levites indeed are not named but seeing the high Priest with the other Priests which were of the tribe of Levi were the contrivers of Christs death then cannot that whole tribe be exempted from this villanous act which is the intendment of Burgensis a great favourer of that nation QUEST LXIX Of the authoritie which the Levites had to doe execution upon the idolaters and the rules prescribed them Vers. 27. THus saith the Lord c. 1. Tostatus thinketh that it is not necessarie here to understand that Moses had any speciall commandement
from God but because he had received a Law from God that idolaters should bee put to death in executing that Law hee might justly say that God commanded it quest 35. But seeing Moses was faithfull in all Gods house we must not thinke that hee would pretend the name of God without Gods speciall warrant yet whether Moses received this commandement from God by revelation or by manifest vision is not expressed Pelarg. The latter is more like as God used to speake to Moses at other times face to face 2. And Moses maketh mention of Gods commandement both to deliver himselfe from all suspition that he did not give this charge of hatred toward the people and in rage Simler As likewise the Levites were encouraged hereby to enterprise this worke which otherwise they would have beene hardly drawne unto Tostatus 3. Certaine rules are given them to observe 1. They must goe to and fro non solum transire jussi sunt they are not only bid to passe thorow but to returne to goe everie way ut in omnes populi partes animadverterent that they should in everie place take punishment of the people Gallas 2. They must go from gate to gate that is thorow the streets and common wayes Non committitur istis ut ingrediantur tentoria It is not permitted them to enter into their tents and houses Cajetan 3. And everie man is commanded to slay his brother c. not that everie one had a brother or kinsman to slay sed ut occidat indifferenter but he must indifferently kill both one and other whom he met that was to be killed not respecting kindred affinitie or acquaintance Tostat. qu. 35. QUEST LXX Whether the Levites did not make some difference among the people as they went and killed Vers. 27. SLay everie man his brother c. 1. Some thinke there was an outward marke of difference made among the people by the which the Levites discerned who were to be killed and who to be spared And here are divers opinions 1. Ab. Ezra with some other Hebrewes thinke that by drinking of the water their faces or bellies did swell that were the chiefe actors in this sinne But then many more should have been killed than 3000. See this conceit overthrowne before quest 59. 2. Gallasius thinketh that by the drinking of the water Moses perceived quibus idolum displiceret who they were which were displeased with this idoll and repented of their sin and who were obstinate by their refusall But it is not like that any of the people trembling now and being afraid at Moses presence durst so publikely and openly shew their contempt 3. Simlerus inclineth to thinke that there were some seditious persons in the camp that went about to make a commotion among the people and that the Levites did slay these 〈…〉 But it is evident vers 35. that they were not slaine 〈…〉 but for the golden Calfe Gallas 2. Some thinke there was no other signe of difference but in the notice and 〈…〉 of the Levites it is probable Minime Levitas latuisse quinam primi esseâ—◠〈…〉 Levites were not ignorant who were the chiefe Captaines of this perverse counsell 〈…〉 beene hard for the Levites who as it is like kept themselves at home and were not present with the people of themselves to know in so great a multitude and in so short a time who were the ring-leaders Cajetan resolveth that the Levites were so directed by God who commanded this to bee done Et qui cunctâ— recte disponit and who rightly disposeth all things so that no innocent man was put to the sword But this needed not to be feared seeing all the people in generall consented in this sinne and few or none of them were innocent 3. Wherefore their opinion is most probable who thinke that seeing all the people were guiltie only of this sinne a few only excepted that the Levites could not doe amisse whomsoever they killed as they met without making any difference that whereas all had sinned it was not unjust if a few were singled out from the rest to pacifie the wrath of God and to terrifie the rest 1. Ambrose giveth this reason Quia melius est pancorum supplicio universos eximi quà m in omnes vindicari It was better by the punishment of a few for all to escape than all to be punished 2. Gregorie Nyssenus saith Omnes sine dispositione punitoâ— that all were punished without any difference quia una omnes admalum conspirantes quasi unus effecti sunt because all of them conspiring together in evill were now but as one c. Like as when one is chastised for his fault Non hoc aut illud affligit membruÌ„ he that beateth him doth not make choice of one part rather than another knowing that wheresoever he is whipped ad totum corpus sensum doloris transiturum that the sense of the griefe will reach to the whole body so was it here 3. Lippoman addeth because all the people were culpable Vt totus populus aliquando punitus videatur That the whole people might seeme to be punished it was more to Gods glorie and the honour of the tribe of Levi Si praceptum 〈◊〉 generaliter factum intelligamus If we understand this precept of Moses generally without any difference to have beene executed 4. Oleaster further so thinketh Omnes occurrentes sine delectu c. That the Levites killed all they met without any choice quemâ—dmodum in aliis punitionibus accidiâ— as it happened in other generall punishments when some were plagued for all 5. Calvin and Simlerus make mention how the like thing was in use among the Romans that if a whole band or company of Souldiers had run away or committed any grievous offence the Emperour would tithe them out and put everie tenth man as he was drawne out by lot to death And thus the Thebean Legion which consisted all of Christians was twice tithed out by that cruell Emperour Maximinus 4. Now the contrarie reasons why some thinke that there was some difference made are these 1. Deus caco turbulento impotu c. God would not have revenge taken in his cause upon a blinâ—e and disordered heat Simler 2. By this meanes it came to passe ut placidâ— totus populus quiesceret that all the people was well pacified when they saw only certaine pestilent men to be taken out of the way Calvin 3. Otherwise if there had beene no such difference made there would have no respect beene had of those which shewed themselves penitent for their sinne Gallas Contra. 1. Here need no disorder or confusion to bee feared seeing all the people were guilty the sword could not light upon any unjustly and in that three thousand onely of six hundred thousand were slaine it sheweth that the Levites executed Moses sentence with great discretion and moderation 2. The people might as well be pacified when they saw a few for examples sake to be punished among
ministery and service herein to God as Iunius readeth because they were employed in the Lords businesse and were carried away with a zeale of his glory 3. Beside by this their fact consecrati sunt ministeriâ— they were consecrate to the ministery and service of God as Deut. 10.8 it is said The Lord the same time separated Levi where reference is made unto this fact of the Levites and this is the blessing which here is bestowed upon them 4. Some understand it thus Vnusquisque in filio in fraâ—re suo erit per hanc actionem consecratus Every one by this action shall be consecrate in his sonne and in his brother Cajetane So also Gallas that is they and their posterity should hereby be consecrated unto God But seeing the word is in the imperative consecrate ye the meaning is rather that they should consecrate every one his hand intersiciendo filium c. in killing his sonne or brother Vatab. Calvin And so is it expounded Deut. 33.9 where it is said that the Levites knew not their owne sonnes or children but mention is not made of slaying their sonnes before QUEST LXXIV Of the time when Moses came downe from the mount and when he returned againe Vers. 30. ANd when the morning came 1. This was the next day after the idolaters were slaine which was the very day of Moses comming downe from the Mount which was the fortieth day of his being in the Mount with God for that day was the publike solemnity celebrated by the Israelites to the honour of their new golden god as it appeareth by their melody and dancing as Moses came downe from the Mount the same day when Moses returned to the campe which might bee about the sixt houre of the day he cast the golden calfe into the fire and armed the Levites against their brethren the next morning he had this communication with the people Tostat. quast 37. 2. Now whereas Moses saith upon this next day that hee would goe up to the Lord to intreat for them some thinke it must be understood of his going up againe into the Mount as it is written Deut. 9. Cajetane Borrh. So that this his going up was when he stayed other forty dayes and nights as he had done before to make supplication for the people Simler And then this followed not immediately after hee had thus said but certaine dayes after other things comming betweene Tostat. qu. 38. 3. But it seemeth that this was another going up unto God than when hee stayed there forty dayes the second time for this going up was the next day after Iun. But many things came betweene before his second solemne going up which are rehearsed in the next chapter QUEST LXXV Why Moses urgeth the greatnesse of their sinne Vers. 30. YE have committed a grievous sinne c. 1. There were two dangers to be feared in the people on the one side security and extenuating of their sinne and on the other desperation therefore to prevent the one he telleth them of the greatnesse and grievousnesse of their sinne and to helpe the other he promiseth that he will goe up and pray for them Simler 2. And here lest they might thinke that they only had sinned which were punished he telleth them that even they which remained were guilty also of a great sinne Tostatus As our blessed Saviour telleth the Jewes that they were not the greatest sinners whom Pilate had put to the sword but that others should repent lest they likewise perished Luk. 13. Ferus 3. And Moses still urgeth the greatnesse of their sinne ut ipsi quoque supplices confugiant â—d Dei misericordiam that they also themselves should by their supplications flee unto the mercie of God Calvin 4. And this Moses doth to take from them a false opinion lest they should thinke to be excused in this sinne by their good intention that they made the golden Calfe to the honour of God Ferus 5. And that which Moses doth here in telling the people of their sinne the Law of Moses practiseth still In bringing men to a knowledge of their sinnes Ferus QUEST LXXVI Why Moses speaketh as it were doubtfullâ— If I may pacifie him c. Vers. 30. IF I may pacifie him for your sinne 1. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ulai is not taken here as a signe of doubting for Moses being a faithfull man and full of confidence did not doubt in his prayers for he that doubteth either maketh question of Gods power that he is not able to grant that which hee asketh or he is not perswaded of his mercie and goodnesse he that doubteth hee shall not receive that which he asketh bonitati Dei injuriam facit doth offer wrong unto the goodnesse of God which he distrusteth And such an one as asketh not in faith shall receive nothing of the Lord as S. Iames saith Iam. 1. If Moses then had prayed doubtfully he had not obtained that which he prayed for Tostat. qu. 40. 2. But Moses speaketh thus either in respect of the temporall punishment which hee was not sure whether it should wholly be remitted for in temporall things wee have no assurance De fide salute certi esse debemus in precibus Wee must be sure in our prayers of faith and such things as concerne our salvation Simler Or rather he useth this doubtfull speech Ne secure de petenda venia cogitent That they should not be secure in asking of pardon Calvin Difficultatem veniae significaâ— He signifieth hereby how hard it was to obtaine pardon for them Gallas that hee might more effectually move them to repentance Ferus As in the like sense this phrase is used in other places of Scripture as Ioel 2.14 If perhaps he will returne and repent him of the evill Iosh. 14.12 It may be the Lord will be with mee 1 Samuel 14.6 It may be the Lord will give deliverance by us So 2 Tim. 2.25 If so be the Lord give them repentance to know the truth Pelarg. QUEST LXXVII Why Moses againe intreateth the Lord seeing he was pacified before vers 14. BUt what needed Moses to have intreated the Lord seeing it is said that he had repented him before of the evill which he had threatned vers 14. 1. Ferus thinketh it was an infirmitie in Moses that having heard before that the Lord was pacified iterum quasi nihil tale audierâ—â— sâ—lliciâ—â—â—â—rat yet prayeth againe as though he had heard no such thing So also Calvin Quod dubitanter inchoent precâ—s That the faithfull begin their prayers doubtfully till faith prevaile But this prayer of Moses proceeded of faith for otherwise the Lord would not have heard him as he did Deut. 9.20 it shewed not then his infirmity 2. Some thinke that Moses obtained nothing at his first prayer but was kept in suspence But this is before confuted quest 40. 3. Some are of opinion that Moses prayer before and this were but one Simler But the contrary appeareth Deut.
Jehovah is doubled 10. qu. Of the twelve names and epithetes here given unto God 11. qu. VVhat the Lord visiteth for in the posteritie of the wicked 12. qu. How the children are punished for their fathers sinnes 13. qu. Why the posteritie of the wicked are punished for their fathers sinnes 14. qu. How Moses and Ezechiel may bee reconciled 15. qu. How a thousand generations are to bee counted 16. qu. The fathers merits are not extended to their children onely Christs merits are extended to infinite generations 17. qu. After what manner God sheweth mercie to thousands and visiteth iniquitie to the third and fourth generation 18. qu. Why Moses made haste 19. qu. Of Moses prayer the manner thereof and of Moses perswasions used in his prayer 20. qu. VVhat covenant the Lord renueth with Moses 21. qu. Of the divers kinds of marvels 22. qu. What marvels those are which the Lord saith he will doe 23. qu. Why the Gangashites are here omitted 24. qu. How it stood with Gods justice to destroy all the inhabitants of Canaan 25. qu. Why they were to make no compact with the Canaanites 26. qu. Why their images were to be broken downe 27. qu. To what use images being pulled downe may be converted 29 qu. To whom it belongeth to pull downe images 30. qu. How the Lord is said to be a jealous God 31. qu. Why they are commanded to cut downe the groves 32. qu. Why idolatrie is called fornication 33. qu. How farre it is lawfull and unlawfull to eat of things consecrated to Idols 34. qu. Why mariages with the idolatrous were forbidden and in what cases 35. qu. Why the images are called molten gods 36. qu. Why the principall feasts of the Israelites are here rehearsed 37. qu. VVhy some feasts and not all are here rehearsed 38. qu. Of the Passeover the right ends and use thereof 39. qu. Why the first borne males were onely due unto God 40. qu. Why mention is made onely of ashes of uncleane beasts 41. qu. Whether the Israelites were absolutely bound to keepe the rest of the Sabbath in earing time and in harvest 42. qu. VVhether now Christians are necessarily tied to keepe the Lords day in seed time and harvest 43. qu. Why the people were charged to goe up thrice in a yeare to the feasts 44. qu. Who were bound to goe up to the feasts 45. qu. Whether all the males were bound every yeare to goe up thrice to the Sanctuarie 46. qu. Whether Moses were twice or thrice fortie dayes in the mount 47. qu. Of the shining of Moses face 48. qu. Why it pleased God to give such great glorie to Moses countenance 49. qu. Why Moses face shined more now at his second being in the mount 50. qu. VVhy the people were afraid to come neere Moses 51. qu. Whether Moses covered his face before hee spake to the people or after 52. qu. What the vailing of Moses face signifieth 53. qu. How long the shining of Moses face continued 54. qu. Whether Moses face continually shined or onely at certaine times Questions upon the five and thirtieth Chapter 1. QUest VVhy the precept of keeping the Sabbath is so often inculcate 2. qu. VVhether it were simplie forbidden the Israelites to kindle a fire upon the Sabbath 3. qu. VVhy the Lord would have his Temple built sumptuously 4. qu. Whether one may offer himselfe to the calling of the Ministerie 5. qu. Of the liberall and franke offering of the people 6. qu. Why the women offered by themselves 7. qu. Why the workmen are named Questions upon the six and thirtieth Chapter 1. QUest Wherefore Moses maketh such a large rehearsall of those things before named 2. qu. Why the same order is not kept in the making of the Tabernacle which was observed in the prescription 3. qu. Whether the middle barre were onely in the west end 4. qu. To what purpose the hooks upon the pillars served Questions upon the seven and thirtieth Chapter 1. QUest How the rings are said to have beene in the sides of the Arke 2. qu. Why it is said He made where the Lord said before to Moses Thou shalt make 3. qu. In what forme the branches of the candlesticke went up Questions upon the eight and thirtieth Chapter 1. QUest Whether there were more than one Laver made 2. qu. Of the forme and fashion of the Laver. 3. qu. How the brasen Laver is said to be made of the womens looking-glasses 4. qu. How the women are said to watch at the doore of the Tabernacle 5. qu. Of the meaning of these words The heighth in the breadth 6. qu. VVhat ministerie of the Levites is here understood 7. qu. Whether the gold or silver onely were given according to the number of the people 8. qu. When the people were first numbred 9. qu. Whether this numbring of the people and that Numb 1. were the same 10. qu. The summe of the gold and silver offered to the Tabernacle as it is valued with money now currant 11. qu. What things were made of silver 12. qu. Of the quantitie of brasse which was offered Questions upon the nine and thirtieth Chapter 1. QUest At what time the worke of the Tabernacle began and when it was finished 2. qu. Why they brought their worke to Moses 3. qu. How Moses is said to have blessed them Questions upon the fortieth Chapter 1. QUest When the Lord spake â—o Moses to set up the Tabernacle 2. qu. Why so often rehearsall is â—â—de of the Tabernacle and the parts thereof 3. qu. Why all the parts of the Tabeâ—â—acle are not said alike to be sanctified 4. qu. Whether it be lawfull for one iâ—sue for a Bishopricke or other Ecclesiasticall prefâ—â—ment 5. qu. When the Tabernacle began the set up 6. qu. What Testimonie was put into 〈◊〉 Arke 7. qu. Whether the tables of the law â—re put into any other Arke beside the Arke of the â—estament 8. qu. When the Priests were consecrated whether at the erecting of the Tabernacle or after 9. qu. Why the Priests were commanded to wash their hands and feet 10. qu. What cloud this was which covered the Tabernacle 11. qu. How the glorie of the Lord filled the Tabernacle 12. qu. Why it pleased God to make the cloud a signe of his presence 13. qu. Why Moses could not enter into the Tabernacle 14. qu. In what order the campe marched 15. qu. Why it is called the Lords cloud and of foure miraculous things in it Tâ—e end of the Table THE EXPLANATION AND RECONCILIATION of that point of theft handled pag 3. and pag. 5. of this Commentarie WHereas pag. 3. lin 32. Piscators opinions misliked which would not have simple theft punished by â—ath and yet pag. 5. lin 13. the same seemeth to be affirmed in â—he first place understand by simple theft such theft as concurrâ—h not with another sin as theâ—t violence and such like in the other that is â—lled simple theft which is onely upon extreame necessitie and committed in
espousals Labans craft Beauty how far to be respected in marriage Abuses to be avoyded in mariage feasts How Leah was not discerned of Iacob Hebrewes fables How farre the fathers are to be imitated S. sin f plur C. inter Ch. cor H.S. alt T. G. T.r. S. ad S. ad S. alt S.G. T.C.r. divers sig T.B.G. H.S. cat T. B· H.S.c. T.B.r. S.c. T. H.r. S.c. S. ad Procreation the gift and worke of God Mandrakes have a strong â—avour Epiph. in philolog c. 4. Mandrakes whether their vertue is to make women conceive Of the description of mandragoras The vertue operation of Mandrakes Hebrewes fables Leah doth not name her son Gad of fortune Iacob hath not only the parti-coloured goats but sheep also Most particoloured sheepe in Palestine The Latine translation refused of the Romans themselves Strange births procured by the conceit and fancie of the minde The force and power of the affections S.T. ad C.r. cor C.r. cor div sig S. cor S.H. cor S. ap f. prop. B. mut temp S. cor S. ad B. H. ad Ch. S. ad H.c. H. de Ch. cor S. ad H. S. ap f. pr. H.c. H.S. det S. ad Who are understoâ—d to be Iacobs brethreÌ„ S. ad S. ap f. pr. S.C. cor C.c. S.C.c. T.B.r. divers fig. T.r. S. app f.p. divers accep B.G.r. Hebrewes curious â—â—servations Why mention is here made only of Iacobs eleven children Hebrewes conceits The Angels not understood by the seven spirits Revel 1.4 H. ad T.G.r. T.P.G.r. H.S. mut temp H.c. H.S.c. divers sig B. Gr. H. trans H.S.C.c. H.S.c. S. ap f. pr. H.S.B. pr. f. â—p Of divers kinds of bowing the body Salem and Sichem whether one place H. det diff ver Ch. c. H. deâ— H.S.C.c. S.P. divers signif T.B.r. S. ad S.c. H. inter H. cor â— b.g.r. Hebrewes uncertaine collections Simeon and Levi whether to be excused in part Reasons for the justification of Simeon and Levi their acts answered The circumstances of the cruell acts of Simeon and Levi weighed Jacobs sentence against Simeon and Levi explained H. det Ch. mut T. r. differ sig S. ad H. det div sig app s. pr. S. c. H. det H. det S. trans H. S. cor T. B. r. H.C. app f. pr. S. ad S.c. How Benjamin is numbred among those that were borne in Mesopotamia S. cor S. cor S. cor S. ad T. cor S. ad H. ad S. cor S. S. cor B. S.H.C. S. S. C. app f. pr. S. H. S. Aholibamah whether the same with Iudith Of Sibeon and Anah Basemath Ismaels daughter Amalek how counted among the sons Adab Of the Horites what people they were Dishon three of that name Gen. 39. â— Hebr. 13. â— Ambr. lib. de Ioseph c. 5. Ambr. lib. â— offâ— c. 14. De utilitate nihil perdideraÌ„t qui acquisierant perpetuitatem â—elius fuit conferre aliquid de fructibus quà m to tuâ— de jure amittere offic 2.16 Non venditionem sui juris sed redemptionem salutis puâ—â—banâ— ibid. Greg. hom 〈◊〉 in Ezechiel Psal. 101.1 Detersa est irâ— quae apparebat non erat ostensa est misericordia quae erat non apparebat Greg. ibid. Toletan 5â— can 5. Gen. 49.24 Ioseph ofâ—asaph â—asaph to adde H. cor divers sig S. det H. det S. ad H.c. H. alt H. ad S.c. T.c.r. T.r. Why Ioseph is said to be a child his yeares being expressed before In what cases priâ—ate admonition is not necessary before publike accusation Why parent loâ—â—â—heir youngest children best The remedie against envy Ioseph wherein a type of Christ. How Iacob rebuked Ioseph Iosephus in errour The judgement of Simeon and Levi. The divers senses of that word sheol Nephesh taken in Leviticus for a dead corps S.c. S.c. C. ap f. pr. H. cor ap f. pr. T.r. C. cor H.c. T.P.r. T.H.r. H.c. H. 〈◊〉 H.c. L.C.r. S.H.c. simil ver T.r. T.B.G.r. T.P.r. Iudah and his children married very young Adullam the nâ—me â—f a village in the tribe of Judah Thamar whether the daughter of Sem. Unnaturall lust how many wayes committed Er or Onan whether the greater sinner Moses Law Deut 24.5 whether to be understood of the naturall brother Why Thamar is adjudged to be burned Iudahs his rigorous oversight in adjudging a woman great with childe to the fire Why Christ condemned not the adulteresse Ioh. 8. T.B.r. C.c. C.att. H. det T.C.r. H.c. T.C.r. H.S. alt C.c. H.c. H.c. S. ad H. cor T.r. H.c. Iosephs maner of imprisonment H. ad S. ad T.r. T.r. S. det T.r. H.S.c. S.B.c. H. det T.r. divers sig T.r. H. det Canaan why called the land of the Hebrewes The hanging upon the crosse an ancient punishment S. ap f. pr. T.r. H. alt H. det T.G.r. H. det S.c. T.B.r. H. alt H.S.c. H. cor C. alt Ga. T. H.r. S. det C. ad H.c. ad divers sig C.r. T.S.r. H. cor H. cor The soothsaiers blinded Pharaoh a common name to the Kings of Egypt Ioseph knew not Pharaohs dreame aforehand as Pererius This plentie and famine not procured by naturall causes The increasing of Nilus in the yeares of plentie how many cubits How the corn was preserved Of the citie On. Why Ioseph marieth the daughter of an Idolater Iacob and Iosephs yeares compared together At 30. yeares a man fit for publike imployment How it was wrought that Iacob had notice all this while of Iosephs being in Egypt The phrase to bâ—eake bread whence taken The Latin corrupt S.C.H.c. T. G.r H.S. ad C. c S.c. S.H. alts T.r. S. cor T.C.r. T.G.r. S. G. c. T. C.r. H. cor H. cor H. cor T.B.G.r. Reconciliation of places How a booke is used in the ministring of an oath Three notable fruits of affliction Affliction maketh us to know God Affliction bringeth us to know our selves Affliction teacheth us to know the world what it is T.B. r H. ad H. det S. cor H.S.c. T.r. H. aâ— Tr. S. ad H. det S. mut pers H.c. inter T.r. Hebrewes fond collections Hebrews vaine confidence Why the Egyptians refused to eat with the Hebrewes The ancient use of sitting at the table Readings of the word Shacar to be drunken H.G.r. H.G.r. H.S.c. H.S.c. T.r. B.G.T.r. Divers opinions of them which justifie this fact of Iosephs examined Ioseph not to be charged here with agrievous sinne Iosephs fault how it may bee extenuated though not justified What iniquity they meane that God had found out Benjamin why called a little lad at thirty yeares Bellar. lib. â— dâ— Monach. cap. 24. S.C.c. S.H.c. T. S.c. S. T.G.r. H. cor H.S.c. S. cor B. T.r Whether Ioseph 〈◊〉 revealâ—◠〈…〉 the 〈◊〉 of his 〈◊〉 against him Hebrewes curious collections Hebrewes â—ables H.S.c. H. c. T.C.H.r. T.P.r. S. c. H. S. c. S. c. H. dâ—â— â— c H. det S. alt S. alter divers signif S. add S. add S. cor S. cor S. cor S. ad divers signif S. det S. ad How the Lord is said to goe downe The grosse