in faith Heb. 11.4 3. It should seeme that God by some outward testimony approved Abels sacrifice whether it were by kindling it by fire from heaven as hee did to Moses sacrifice Levi. 9.24 and Elias 1 King 18. as Hierome thinketh and Theodoâ—ion readeth Deui inflammavit c. God set on fire Abels sacrifice or by the rebounding of the flame of Cains sacrifice upon himselfe as the fire of the furnace whereinto the three children were cast slew those that made it Dan. 3.22 It is like that by some visible signe God delivered his acceptance as the Apostle saith God testifying of his gifts Heb. 11.4 Iunius Mercerus and Calvin referre this to Abels prosperous successe but I approve rather the other opinion 4. Ambrose note may well here be received ubi nascuntur hi fratres c. that in the birth of these children the order of nature is observed the eldest is named first ubi exprimitur disciplina vivendi seniori junior antefertur but when mention is made of their religion the yonger is preferred before the elder and first named ex Perer. QVEST. III. Vers. 7. IF thou doe well c. 1. The Septuagint here translate very corruptly as is before shewed which while some of the fathers followed they did weary themselves with many interpretations Ambrose saith he divided not aright quia ante omnia Deo debuit offerre primitias because hee offered not the first fruits unto God but kept them to himselfe be quiet that is erubesce be ashamed of thy sin Chrysâ—stome expoundeth it of Cains intention that it was not good and be quiet that is tranquilitatem facito cogitationum appease thy thoughts and proceed not to adde sin unto sin against thy brother Augustine non recte dividendo i. non rectevivendo he divided not aright because he offered a good sacrifice in it selfe leading an evill life quiesce i. manus á scelere contine be quiet keep thy hands from mischiefe Thus while they justifie a corrupt translation if thou divide not aright which the Hebrew hath not they are divided among themselves the sense is evident that if he did well upon his repentance he should finde forgivenesse if not sinne lay at the doore both inwardly gnawing upon his conscience and outwardly drawing speedy punishment To lye at the doore sheweth that the punishment of sinne is ready at hand so that it cannot properly bee referred to the day of judgement as the Chalde paraphrast which is prolonged and deferred QVEST. IIII. How Abels desire was subject to Christ. VNto thee his desire shall be subject Which is not understood of sinne as Ruperâ—us that sinne while it is in the desire and not effected a man may subdue it as Olâ—aster because the punishment of sin committed hath a desire to lay hold of the offender as Ambrose expoundeth the turning thereof shall bee toward thee in te revertetur crimen quod à te â—â—pit the sinne returneth upon thee where it began And so Augustine that then a man hath dominion over sinne when non defendendo sibi praeposuerit sed penitendo subjecerit he doth not advance it by defence but subjecteth it by repentance But this clause as Chrysosostome well taketh it is understood of Abels subjection to his brother as the elder post peccatiam hoc permitto ut primigâ—nitura privilegiâ—â— gandeas though thou hast sinned I deprived thee not of the privilege of thy birthright and so the Lord would appease the wrath of Cain towards his brother by shewing his ready and willing subjection unto his elder brother both by the law of nature and his owne ready disposition Iun. Mercerus with the rest expoundeth it of sin but the other exposition is more proper QVEST. V. Of the talke betweene Cain and Abel Vers. 8. THen Cain spake to his brother Abel .1 It is superfluous to inquire what Cain said to Abel the Septuagint and the vulgar latine doe make these to be his words Let us goe into the field but they are added to the text Hierome thinketh he rehearsed those words which God before spake to Cain the paraphrast of Hierusalem supposeth this to have beene the talke that Cain affirmed there was no Judge that governed the world nor no other life but this nor reward for the righteous or punishment for the wicked because his oblation was not accepted as well as his brothers Abel did hold the contrary some thinke that Cain provoked Abel with angry and furious words into the field but then it is not like that Abel would have gone with him but it is more probable that Cain dissembled and spake friendly to his brother till he had him in the field where seeing they were alone he might execute his wicked purpose QVEST. VI. How Cain killed Abel 2. AS touching the manner of death it is not like as the Hebrewes imagine that Cain worried Abel with his teeth it was such a death whereby Abels bloud was abundantly shed and that in many places for the word is in the plurall number vox sanguinum the voyce of his blouds so that it is like to have beene done with bats or stones or by some such meanes and when he had slaine his brother he buried and hid his body because the Lord asked him where his brother was Pererius But the Hebrewes conceit because it is said that Cain rose against Abel that Cain was first downe and then rose againe hath no ground QVEST. VII The sinne and punishment of Cain Vers. 9. 1. COncerning Cains sin hee sheweth himselfe a lyer in saying I know not wicked and prophane in thinking that he could hide his sin from God unjust in denying to be his brothers keeper or that hee ought to have any care of him obstinate and desperate in not confessing his sinne but stubburnly complaining of the greatnesse of his punishment 2. Hee sustaineth a threefold punishment he is cursed in his soule a vagabond in his body unprosperous in his labours the earth should not yeeld her fruit thus as the Devill was cursed so Cain is the Devils minister to Adam God said not cursed art thou but cursed is the earth for thy sake Genes 3.17 and as Cain for slaying righteous Abel is made a runnagate so the Iewes for shedding the bloud of Christ the most innocent Lamb of God are vagabonds to this day over the face of the earth QVEST. VIII Whether Cain confessed his sinne Vers. 13. MY sinne or punishment is greater this was no confession of his sinne as Chrysostome thinketh sufficiens confessio sed intempestiva a sufficient confession but unseasonable because God had given sentence upon Cain and therefore his confession came too late for no confession in this life is unseasonable neither doth Cain complaine of the greatnesse of his sinne as some translators have it but rather of the greatnesse of his extreme punishment because he feared lest every man might have liberty to kill him as he himselfe expoundeth
Hebrew ach to be read as an adversative as Paulus Burgensis readeth veruntamen notwithstanding as though the sense should be this though yee are permitted to shed the bloud of beasts yet it is unlawfull for you to shed the bloud of man 3. Neither is this another exception concerning mans food as Cajetane that as before the bloud of beasts is excepted so here humane flesh that if it be not lawfull to shed the bloud of man neither is it to eat his flesh which first must be kiâ—led before it be eaten 4. Neither need there to be here understood any sentence as this I will not have you to shed mans bloud and then this to follow as a reason for this prohibition to shed mans bloud followeth directly in the next verse 5. But this word translated for may be read as a causall why God would have them abstaine from all cruelty or savage behaviour in eating of the bloud of beasts that they should have a greater detestation of the spilling or shedding of mans bloud Perer. Mercer QVEST. VII How God will require the bloud of man at the hand of beasts Vers. 5. AT the hand of every beast 1. Rupertus by beast understandeth the Devill that shall answer for the death of mens soules but Moses here directly speaketh of the bodily life which is in the spirits and bloud 2. Neither by beasts here are understood cruell and beastiall men for it followeth afterward aâ— the hands of man will I require it c. 3. Neither doth Moses insinuate the death of martyrs which were exposed to beasts for which the persecutors shall answer for that did cast the Saints before the beasts 4. But here is shadowed forth that Law which was afterward published that even the beast that killeth a man should be stoned Exod. 22. QVEST. VIII How his bloud shall be shed that sheddeth bloud Vers. 6. BY man shall his bloud be shed 1. Some reade in homine and referre it to the first clause Hee that sheddeth mans bloud in man as they which are strangled have their bloud shed as it were in them sic Tostatus but in this sense one kinde of murther onely should be prohibited 2. Some read in homine against man that is in despite of man Cajetan 3. But the best reading is per hominem by man and to referre it to the last clause by man shall his bloud be shed that is by the Magistrate as the Chalde interpreteth by witnesse by the sentence of the Iudge for it should seeme that before the floud there was no law made nor power given to man to punish murther as Adam proceeded not against Cain that killed his brother Abel Mercer 4. And this must be understood not de facto sed de jure merito not of the fact for many times murtherers escape but of the right and due desert of murtherers that they are by Gods Law worthy of death and many times where the law of man faileth that such are not executed Gods vengeance overtaketh them such are either slaine in battell or by the hands of other or by some other meanes as it is in the Psalme men of bloud shall not live halfe their daies Psalm 55.24 Calvin QVEST. IX That mans life should be preserved because of Gods image IN the image of God c. 1. Hence it followeth not as Oleaster collecteth that the image of God is in mans body because the image in the soule cannot be by the killing of the body destroyed for the reason concludeth well though this image of God be not in the body yet because the body is the Tabernacle of the soule and beareth that which beareth the image of God it ought for that cause to be reverenced and yet the image of God though not originally or principally yet by the consequent and effects is expressed and shineth in some sort in mans body in that it is made upright and aspiring to celestiall things and so sutable to the soule and in regard that into the hand of man God hath delivered the rule and dominion of the creatures cap. 1. vers 28. 2. Though the image wherein man was created be much decayed and impaired yet some part thereof remaineth for the which the life of man should be spared and preserved Calvin 3. And if for this reason the life of any man whatsoever should be regarded much more the life of Christians in whom this image is renewed in Christ Muscul. QVEST. X. Of the Raine Bow Vers. 13. I Have set my bow in the cloud c. 1. Neither Ambrose conceit can be admitted who understandeth not here the visible Raine-Bow in the clouds but the invisible power of God whereby he sometime intendeth sometime remitteth his judgements as a bow is bent and unbent againe But this collection is contrary to the text which saith The Bow shall be seene in the cloud vers 14. 2. Neither is their opinion found that thinke there was neither raine noâ— Raine-Bow before the floud for how could the plants and fruits of the earth have beene so many yeares preserved without raine so then the Raine-Bow was before the floud but it beganne onely now to be a signe of this covenant betweene God and man as the Lord chuseth sometime naturall things for signes as Bread and Wine and Water in the Sacraments Mercer 3. Neither is the opinion of some Hebrewes to be admitted that thinke the Raine-Bow to have beene before the floud but then it appeared in the cleare aire now in a cloud for the iris or Bow can have no existence or being but in a dewing or stilling cloud Mercer 4. Neither is Thomas Aquinas judgement and Cajetanus sound which thinke that the Râ—ine-Bow is partly a naturall signe that there shall be no floud because the Raine-bow sheweth not but when the clouds are thinne and dispersed whereas thicke and blacke clouds ingender inundations for the causes of the generall floud were not naturall and God without the clouds by the overflowing onely of the waters could drowne the world and beside if the Rain-bow were a naturall signe then before the floud came it might have prognosticated so much but then it should have beene a lying signe for notwithstanding the Raine bowes often appearing before the deluge as it is like the floud came 5. Though the Raine-bow bee not a naturall signe but voluntary depending upon the will and institution of God yet notwithstanding hath it some agreement with that which it is made a signe of like as baptisme in the flesh hath some resemblance of the soule so the Raine-bow is a fit and convenient signe to portend no inundation likely to follow because it is orâ—inarily a signe either of faire weather or of no long raine And it hath beene observed that a Raine-bow in the morning betokeneth showers in the evening faire weather Beside the Raine-bow is found to be wholesome to plants and herbs that where it lighteth it giveth them a more pleasant
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
their usuall food before the floud as it is now as seemeth to thinke Dominicus à Soto a Popish Writer for when as yet the earth and plants were not corrupted by the floud but retained their naturall force and vigour they yeelded more sufficient nourishment so that the eating of flesh was not then so necessary and as the more delicate use of some plants as the use of Wine by Noah was brought in afterward so much flesh of fowles and beasts did grow in request after the floud which was not covered before 5. Wherefore the sounder opinion is that not onely the eating of flesh was permitted before the floud but used not onely among the prophane race but with the faithfull though with greater moderation Our reasons are these 1. Because there is made no new grant neither in this nor in the rest as of multiplying and bearing dominion c. but onely the ancient privileges granted to man confirmed 2. The distinction of cleane beasts which it was lawfull for them to eat and the uncleane whereof they might not eat Levit. 13.8.3 It is evident by the oblation of Abel who offered the first fruit of his sheepe and the faâ— of them but it had beene no praise to Abel to offer the fatlings if he used not to eat of them it had beene all one to God whether to offer leane or fat but herein Abel is commended because he preferred the service of God before his owne private use and therefore Iustinus well collecteth Si anâ—e posuit Abel utilitatisâ—a Deum non dubium quia solitus fit ex labore suo utilitatem percipere If Abel did preferre God before his profit certainly he did reape profit of his labour and to the same purpose he alleageth that saying of the Apostle Who feedeth a flocke and eateth not of the milke thereof 1 Cor. 9.7 and by the same reason also of the flesh thereof 4. In that expresse mention is here first made of eating of flesh it is not as one well resolveth quantum ad usum in respect of the use sed quantum ad necessitatem in regard of the necessity The food of flesh beganne now to be more necessary because the plants and herbs had lost the first naturall vigour and strength QVEST. IIII. Whaâ— the meaning is of eating the flesh with the life or bloud 4. BVt flesh with the life thereof that is the bloud c. 1. This word anima in Hebrew nephesh translated life is taken foure wayes in Scripture first for man as the soule that sinneth shall die Ezek. 18. Secondly for the reasonable soule feare not those that can kill the body but cannot kill the soule Matth. 10. Thirdly it is taken for the inferiour part of the soule that is the affection as thou shalt love the Lord with all thy heart and soule Matth. 22. Fourthly it is taken for the life as a good shepherd will lay downe his life for his sheepe Ioh. 10. and so it is taken in this place for the bloud is the seat and chariot of the life and vitall spirics 2. These words are neither figuratively taken as Eugubinus thinketh for the shedding of mans bloud because he that killeth a man seemeth to devour his flesh for in this sense the words should have no coherence at all with the former verse and where words may be taken in their proper sense without any inconvenience a figure is not to be enforced neither is it all one to eat flesh with the bloud thereof and to eat things strangled as Chrysostome collecteth for the Apstoles distinctly speake of bloud and things strangled Act. 15. Neither is the eating of live flesh here onely prohibited as Cajetanus conjectureth or of hot bloud as Mercer for from this bruitish kinde of food the very nature of man abhorreth and therefore it needed not so especially to be provided for by precept But here generally the eating of the bloud with the flesh is forbidden whether together with the flesh alive or dead or separated from the flesh as to drinke it or to eat it as now the use is in confected meats QVEST. V. Wherefore the eating of bloud was prohibited NOw whereas the eating of bloud was forbidden both before the Law and under the Law Levit. 17. and after the Law in the beginning of the Gospell Act. 15. it shall be profitable to consider the causes of this prohibition First it was forbidden before the Law 1. Not so much for decencie and comelinesse or for that bloud is a grosse and heavy food 2. But either that aforehand by these ceremoniall precepts mens minds might be prepared the better to beare the yoke of the Law which afterward should be promulgated 3. Or rather that by this precept of abstaining from bloud men might be the more terrified from the shedding of mans bloud sic Chrysost. Secondly this law was revived Levit. 17.11 12. whereof two reasons are given one civill because the life of the flesh is the bloud that they should forbeare from all shew of cruelty and so much the more detest the shedding of mans bloud the other religious because I have given the bloud to offer at the Altar the bloud the organ of life is holy unto God the Author of life and therefore they should not pollute or prophane it by devouring thereof Thirdly the Apostles did forbid the eating of things strangled and bloud 1. Not because among the Gentiles suffocated things were held to be the food of evill spirits as Origen writeth for it is not like that the Apostles would ground their decree upon such heathenish fantasies 2. Neither by bloud is homicide forbidden and by things suffocated uncleane as some thinke for the Apostles would not use obscure and mysticall tearmes in their decree and these things were already provided for by law among the Gentiles 3. Neither did the Apostles forbid these things onely to restraine intemperancie for many kinds of food are more delicate and to be defiâ—ed than these 4. But Augustine sheweth the true cause of this prohibition Quâ—dideo fâ—ctum est quia elâ— gere voluerunt Apostoli pro tempore rem facilem c. This was decreed because the Apostles for a while would chuse some easie thing not burdensome to the observers which the Gentiles might observe in common with the Iewes c. Thus Augustine disputing against Faustus This the Apostles did onely for a time lest the beleeving Jewes who could hardly all at once be removed from the legall rites might have beene offended at the libertie of the Gentiles but now this cause being removed and there being no such feare this decree also is expired QVEST. VI. How this prohibition dependeth of the former verse Vers. 5. FOr surely I will require your bloud c. 1. Which words are neither an exposition of the former verse as Eugubinus who by the eating of flesh with the bloud understandeth figuratively the shedding of mans bloud 2. Neither is the
Rubens counsell for the delivering of Ioseph Vers. 21. BVt Ruben when he heard it c. 1. Ruben is said to have delivered Ioseph because by his counsell he hindered the purpose of his brethren that would have killed him Iun. 2. Iosephus setteth downe divers reasons which Ruben should use to disswade his brethren from this bloudy enterprise 1. In respect of God from whom nothing could be hid 2. In regard of their father whose great griefe and soâ—row by this meanes should be procured 3. And concerning Ioseph that they should consider he was but a child and therefore to be pittied he was their brother and therefore to be spared 4. And for themselves to remember what a great sin they should commit in shedding innocent bloud and that only envy toward their brother was the beginning of this mischiefe intended ex Perer. 3. It is like that Ruben might use other perswasions but Moses only expresseth that principall reason that they should not shed bloud whereof the Lord gave an expresse law to Noah after the floud Mercer 4. Herein appeareth the hypocrisie of the rest that thought they were free from bloud if they did not shed it with their owne hand though they otherwise caused Iosephs death as by starving or pining him in a pit which was far worse than if they had presently killed him and hereupon Ramban untruly noteth that he sinneth not so grievously which procureth anothers death as hee which with his owne hands sheddeth his bloud 5. Ruben in giving this advice to let downe Ioseph into a pit had no purpose that there he should die but as the text is to deliver him to his father by this meanes he might thinke to be reconciled to his father whom he had before offended by his incest Calvin The Hebrewes thinke that for this compassion of Ruben he deserved afterward to have a Prophet of his tribe namely Hosea and to have one of the cities of refuge in his lot and division Mercer QUEST XIX Of Iosephs party-coloured coat which his brethren spoyled him of Vers. 23. THey stript Ioseph out of his coat c. 1. They neither left him naked as Aben Ezra thinketh 2. Neither did they take away from him two coats as Lyranus 3. Neither is it certaine whether our Saviour Christs coat were like unto Iosephs 4. They tooke from him this party-coloured coat which was his upper garment not so much for desire they had to the garment but because it was a token of his fathers love Mercer As also with an intent to shew it to their father thereby to colour and conceale their fact vers 32. Iun. QUEST XX. Of Iosephs letting downe into the pit Vers. 24. THey cast him into a pit c. 1. It seemeth it was an old broken pit for there was no water in it such as Ieremie speaketh of alluding to the fashion of that country they have digged them pits broken pits that can hold no water Ier. 2.13 2. It is not like as R. Salomon conjectureth that this pit was full of serpents and scorpions for then as Ramban noteth they must needs haue acknowledged a miracle in the preservation of Ioseph among serpents as of Daniel among the lions 3. It may be though no water were in the pit yet it was full of mire such as Ieremie was let downe into Ierem. 38. Perer. QUEST XXI Of the spices and balme which the Ismaelites carried Vers. 25. LAden with spicery balme and mirrhe 1. The word necheth is the same which the Arabians call Nuketa that is spices sweet druggs yet elsewhere it is taken generally for precious things as 2 King 20.13 Hezekiah shewed to the king of Babilons servants his house Nechothe of precious things Oleaster Iun. though Mercerus interpret it Domum aromatum House of spices 2. The word tseri is not wax or rosin as Oleaster although the Latine word cera and rasina and the Greek word rheténe the letters somewhat transposed come somewhat neare the sound of the Hebrew word but it is better interpreted balme as Iun. whereof there is great store in Gilead Ierem. 8.22 rosin was neither so rich a merchandise to be transported so farre nor so precious for curing of diseases as the Prophet there noteth 3. The last kinde of merchandise is called Lot which cannot signifie the Chessenut as derived from the root Lut which signifieth to wrap in or cover as Oleaster for this had beene no such precious merchandise to carry so farre and Exod. 30. it is reckoned among the sweet spices whereof the perfume there prescribed was made but it is better translated ladanum Iun. which commeth somewhat neare the Hebrew word the Chalde and Septuagint reade stacte which is the same that ladanum the gumme of the myrrhe or Cypres tree QUEST XXII Why the Ismaelites are also called Midianites Vers. 28. SOld Ioseph to the Ismaelites Which are also called Midianites vers 28. and Medanites vers 36. which were three divers people the first of Ismael Abrahams sonne by Agar the second of Midian by Keturah the third of Medan Abrahams sonne by Keturah also these three are indifferently taken for the same people in this place 1. Not for that they were distinct Nations but grew to be one people as Augustine 2. Or because they all came of Abraham and had the same father Thom. Anglic. 3. Or because Agar and Keturah are supposed to be the same Histor. Scholast which is an untrue surmise 4. Neither are we to imagine with some that Ioseph was thrice sold first to the Ismaelites then to the Midianites and lastly to Potiphar as Rasi for vers 28. at the same instant Ioseph was sold both to the Ismaelites and Madianites 5. Wherefore these merchants are named as well Midianites as Ismaelites both because they did traffike together and the company consisted of both sorts Mercer as also because the Ismaelites and Midianites dwelt in one Countrey of Arabia together and therefore Oukelos readeth vers 25. for Ismaelites Arabians and for this cause the Kings of Midian are called Ismaelites Iud. 8.24 26. because of their cohabitation together Iun. QUEST XXIII Of the price which Ioseph was sold for FOr twenty peeces of silver c. These were twenty sicles of silver which are in value 23. s. 4. d. starling for every common sicle weigheth two drachmaes that is â— 4. d. starling the fourth part of an ounce so that foure sicles make a doller Iun. 1. Wherefore it was neither so small a summe as Bahai ghesseth who would have these to be twenty denarii which make but five sicles 2. Nor so much as Iosephus reckoneth who would have Ioseph sold for 20. minâ—â— pounds every mina or pound weighing 100. drachmaes that is 58. s. 4. d. starling 3. The Septuagint also are deceived that for peeces of silver reade peeces of gold 4. Neither was Ioseph sold for 30. silverlings as some translations did reade in Augustines time because they would make the type body
the selling of Ioseph and of Christ to agree in the summe who was sold for 30. pence but it is not necessary that the type should be answerable in every particular circumstance 5. The Hebrewes thinke that the ordinary price of servants was 30. sicles but that they abated ten because they sold Ioseph in secret but it appeareth otherwise in the law where the price of redemption of the male from five yeares to twenty is twenty shekels Levit. 27.5 But in this place they had no respect to any custome or law but according to their number they set the price of 20. shekels for every one of them which were ten in all two shekels for Benjamin was very young not above foure or five yeare old and could not give consent and Ruben afterward gave consent unto them Mercer QUEST XXIV Of the counsell of Iudah to sell Ioseph into captivity Vers. 26. IVdah said what availeth it if we slay though we keepe his bloud secret c. 1. They were resolved already not to lay violent hands themselves upon Ioseph but to suffer him to perish in the pit and yet Iudah so accounteth of it as if they should slay him themselves 2. Iudah was moved by the spirit of God to deliver Ioseph from this second death yet he sheweth his hatred in that he giveth counsell to make a bond-slave of him which was a bad as death 3. Iudah by this meanes thinketh to avoid three inconveniences first the shedding of his bloud secondly to take him from his father who was so affected toward him thirdly to prevent the honour which Ioseph dreamed of 4. The Hebrewes thinke that for this compassion in Iudah afterward Daniel of that tribe was delivered from the Lyons but it is certain that upon this occasion of selling Ioseph into captivitie the Israelites afterwards went downe into Egypt and were afflicted with a long and hard bondage 5. In the meane time while they were making their bargaine Ioseph did intreat his brethren with many prayers and teares Gen. 42.22 but they would not heare him Mercerus QUEST Where Ruben was when Ioseph was sold. Vers. 29. RVben returned to the pit 1. Ruben was absent when Ioseph was sold some thinke to minister to his father according to his course some to mourne alone by himselfe for the sinne committed with his fathers concubine But it is most like that he went about some other way to the pit to have taken Ioseph thence secretly and therefore Iosephus thinketh that Ruben came thither in the night Mercer 2. Philo thinketh that after Ruben understood that his brethren had sold Ioseph he utterly misliked it making them worse than theeves for they prey upon strangers but these upon their owne brother lib. de Iosâ—ph but it is more like that Ruben did rest satisfied after he understood that they had not killed him and consented unto them Mercer 3. Before he knew what was done he cryed out Whither shall I goe both because he was the first-borne and therefore should bee most blamed for the losse of Ioseph Muscul. as also for that he had so lately offended his father before for his incestuous act Iun. QUEST XXVI Of the sprinkling of Iosephs coat with bloud and the deceiving of Iacob Vers. 31. THey tooke Iosephs coat and killed a kid c. 1. Iosephus thinketh that they brought Iosephs coat themselves but the text is otherwise vers 32. they sent it but Iosephus ghesseth right that they sent the coat rent and torne as though indeed some wilde beast had devoured Ioseph and they dipped it in a kids bloud which they say is most like unto mans bloud 2. Iosephus also is deceived in that he thinketh that Iacob had some knowledge before of Iosephs captivity but now changeth his minde thinking surely that Ioseph was devoured for from whence could Iacob have any knowledge what was befallen Ioseph but by his brethren who were sure to keepe it secret from their father ex Perer. 3. Rupertus hath also a strange opinion that Iacob was not so simple when he saw the bloudy coat to thinke that a beast had devoured every part of Ioseph nothing to remaine but his coat but that he did surmise that his brethren had killed him but durst not tell his sonnes of it because he saw them so maliciously bent for Iacob sheweth the contrary by his owne words that he gave credit to their report that an evill beast indeed had spoiled Ioseph vers 33. and if Iacob had so thought hee would not have spared by his fatherly authority to rebuke his sonnes to bring them to repentance 4. It is like that afterward when it was knowne to Iacob that Ioseph lived that his brethren confessed the truth to their father and acknowledged their fault but that Iacob seeing how God had turned Iosephs captivity to the good of them all therein considering Gods providence spared to rebuke them as Ioseph upon the same reason did forbeare his brethren Gen. 45.7 5. Simeon and Levi as they were most cruelly given as it appeareth by the destruction of the Sichâ—mites are thought to have bin the principall actors against Ioseph which may be the cause that afterward Simeon was bound by Iosephs commandement so the Hebrews thinke that Iudas that betrayed Christ was of the tribe of Simeon as the Priests and Scribes were of Levi that put him to death And as Iudah here might have counsell to deceive Iacob with the bloud of a kid so hee himselfe was deceived of Thamar about a kid Mercer QUEST XXVII The greatnesse of Iacobs sorrow for Ioseph Vers. 34. HE sorrowed for his sonne a long season c. Many things increased the sorrow of Iacob for his sonne Ioseph 1. Because he imagined that Ioseph was devoured of some beast Ne frustum quidem superest quod sepulchro infâ—ratur There was no part of him left to be committed to buriall 2. The very sight of the torne and bloudy garment did augment his griefe as the very sight of Caesars garment wherein he was killed moved the people to be revenged upon those that murdered him and Iulia the wife of Pompey when she saw his garment sprinkled with bloud at the sight thereof swouned away and died Perer. ex Dion 3. Iacob continued twenty two or twenty three years mourning and lamenting for Ioseph for now he was seventeene yeare old but when Iacob heard tell that he was living in Egypt he was 39. yeare old for he was 30. yeares of age when he stood before Pharaoh and after that seven yeares of plenty were past and two yeares of famine 4. This extremity of griefe caused Iacob outwardly to testifie the same first by the renting of his cloaths which afterward did grow into use and custome to shew the great sorrow and indignation of minde as Caleb and Iosua rent their clothes Numb 14.6 when they heard the murmuring of the people and Paul and Barnabas when the people would have offered sacrifice unto them Perer.
that can save and destroy Iam 4.12 Onely God that gave unto man his life hath power to take it away and therefore otherwise than God hath given direction either by particular precept or generall rule the life of man is not to bee taken away 3. And seeing Magistrates are but Gods Ministers Rom. 13.4 they must execute justice according to his will for it is required of a disposer that he bee found faithfull 1. Cor. 4.2 but Gods will otherwise appeareth not than in his word 4. And seeing whatsoever is not of faith that is firme perswasion is sinne Rom. 14.23 and faith must be grounded upon the word as being wrought by the word Rom 10.17 how can the Magistrate approve his acts of justice as in the sight of God unlesse hee can warrant the same by the word 2. Neither yet can I consent with those which thinke that the punishment inflicted by Moses for the breach of the morall law together with the morall law is imposed upon Christian Magistrates as it is not lawfull to punish adulterie otherwise than by death nor simple theft by death but by restitution Piscator praefation in Exod. for if this were so then the Gospell should overthrow the policie and institution of divers Common-wealths which of a long time have continued but God is the author of peace not of confusion 1. Cor. 14.33 2. Mardoche and Daniel having place of government under the Persian Kings did no doubt minister justice according to the lawes of that countrey 3. Our Saviour Christ commanding to give tribute to Caesar and injoyning obedience to the higher powers which did beare the sword and that for conscience sake Rom. 13. seeme to give approbation to the lawes of nations maintaining right and tending to equity 4. Our Saviour himselfe observed not the judicials belonging to the morall law for whereas he that gathered stickes upon the Sabbath was stoned to death by Moses yet out Saviour excuseth and defendeth his Apostles who did as much as the other in rubbing the eares of corne for their necessity Matth. 12. yea hee giveth a rule that for fornication onely and adulterie it was lawfull for a man to put away his wife Matth. 19. which exception needed not if either in fact then or in right afterward adulterers and adulteresses were to bee punished by death If it be answered that Christ tooke not upon him the office of the Civill Magistrate to impose corporall punishment yet would not our Saviour have defended his Apostles nor yet by silence have left them unreproved for neglect of the law 3. Wherefore the best resolution is that the morall judicials of Moses do partly bind and partly are left free they do not hold affirmatively that we are tied to the same severity of punishment now which was inflicted then but negatively they doe hold that now the punishment of death should not be adjudged where sentence of death is not given by Moses Christian Magistrates ruling now under Christ the Prince of peace Isai. 9. that is of clemencie mercie may abate of the severitie of Moses law mitigate the punishment of death but they cannot adde unto it to make the burthen more heavie to shew more rigour than Moses becommeth not the Gospell to extend more favour is not unbeseeming of these two assertions my reasons are as followeth 1. That which Ambrose urgeth out of the mouth of Luke how our Saviour reproveth his Disciples because they would have had fire come downe upon the Samaritanes upon the which example hee thus inferreth Ostenditur nobis non semper in eos qui peecaverunt vindicandum quia nonnunquam amplius prodest clementia tibi ad patientiam lapso ad correctionem It is shewed us that alwayes vengeance is not to bee taken of those that offend because oftentimes clemencie is more profitable for patience in thee and amendement in the offender And this collection is ratified by the answer of our Saviour in that place The Sonne of man is not come to destroy mens lives but to sâ—ve them Luk. 9.55 2. Augustine urgeth the example of Christ who suffered the woman taken in adâ—â—tery to escape without punishment of death Ioh. 8. Whereupon hee inferreth that the adulter◠〈◊〉 not now to bee put to death but to live rather to be reconciled to her husband or to come 〈…〉 the usuall answer is that our Saviour doth not here abrogate the Law against adultery 〈◊〉 only to meddle with the Magistrates office Piscator Ans. Neither doe wee say that Christ abrogateth that law but leaveth it free and taketh away the necessitie of it And though Christ exercised not the Magistrates office in his owne person yet in this case it had not beene impertinent to have given direction to have her before the Magistrate as in another case he sendeth the leper to the Priest Matth. 8.4 if it had pleased him to impose still the severitie of the law yea our Saviour sheweth by his answer Let him that is amongst you without sinne cast the first stone at her Ioh. 8.7 that hee would not have them such strait executors of the rigour of Moses law upon others but rather to bee severe judges of themselves and with charitable affection to support the frailty of others to the which themselves were subject 3. Further the difference betweene the times of the Law and of the Gospell must be considered then they received the spirit of bondage to feare but now the spirit of adoption Rom. 8.15 then they which came neere the mount where the morall Law was given were stone or stricken thorow with darts whether man or beast Heb. 12.20 but it is not so now then the bloud of Abel cryed for vengeance but the bloud of Christ now calleth for mercie and so speaketh better things than that of Abel Heb. 12.24 Therefore to mitigate the severitie of Moses Law in some cases yet not leaving sinne unpunished nor by connivence cherishing the same it is more sutable to the profession of the Gospell of peace and mercie Wherefore I here say with Chrysostome Vbi paterfamilias largus est dispensator non debet esse tenax Where the master of the house is bountifull the steward must not be sparing Melius est propter misericordiam rationem reddere quà m propter crudelitatem It is better to be called to account for too much pitie than for cruelty 4. The continuall practice of the Church sheweth as much that the rigour of Moses judicials is mitigated S. Paul willeth the incestuous man only to be excommunicate 1. Cor. 5. it seemeth then there was no law in force to put such to death nor in Cyprians time who thus writeth Quidam episcopi in nostro provincia c. Some Bishops in our province have altogether shut up penance against adulterie Nor after that in the time of the Eliberin Councell which was held under the reigne of Constantine where it was decreed can 9. Moechatus
Hebrewes 4. Some that herein they were judged that is declared to bee vaine because they were not able to defend their worshippers Iun. 5. And because the Egyptians worshipped certaine beasts above the rest as Apis or Serapis which was a pide Oxe that kinde was specially punished Perer. As the last sense but one is very agreeable so I thinke that beside some notable accident befell the Egyptian gods and Idols as there did unto Dagon the Philistims Idoll in the presence of the Arke QUEST X. How the Israelites escaped this destruction of the first borne NOw the Israelites though they were intermingled with the Hebrewes were exempt and freed from this judgement after this manner 1. They were commanded to strike off the bloud of the Lambe upon the two side posts whereupon the doore hanged and upon the upper doore post because in this it was more conspicuous and in sight and in the other rather than upon the doore which was moveable and sometime open and sometime shut 2. This bloud was a signe not so much for the Angell to passe by their houses for the Angell could have told in whose houses the paschall Lambe was killed without seeing of the bloud but it was a signe to the Hebrewes both presently to confirme them in the hope of their deliverance and to be a type and figure of the bloud of the Messiah the onely unspotted Lambe by whose bloud sprinkled on the posts of our hearts by faith wee are saved from everlasting destruction 3. Now whereas some of the Israelites were so poore and few that they were not sufficient for the eating of a Lambe they joyned themselves to other families and returned not unto their owne houses that night and so their houses where no Lambe was killed were not sprinkled and marked with bloud they stood emptie that night and such Hebrewes as sojourned in the Egyptians houses left their houses and went to the houses of the Hebrewes for it is not like that the Egyptians would have suffered any Hebrew to kill a Lambe in their houses which thing they counted an abomination Perer. QUEST XI The mysticall application of this last plague upon the first borne FOr the mysticall application of this last plague 1. Origen by the first borne of the Egyptians that are slaine understandeth the devill and his angels the principalities of this world whom Christ subdued at his comming likewise Heretikes and inventers of strange doctrines which are overcome by the truth 2. Augustine maketh a resemblance betweene this tenth plague and the tenth Commandement For as they which cover their neighbours goods doe desire them to inrich their heires and posteritie so the Lord doth punish their covetousnesse and oppression in their heires and first borne 3. Rupertus by the first borne of Egypt understandeth the originall sinne of the world which is taken away by the death and passion of Christ. 4. But leaving mens uncertaine and inconstant fansies which are as divers as the heads where they are forged the Scripture thus applieth this signe of the Passeover that we are by the sprinkling of the bloud of Christ delivered from eternall death as the Israelites were by the bloud of the Lambe from a temporall and that as onely those houses were exempted that were marked with the bloud of the Lambe so onely in the Church is salvation to be found where the bloud of Christ is apprehended by faith Simler QUEST XII Of the generall application of these tenne plagues NOw for the generall application of all these tenne plagues of the Egyptians 1. We have seene before how Augustine forceth a kind of resemblance and comparison betweene the tenne plagues oâ— Egypt and the tenne transgressions of the tenne Commandements as the turning of the water into bloud he would have to signifie the corrupting of the true worship of God with the inventions of flesh and bloud by the frogges the blasphemies of the heathen against the name of God the plague of the liâ—e signifie such as have a gnawing and restlesse conscience as the Sabbath betokeneth the rest of the minde And so in the rest But by these we may judge that these allegories are but the superfluitie of mens wits and as every mans conceit is so he findeth an allegorie 2. Yet Ferus application is more apt who by these ten plagues setteth forth the ten torments and paines of hell 1. There water shall bee turned into bloud all things shall bee turned to the destruction of the ungodly 2. Their frogges are horror of conscience 3. Their lice a restlesse and unquiet minde 4. By the flies is signified that they shall be destitute of all helpe 5. By the murrane of beasts the perpetuall punishment of their bodies 6. By the boiles the anguish of minde 7. By the haile continuall terror 8. By the Locusts the want of every good thing 9. By the darknesse their depriving of the favour of God 10. And everlasting death by the death of the first borne But neither is this allegoricall application simply to be approved for how can any man number the plagues of hell which are endlesse infinit and without number and to make the comparison hold hee is constrained to inculcate the same thing twice or thrice 3. Wherefore somewhat to content them which delight in such curious applications these ten plagues which the Egyptians indured may seeme to decipher those ten mercies principall benefits which God vouchsafed unto the Israelites being delivered out of Egypt 1. As one had water turned into bloud so the other was blessed in their water they received it out of the rock and whereas it was bitter it became sweet Exod. 17. 2. As they had their rivers and fields crawling full of frogges so the other saw the red Sea full of the Egyptians bodies floting in the water and rose up upon the land 3. Their dust was turned into lice and the Israelites had Manna that â—ay in stead of dust upon the ground 4. They had swarmes of noysome flies and serpents the other were healed from the biting of serpents 5. And as the Egyptians lost their cattell by the murrane so the other were increased and inriched with the cattell of their enemies as from the Midianites onely they â—ooke 675000. sheepe 72000 beeves 61000. asses Numb 31 32 33 34. 6. In stead of the Egyptians soreâ— and botches their feet swelled not in all their journey 7. They were terrified with lightning and thunder the other received the law in thunder and lightning in mount Sinai 8. For the Egyptians Locusts the Israelites had quailes 9. In stead of darknesse they had a piller of fire to guide them in the night and Gods glorious presence in the Tabernacle 10. And as they were punished with the death of their first borne so the first borne of Israel are made holy and consecrate unto God Exod. 13. Vers. 10. The Lord hardned Pharaohs heart For the evident and full discussing of this question how the Lord is
prescribed for the solution whereof these things are to be considered 1. Divers rites were injoyned in the celebration of the first pasch which were not perpetuall such was the preparing of the lambe foure dayes before Perer. And the indifferent choyce of a lambe or kid Iun. in Analys Likewise their girding of the loynes eating with a staffe in their hand their standing were onely signes of readinesse for that time which usages and rites they did not hold themselves tied unto insomuch that it was an ancient tradition among them afterward to sit at the Passeover in signe of their deliverance obtained so that our Saviour sitting at the eating of the pasch is found to be no transgressor of the law Iun. in Matth. 26.20 And so generally the rites of the first Passeover are set downe unto the 14. verse of this chapter and afterward the perpetuall law of the pasch is prescribed 2. In the perpetuall observation of the pasch some things might be dispensed withall some not upon necessarie occasion the generall time of the moneth they might keepe it in the second moneth if any were uncleane or in a long journey Numb 9.10 11. As it was practised in Hezekiâ—hs time 2 Chron. 30.1 2. The King with his Princes consulted to keepe the Passeover upon the 14. day of the second moneth because the Priests were not sanctified neither were the people gathered together to Jerusalem But concerning the particular time namely of the day it could not be altered but still they kept the pasch upon the 14. day of the moneth though the moneth were changed as is evident in these places before recited therefore the opinion of them hath no probabilitie that thinke our Saviour Christ did eat his pasch upon the 15. day at even So likewise the place where they should keepe the pasch was necessarie even where the Tabernacle and Sanctuarie was the place which the Lord should chuse as Deut. 16.6 for all their oblations and sacrifices must be brought thither Levit. 17.4 and Deut. 12. throughout the chapter And this is the cause why the Jewes to this day use no sacrifices nor ablations Perer. QUEST XXXIV What ceremonies the Iewes doe hold themselves tied unto at this day BUt here further it will be demanded what legall observations might be kept out of that place where the Sanctuarie was â— Here the Rabbines doe use this distinction that such legall rites as had necessarie relation to the place of the Sanctuarie as their sacrifices â—blations tithes offrings which were all to be brought to the place which the Lord should chuse such could not be observed in any other placeâ— as it is commanded Deut. 12.13 〈…〉 offrings in every place which thou 〈…〉 And in the same chapter vers 17. Thou mayst not eat within thy 〈…〉 of thy 〈…〉 the first borne if thy 〈…〉 observe wheresoever and to this day they doe as the dayes of unleavened bread circumcision abstinence from certaine meats fasting resting upon the festivals and all their judicials they hold themselves bound unto if they had Judges of their owne So they keepe their festivals in part in respect of resting from worke but in part they keepe them not because the sacrifices and oblations which were prescribed upon their Feast dayes are necessarily omitted being limited to a certaine place 3. Iustinus Martyr hereupon very well collecteth that seeing the Lord did tie the legall sacrifices to the place of his sanctuarie which he did foresee in time should bee destroyed his intent also was that all such sacrifices and ceremonies should cease at the time appointed Dialog cum Triphon And if the Jewes had any grace to consider this they might thinke that the wrath of God is upon them and that they worship him not aright seeing that they are deprived both of the Temple Priesthood and sacrifices so that their case is harder now than it was in Egypt where they did eat the Passeover which now it is not lawfull for them to doe QUEST XXXV Whether the sprinkle were of Hysope or Rosemary or some other thing Vers. 22. TAke a branch of Hyssope 1. Some have taken this for mosse as Tremelius and Iunius in their first edition because 1 King 4.32 it is said to spring out of the wall and is set against the Cedar the tallest tree as the vilest plant But Iunius hath reversed his first opinion and taketh it for Hysope because comparisons are not of unlike things but of the same kind the Cedar as being the highest tree that groweth upon a bodie is set against the Hysope which is one of the smallest things that riseth upon a stalke or shaft as the bodie thereof 2. Piscator doth thinke it to be Rosemarie both because for the divers branches it is fittest to sprinkle with and it delighteth to grow in stonie places and beside that which the Evangelist calleth Hyssope wherewith they reached unto Christ the spunge of vineger Ioh. 19.29 is in Matth. called a reed Matth. 27.48 which best agreeth to Rosemarie which hath a stiffe stalke like a reed Contra. All this here alleaged agreeth to the Hyssope as well as to Rosemarie for it hath many sprigges apt to disperse and sprinkle water it groweth also upon walls and in those countries it ariseth up to great bignesse that the stalke thereof might well serve to make a reed of to reach up the spunge so the mustard seed in Palestina groweth to a tree and Herodotus saith that he hath seene milium millet which is a kind of wheate in Babylon of the bignesse of a tree Beza annotat in Matth. 27.48 3. Though it be no great matter whether it bee taken for Hyssope or Rosemarie for the word generally signifieth such herbes as are good against rheumes and flixes and so it comprehendeth as well Hyssope as origanum marjeram saturai savorâ—e thyme c. and this libanotis rosemarie among the rest yet I thinke with Iunius that it most properly signifieth Hyssope both because of the similitude of the name eezob the consent of interpreters the Chalde Septuagint with the rest and most of all the Apostles authoritie Heb. 9.19 who calleth it Hyssope having relation to the ceremonie Numb 19. of sprinkling bloud with Hyssope QUEST XXXVI Whence they tooke the bloud which they laid upon the doore posts ANd dip it in the bloud that is in the basen Because the Latine translator readeth in the bloud that is on the threshhold or by the doore Augustine moveth a quâ—stioâ— what bloud that should be 1. He will not have it so to be taken as though the lambe were killed hard by the doore but that the bloud was saved in some vessell and set by the doore to be there in a readinesse to sprinkle upon the doore quest 48. in Exod. hereunto subscribeth Perer. 2. But what need so many superfluous questions seeing in the originall it is in the basen not on the threshold or doore all this labour might bee spared in seeking
bloud Galas 5. Polluitur foedatur terra yea the land it selfe is polluted and defiled with bloud Numb 35.36 Galas 6. Mans bodie is the temple of the holy Ghost 1 Cor. 6.16 If any then destroy the temple of God him will God destroy 1 Cor. 3.17 7. The murtherer also sinneth against Christ whose member his neighbour is whose life hee hath sought So reasoneth the Apostle but in a divers case that he which causeth the weake brother to perish for whom Christ died sinneth against Christ himselfe 1 Cor. 8.11 QUEST XI How diversly murder is committed THis kinde of externall and actuall murther is committed two wayes either by a man himselfe or by another 1. The first is done two wayes either by the cruell shedding of mans bloud which is the most grievous sinne of all or by neglecting the meanes and not preserving our neighbours life either by helpe or counsell when it is in our power as the rich man suffered Lazarus for want of reliefe to perish at his gate Luk. 16. So the Priest and Levite passed by the man that had beene wounded of the theeves and was left for halfe dead and had no compassion of him Luk. 10. So the Wise-man saith in the Proverbs chap. 24.11 Deliver them that are drawne to death and wilt thou not preserve them that are led to bee slaine Isidore saith Qui incurrit in nudum esurientem c. He that meeteth with a man readie to perish for hunger and cold if he doe not give him meat and raiment homicida tenebitur shall be counted a murtherer So Gloss. interlinear A man committeth murther manu vel mente vel subtrahendo auxilium aut consilium c. with his hand with his heart and when he withdraweth his helpe and counsell 2. A man killeth by another two wayes consensu by giving consent as Saul did when Stephen was put to death keeping their garments that stoned him Act. 7.58 And the people crucified Christ calling unto Pilate Crucifie him Mandato voluntate By willing and commanding ones death as David did contrive Vrias death and Iezabel Naboths Bastingius QUEST XII Of the divers kinds of murder THere are divers kinds of killing 1. There is a lawfull killing or taking away of the life by the Magistrate as either in putting malefactors to death or in just warre where much bloud is shed 2. There is another kinde altogether unlawfull and inexcusable which is called wilfull murther when any of hatred smiteth a man that he die or of purpose lie in wait for him Numb 35.20 So Ioab wilfully killed Abner and Amasa 3. There is a third kinde of involuntarie murther when a man lieth not in wait but God offereth him unto him Exod. 21.13 For though such things seeme to us to fall out by chance yet all things are ordered and disposed by Gods providence and with him nothing happeneth by chance of this kinde there are three sorts 1. When two doe of a sudden having no purpose before fight together and the one killeth the other as striving upon the way or falling out upon any other sudden and unthought of occasion this is called manslaughter as Abner killed Asahel that met him and pursued him in battell this kinde is not so hainous as wilfull murther yet it far exceedeth these other kinds that follow 2. Sometime one is killed by chance which is of two sorts either a chance which falleth out by meere oversight and negligence as if a Physitian through carelesnesse mistake the medicine and so kill his patient which might by his care have beene prevented or it falleth out by meere chance which could not be helped as when one heweth wood and the axe-head flieth off and killeth one that standeth by 3. But that kinde which deserveth most favour and may best be excused is when one is forced to kill another se defendendo by defending of himselfe which was the womans case that with a milstone pashed out cruell Abimelechs braines when he attempted to set fire upon the tower and to burne the woman and all the rest of the people there Iudg. 9. QUEST XIII Magistrates are not guiltie of murder in putting malefactors to death ALl kinde of killing is not then unlawfull whereof there are three sorts there is divina vindicta heroica ordinata divine revenge heroicall ordinarie 1. The divine is which is directly and immediatly commanded by God as Abraham at the Lords bidding would have sacrificed his sonne Abraham non solum non est culpatus crudâ—litatis crimine sed laudatus est pietatis nomine Abraham was not onely 〈◊〉 blamed for his crueltie but commended for his pietie therein So Ioshua had commandement from the Lord to destroy the Canaanites 2. The heroicall kinde of killing is when any being inflamed with the zeale of Gods glorie and extraordinarily stirred by his spirit doe take revenge of the Lords enemies as Sampson upon the Philistims in his death Phineas in zeale killed the adulterer and adulteresse and Samuel hewed Agag the King of Amalek in peeces Marbach 3. The ordinarie killing is by the Magistrate who by direction of the word of God and according to wholesome lawes grounded upon the same doth give sentence of death against malefactors or wageth just battell upon these occasions the Magistrate sinneth not in shedding of bloud The reasons are these 1. Hierome saith Homicidas punire non est sanguinis effusio sed legis ministerium To punish murtherers and other malefactors it is no effusion of bloud but the execution of the law in Ieremiam c. 22. So Gloss. interlinear Index non occidit reum sed lex quae jubet The Judge killeth not the guiltie partie but the law which commandeth 2. Thomas saith Id quod licitum est Deo licitum est ministro ipsius per mandatum ejus That which is lawfull unto God the author of the law is lawfull unto Gods Minister by his Commandement But the Magistrate is Gods Minister Rom. 13.4 2. Places of Doctrine upon the sixth Commandement 1. Doct. Of the generall contents of this Commandement THou shalt not kill This Commandement consisteth 1. Partly in prohibiting all kinde of hurt or wrong to our neighbour either in leaving or forsaking him or in doing him hurt either outwardly by murder rayling reviling or by any injurie whatsoever or inwardly by anger hatred desire of revenge 2. Partly in commanding the preservation of our neighbours life either in not hurting whether provoked or not provoked or in helping either by the depulsion of wrongs and injuries offred or by the collation of benefits 2. Doct. The particular vertues here commanded THe vertues then prescribed in this Commandement are of two sorts either such as doe not hurt or such as are beside helping also Of the first kinde are 1. A particular justice and equitie in all our acts and doings not to hurt or molest any in word or deed by violence fraud or negligence or by any other meanes such an one
the oxe is specially mentioned because the Hebrewes were most given to keeping of cattell their horse were for the most part brought out of Egypt Simler 2. It is understood to be such a goring and wounding as that death followed upon it for otherwise though one were sore wounded with the push of an oxe if he died not the oxe was not in this case to be stoned Tostat. 3. But that other conceit of Tostatus in this place is not so good secus est si calce petierit c. It is otherwise if the oxe strike with his heele not with his horne in this case the oxe is not to die because it was his fault that stood within the reach of the oxes heele whereas he pursueth after men to gore them with his horne for what saith he then to the horse heele if any were stricken to death therewith was not the horse to be killed by the equitie of this law as Lippoman expoundeth it as well de equo calcitroso of a striking horse as of a pushing oxe If this law provideth for the stroke of the horse heele why not for the oxe hee le also And this is yet more evident Gen. 9.5 that the Lord will require mans bloud at the hand of every beast the heele is as well the oxe hand as his horne By what meanes soever then a beast killeth a man this law was to take place QUEST LXIII Why the oxe that goared was commanded to be stoned to death Vers. 28. THe oxe shall be stoned to death c. 1. Though a bruit beast cannot sinne and therefore this punishment is not inflicted for any sinne committed by the beast yet it is in joyned ad horrorem facti for the horror of the fact Tostat. 2. Quia esset horribilis ad videndum c. Because the sight of such a bloodie beast would be horrible and grievous to men Lyran. 3. And it might be feared lest such a dangerous beast if he should live should kill others also Simler 4. This was also provided for the masters advantage who was bound to make good all losses which should fall out afterward by his beast which used to push Tostat. 5. And by this law men are given to understand that if bruit beasts are not spared much lesse shall they goe unpunished if they shed mans bloud Gallas 6. The equitie also of this law herein appeareth that sicut creati sunt boves in hominum gratiam c. That as oxen were created for mans sake so they should serve for the use of man whether by their life or death Calvin 6. Agreeable to this law of Moses as grounded upon the law of nature were the like constitutions among the Heathen as Solon made a law in Athens that if a dogge had bitten a man hee should be tied in an halter and delivered to him that was hurt So among the Romanes in their 12. tables it was decreed that if a beast had done any hurt Dominus aut litis astimationem solvito aut eam noxa dedito The owner should either pay aâ— was awarded or deliver up his beast to punishment Draco also was the author of this law in Athens that not onely men but beasts yea things without life that had beene the meanes of any mans death should be banished out of the countrie and cast out whereupon the image of Theogenes among the Thrasians falling upon one and killing him was adjudged to be cast into the Sea Simler QUEST LXIV Why the flesh of the oxe was not to be eaten ANd his flesh shall not bee eaten 1. It was neither lawfull for them to eat the flesh themselves nor yet to sell it to the Gentiles as they might doe other things that died alone Deut. 1â— 21 Iun. But the flesh should be cast away as a cursed and abominable thing 2. Not so much because being stoned to death it was as a thing suffocated and so they should have eaten it with the bloud Simler Osiander But tanquam aliquid maledictum c. as a thing accursed they were to abhorre the flesh of such a bloudie beastâ— so that although the owner should slay this murtherous oxe before it were stoned it was not lawâ—ull to eat the flesh thereof Tostat. quaest 30. 3. And this was tum propter horrorem factâ— both for the horror of the fact tum quia per hoc damnificabatâ—â— Dominus bovis and by this meanes also the owner of the oxe was damnified the flesh thereof being unprofitable for any thing that he might be more â—autelâ—â—â— afterward and take better heed to his cattell Lyranus 4. The Hebrewes addâ— further that the very skin of the oxe was not to be used to any purpose but the whole to be cast away as a thing abominable Tostat. quaest 28. QUEST LXV In what case the owner is to die when his oxe goared any to death Vers 29. IF the oxe were wont to push c. Another case is put when the oxe chanceth to doe any hurt with the masters knowledge where divers conditions are required 1. That the oxe used to push before the words are in the originall yesterday and yeâ— yesterday a definite time is put for an indefinite it is noâ— enough if he had once goared before but he must have one it twice at the least as R. Salomon Lyran. He must have beene knowne in former time to have beene used to push 2. This also must have beene notified and signified also to the owner for it may be that the oxe had used formerly to push and the owner knew it not Simler Or if he knew it he might denie it unlesse he had beene admonished by others to take care of his beast Tostat. quaest 28. 3. He or she must be free and not a servant whom the oxe used to push goareth to death for concerning the goaring of servants there followeth another law afterward vers 32. If the oxe goared a man or woman a sonne or daughter that is though they were never so little it was all one Lyran. Some thinke it is understood of the owners owne sonne and daughter Calvin Oleaster But the next law as touching the goaring of servants sheweth that it is rather meant of his neighbours sonne or daughter Hugo de S. Victor But it is rather understood in generall de quo viâ— capite libero of every free bodie great or small man or woman Iun. 4. In this case the owner being warned before of his oxe is to die for it because he did not keepe him in knowing him to be a harmefull beast Quia videtur illud quasi immittere aliorum cervicibus because he seemed of purpose to let him loose to doe mischiefe Simler QUEST LXVI When the owner might redeeme his left with money Vers. 30. IF there be set to him a summe of money 1. R. Salomon thinketh that in this case the next of kin to the partie slaine were to take a peece of money of the owner of the oxe and they
publike peace and safety is violated as in the Campe among souldiers and robbing by the high way where ones life is put in danger All these kindes being more than simple thefts may receive the sentence of death by Moses Law and Magistrates herein may with a good conscience execute the rigour of the Law upon such violent outragious impudent wanton and incorrigible thefts But they are wisely to consider every circumstance and the occasion that draweth one to steale whether he doe it of necessity to releeve his hungry soule or of an evill custome and obstinate minde to maintaine his lewd and unthrifty life In the first case it seemeth to be too sharpe to take away ones life unlesse he be such an one as will take no warning but continueth hardened in his sinne And so for simple and single theft only except it be in stealing of men unlesse it be aggravated by other circumstances concurring 〈◊〉 violence rapine obstinacie custome in sinne and such like neither the Law of Moses prescribeth punishment of death nor yet is it practised by our Lawes which in such cases intend favour by allowing the privilege of the booke See before p. 6. QUEST IV. Why the theefe breaking up might be killed Vers. 6. IF a theefe be found breaking up c. 1. R. Salomon thinketh that this Law which alloweth the theefe found breaking up an house to be slaine is understood not only of theeves that breake in by night but by day also and that clause which followeth When the Sunne riseth upon him they interpret metaphorically that if it be evident and manifest as the light that the theefe came not only to steale but to kill that whether by day or night he may be killed So also the Chalde Interpreter seemeth to follow the same sense Si oculus testium vidit eum If the eye of witnesses saw him that is if it were evident that he came not only as a theefe but to assault Contra. Though this be true that a man might defend himselfe even by day against him that assaulted his life yet this is not the meaning here the words of the Law are literally not metaphorically to be understood 2. The reason of this difference betweene a night theefe and a day theefe is because in the night breaking in it is not knowne whether he came to steale only or to murther but in the day it may easily appeare by his armour and weapons Tostat. Simler Beside in the day he may call for helpe against the theefe which cannot be so well done in the night when he is left without all other remedy but his owne defence Galas Marbach And in the day he may have witnesses of his theft and so convent him before the Magistrate Lippom. 3. The Romane Lawes allow not onely to kill a night theefe but a day theefe also si se tel◠defenderit if he defend himselfe by a weapon Moses Law much disagreeth not for though he that commeth only as a theefe in the day time is not to be killed but to make restitution only yet if he come with weapons as having a murtherers intent now he may be repelled by force even as a night theefe may not now as a theefe but as one which commeth to assault and murther Iunius QUEST V. How it is made lawfull for a private man to kill a theefe Vers. 2. ANd be smitten that he dye no bloud shall be imputed 1. Cajetanus here observeth that this Law simply alloweth not to kill the theefe but if a man smite him in his owne defence not intending to kill him that in this case he shall be free Percussio fuit intenta mors autem per accidens sequnta c. He intended only to smite him but death followed accidentally upon such smiting so also Simler Non probat ut animo occidendi feriatur This Law alloweth not that he should be stricken with a minde to kill him sed indulget affectui c. but it beareth with a mans sudden passion if in defence of himselfe it so fall out that he be killed 2. But this Law seemeth not only to permit one to smite a night theefe but directly to kill him also so it be not with a desire to kill him where he may otherwise escape but to defend him and his from violence which he cannot doe unlesse the theefe be killed Borrh. 3. For seeing both the Law of nature and other Civill lawes doe allow a man to defend himselfe now when the Lawes doe arme a man they seeme publicam personam imponere to impose upon him a publike person so that now he smiteth not as a private man but by authority of the Law and in this case he is tanquam minister vindex Dei as the minister and revenger of God so that he doe it not of a lust and raging desire to be revenged but intending to use a lawfull defence in the safegard of his owne life Gallas And the case is here all one as if a man being set upon by the high way should kill him that maketh the assault upon him Marbach QUEST VI. After what manner the theefe was to be sold. Vers. 3. HE should be sold for his theft c. 1. So was also the Law among the Romans that the debter should be given up in bonds unto his creditor Whereupon Cato was wont to say Fures privates in nexu compedibus vivere publicos in aur◠purpura c. That private theeves lived in chaines and fetters but the publike in gold and purple c. But this custome because it seemed very hard was abrogated by the Law of Arcadius and Honorius Gallas 2. But here it must be considered whether the theefe were an Hebrew or a stranger if an Hebrew how great soever the debt were for his theft he could be but sold over for six yeeres for all Hebrew servants were to goe out free the seventh And as the theft was valued so should he serve more yeeres or fewer But if he were a stranger he might be sold over to serve all his life if the value of the theft were great if it were but small he was but to be sold to serve so many yeeres as might suffice to recompence the theft Tostat. QUEST VII Why the theefe is only punished double with whom the thing stollen is found Vers. 4. HE shall restore double 1. That is one beside that he stole because that is found in his hand which is stollen and so restored Iun. And so must the five oxen be taken which the theefe must make good five with that which was stollen Lippom. 2. Now the reasons why when the thing stollen is found only double must be restored and five or foure-fold when it was killed or sold are these 1. Because he seemeth to be the more cunning theefe when the thing stollen cannot be found 2. Adhuc difficilior ratio in investigando and it is harder to finde out the theft and therefore he is
reines and kidneyes the pleasure of the flesh and the liver unto which the seat of choler is annexed betokeneth anger Hâ—c omnia consecrarijubet He commandeth these things to be consecrated To the same purpose also Basil Quibus omnibus id nobiscum agitur ut adversus voluptatem totam quasi contra multorum capitum hydram c. By all these we are moved that we should fight against all pleasure as a serpent of many heads c. 2. So Borrhaius thereby understandeth the mortifying of the old man and by the carrying of the flesh skin and dung without the gate as a thing ignominious the suffering of Christ which tooke upon him our reproach without the gates of Jerusalem as the Apostle applieth it Hebr. 13.12 So also Gallas Marbach 3. By the foure corners of the Altar which were touched with bloud Lippoman interpreteth the shedding of Christs bloud who is our Altar and sacrifice by the which we are redeemed Terra quoque nostris sceleribus polluta c. hausto Christi sanguine reconciliatur c. The earth also being polluted with our sinnes having as it were drunke in Christs bloud is reconciled which otherwise would crie out for vengeance against us 4. Marbach by the laying the bloud upon the foure corners of the Altar would have signified the preaching of the shedding of Christs bloud and the dispersing thereof to the foure corners of the world And by the inwards liver and reines which are the seats of pleasure the willingnesse of Christ and delight in fulfilling the will of his Father So also Osiander 5. But this is the most proper signification thereof by the fat is understood the grosnesse of our nature in all the faculties and powers of the soule which are three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the understanding in the heart 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the angrie motion in the liver 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the concupiscence or desiring facultie in the reines all which by nature are corrupted and therefore they must be offered unto God to be purged by the fire of his Spirit So Iunius Pelargus Simlerus QUEST XVII Why the sacrifice for sinne was offered first Vers. 15. THou shalt also take one ram Now followeth the second kinde of sacrifice which was the burnt offering 1. The bullocke the sacrifice for sinne was first to be offered that thereby the other sacrifices might be accepted for as it is in the Gospell Ioh 9.31 God heareth not sinners neither doth he accept the sacrifice of sinners And hereof it was that in the solemne day of reconciliation the high Priest first prayed for his owne sinnes and made reconciliation for himselfe and his house Levit. 16.11 and then for the people So in this place the burnt offering and peace offering would not have beene accepted unlesse first the Lord were appeased toward them for their sinnes it was requisite therefore that the sacrifice for sinne should be the first whereby the rest might be sanctified 2. But it will be objected that by the same reason neither can the sacrifice for sinne be accepted because he that offereth it hath not yet obtained remission of his sinnes The answer whereunto is this That it must be considered whether he that sacrificeth for sinne doth it for his owne sinnes or anothers for others his sacrifice cannot be accepted as long as he is in sin but for his owne sins such sacrifice is available As concerning prayer likewise which is the spirituall sacrifice of Christians a man yet in his sins shall not be heard praying for another but for his owne sins he shall be heard otherwise it would follow that he which hath committed any sin should never have remission and forgivenesse of them if his prayers should not be received 3. Beside as it is in the Sacraments of the new Testament Quadam requirunt dispositionem in suscipiente quaedam non Some required a disposition and preparation in the receiver some not as in the Eucharist unlesse one examine himselfe before and so be prepared to receive that holy Sacrament he is an unworthy receiver and eateth and drinketh hiâ— owne damnation 1 Cor. 11.29 But in the other Sacrament of Baptisme no such disposition in the receiver is required for infants that cannot examine themselves neither have faith are thereunto admitted So the like difference there was in the sacrifices of the Law some served to prepare and dispose the offerer to performe other duties as the sacrifices for sin some required a preparation and disposition going before as the burnt offerings and peace offerings Tostat qu. 9. QUEST XVIII How the bloud of the burnt offering was bestowed upon the Altar Vers. 16. THou shalt take his bloud and sprinkle it round about upon the Altar 1. This must be understood to be all the bloud which was to be bestowed round about upon the Altar for it was not lawfull to carrie any part of the bloud to any other prophane place and it was the law of burnt offerings that all the bloud should be offered unto God Levit. 1.5 2. Concerning the manner of sprinkling or powring this bloud round about upon the Altar neither is the opinion of R. Salomon and Lyranus to be received that thinke this was not done in parte superiore sed magis circa basin in the upper part of the Altar but rather toward the bottome for it was sprinkled upon the Altar therefore not under and it was offered unto God but all offerings were offered upon the Altar And againe Levit. 1.15 it is said the bloud should be strained shed or pressed forth on the sides of the Altar it seemeth then that it was sprinkled above and so ran downe by the sides of the Altar Neither yet doth Tostatus ghesse aright that the bloud being powred aloft did run downe per partem exteriorem by the outward part or side of the Altar for it could not be conveniently so powred without as to run downe by the sides therefore the bloud was rather powred on the inside of the Altar because it was part of the burnt offering and therefore was to be consecrate unto God by fire as it is said vers 18. It is an offering made by fire unto the Lord. And by this meanes the fire licked up the grosse substance of the bloud and so dried up the vapours thereof which otherwise would have beene very noisome Simler QUEST XIX Why the hornes of the Altar are not here touched with bloud Vers. 16. ANd thou shalt sprinkle it round about upon the Altar 1. Some things are common to the burnt offering and the sacrifice for sin as that Aaron and his sons did stay their hands upon the head thereof that it was killed before the Lord and that the bloud thereof was laid upon the Altar but these things were peculiar unto it the dividing of the parts not to burne them by peece-meale one after another but to couch them better together and to lay one part upon another then the