PPuritanSearch
Primary source research library
SearchJohn MayerSource
English Puritan & Reformed

Commentary on the Old Testament Volume 1

John Mayer (1583-1664) · 1,817,311 words · 8077 min

Large work readerShowing section 12 of 52. Corpus search still uses the whole work; source find opens the first matching section.
Previous sectionNext section
Section 12/52
made one flesh with her, because he is in the fleshly copulation joined unto her, having now lost the power of his own body, and made it over to her, which approveth the thing before spoken of their being made one flesh, by the mutual power over one another's body. Verse. 25. And they were both naked, and were not ashamed. These words are added to show the innocence and freedom from sin in our first parents. For even as little children are naked, and are not ashamed, for want of judgment, what is comely, and what is filthy, so Adam and Eve, although they were of ripe judgment for their innocence, were not ashamed, as appeareth, because having sinned, it is immediately said, that they were ashamed. By sin then it is brought about, that [Note.] many hath need to be ashamed, which showeth, what a filthy and shameful thing sin is. So that now to be ashamed, is rightly held to be a sign of grace, and of an heart not obstinately set upon sinning, but touched with repentance, contrariwise, to be impudent, and brazen faced, is a sign of an heart hardened in sin. Hence cometh the nakedness of the Americans, a most rude and barbarous people at this day, some of them in some parts having nothing upon them, to cover so much as their privities, and hence that Sect called Adamites blushed not to go naked, men and women together, as Epiphanius showeth, after the manner of Adam. But to return again to Adam and Eve, they loved doubtless without lust, using their members of generation, as reason willed, and not having the heat of lust in them blinding reason, and immoderate delight, as at this day. For as God had made their bodies such, that they might have lived ever free from corruption, why may we not think, saith Augustine, that before sin they could so command over their genitall members, for the procreation of children, as they did over other members, which the soul moveth in any work without any trouble or itching of pleasure? For if amongst the most minute creatures there be some, as the Bees, which do work the generation of their young, as Wax and Honey, why should it seem incredible, that God made our fist parents such bodies, as that they could as easily command over their genitall members, as over their feet to go, and their hands to do this or that, and to sow without ardour, and to bring forth without pain? And if so, there was no reason, why yet they should be ashamed. Some there are and those ancient and learned, who have held, that if Adam and Eve had not fallen, man should not have had issue by the carnal knowledge of his wife, but some other way after the manner of Angels, but is well confuted by Thomas Aquinas and others, because the genitall members were so formed at the first, and therefore generation must needs be hereby, and because the Lord commandeth them being made to increase and multiply, teaching Adam to say, that they were one flesh, which the Apostle showeth, is by carnal copulation, so that by this means, it was the Lord's will even at the first, that they should increase and multiply. The only difference then was, as hath been already said, they had not in them that heat of lust overcoming reason, but by the moderation of reason did that, which pertained to generation, as well as any other action.




CHAP. III.

NOw the Serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field, which the Lord God had made, &c. A great question ariseth here, how that, which is spoken of the Serpent, ought to be understood, whether it were a Serpent indeed, or the Devil in the Shape of a Serpent? To this divers answer diversely. 1 Some, that it was a true Serpent, having at the first the faculty of speaking, as man and woman had, although for this it were deprived thereof, and poison instead of speech fixed to the tongue, and as the Serpent, so they say, the rest of the beasts lived in good agreement together, having the use of speech, neither did the Serpent go upon the belly, but erect, until that for man's sin, to which it tempted him, it was thus punished. And the reason, why the Serpent sought to make him sin, was the envy thereof, at the man's excellent estate, wherein he should have remained, if he had not sinned.

2 Some, that the Serpent could not speak ordinarily, but by the Devil it was obtained of the Lord, that it should speak at this time to tempt them, as sometime he obtained liberty to tempt Job. Thus Moses-Barcephas saith, that Ephrem Syrus, who was of the same time with Basil h • ld, and so his faculty of speaking was but like to that of Balaam's Ass.

3 Some, that it was no true serpent, but the likeness of a Serpent, wherein the Devil came to Eve.

4 Some, that the Devil spake in the Serpent, the Serpent itself not being able to utter any voice, for the Devil could use what beast he would, as his instrument to speak and to reason thereby, that instrument so used in the mean season not understanding, what is said, as in men, that are wrapped with an evil spirit. And this seemeth the more probable, because Serpents are still moved strangely at incantations, which are of the Devil, above all other creatures, not that they understand them, but by a diabolical power, as Augustine reasoneth. And this is most generally followed by the ancient Fathers, and by the Commentators of these times, R. Menahem saith, it was the unclean spirit Samuel in him, and likewise Eliezar.

5 Lastly, others hold, that neither any true Serpent here spake, nor the Devil in a Serpent, neither that any audible voice was heard, or shape seen, but that this temptation was only a motion suggested by the Devil into the mind of Eve, because it is usual in the holy Scriptures to seak of the Devil by the name of the Old Serpent, and the Dragon, and of Behemoth.

I would willingly now, having related the divers expositions, go with the common stream of expositors: for there are many considerations inducing unto it, as that nothing had the faculty of arguing rationally, besides the Devil, except God, Angels, and men, and therefore it seemeth, that it could not be a mere Serpent, but the Devil in the Serpent, and that the Devil is said to have been a liar, and a murderer from the beginning, which could not have been spoken, unless he had been the agent in this temptation, and in another place it is expressly said, through the envy of the Devil, came death into the world. Lastly, he is called the old Serpent, the Devil, as noting this Serpent here spoken of. Yet there are two things, both or one of which, I think unanswerable, that may be objected. First, that the Serpent is said to be more subtle, than any of the beasts, which must needs be understood, as a preparative to the ensuing relation, and so that through his subtlety and cunning, and not only by the Devils using him, as an instrument, the woman was deceived, to which effect also the Apostle speaketh, 2 Cor. 11. 3. For to what purpose had it been to tell of the Serpents subtlety, unless this communication had proceeded therefrom, and not from the Devils altogether, seeing the simplest of the beasts might as well have been used, as an instrument of temptation, as the most cunning? Neither will it help, that some say here, that it is not meant that the Serpent in itself was the subtlest, but the Devil in the Serpent: for Moses compareth not Devils with beasts, but one beast with another, amongst which the Serpent is said to be the most subtle: For if he had meant it of the Devil, he might better have said, more subtle, than either the beasts or the man, which God had made, because in subtlety the Devil being a spirit exceedeth all.

Secondly, this temptation being ended and man seduced, the author thereof, the serpent being found out, he is cursed to go upon his belly, and to eat dust, being in this debased more than any beast else, when as in some respects, he was more excellent at the first. Now it cannot be just with God, thus to punish a creature, wherein there was no fault, as it must needs be confessed that he did, if the Serpent in this action was a mere patient, and these speeches were forced from his mouth by the Devil, he not knowing, what he said. For as that man is faultless, whom the Devil possessing useth, as aninstrument of blasphemy, he not knowing what is spoken by him, so the Serpent, if the Devil only spake in him and by him, he conceiving nothing must needs be without fault also, and so this punishment could not justly have been inflicted upon him, whereas this punishment is justified by Calvin and Musculus, because the Lord hath power over his creatures, to deal with them for his own ends, as seemeth good unto him, and therefore this dumb and unreasonable creature being made an instrument to pervert man, whereas hemade all things to serve him, he might justly, to show his horror of sin, that man might be the more affected, strike him in this manner, as a father breaketh the sword wherewith his chlilde was slain. I grant that this reason may satisfy indeed, for punishment inflicted without a reason rendered, but here the cause is expressed, because thou hast done this thing, and so no liberty is left to excogitate any other reason, and to this the serpent might have answered, I did not, but the Devil spake in and through me, if he had been a mere paient. He did it then voluntarily at the Devils instigation, as he now biteth the heels of men, or of cursed corruption, wherefore I cannot for my part subscribe to this exposition, and much less to any of the other four. For the first is most improbable, because if all the beasts could have spoken familiarly at the first, there had been no reason to deprive them all of speech for the fault of one, and it is strange, that even this one should be herein punished, when as his doom toucheth it not, but only going upon his belly, and eating of dust. Touching the second, it is not likely, that the Serpent would have been so pliant to the Devils mind, a liberty of speaking being obtained, as to use it to seduce man, whose subject he was made, and not the Devils, especially all things in the terrestrial creatures, being now very good and right, and so no leaven of malice or envy against man, being in any of them. Again, had God granted the Serpent liberty to speak thus, he had not faulted, and so had been unworthy of punishment therefore. For the third, it cannot stand, because then a phantasme, and not the serpent should have been punished, and the thing being done, for which the Devil took this shape upon him, he would have immediately deposed it again, and not have been found in the same, when the Lord came to punish the author of this mischief. And for the fifth, it perverteth the truth of the history, and turneth it into an allegory, and if we may so do for this particular, Origen like, we may do so for all things preceding, and so this whole narration of the creation shall be nothing certain. Besides, it is proper to the Serpent literally understood, which is after set down for the punishment thereof, and not to the Devil, whose suggestion only, if this had been, he only should have been rebuked. These objections against all the expositions hitherto brought, being considered by some, they have thought the doubt of this place indissoluble, what therefore, if we shall essay the resolveing of it another way, by taking something from one of them, and something from another, thus? A very Serpent this was, and full of wit and subtlety, but naturally without the faculty of speaking, neither did he of himself apply his mind to seek the hurt of man, his Lord and master, but the Devil persuadeth the Serpent to this out of his envy, and finding him tractable, as he could easily gather by any little sign, he helpeth his tongue to speak, and putteth words into him, instructing him, how to take the opportunity, and at that time the Serpent was a goodly creature and went upright, so that the woman being but newly formed and not knowing, whether it were an usual thing for Serpents to speak or no, might well without suspicion enter into communication with him, as a fit companion to parley withal. If it be doubted here touching the wit of the Serpent, because this is proper to a reasonable soul, such as beast had not, but man and woman only, it may be said, that the Serpent had not indeed such wit as man, but was the wittiest of beasts, and in some things is so witty and subtle, as that he may put man nowadays to school: for so the Lord saith. Be ye wise as serpents, and innocent as doves, which we may well oppose against all authorities of Philosophers, who write of the Serpents subtlety, as if it were not so great, as that of some other beasts. For be it, that what Moses saith here of the Serpents subtlety, may be evaded, by saying, that he meant it of the Devil, yet that which is spoken by Christ of the Serpents wisdom, I am sure cannot be thus evaded, wherefore the Serpent doubtless is most intelligent for a beast, to this day. If it be doubted touching the erect going of the Serpent then, because as man having sinned was not changed in any natural faculty of the body, to be apparently divers from that, which he was before, so it is not likely, that the Serpent should be changed, the very doom pronounced may resolve it. For why should this be denounced, as a curse for that thing done, if it were so before? And it is no good arguing to reason from man to the Serpent, for to each of the three offending is assigned a divers punishment, so that although in man there were no alteration in respect of the figure of his body, yet there might be in the Serpent. But that the Serpent could not ordinarily speak, besides that, which hath been said to this already, it is probable, because the Lord having questioned with the man and the woman about their sin, as speaking to those, that could answer him, when he cometh to speak to the Serpent, without all questioning he proceedeth to judgment. Objections more against this exposition, how any may be made I cannot see. And thus the Devil appeareth to be guilty by moving the Serpent, and helping him to speak, and the Serpent guilty by being drawn by the Devil to use his wit to so bad a purpose, and so worthily judged, and so we see, for what end the Serpents subtly is spoken of before the temptation. And if any man maketh a question, how the Devil could help the Serpent to speak? I answer, as the Angel sometime helped Balaam's Ass to speak by opening his mouth, and as the horse of Achilles spake and foretold him of his death, according to Homer, and as the river Causus spake to Pythagoras, according to Porphyrius saying, Salve Pythagora, which examples with some others are brought by Cyril, lib. 3. cont. Julian. Thus I have been bold to adventure my imagination amongst others, and if any yet shall be able to bring better, or to confute this, I shall be ready to recant and to subscribe unto him.

Other things here are not so hard to be resolved: for if a question be made, why the Serpent came rather to the woman, then to the man? it is easily answered that she was the weaker, and so the more easy to be persuaded. And thus Augustine, He began with the woman, the inferior part of that human society, that he might come by degrees to the whole, thinking not the man to be so credulous, or that he would err by being deceived, but in yielding to the error of another.

And herein others consent also. But how doth the Serpent begin? Hath God indeed, or yea hath God said, a speech, that seemeth to hang to some-what spoken before, was there not then some communication between the Serpent and the woman before this? Ans. Rabbi, David, Chimhi saith, that certainly some speeches were had between them before this, the Serpent calumniating God in other things, as not dealing so well by them, as he might have done, and Fagius saith, that the Hebrews constantly hold, that the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here used is never wont to be placed at the beginning of a speech, but after some things spoken before, being as much in effect, as quanto magis, or as Vatablius hath it, multo magis miror, much more do I wonder, that God [Quest.] should forbid you to eat of the Trees in the Garden. The Chaldee Paraphrast hath it, is it true, that God, &c. And this seemeth to be rightest unto Calvin, but it is most generally held, that some speeches were had between them before, as an introduction to this, whereby the Serpent sought to work in the woman an hard opinion touching the Lord, and this seemeth most probable, because it had been strange for him to have begun thus abruptly, and the woman might so have well suspected his plot.

Touching the question hath God said, ye shall not eat of every Tree of the Garden? This is understood by some, as if the meaning were, is there someone Tree, which God hath forbidden you to eat of, or doth he not without difference allow you to eat of everyone? by others, as if he had said, Hath God forbidden you to eat of any of the Trees in the Garden, or is he possessed with such envy against you, that he will not have you to eat of any of these delicate fruits but that you must seek your food else-where, out of the Garden? Calvin mentioneth both these, and confirmeth them, but rather approveth the former, and so 〈…〉 h Musculus, saying, that the Serpent did herein seem to be more for the good of man, then the Lord, in that he made a show, as if needlessly he had forbidden them the eating of any Tree, but by Evahs answer, the other exposition is rather approved: for she defendeth God's liberality in allowing all the Trees unto them, but one only, which she needed not to have done, but might rather have shortly answered, yes, there is one Tree that he hath forbidden us to eat of. Some note here, that he would make her believe, that God did not say so, but she was mistaken, because then some reason could have been rendered of this prohibition, and according to this the vulgar Latin readeth it, why hath God said, &c. But it is better to understand it, as a simple inquiry into the thing, his purpose being, by and by to strike at her faith, in telling her against God's express word, ye shall not die at all.

And the Woman said, we may eat of the trees of the Gaoden, but of the tree in the midst of the Garden, God hath said, ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it least ye die. Rupertus saith, that Eve sinned in thus speaking three ways. 1 In that she made the commandment stricter then God had made it, he having forbidden only to eat, she saith, he forbad also the touching of it, so that first she sinned by adding. 2 By diminishing, in that God having said, ye shall surely die, she saith, least ye die, as doubtful. 3 By changing, in that God having forbidden to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, she saith not so, but of the tree in the midst of the Garden: That this precept was given both to the man and to her together. I have already shown, so that I shall not need to inquire here again, how she came to know thereof. Some hold, that Adam told her of it, and that in these words, as Ambrose showeth, and some that God delivered it in these words to Adam, but that Moses not having setit down thus precisely before, now doth it in these words of Eve. But the Father approveth of none of both these, neither are they to be approved of, not the first, because God spake himself to them both, nor the second, because so Moses should have imperfectly related the Commandment, which it must be far from us to think. Eve therefore as the same Father saith, began even now to sin in thus saying, for she shown a mind already exasperated against God, in making his command more grievous then it was, even as a woman, as one compareth it, who being forbidden by her Husband to go abroad to other folks houses, where there may be suspicion of incontinency, to aggravate her Husbands austerity, telleth her Neighbors, that she is forbidden so much as to set her foot out of doors, or to look abroad,

Now to add to God's Commandments, or to take ought there from is a sin, and threatened with judgment, and therefore Eve sinned herein; Moreover, she sinned by unbelief, because she made it doubtful, whether in eating they should die or no, when God had so expressly threatened death. Lastly, it was a fault also in her, that there being two Trees in the midst of the Garden, she spake so indefinitely of this by that circumstance, and not as it had been described unto them, the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil, in the Lord's words, as if she could not well tell, whether of the two was prohibited, by which some advantage was given to the Serpent to proceed with her. But Calvin excuseth Eve, holding, that she was in no fault, till that in the end of her answer she spake doubtingly: for first, in saying that a liberty was granted them to eat of all the Trees, except one, she magnifieth the bounty of God, and then in saying, that they might not touch, that Tree, she expresseth a pious affection to God's Law, being averse from the least degree of entering upon the breach thereof. But howsoever the first part of her speech may be well construed, yet upon the reasons before alleged, it is more probable, that she faulted immediately, and that which is turned to the magnifying of God's bounty in her answer, may be better understood, as a simple relation of the truth, she yielding what she must needs, but presently casting such an aspersion upon God's bounty, in that she saith, he forbad them to touch one Tree, as that, all being considered together, God was little beholding to her for that which she spake of the Trees by him allowed.

Then the serpent said to the woman, ye shall not die at all: But God knoweth, that what day ye shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened, &c. The woman having answered doubtingly, the Serpent now taking advantage hereby, is bold to • e • her, that they shall not die at all, so that, if there be in us the least doubting of God's Word, the Devil will attempt presently to root all faith quite out of our minds. All the speech of the Serpent here is a most gross lie. 1 That that they should not die. 2 That God in policy forbad the eating of that Tree, as whereby their estate should be bettered, as impatient of compeers. 3 That the eating of that Tree would open their eyes and make them more happy. 4 That as he said, so God knew all this to be true, but concealed it from them. And what he indeed, he would make the woman believe that God was, viz a liar, in that he said, they should die, when they should not, as he knew well enough, and envious, because he would hereby keep them from, rising in dignity. But in all this he speaketh so, as that he is altogether ambiguous, so that every passage may in some respect be justified to be true. For, 1 they should not die the bodily death instant. 2 They should be as some gods, or angels, as the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is sometime used, viz. evil angels. 3 Knowing good and evil, but to their cost. 4 God also knew all this. The Devil not long before had aspired to be as God, and hence came his woe, wherefore he seeketh to entangle the woman in like manner, but as one saith, She might easily have replied, if eating of this Tree will make one like unto God, do thou (O Serpent!) eat first of it, and as I see it take effect in thee, so I will do. The words, ye shall be as God's, the Chaldee Paraphrast rendereth, ye shall be as Princes, others, as Angels, and the tempter might mean it so, as the angels that fell, from their great knowledge called Daemones, and from their power principalities, although the woman understood it of the blessed Trinity. But I prefer that of Calvin and others understanding it, as meant of God, thus he made her believe, that they should partake of the divine nature.

Then the woman seeing, that the Tree was good to eat of, and pleasing to the eye, &c. took of the fruit thereof, &c. When the Serpent had thus tempted Eve, she looketh upon the Tree with more serious consideration, whether that which God had said, or that which the Serpent had said, were most likely to be true, and seeing it to be a goodly Tree and the fruit pleasant, and withal weighing that, which had been spoken by the Serpent of getting knowledge by eating thereof, she taketh of the fruit and doth eat. To this effect, Rupertus saith, She saw, that is, she considered and diligently beheld, and more curiously attended, and would herself be judge of those things which she had heard both from God, and from the Serpent, but those inward eyes, wherewith she should have judged of this, were hindered by the lust of the outward eyes, that they saw not a double death about to be brought upon her by this eating, not by the nature of the Tree, but by the transgression of the Commandment. And thus seeing nothing dreadful, but all things desirable, she thought that more true, which the Serpent had said, then which God had said, and thus by a sacrilegious temerity she took of the fruit and did eat. For by the eye, as by a window, sin is let into the soul: By the senses of the body, as Gregory saith, As by windows, the soul looketh upon outward things, and by looking, lusteth after them, whence it is, that Jeremiah saith, death hath ascended by the windows: Jer. 9. 21. For the soul being invisible cannot be moved with things corporal, but because being in the body, it hath the senses thereof, as certain poares, whereby it goeth out. The Seeing, Hearing, Tasting, Smelling, and Touching, are certain ways of the mind, whereby it goeth forth and lusteth after those things, which are without the substance thereof. From this example of Eve, we learn to refrain our eyes from seeing, if we would keep our hearts from lusting. There are here three [Note.] degrees, first, her intentive beholding of that, which before she feared to touch, or once to consider, whether it were good to eat of it or no. Secondly, her delighting in it being seen. Thirdly, her judging of it, according to the Serpents suggestion, to be a Tree desirable to get knowledge, thus proudly beginning to conceive that she should now upon the eating hereof be, as God, knowing good and evil. And by these degrees we offend to this day, by the lust of the heart, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. We look and consider, then are delighted and apprehend more pleasure or good to come by the acting of that, to which we are moved, and so adventure to do the thing forbidden. Targum Onkeli, as Fagius hath it, readeth the last words here, quod sanitas esset oculis, which is an Adage amongst the Chaldees, as if it had been said, to feed the eyes, whence some have gathered, that it was medicinal to the eyes: but the word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to get understanding, and this answereth better to the temptation preceding, and therefore is to be preferred.

The sins of Hevah in all this were first Pride, in that she palpably aspired after an higher condition. For, as Augustine saith, No sin can be, but where the will is depraved, and the will is first depraved by pride, and pride is nothing else, but an appetite unto perverse celsitude, and this perverse celsitude is, leaving that principle, viz. God's will, to which the mind ought to cleave, and becoming after a sort a principle to himself. Secondly, discontent at the Lord's prohibition, as being made to keep them from coming to a better estate. Thirdly, lying, because she said God forbad to touch that Tree, which he did not, Fourthly, an adding unto, and altering of the word of the Lord. Fifthly, infidelity, in that she first spake doubtingly, and then fell altogether from the faith. Sixthly, intemperance, in that she yielded to her appetite further, then was allowed. Seventhly, disobedience. Eighthly, she laid a stumbling-block for her Husband, enticing him to eat also. Touching Adams eating, Calvin saith, it is a common received opinion, that Adam ate not at the enticement of the Serpent, but only of the woman being won by her flattery, but not deceived as she was, for which also that of the Apostle is brought, the man was not deceived but the woman: but this is spoken only comparatively, in regard of this, that she was the first deceived. For afterwards, the Lord speaketh of the man, as being drawn by the same persuasion, because the man is become as one of us, upbraiding him, that he thought by eating to become as God. And the same Apostle elsewhere is plain, for the man being the fountain of sin to us all: hitherto Calvin, who also conjectureth, that Adam was absent from his wife, when the Serpent tempted her, but came when the colloquy was now ended, and so she told him, what the Serpent had said unto her, he being entangled by the same means that she, was, although some from this word with her, guess, that he was present at the temptation. But this were a forcing of the words, there being no more meant hereby, but that as she had eaten, so he being thus persuaded, ate of the same fruit together also. Saint Augustine seemeth to be of a contrary mind to this of Calvin, holding, that Adam ate, not being deceived, but persuaded by the woman, when as he knew he should offend in so doing. For as Solomon, saith, he was brought to serve Idols, not being seduced by error, but forced by women's flatteries: and as Aaron consented not to make the golden calves being induced, but gave way hereunto being forced, so it is to be thought, that Adam believed not her, as being seduced by that which she told him, as thinking it true, but obeyed her by a social kind of necessitude, and thus he sinned wittingly, that he might not be parted from her, to whom he had been joined, no not in the communion of her sin, & therefore he was no less guilty then she. Yet herein he might be deceived, in that having no experience yet of God's severity, he might think this sin venial, and happily he might think, that it would be a good plea for him, The woman whom thou gavest me, did give unto me, and I did eat. And all this, Augustine groundeth upon that saying of the Apostle, the man was not deceived, but the woman. Moreover, it may be thought that he considered, how she having eaten, was yet alive, and not smitten with death, as it was threatened, and therefore he might think, notwistanding the Lord's threatening of death, to escape. But Ambrose holdeth, that Adam was deceived, as well as Eve, thinking by eating, to become like God, which he proveth from the words of God unto him, Adam is become, as one of us; as if he had said, thou thoughtest, that thou shouldest have been like unto us, therefore, because thou wouldest have been what thou wert not, thou hast ceased to be what thou wast. And touching that place of the Apostle, he saith, as Calvin, That the woman is said to have been deceived, and not the man, because she was deceived first, and was the author of errrour to her husband, and not he to her. Prosper, likewise saith, That Adam lost his faith, because he believed the words of the Serpent more, than the words of God, and with Ambrose, agree Epiphanius also, Heraes. 38. and Hilarius, Chap. 3. in Matth. and many others, and to this do I rather subscribe, and he might well be deceived, because he was more strongly tempted, seeing her eat before him, and yet not smitten with death, and because there was not only the beast his subject, but the woman, his fellow to persuade him, as Chrysostom reasoneth, who also brought of that fruit unto him in love, because she would have him partaker with her of the same felicity. And in this sin of Adam, as in that of Hevah concurred many sins. 1 Pride, in that he aspired to be like unto God. 2 Infidelity, 3 An inordinate love of his wife, in that he was moved more hereby, then by the love of God. 4 Intemperance. 5 Curiositie to try, what lay hid in that fruit. 6 Ingratitude for the liberty of eating of all other trees granted unto him. 7 Disobedience to the express commandment of the Lord. But if the question be, whether of them sinned most? I answer, in some respects Eve, and in some other Adam. The sin of Hevah was greatest. 1 In that she began unto him, in which respect it is agravated so by the Apostle, that Adam is said not to have been in the transgression in comparison of her. 2 In that by her flatteries and enticements she drew her husband to sin, for this is to become not only a sinner, but an instrument of Satan, yea, a very Devil, for so much as he hath this name, because he is a Tempter. The sin of Adam was greatest. 1 Because he was wiser, and more able to resist temptations then the woman. 2 Because he was more obliged to God for greater benefits bestowed upon him, and therefore he ought to have been more observant of God's commandments. 3 Because he was the head of the woman, and so should have instructed her wherein she was ignorant: have reformed her wherein she was erring, confirmed her wherein she was weak, and erected her wherein she was fallen. But yet forsomuch as the Apostle aggravateth the woman's fault, as greatest, it must needs be yielded, that not Adam, but she sinned most, for which cause also she was most cursed. But yet in time God had again mercy upon her, to honor her by making her the instrument to bring forth another Fruit unto us, whereby we may be saved. And as for Adams wisdom, although it were as great, as any man's natural wisdom could be, yet he wanted hitherto all experience, so that to avoid dangers, and traps set for him, he had not that knowledge and understanding, that the servants of God, that are grown to any antiquity, now have.

Touching the time, when these things were done, all are not agreed, because it is not set down, and so cannot by any man be certainly determined. Some have held, that they lived as long in Paradise, as Christ did upon earth: some as long as he fasted, viz. Forty days, his fasting being an expiation of man's intemperance, some till the eighth day after their creation, viz. upon the Friday, and so the time of the coming in of sin into the world, and of the expiation of sin by Christ's death doth well agree. Some that they fell and were cast out upon the Sabbath day, and some upon the same day, wherein in they were created, for which opinion many ancients have stood, as Irenaeus, Epiphanius, Cyrillus, Ephrem, &c. Maimonides a Rabbin saith, all our Wisemen hold, that this whole matter was done upon the sixth day, for they say, that Adam was created the first hour of the day without Paradise, and brought into Paradise the third, sin the sixth, was found out by the Lord the ninth, and cast out in evening, before the sun setting, and if so, the second Adam, Christ in suffering did notably answer to that which befell the first Adam. For upon the same day Christ suffered, the first hour of the day he was arraigned, and abused, the third hour he was condemned and led away, the sixth hour he was crucified, the ninth hour he gave up the ghost, and finally, before the same day fully ended, he brought man into Paradise again, viz. The thief upon the Cross. The authors of this opinion argue also from the malice of Satan, who would, doubtless, immediately attempt their destruction, from this time being most fit, before they were more confirmed, and from the Serpents question, hath God forbidden you to eat of the trees of the garden? Whereas, if he they had stood, till they had eaten of other trees, he could not have propounded it so. Others yet are of opinion, that they fell not the same day, but stood some longer time, but how long they say not, & as a ground hereof, they urge the many things done upon the sixth day, as first, the making of all earthly creatures, then the making of man, the casting of him into a sleep, the forming of woman, the bringing of the creatures to him, and the bringing of the man into Paradise, and placing him there, for all which, so much time was requisite, as that none could remain for temptation, falling and ejection out of Paradise: again, it is improbable, that so soon as they were made, the Serpent would begin to tempt them to eat, eat, because there must some time come between; first, that they might be hungry, as he waited, till Christ was hungry, before that he began to tempt him to make bread of stones. Of this opinion therefore was Josephus, Basilius, Damascene, who said, that the Devil observing the Serpent to come often to, and to converse with Adam and Eve, and to converse daily with them, chose him, as a fit instrument to deceive them. And Augustine saith, that howsoever they stood not long, yet they continued more then one day in Paradise Amongst all these opinions, that of their abiding in the Garden 33 years, or 40. days is most improbable, because the devils envy would certainly not suffer them to go untempted so long; nor yet would he suffer them, until the eighth day, and upon the day, wherein they were made. I cannot think for the reasons already alleged, that they fell, and seeing there was a space between their falling and the Lord's calling them to an accompt therefore, wherein they gathered Fig leaves and sewed them together, and in the evening, as being a good space after, it is said, that God came into the Garden to call for them. And upon the Sabbath day, which was the next, it could not be, because at that time it is most likely, that they were wholly intent to divine contemplations, and would not have admitted of any parley with the Serpent, and moreover it is said, because the Lord rested then, he sanctified and blessed that day, which would not have been said, if he had done this work of cursing, and ejecting man out of Paradise. It remaineth then that this was done upon some other day, and because no reason can be yielded, why it should not have been done the next day after the Sabbath, for my part, I hold that it was the day. They making themselves ready then in the morning for the work of the Garden, and to this end gathering food, Adam in one place and Eve in another, the Serpent cometh to Eve, and persuadeth her to eat of the Tree of knowledge also, from which she had hitherto refrained. And thus the allegory will hold as well from Adam to Christ, as any other way, the day of Adams fall and dying being the day of Christ's rising from death to life, and as he fell the third day after his creation, so Christ rose the third day after his being made a sacrifice for sin.

If it be objected, the Serpent could not have said, as he did, hath God said, ye shall not eat of the Trees of the Garden? if they had eaten of them formerly: [Object.] I answer, he might question thus very well, notwithstanding, as seeming to think, that although they ate of some, yet they did herein more then was allowed them. For the answer of Eve seemeth to make it plain, that they had not hitherto gone without eating, but had eaten of other Trees before, and used so to do a day or two at the least: for, she saith, we eat of all the Trees in the Garden, but of the Tree in the midst, &c. And their eyes were opened, and they knew, that they were naked, and sowed Fig leaves together, and made themselves Aprons. Some Rabbins of the Jews have upon these words taught, that our first Parents were blind, till now, but this is absurd; for they saw one another, and Adam beheld the creatures to give them apt names. They were not therefore their bodily eyes, but the eyes of their minds, that were opened. Musculus speaking of these two kinds of eyes saith, that the opening of the bodily eyes in the holy Scriptures is three ways to be understood. 1 Of blind to be made to see, 2 When as a man saw not before some things before him, although he saw others, is made to see these also, as Balaam, whose eyes were opened to see the Angel that stood in his way, whom he saw not before. 3 To be made to know that, which a man seeth, as the enemies of Elisha, who being led into Samaria knew not that it was Samaria, till their eyes were opened, & the two Disciples, that travailed towards Emmaus, knew not Christ, whom they saw, to be Christ, till their eyes were opened. Again, the opening of the eyes of the mind is three ways also. 1 By the preaching of the word, to be enlightened in the truth: 2 By miseries and adversities, to be brought to see into our sins. 3 When we have sinned, to be touched in conscience, therefore, as Judas was, and thus the eyes of Adam and Eve are said to have been opened. And to this agreeth the teaching of St. Augustine who saith, that they were not blind before in their bodily eyes, but knew not, what the grace, which they had, was, whereby their members were kept from rebelling against their mind: but now this being removed, a kind of impudent novity came upon them to be attent unto, and to look upon the members of one another to lust, and so to be ashamed, they saw also the good which they had lost and the evil that they fell into And yet Rupertus cometh nearer to the same, saying, that this opening of their eyes was a demonstration, and agnition of great confusion, that they were spoiled of the honor, wherein they were created and made like unto the beasts for sensual lust, and so they could not but be greatly ashamed, and seek a covering: For whatsoever is ordained of God being pleased or angry, man's nature cannot be ignorant of, and therefore as he cannot but have reason, which God being pleased hath given unto him, so it is impossible for him to be ignorant, that the passion of concupiscence is a thing to be ashamed of. And Artopoeus more fully saith, this opening of their eyes was the seeing of their conscience, when as the guilty mind saw the greatness of the sin committed, and the horrible sequel of all punishments and evils. Thus also Calvin and others. Their eyes then were opened, not as the Serpent promised, and they expected, to the filling of them with more understanding, and to the making of them more excellent, but it was a miserable kind of opening of their eyes to see their own folly and shame, for now in their conscience they saw a most horrible sin committed by them, and the vengeance of God hanging over their heads therefore, they saw themselves out of the state of grace, which before had been, as it were, a most comely clothing unto them, so that to have their privy parts seen then, was no more to them, then to have their hands or face seen; lastly, they perceived a sensible alteration in them, they not having before any violent passion of lust carrying them to the mutual desire of carnal copulation, but being able herein to do, according to the dictate of right reason, yet now feel carnal lusts abounding in them, as in the brute beast, the reins of reason being shaken off, all which being seen, they were filled with shame and confusion, and so sought to cover and hide themselves, and specially those parts, which were now most violently carried to sinning, and over which now reason began to have the least command. We may here see, as Calvin well noteth, what the power of a guilty conscience is, when there are no witnesses to accuse and no Judge appearing to condemn, that alone doth the part of all, when Hevah had eaten alone, it is not said, that her eyes were thus opened, but when Adam had eaten also, the conscience is not presently opened, but some time after the sin committed, and yet not then to repentance, neither in many, as it was not in them. For their sewing of Fig-leaves together, almost all Expositors generally hold, that they took not of these leaves rather then any other, because they were the leaves of that Tree, of which they had eaten, and so nearest at hand, but because they were very broad and fittest for a covering. For the mystical things set forth hereby, divers speak diversely. Irenaeus saith, that hereby they shown [Note.] their penitency, in that they took and applied Fig-leaves, which were rough and pricking, and did more then others, rebuke the petulant force of the flesh, so that they used these, as a bridle of continency, fearing the coming of the Lord to punish them for their sin, and thus they would have gone always, had not the Lord in mercy taken them away and given them skins instead thereof, which were more soft and smooth. Augustine also seemeth to incline to this, that Fig-leaves did hurt and afflict them, but that they did not therefore make choice hereof, but ignorantly took of them, purposing nothing but to cover themselves therewith, and yet thus it was signified, that they deserved such a punishment. But that they took Fig-leaves for chastisement is contrary both to Augustine, and Ambrose, and Calvin, and all other Expositors, who do generally interpret this fact, as a sign of impenitency, seeing that to repentance, the laying open and confessing of sin to God is most necessary, and therefore to cover and hide it, being here set forth, argued an unrepentant heart yet in them. Ambrose from hence draweth an allegory touching those, that excuse and hide their sins, saying, Adam took of the Fig-leaves, when as he should have taken of the fruit, so the just take of the fruit, and sinners of the leaves, The fruit is Love, Joy, Patience, Benignity, Modesty; Continency, he had no fruit, that had no joy, he had no Benignity▪ that transgressed the Commandment, he had no continency, that refrained not to eat the fruit forbidden: the leaves are excuses, when a man transgresseth and is made naked and filthy to himself, he will cover himself with certain Fig-leaves, happily with certain vain and umbratile speeches, which with made lies, he sewing together, and adding word to word, maketh a covering to hide the conscience of his mind & fact, as by saying, that the Devil tempted him, or he was led by the flesh, or some other was the author to him of his sin, or else he will bring examples out of the holy Scriptures, of the best that have faulted likewise. The Master of the Scholast History saith, that Fig-leaves being bruised, and the juice of them taken, and the flesh of man being anointed therewith, there is presently stirred up a certain voluptuous itching, and therefore he saith, the lustful motions of the flesh beginning after sin, were signified by their using of these Fig-leaves. I think with Augustine, that whatsoever end God in his Providence directed them to in this action, yet they intended nothing else, but to take of such leaves, as were most large, and fit to cover their privities, whereof they were, & might well be now ashamed. Now God's ends, notwithstanding, were such, as have been already touched. First, to show the shameful foulness of sin, in that they make haste, having sinned to get them a covering, as being much ashamed. Secondly, the way of sinful man, being without guidance of grace, whereas having sinned, he should, to be delivered again, confess it to God, he contrariwise hideth it from God, as much as he can. Thirdly, the foolish conceit of a sinner, he thinketh, that having done evil; he may hide it yet, and so not be found out to be punished. Fourthly, that all excuses that can be brought for sin, are but the sewing of Fig-leaves together, that is, mere vanity. Fifthly, that for the pleasure of sin, galling and piercing with pain is due, man himself that sinneth, being made judge in this matter. They made them breeches, The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth any kind of thing, that girdeth about, but it is generally taken by all for a covering of the privy parts, and hence all their posterity, even in the most barbarous countries, where they go naked, have taken this custom up, as it were, by an instinct of nature to cover these parts. But why these, rather then any other? why not the eyes and the hands, that were instruments of this sin? To this Calvin answereth, that it was enough to set thus a brand of the shamefulness of sin upon any part of the body, & yet herein a respect was had to the parts most corrupted, that they specially should be thus branded, and that hereby a demonstration of the shamefulnes of sin should be made forever. Julius Pollux telleth of three parts, that women were wont to cover, 1 Their breasts with a thing called fascia. 2 Their belly with a thing called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . 3 Their [Note.] privities. And this may serve to shame Gentlewomen now a days, that in the midst of this light will go with open breasts.

And they heard the voice of the Lord God, walking in the garden in cool of the day, &c. A great question is here made, how the Lord is said to walk in the Garden, and what voice this was, which they heard? Some pass these things over, as spoken after the manner of men. But the Lord did doubtless appear in these times in a bodily shape, conversing familiarly, and talking with man, as one man talketh with another, as I have shown before, when God gave the command, not to eat of this tree. Fagius saith, that some refer walking to Adam, as if he walking in the Garden, had heard the Lord's voice. For the voice heard, I do neither hold with those, that think this to have been the voice, whereby he called to Adam, for he fled from this voice, but at that he came forth, nor with those, that think it to have been some mighty wind, who also apply, that which followeth, in the cool, or the wind of the day, as the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth, hereunto, as if that were an expression of this voice, what was meant thereby: For although the Lord coming by Elijah, a mighty wind went before, yet the thunder and not the wind is called the Lord's voice, and when the Lord hath come at any time with a wind, it is expressed, as when the Holy Ghost came upon the Disciples, there was a rushing heard, as of a mighty wind, wherefore no such thing being expressed here, I rather hold with them, that are for the sound of the Lord's walking, because amongst the Hebrews any sound is called a voice, as the the sound of thunder, the sound of waters, the sound of a trumpet, &c. They heard then the voice of Lord walking is, they heard the sound of him walking. And they were afraid, that is, out of the guiltiness of their conscience: For I do not think that God as yet appeared in any terrifying manner as some have delivered, because yet he speaketh familiarly to Adam as not taking notice of anything done amiss. In the cool of the day, these words are by divers rendered diversely, by Aquila, in the wind of the day, by Symmachus, in the spirit of the day, by Theodotion, in the spirit, which is to the cooling of the day, in some Latin translations, in the evening, in others, after noon, of all which Jerome speaketh. The Chaldee Paraphrase saith, at the rest of the day, when the heat is over, Uatablus, ad auram diei, at the air of the day, or, ad ventum diei, post meridiem. Fagius, according to this last, saith, that the wind of the day is spoken of to describe the evening, when as the wind in those hot parts was wont to begin to rise. Calvin differing from all others, after mention made of the readings of some, taking the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for a part of heaven, and of others, noting a time least obnoxious to terrors hereby, which they say is spoken of, to show the terrors of an evil conscience, in that they now feared, as the Psalmist saith, where no fear was, he saith, that the air of the morning to be understood, not of the Evening, which would have been improperly called, the air of the day, and he saith, at the rising of the sun a wind cometh withal being thereby stirred up. Herein I cannot subscribe to this learned Expositor, because so Adam should not have been so much as adjudged to death, in the day of his eating, as he must needs be, according •• God's threatenning, if, as he saith, he had been let alone to sleep in his sin all night, and the Lord had not come to find him out till the morning following. I do therefore with others, rather understand the air, or cool of the evening, when; the sun being ready to set, vapors arise, and specially because in parts near the Sea, such as Canaan was, a wind is wont then to arise, wherefore the Jews used this phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for in the evening. And at this time, God cometh to find out man sinning to judge him, to prefigure his coming, by taking flesh to deliver him as it were, in the evening of the world, as Irenaeus noteth. And Adam and his wife hid themselves, &c. This fleeing away of our first parents from God's presence is generally expounded of their fleeing, through the terror of an evil conscience after sin committed, into the thickest and most obscure place of Paradise, hoping, that although their Fig-leaves could not hide them, yet there they might lie close, and not be seen of the Lord, who they feared, now came to take revenge upon them for their wickedness. So foolish doth man grow, when his understanding is darkened by sin, that he thinketh, his wickedness may be covered, and [Note.] he may be concealed by some means, or at the least he hath no mind, but of fleeing from God, & not of coming to him to crave pardon. But all this is vain, since there is no hiding of anything from his Al-seeing eye, as David teacheth. The cursed fruits of sin then are many, first, the opening of the eyes to see the horror of sin. 2 Nakednesse, by being stripped of all the goodly ornaments of grace, see Exodus 32. Hosea 2. Revel. 3. 3 Shame and seeking to means, wherein there is no help of the shame that cometh by sin, see Rom 6. Ier. 33. 4 An accusing conscience turning now to be utterly against the man, in whom it is. 5 Terror and trembling that ensueth hereupon. One observeth hence, that a sinner having sought to excuse his sin, one way resteth not, but still deviseth new ways to hide it, when leaves will not suffice, he fleeth to whole Trees. This is that, which cometh of sin, they that do evil hate the light, but the just love it, and are delighted in God's presence, being merry [Note..] and cheerful through a good conscience. St. Augustine speaking upon this saith, that sinners being troubled in conscience do like mad men through over much shame and fear, they know not what, something yet being signified hereby, which others may afterwards make a profitable use of. Amongst all Expositors, Iecrnaeus alone will have this done by way of penitency and humiliation. For Adam fled, saith he, not as though he could go from God, but being confounded, because he had transgressed, he thought himself unworthy to come into his sight, and to have conference with him. But because to do thus is of grace, whereof Adam was now altogether destitute, it is not to be thought, that he did it in humility, but through terror, as hath been said. That of the Psalmist is here elegantly applied by Rupertus. God awoke out of sleep as a mighty Giant refreshed with Wine, and smote his enemies on the hinder parts. He was gone, as it were to take his rest a little in the heat of the day, at what time the Serpent cometh, and seduceth Adam and Eve, but as a man in the cool of the evening cometh forth, so doth he, and smiteth the Serpent, as a man doth his enemy, to slay him, by damning him everlastingly, but Adam and Eve, as a man doth his son or his servant, to bring them waxing proud to humility, which is the way to salvation.

And the Lord God called to Adam, and said, where art thou? Here the Lord inquireth not, in what place Adam was, as being ignorant, for he knew that very well, but in what state, to what have thy sins brought thee, that thou shouldst flee from thy God, whom thou soughtest before? as Ambrose speaketh. It is, as Ocolampadius hath it, as if he had said, into what pit hast thou cast thyself, whither hast thou run head-long? from what felicity art thou fallen? And yet it may be said, that the Lord inquired here of the place, although not ignorant of it, as if he had said, how happeneth it, that thou keepest not, where thou wert wont to be, in open places, but fleest into thickets? For although the Lord knew all things well enough, he dealeth yet by interrogations, that man and woman might for their sin be out of their own mouths condemned. Thus he inquireth afterwards about their eating, when he knew it, and I see no reason, but that he may be understood as well here, as inquiring about the place where he was. Yet, as he doth inquire of this, so he doth it by way of inviting him to come forth, and not to be so desperately fearful, as a Father, that seeketh up his prodigal son. For the manner how the Lord spake, whether internally to the mind or externally to the bodily ear, St. Augustine saith, that although before he might speak spiritually to him, yet now it is rather to be held, that he spake appearing in a bodily shape, and Gregory likewise, that he spake by an Angel assuming a body, as also at sundry other times. For when God speaketh by himself, saith the same Father, he speaketh only to the mind by an internal motion, and the heart is taught his word without letters and syllables, because his virtue is known by an intim kind of sublenation. It is a speech without noise, that openeth the hearing and yet knoweth not, how to hear a sound. It was not so with Adam now, but he heard a sound of words, and thereby was brought out of his lurking place.

And he said, I heard thy voice in the Garden, and I was afraid, and hid my self, because I was naked. Some here upon conjecture that Adam and Eve then first made them Breeches of Fig-leaves, when they heard the Lord's voice: but this is false, both because that is plainly recorded to have been done so soon as they had eaten, seeing their own nakedness, and also because there was no time, now upon the sudden, for such a business. They did therefore now only hide themselves being ashamed to be seen naked of the Lord.

But had they not heard the Lord's voice before, and yet kept their standing, or could they not have recounted, how both they and all creatures were made naked? why then were they now ashamed of this? Luther saith, that they shown their folly herein, to plead this as the cause of their fleeing, which simply in itself could be no just cause of fleeing. And such fools are [Note.] all sinners, they look not to their sins to be ashamed, but to some outward ignominy, or blemish coming hereby, to be grieved and ashamed for that. But how is it, that they were still ashamed, having covered their more shameful parts with Fig-leaves sowed together? This showeth, that when man hath done what he can to cover his sins, and to be justified here, from by his own righteous actions, so that for a time he resteth herein, yet this will not always hold, but the time shall come, namely, at the last day when God cometh to judgment, that he shall find and feel all this to be nothing worth, because dread and terror shall remain unto him notwithstanding, if he hath nothing else to be a defense and covering unto him.

And he said, who told thee, that thou wast naked? hast thou eaten of the Tree? &c. The Lord, doth hereby obliquely confute and reprove that which Adam had said: for he added to his former sin by laying the fault of his being ashamed upon God, who made him naked. And so it is, as if the Lord had said, thy nakedness is not the cause of thy fleeing and hiding thyself: for then I had created thee with some great blemish upon thy body, and thou shouldest have been ashamed to stand before me so soon as thou wert made, but this was not so, for they were then both naked, and were not ashamed, as was declared before. Hast thou not therefore sinned by eating contrary to my command? and thus the Lord speaketh, by way of question, and not plainly charging him, because he would wring an accusation of himself out of his own mouth, who did not hitherto ingeniously acknowledge his sin, but sought by all means to hide it.

And the man said, the woman, that thou gavest to be with me, gave me of the fruit and I did eat. Adam hereby layeth the fault of his sinning upon God, by saying, the woman whom thou gavest me, thus still agravating his sin more and more, and when the Lord cometh to question with Hevah, she doth likewise: for she saith, the Serpent beguiled me, as if she had said, if thou hadst not made a Serpent to be here with me, I had not eaten. Where upon Gregory saith excellently. They, Who had heard from the mouth of the deceitful Serpent, ye shall be as gods, because they could not be like unto God, to make up the heap of their error, attempted to make God like unto themselves in faulting. And thus whilst they go about to defend their guiltiness, they add hereunto, and being sifted it becometh, more heinous, then it was being committed. But the Lord, as the same Father hath it, dealt more graciously with them, he questioneth with them about their sin, as willing to bring them to repentance, that they might yet be saved, whereas coming to the Serpent, for whom there was no revoking to be pardoned, he is not once asked touching his offense. And here we may observe by what degrees man proceedeth to this day in sinning, as they are set forth by divers, but one, mellifluous Bernard, shall speak for all. There are four degrees of sinning, saith he. 1 The inward consent. 2 The outward performance. 3 A custom. 4 A defense or excusation: The increases of sin, Job mystically deploring saith, why died I not in the womb, or so soon as I was come forth: why was I sustained upon the knees, or suckled with the breasts? For, first, sin lieth hid in the thought. 2 It cometh forth into Act. 3 It is confirmed by custom. 4 It is suckled and nourished by excusing and defending. And by this excusing Gregory saith, man hideth not, himself from God, but God from him: for as Lazarus is bidden, not to revive but to come forth, so to the end that we may be delivered from sin, we must come forth of ourselves by confession, but by denying we keep God as it were, aloof from us, so that although we cannot be hidden from him, yet the light of his countenance is hidden from us, neither can we have any comfort thereof. Besides the fault, that was in Adam in respect of God in thus excusing his sin, there was a great fault against his Wife, in this thus saying, as Bernard also observeth. Consider we, that as indulgent, as Adam was to his wife in sinning, so cruel was he against her in undergoing the punishment. For by transferring the fault from himself to his wife, he would also have transferred the deserved punishment to her alone. O perverseness! doest thou refuse to undergo punishment for her, and refusedst not to sin with her? Thou wert pernitiously merciful, whereas thou oughtest to have been severe, but more perniciously cruel, wherein thou oughtest to have been merciful. For we ought never to sin for others, which is a point of injustice, but we ought willingly to bear the sins of others, which is a point of mercy. We may see here the case of a sinner, having offended once, he stayeth not here, but proceedeth to add sin to sin, without end or measure. He hateth the punishment due to him therefore, and so hateth God the author thereof, and spareth not to break out into blasphemy against him, and into cruelty against those, that are any way an occasion of evil unto him, although most nearly linked unto him.

And the Lord God said unto the woman, what is this that thou hast done? and she said, the Serpent beguiled me and I did eat. Calvin saith, that these words, what hast thou done? are rather to be turned, as the speech of one admiring, how cometh it to pass, that thou hast done so foul and so heinous a thing? He examineth both the Delinquents, before that he proceedeth to punishment, as good Magistrates ought to do. But as the Man, so the Woman excuseth herself, and layeth all the fault upon the Serpent, and consequently, upon him that made him so subtle.

And the Lord God said to the Serpent, because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all Cattle, &c. upon thy Belly shalt thou go, and Dust shalt thou eat, &c. He questioneth not with the Serpent, as he had done with them, because the Serpent could not answer, and was uncapable of repentance, an occasion whereof the Lord gave to them in mercy by questioning with them about their sin, since he sought thus to drive them to the confession thereof, playing the part herein rather of a Physician, then of a Judge. The Serpent is first punished, because the first that offended. But here it is demanded, whether the Serpent indeed were he, whom the Lord meant, or the Devil, because the Serpent wanted reason, and so had done what he did, only as an instrument, so that it may seem unreasonable to punish him, and for the punishment here spoken of, going upon the Belly, &c. How can this be said to have befallen the Serpent, as a punishment, which was natural unto him from the beginning? To these things divers answer diversely. Some, that the beast called a Serpent only is here meant, and not the Devil, because he is plainly thus described, and it agreeth to him and not to the Devil to go upon his Belly, and to eat Dust, and that before this, the Serpent went upright, but now was made to go thus, as the Devil for his sin was turned from a glorious angel to an unclean spirit, and Lots Wife into a Pillar of Salt. And more over, that the Serpent wanted not reason, as some say, or if he did, yet God might justly punish him thus, partly to vex Satan, whose instrument he was, partly to show his hatred of sin, as other Beasts and Fowls were drowned in the Flood for the sin of Man, and partly that man might be more affected in seeing this punishment inflicted upon a beast for their offense, as others say. By this exposition, how far forth I have been led, see before. verse 1. Yet I do not think, but as the Devil had an hand in that, which the Serpent did to seduce Man, so although first and literally the Serpent be meant here, yet mystically the Devil is meant also, as Calvin and others consent, even as when the brazen Serpent is spoken of, those things, that were done thereby were truly done by that Serpent, but mystically Christ Jesus was set forth hereby. But what is meant here literally and what mystically? Literally the Serpent goeth upon his Belly drawing all the rest of his body after him, and to show his baseness more, licketh up the dust, as none other beast doth, for they live upon the fruits of the earth, as God at the first appointed. Moreover the Serpent, with whom the woman was so familiar before, is now at greatest enmity with the woman, & her seed, of all other beasts of the field, and again, the woman and hers do most hate Serpents. Men indeed do also generally by an instinct of nature hate Serpents above all, and kill, and destroy them, wheresoever they find them, but women specially are set against them. And it is remarkable, which Ferus hath, that if a woman with her naked foot presseth the Serpents head but a little, he dieth forthwith, but if he biteth, but her Toe first, she is poisoned and dieth, which is the more admirable, because, if a Serpent be stricken many blows on the head, he is hardly killed otherwise. Lastly, Serpents lie lurking in the Grass, and are still ready to bite at our heels, and to poiso nous, but we strike at their heads and so kill them up. Mystically the Devil goeth upon his Belly, saith Gregory, or upon his Belly and Brest by Cogitation, and Luxury, whereby he doth rule over men's hearts, because Luxury followeth those, that are given to the appetite, and he eateth dust, that is wicked men, whom he hideth in the belly of his malice, and thus he is refreshed, as by meat, whilst he is delighted in their evil works. Wherefore he is compared by Saint Peter to a Lion, that goeth about seeking, whom he may devour; and thus Rupertus, and some others of the Fathers also, For his enmity against us, it is notorious, if by the woman and her seed we understand the godly, of whom Christ, that came of a woman is the head, and by the Devils seed, the wicked, of whom the Lord saith to the Jews, ye are of your father the Devil. For as betwixt Cain and Abel deadly enmity began, so it is still and will be continued betwixt the wicked and the godly throughout all generations, as is partly touched, Gal. 4. and St. Augustine setteh it forth at large in speaking of two Cities, the one of God, and the other of the Devil: but the comfort is, that in the end the victory shall fall to the godly, which is set forth by the head and the heel, whereof the one, that should be smitten, is superior, and the other inferior, so that hereby is set forth, that the godly shall at last be superior to the wicked, and their father the Devil, and they shall be made inferior, whatsoever dominion they attain to in the mean season. Gregory hath another elegant application of this saying. For as the heel, saith he, is the end of the body, so by the heel is meant in this place the end of our actions. When the old enemy striketh not in the beginning of our intention, nor in the journey of our actions intercepteth, he layeth worse snares in the end, which he doth the more eagerly attempt, because he seeth that only left for him to assault. To observe the head of the Serpent is to behold the begiunings of his suggestions, and utterly to root them out from the entrance of the heart with the hand of solicitous consideration, who notwithstanding being thus put back attempteth to smite the heel, because although he striketh not by his suggestion the first intention, yet he essayeth to deceive in the end. But if once the heart be corrupted in the intention, the middle and the end of the following action is securely possessed by the subtle adversary, because he seeth that Tree, which he hath vitiated with the tooth of his poison wholly to bear fruit for him. But by the seed of the woman is generally understood Christ Jesus, as Calvin noteth, but disliketh, because the word Seed is a Nown Collective, more being meant hereby, and not one only, and because a perpetuity of enmity is here set forth Generation after Generation. And therefore he rather understandeth here by mankind, that is, so many, as are faithful, who notwithstanding because they are not superior to the Devil and his Instruments in themselves, must be considered in their head Christ Jesus, in whose triumphing over Satan they triumph also, whereupon it is, that the Apostle saith, God shall, shortly tread Satan under your feet: with Calvin agree many other of our most learned writers, and both Augustine, Chrysostom, Gregory, and other of the ancients, when they speak of this, apply it unto mankind, amongst whom some always are found fighting against and overcoming the Devil.

Some understand Lucifer by the Serpent and other evil spirits that fell with him, by his seed: if we understand them and wicked men also, as Musculus doth the sense will be more full. But by the seed of the woman certainly, as when Abraham's seed is afterwards spoken of, Christ specially is meant, so by the woman's seed in this place. For otherwise there had been nothing to intimate Christ to come, by whom mankind hath redemption and deliverance from sin, till the days of Abraham, and so neither could our first Parents for the want of the knowledge of him, nor any of the ages succeeding, til Abraham's, have been saved. It is a truer tenet therefore, which is held by most, that Christ, who was to come of a woman, by his death should strike the head of the Devil, and destroy it, that is, the power of sin and death, which he had over all, is meant in this place. And so that saying, the Lamb of God slain from the beginning of the World, is verified, because even now he was mystically promised to be slain, for the subduing of Satan, and by his virtue it is effected, that the Devil can do no more to him, but nibble at his heel, that is, by his cursed instruments persecute, and for a short time take his bodily life from him, and all his power is against the body only, and the flesh, and not against the soul, and the mind in any of his faithful members.

And thus it appeareth, that no sooner had man sinned, but a Savior is promised, and therefore in all ages from the beginning of the world Christ hath been preached and set forth, which Saint John also affirmeth, and the Apostle Paul somewhat more obscurely, saying, jesus Christ, yesterday and today, the same also forever. And in particular sometimes, as here, to come of a woman, as Esa. 7. 14. Jer. 31. 22. And Evagrius saith, that Jeremiah gave the Egyptians this for a sign of the falling of their idols, when a Virgin should bear a Son, for which cause they kept the image of a Virgin, with a child in her arms, in a more secret part of the Temple, in the Targum Hierasol. The seed is exponded of the King Messiah, and R. Menahem saith, all souls are unclean through the corruption now entering, and so must needs die, till the Messiah cometh, As some therefore are for the beast, called the Serpent only, as meant here, so others are for the Devil only, as the subject of this curse, making the speech altogether allegorical, as Augustine, Beda, Rupertus, Hugo de Sancto Victore, &c. Because the Devil is commonly set forth by the name of a Serpent, and there is something analogical to be found in him, to those things which are in base Serpents. And whereas one word is only used, upon thy belly shalt thou go, they have two, upon thy breast and belly, by the breast understanding pride, or folly, or the cogitation of evil, because the breast is the seat of these, and by the belly, the putting of the same in execution, as hath been partly touched before. But a Serpent properly understood hath been so plainly described, as that this exposition can by no means be admitted, and as for the Devil, he was accursed before this Lastly, others therefore first, and literally understand the serpent, & mystically the Devil, according to the discourse already made hereupon: but that they differ from us in two things. First, in that they will not have any allegory in the former words, upon thy belly shalt thou go, &c. But only in the latter, I will put enm • ty betwixt thee and the woman, &c. Secondly, in that they censure the opinion of the Serpents going erect before this, and that touching his having any subtlety to deceive, because then one kind of serpents only should have been thus punished and not all. But touching the first, I oppose the authrity of so many ancient Doctors, and that of the same judgment there must needs be in all likelihood the same reason of mystical expounding, and not of one part of it only, because it is no pain, but a pleasure to the Devil to devour men, and to rule in their breasts and bellies by evil cogitations and actions. Touching the second, I have said some what before, specially, that if the Serpent went thus in times past, it could be no punishment, and besides the Authors there alleged, I may here also cite one of the most orthodox and sound; Chrysostom, who speaking of this thing, saith to this effect. As I cast the Devil down from heaven, who wrought by thee, because he would be wiser, then was meet, so I command, that thou also from henceforth go in another figure or form, creeping upon the ground, and being fed therewith never once looking up anymore. As for the objection, that all kinds of Serpents should not then have been thus punished, it is easily answered, that God hath sovereign power over all creatures, and therefore although one kind of Serpents only ascended, out of the detestation of the fact, he might as well punish all kinds, as all the living things of Amalek for the sins of the men therein. But be it, that Serpents went all upon their bellies before this, yet there was no enmity betwixt them & mankind, how then happened it, that they should all sorts alike be now hated of men? for herein I am sure they participated with that kind, which was made an instrument to work the woman to sin, and thus much Pererius, who is for, and if in this, why not in the other, confesseth their gate also. The reasons, I confess, which are brought to justify the Exposition opposed, that the Serpents manner of going, howsoever he went upon his belly before, yet now only it became a punishment unto him, are of some force; As first, that the nakedness of man was before sin, but after sin committed, only it becometh shameful, mand was by nature at the first mortal, viz. So that he could die, and there was a natural antipathy betwixt man and Serpents, but both this was restrained by the Lord from breaking out, till now, and death was kept away from man: and why then might not the Serpents going upon his belly be natural, and yet now be made a punishment. Secondly, the Rainbow cometh of natural causes, and yet the Lord saith, after the Flood, that he set it for a sign, when as indeed it was before: so the Serpent might be thus appointed now, being yet such before also, upon thy belly shalt thou go, is no more, saith Calvin, then as if the Lord had said, d • est thou thus lift up thyself to bring down man made after my image, and a Lord over all Cattle? thou shalt no more exalt thyself in this manner, but shalt go upon thy belly, &c. like a base creature as thou art: for the Prophet Isaiah speaking of the Serpent in the time of the restauration of all things to their perfect natural condition, saith, that the dust shall be food to the Serpent. But this place of Isaiah ought not to move us, because although other creatures be reduced to a better condition, yet it is contrary to the doom against the Serpent, to have his case ever altered, and for the other reasons, if there were any necessity to follow that Exposition, they might serve in some sort for the justification thereof, and yet of nakedness, the Lord doth not say to Adam and Eve, for this cause ye shall go naked, as he doth to the Serpent: Thou shalt go upon thy belly, because thou hast done this thing, so that whatsoever man's nakedness was now unto him, yet for so much as it is not an express punishment, as this of the Serpent was, the reason holdeth not so well from the one to the other: for any enmity in any measure in any beast at the first against man, I cannot see, how it may be affirmed, because all things made by the Lord were very good: Lastly, although the Rainbow was before, yet it was not set for a sign, so that this was plainly a new matter, whereas no such thing is expressed touching the Serpents going upon his belly, that his baseness should henceforth appear by this, and therefore the similitude betwixt these two doth not well hold, to prove that the Serpent might go upon his belly before. And if the Serpent had been in the same state before, and nothing had been newly imposed, here had been a less punishment for the Serpent, than for man, to whom a new vexation was added, besides that of his nakedness becoming shameful, and so a vile beast, the beginner of all the mischief should have been less than he. There is one ancient, Dydimus, who saith, that the Serpent at the first went upon his belly, but was erected by the Devil, that he might in this form come & parley with the woman, but now he is again cast down by the Lord: but because this were no punishment great enough for so great an offense, to be brought only to that state, wherein he was created, this cannot by any means be admitted. Having thus cleared the greatest question of this Text, little more remaineth to be said for the full understanding of all things. Because thou hast done this, (saith the Lord) thou art cursed above all cattle, that is, because thou hast been the author and persuader to so great a sin, whereas the earth, the Mother, and all other cattle, the children thereof shall bear a curse therefore, being subjected to vanity, thou shalt be cursed above them all: for upon thy belly shalt thou go groveling; as thou didst talk to the woman of an high condition to be attained by eating, thou shalt be made low enough, and Dust shalt thou eat: whereas thou didst cause the woman to eat pleasant fruit, thy food shall be most course and unpleasant, and in the holes of the ground and in the Dust shall be thy habitation, as by tempting to sin, thou hast brought mankind to that, that he must return to the [Note.] Dust and to the grave: where we may note, how sin is punished in the kind, and so it was both in the woman and in the man also. I will also put enmity betwixt thee and the woman, &c. That is, instead of the wicked amity and familiarity, that hath been betwixt you, there shall henceforth be deadly enmity, not that it shall not be so betwixt the Man and the Serpent also, but the woman and her posterity are singularly spoken of, because it was with the woman and not with the man, that the Serpent had conversed in so much seeming love. That amity, which is in sin amongst the wicked shall not [Note.] long hold, but be turned into the greatest enmity. And mystically by the woman we may understand the Church, for thus she is set forth in the Revel. 12. And by her seed Christ, and by the Serpent and his seed all the Devils in hell and wicked men, because no one thing is more adverse to another, then Devils and wicked men to Christ and the Church, and they to them. He shall break thine head, and thou shalt bruise his heel; in the vulgar Latin it is, she shall break thine head, which is false and blasphemous, and yet it hath passed from time to time, as Calvin noteth, without correction, being applied to the Virgin Mary: whereas the words are commonly read with some variation, He shall break thine head, and thou shalt bruise his heel, and in the vulgar Latin, tu insidiaberis calcaneo ejus, the same Calvin noteth, that in the Hebrew there is no difference, but the same word coming of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is used in both places, which cometh from the same root with that, which signifieth a Serpent, viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and it signifieth to crush or to break in pieces, conterere, whereby therefore he turneth it in both places. Ille conteret caput tuum, & tu conteres calcancum ejus: They should mutually do the greatest hurt, that they could, the one unto the other, but the man, according to the erect stature of his body, should strike at the head, and so more deadly, and the Serpent lying low, at the heel, not to do the man so much hurt. In the Serpents head lay the subtlety, from whence that temptation to sin came, and therefore that specially should by man be stricken at as most hateful, and so we should specially look to the root of sin within us, viz. evil concupiscence, to subdue and mortify it, and the heel the Serpent strikes at, because lying under the feet of men, and able to reach no higher. Mystically Christ dissolveth the power and head-force of Satan, and Satan hurteth bim, what he can in his inferior part, the body, whilst he was here, and in his members in respect of the body, and of the flesh, but as it did not him, so it shall not put them to any great detriment, but only such, as shall turn to their greater future advancement.

And unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy Conception, &c. Here three doubts offer themselves. 1 How the multiplying of the woman's Conceptions is spoken of, as a punishment of her sin. 2 Whether to bring forth with pain be not natural, because it is another punishment here inflicted, and the causes of pain in women seem always to have been the same. 3 How this is to be understood, that the woman's desire should be subject to her Husband, and that he should rule over her? Touching the first, some say, that by her Conception is to be understood the time of nine Moneths, that she should now go, before her deliverance, whereas if she had not sinned, she should presently after conceiving have been delivered: but this is absurd, it being always requisite in nature, that the young should stay in the womb a certain time, before it cometh out. Others therefore by conceptions here understand both those of the body and mind, which are accursed in that they are the Conceptions of death, till that they be again delivered by Christ, yea most, say some, of those, that are conceived, be vessels of wrath; but this is little to the purpose, seeing not most but all the Conceptions of women are here spoken of, and in conceiving such as shall perish, there is no sensible pain in that respect, because they that conceive such, know them not, whereas here the pains felt in conceiving and bringing forth are meant. We must not therefore thus expound it, nor yet as some do, by the pinching with want, that is to some in having many Children, or by the grief that is when they prove naught and unruly, nor by the many abortives, nor yet by the deformed, which are some-times brought forth. For these words are plainly expounded by the words following: in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children: so that I will multiply thy sorrows and conceptions, is no more but as if he had said, I will multiply the sorrows of thy conceptions, it being usual in the Hebrew tongue to put two Substantives together with a Conjunction copulative, when as the latter of them is to be rendered by the Genitive case.

Touching the second, although the woman should have conceived, as [ 2] now she doth, and have brought forth children the same way, , that is, by a passage too narrow, for which cause there must necessarily at that time have been a dilating thereof, yet, had she not sinned, it should have been without all pain and grief. This is by Augustine excellently set forth thus; When the fruit of the womb had now been brought to maturity, it should then have come to pass, that the Mothers bowels should have been so far forth loosened, that they should have given a fit passage to this fruit without the pain of the Mother. So that God at the first had ordained children to come forth, as it were by the enforcement of maturity, and not by the strugglings and painful laboring of the mother. But now, by multiplying I will multiply thy sorrows, saith the Lord, that is, by an Hebraism, I will certainly fill thee with many pangs, both in conceiving, bearing in the womb, and in bringing forth. In conceiving, the tenth day, saith Pliny, there are pains in the head, darkness in the eyes, and sickness in the stomach, the fortieth day there is a change of the color, although it be better for Males, worse for Females, the ninetieth, when the child beginneth to stir, and the hair beginneth to grow, there is much languishing of the members, and specially every full of the Moon, and after all this the smell of a Candle put out, causeth abortion, and yauning death in the very travail, so that it pitieth me, and I am ashamed to think, how frivolous is the beginning of the proudest of the creatures. In bringing forth, how full of pangs women are above all creatures, both experience teacheth, and the holy Scripture speaking hereof, as the greatest of all pangs, confirmeth.

Lastly, for the woman's desire being subject to her Husband, some expound [ 3] this, as being the same with that, which is set forth in the next words, he shall rule over thee, as if he had said, thou shalt no more be free, as hitherto thou hast been, thy subjection to thy Husband being nothing voluntary and free, as it was before sin, as God made thee for an help unto the man, and he being then towards thee in every respect, as an Husband ought to be towards his wife, that together ye might have, as loving yoke-fellows, always led a most sweet and pleasant life: but now thy subjection shall be necessary and constrained, there being no further liberty left unto thee to do what thou wilt, but what he alloweth or appointeth, although happily he may now be churlish and harsh. Some again expound it as a different thing, as Artopoeus remembereth, but he followeth the former, viz. as if by desire were meant the woman's affection, which should still be most earnest to company with her Husband, notwithstanding all her pangs by his means formerly suffered. For as if all her sorrows in child-bearing formerly had, were forgotten, she soon after desireth the company of her Husband again, and accordingly Symmachus turneth it, Ad virum appetitus tuus, and the Hebrew word here used, properly signifieth desire or lust, and of this it is by the Hebrews understood. Some again, as the same Artopoeus saith, expound it of help, which the weak and infirm woman desireth of the man.

Amongst these, I prefer the middlemost: for it seemeth to be an addition to that of her sorrows, that having suffered them sometimes, she should seek to bring them upon herself again and again, not being able by reason of this malediction laid upon her, to do otherwise. For thus the woman is here punished two ways; both in that she is put under the dominion of the man, and also in that her very affections are subjected to him, whereby a preparative is made to the renewing of her sorrows again: whereas, if it be expounded according to the first, as Chrysostom also and Rupertus expound it, and many others, the punishment will be but single, and the word, desire or lust, doth not so well agree either to it, or to the last. The Septuagint turn it, Ad virum erit conversio tua. Whereupon Chrysostom saith, thou hast turned after the Serpent, whilst thou wert equal to thine Husband, and hadst together with him principality over the creatures: wherefore seeing thou couldst use thy liberty no better, thou shalt now turn after him, and he shall rule over thee. Thou didst then without fear rush headlong into danger, because thou couldst not then rule thyself better; I will now have thee to be ruled by him, wherefore as the body is ruled by the head, see that thou henceforth sweetly acknowledge and follow him thine head. Many think, as was touched before, that the woman was under the man from the first, but then freely, finding no pain therein, but now to her grief oftentimes and trouble. But Chrysostom is against this, and by the Text it seemeth that inferiority came in only by sin, yet for so much as she was made for the man, as Saint Paul teacheth: I must needs rather assent to those, that are for a kind of inferiority before, but altogether differing from that which now it is: yet the man is not now to rule over his wife, as over his servants or children, but as over his most dear and beloved companion, his ruling over her being mixed with a giving of honor to her, as is commanded, love as of his own flesh, moderating in all things, and bitterness by striking, and by Lord-like speaking, as is used to other inferiors, being put away. And for the woman, whatsoever Husband she hath, let her learn with patience to be subject to him, as the Lord hath appointed, opposing obedience to her Husband, and patience, as the chief of virtues, to that disobedience of the first woman unto God, as the chief of vices, and so she may have comfort yet of being one day exempt from this subjection, and restored to an equality with the man in Dominion and Glory in the Kingdom of Heaven, as the Apostle hath plainly taught. As for those women, that marry not, but live always Virgins for the Kingdom of Heaven, they are by their continency freed from his subjection and sorrow, which is only to the married, and yet not altogether, because they come of Hevah, that sinned: for they are troubled with their monthly flowers, and are restrained from that authority which men have: for I permit not the woman, saith the Apostle, to teach, or to usurp authority, &c.

Now the punishment here inflicted upon the woman smiteth with her sin. In that she was carried by pleasure to eat; wherefore she is first adjudged to pain. 2 In that by eating, she brought death upon herself and her children, therefore at all times of her bearing children she should suffer pangs like to the pangs of death. 3 Because she by her flattery drew her Husbands desire also to this cursed fruit, and contrary to her condition as his Master taught him to sin, therefore her desire now should be to him, and he should be her Master, and ever after rule over her.

And to Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, touching which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat thereof, cursed is the ground for thy sake, &c. As the earth was made principally to afford food & habitation to man; so man having sinned, it is justly accursed unto him. The old translation, saith Calvin, hath it, Cursed be the ground in thy work. Being deceived by the similitude of the word, to that which signifieth to till the ground, for it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth to till the ground, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for thee is written with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 this will 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And cursed is the ground by sterility of good things now befalling it instead of fertility. And yet it is not so sterill of good fruits, but that it bringeth forth abundance of them still, but much labor of man is now required for this to extirpe briars and thorns, and other noisome redundancies meant hereby, whereunto it was not liable from the beginning. So that the earth was now changed in this, that before it yielded all things only profitable of the own accord for man's use, there being no need, that he should labor, but moderately, and with pleasure rather, then pain, as hath been already shown; but now Briars and Thorns, and the like begin to over-spread the ground, to the choking of Corn and Grass, and to the hindering of good fruits, inso much, as if man toileth not upon it continually to keep the ground clear from these, he cannot have sustenance therefrom. Some hold, that Thorns and Briars grew upon the ground before, but now more abundantly: but so the ground would in time have been overspread with them, although man had not sinned, and he must have toiled in cleansing the ground, which is absurd. This then cometh now, first of the curse upon sin: Thorns also and Thistles it shall bring forth to thee, and thou shalt eat of the herb of the field. The last words here Calvin saith, some understand, as if man were now restrained from all other food, but herbs with the beasts, but this he taketh to be too strict an Exposition, understanding it rather, as some restraint of the plenty, wherewith he was fed before, so that he had need now to seek a supply by herbs, or as a comfort, that yet he should have herbs to feed upon, as at the beginning. Ferus understandeth the earth here, as opposed to Paradise; the herbs of the cursed earth, for those of the blessed Paradise, being base in comparison of them. To me the words seem neither to be restrictive at all, nor yet such, as tend to comfort, but only, as if he had said, although the ground shall be full of briars and thorns choking the herbs of the field, yet thou shalt not any new way be fed, but with these herbs preserved to grow, and gotten with much labor & difficulty. For as he speaketh of herbs, so he speaketh v. 19. of bread, In the sweat of thy brow thou shalt eat bread, &c. whence it is plain, that he restreineth him not to grass only, neither did he mean, that herbs should be used, as a supply more now then at the first, but in the want of corn, because then he appointed for the food of man, herbs and fruits of trees also; and least of all can it be conceived, that in punishing him he would speak any comfort unto him. The laborious life, that man should henceforth lead then, is hereby set forth, which is further expressed by speaking of his sweat, and with such travil and labor should he get his living, till that he returned to the dust: for, Dust, saith the Lord, thou art, and to the dust shalt thou return: and withal, his base food, with which he should be sometimes glad to satisfy his hunger, was meant, viz. grass with the beasts, to which Nebuchadnezzar was afterwards adjudged for his pride, Dan. 4. For at the first herbs bearing seed, and fruits were appointed for man, and grass for the beasts, Ch. 1. 29. 30. How man was made out of the dust was shown before: now having sinned, he must die, and his body be resolved to dust again, although his spirit goeth to God, that gave it, as is taught, Eccl. 12. 1. But the body only is spoken of here as Dust, to beat down the pride of man, wherein he had gone so far. Of this resolving to dust the time is set down only indefinitely, to make man always to be thinking upon it, and preparing for it, as being a thing, that shall certainly come, but how soon he cannot tell. The punishment of man consisteth in three things: First, the ground is accursed to him, to bring forth briars and thorns, as he had abused the delectable Trees and pleasant fruits (which it brought forth before) to intemperance, not keeping to those, unto which the Lord had restrained him. 2 The getting of his food is made laborious; as the fruit of which he ate, came to him without all labor, being brought and given to him by his wife. 3 The sentence of death is denounced against him, whereas he expected hereby to have been made as the immortal God.

And Adam called his wives name Eve, because she was the mother of all living. There is a question here amongst Expositors, To what time this is to be referred, because it seemeth unreasonable, that the man so soon as he was smitten with the sentence of God's judgment, should turn himself to his wife, the cause of this mischief, and give her so high and magnificall a title, yet some will have it done in that order, wherein it was set down. For Adam conceiving now by God's sentence some hope of living still, yea not believing that he should die at all, doth thus proudly in contempt of God call his wife, life, so Rupertus: but others, that he called her thus in respect of that, which the Lord had foretold of her seed, that it should break the Serpents head, meaning that Christ should one day come of her, in whom alone we all live: others again, that he called her thus by a bitter irony, because she brought death to all men, as the furies of hell are in Greek called Eumenides, easy to be entreated, by a contrary name, when as they are inexorable. And there are not wanting, who think Ave, the word used by the Angel to the Virgin Mary, here aimed at, being made out of this word Eve by a little alteration. Lastly, some hold, that he gave her this name▪ as who would hereby celebrate God's mercy in prolonging their lives, who had deserved to die presently. And this, I take it, cometh nearest to the right reason: for Adam having heard the Lord to speak of her conceptions and bringing forth of children, and before that, of her seed, which should break the Serpents head, could not but in the midst of his perplexities be somewhat comforted, hoping of good that should yet come by her, tending to life and to the propagation of mankind, as there had come evil by her to make him and them all subject to death; and therefore rousing up his drooping spirits, he settleth a name upon her suitable to that, which hath been said, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 living, that whensoever this name should be mentioned, God's mercy might be remembered in making her fruitful, though with great pain, and fruitful to bring forth such a living seed, as should at length subdue the Devil. Others expound it, as if it had been spoken by the Preterpluperfect tense, and so remembered here only, but that he called her thus before. I rest in the former, as most excellently agreeing; Because she was the mother of all living, that is, of all men living when Moses wrote this, and of all that should be to the worlds end. This denomination then is authentical, because Scripture, and so the denominations made by some Hebrews are but vain imaginations, as those two remembered by Fagius, the one, that she was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , life, to set forth her corruption, misery and mutability, as it is with this life, the other, that she was so called by the Chaldee word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifying to tell, because she inconsiderately told her Husband of the Serpents speech, whereby he was seduced. Ferus besides the good sense, in which he saith this may be taken, premiseth another, as if Adam did this out of stupidity, not regarding God's threatening of death, and saith, this his naming of her is mentioned here, to show his Dominion over her, according to the sentence, v. 16. For thus his dominion over the creatures was before set forth, Ch. 2. 19.

Unto Adam also and his wife the Lord made Coats of skins, &c. These words, saith Fagius, are diversely read; by the Chaldee Paraphrast thus, The Lord God made for Adam and his wife Vestments of honor upon the skin of their flesh: by others, Coats taken from the skin, that is, of Wooll. But both these are from the purpose; for neither doth Moses speak of their skins, but of the skins of beasts, nor of that which grew upon skins, but of the skins themselves. Origen, Gregory Nissen, and some other Ancients, because it is absurd to hold, that God wrought upon garments to make them, after the manner of a Taylor, understand this only allegorically, that he clothed them with mortal bodies full of many miseries. But August. and Chrysostom, and others that are more sound Expositors, understand it literally first, howsoever some after the literal sense add a mystical understanding also. But so a great question ariseth, both whence these skins came, and how it is said, that the Lord made them Coats thereof, and to what end? For to have skins, some beasts must necessarily be killed, and so some kinds of creatures must have been wholly destroyed again soon after they were made, if there were made but two of a kind at the first, as is most likely. Again, for the Lord's making them Coats, how may that be thought of, seeing he is not like man to sew and to make Garments? Some answer, that they were not skins, but barks of trees; but those were unfit for such a purpose, and the word translated skins doth nowhere signify such a thing. Others therefore say, that more beasts were made of every kind, and that they were the skins of some of these being killed not for meat, but for the use of Garments. And as for the Lord's making them, some say, that he did this by his word, as he did other things, and some by teaching them, the necessity of their naked bodies, now urging them to it, to kill of the beasts and to make them of their skins, or that he did it by the ministrey of Angels, as Hugo de Sancto Victore But what need is there to dispute of the Lord's doing herein? He could by his power have skins without killing of beasts, clothing the beasts again with new skins immediately, as ordinarily the Serpent putteth off the old skin sometime, and a new then succeedeth, and these skins he could by his word immediately make into Coats, and put them upon their bodies, yet I rather think, that they gave them the wit; thus to clothe themselves: Touching the cause why, he saw that they had sewed Fig-leaves together, and yet were not sufficiently clothed, and that now their need was great of clothing to cover their shame, and to keep them from many injuries of the weather and other occurrences; wherefore, although he were greatly offended with their sin, yet out of his infinite goodness, whereby he maketh the Sun to shine, and the Rain to fall upon the just and the unjust, he would provide thus for their present necessity, teaching them hereby, how to clothe them and theirs afterwards. That God put it into their mind to take skins and make themselves coats, and this was his making of them, is the more probable, because they of their own heads made themselves Aprons of Fig-leaves; but now being better taught by God; they made themselves Coats of skins.

In that the skins of beasts are taken to clothe man, his degenerating to a condition, like that of a beast, is figured out, after his eating, contrary to his expectation, which was to be made like God, as the Psalmist partly teacheth. For now in his lusts he became like a beast, and in his affections, and mortality before his nakedness put him in mind of his sin, now his clothing. So that they do altogether pervert the use hereof, that turn it to pride and vain glory as if a Thief condemned to die, should yet for a time be spared, and for penance be made to wear an Halter continually about his neck, and having done so a while, in time adorn it with Silver and Gold, and silk, and so wax proud thereof, as Musculus hath it. Again, this was done to teach man frugality in his clothing, as both Elias and John, that we set for patterns to others, took it, clothing themselves likewise in skins. Some will have the use of them being skins of dead beasts also, to singifie, that death is man's due, that he might always think upon it. Lastly, the providence of God over men being sinners is here set forth, that we may always trust to be provided of necessaries, although we be a sinful generation. And mystically, that man cannot by anything that he can do, cover the shameful nakedness of his sin, but God only doth that, as Ps. 32. so Ferus.

And the Lord God said, Behold; the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil, &c. In that these words are used after the judgment given against man, and this clothing put upon him, it is plain, as all Expositors agree, that there is an Irony in them, as if the Lord had said, do all ye, that read or hear of the state, to which man hath brought himself by his aspiring, see and consider, how like unto God he is now become by his knowledge of good and evil; of naked and not ashamed, he is become shamefully naked; of a laborer upon pleasure, he must now necessarily labor with great toil and pains, and of one in the likeness of God, he is made like a beast, with a beasts skin upon him: loe all this, like a wretch, hath he brought upon himself. Knowledge indeed he hath, which before he wanted, that is, he knoweth now experimentally, that it was a great sin to eat of this Tree, and this is all the likeness to God, which he hath thus attained to in the knowing of good and evil. Like one of us, is generally understood, as spoken of the Trinity, although some think otherwise. Now, therefore, l • st he put forth his hand, and take of the Tree of life, &c. This speech is eclipticall, and thus to be supplied, Now therefore let us put him out of the Garden, and keep him out forever, that he may not at any time take of the Tree of life: which is spoken, not as if man could use any means to live forever, whether God would or no, contrary to his decree, but as noting, that he would be ready to do this, if he were not kept from it, and therefore the Lord having adjudged him to die, hasteneth to deprive him of the means of prolonging his bodily life unto eternity. Whence we may note, that man having by sinning exposed himself [Note.] to the danger of death, spiritual and temporal, is not so much affected with the spiritual, but with the temporal, and so chiefly intendeth the seeking of deliverance therefrom. And again, that where God taketh away the means of life for sin, from such as have formerly had them, they are certainly thus excluded from life itself. But Ferus saith, that God's expelling of man, that he might not eat of this Tree and live, was in great mercy, because if he should live here now always, he must live miserably, and through that desire which he hath of this natural life, he would be well pleased with it, never seeking after a better: wherefore, in mercy, he is kept from eating of this Tree, that he might seek for the best life.

And he placed at the east of the Garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming Sword, which turned every way to keep the way of the Tree of life. Divers expositions are by divers made upon these words, but first, it is to be understood, that the Septuagint read them somewhat otherwise thus. And the Lord c • st out Adam, and placed him before Paradise, and set Cherubims, &c. But both in the Hebrew, and the Chaldee Paraphrase it is read as before, yet no man doubteth, but that Adam was set to till the ground near Paradise, that seeing the place, from which he was cast out, •• d the pleasures thereof, he might be touched with the more penitency. But for the meaning of these words, some expound them only Allegorically, as if hereby were set forth two sorts of things, that hinder us from obtaining of eternal life, against which we must continually fight, the first invisible, such, as are the internal spirits, of them it is spoken, Eph. 6 12. the other sensible, both pleasures set forth by a flame, and terrors, set forth by a Sword, so that we are hereby taught, that we must by force and violence, as it were, fighting and warring take the Kingdom of Heaven, or else we shall never attain unto it. Now although that which is here said, may thus be profitably applied; yet this being a true History, the literal sense is first and chiefly to be respected. But for this, some will have by the Cherubims and the flaming Sword the torrid Zone understood, because that burneth, as a flame, and the Sun, which is the cause hereof, is moved by the Angels of God: but this is a thing natuiall and so not now set, but where it was from the beginning. Others think, that a great quantity of fire was made by the Lord to break out of the earth at the entrance of Paradise, and made a continual flame there: but what then were the Cherubims? Others understand it of the fire of Purgatory, through which all must pass, being herein purged from the remainder of their corruptions at the last day, before that they enter into the Paradise of God: for thus that of the Psalmist is verified, We have passed through fire and water, that is, the water of Baptism, and this fire, wherewith Christ shall Baptize all his at the last day, as it was said by John, He shall Baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire, and he shall thoroughly purge his floor. Thus Ambrose. and Rupertus likewise compareth this with the fire spoken of, 1 Cor. 3. 13. in which the Cherubims shall distinguish through their fullness of knowledge, as the word signifieth, betwixt the good and the bad, and then and not otherwise the tried thus shall have entrance into Paradise given them. But these things are altogether from the purpose; because not Heaven, but a Paradise in this World; and not eternal life in another World, but a corporal life in this is here spoken of: and so to expound it thus, is to turn it into an Allegory, which hath been already taxed.

Theodoret saith, that these Cherubims, and flaming Sword were some mighty terrifying visions, which were made to appear there, that man might not dare anymore to come near the entrance of Paradise, because, if they had been Angels indeed, they had been invisible, and the terror had not been sensible; and by Cherubims it is usual in the holy Scriptures to set forth whatsoever is endued with great power. And this doth not much differ from the common received opinion, that these Cherubims were Angels appearing like men with bright Swords in their hands, bandied hither and thither, at the sight whereof any man would be afraid to come nigh. Yet the word Cherub signifieth a similitude, although the Angels; because they have appeared oftentimes in likenesses, are so called, and sometimes Seraphim. I hold rather with Theodoret, that they were not Angels, but terrible similitudes, like unto armed men, through which yet it was impossible for man to pass without certain destruction, because the Angels are God's Messengers, not fixed to any place upon earth, but passing and repassing, as God thinketh good to employ them in any service. The thing generally set forth hereby is, that man should not by any means after this live in the flesh forever, [Note.] although to the faithful after this life ended a spiritual life everlasting is restored by Christ, to take place after the resurrection. But through the terrors and striving with death we must come to this, and to have part in Christ the true Tree of life, there are always set to stop our passage dreadful apparitions of fire and sword, wherewith we are subject to be persecuted, and of spiritual temptations inwardly affrighting: but through them all must we break, by the strength of faith resisting the Devil, and not setting by our lives, so that we may win Christ, and through him live forever in the world to come. It is a strange conceit of some here, that these Cherubims were set, as to keep man, so Devils from entering into Paradise, lest they should take of the Tree of Life and bring it to man: for both the Devils nature is such, as that he could not only by the entrance, but any way have come into Paradise, seeing he is a spirit, and his envy against man is such, that he would never give him anything to live, but if he knew any means to bring him to his death with the most speed, he would certainly have given him that rather: R. Menahem saith, although man be yet excluded from the Tree of life, yet it standeth not in vain; for the men of the resurrection shall eat thereof, and live forever: but hereby Maimonides showeth that the enjoying of everlasting happiness, and not eating properly is meant; for our wise men, saith he, have taught, that in the world to come, there is neither eating nor drinking, nor sitting, nor lying, nor sleeping, but wearing of Crowns, and the fruition of the Glory of God forever.




CHAP. IV.

ANd Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord, &c. When Adam went into or knew Eve first, whether in Paradise, or not till he was cast out of Paradise, may justly be inquired here, because so soon, as they were made, they were bidden to increase and multiply, and therefore it may seem improbable, that Adam would not presently obey the Lord's command, by going into his wife to this end and purpose. But his stay in Paradise was so short, and there were then such other occasions to take up Adam otherwise for a time, as that it is generally held, that he knew her not, till after his ejection out of Paradise, according to the order here followed by Moses. And herein it is to be held, that God moderated by his special providence foreseeing the fall of our first [Note.] Parents, that not one man might be begotten in Paradise, as none was made there, and so none should be able to challenge a better place, as his birthright, then the common accursed earth, and if he atteineth to better hopes, of an heavenly Paradise to be hereafter enjoyed, it is to be ascribed altogether to the grace of God, and he only is to be magnified therefore. For the phrase, Adam knew his wife Hevah; because it is so modest, some observe, that the Hebrew tongue is rightly called the holy tongue; because nothing obscene is spoken therein, and that the coming together of man and wife is spoken of by this word knowing, because the seed of generation cometh from the brain by the Spina dorsi, which is the seat of knowledge: or, as others, because reason ought to moderate in this action. Notwithstanding the order followed by Moses, and reasons formerly set down evince, that this was not done, till after their fall, yet some Hebrews translate these words by the Preterpluperfect tense, as if Adam had known Eve immediately after her creation: but this were to hold him to have been, as apt then to be inflamed with lust, as young men nowadays are, which abhorreth from all right understanding. For the time, when Cain was begotten, it is not set down. But a counterfeit Methodius, as the Master of the Eccles. History relateth, saith, that it was revealed to him being in prison for the Gospel, that our first Parents lived in Virginity 15 years after their fall lamenting their sin, but after that coming together they had Cain and Calmanan, his sister, and 15 years after that, Abel and Delbora his Sister, and that Cain slew Abel, Anno Mundi 130. whose death they having lamented 100. years, after that had Seth. But who can doubt at the first hearing of these things, but that they are fabulous, seeing both their mutual love, and the necessity of the world being then emdty of men, would not doubtless suffer them to contain, for any such time, and according to this Sheth was not borne till Anno 230. of Adams age, whereas Gen. 5. he is said to have been born Anno 130. This was therefore the invention of some Frier rather to magnify Virginity, as amongst them, that saying of Jerome upon this, that Adam is not said to have known his wife, till his ejection out of Paradise, is highly extolled, Virginity filleth Paradise, but Marriage the Earth. Hevah having brought forth a Son calleth his name Cain. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth to get any kind of way, and not only to buy: it may be translated also, saith Vatablus, I have possessed, but the common translation agreeth best, Cain from getting, because of the next words, of the Lord, or from, with, or by, or to the Lord, as divers read it, as if she meant either, that it was God's blessing towards her, when she had deserved to die, to live to have a son, or as if she meant to dedicate him to the Lord, or made account of him, as the seed promised to break the Serpents head, but they, which understand the words so, read them, I have gotten a man of the Lord, meaning an extraordinary and singular man. I doubt not, but Hevah rejoicing much looked up to God, and thankfully beheld this her son, as his great blessing, and by speech and the name giving expressed her self herein.

Again she brought forth his Brother Abel, &c. These two, saith Vatablus, were twins, and the manner of Moses his telling of this Abel showeth no less, because he saith not, Adam knew her again, and she conceived, but having brought forth one, she soon brought forth his Brother; and it is most likely, that then the woman was so fruitful, that she commonly brought twins. For the name, no reason is rendered hereof, as of the name Cain, but the word signifying vanity, or misery, or mourning; some have thought that she called him so, as if she thought him superfluous, and that her trouble should be but increased by having him, and because Abel was a good man, they tax her for giving him such a name. But both Calvin and other judicious Expositors reject this, as improbable: for how could she possibly, being but even now so joyful for one son, when another came forth to vilipend him? especially, seeing in that time of the want of men, the more were borne, the more joy must there needs be. He is not then thus called, as vain and needless, but rather Hevah beginning to think now, that many in time should come of her, and be subject for her sin to much vanity and misery in this world she calleth him by this name for admonition both to him and to all posterities, to make none other account of their estate here then as vain and transitory. Ferus saith, that she called him so; either because the murthering of him should cause much sorrow to her, or because she brought him forth with much sorrow, or lastly, because he was the first of the blessed mourners, Matth. 5. Abel was a shepherd, and Cain an husbandman: both necessary callings, and no doubt, but to these they were set by their Father Adam, whereby his care is commended, and these callings especially, as most needful and honest to all generations, thus then they both began well.

And in process of time Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering to the Lord, &c. It may be questioned here; wherefore Cain and Abel offered, and who taught them so to do? many think, that Adam taught them, and that he was commanded by God: but Chrysostom saith, that they had none instructer to direct them herein, but their own conscience. I think, that although by the light of nature they might conceive, that all coming from God, it was meet, that something should be brought, as a gift to God again in way of thankfulness; yet they could not, without instruction, understand the end of sacrificing; which was to set forth, that necessarily an oblation must be made, blood must be shed, and there must be burning of the creatures in the fire for the expiating of sin, and to be delivered from the fire of God's wrath by sin deserved: and yet that this was not done merely by the sacrificing of beasts and such things; but by Christ set forth hereby, who was afterwards to come into the World, to be offered upon the Cross, to have his blood shed, and to be put, as it were, into a burning fire of extreme passions, as he was; when being in an agony he sweat so wonderfully. For how could it possibly enter into the heart of man without instruction, that a stinking fume made with the fat of a beast could afford pleasing smell unto the Lord? and how can it be thought, but that Adam did so before them, although it be not recorded; because there was none occasion, as here, that the cause of Cain's enmity against Abel might appear, since it pleased the Lord to have the history of the things happening between them two to be recorded? And if Adam sacrificed before, he did doubtless teach his sons to do the like; and God set him a work at the first so to do, that, as he had made a comfortable promise of the woman's seed to come, that should break the Serpents head; howsoever he was shut out from the Tree of life, yet he might have something continually before his eyes, figuring out this seed to come, and to suffer for the expiation of all his sins. Some observe, that amongst all the Patriarchs, Adam's sacrificing and Isaac's is passed over in silence; of which they render this reason: Adam was the fountain of sin, and therefore God would not have him set forth, as the fountain of piety also; and Isaac was himself a figure of Christ, in that he was taken to be sacrificed, and therefore he is not propounded, as sacrificing beasts, then whom he was a far more excellent type: but the best reason hath been rendered before, there was none occasion to speak of their sacrificings, and therefore they are not set forth, as those of others be.

In process of time: In the Hebrew this is, in the end of days 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that is, because 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is commonly taken for a year consisting of many days, at the end of the year, or after certain years, as one hath it. But (at the end of the year) agreeth best, because it is likely, that every year, when they had reaped the profits of that year, they offered some of them to the Lord, who sent all, thus days are put for a year, Levite. 25. 29, 30. compare Exod. 34. 22. with 1 Sam. 1. 20. and afterwards it was commanded at the end of the year to bring offerings to the Lord, Exodus 23. 16. and from hence it is certain, that the custom of sacrificing came in use amongst the Heathen, and not by a natural instinct; but God having taught the first man to do thus, they held this custom still, though not to God, but to Devils, when they had degenerated to Idolatry.

But whither did they bring their offerings? some say, to the place of public meetings, to the worship of God unto Adam, who was then the only Priest of God, and offered them for them. Saint Paul to the Hebrews, saith: By faith Abel offered a more excellent sacrifice, than Cain: whereby it seemeth rather, that each one then offered for himself: but to this it may be answered, he is said to offer, who bringeth the thing offered, although it be laid upon the Altar by another, as Solomon is said afterwards to have offered a thousand burnt-offerings, but it is certain, that it was done by the Priests hands, and it is not to be doubted, but the God of order would have an order held in his service from the beginning, and therefore the eldest of the family being the Priest, Adam now was he, and it is most likely, that their offerings were presented by his hands. Maymony saith of the place, It is a tradition, that it was the same where Noah built his Altar, and Abraham prepared to offer up Isaac, and David offered to stay the pestilence, 1 Sam. 24. and Solomon built the Temple.

Now in telling of Cain's bringing of his gift, Moses speaketh not so magnifically, as of Abel: for Cain, he saith, brought of the fruit of the ground: something, as is thought by most, which came next to hand, not making choice of the best, but Abel brought of the firstlings of his flock, and of though fat thereof, that is, the principal, and amongst them of the fattest, for this see the Laws made afterwards, Levite. 3. 16. and 7. 25. yet, as some note, this was not the thing, that made Cain's sacrifice to be neglected, and Abel's accepted; but, as was said before, the faith and piety in the heart of the one, which was wanting in the other. Abel was a good man, and so his heart was right towards God, when he brought his offering, but Cain was wicked. And although Hypocrites, whose hearts are evil, do sometimes make as glorious a show outwardly, as the best, yet it was not so here: for Abel excelled every way, the last was first, and the youngest excelled the eldest. See here, it is no certain true piety to do the duties of God's worship, w • cked Cain offereth as [Note.] well as righteous Abel: and to bring somewhat to God, but not making a conscience to bring his due, of the chief and best out of a free and liberal mind is to serve him like Cain, it ever argueth an heart not right. The word translated offering here, is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of which read Levite. 2. but it setteth forth any kind of oblation, coming of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to bring, to comfort, to please, or to rest. And God had respect to Abel and to his offering, &c. He was well pleased therewith, as the Chaldee Paraphrast hath it, and praised it, and so made it known to be pleasing to him, as Chrysostom saith, but how or by what means Cain knew this, I find none to have declared, but Jerome, who saith, that fire coming down from the Lord, burnt up Abel's offering, but left Cain 's untouched: and according to this Theodotion translateth it; inflammavit Dominus super Abel. The person of Abel is first accepted, and then his offering: so that as the state of the man is, so is that accepted of, or not accepted, which he doth in the service of God, as Calvin noteth; and therefore, till a [Note.] man be justified by faith, which maketh God to be well pleased with him, his actions cannot please God. And hereby we may see, that although God would have his servants bring sheep and other such like things unto him, yet he never delighted in these things, but the faith and integrity of the heart of the offerer was that, which pleased him, as Chrysostom reasoneth: those smells were not pleasing in themselves, but being perfumed with the sweet smell of an holy and sanctified spirit. Lastly, from hence also, it is manifest, that the Lord appointed these offerings to be made, because otherwise Abel himself could not have brought one in faith, seeing the ground of faith is God's Word. For that opinion of God's answering Abel by fire, it is not improbable; because we know he hath often shown his acceptance thus at other times, as Levite. 9. 24. Judges 6. 1 Chron. 21. 2 Chron 7. 1 Kings 18. and yet Musculus and Calvin are altogether against it, holding rather, that in time God's favor appeared by some outward blessing

And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. There were two things that moved Cain against Abel: first, that he being his elder Brother; secondly, offering first, yet Abel was preferred before him; so envy wrought afterwards in Josephs brethren against him, and it is an evil affection, that commonly worketh upon occasion of another's preference. Fagius observeth, that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , here used to set forth Cain's wrath, is but one word of eight of the same signification; and yet the most significative showing one all on a fire with anger. And this bewrayed the great pride of his heart, and that he thought most highly of himself and basely of his brother, as some note, as if he were greatly wronged, when as he was most worthy. For had he been humble, instead of being thus ill affected, he would, as Chrysostom saith, have thought, that there was something amiss in him to have searched it out, and to have been moved with penitency therefore. But the Lord, to show, what he expected he should have done, calleth to him, Why art thou angry? &c. as he had sought to bring Adam to repentance by calling to him, Adam, where art thou? so he doth to Cain. How is it that thou considerest not, that I see into every man's heart, and therefore not finding thee to have come with a right heart to offer unto me, I have shown thee no sign of favor. The fruit of the ground, which thou hast brought, is nothing to me, but a faithful and humble heart, with this Abel came, but thou not, which should have affected thee with grief and sorrow, and have beaten down this pride in thee, and if yet thou wilt repent and be humbled, I shall be ready to receive thee to grace, and thou shalt still hold thy birth-right over Abel, but if not, be assured, that judgment is not far from thee. To this effect Chrysostom paraphraseth upon these words. If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? but if, ill, sin lieth at thy door, and his desire shall be to thee, and thou shalt rule over him. In the Hebrew, it is a little otherwise: If thou doest well, shalt thou not be forgiven? and his society shall be to thee, but do thou rather rule over him, as Jerome hath translated it. The Chaldee Paraphrast, If thou amend thy works, shall it not be forgiven thee? but if thou amend them not, thy sin is kept to the day of judgment, that thou mayest be punished therefore. The Septuagint's translation, Hast thou not sinned in not dividing rightly, although thou offerest rightly? Be quiet, his turning shall be to thee, and thou shalt rule over him. And this is followed by Chrysostom, and by Ambrose, August. and many of the other ancients likewise. And they labor much in expounding these words: Hast thou not sinned, although thou offeredst rightly, by not dividing rightly? Saint August. saith, A man offereth rightly, when to God, but divideth not rightly, when he disceneth not rightly the time, the place, the things that are offered, the person offering, or to whom, or those, amongst whom the offering is to be distributed to feed upon it. Now Cain divided not rightly, because he used not right discretion, offering his gift unto God, but not himself, because, as John saith, his works were evil, and so whatsoever gift he brought unto God, could not be accepted: to this effect, August. in many more words. And Ambrose seemeth to lay the fault of his division in the time; because he did not first and before all things offer to God. And touching the other words, be quiet, his turning shall be to thee, &c. they will not have them understood of Abel, but of his sin: against the understanding of them of Abel, Augustine is so far, as that he saith, absit, God forbid. And therefore he expoundeth it of his sin, the turning of this sin shall be to thee, &c. that is, take it upon thyself, and lay not the fault in any other, accuse thyself therefore, and in so doing, and humbly confessing, thou shalt bring thy sin under and get the mastery over it, whereas otherwise it will have the dominion over thee. But Ambrose in a different manner. Be quiet, say nothing to excuse thy sin, but rather stand mute as ashamed, thy Brother is in no fault, that thou shouldest be wroth with him, but thyself only, thou hast been to thyself the author of offending, and so mayest rightly be called the Prince of this sin. Thou hast not been drawn unwittingly or against thy will, but wittingly and willingly thou hast run into this mischief. Rupertus speaking upon the same words saith, Because thou hast a purpose in thy mind to do a work of sin, behold I tell thee, before thou doest, that when thou hast done it, thou mayest not excuse thyself of ignorance. Knowest thou not, that if thou doest well, thou shalt receive, and if ill, thou shalt receive too, for sin will by and by be at thy door, that whithersoever thou turnest thee, and whatsoever thou doest thence forward, it may be a Companion to thee in the journey, and a Prince in the work, and then truly it shall be above thee, and rule over thee, because he that commiteth sin, is the servant of sin. Now before thou dost it, whilst it is yet in thy desire, the desire thereof is under thee, and thou mayst master it, as a King not yet crowned is under the people, so that they may refuse him, if they will.

After the same manner also Bernard, showing from hence that a man needeth not to yield to temptations, unless he will, but may be Lord and Master over them: but he conculdeth by an Epanorthosis, But what are we, or what is our strength to resist so great temptations? This is that indeed, which God seeketh, and to which he endeavoreth to bring us, that seeing our own want, and that we have none other aid, we might in all humility flee to his mercy. They that are for free will, do greedily lay hold upon this place, and upon such Expositions, but very vainly, because, although it be thus understood, God doth but, as Bernard saith, hereby teach us what we should do, that finding ourselves unable we might flee to him for aid, saying as Augustine hath it, Give Lord what thou biddest, and then bid what thou wilt: for according to the Hebrew it is, do thou rule over him, teaching, what he should do, and not what he was able to do without grace; of sin, according to the foregoing Expositions, and not of Abel, as amongst many it is commonly taken, Vatablus saith, almost all Expositors understand this, yet Calvin rather followeth Chrysostom, understanding it of Abel; because the Pronouns his and him, are of the Masculine Gender are in • Hebrew, and not of the feminine, as sin is. And indeed as we read the words, any man would take them, as spaken of Abel. But when I consider, that in the whole speech of the Lord, nothing is said of Abel, but against Cain's envy and malice, and that there was no reason thus to puff up a wicked man too proud already, and to subject a man better unto him, contrary to the course taken with others, as with Isaac and Ishmael, Jacob and Esau, David and Eliab, &c. I think it unreasonable to expound them of Abel, and therefore do rather prefer that of the most, as if the Lord had said, why dost thou thus senselessly boil with malice in thy breast, against thy Brother, by thy downward look bewraying, that thou meditatest upon some great mischief against him, shere is no just cause of being thus incensed against him, but to turn all thine anger against thyself; because although thou hast brought me an offering, yet thy heart was not right, neither hast thou therefore done well: for hadst thou come with a good and humble heart, thou also shouldst have been respected. But neither hast thou done so, and now instead of turning and craving pardon, which I expected thou shouldst have done, I see thee in thy mind plotting the murthering of thy Brother, which if thou proceed to do, adding so great an evil to thy former wickedness, thy sin will become most hemous, and then vengeance stands ready at thy door to light upon thee, (for thus sin may rightly be said to be at the door, when some great judgment is ready to be sent upon the sinner for the same:) subject this rebellious malice then unto thee in time, and suffer it not to get the dominion over thee, as it will certainly do, and bring thee to confusion, if thou proceedest in this thy mad mood, but quell and keep it under, and so get the dominion over it. For these words, the desire to thee, are by the common use of the Hebrew tongue put to set forth subjection, and the word, rule, is of the second future, which is in the force, of an Imperative. So that according to this sense, I would render the words thus, and they will well bear: therefore subject it unto thee, and do thou rule over it. As for the Masculine Pronoun, which seemeth to hinder from thus expounding it, we may take it, as a neuter, which in the Hebrew is all one, for this thing, and so it may as well have reference to that which Cain was then led by, as to any man.

As for the difference amongst Expositors about these words, shalt thou not be accepted? some understanding them, as if he had said, shall not thy countenance, which is now cast down, be lifted up again, thou being made glad and cheerful? others, shalt thou not be remitted or pardoned? others, shalt thou not be accepted and had in honor also, as well, as thy brother Abel? All these varieties arise from the various significations of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here used, which, as Vatablus noteth, is sometime put for elevare, or attollere, sometime for parcere, or remittere, and sometime for suscipere, or acceptare. The reader may follow which he will, I but I do with Calvin, as we commonly read it, prefer the last. Ferus saith that some expound the words thus, should his desire be subject to thee, and wouldest thou rule over him in matter of conscience, that he should follow thee in doing ill, and be no better then thou art? Now one doubt only more remaineth here, How the Lord spake unto Cain? To this Calvin briefly answereth, even as to Adam before, and as he used to do in those first beginnings, assuming some shape, and so speaking unto men, before that the Ark of the Covenant was set up and the Oracle, at which [Note.] they afterterwards received answers. Let the speech of the Lord to Cain be an admonition to us all, when things succeed better to others, then to ourselves, whereupon we are ready to be discontented, or when we are in any want, or any way dejected, to consider that we have not certainly done well, but there is some evilin us, which must be repented of & reformed, and so we shall be restored again: but if we will not thus consider, our state will still grow worse and worse, greater judgments lie at our door, as who do carry ourselves unworthily in not mastering our unruly affections, but suffering them to get an head over us and to bring us under their dominion.

And Cain talked with Abel his brother, and when they were in the field, &c. If it be rendered word for word, it is, Cain said unto Abel, but it is not set down, what he said, only the vulgar Latin addeth, prodeamus foràs, the Greek hath it, into the field, and so Ambrose readeth it, but in the Hebrew and Chaldee there are no such words. Jerome thinketh, that Cain told him, what the Lord had said unto him, others that he spake flatteringly, till he saw his opportunity to strike him. No man can tell certainly, what he said, and therefore that must be left doubtful. It is most probable, that he spake so unto Abel, as that he might least suspect, what he went about, that taking him at an advantage, he might strike him unawares the more deadly: for when one man will not speak to another, it is plain that he hateth him, wherefore in speaking he feigned to be in love and charity with him, and not in any hatred. Some Hebrews say, that he spake unto him in a quarrelling manner, after which they went to blows, and Abel having overthrown Cain spared him, but he rising up again killed Cain, because it is said, He rose up against him. But this is frivolous, for this phrase doth not always employ one being down before, but simply an hostile invading and setting upon another. Ferus addeth further out of the tradition of the Hebrews, that Cain said to Abel, there is no judgment to come, nor reward in another life, which Abel gainsaying he fell out with him, &c. And no better is that of theirs touching the kind of death, to which he put him, viz. by biting and tearing him with his teeth. It is more likely, that he struck him unawares with some cudgel, and thus shed his blood. And when he had done, Josephus saith, he hid his body, thinking that it should never be known. And to all the wicked maligning, persecuting and slaying the godly, is Cain thus made a ring-leader, it being the [Note.] common case of the godly to expect such usage at the hands of the wicked ever, whilst this world lasteth.

And the Lord said unto Cain, where is Abel thy brother? Luther saith, that some will have this interrogation propounded by his parents, but is plainly made by the Lord, with whom it was no unwonted thing to speak to men of old, good or bad, by a lively voice, as since he hath done by his Word. The Lord showeth himself here to be a discoverer of murder especially, above other sins, and that how secretly soever it be done, it shall not go unpunished. He inquireth not, where Abel was, as being ignorant, but as before of Adam, touching his eating of the forbidden fruit to wring out of him a confession of his own sin. But Cain is so far from this, that he both denieth to know, where Abel was, and also carrieth himself most unreverently towards the Lord, saying, Am I my brothers keeper? Showing himself hereby to be grown to the greatest height of sin that could be. But the Lord suffereth him not to go on thus, in facing out the horrible sin, which he had committed, but bringeth testimony against him, saying, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brothers hloud crieth to me from the earth. In the Hebrew it is, the voice of bloods, whereupon the Hebrews, as one noteth, say that it is meant of the seeds of generation, which should have come from Abel, for these being thus prevented cried. But he saith better, who expoundeth it by the drops, that are in blood, everyone of which crieth against a murderer. A voice is ascribed to blood-shed by a Prosopopoeia, to set forth, how that, when sin is committed, [Note.] and no sound is heard thereof anymore amongst men, yet there is a loud cry made hereby in the ears of God for revenge. The stones and the timber out of the wall crieth against him, that buildeth his house by deceit, and the sin of the Sodomites committed without noise in the dark, cried up to heaven. When a man is dead by wicked hands, so that he can speak no more, yet his blood crieth, especially the blood of God's Saints, which is most dear in the sight of God: For he careth for them not only living but dead, which may be a comfort against the fear of death any way.

Now therefore thou art cursed from the earth, &c. In that God pronounceth Cain cursed from the earth, but not from heaven, one saith, that some hold, that this was thus spoken to keep Cain's posterity from despair: but the simple meaning is rather, as others have it, the earth was polluted by bloodshed, and therefore the Lord would that Cain should first have his punishment from the earth, this one act of murder so tainting the ground to him, as that he should toil in his husbandry, as his calling was, but have little store of fruit, and this should be a perpetual punishment unto him. But Chrysostom and others seem to make these two distinct punishments, one upon his soul, cursed art thou of all upon the earth, de terra: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 setting forth others upon earth also above all whom he was accursed, as the Serpent before above all beasts, to whom he was most like, first, in that he sought out of envy by fraud to destroy Abel, a most happy man for that faith and piety in him, as the Serpent sought to overthrow Eve being in a most blessed condition. 2 In that he was to this end an instrument of the Devil, and his first instrument amongst men, as the Serpent amongst beasts: the other punishment upon his outward estate, it shall not henceforth yield • nto thee her strength, that is, any great, but a poor increase. And unto these is a third added in his body, a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be on the earth, thou shalt go sighing and trembling, saith Chrysostom, because thou hast abused thy bodily strength unto so foul a murder, that others seeing the trembling of thy members, and thy continual most sorrowful life far worse then death, may forever fear to do the like. But there are two words used, one from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifying to wander, the other from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifying to flee, so that out of an inward terror rising from a guilty conscience, he should always be unquiet and fear, either when he saw any man, or was solitary. For simply to wander and to flee is no curse, it being the common condition of the godly, but they having God everywhere with them, are still joyous and comfortable; Cain having God against him in all places, could not but be ever full of horror: a good conscience in them is a continual feast, an evil conscience in him a continual rack, yea when he had built a city and dwelt therein. Thus Calvin. So that the translation of the Septuagint followed by Chrysost. trembling and sighing, setteth not forth so much the proper meaning of the words, as the effect of the curse inwardly. By Cain's reply, Thou hast driven me from the earth, it seemeth that to be cursed from the earth is to be restless in any part of it. Rupertus notably maketh a comparison here betwixt Cain killing Abel, and the Jews killing Christ. For as the earth received Abel's blood, so the intelligible earth receives Christ's blood, that is, the faithful; and as Abel, blood cried, so Christ's blood speaketh, for it speaketh better things, then the blood of Abel, for that spake to accuse one, this to excuse many; as Cain tilled the ground, but had none increase, so the Jews til the spiritual ground of the Law and Prophets without profit; and as he was made a vagabond, so are they to this day. Adam was not thus accursed, for to him, Cursed only, is the earth, saith the Lord, for thy sake, but to Cain, Cursed art thou, &c. A man being deceived and sinning, may by repentance yet be exempt from God's curse, but the malicious, blood-thirsty and deceiving are so involved in the curse, as that they are seldom ever exempted again.

And Cain said to the Lord, My punishment is greater then I can bear. v. 14. Behold, thou hast driven me this day, &c. These words are read three ways, first, by the Hebrews, as an interrogation, Is my sin greater, then can be pardoned? 2 In the Septuagint and vulgar Latin, My sin is greater, then can be pardoned. 3 My punishment, &c. As before word for word out of the Hebrew. For here is no word signifying pardoning, but bearing, and the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 translated, iniquity, is by Pagninus and others skillful in the Hebrew tongue rendered punishment, which it more properly signifieth. This is generally understood by all expositors, as the voice of one despairing: for although it should be rendered by the word iniquity, and so he be taken, as confessiing his sin, as Chrysostom will have it, yet in that he saith it is greater, then can be pardoned, he showeth his desperation▪ It is somewhat strange, that Chrysostom finding a confession here to be made, answereth that question, Why then was he not pardoned, by saying, that the sentence was past, and therefore it was now too late for him to confess, as it will be for the wicked at the day of judgment, or being in Hell. For whilst a man liveth, no time is too late to confess and repent, but only after this life ended, we may rather answer with Calvin, he was not pardoned, because the horror of the punishment wrung his confession from him and sorrow, as from Judas, and not the sense of the foulness of his sin, and therefore he was not truly penitent. But this be said, if we read it by the word iniquity, which also the Hebrew word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth. But if we render it by punishment as we do, and as is most proper here, and is confirmed by his expressing of himself in the next words, thou hast driven me this day from the face of the earth, &c. And whoso shall find me, shall kill me. His despairing is, that he made no confession of his sin, nor put up any petition for pardon, as who thought himself altogether given over of God to perish forever, without all deliverance by his mercy.

Behold, thou hast driven me out this day, &c. Here Cain expostulateth with the Lord, saith Calvin, as if he were dealt too hardly withal, thou allowest me no place upon earth to rest quietly in, and thou art angry with me, which is meant by saying, and from thy face shall I be bid, so that thou wilt take no further care of me to protect me from danger, and thus I shall go in continual hazard of my life, always perplexed, affrighted, and troubled through the disquiet of my conscience; so that it were far easier for me now to be stricken, and to die presently by thine hand. If it be demanded of whom Cain speaketh when he saith, everyone, that findeth me, shall slay me? Ambrose answereth, he meaneth either the beasts of the field, or his own Parents; because there were at that time none other upon earth, but they. But others think better, that Eve was not without many other children, by that time Cain was grown up to be a man, and this murder was committed; which may be probably thought, not to have been much before the birth of Sheth, which was Anno 130, Gen. 5. 3. because he was called thus, as put in the stead of Abel, whom Cain slue: so that he was (doubtless) the next male, that Eve had after this, unto which it could not be long in those days, wherein the Lord made women extraordinarily fruitful for the peopling of the World, and therefore of some of the men upon earth, of whom there were many, it is rather thought that he speaketh this; but it may be understood of the beasts also, seeing all things are enemies to them, with whom God is at enmity. But Ambrose observeth one thing here very well, that Cain is solicitous for his bodily life, and to think of losing [Note.] that much troubleth him, but for his soul he taketh no thought, so wicked men are greatly affected with outward things, but they are senseless of spiritual, their minds are never exercised in considering, what shall become of their souls another day.

And the Lord said unto him, he that killeth Cain, vengeance seven-fold shall be taken on him, &c. Why the Lord would not that Cain should be presently killed, hath been already touched, his will was, that he should live such a life for example, as was worse, than any death in toil and labor without profit, being thus forced to remove from place to place, having never any rest, but travail and inward vexation and disquiet, and fears for his horrible murder committed, sighing and crying out, as Chrysostom saith, and giving warning to all others to take heed of doing the like. But Calvin holdeth not this to be the genuine reason, but because the Lord would not have any man at his own will dare to kill him, or any other, as he had done Abel, lest thus men should have grown to an habit of blood-shedding in those first beginnings, which would have tended much to the wasting of mankind. For although afterwards, Gen. 9. the Lord maketh a law for the killing of those, that kill, viz. by the Magistrate armed with his Authority, yet now he would not give to any a commission so to do, and if any without authority from him should do it, vengeance seven-fold should be taken of him. For mine own part, I can see no such difference between the state of the world in Noah's time, when there were but eight persons, and of these times, when there were probably many more, that now men should be altogether inhibited from doing execution upon a murderer, but then commanded it. There must then certainly be somewhat else in it, and that is, the Lord would not have Cain killed, not in favor of him, or that by this charge touching him, men might learn to fear to put any to death, that should commit murder afterwards, but that living still in such a case he might be a continuaal living admonition to all to take heed of murder above all sins. For the sevenfold vengeance here threatened, because it seemeth strange, that one act should have more than one punishment, and an act of killing the wicked, who had shed innocent blood, Expositor are much troubled about giving the sense hereof. Some say, the words are to be divided thus, whosoever killeth Cain, there being a stop made here by an Aposiopesis, to be thus supplied; shall be punished, and then they will have the next words to be spoken of Cain, a seven-fold revenge shall be taken upon him, according to his seven-fold sinning by envy, by flattery, by plotting murder, by murthering, by doing the first murder, by murthering a Brother, & by lying to the Lord, when he was called in question therefore; thus Chrysostom numbereth them, but not in this sense: others that are for this, number them thus. 1 He sacrificed ill. 2 He envied his Brother. 3 He contemned God's admonition. 4 He cunningly plotted his death. 5 He acted it. 6 He denied it by lying. 7 He despaired of mercy.

Others read the latter words thus, Septimus punietur, so Symmachus. Whereupon it is gathered, that Cain should not be slain, till the seventh generation from him; which was in a Son of Lamech, of whom he is said to have been slain: others, as Calvin noteth, refer it to the flood, which was in the seventh generation. But thus to expound, is rather to darken, then to give light to the holy Scriptures. The speech is plain, he that killeth Cain, and not Cain, shall have vengeance taken on him sevenfold, that is, shall be most severely punished, the number of seven being usual to set forth many, not because Cain was not worthy to die, but because it was against God's will, that he should be yet taken away, by whom others might be deterred from murder. For when God maketh an express decree, for any man to go against it, in what kind loever it be, it is intolerable: yet some say, it may also be otherwise understood, that he shall deliver Cain from the seven punishments at once inflicted upon him for his seven sins before named: but this is plainly against the sense; because God's care is altogether here to keep Cain from being killed, unto which what force could there be in saying, that who so killed him, should exempt him from many punishments at once? Chrysostom saith, that a seven-fold punishment is set for him, that should kill Cain, because in taking him away from bearing the punishments laid upon him for his sin, he made himself guilty of the same seven-fold sin, and so was worthy himself to bear a seven-fold revenge, which reason is not to be disallowed.

Therefore he that killeth Cain, the word therefore is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 compounded of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as some will have it, signifying not so, or it signifieth surely as Vatablus rendereth it. And God set a mark upon Cain, &c. what this mark was divers have conjectured diversely, some of the Hebrews will have it to be an horn fixed upon his forehead, others a Dogg, that ran everywhere before him, others a Letter of his name, wherewith he was branded, others a truculent aspect, and others a continual trembling, as Munster relateth: but all these are vain; because it is only a mark, but not expressed what. It was therefore some outward visible mark set upon him conspicuous to all that looked upon him, and admonitory to refreine from laying hands upon him, but undeterminable in particular what it was, as Ferus saith a mark making him infamous amongst men forever. It is a fond conceit, that Josephus uttereth here, that God being pacified with Cain's sacrifice would have his life spared, and as fond is that of some others, that he was spared to repent; for this is against that which was said before of his case differing from that of Adam, and for his sacrifice, it is plainly said, that the Lord gave no respect unto it.

Cain therefore went out from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in the Land of Nod. As he had said, from thy face shall I be hid, so Cain now having received his judgment, goeth from before the face of the Lord, that is, not so, as if God did not see him anymore in the place, to which he went, for all places and things are manifest to his sight, but from those parts, where God used to appear and to talk with men, and in going from hence, he went also from under his protection to lead a miserable fugitives life in other places of the earth, according to the doom upon him; and it is not to be thought, but although he became thus, as it were, a banished man, yet he preferred thus to go away, avoiding the presence of an angry Judge; thus almost also Calvin. Ferus saith, he went from his Parents and their family, where the Word of God was, which he could no more endure, and so he went from the presence of God, for where the Word of God is, there is God, or he thought happily, although the earth was there cursed to him, yet in other places it was not, and therefore he might till it more profitably elsewhere: And dwelt in the Land of Nod, in the vulgar Latin: Habitavit profugus in terra; he dwelt a fugitive upon earth, for Nod, saith Jerome signifieth, profugus, vagus, instabilis, & sedis incertae. But it is most likely, that the place, where he kept wandering up and down, was hence called Nod; because all places come to have names upon some occasions in time, being before not so named. Josephus saith, that he built a Town called Naid, after that he had long wandered in many parts, being a most wicked man, and falling to new divices to cozen and beguile other men, whereby he was enriched. And thus the judgment of God took effect upon him, the same word being used to name the tract of ground, where he wandered, that was used in the sentence against him, from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to flee. He had not then any certain abode a long time, his dwelling being but a keeping within a certain compass, wherein he was always going and coming: that place at length attaining the name of Nod there from, on the East from Eden, not from Edom, as Musculus saith, some Greek copies have it, but erroneously, who also well observeth, that the way to be of an uncertain and unstable life always turmoiled and tossed about [Note.] without comfort, is to be wicked, and so out of God's protection, and to do; as one hidden from the Lord, but to live as in his presence, righteously and holily, is contrariwise to be in a firm and most stable condition.

And Cain knew his wife, who conceived and bare Hanoch, and he built a Cily and called it by the name of his Son Hanoch. Here it may be demanded, how any woman durst adventure to marry with Cain being so accursed? Ans. It is most likely, that he was married before, although it be not mentioned, and so he took her in his travail along with him if it be demanded, where he had a wife, seeing there were yet no women that we read of: it is answered, Adam had many children both Sons and Daughters, which are not spoken of, and one of these Daughters being his Sister as the necessities of those times required he had to wife. But why is his generation set forth, before any other, that was better? To this Luther answereth, that it is done so, because the wicked are before the Godly in this world: first, is that which is natural, and then that which is spiritual. But Cain being the eldest Son of Adam, order requireth to speak of his generation first, as the generation of Esau is afterwards spoken of before Jacob's. But whether was this the first Son of Cain, Answ. Happily he had other children before, although they be not spoken of: for the purpose of Moses being only to set forth his line in one to Lamech, concerning whom he had some remarkable things to write, he passeth over all others. For the name, Hanoch, it signifieth to instruct, or to season, this Son being so called; because he was instructed and seasoned with conditions most like his Father. But how doth this History agree with his curse, he is condemned to be a fugitive and yet buildeth a City first of all others? Answ. It is to be thought indeed, that he first built a City and houses to dwell in, the more Godly dwelling in Arbours, or Cottages in the open Fields, as who were not afraid of hurt, having God on their side, but this wretch being full of fear devised the building of a defensed City, first for his greater safety, and happily, that therein, as Josephus saith, he might have all his wicked brood together, to teach them, and to send them out to exercise Robberies upon others. But what inhabitants could he have to put in this City, or builders to build it, if Hanoch were his first Son, and soon after his birth, he fell to building of it, because there seem to have been no more now with him, then his wife and this child? To this St. Augustine answereth, that it is not necessary to hold, that he was his first, although none other be spoken of before; because many are by Moses passed over in silence, which belonged not to the course of his History, and we know, that sometimes the younger have been most beloved, as Joseph by Jacob, and so though this were youngest, Cain for his love to him specially might call his City after his name. But it being granted, that he was his first-borne after his banishment, yet it is not necessary to hold, that he fell immediately after his birth to building, but certain hundreds of years after, in which time his posterity might become most numerous. Thus Augustine. And it is no wonder, that Cain, before he died, had people enough, that came of him to replenish a City, seeing Jacob had in less then 400 years 600000 that came of him, and in latter times, man's life growing much shorter: Ludovicus Vives writing upon Augustine de. civit. Dei saith, that in Spain there was an old man, that lived to see an 100 Housholds, that came of him. Here we may see, which was the first City in the world, viz. Hanochia, and that as clothes, so Cities are Monuments of sin. And as Cain built the first City, so Romulus, who like another Cain slue his Brother Remus, built Rome, the chief City of the World. The Greeks held, that Cecropia built by Cecrope was the first built City in the world, and the Egyptians, that Thebes was the first, but erroneously, for the one was not, till the time of Moses, and the other was built by Misraim the Grand-child of Noah. One Annianus saith, that this City stood near the Mount Libanus on the East of Damascus, and was the habitation of Giants, the ruins whereof remained to his time, the Inhabitants thereabouts saying, that it was Cain's City. The vain glory of Cain amongst other vices of his did not a little hereby appear, that by calling this City after his Sons name, and by building it, he sought immortal [Note.] fame to his posterity, but this is a poor honor to such as are appointed to perdition, to have their glory blazoned upon earth, when they are in the midst of hellish torments.

And unto Hanoch was born Irad, &c. v. 19. And Lamech took to him two wives, Adah, and Zillah, &c.

The posterity of Cain is here only lightly touched unto Lamech, who was the sixth from him, and then somewhat is spoken only of his sons, in whose time it is supposed the flood came, when his stock was quite cut off, and therefore his line is drawn no further, but haste is made to speak more largely of those, that were better, both how long they lived, at what age they had each one the son nominated, and unto one son still is added a mention of more, both sons and daughters, none of which is done touching Cain and his issue, to show in what little account the wicked are with the Lord. Touching Lamech, the Hebrews say, that before the flood it was a common thing for a man to have two wives, one for the procreation of children, who so soon, as she had conceived, was put apart in widows array to live solitarily, till she was delivered, and the other for pleasure, who was gorgeously apparrelled, and had something given her to drink to keep her from conceiving, that she might always keep her husband company, and such was Zillah taking her name for this from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifying a shadow, becuse she lived continually under the shadow of her husbands wing. But this is vain and confuted by this very text, because as the one, so the other is said to have borne children. It is noted by some of ours here, that Lamech was the first, who sinned by Polygamy, contrary to God's first Ordinance of joining one only woman with one man, his licentiousness and wickedness appearing the more hereby, so likewise Ferus. But whether Polygamy in elder times were a sin or no, is much disputed amongst the learned, being by some defended, and by others impugned. Peter Martyr argueth strongly for the defense of the lawfulness of Polygamy, alleging Chrysostom, and Jerome, who held it tolerable in times past, and Augustine, who argued, that it was neither against nature, nor against any law, nor against custom, and that holy men were not led unto it by carnal lust, but by a desire to increase mankind. And even in these Evangelical times he allegeth Socrates, relating, that Valentinianus a godly Emperor had two wives together, neither was he reproved by any of the Fathers therefore; and of Charles the Great it is reported, that he had four wives besides concubines. But, whatsoever may be said for Polygamy of old, it is strange, that any living by rule should be so far overseen, as to use or tolerate it under the Gospel, wherein virginity is rather commended to all, that can contain, and such as cannot, are only allowed every man to have his own wife, not wives, and that it was an impeachment to have more at once appeareth, because Bishops and Deacons are to be chosen not from amongst the Polygamous, but such as had only one wife a man, which if it had been no sin to be Polygamous, should not doubtless have been so ordered. And howsoever there are arguments brought for Polygamy, yet there are grounds, that may seem more firm, that it was never lawful, as from the first institution, not two but one woman only was made and brought unto Adam, whereupon see, what is said, Mal. 2. 15. And Tremellius standeth firmly for a law against having two wives at once, Levite. 18. 18. Thou shalt not take a wife to her sister, which may as well be rendered, one wife to another, for so also the Hebrew word will bear. Whereas the holy Patriarchs then may seem to have offended in this kind, and David and many more; It is answered, that the Lord dispensed with them, as for other reasons, so for signification, as Justin Martyr argueth touching Jacob in particular. Unto which we may add, that one special reason might be for the increase of posterity, whilst the Church consisted of one only people, that is, till Christ's coming, that the innumerable increase promised to Abraham might thus with the more celerity be made. But now all people being God's Church, all are to be held to the first instituon, Matth. 19. 4.

And Ada bare unto him Jabal, he was the father of such as dwell in tents, &c. Jacob is called the father, because the author of Tent-making and of removing Tents and cattle, from one place to another, that still they might have fresh pasture, and be brought in at night, and so prosper the better, and be kept together with the more facility, which tended to the great benefit of the owners. It seemeth by this, that Abel and others, who had kept and fed cattle before, had not yet devised the setting up of Tents, wherein they might harbor, that looked unto them, which was a great discommodity, both they and their cattle being the more exposed to dangers, and to many hazards. Wherefore when this was invented, it was worth the recounting, & by whom, as also by whom music, and working in brass and iron, were invented, as in the next words, viz. by the posterity of Cain, that howsoever they were a graceless generation, yet we may see, that God did not send into and maintain such in the world, but for some external good to the world. For the skill of ordering cattle rightly, and curing their diseases, which Jabal doubtless had, is very beneficial to the Common-wealth, and the music of Jubal next spoken of was afterwards translated to the worship and service of God, and brazen and iron works are for divers uses most necessary, of which Tubal-Cain the next son of Lamech is said to have been the author. The knowledge of Astronomy, of Philosophy, and of all the Mathematics also, whence came it first unto us, but from the Heathen. So that we may make use of the wits and inventions even of wicked men for our good in this world. And it is to be noted, that inventions tending to profit are first, and then those that that tended to delight, Tent-making and the care of cattle is first, and then Music. Ferus turneth all this another way, that necessity made these men artificers, because they could not have such benefit by the ground. And he will have the first, the author of Covetousness, the second of Luxury, the third of War, and the fourth of pride in apparel. Tubal-Cain the third son of Lamech, instead of a brother happily coming at the same birth, as Jabal had, is said to have had a sister, named Naamah, fair, as Ada before had her name from neatness and fineness, here then is some intimation of the beauty of the daughters of men more plainly spoken of afterwards, Gen. 6. 2. The Rabbin's say, that all the world were in love with Naamah, and that of her were borne evil spirits.

And Lamach said unto his wives Ada and Zilla, hear my voice (ye wives of Lamech) &c. For I have slain, or I would slay, a man, to or in my wounding, and a young man, to or in my hurt, if Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy times seven fold. This passage, because of the abrupt bringing of it in, nothing being before told of that which Lamech did, is most difficult, and by some thought inexplicable. The obscurity of it hath certainly bred great [ 1] difference amongst the Learned, about the expounding thereof. Many understanding it of an old tradition amongst the Hebrews, that Lamech was much addicted to hunting, but growing old and somewhat dim-sighted, he used to take his son Tubal-Cain with him, to espy the wild beasts, which he might shoot at, going on in which course, it happened upon a time▪ that Tubal-Cain seeing something russeling in a bush, which he supposed to have been a wild beast, directed his father to shoot at it, which he having done and killed it, found it to be Cain, that was lurking there, whereupon he was moved against the young man, that he beat him with his bow, till he had killed him. Many, I say, grounding upon this, expound that which is here said thereby, as if Lamech did in thus saying, judge himself worthy not only of seven fold revenge, as the Lord had threatened, for his killing of Cain, but of a far greater, in that he had thereunto added, the murthering of Tubal-Cain also. This Jerome speaketh of, as a thing received from antiquity. This, saith he, is the opinion of our Ancestors, that they thought Cain to have been slain of Lamech in the seventh generation, but not willingly, as we have read in a certain Hebrew book. Thus also Lyranus, Rupertus, Cajetan, &c. Now I confess, if it were certain, that Lamech did thus kill Cain, I should soon be satisfied for the meaning of these words. But it soundeth like a devised tale, whereupon Calvin, and Fagius call it putidam fabulam; because Cain did not so flee the presence of men, till Lamech time, as to consort with the beasts by shrouding himself under bushes and thickets, for he built a city, and therefore without doubt he dwelt in it: again, if Lamech the sixth from him were so old now, how could Cain be alive to that time? Moreover, there is no certain credible author of this story: for whereas Josephus is alleged by Tostatus, he speaketh not of it, but only, that Lamech had 77 sons by his two wives, &, happily conceiving, that in the 7 th genration vengeance should be taken upon Cain, which was now come, he called his wives and said thus unto them. Others therefore hold, that Lamech slue not Cain, but [ 2] only some other young man, whom he calleth a man, & a young man, of w ch he made confession and was truly penitent therefore, thus giving sentence against himself, and escaping all revenge at God's hands; thus Theodoret. And from this Chrysostom doth not much differ, who saith, that Lamech having done wickedly in secret, was touched in conscience therefore, and so voluntarily accuseth and condemneth himself, as worthy of a greater punishment, by far, then Cain, because Cain slue but one man, he two, Cain had no such warning, but he was warned by Cain's example, and therefore he saith, that he had slain a man, and a young man to his hurting and wounding, because the hurt of it should redound to himself, so much, saith Chrysostom, did he profit by that, whereby God intended others should take warning, namely by his making Cain an example to all Murderers. But of the foresaid History of Lamech his killing Cain, and another, he saith nothing. To this I cannot yet subscribe; because the whole generation of Cain, for ought that we read, was wicked, and if Lamech had been better, Moses doubtless would have given us some hint thereof for the comfort and instruction of posterity in future times, as he doth of the goodness of Enos, v. 26. Certainly so famous a thing at this time should not have thus been involved in obscurity, Moreover, if this should be taken for a penitent confessing, why may not Judas also be said to have confessed his sin penitently? this man confessed to his wives, he to the high Priests, neither to God. Lastly, the words will not well bear any such sense, If vengeance be taken of Cain seven-fold, of Lamech seventy seven. Now vengeance was not taken on Cain seven-fold, but threatened to the killer of Cain; and therefore to argue from vengeance upon the killer of Cain, to Lamech a killer of others doth not agree, but rather to the killers of Lamech for his murders. Soudas reporteth, that Lamech slue [ 3] the two Brethren of Enoch most Godly men, and therefore he thus censured himself, and was accordingly most grievously punished. Some Hebrews again expound them another way, as an Interrogation, Have I slain a man, [ 4] or a young man, as Cain did? And if not, certainly, if seven-fold vengeance shall be taken upon the killer of Cain, seventy times seven-fold shall be taken upon him, that killeth me, which, they say he spake to his wives complaining of the violence and slaughters made by his sons, now that they had Iron Instruments, whereupon they said, surely it would for this come to pass, that men would seek out the Father of such children to slay him. But the words are not Interrogative, but affirmative. There is another Exposition of Calvin, which seemeth to me to come nearest to the truth of any [ 5] Expositions hitherto brought, who understandeth these words, as a challenge, as if Lamech in ostentation of his manhood should have said; Do not think, that ye have a coward to your Husband, for I do so little fear the face of any man, as that I could wish now, that I had a man, yea a young and most valiant man to encounter with me, for so I would kill him at my peril, whatsoever should come of it. He saith moreover, that it is most likely that his wives first dealt with him about his cruelty, of which many complained, seeking by gentle persuasions to win him to more mildness: but he was so far from being won hereby, that he thus breathed forth his cruelty more and more. Some, saith he, by these words, in my wound, and in my hurt, understand, as if he had said. If I were hurt and wounded, I would kill, &c. And therefore much more being well and sound: but he rather preferreth this, If any man should hurt and wound me, and thus provoke me, I would kill him, whatsoever he were. As for the following words, if Cain be avenged sevenfold, &c▪ He expoundeth this, as a mocking at God's judgment, as who feared no revenge to be taken on him, if he should commit murder. There are [ 6] other Expositions brought also, as if Lamechs wives denied to company with him either for his ferity, or for the judgment, which they thought, was now at hand, upon him and his Family being the seventh generation, as they understood the threatening before uttered against Cain: thus Fagius relateth. But not to stand about repeating or confuting anymore interpretations; I think that of Calvin the soundest, if it be a little thus supplied. The third Son of Lamech was spoken of immediately before this, as the author of Iron and Brazen works. Lamech therefore being now furnished with weapons made by him, cometh in to his wives, vaunting himself like a profane man, as if he had said: Being thus provided, I would now see the man, that durst do me any hurt, or give me any wound: for so I should soon be avenged on him with the shedding of his dearest blood, be he what he may be, a man, yea, a young man, and most strong, and in thus doing, I would not fear, but God would take my part much more, then he did Cain's: for he having killed his innocent Brother Abel, that did him no wrong, was yet by God defended, who threatened seven-fold revenge upon any, that should kill him, and therefore, if any should attempt the like against me, he would lay much sorer judgments upon him; because this my killing of men should be upon injury offered me, whereas his was not. But neither do I think, that Lamech was serious in saying thus, but spake it in the way of deriding, all fear of God being cast from before his eyes. And thus, as this race began wickedly, so the Lord would have us take notice, that it still continued, and was all not long after swept away with the flood, when they had filled the Earth with cruelty, and other races by mingling with them in Marriage, came to be likewise corrupted, and to be associates with them in their wickedness, all but Noah and his family. And thus the words, if Cain be avenged seven-fold; that is, vengeance seven-fold, shall be taken for Cain, for Lamech seventy and seven-fold, do most aptly agree. That we shall, not need curiously to insist upon these last words, but by them understand a manifold more grievous revenge, is plainly by another like place, where the Lord Jesus being asked, Should I forgive my Brother seven times, answereth, I say not unto thee seven times, but seventy times seven, that is, many more times by far, so that it is not worth the speaking of, that is laid hold upon by some out of Josephus, telling that Lamech had 77 Sons, as if herein it were alluded to them. Or if this pleaseth not, because the Verb is in the Preterperfect tense; I have killed: we may with Ferus say, that having been a Murderer, he was now tormented in conscience for it, as Judas, and so breaketh out into these speeches despairingly, as Cain uttered words of despair before.

And Adam knew his wife again, and she bare a Son, & called his name Seth, &c. all agree that although no mention be made of other children between Abel and Seth, yet Eve had many others, before this: for Seth is said to have been born Anno 130. of Adams age, all which time certainly was not spent, when it is to be thought, that mankind was most fruitful, without issue. But after that Cain had slain Abel, it is most likely, that Seth was the first, that was borne to supply that great loss, and was the first of that line, of which Christ came, whom Moses chiefly respected in his Genealogies; whereupon he had his name Seth, signifying a foundation, or one put, according to Fagius. And he is rightly said to have been given in Abel's stead, because he was a most godly man, as Josephus, writeth, giving himself to study and learning, soaring up even to the knowledge of the course of the Stars, and such as he was, were his children after him, who wrote upon two Pillars such things, as they had by long study found out, the one being made of Brick, the other of Stone, which last, he saith, continued in the Land of Syria to his time, and Soudas saith, that he for his virtue was called a God, whereupon it is said, Gen. 6. of his posterity, that the children of God saw the daughters of men, that they were fair, &c.

And to Seth was borne a son, and he called his name Enos, then men began to call upon the name of the Lord. In the Septuagint's translation it is, He began to call on the name of the Lord, and so in the vulgar Latin, but thus in the Hebrew and the Chaldee, and doubtless, not the act of one man, but of more is here noted being instructed by that one Seth, and it is, as if he had said, When Seth began to have children and had a family, he expressed his piety by this, that when as others generally were profane, he yet set up the worship and service of God in his family. Cain and his posterity were wicked, others not mentioned, that came of Adam and Eve were not famous for any goodness in them, and therefore it is likely, that they are not mentioned: so that between the death of Abel and Seth’s birth and growing up to have a Family there coming a long space of time, wherein the Worship of the Lord was neglected by Adams children, for of him Moses speaketh not, it is worthily observed here, as a thing to be noted, that now Religion, which was in a manner hitherto banished, began to be put in practice again. There cannot then [Note.] be a Seth, that is, a godly man, but he is known by the exercise of prayer in his family, he that maketh this no part of his care, is rather after Cain, then after Seth, and so unworthy to be member of Christ's Church. One saith, that now first, God was called upon by the name Jehovah, being not called upon by this name before this time, but this is frivolous. The Chaldee Paraphrase, for beginning to call upon the Name of the Lord, readeth it, profaning the invocation of the Lord's Name, which some think, was by turning the true worship of God into the worshipping of idols, so saith Fagius. Maimonides saith, that they worshipped the stars, and made Images to them, and sware by them, and forgot God, and that Enos was entangled with this error. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 indeed signifieth either to begin, or to profane, or to kill, but when Moses is speaking of the Godly, to hold, that he telleth of polluting God's worship, is absurd, and therefore this is to be rejected by the judgment of most, and the other of beginning holy devotion, to be embraced. The name Enos signifieth a miserable and calamitous man; Seth by calling his son so, presaging the condition of the godly in this world, they are full of calamities and miseries always in this life. So Musculus.




CHAP. V.

THis is the book of the generations of Adam, in the day that God created him, in the likeness of God made he him. Moses having done with Cain and his wicked race, now returneth to Seth, a son virtuous and godly given to Adam instead of Abel, concerning whom and his father Adam, ye and all his posterity he saith, that having lived so many years they died, that the justice of God might appear in striking with death, as he had threatened it upon the eating of the forbidden fruit, whereby it appeareth, that as Adam, so all his posterity was guilty of that sin, as is further declared, Rom. 5.

Of the death of Cain and his posterity nothing is said, nor how long any of them lived, because God had cast him and his out, and so seemed no more to regard either their living or dying, both being as it were, of Foreigners, and not of the Lord's Domestickes, of whom only a register is kept, to show, that they belong unto him, and that he never doth nor will forget them. Moreover, by his setting down the years of each man's life we may easily gather the years of the world from the Creation to the flood, and because he goeth in one race only, which continued even then, all others being omitted, thereby measuring the times, he did it certainly to intimate the promised seed to come of that race, who together with his only shall continue forever, when others shall be destroyed, as Luther partly noteth. This is the book, or catalogue of generations from Adam, and so forth. Now he is said again to have been made at the first in God's likeness, to prepare to that, which here followeth of his begetting a son in his own likeness, and image, for I doubt not, but as Adam is said to be after God's likeness for his Lordship and authority over all creatures upon earth, he being, as another God amongst them, and such an one, as in whom God's glory did most shine, for which he is said by the Apostle to be the image & glory of God's. So Sheth is said to be after Adams own image and likeness for the dominion, that he should have after him above all others, & for that excellency found in him, much like to that in Adam before his fall, the Image of God, which is in righteousness and holiness, which was decayed by Adams fall, being by grace in this man much repaired. For when it is said, he begat a son in his own likeness, it is not meant, that he was such by the power of generation, for by nature and generation, since the fall, we are all corrupt, but he begat a son, whom God sanctified so by his grace, that he was in Adams own image, that is, holy and full of excellent graces, as he was by his first creation, although not in perfection, as Adam himself never was holy, as God, in perfection, in whose Image he is said to have been made, but so as man fallen is capable. Now being such, he saith not yet, that he begat one in God's image, but in his own, because mortal, whereas this was one thing, in which Adams likeness unto God at the first stood, that he was immortal, but now both he and all his must needs die from the worst to the best, because the very best is a sinner. To this effect Musculus having scanned divers expositions of this similitude concludeth, he was in Adams similitude, because a man endued with reason, and Lord of the earth, and because of sin obnoxious to death and corruption, as Adam was. But neither he nor Calvin seem to favor this, that he is said to have been in Adams likeness for his holiness, or peculiar excellency, but as other men commonly were, yea some will rather have this image to be in sin and corruption. But this is most improbable, that Moses being about to set forth an holy strain, in beginning with the first thereof, would begin with his corruption by sin: for this certainly had been a more fit entrance for the history of Cain, or of some other wicked generation. This similitude then, as I said at the first, stood in a certain peculiar excellency of Sheth, which in Adam was a likeness unto God: for I cannot see otherwise, to what end that of Adams being made after God's image, should here be first repeated, but that the next man spoken of, as like unto him, that was like unto God, might be understood to be like unto God also, so far forth as a mortal man, bearing about with him flesh and blood can be. Moreover, it seemeth by the joy, that our first parents had in Seth given them in Abel's stead, a godly son, and by their good educating of their children, teaching them to serve God, and to offer sacrifice, as before was shown, and because Adam is reckoned by Luke as one of the holy line, of whom Christ came, that Adam, although sin entered to all by him, yet was himself a faithful and holy person, and therefore Seth is said to be like unto him, a man truly having an earthly body, as he had, according to the last words, Vers. 2. He called their name Adam, Red Earth, but as he was like unto him herein, so he was in the better part, the heart and the mind also, and such a son, as he desired to have, as from whom in his posterity only mankind should after the flood be propagated again, as all were at the first propagated from him alone. For if Adam had continued still in his corruption, and had not been sanctified by God's grace, there had been a time when the holy Seed Christ was preached altogether in vain, forsomuch as God by speaking of him, preacheth him so soon as man was found but to have sinned, and the Devil must have had some for his before the Lord, and so all ordinary means of converting, and sanctifying others should have failed, whereupon the wicked might have had some color to open their mouths in defense of their wickedness, because there was no teaching or praying or means to make them better. If any shall marvel, that Abel was not likewise said before to be in Adams own image, forsomuch as he was godly also; I answer, that because he was soon cut off, Moses maketh no large relation of him, but now coming to one, whose seed continued from generation to generation, in prosecuting whose history in his posterity he intended to be large, he setteth down in the entrance of his history such circumstances, as might make for his further commendation, not that Abel was not such, but because his short abode here required none other, then a short narration. And so I have done with the third verse also, before I come at it upon occasion of God's Image, wherein Adam is said to have been made. So that now in these three there is nothing more to be expounded, but that it is said, ver. 2. as is nowhere else, he called the name of the male and female Adam, but it was, he saith in the day, that he created them, in alluding to Gen. 1. 27. before that the History of the woman's creation is particularly set down: for when man was first made, although he be said to be both male and female, yet there is none other name used but Adam, till that the woman was separated and distinguished and built up by herself, thus having the name of woman by Adam given unto her. For one hundred and thirty years of Adams age here mentioned, the Septuagint read two hundred and thirty, and in the years of others they do much differ also from the Hebrew, in so much that whereas by this catalogue of ages it appeareth, that from the beginning to the flood there were but 1656 years, according to their reckoning there were 2242 years. Saint Augustine discussing this at large, and noting, that for five generations together the difference of the Septuagint's is only in the first number of years, before the birth of a son, they commonly making them many more, then the Hebrew doth, but the years reckoned after, they make so many fewer, so that the whole age of each man being brought together, from the first to the last, agreeth with the whole reckoning in the Hebrew, but in the sixth generation and others this order is not kept, he, I say, noting this, saith, that there was fault in such, as at the first copyed out the Septuagint's translation, who not thinking the number of years material, wrote them out carelessly, and for the five former generations, he thinketh, that the Septuagint's themselves ordered them so, that it might be thought the more probable, that those men lived so long, seeing everyone was 200. or near 200. years old, before that they were grown up and able for generation, supposing, that if they had put it down otherwise, according to the Hebrew, it would have been held incredible, that any man should live so many hundreds of years. And to this of Augustine do I subscribe; because the original copy must needs always be truest, and translations must be corrected thereby, especially seeing it is the complaint of many, that the Septuagint's translations do much differ amongst themselves, and it is generally confessed, that there is not any pure copy of theirs to be had at this day. But at the great number of years, to which Adam and others lived many do much stumble, thinking, that it cannot be true, that any should live so long, or else that they reckoned a far shorter time for a year, then we do, and they inquire also, why not one lived 1000 years amongst them all?

Adam lived 930 years and died, and Methushelah, who lived longest of all, died the year of his age 969. But neither are their years to be understood otherwise then ours, nor is it incredible, that men should then live to so great an age. Some have thought, that Moses followed the Egyptian account, who counted their years by the Moon, that is 36 days for a year, ten Lunary years for one Solary. But so Enoch and Cainan should have gotten children at six years of age, seeing they are said to have begotten at 65 or thereabouts, and he that lived longest, should not have lived to 100 years, whereas some live so long and longer to this day. But that Moses counted his years as we do, by twelve months is plain from the reckoning that is made of one year in Noah's time whilst the waters were going and coming. For Noah went into the Ark the 17 day of the second month, immediately after which the waters fell 40 days together, and prevailed from their first arising 150 days, to the 17 of the seventh month. After which they decreased to the first of the tenth month, that is 73 days, from which time yet Noah stayed 40 days, and then opened the Ark, but it being opened at the Window he stayed yet from the end of those 40 days to the first of the first month fifty, before he uncovered sending out at times a Raven and a Dove by the window, but yet he came not forth till the 27 day of the second month, that is 56 days after, all which being put together make 365 days at the least, the ten above a year being deducted also, and yet all this Line is precisely noted to have been but one whole year, for Noah entered the Ark in his year 600, and came forth in his year 601. Again, for the greatness of their age, if we consider both the great need, that was thus to prolong their days for the increase of mankind, and for the finding out of the knowledge of many things profitable for the life of man, and the great strength of men's bodies, they growing still and waxing stronger, till they attained to the age of 60 years at the least, as appeareth in that, none are said to have gotten children, till they were past that age; I see no reason why it should be thought inc • edible, that the Lord should prolong their lives to such a number of years, beyond the time, that men live now a days. Moreover the bodies of men were then in perfection, as God at the first made Adams, the humors being equally tempered, and their diet was simple, and the fruits of the earth, before the flood, were more wholesome, whereas since there hath been a declination in the nature of man, and by the flood, salt waters being brought upon the earth, the fruits of it were more corrupt, which appeareth, in that flesh was after allowed to be eaten. And therefore it is to be noted, that immediately after the flood, the age of man grew far less, from 900. to 600. 500. 400. and 300. as appeareth Gen. 11. Berosus and Pliny were of opinion, that man could never live much above 100 years; because, as Pliny saith, the heart of man groweth till 50 years of his age, but thence forward it decreaseth again as much in 50 years more. But by the relations of the same Authors, this is false. For Pliny teleth of men that were found in the time of Vespasian the Emperor, some 140, and some 150 years old. And Josephus allegeth, Berosus and Manethon teling of some that lived 500 or 600 years and more, and unto them he addeth Mochus, Estieus, Jeron: Egyptius and many more making the like relations, but unto a full 1000 years no man ever lived, as Irenaeus saith, to show the frailty of man's life, as being of no longer time then that, which is with the Lord, but as one day, for with him a 1000 years are but as one day, or as Oecolampadius; because 1000 is a number of perfection, so that they all dying before this, it was hereby intimated, that no perfection of grace is to be attained to in this life, and yet herein it was shown, that God could have made man to live forever without dying, if he had not sinned, as well as almost 1000 years.

Sheth lived 105 years, and begat Enoch. It is not necessary to hold, that this was his first Son, as neither touching others, that follow, for it is not to be imagined, that they went so long without all children, but this was he in whom the line went to Noah, and therefore, others being omitted, he only in particular is named, especially for Christ's sake, for whom chiefly the Lord would have these things registered, that we may see through what families his line ran throughout all ages.

And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methushelah 300 years, and begat sons and daughters; of Henochs walking with God by pleasing him, and of his translation I have entreated, Heb. 11. 5. as also of his Books and Prophesying, Jud. Epist. v. 14. so that I may well spare the labor of discussing those things here.

And Methushelah lived after he begat Lamech, 782 years. This was the longest liver of all, and yet no question can from the Hebrew text arise touching him, what became of him in the time of the flood, for he died that very year, as is most probable, the first month, whereas the flood came the second, as will appear to him, that shall compute the time. For Lamech begat Noah the 182 of his Age, and Noah being upon 600. the flood was sent, which together make 782, to which years add the 187 of his age, when he begat Lamech, and all together will make the just age of Methuselah, here set down, viz. 969, which years he might be said to live to, although he attained, but to the first month of the last of them. But by the Septuagint's translation 804 years are ascribed to Methushelah after the birth of Lamech, which, although Lamech be made 6 years older, before the birth of Noah, as indeed they make him, yet come not to be ended, till 16 years after the flood. So that here is a plain corruption, yet not in all copies, for Saint Augustine saith, that he had seen three Greek copies, one Latin, and one Syriac, whereby Methushelah appeareth to have died six years before the flood.

Lamech lived 182, and begat a son, and called his name Noah, saying, this