Commentary on the Old Testament Volume 1

CHAP. XI.

ANd all the earth was of one language, and of one speech. In the Hebrew it is, of one lip, and of the same words. And this was most agreeable to nature, and diversity of Languages is a thing monstrous in nature, for men endued with the like reason, and having the like Organs of speech to differ so much in speech one from another. The identity of the Language also is a great means to preserve unity amongst divers Nations, they hereby seeming to be all one, howsoever diversely dispersed. Wherefore the confusion of tongues, which Moses setteth forth in this Chapter, was a great judgment of God upon mankind for sin. The only question here is, what tongue was then used? To this most answer, that it was the Hebrew tongue, and the very names given at the creation Adam and Eve being Hebrew evince no less. Moreover the name Noah is an Hebrew name signifying rest, and Peleg so called at this very time is an Hebrew name also. Philo contendeth, that the Chaldee tongue was the first, but he is opposed by Jerome herein, and in truth there is so near affinity betwixt the Hebrew and the Chaldee tongues, that happily they were then both one, but the difference of dialects grew in time, as in divers other languages also, so Musculus. And it is the more probable because the Chaldees and the Hebrews came both of Arphacshad, as hath been already shown.

And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the East, they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and dwelt there. Some make a question, whether this be to be understood of all people of all parts without exception, or of some of them? Answering, that the meaning is nothing else, but that when all were of one language, such of them, as went Eastward, came to this plain in Shinar. But others say the Text is plain for the going of them all; for v. 1. it is said, The whole earth was of one language, and here, It came to pass, as they journeyed, that is, altogether. Calvin expoundeth this of those that went, of Nimrod and his company, & if all must necessarily be here understood, then the next verse must be understood of all without exception also, viz. when they consult about the building of a tower, which was so displeasing to the Lord, & then it will follow, that Noah and Shem, and other godly persons were of this conspiracy, which certainly could not be. And therefore I rather hold with those, who think, that not all the people of the earth without exception of any are meant, when it is said, that they went from the East to Shinar, but only that there went a company, and most probably, under the conduct of Nimrod, the best still remaining behind, and so when God being offended confounded the Languages of the builders, these retained still that old Tongue spoken from the beginning. They are said to go from the East, because Armenia, in which it is likely, that they dwelt till this time, being the country, where Noah's Ark rested, was Eastward from Babylon, but now they increasing to a greater company then those parts could contain, and partly, as it is to be thought, not so well pleased with those rough and mountainous places, went in great numbers to seek new abodes, which might be more pleasant and commodious for them. And hereby it appeareth again, that it could not be three hundred years, as the Hebrews would have it, betwixt the flood and this; for certainly mankind would by that time have been so multiplied that one Country could not possibly have contained them, and therefore it is to be held rather that a 100 years were the most. The Plain in Shinar or Babylonia was a most delightful and fruitful place indeed, so that they might well resolve to settle themselves, and to build there.

And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, &c. ver. 4. And let us build a City and Tower, whose top may reach to Heaven.

Although it be most probable, as hath been said, that Nimrod was the first ring-leader to this work, yet it being propounded took so amongst the whole multitude, that they encouraged one another to the work, and so it was not the fault of some few, but of them all. And it is to be noted, how stiffly they were bent to do it, in that wanting stone and mortar, they resolved to burn brick instead of stone, and to take slime for mortar, that is, a kind of cleaving matter like pitch, a brimstony substance, which Pliny saith, is moist in those parts. Men will refuse no labor to fulfill their own wills, how wicked and sinful soever they be, as Calvin noteth hereupon, and this aggravated much their sin. Audax omnia perpeti, gens humana ruit per vetitum nefas, and again, Coelum ipsum petimus stultitiâ. For the city and tower, which they went about to build, it is not to be thought, saith Calvin, that they could be so foolish to imagine, that they could build up to heaven, or do anything against God, as Heathen Poets have written of Giants, that set Mountain upon Mountain to ascend and fight against the gods. But that which is here spoken of the top reaching up to heaven, is hyperbolical, as the cities of the Anakims are afterwards said to have been walled so high that they reached up to heaven, that is, of an exceeding great height. For the conceit of some, that they attempted this work to escape drowning, if another great flood should come, it is rejected by the same Calvin, as an idle conceit, because they themselves express the reason of their building, viz. to get them a name, and as well may that be rejected of others, that they had some fore-knowledge of the destruction of the World by fire, as a preservative against which they made this vast building. Doubtless they had none other end, but as the Text speaketh, by setting up some famous Monument, to make it memorable to all posterities, that there had once such brave-minded men, and so mighty lived in World, from whom all others diversely dispersed had their original. For they add this, as a reason, to get us a name, lest we be scattered over the face of the earth. And this kind of building truly was fit for the purpose, because bricks made of a chalky substance, saith Pliny, and well burnt, do endure to Eternity. Touching the slime taken for mortar, Theodoret saith, that he had diligently searched, and so had found, that in those parts there were fountains, which cast up this kind of stuff continually with water. And Philo saith, that upon the bricks they wrote their names. But how came they to imagine a future dispersion? To this some answer, that Noah yet living threatened them herewith for their sins, others, that by a divine instinct they were moved to fear it, but these are conjectures, the true reason is, that when they should be more increased, they knew, that they could not possibly dwell altogether in one place, but must be dispersed into other parts. Yet Josephus saith, that being warned by God, when they were greatly increased, to disperse themselves into the divers parts of the uarth, to replenish it, they wickedly refused so to do, interpreting this Mandate of the Lord, which was for their good, as tending to a course to weaken and to overthrow them, and to keep them the more firmly together, attempted this presumptuous work, and that by the persuasion of Nimrod. The vulgar Latin rendereth it, before we be dispersed, as if they expected a dispersion, although they were unwilling. But the other reading is according to the Hebrew, Lest we be dispersed.

And the Lord came down to see the City and Tower, which the children of men built, &c.

By that, which is here related, it seemeth, that God was angry at this attempt, of building, a question therefore may be made, what did so greatly displease him, that he for this laid such a judgment upon man, as to confound their Languages? Tostatus will by no means yield, that God was hereby offended, and therefore he holdeth that their Language was confounded, only lest, if they should have finished the intended City and Tower, they would the more slowly have dispersed themselves into other parts: for to build a City and Tower is a thing lawful, saith he, in itself, and by lawful means to seek fame is no sin: But Chrysostom and Augustine and all other Expositors are against him herein, and by the Text it is plain, that they sinned greatly by pride and vain glory. For although fame and a good name be a good thing, when it is rightly attained unto, yet to do anything not for God's glory, but for a man's own, is a wicked ambition, and highly displeasing to God, and it is just with God to bring shame and confusion, instead of glory upon such. Augustine saith therefore, that Nimrods impious pride was signified hereby. And Chrysostom saith, as the builders of Babel, so are the vain-glorious nowadays, who build sumptuous Houses, Galleries, Bathes, and Walkes, that they may be magnified hereby: but as the men of Babel, so these are rewarded with shame: For what are men wont to say of them, when they behold their cost, but lo, the building of such a covetous wretch, of such an oppressor, or spoiler of Widows and Orphans? The right way therefore, saith he, is to give to the poor, and to be full of almsdeeds. Moreover, that which followeth of the Lord's coming down to see this work, argueth, the wickedness of the workmen to have been exceeding great, because this phrase is never wont to be used, but when some horrible sin hath been committed, as when Sodom was so full of sin, and the Egyptians did so grievously oppress the Hebrews, when the Lord is said to come down to see, we must not conceive, that being in Heaven he cannot see things done upon earth, for he filleth all places with his presence, and it is impiety, as Philo speaketh, to think, that he moveth from one place to another. He is then said to come down, first, for the certain notice which he took of the thing done, that men might learn hereby, not to judge of things by hearsay, but first to go and see, as the same Philo speaketh.

A second reason may be that which is yielded by Augustine, God is said to come down, because by a wonderful work wrought there by him in confounding Languages, he made it appear, that his providence extended thither to punish their great pride and ambition, and by his Angels he descended to hinder them in their work. A third and last reason may be that of Chrysostom, this is spoken to show the longsuffering and patience of the Lord, and he also yieldeth for another the reason of Philo before-going.

And the Lord said, They are all one people, and have one language, and this they begin to do, and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined. In these words is contained an Irony, whereby they that labored so earnestly in this building, are derided, for the Lord knew well enough that he could easily confound this their machination: wherefore it is to be understood, as spoken according to their conceit; for being an innumerable company, and through the unity of their idiom all as one, they thought doubtless in the pride of their hearts, that nothing could possibly hinder them from bringing their intended work to perfection. But we may see how vain men are in their greatest strength, and in their most earnest attempts, one blast of God's mouth [Note.] is able to overthrow them. Again, see how he suffereth long the wicked in their evil courses, so that they begin to think themselves secure, but even then, when they fear least, he is ready to take vengeance upon them.

Go to, let us go down, and confound their language, &c. Julian the Apostate abused this place to prove a multitude of gods, but it is spoken here, as Gen. 1. about the making of man, Let us make man after our own image: and therefore how a triplicity of persons is intimated in this saying, see there, their language, in the Hebrew it is as verse 1. their lip, and that they may not understand one another's lip. This, as Luther noteth, was no small punishment, the seeds of future discords and contentions being sown hereby, but it was afterwards at the coming down of the Holy Ghost taken away again, because although all Nations under the Gospel speak not one and the same language again, yet in divers languages they speak the same things, as Calvin observeth. But the dissention made by the Lord through the confusion of language, was not hurtful, but profitable for them, because, if their language had continued one still, they had gone on in their sin, but being divided, they break off, and were without doubt confounded in themselves. In setting forth the hurt of the unity amongst these men, and the God of their division, Cassianus speaketh excellently thus: The confusion of tongues arising suddenly appeased the sacrilegious and wicked attempts of men: for there had remained an evil consent of men against God, unless the diversity of language making them at variance one with another, by divine dispensation had compelled them to come to a better condition, and a good and profitable discord had called them back to their salvation, whom a pernicious consent had animated to their destruction, &c. And a most apt punishment was this for their sin, because the domination of him that commandeth, lieth in the tongue, and therefore the pride of these men who desired superiority was punished herein, that he might be no more understood, that commanded men, who would not understand to obey God commanding him, as Saint Augustine speaketh. And thus this conspiracy was dissolved, whilst every man went from him, whom he could not understand, and joined himself only to such as he understood. For we are not so to conceive, when it is said, that one could not understand the language of another, as if there had now been so many languages spoken, as there were particular persons: for then there could have been no societies amongst men, but there were certain companies, that spake some languages, and others again that spake other languages, who accordingly divided themselves into several countries, and therefore it is said, in concluding the Genealogies of the sons of Noah, These are the sons of Shem after their families, after their tongues in their lands, intimating divers languages, not of particular persons, but of several families. It is worth the noting here, that wicked men are disappointed of their ends, the contrary to that, which they intend and propound to themselves still coming upon them: for these men propounded to confirm their unity by building, but this turned to their dissipation: they aimed at glory, but reaped perpetual [Note.] shame. The effect of pride is contrary to that of humility, as Gregory hereupon observeth, they that attempted to build a Tower against God, lost hereby the communion of one tongue, but the Disciples which humbly feared God, had in them all tongues again united. How these men came to be scattered abroad by this judgment hath been already touched, they could not certainly at the first but take great indignation one at another, when one spake in one tongue to another, and he answered him again in nothing that he could understand, as who might well suppose himself to be mocked herein. But after a while they were doubtless amazed and confounded in themselves at this thing, and so departed asunder, leaving for an ever enduring memorial of this their confusion the name of Babel, that is, confusion, to this their vainglorious building. But that which now happened, should seem rather a division of one tongue into many, then a confusion of tongues, wherefore Philo saith, that Moses is not to be understood, as speaking historically, but tropologically, as if when the Lord is brought in saying, Let us confound their language, he had said, Let us make all their vices dumb and deaf, that neither by speaking nor by consenting together, they may be able to do hurt, &c. But Moses certainly, as in all other things, so in this speaketh historically, and the language is truly said to be confounded, when men by the diversity of tongues which they understood not, were confounded. How many the languages then were made, cannot certainly be known, but by the consent of the ancient Fathers and other Writers it is most probable, that they were 72 because so many families descended of Shem, Ham, and Japheth at that time. Thus Epiphanius, who saith also, that they were called Meropes, for their divided tongues, and Jerome in Matth. 26. and Augustine de Civit. lib. 16. c. 3. and Prosper lib. 2. de vocat. Gent. c. 4. And Arnobius more particularly saith, that of these three came 100 Generations, of Shem 406 distinguished by 27 tongues, inhabiting Persia, and far into India, and even to the Rhinocorurae: of Ham 394. distinguished by 22 tongues, inhabiting from Rhicorurae to Gadara: of Japheth 200 divided by 23 tongues, inhabiting along by the River Tigris, where by Generations he meaneth Countries possessed by them, divers of them using one and the same language. But since the languages of the World are many more, happily derived out of these. The ground of this conjecture of 72 tongues is, the 72 families reckoned, Gen. 10. But to make up this number, they which are named unto Peleg, at whose birth this division happened, are not enough, they which came of Japheth being numbered but 14. and of Ham 32, and of Shem 12, together 58; wherefore Augustine addeth also Iochtan and his sons, contending, that he was elder than Peleg by much, and had at this time so many Sons, Fathers of Families, which is unprobable. This therefore touching the number of languages must rest uncertain, notwithstanding this ground, because as they might be so many, so they might be more or fewer, for ought that we know. Mystically by the builders of Babel, Heretics are set forth, who build up to heaven, by teaching justification by man's own righteousness, but they build not upon the rock Christ, but in a plain, with the brick and slime of their own inventions, and are confounded by being divided into many sects amongst themselves. Ferus.

Shem was 100 years old, and begat Arphacshad two years after the Flood, &c. Moses having briefly touched the Genealogy of Shem, chap. 10. as of the other sons of Noah, here to make a perfect Chronology by this line for honors sake, as Luther saith, because it was the holy line, as in any Nation the years are computed by the Kings reign, he returneth to this Genealogy again. Neither is it a light thing, or unworthy a sacred Historian thus to set down, how long such a man lived, and then begat such a son, and so touching a second and a third, &c. for hereby both we are the more confirmed, that the world had a beginning, because by the years of these Generations we know, how long ago it was since the world was made, and some prophecies, which have reference to time, are the more confirmed, and also we may see, what a proportion of time hath been held betwixt the creation and the giving of the Law, and the time thereof, and the Gospel, and so both, what a long time passed after the promise of the seed of the woman, and his coming into the world, that we be nothing doubtful of his second coming, although it be hitherto deferred. Touching Shem’s age of 100 years two years after the flood, I have spoken already. Noah was not just 500 years old, and then begat Shem, Ham and Japheth, but he was of this age, and soon after he began to have this issue.

Arphaxad lived 35 years and begat Salah, &c,

In the Septuagint's Translation, as I also partly touched before, Cainan is put between Arphacshad and Salah, and likewise by Saint Luke, ch. 3. 36. whereupon Expositors have been greatly troubled: for if that of the Septuagint be right, the computation of Moses in the Hebrew is erroneous, and if the Hebrew be right, Luke erred to follow the Greek exposition rather then the Hebrew original. To this it must not be answered, that both the Septuagint and Luke also erred herein: for if Luke being a Penman of the holy Scripture erred in one thing, why might he not also in another, and if he, why not other holy Writers, and why not in other things also? and so there shall be no certainty of divine History. Neither may we say, that the Hebrew copy was corrupted in this, for there can no reason be imagined, why the Jews should deal thus herein, this being a matter no way concerning them in their Tenets against Christ. Some therefore answer, that Cainan [ 1] was put into the Septuagint's Translation erroneously, there never being any such betwixt Arphacsad and Salah, and that Luke notwithstanding followed them, because at that time the Septuagint's Translation was commonly followed by all men, and if he should have differed therefrom, it would have been a means to make men distaste his Gospel. Others, that Cainan and Salah were not two men, but one and the same, and [ 2] therefore that it should be read, which was the son of Salah who was Cainan. Others, that Cainan was indeed between Arphaxad and Salah, but purposely omitted by Moses, that he might make a just Decad of generations [ 3] from Noah to Abraham, as he had done from Adam to Noah, but the Septuagintr knowing by tradition that he was indeed the next to Arphacshad, set him down also. And to make it the more probable, they say that Matthew in setting down the Genealogy of Christ omitted divers, to make just three fourteens in his line. Lastly, others say, that Cainan was put in by some Scribe in the Septuagint's translation, and because it was set down so there, into Saint [ 4] Luke's Gospel also, which they say, is the more probable, because Jerome in his Book of Hebrew traditions upon Genesis maketh no question about it, so that it was not certainly in the Septuagint's copy, which he then had: And Josephus, who followeth the Septuagint, maketh no mention of Cainan, nor Epiphanius, who likewise computeth the years after the Septuagint, so that hitherto Cainan was not in the Septuagint's Translation. Of all these resolutions the first pleaseth me best: for although Luke would not certainly by following it countenance any error in any Translation, which might be any way dangerous, yet he might well follow a common received Translation, as he found it, in a mere name redundant, not to trouble the reader, who might stumble at an alteration, if he had made it, and to hinder him from passing on to things more profitable. For that Luke was not corrupted herein, but that he wrote it so from the beginning is plain, because no copy is to be found, wherein Cainan is not, and therefore the fourth resolution cannot stand. That this name was put in more then should be in this place in some copies of the Septuagint's Translation, is the more probable, because, 1 Chron. 1. even according to the Septuagint, it is omitted. There is a Cainan in the line before the flood, Gen. 5. and from thence happily it might by chance in writing it out creep in here also. For the second resolution, that Cainan and Salah should be all one, cannot be admitted without granting an error in all copies of Luke; & it were strange, that one should be set forth by two names more then any other in all these Genealogies. For the third, it cannot stand for the number of years reckoned to everyone, so that if there were a Cainan omitted by Moses, his years must be omitted also, and so not the full but an imperfect Chronology was made by Moses. Wherefore I for my part rest in the first, knowing no other way, but that I must needs with Beda be confounded to think upon it, that Luke following the Greek rather then the Hebrew should make 11 Generations between Noah and Abraham, when as Moses in the Hebrew maketh but 10.

But that the Septuagint's Translation is corrupted, appeareth moreover by the difference of years both before they are said to have begotten, and after when the years of their surviving are set down: for before to eight of them are added 100 years more then are in the Hebrew. Arphaxad is said to have been 135 when he begat Cainan, Cainan 130 when he begat Salah, Salah 130, Heber 134, Phaleg 130, Reu 132, Serug 130, Nahor 179. And after whereas in the Hebrew Arphaxad is said to have lived so long, as that his whole time maketh 438, the Septuagint have but 435, and for 433 of Salah 460, for 464, of Heber 404, for 239 of Phaleg 339, for 239 of Reu 337, for 230 of Serug 330 for 148 of Nahor 304. And lastly, to everyone is added more then in the Hebrew, he died, doubtless in imitation of that of chap. 5. If the reason of this great difference of years be demanded, of 100 years still placed before the lesser number by the Septuagint; this may seem to be a reason, they would not set forth any, as begetting at 30, or 35, because happily they thought it would not be so well credited, that in those days, when they lived so long, they were grown to any perfection to beget children at so few years, so also Musculus. For the other differences, no reason can be yielded, but that in copying out the Septuagint's Translation there have many corruptions creptin. And Terah lived 70 years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran. Of Terah and others the Progenitours of Abram it is spoken again, Jos. 24. 2. that they served other God's, so that before Abraham's time we may gather, what great corruption there was in the World: for if the holy line so much respected by the Lord, turned after Idols, how can we think, but all the rest of the World was degenerated from the true Religion much more? There were yet some few ancients, who doubtless served the only true God, as Noah, who lived 58 years, after that Abram was borne: for between the flood and Abram were 292 years, and Noah lived after the flood 350 years. And Shem, who lived 150 years longer then Noah, and Arphacshad, and Salah, and Heber, from whom the Hebrews took their name. Touching the rest, Peleg, Ren, Serug, and Nahor; happily most of them might hold the true Religion also: and by the care of Noah, Shem, and others of them, it is not to be doubted, but some others were kept from Idolatry in those days: yet for Terah, Abraham's Father, it is plain, that he turned Idolater; wherefore there being such a general declining, & the Church thus being in danger to be extinct, God provideth an Abram to repair the decaying state thereof. So that hence we may both gather, how headily men are carried to error & superstition, [Note.] when the reverence of so grave and holy ancestors, yet living could not contain them of those times; and also that God's Providence is such over his Church, that henever suffereth it utterly to fail, but when corruption is grown to the highest, even then he layeth a foundation for the reflourishing of the truth, that finding it so hard to keep out Idolatry and Superstition, we may never give any way unto it, but withstand it to the uttermost of our power; & considering God's Providence over his Church, we may never despair, but when things are most desperate, be erected in our minds through hope of a timely restauration. But why doth Moses mention three sons of Terah [Quest.] together here, and not Abram only, whose History he specially intendeth? To this Calvin and Musculus answer well, that Haran is mentioned, because of Lot his son, of whom he was afterwards to speak, and Nahor, because of Rebecca, who sprang from him, and was afterwards Wife unto Isaac. But here is a greater question touching the age of Terah, when he is said [Quest.] to have begotten Abram, how he could be said to be but 70 years old, when as his whole age was 205 years, and after his death Abram's age being spoken of is set forth to be but 75 years, which being added to the age of Terah when he begat Abram, make only 145. For that Terah died before this going of Abram into Canaan at 75 years of age is further confirmed, Act. 7. 4? The answer of Calvin to this, before whom Theodoret answered likewise, and Lyranus, is, that although by the order of naming him, Abraham may seem to be eldest, yet indeed he was not, but the youngest son of Terah, only he is named first for honors sake, but Haran the Father of Lot and Sarai was the first, Nahor the second, and afterwards Abraham, not when Terah was 70, but 130 years old. And Calvin will not so much as yield, that Terah begat any of them at just 70, but only that he was thus old, and then begat. Moreover, he saith, that this is a strong argument, that Abram was a younger Brother, because Aarai his Wife was but 10 years younger then he, which could not possibly be if she were Daughter to his younger Brother. This argument, I confess, is so strong, as that I cannot see, how it may be answered by any means, if by Haran Terah’s son, Brother to Abram be understood: for to say, that she was Harans adopted Daughter or Daughter in Law, is but a Cavil, as Calvin reasoneth: yet how it may be yielded, that Abram was not begotten, til 130 years of Terah’s age, I can less see, forsomuch, as by this line a Chronology of the World is made, wherein it cannot be avoided, but there must needs be a great imperfection, if this be yielded to. For whereas in all other Genealogies Moses is most exact, setting down the age of the Father, when he begat that son whose begetting of another, and his age then is next respected, &c. to find the just time from the beginning of the World, till then, in Terah’s age, when he begat Abraham contrary to his course only there shall be a fail, and we shall be put to find it out by comparing other places together, which is most improbable, especially in Abraham, who, we must think, being of so great fame was more respected, then ordinary, and therefore he would not fail, but set down his Fathers age precisely, when he was begotten. But how then shall this doubt be cleared? For the argument taken from Sarai being but ten years younger then Abraham, proving that Haran her Father must needs be Abram's elder Brother, it may be answered thus. Haran the Father of Sarai was not one of the three Brothers named together, but some other man: for Haran one of the three was the Father of Lot, and by him only he is described, but this Haran by Milcah and Iscah his Daughters. For Haran, who was one of the three, hath his whole History set down together, v. 27, 28. Haran begat Lot, and Haran died before his Father in the Land of his Nativity. And then Abram's and Nahors taking them Wives is set down, v. 29. Abram took Sarai, and Nahor Milcah, neither is Sarai said to be Harans Daughter but Milcah only, & that Haran is further described thus, the Father of Milcah, and of Iscah. Whereas if Haran one of the three mentioned before were meant Moses needed not to have said anymore, but Milcah the Daughter of Haran. As for the other argument to prove, that Abraham could not be borne till Anno 130 of his Father Terah, viz. because after Terah’s death, he having lived 205 years, Abram is said to have been but 75. This cannot be well proved out of the History: for although Terah’s death be first set down, and then the coming of Abraham into Canaan, this might be done, as S. Augustine noteth, because Moses intending to set forth the full History of Abram by it self, would first finish all that he had to say touching Terah his Father, and so he briefly runneth through his coming to Charran or Haran, and his dying there, and then returning to Abram, chap. 12. beginneth with God's first calling of him, which could not be after, but before his Fathers death many years, as appeareth by comparing the years of his age then with the time of his birth, as hath been done already. But Saint Stevens relation indeed seemeth to be plain, that God's calling of Abram mentioned, chap. 12. was after Terah’s death: for he saith, Then he came out of the land of Chaldea, and dwelt in Charran; and from thence, when his Father was dead, he removed him into this land. Touching the names Haran, and Charran, and Charras, all Historians agree, that they were all one, viz. a City in the borders of Mesopotamia. To that out of Stevens narration, I answer, that Abram indeed was not removed to Canaan with his Wife and all his substance, &c. as is specified, Gen. 12. 5. till after his Fathers death, but he with his Nephew Lot departed out of Haran, when they were first come thither with Terah, to see this Land, and returned sometimes again to see their aged Father for his comfort going and coming until his death, but then, which was 60 years after, they with Sarai, & all that they had, went to Canaan to settle themselves. For both a departing first seemeth to me to be plainly intimated, Chap. 12. v. 4. where Abraham is said to have departed only with Lot, and another remove v. 5. where not only Abram and Lot go to Canaan, but Sarai, and their substance, and all the souls, which they had gotten in Haran, are carried with them. And of this last remove Saint Steven speaketh, and Moses, when he setteth down his age, of the first, Chap. 12. v. 4. And that Abram was spoken to about this Land of Canaan, whilst Terah lived, appeareth, because, Gen. 12. 1. he is bidden not only to go from his Country and kindred, but also from his Fathers house, to a Land, that God would show him, and that he made a long stay in Haran, before his last remove, is as plain, because he and Lot had gotten much during the time of their abode in that place. If this solution shall seem improbable, because it is not likely, that Abraham would delay so long for any friends sake in the World, to do, as God commanded him; I answer, he did not delay to go thither to see the Country, according to the Lord's direction; Go to a Land, that I will show thee, but only he waited, after that he had been there, the Lord doubtless giving him leave, till a fit opportunity to remove with all his family, which was the time of his Fathers death, who living and being unwilling, had command over him, as a Father, and so could cause him to stay, neither ought he out of filial duty to refuse so to do, unless the Lord had expressly charged him to remove with all his presently, which it is likely he would not do, because he would have Abram a pattern, as in other things, so in duty and obedience to his Father growing now very aged, and so standing in need of him and Lot, whom only he took out of Chaldea with him. Thus that, which seemeth to make against Terah’s age of 70, when Abram was borne, being resolved, we see, how it may be maintained, that he was borne then, and yet but 75 at his departing from Haran to Canaan, and so that the Chronology made by him and others of that line is perfect and plain. Others resolve this question otherwise, as the Hebrews, whose resolution Jerome mentioneth, and followeth. They say, that Abram is said to be but 75 when he went to dwell in Canaan, because from the time of God's preserving him miraculously out of the fire, into which he was cast in Chaldea, his life is reckoned by Moses, and not from the time of his birth. For they had an old tradition, that Ur of the Chaldees, out of which he came, was the fire of the Chaldees, according to the signification of the word Ur, into which he was put, because he opposed their Idolatry committed with the fire. They then held, that Abram at his going into Canaan was 135 from his birth, but 75 only from this time, when he had his life the second time given him. But first the ground of this is uncertain, Ur not setting forth any such fire, into which he was cast, according to the opinion of many grave Authors, for then Terah also and Lot must have been in the same fire, and Sarai, who all came together from Ur of the Chaldees, but a City at this day called Orchae, as Petrus Appianus saith, 624 miles distant from Jerusalem Eastward; and again, if Moses had reckoned the age of Abram by this at 75, why may he not be thought to have reckoned some others likewise? and what certainty then can we have in this Chronology. And no better to be liked is that answer of Andreas Masius, who saith, that Stephen speaking of Terah’s death, meant not his natural, but his spiritual death in idolatry. If any can find a better solution, then that, which I have before set down, let him friendly impart it, for because of the histories following, I am nothing satisfied touching this question. Yet happily Abram besides his once going, went and came again and again, till that finally coming to Haran, and burying his father, he went to Canaan to dwell, never to return anymore, his being there till this, being a kind of peregtination rather then an habitation, at which Stephen pointeth, when he saith after his fathers death, God 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , made him a stable inhabitant there, as Saint Augustine interpreteth it, and the word signifieth. And in the time of Abram's going and coming before this his final removing, many things happened, which are set down after, verse 5. of chap. 12. all which happened according to this account, before that his last going thither. To conclude, seeing all those things, both chap. 12. & 13. &c. following after chap. 12. 5. when Sarai went with Abram, were done when they dwelt together in Canaan, and Isaac was born before Terah’s death 35 years, the best resolution is that of Augustine, if we do but add that Stephen respected only the course of the history, and examined not exactly the just time of his remove. It is then to be conceived, that he came first to Canaan with Lot at 75, chap. 12. 4. and certain years after with the substance that he stayed to gather.

And Haran died before his father in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees. By this it plainly appeareth, that Chaldea was the Country where Terah dwelt from the beginning, and where Abram was born, so that originally Abram was a Chaldean, who were called Casdim or Chaldeans from Arphaxad, but he and his, and the line before him from Heber, Hebrews. Yet some contend, that Haran was Abram's native place, because, Gen. 24. 4. Abram calleth the City of Nahor in Mesopotamia, which was this Haran, his Country, when he sent his servant thither to fetch a Wife for his son Isaac. But he spake thus in respect of his long abode, not of his nativity there, for it is expressly said, that Terah took him with him, when he came first to Haran out of Chaldea, Touching these words, Haran died before his father in Ur of the Chaldees, the Hebrews have a strange exposition, as it is recorded by Jerome, viz. that the Chaldeans being great Idolaters, and Terah likewise, Abram would by no means be drawn to the worshipping of their Idols, whereupon his father complained of him to Nimrod or Belus the King, and he was condemned to be burnt in the fire, but being cast in, God preserved him miraculously, so that he came forth without hurt, which Haran his brother seeing, he was animated against their Idolatry also, and was adjudged to the fire in like manner, but being not so strong in the faith as Abram, he was burnt to ashes, his father Terah beholding it, and consenting, and that this is meant here when it is said, he died before his father in Ur, that is, the fire into which the Chaldees cast him. But this is certainly a fable, as Jerome also sometime calleth it, because Moses would not doubtless have omitted so great a miracle, and because in the next verse Terah, and Lot, and Sarai also are spoken of as coming out of Ur of the Chaldees, and here this Vr is said to be the land of Harans nativity. If that saying, Gen. 15. 7. I am the God that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, shall seem to intimate some great deliverance of Abram there, as when the bringing of the Hebrews out of Egypt is spoken of, which is urged by Burgensis, who is for this opinion; It is easily answered, that it was a great mercy of God to Abram to bring him from amongst those Idolaters, preserving him from that spiritual danger, and placing him, where he might freely serve God without any interruption by means of such miscreants, and therefore he might well mention this, as a singular favor.

For that which is here said of Abram's and Nahors wives, Milcha the wife of Nahor is said to be the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah and Iscah. Some hold, that this Iscah was Sarai, who had these two names, because they will needs have Sarai the daughter of Haran also, thus Jerome and Augustine and some others. But this seemeth to me to be but a mere conjecture. For neither is Sarai in any other place called by this name, neither doth Moses having named Sarai and Milcha, say in the plural number, the daghters of Haran, but as speaking of one of them only, viz. Milcha, in the singular number, the daughter of Haran, and whereas he is called the son of Haran, Terah’s son, ver. 31. Sarai is not called his daughter, but Terah’s daughter in law. Moreover in another place, viz. Gen. 20. 12. Abraham saith of Sarai, she is indeed my sister, for she is the daughter of my father, but not of my mother. Whereupon some have held, and it may well be gathered, that she was not the daughter of Haran, Terah’s son, but of Terah by another wife. There be many grave Authors, I confess, that will not have those words of Abraham so understood, but that Sarai is called Terah’s daughter, but not by the same mother, because amongst the Hebrews grandchildren were called sons and daughters to their grandfathers and grandmothers, and so amongst other Nations, and for marriages betwixt brethren and sisters, they deny it to have been in use in those days. But who seeth not, that Abram's words to Abimelech do plainly describe one coming of the same father, it being an improper speech touching a grandchild, she is the daughter of my father, but not of my mother? And for such marriages, there was yet no law to prohibit them, and for such, as would contain themselves in their own families, there was then often-times a necessity of marrying with a sister, werefore it is rather to be held, that Iscah was some other woman, but who, or married to whom, it is uncertain.

And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his sons son, and Sarai his daughter in law, and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees to go into the Land of Canaan, & they came to Haran, and dwelt there. For Ur of the Chaldees, the Hierosol. Targum hath the fiery furnace of the Chaldees, because Ur signifieth fire, and the Chaldees were worshippers of the fire, giving to this City, where they kept this fire continually burning, this name from fire, as is most probable. This journey undertaken by Terah and his company was very long, for from Ur to the City Haran are reckoned by Geographers 376 miles, and from Haran to Shechem in the land of Canaan 400 miles, there was a nearer way from, or to Canaan, but this was safest. A question here offereth it [Quest.] self first, what moved Terah to enter upon this long journey? To this Calvin and Musculus answer rightly, that God called Abram to this journey, as appeareth, Chap. 12. 1. and, Acts. 7. 2. and therefore it is most probable, that he declaring this his calling to his father, he was also willing for his great love to so good a son, to go along with him. Yet this going and taking Abram with him is referred to Terah, whom Abram followed as an obedient son, he having the honor of the chief in this voyage for his paternities sake. Whereas Moses saith, that God brought him from Ur of the Chaldees, it differeth not from this, that Terah took him with him, God was the author of this journey, and Terah the instrument to lead him forth. But it may seem strange, that Terah being an idolater, as is taught, Josh. 24. 2. should so readily go away with Abram, the cause of whose departure were the abominable idolatries of the Chaldeans, as is touched, Judith 5. 7. and not rather stay with his son Nahor there still. There are some indeed, that hold both Terah and Abram to have been idolaters before this, as the Jewish Rabbin's, two especially of great note, Johanan and Hanine, cited by Genebrardus in his Chronology. They say, that Terah was most earnest in that superstition, and a persecutor of oppugners, and that Abram lived therein, till Anno. 48. of his age, about the time of the division of Tongues, when abandoing all idolatry, he served the true God only, and Epiphanius saith, that Abram provoked Terah his father to follow him, herein, and Soudas saith, that Abram brake his fathers Images, and some of them he burnt with fire. And both Ephiphanius and Soudas note Serug to have been the first Idolater of that line, who would have worthy men to be worshipped after their death, and his son Nahor did likewise after him, but Terah devised the making of earthen Images to be worshipped, and therefore God punished him in taking away his son Haran by death before him, whereas never, till this time do we read of any, that died before their fathers. But of Abram do neither of both these Authors say, that he ever served other gods, but Soudas contrariwise saith, that, as the Chaldeans were much given to the contemplation of the Stars, so he being intent in looking up to them thought that there was one most glorious Creator of them all, who alone was to be worshipped, and therefore being but fourteeen years old, he reproved his fathers idolatry, & going on to serve the true God, he afterwards appeared unto him. And Josephus speaketh also to the same effect, how he argued from the moving and influence of the Stars, that there was one God, who giveth life and motion and virtue to all things, who alone ought to be worshipped. And Saint Augustine standeth not only for Abram's, but for Terah’s innocence also in this respect. For when he took Abram and Lot, &c. with him, he saith, that the reason, why he left Nahor behind, was because he was an Idolater, and would not be reclaimed herefrom, to flee which and the persecution stirred up against them therefore by the Chaldeans, he and Abram fled away. Why Terah should be excused from idolatry against the report of other Ancients, I can see no reason, especially they saying the same with Joshua? But Abram doubtless was always untainted, or else sometime he would have made mention of his conversion to the greater praise of God. And it is most probable, that Terah was turned by him, and so when God called him out of Chaldea, would go with him, but Nahor his other son not being moved to repent, stayed still behind. Yet afterwards he came to Haran also, and dwelt there, as appeareth in this History. But why did Terah [Quest.] stay at Haran in Mesopotamia, and not go through to Canaan? It is most probable, as all consent, that being an old man, and weary of this way, he would go no further, but settled his abode there, suffering his son Abram with Lot to travel and see it, and so to come again, till that he should be gathered to his fathers, wherein also they obeyed him. For the time of his abode in Haran before his death, it cannot possibly be so short, as Calvin imagineth, who saith, that Terah surely stayed but a little time in Haran, and then died, or else Abram would rather have obeyed God in hastening forward to Canaan, and not after threescore years more expired. For that they dwelt long in Haran is intimated, Chap. 12. ver. 5. where it is said, that Abram and Lot took with them all their substance, and all the souls that they had gotten in Haran, and went into the land of Canaan. If their abode had been but a little time in Haran, it would rather have been said, all their substance, they had gotten in Chaldea. But it is likely, that fleeing persecution they came empty to Haran, or with little, and there were greatly increased, for which they must necessarily dwell there many years, even threefore, as hath been shown before, at what time Terah died. As for the delay of so long a time, I doubt not, but it was made known to Abram, that it was with the good will of the Lord, he being satisfied for that time with Abram's travelling thither, and returning again to do his duty to his father.

CHAP. XII.

Now the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and fathers house, &c.

This is not to be understood, as spoken to Abram, after Terah’s death, as it may seem, but long before, when he was yet with his father in Chaldea, so Calvin. For if it had been spoken to him in Haran, he migbt have replied, I am already come out of my country, and the journey undertaken hitherto had been without warrant, wherereas without doubt this call of the Lord was the cause thereof, yet against this seemeth to make the relation of Steven, Acts 7. For he saith, that God apeared to Abram in Mesopotamia, that is, as Saint Augustine saith, between Ur of the Chaldees & Haran, as they were travelling. But this is easily answered, the word Mesopotamia is largely taken by Saint Stephen in that place, that whole tract of ground beyond the River Euphates, being meant hereby, which contained Mesopotamia, Chaldea, and Babylonia: for accordingly he addeth, Act. 7. 4. So he went out of Chaldea, and dwelt in Charran. And that Mesopotamia properly so called, was not the place, where God spake to Abram in this manner, is plain, because he biddeth him to go from his country, and from his fathers house, and if from thence, he was then in his country Chaldea, when he was bidden thus to do, and not upon his journey. If it be objected, this apparition was after Terah’s death, when Abram dwelt in Haran, for so it is related, and therefore in Haran and not in Chaldea, again, from Chaldea he was taken by his father, therefore not by this call of the Lord: lastly, he forsook not his kindred in going out of Chaldea, for Lot and Terah went with him: for hereupon some hold, that Abram was in Haran when God spake thus unto him, as Rupertus, Lyranus, Tostatus and Paulus Burgensis, This is all easily answered. First although it be set down after Terah’s death, yet it might be before, all touching Terah, being written together, chap. 11, and the history of Abram being begun here, and therefore this apparition, although had before, not related till now. Secondly, his father in taking him, was rather a companion with him, out of his love, then the first Author to him of this journey, as Chrysostom teacheth, and hath been before shown. Lastly, he might be called to leave his father and all, yet if he being converted would go with him, this was not against the will of the Lord. Tostatus to defend his opinion saith, that Abram was called twice, once in Chaldea, of which Stephen speaketh, and then in Haran, of which it is spoken here. But this is a new invention, and unknown to all ancient Expositors. Besides, the words set down by Moses, and used by Stephen, evince, that they both point at one and the same calling.

But why doth the Lord speak both of country, kindred, and his fathers house, and not of his country only, which includeth both the other? To [Quest.] this Ambrose answereth. It had been enough indeed to have bidden him go out of his country, for so he should have gone from his kindred and fathers house also, but therefore the Lord speaketh of them severally, that he might try his affection, lest peradventure he should seem either unwisely to have begun his journey, or some fraud had been prepared in the heavenly Commandments, &c. For a man's country is dear unto him, and when a man thinketh upon his kindred there, it maketh him yet more loath to leave it, but when he thinketh also upon his fathers house, his affection is yet more drawn. Wherefore the Lord would hereby set forth Abram, as admirably obedient, who could not be moved by all these to reluct against this divine vocation. And yet his obedience is the more to be extolled, in that he telleth him not, into what country he should go by name, but at large into a country, which he should show him, which is further thus set forth by the Apostle, he went out, not knowing whither he went. Yet some there are, who think, that Canaan was then named unto him. But no such thing, but the contrary can be gathered from the text, and therefore it is held by most, that at the first he was not told the name of the country, but having shown his obedience in beginning to go, it is likely, that the Lord named it unto him; wherefore when Terah with Abram, is said to have gone out of Ur, to go into Canaan, it is to be understood, that Moses setteth down the name by anticipation. But would the Lord have Abram to go so far, and to this country in particular? [Quest.] Answ. If the way had been short, his obedience had not been so great, and there was a prophesy of Noah, touching Canaan to be fulfilled, that he should be a servant to Shem, which was in Abram's posterity at length subduing the posterity of Canaan, destroying some of them and making servants of others, and to this doubtless the Lord had respect now in making Abram to see it and expect it. Philo and after him Ambrose allegorically hence teach, how every soul is called from his country, kindred and fathers house to supernal places, which God will show unto it at the last. And this country is the body, being terra, because taken out of terra, the kindred is the sense, because it hath near alliance to the soul, and the fathers house is reason, the father, as it were of our speeches and actions. From these we are called out, from the body, when we are called from defiling & making it filthy by sin, from the sense, when from following sensual lusts, which sway to these pollutions, & from the reason, when from exercising it about worldly things, that it may be lifted up to things heavenly. Now whosoever is a true child of Abram, then applieth himself readily with all his power to obey God herein, and to him, that doth so, God will show another Country far above, even the most glorious heavens to be possessed by him for evermore. It is noted here by Ferus, that God made this gracious promise to Abraham, no mention being before made of his works, to show, that of God's mercy, and not for man's merit his grace is extended unto him.

And I will make of thee a great Nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great, and thou shalt be a blessing, &c. Here is a sevenfold favor promised to Abram, to set forth all manner of favor: 1 The numerosity of children. 2 Abundance of riches, which God's blessing bringeth. 3 Glory of name. 4 Such happiness, as that he should be a blessing in the abstract. 5 Blessing upon such, as blessed him. 6 Cursing upon such, as cursed him. 7 A blessing upon all Nations through him. And hereby he should be abundantly recompensed, for departing from his Country, another should be shown him, which he should inherit, for leaving his kindred he should have an innumerable posterity, and for departing from his fathers house, so that he could not bless him anymore, he should lose his part in his goods, and so his name should be put out amongst his brethren, God would bless him, and bless those that bless him, and contrariwise curse those that curse him, and make him a blessing, and through him bless all other Nations, and through God's blessing he should be full of worldly wealth, & his name should be great. So whosoever in obedience to God loseth anything, he is a great gainer [Note.] thereby. God requireth no duty at our hands, but if we do, he propoundeth unto us an ample reward. For the first thing here promised, I will make of thee a great Nation. This was a wonderful mercy, Abraham having lived hitherto, and yet being childless, as Calvin noteth, a great Nation he promiseth to make of him, that is, both for the number of his children, and for the singularity of that people, it being sequestered from the rest of the world, as a peculiar people, and dealt so by, as never any other Nation was, Deut. 4. For the second, I will bless thee, that is, by my blessing it shall come to pass, that thou being thus old, yet shalt be so fruitfult, and I will send thee prosperity in all things, and greatly increase thy substance. For the third, I will make thy name great, that is, most famous, so that everywhere Abram's name shall be spoken of with honor, not only in his life, but after his death. Josephus telleth, how all Nations round about honored the name of Abram, and since the preaching of the Gospel in all Countries, the name of Abram is most famous in all places. God made his name great also by calling himself by his name, the God of Abram, the God of Isaac, and of Jacob. For the fourth, and thou shalt be a blessing. Hereby is meant, that his estate should be thought so happy, that when any man should wish happiness to themselves or others, they should say, God bless thee, and make thee like unto Abram, thus Calvin. But to be a blessing is rather to be such, as in whom others are blessed, so Abram was a blessing, because for his sake his children after him were blessed extraordinarily. I say, not and all Nations also, for that is another distinct thing after added. For the fifth, I will bless them that bless thee, and the sixth, and curse them that curse thee. Here is the greatest league that can be, as between Kings, that have common friends and common enemies, yet thus is God in league also with all the faithful, if any do them good, he will reward it, if wrong, he will be avenged therefore. Thus he blessed the Midwives of Egypt, and Rahab of Jericho, and Ebedmelech the Blackmore in Jeremiah, as Luther noteth, but he cursed Pharaoh, the Ammonites and Moabites, Balak & Sennacherib, and all the Monarchs of the World for vexing his Church. For the last, In thee shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed, what is meant by this, is plainly expressed, Gen. 22. 18. In thy seeed shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed, and this seed Saint Paul showeth was Christ, Gal. 3. 16. yet the Jews to elude this, say, that to be blessed in any man, is no more but to be prayed for, that God would bless, as he blessed him, so to be blessed in Abram is to become such as he was, and so to be blessed accordingly. Moreover they say, that the tribe of Levi, which came of Abram, was set to bless, Deut. 10. 8. Esa. 65. 16. and so all being blessed by them, are blessed in or by Abram. But this is a mere cavil, seeing Levi blessed not all Nations, but Israel only, and God expressly hath interpreted himself otherwise, as hath been said. Moreover, the event proveth this to be so, because, when this seed came, then God's blessing began first to be diffused amongst the Nations, they being turned from Idolatry, to serve the only true God and his Son Jesus Christ by the preaching of the Gospel. This place, as Luther noteth, showeth the expectation of the Jews to be vain, in looking for a Messiah, who should subdue and bring under them all other Nations, for God promiseth in Abram's seed a blessing upon all Nations, and threateneth not a subjection, bringing under, and violent subduing to any foreign Government, in respect of outward polity.

So Abram went, &c. This is not to be referred either to his going first out of Ur of the Chaldees, or to his last going out of Haran to Canaan to settle there, when he took all that he had with him, v. 5. but, as hath been already touched, to his going up from Haran to see Canaan, and to travel about it, whilst his father Terah was yet living, and stayed in Haran, from whence he continued going and coming till Terah’s death, and then removed with all that he had. For these words, The souls that he had gotten, the Chaldee hath, that he had subdued to the law, the Jerus. Targum the souls of Proselytes.

And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Shechem, to the plain of Moreh, and the Canaanite was then in the land. The Greeks, saith Musculus, read it, Abram went through the length thereof, even nigh to Mount Gerizim, where Shechem stood, so that being come into the land, the Lord did not yet show him a place to rest in, but after so long a journey, caused him still to pass on many miles more, thus further exercising his faith. Geographers describe this Town, as lying 36 miles from Jerusalem northward, and it pertained afterwards to Samaria. Joh. 4. Shechem signifieth a shoulder, and so had the name therefrom, because of the likeness, as Melancthon saith, yet at the first it was not so called, but Moreh, or the oak or valley of Moreh, as Vatablus saith: for the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 howsoever it signifieth an oak only, may be translated both ways: and it is likely, because it was a plain or valley, where this oak or thicket of oakes stood, by a figure, whereby the continent is put for the content, it was thus translated by Jerome, whom others do follow herein For the word Moreh it signifieth conspicuous or famous, or a shewer, and by this name it is most likely, that Abram called it, because God appeared there unto him, showing him for what cause he brought him thither, as v. 7. That of the Canaanites being in the land is added, that Abram might think his state no whit better here than in Chaldea, so wicked and impure a people inhabiting in these parts, and that being possessed already by them, he should never attain to the possession hereof, so that a great and strong faith must needs be in Abram to overcome these temptations,

And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land, and he built an Altar there, &c. It is observed by Chrysostom here, that this was the first appearing of the Lord to any man mentioned in the holy Scriptures. He spake indeed to Adam, to Cain, to Noah, and to Abram before, but it is not said that he appeared. So that upon this extraordinary fact of Abram's the Lord revealed himself unto him in an extraordinary manner. He having at the word of the Lord gone to a Country so far, to comfort him after this long travel, the Lord did not only speak, but appear unto him. But whether by vision, or by dream, or what other way, no man can tell. It is most probable, that he appeared by an Angel showing himself in some glorious likeness, and speaking thus, as the Lord's Deputy unto him in the daytime: because in divers other places, when the Lord is said to appear, it is certain, that it was by an Angel. As when Moses was with the Lord in the Mount giving him the law, this is said to have been done by the ministry of Angels, and Jacob, to whom God appeared sometimes, saving from him all dangers, when he speaketh hereof saith, The Angel that redeemed me from all evil, &c. For God himself Moses, that talked so familiarly with the Lord, never saw, for which cause, he once desired, that the Lord would show himself so unto him that he might know him. But this was denied; because, said the Lord, No man shall see me and live. But when the Lord appeared to Abram, what did he for him? He promised, that his seed should inherit that land, wherein the Canaanites then dwelt, and possessed it, for which cause also, that clause of the Canaanites being in the land, was put in before. At his first speaking to him he promised to show him a land, and no more, but here he promiseth the possession of it to his posterity. A poor comfort, a man may think, as Calvin noteth, after so tedious a journey to promise a thing, which should not be fulfilled till many years after, and to speak to one of his posterities inheriting it, who was old, and his wife also, and yet had no child, but Abram by faith transcended all human reason, and because he did steadfastly believe this▪ in way of thankfulness he built an Altar there to the Lord. Of Altars building see before, chap. 8. 20.

And he removed thence to a mountain on the East of Bethel, and he pitched his tent, having Bethel on the West, and Ai on the East, and there he built an Altar, &c. Wherefore Abram removed from the foresaid valley to this mountain is not expressed: but Expositors conjecture, that for the diversity of his religion he was envied by the Canaanites, and this gave him occasion, when he had been a while in one place, to remove to another. But what mountain this was, is controverted. Mercator and Tostatus say, that it was that mountain, whereupon stood Mount Gerizim, and Ebal, being both tops of one mountain, where the blessings and the cursings were rehearsed, Jos. 8. as was appointed, Deut. 11. 29. and more particularly upon Mount Ebal, where Joshua afterwards built his Altar, Jos. 8. 3. But others say, it was some other mountain, because these stood in Shechem, as Josephus saith, and Brocardus. And there is one Henry Bunting, who in writing of the travels of Abram, saith that this mountain was mount Ephraim, 28 miles from Shechem. And indeed the situation of mount Gerizim, and Ebal being such, as hath been said, viz. near to Shechem, and by the plain of Moreh, as is also set forth, Deut. 11. 30. it cannot be, that this should be here meant, for to remove so little a way, had not been worthy the name of a remove, and therefore it is to be thought, that it was rather a mountain further off. For the name Bethel, that place was not then so called, but Luz, having this name given it afterwards by Jacob Gen. 28. but here spoken of by anticipation. He pitched his tent, as Chrysostom saith, after the manner of soldiers, that with the less trouble he might remove again, and whereas Sarai his wife being with him is not spoken of, as being discontented at this tumultuous kind of living, he admireth her faith as much herein, as the faith of Abram.

And Abram journeyed, going on still towards the South. To what place is not expressed, but Calvin conjectureth, that it was Hebron, a City afterwards of Priests, but then a place, where the Kings of the Canaanites dwelt. It is likely, that he was now guided that way which was towards Egypt, that he might the more easily remove thither in the time of the famine, of which mention is made in the next verse. The coming of Abram into this Country was to see it in all the parts thereof, and therefore in this respect he was not to continue long in any one place.

And there was a famine in the land, & Abram went down into Egypt to sojourn there, &c. It is strange to see what crosses befell Abram, to whom such ample promises were made. Unto all his former necessitated removes, here is added a great famine, so that he was compelled now out of that promised land to seek for food for him and his in some other Country. Neither could he be securely there, but in danger of his life, or of having his wives chastity violated, or of both. But God, by whose providence all things are ordered, did thus dispose of things. In fine, to confirm him more of his fatherly care in all places over him, and he being still exercised with such great crosses was made a more illustrious example of faith and patience, that we might learn from him as from Job, never to despair, but in greatest calamities to put our trust in God, and so patiently to bear all events. Philo in speaking of this famine saith, when they labored a long time with the penury of the fruits of the earth, partly through unwonted squalours, partly through over-frequent showers, the Cities of Syria being oppressed with famine were left by their inhabitants, some shifting for themselves in one place, and some in another, Abram hearing of the fertility of Egypt, removed thither. But to what part of Egypt is not set down, yet Henry Bunting in the travels of the Patriarchs saith, it was Tanis, in Hebrew called Zoan, the chief City of Egypt, where King Pharaoh kept his Court, and near to which the Hebrews afterwards dwelt, working and building for Pharaoh, Pithon and Raameses. And therefore Goshen, where they dwelt, is spoken of, as being in the field Zoan, and most fruitful. This Tanis also was near to Nile, in that part which lieth towards Palestine, and so fittest for Abram to come unto from Canaan, and this journey, as the same Author saith, was 240 miles. Egypt was lower than Canaan, and therefore, when he goeth thither, he is said to descend, when he returneth again, to ascend. Touching the famine, which caused this flight Calvin noteth, that Canaan was a plentiful country, and therefore it is probable, that it had not been formerly oppressed with famines, but now Abram coming thither, a famine followeth, so in Isaac's time, and in Jacob's and Josephs. This was to show, that piety is full of scandals, if they be not overcome by faith. For here was occasion given to the Canaanites to blame Abram and his company with their religion, as the cause hereof. And Musculus maketh a question, whether Abram sinned not in fleeing into Egypt now, and whether he ought not rather to have stayed by it, relying upon God's providence? To which he answereth, saying, that Rab. Moses Gerund. held, that Abram sinned in thus doing, because the Lord had brought him thither, and therefore till he had been called from thence again, he ought not to have removed, and because of this, his posterity was punished, by being kept in Egypt in servitude 200 years. But Musculus is of a contrary opinion, that Abram sinned not herein, because the Lord did not prohibit him, as he did Isaac afterwards, Gen. 26. 2. and not having any revelation, that he should be miraculously preserved there, he could do no less, when food failed, as he would not tempt the Lord, but remove where food might be had. Neither did he go away, but with a mind to return again, and therefore it is said, that he went to sojourn in Egypt. There was certainly a providence, as Chrysostom noteth, in this his remove, as in the rest, God carried Abram thus about, as a Doctor of virtue and piety to the people of both Nations, and he made this famine his Serjeant as it were to take Abram into Egypt, that his fame might be spread there, and notice might be taken, how gracious he was with the Lord, as was before promised, that his name should be made great: in Chaldea he did not thus carry him about, because a Prophet is not without honor, but in his own country. Abram being towards Egypt, fearing that the Egyptians would kill him for Sarai so fair a woman, desireth her to say, that she was his sister. Here a question offereth it self, first, why Abram feared violence at the Egyptians hands for [Quest.] his wives cause more then at the Canaanites? It seemeth, that the Egyptians were more notorious for their inordinate lusts, then the very Canaanites, and therefore there was now more cause to fear; and moreover, their women were black, and sanny, in which respect Sarai did far exceed all them in beauty, whereby it was probable that they would be the more tempted. We may see here, what a troublesome thing it is for a man to have a very beautiful woman to his wife, at sundry times he is in much fear by reason of [Note.] her, as Ambrose noteth, and therefore adviseth, not to look much after beauty in marrying, but virtue, which giveth to a man the most certain content. But why did Abram think, that they would kill him, if they knew her to be his wife, could not they being without all fear of God, take and abuse her as well, [Quest.] he being alive, as dead? I answer, it appeareth hereby, that being such, as they were, they abhorred from adultery, but their blindness appeared in this, that they abhorred not, but were ready to commit a greater sin, even the sin of murder.

But the greatest question is still behind, whether did not Abram sin in causing Sarai thus to dissemble: For although she told no lie in saying, she [Quest.] was his sister, yet in saying thus to the end, that they might not think her his wife, that some other man might take her to wife, how could it be without fault? And Abram seemeth herein the more blame-worthy, because God had so extraordinarily revealed himself unto him, and made him such gracious promises, that he needed not to doubt of his protection wheresoever? To this Chrysostom saith not directly, that Abram sinned herein, but that he consented to his wives adultery to save his own life, in so great fear was he of being slain. Jerome saith, it was foeda necessitas, whereby Abram was brought to do thus. And Origen for the foulness of the thing, will not have it understood literally, but allegorically. Calvin also and others of our new Writers hold this act of Abraham inexcusable from all fault. That he provided for the safety of his own life indeed is excusable, saith Calvin, and a fruit of his faith, because, according to God's promise he expected to be a father of a great Nation, and that through him a blessing should come to all nations, about which he did well to be solicitous in this time of danger, and in this respect, not to set by his wives chastity in respect of his own life being of so exceeding great consequence, although he loved her most dearly, and had rather otherwise to have endured death, then to have lived, to see her abused. Yet in that he devised this oblique way of saving himself, he saith, doth not seem excusable. His end was good, but through incogitancy he erred in the way, by using unlawful means. As therefore they re rash judges, that condemn this fact of Abram, so no man can deny a fall here in Abram, because he should have relied upon God's providence, referring the success to him. But on the other side, Augustine defendeth Abram, as free from all fault herein. For if Abram, saith he, had confessed her to be his wife, he had committed two things unto God to be defended, his own life and the chastity of his wife. Both these he could not find a means to defend, but one, viz. his life he could, he did then what he could, that he might not tempt God, what he could not, he committed unto God, he committed his wife to God, that she might not be polluted. And to the same effect speaketh Rupertus, saying, he committed his wives chastity to God, knowing assuredly that God, who brought him out of Ur of the Chaldees, could save her from the Ur, or Fire, that is, the lust of the Egyptians. But thou wilt say, why had he not the same confidence then, that God could preserve his life? I answer, he feared the Lord, and therefore would not tempt him. For he tempteth the Lord, who being in danger doth not exempt himself from as great part of the danger, as he can, but therein requireth a miracle, wherein human reason may afford some help, wherefore he concludeth, that Abram did wisely herein, and that the sequel approved his fact. And to this do I subscribe, it being ever far from me to impute sin to any of God's faithful servants, in anything, which they did, in which they have not been charged by the Lord with sin, neither can it be directly proved. Sarai was Abram's sister indeed, as he afterwards telleth Pharaoh, wherefore he put no more into her mouth, then the truth, and it is not to be thought, but that he was without doubt of her continency, although she were taken to Pharaohs house, and that whilst Pharaoh prepared to marry with her, God would provide for her deliverance. If he should at the first have confessed her to be his wife, there would have been danger of death unto him, and she should have remained the more exposed to the will of a barbarous people. I cannot see then, but that Abram's providence is to be applauded, in preventing one danger, which he could, by policy, and committing the deliverance of his wife, which he could not, to God's miraculous working. Neither was his expectation frustrated, as is here further dedeclared, for as he said, Sarai being beheld by the Egyptians was commended to Pharaoh, and taken into his house, and he was entreated well for her sake, and he had sheep, and oxen, and he-asses, and men-servants, and maid-servants, she-asses, and camels. This is added for explication, to show, what benefits Pharaoh bestowed upon Abram for his supposed sisters sake.

But God plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues, because of Sarai Abram's wife. What the judgment was, which now befell Pharaoh, Moses relateth not, but Philo saith, that Sarai being now in great danger to have her chastity violated, sought to the Lord for help, when her husband could afford her none, then he laid grievous torments upon the King, both in body and mind, so that he thought now upon nothing tending to lust, but how he might be exempt from this malady again, which vexed him day and night. And the same judgment was also upon the whole Court, and that justly, because no man resisted, but assented unto, and sought to satisfy the Kings lust. Josephus saith, that God smote the Court of Pharaoh with the pestilence, and that a sedition was raised amongst the people. The Rabbin's of the Jews say, that Sarai had an Angel to guard her, to whom when she spake against the King, or any man, that attempted to violate her chastity, he presently smote him, that he neither could nor would come near to her. Some think, that the judgment inflicted was the shutting up of wombs, as afterwards it is said of Abimelech and his people. But the the Text saith, great plagues and therefore I think rather with Philo, that some bodily diseases were laid upon them, whereby their minds were wholly averted from nuptial matters, and altogether made intent to their pangs, to think, how to be eased of them again. The relation of the Rabbin's smelleth, as many other things of theirs, of a fable, and to make good their report, they alter the words, because of Sarai Abram's wife, into these, at the word of Sarai. That of Josephus is improbable, for then many should have died. For another question arising here, how the punishing of Pharaohs whole house can be justified for his only fault. It hath been already answered [Quest.] by Philo, with whom Chrysostom speaketh the same. Yet Musculus thinketh not this a sufficient answer, because not only they, that told Pharaoh, and promoted this libidinous business, but all others of his house were punished also. Wherefore he answereth, that they had other sins, and that God took this occasion to punish them together therefore. But neither is this answer full enough, unless we add, this was done to make it apappear, how odious adulteries and rapes are before the Lord.

But Calvin maketh another question here yet, how God's plaguing of [Quest.] Pharaoh may be justified, seeing he knew not Sarai to be Abram's Wife, neither could he learn, but that she was free for him to marry withal? and answereth, that although there seemed to be no fault in Pharaoh, yet God saw a fault in him, viz. unbridled licentiousness, forsomuch as he was a King, and no man durst control him. Wherefore Kings are to be admonished from this example, to think always of another superior to them, and to use their power modestly. By former experiments surely Abram had learned, how Pharaoh was addicted, which made him so to fear. The cruelty of him and his it is likely was such, that if anything stood in their way to hinder them of their filthy Lusts, they would not stick to shed blood to remove it, and therefore although no actual sin was now committed, yet God, that looketh at the heart, saw that to be ill bent, and so punisheth most justly, which I thought good to add to Calvin's answer to make it more full. Saint Ambrose [Note.] hence taketh occasion to teach God to be protector of conjugal chastity, and the revenger of the same violated. For this place, saith he, yieldeth a great document and testimony of chastity, that no man affect the bed of another, or commit adultery with another man's Wife with hope of lying hid, or of impunity when he doth so, or be provoked unto it by the ignorance or foolishness of the Husband, or by his longer absence. The president of marriage, God is at hand, from whom nothing can be hidden, and whom none can escape, none elude: He defendeth the turn of the Husband being absent, he keepeth watch and ward, yea without watching he takes the guilty, before he doth the deed, for which he prepareth. Although (thou Adulterer) deceivest the Husband, yet thou canst not deceive God, and if thou escapest the Husband, and eludest the Judge of the Court, thou canst not yet escape the Judge of the whole World. Let such, as not ignorantly with Pharaoh here, but wittingly out of a filthy affection take to them other men's Wives, consider of these plagues upon Pharaoh, and be abashed at so great insolencies: for if the taking of another man's Wife, not known to be such, in way of marriage was punished with great plagues, how great shall the plagues of common Adulterers and Whore-mongers be?

And Pharaoh called Abram, and said, What is this, that thou hast done to me? why didst thou not tell me, that she was thy Wife? A question is here moved by Chrysostom, how Pharaoh knew, that she was Abram's Wife? and answereth, by the Revelation of God, which is the more probable, because in the like case God is said to have revealed it to Abimelech. Josephus saith, that he consulted with his Priests, what should be the cause of those judgments, who answered, for that he prepared to offer injury to the marriage of his guest; and happily it might be so indeed, because we read of the like done by the Philistines, when they were plagued, 1 Sam. 6. Ambrose noteth upon this, that Pharaoh was averse from adultery, it appearing by him, that nature teacheth to abhor therefrom, which is seconded by this, that other creatures some of them keep to one female only, and will not endure their females to couple with others.

Why didst thou say, she is my Sister? so I might have taken her to me to Wife. The Latin translation followed by Marlorat is, & tuli eam mihi in Uxorem, the vulgar Latin, ut tollerem eam mihi in Uxorem. It is the opinion of all Expositors, that he had not yet taken her, but meant to take her, according to the first reading. Chrysostom saith, that God made Pharaoh to desist by a most sharp punishment for the heinous wickedness intended. Theodoret, that so soon as Sarai was taken into Pharaohs house God laid a sickness upon him, and hereby, as by a band tied him from violating of her. This sickness blunted his lust, and so the hunter having gotten his prey in his net, could not yet enjoy it. Moses saith not here, that Pharaoh had not touched her, as afterwards of Abimelech, because it was then more material to know it, in regard of Isaac, with whom she went about that time, that it might be certainly known, that she had him by Abram, and not by any other, so Theodoret. Jerome conceived, that amongst the Egyptians Women might first be prepared, as amongst the Assyrians Hester was for Ahasuerus, and so although Sarai were many days at the Court, she might yet be inviolate. But forsomuch, as this is but a conjecture, I rather subscribe to Theodoret, that it was done by miracle, and indeed Chrysostom extolleth the miracle in this, as being equal to that in saving Daniel from the hungry Lions, because Pharaoh having gotten her, with whose beauty he was so much ravished, did yet refreine from the use of her.

And Pharaoh commanded his men concerning him, and they sent him away, and his Wife, and all that he had. Here also was a wonderful providence, that the King did not interpret this dissimulation of Abram, offering this Woman as his Sister to him, as a contempt, instead of sending him thus away, to take off his head, as Princes commonly, when they are grossly deluded, are wont to do: for this is not to be imputed to Pharaohs humanity, but a terror stricken into him by God, lest he should incur further danger. And men were used to conduct him, because, as is most probable, he was for the plagues hated of the people, lest they should offer violence to him. Betwixt that which befell Abram here, and his posterity afterwards, there is a notable similitude, as Rupertus observeth, so that the one may seem to prefigure the other. For as Abram, so Jacob with his came into Egypt, when there was a famine in Canaan. Again, as Abram had hard measure offered to him in the taking of his Wife from him, for which Pharaoh and his house were plagued, so to the Hebrews an hard measure was offered in taking away their male children, for which Egypt was plagued. Moreover, as Abram was sent away at length with all that he had, so were they with great riches. Lastly, as Abram after this fighteth against Kings, and overcometh them, and Melchizedek meeteth and blesseth him, so they fought against many Kings, and at length Christ Jesus figured out by Melchizedek cometh amongst them with the rich treasures of his blessings. The time that Abram tarried in Egypt, could not be very long, because that after his return from thence at the birth of Ishmael he was but 86. years old, so that betwixt his coming out of Haran to Canaan and that, only 10 years passed, whereof a great part was spent in Canaan, before his going down into Egypt, some part in travelling, and some after his departing from Egypt, in fighting for Lot, &c. So that, whereas in Eusebius 20 years are spoken of, that he abode in Egypt, that cannot be true, it is rather more probable, that he stayed not above a year or two at the most. It may seem strange, that Abram being challenged so by Pharaoh answereth nothing. But happily such haste was made to send him away, that he had no liberty to reply, so did the plagues of Pharaoh vex him, as afterwards that other Paaraoh, that in all haste he forced the Hebrews to be gone. How it might have been answered, appeareth upon the like occasion, in that which he said to Abimelech.

CHAP. XIII.

IN this Chapter is shown, how rich Abram returned from Egypt, which was, as we may gather, Chap. 12. 16. from the beneficence of King Pharaoh, but only, besides the cattle, which he is there said to have had, here his Silver and Gold is spoken of also. God's blessing was with him everywhere, as was promised, Chap. 12. 2. and hereby he increased thus greatly, for it is the blessing of God that maketh rich. So that to be rich simply is not to be in an evil estate, but for the pride and covetousness, which accompany riches, and for the wicked means, which men use to attain to riches. Rich men are commonly the more drowned in earthly cogitations and pleasures, the more they have, being the more bent to the things of this World, and the less regarding things, that belong to piety and virtue. But it was not thus with Abram, he goeth to the South again, from whence he had removed, Chap. 12. 9. holding on in a constant care to obey God in keeping him to that Land, unto which the Lord had brought him, not being discouraged by the want, with which he had met there before. And as he had made no stay before in the South, so now he tarrieth not, but hasteneth again to that place, where he had set up an Altar to the Lord, chap. 12. 8. even to the mount between Bethel and Ai, and there he calleth again upon the Name of the Lord, that is, did some solemn service by sacrificing, and praising, and publicly praying to the Lord. For, as Calvin noteth, we must not think, that at such times only he called upon God, as are expressly mentioned, for he did that doubtless continually, but at these times, he shown his devotion more publicly, that others might also be excited thereby. Let all rich men learn of Abram to be examples of piety to others, and not the less to regard God and good [Note.] duties, the more they abound. For these words Abraham was very rich. Verse 2. Hebr. he was very weighty: this is applied to weight of glory, Gen. 31. 1. and of people, 2 Kings 6. 14. and of cattle, Exod. 12. 38.

And Lot also, who went with Abram, had flocks, and herds, and tents. And the land was not able to bear them, &c. Lot, who accompanied Abram always, doth with him partake of God's blessings also, whence we may learn, that it is good to be in league with the godly, we shall be in the way of prospering the better therefore. But this their superabundance see what an effect it had, they could no longer dwell together, which doubtless must needs be grievous to Abram loving Lot his Nephew so dearly. This, as Calvin well noteth, fell out by a providence, that Abram flowing now with worldly wealth, might not be too much affected to the world, the vinegar of contention with one so near unto him being put to the sweet of his great increases before spoken of, that he might not be overmuch pleased with the taste thereof. And of the incommodities [Note.] of riches, it is good for us often to think, that we may not so earnestly desire them.

And there was a strife between the herdmen of Abram's cattle, and the herdmen of Lots cattle.

Philo entreating of this contention saith, that Lot growing rich, did carry himself variously towards Abram; sometimes familiarly and flatteringly, and sometimes contemptuously and proudly; and hereupon his servants observing their Master grew contentious and quarrelsome, railing upon and falling out with Abram's servants, but they for the mildness of their Master gave way unto them, who upon this grew more insolent and impudently bold, so that they were at length forced to betake themselves to arms. This Abram perceiving, and thinking, that his men being more, if they should go to it with blows, that his Nephew Lot might be made a sad man through the destruction of some of his men in this conflict, seeketh to prevent their intended fight, and so maketh offer to Lot to choose to go to some other place. About what in particular they quarrelled it is easy to conjecture, viz. for pastures and waters, whereof there were scarcity in those parts. But what is this, which is added, The Canaanites and Perizzites dwelled then in the land. Some say, that this was added to show, that the thing before spoken of might well be true, that the land could not contain the cattle of Abram and Lot: because not only they, but also the Canaanites and the Perizzites dwelt in that land, so that Abram and Lot could not have all, but such part of the land only, as they would spare them. Others, that it is premised, as a reason, why Abram sought to appease this contention, lest these uncircumcised seeing their quarrels should take occasion to speak ill of them and of their religion, and this is such a reason as the Apostle toucheth upon, 1 Cor. 6. 6. and thus it is commonly taken. Lastly, others taking it as a reason also, yet say that the force of it lieth thus, these heathen were infense enemies, and therefore waited but for an opportunity to invade these new-come guests, whom they could not but envy for their wealth and different religion. Abram therefore wisely foreseeing this danger, seeketh the rather to pacific the strife by dividing. Thus Calvin, to whom I rather subscribe, because it was most fit, having spoken of the strife of their servants, that he should set it down, if there were anything else which aggravated the mischief, as this indeed doth, that they dwelt not then with their families alone in the land, but in the midst of enemies, who whilst they by their dissensions wasted one another, would be the more glad, as thinking by this means to come shortly to make a prey of their great substance, and yet the other may be added well, as a second and third reason also.

And Abram said to Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, &c. That they two contended, is not said before, but only their servants: but, as was noted out of Philo, Lots servants took occasion to strive thus upon their Masters ill carriage towards Abram. Brethren, Abram saith, they were, and not only kinsmen, to move him the more, and amongst the Hebrews, kinsmen were commonly called brethren. Lo, here one, to whom wrong was [Note.] offered, seeketh to him that offered it, although he were his Uncle and Superior; to teach us to do likewise. And again, that this consideration, that we Christians are all brethren, should keep us in unity.

Is not the whole land before thee? Separate thyself I pray thee from me, if thou take the left hand, &c. Some gather from hence, that the land was but little inhabited, so that although in the place, where now they were, no more room might be had, yet further off there was room enough to inhabit and keep their cateel in. The Septuagint read it, If thou wilt go to the North, I will go to the South, happily, because the North was on the left hand, and the South on the right. Here the goodness of Abram doth yet more appear, in that for peace sake, he giveth his inferior his choice, as before through the lowliness of his mind he had made himself but equal to him, in saying, We are brethren.

And he lifted up his eyes, and behold, all the plain of Jordan was well watered every where, before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the Garden of the Lord, and like the land of Egypt, as thou comest into Zoar. This plain of Jordan by means of that famous river overflowing it becoming so fruitful, lay towards the five Cities, called Pentapolis, that were afterwards for the foul sins of the inhabitants destroyed by fire and brimstone, one of which was Zoar, or Segor, as some read it, chap. 14. 2. which is here mentioned. Now this whole tract of ground went commonly under the name of Sodom and Gomorrah, because (as is likely) they were the greatest, as being most known, and most commonly spoken of. And he saith, that it was a most pleasant place, even unto the entering of Zoar, comparing it for this cause with Paradise watered with four famous Rivers, and unto Egypt watered with the River Nile, for so was this place watered with the River Jordan. Yet some understand these words, as thou comest unto Zoar, as having reference to a part of Egypt, lying towards Zoar. But because it nowhere appeareth, that this part of Egypt was more fruitful than that, which lay towards other Cities of Palestine, I rather prefer the other exposition.

Then Lot chose him all the plain of Jordan, and journeyed from the East, &c. Here a question ariseth, how Lot can be said to have gone from the East, when as that place lay Eastward from Canaan? Our new Translation readeth it, Lot journeyed East, as if he had gone to the East, but in Hebrew it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from the East; not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to the East, howsoever some contend that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is sometime put for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , but, as Luther justly objecteth, some other place of Scripture then should be shown, where this particle is thus used, and because there cannot, he resolveth it by saying, that the place, to which Lot went, was Eastward on the other side of Ai, if respect be had to Abram's abode, or else that they separated in their journey out from Egypt, before their coming to the mountain between Bethel and Ai, and so that, which is here set down, is to be understood, as spoken by way of capitulation, or lastly, because the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be translated, from the beginning, for so the Chaldee Paraphrast rendereth it, Lot is said to have gone from the beginning, because he went first, betimes in the morning his way. But there is no need to seek to any of these shifts: for the place, in which they now were, was more Eastward, than that plain, to which Lot went, although in respect of those parts about Sodom, the land of Canaan, if the whole be considered, lay westward, and that Pentapolis be afterwards spoken of, as the East-limit of Canaan.

And Abram dwelt in the Land of Canaan, and Lot dwelt in the cities of the plain, and pitched his Tent towards Sodom. Now the men of Sodom were wicked, &c.

The cities of the plain were those five cities, which were destroyed afterwards with fire and brimstone. In these Lot is said to have dwelt, because sometimes in one, and sometimes in another, as was most convenient for the feeding of his cattle, until that he came to Sodom it self; of the wickedness of the people whereof Moses here telleth, to show, that Lot having his choice was not so happy herein, as Abram, because although he lived in a fruitful soil, yet he could not, but be vexed at the unclean conversation of the people, and as notorious sinning always bringeth down God's judgments, so by the sins of the Sodomites within a short time most horrible judgments were brought down upon that place, whereby Lot was put to more detriment by far, then he got gain there, and hardly escaped with his life. Yet, as Oecolampadius noteth, there was a providence in Lots coming thither, that they, having a Preacher of Righteousness amongst them before their destruction for sin, might the more justly be so severely proceeded against. It is to be noted, that he doth not only say, that they were wicked, but also sinners before the Lord exceedingly, to aggravate their wickedness, his meaning being, that they sinned so, that the cry of their sins went up to Heaven, into the presence of the Lord, as is afterwards expressed, Gen. 18. 21. Others say, that their impudent and open sinning is meant, for thus their sinning is described, Esa. 3. 9. Others, their sinning against their own conscience, which is known only to God. And lastly, some, their sinning, when they were admonished and reproved by the men God, such as Lot was. I rest in the first.

When Abram and Lot were thus separated, the Lord comforted Abram, bidding him to look towards all the quarters of Heaven, and promising, that his seed should inherit all that land forever, and that it should be innumerable, as the dust of the earth, bidding him therefore to walk through the breadth and length of all that land, whereupon he removed his tent, and came and dwelt in the plain of Mamre, which is Hebron, and built an Altar there to the Lord.

It it not to be doubted, but that Abram was troubled at Lots departing from him, and therefore the Lord comforteth him now again in this manner. But from what place could he look to see all the quarters of the land of Canaan? [Quest.] Oecolampadius saith, that the eyes of his mind, and not of his body are meat. But the place where he then was, was a Mount, and therefore fit to behold from thence, and to see far about every way, and therefore it is improbable, that he should mean any other looking then with the eyes of his body, being then so elevated, as then it was. But it may be thought impossible from any one place to see a country of that greatness full of mountains and valleys towards every quarter in the full extent thereof. And yet Moses is said likewise from mount Nebo to have seen all the land, before he died. To this Saint Augustine answereth thus: Abram did not see the whole land at one view, but he saw far into all the quarters Eastward, Westward, and Southward, having a promise that his seed should inherit, not so much only as he saw, but that which he then saw, and forth on, as far as that whole country extended towards every quarter of heaven, which is plainly intimated in that when he had bidden him look every way, he biddeth him to arise and walk over the breadth and the length of the land, that in his perambulation he might see the whole land every way in the full extent, which he promised unto him, because standing in one place he could not possibly do it. To this effect Augustine, but that I have made his answer a little more full. Some hold, that this speech was had to him in a dream, and so all was represented unto him, some, that God by his Divine power made him to see all at once setting before his eyes, as it were, the Map of all together, as the Devil shown Christ all the kingdoms of the earth in the twinkling of an eye. But it is not spoken, as if Abram were then sleeping but waking, and the speech doth not agree with that of the Devils showing to Christ the whole World, and therefore is not so to be expounded, and so Augustine's answer remaineth, as the only true solution of this doubt.

For that, which is said touching Abram's seed, that it should be as the dust of the earth, it is an hyperbolical speech. Touching the Lord's bidding of him to walk through the land in the breadth and length thereof, which it doth not appear by the History that he did, it is not to be understood therefore as an absolute command, but as if he had said: Walk through the length and breadth of it, if thou wilt, and take a full view of it, for it shall all be thine in thy posterity: or else when Abram is said to have gone and dwelt in the Plain of Mamre, the meaning is, that having gone through the land, as the Lord bade him, he finally came and dwelt in this place, as Musculus hath it. The Plain of Mamre is so translated, as the Plain of Moreh, Chap. 12. 6. the words thus rendered be in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Oak, or Thicket of Mamre, but how it cometh to be rendered the plain of Mamre, see there. The Chaldee Paraphrast, according to the word, rendereth it quercetum Mamre. This place was named from Mamre an inhabitant of that Country, who built him an house and dwelt there, being brother to Eshcol and Aner, mentioned, Chap. 14. ver. 13. as Abram's confederates, who grew into this league with him, because conversing together they were instructed by Abram in the knowledge of the true God. It was, as he writeth, distant from the place, where he dwelt before, viz. the mount between Bethel and Ai thirty miles, and near to Hebron, viz. but one mile off. But the Text saith, that it was Hebron, so that the city of Hebron included this place, as an appurtenance thereof. But the name of Hebron it obtained afterwards from Hebron, the son of Caleb, being before called Arbe, which signifieth four, for the four Patriarchs buried there, Adam, Abram, Isaac, and Jacob. In the Hebrew Commentaries, for the four, Abram, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre dwelling there. Here David reigned seven years, here the Priests dwelt, and this was one of the cities of refuge, and here now Abram buildeth another Altar, intending happily to make some long abode, that he might offer his sacrifices from time to time thereupon. Whereas, ver. 15. God promiseth this land to Abram and his forever, it is to be understood, that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here used doth not only signify to the end of the world, but to a certain period of time, which is their ever, of whom it is spoken, as 1 Sam. 1. 22. Hannah saith, that she will bring her child Samuel, and he should remain before the Lord 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that is, during his life, so Deut. 15. 17. Jer. 2. 19. So in this place forever, is during all the time of Abram's posterities being a peculiar people to the Lord. But at the propagation of the Gospel to all Nations, this time was terminated, they ceasing then to be the Lord's peculiar, the whole World, where the Gospel was embraced, becoming then the Lord's inheritance, and the children of Abram, as well, yea or rather, then his carnal posterity, because they were rejected for their infidelity, and these received. Saint Augustine handling this question divers times, as lib. 16. de Civit. Dei. c. 21. and cap. 17. lib qu. in Gen. qu. 31. lib. ad Orosium, cap 5. giveth divers answers, but that which is chiefly to be rested upon, is the same with the solution before going, that forever and eternally are not all one, although in translating that word, one be used oftentimes for the other. Because forever is manifestly put for a most long time, the end whereof is not mentioned, and so it is here to be understood. Or forever, is during that World, in the time whereof it is spoken, so that the time of the Gospel being, as it were, a new World, for the great alterations of all things, the old World was then ended, when this was preached, and so the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of that was fully expired at that time.

CHAP. XIV.

ANd it came to pass in the days of Amraphel King of Shinar, Anach King of Ellasar, Chedarlaomer King of Elam, and Tidall King of the Nations, &c. Why Moses inserteth this History here of the Wars of Heathen Kings may easily be gathered, viz. because Lot was amongst them, and Abram acted a part herein. And hereby is intimated, how the Lord did first more lightly [Note.] punish the Sodomites, after Lots coming and preaching repentance unto them, they being nothing moved hereby to break off from their foul sins, before he brought utter destruction upon them. And again, to what miseries they expose themselves, who for worldly respects mingle with the wicked, as Lot did. Lastly, with what courage and warlike virtue, the Lord endued Abram, as well as with humility and meekness, and how in all attempts he was with him to bless, prosper, and encourage him, and how full of courtesy he was, and free from all desire of the base gain of this World, so that he shown himself indeed a mirror of all manner of virtue. For the time, when these things were done, it was doubtless, as by the course of the History is intimated, after that Lot and he being parted, he dwelt in the Plain of Mamre, with whom, and his two Brethren he was grown in league, so that they went to this War with him, but precisely what year after, it cannot be determined. These Kings Josephus calleth four Emperors of the Assyrians living under the obedience of that great King of Assyria, who then was Emperor of Asia. Diodorus saith, that they were Persians, Eupolemüs, that they were Armenians, as Eusebius reporteth. But of the Armenians Moses speaketh nothing, and for the Persians, they came not to have a Kingdom, till long after this. But the Assyrians indeed had then taken the Kingdom from the Babylonians, and so he which is here called the King of Shinar, might well be the King of Babylon or of Assyria, seeing Babylon was in the land of Shinar, Gen. 11. 2. and the other three were either under him, or Confederates with him. Touching the name of the King of Assyria, Amraphel; I read nothing in other Histories, but that Ninus was the first, Semiramis his Queen the next, that reigned in that Empire, and Ninias or Nemeis, as Eusebius calleth him, the third, in whose time it is conjectured, that this War was made. Touching the second, Arioch King of Ellasar, in the vulgar Latin, King of Pontus, but erroneously, because Pontus was too far from hence, for the King thereof to come and War in this place. He is therefore held rather by most to have been King of a City in Palestine, and Stephanus nameth this to be Coelesyria. Touching the third, Chedarlaomer King of Elam, of the Elamites, came the Persians, who afterwards by their greatness obscured and put out the name of the Elamites. Touching the fourth, Tidal King of the Nations, he is thought by some to have been King of Galilee called Galilee of the Gentiles or Nations, because a place full of Ports, they repaired for traffic from all Countries thither. But Vatablus thinketh, that some place was called by the name of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 translated Nations, over which he reigned. Calvin, that the people, over whom he reigned, were Runnawayes from divers Nations, whom he received, making an Army of them.

These made War with Bera King of Sodom, Birshah King of Gomorrah, Shinab King of Admah, Shemeber King of Zeboiim, and the King of Bela which is Zoar.

If the signification of the names of these Kings be respected, as Oecolampadius noteth, they were very bad, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Bera signifieth in malice 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in wickedness, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he which hateth his Father. The fifth is not named, because happily his City was very small, called therefore Zoar, as we may see afterwards, Gen. 19. 22. and so he is omitted as a King of small reckoning. Now all these joined together in the valley of Siddim, which is the salt Sea. This valley of Siddim in the vulgar Latin Translation is rendered vallis sylvestris, and accordingly by Aquila and Theodotion, amoena nemora. But the Chaldee Paraphrast readeth it vallis agrorum The word Seed, or Sadeh, of which Siddim seemeth to come, signifieth to till a field plain, as when it is harrowed over, or make a wall plain and even by pargeting, so that if the word be taken Appellatively, it signifieth a Plain in the midst of tilled grounds. But it seemeth rather to be a proper name, and that the place was before full of Salt-pits, which after the burning of Sodom was turned into the Dead-Sea, being then, as it were a sea of Salt and Brimstone; wherefore Jerome saith, it may be expounded vallis salinarum, and for the Lake running there, being saltish, and the multitude of Salt-pits it might well be called the Salt-sea, according to the Hebrew phrase, whereby the congregating of many waters together is called a sea. It was not so, as is most probable, in times past, although some Lake did run there from the beginning, for the River Jordan runneth through this place, but Moses speaketh of it, as it was, when he wrote this Book through the judgment of God.

Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled. 5 And in the 14 year came Chedorlaomer, and the Kings that were with him, and smote the Rephaims in Ashteroth Carnaim, the Zuzims in Ham, and the Emims, &c.

Lyranus here examining the reason, why these four Kings coming against the five before commemorated, fought first against other people's, answereth, that most probably Chedorlaomer help them first in subduing their Enemies, and then they came on with him to helped him in subduing these his Rebells. For that he was not the chief amongst them, but rather the King of Shinar, appeareth by the order of Moses in placing of them, wherefore it was fit, that his turn should be first served, and then that Chedorlaomer should have help; but because the other Kings quarrels against the Rephaims, &c. did nothing concern this History, but Chedorlaomers only, because of Lot, who lived amongst the Sodomites, they are omitted by Moses, and that only is set down. Touching the people's, here said to be subdued, the Rephaims, Emims, &c. Saint Jerome saith, that the Rephaims were Giants most strong in Arabia near to Sodom, and Zuzims and Emims signify terribiles and horrendi, and accordingly indeed Moses speaketh of them, Deut. 2. 10, 20. calling the Zuzims in the Moabites language Zamzummims. Touching the Horites see also Deut. 2. 12. unto Elparan. Touching this wilderness see Numb. 13. 1. it was that, through which the children of Israel passed, when they went from Mount Sinai. Touching En- Mishpat, to which returning they came next, which he saith, is Cadesh. It signifieth the fountain of judgment being in the desert of Arabia, nigh to which was Cadesh a City, as Jerome saith. It was called En-Mishpat, not at the time of this War, but afterwards, because God judged or sentenced Moses and Aaron there, for that they glorified him not, when he brought waters out of the Rock. Here they smote all the Country of the Amalekites and the Amorites unto Hazzezon-Tamar. This by some is interpreted the City of Palme-trees, for Tamar signifieth a Palm-tree, and is now called Engedi. Now if any man shall marvel, why Moses doth so diligently commemorate these several people's thus smitten Chrysostom showeth that this was not done, but upon good consideration, that hereby the power of these barbarous Kings might the more appear, in that they overthrew and subdued all, wheresoever they came, yea, Giants and men of such might, as that they were terrible and dreadful to all their Neighbor Nations, that so the mighty power of God working with Abram might be the more magnified, they being overcome, and destroyed by him with so great facility and celerity. Against these four Kings, the five before spoken of go forth to fight, all whom Moses numbereth over again by name, adding that four fought against five, and overcame them, that God's hand might be acknowledged herein, the fewer prevailing against the more, through a just judgment upon them for their sins. For they had not only the advantage of the number, but also of the place, full of salt-pits, by them chosen purposely (without doubt) to entrap their enemies, being ignorant of the dangerous pits there on every side.

And the vale of Siddim was full of slime-pits, and the Kings of Sodom and Gomorrhah fled, and fell there, &c. Some say, that they cast themselves into these, to avoid the dint of the enemies sword, and so perished, but this cannot be, because the King of Sodom cometh after this to meet Abram, v. 17. The Hebrews feign, that these two Kings by chance fell in as they fled, but were preserved alive, that they might acknowledge God's power in bringing Abram out of the fire of the Chaldees. But this is a fiction touching Abram, only that which they say first is most likely to have been true, that they fell into some of these pits, but perished not, and so came out again when their enemies were gone, because otherwise the King of Sodom could not have come forth after this to meet Abram. To expound their falling in these pits of their armies falling, as some do, is forced, for it is spoken plainly of their persons, their armies being in that hurly burly mingled with the armies of the other Kings, and so many of them doubtless escaping to the mountains with others, or being taken prisoners,

And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew, &c. Touching the name Hebrew, enough hath been said Gen. 10. 21. Who it was that escaped, divers conjecture diversely, some that it was a godly man, some that it was Og the King of Bashan, but these are idle imaginations, it is most likely, that it was one of Lots servants, who knew the near relation of Lot to Abram, being preserved by a singular providence, that Abram might by him be thus stirred up for the rescue of Lot. Abram then dwelling in the plain of Mamre, and having him and his two brethren Eshcol and Aner, confederates with him, he armeth his trained servants borne in his own house 318, and pursueth them unto Dan.

Musculus moveth a question here, how Abram could make a league with Mamre and his brethren, they being Amorites, and so such as with whom his children afterwards were forbidden to make any league, Deut. 7. • , 3? To this he answereth first, that they sought it of him, as is most probable, and therefore it tended to God's glory. Secondly, that at this time they had the possession of the land of Canaan, neither were they yet to be expelled, and therefore Abram was not now tied from making leagues with them, as his children were afterwards. And Oecolampadius noteth, that hereby this entering of them into league together appeared to be of God, in that to assist Abram a stranger they would thus adventure themselves to go and fight with him against four such Kings being Victours so many times, and by their victories so fleshed, as they were to quell all assailants. But if they were converted by Abram, as H. Bunting noted before, v. 18. all this question is cut off. By the number of men, that Abram had able to bear arms, it appeareth, that he was a Prince amongst this people, and so other Lord's or Princes, such as it is likely these were, might well seek to be in league with him. These 318 saith Josephus, were all Captains, having everyone his band of men, but this is incredible. A necessary question here offereth itself, how this expedition of [Quest.] Abram may be justified, seeing the Sodomites and the rest were subjects to Chedorlaomer, and in his thus coming against them for their rebellion, he did no more than agree with justice? Moreover Abram was not armed by any public authority, which is a necessary thing required in him that taketh up the sword to shed blood; for against all private persons that of the Lord holdeth; He which taketh up the sword, shall perish with the sword. There is one who handleth this question, & having set down such things, as must necessarily concur to the making of a just war, as 1 a just cause, 2 a right intention, 3 such a state and condition of life, as agreeth with warfaring, 4 a measure in revenging injuries, 5 lawful authority, 6 wisdom and providence, that he which maketh war bring not himself and his into danger. He saith, that all these concurred in Abram, for it is most probable, that Chedorlaomer at the first subdued these Cities unjustly by force, compelling them tyrannically to serve him, and his cause was just, and by the joining of Aner, Eshcoll, and Mamre Princes of that Country with him, it appeareth, that he was armed by the authority of the Kings there, and certainly he had such a confidence in God's help, with whom he had such familiarity, that he knew he went not without him, so that even with those few he had full assurance to prevail, and as for the other things requisite, there is no doubt to be made of them. And unto this we may add, that Lot his brothers son being but a stranger in that land, and living innocently towards all was manifestly wronged, for whose cause especially he undertook that expedition. Touching the place called Dan, to which he pursued them, it was before called Lais, until that the tribe of Dan, the old inhabitants being expelled, inhabited there, from whence it afterwards took the name. To this place from Hebron, H. Bunting saith, it was one hundred twenty four miles. It was the furthest North-coast of all the land of Canaan, according to Hieronymus, and within 4 miles of Paneas in Phoenicia: From this Dan, he saith also, that Jordan took the name, because it rose from two Rivers meeting here together.

And he divide himself against them, he and his servants by night, and smote and pursued them unto Hoba, which is on the left hand of Damascus. Abram came to the camp of his enemies, as Josephus saith, the fifth night after that he set forth. Hoba was a Town, inhabited afterwards by Christians called Ebionites, according to Jerome. R. Solomon denieth it to be a proper name, and saith, that Dan was called so for the great fault of Idolatry committed by the Danites, because Hoba signifieth a fault. But that it was a divers place is plain, because from Dan he pursued them hither. The vulgar Latin hath it Hoba in Phoenicia in some copies, but it is not so in the Hebrew or Septuagint. The great prudence of Abram appeareth by his dividing of his Army thus, that he might rush upon his enemies unprepared in many places at once. Although he and his servants only be spoken of, yet it is not to be doubted, but that his confederates with their servants are meant also, for they all now served him in this war.

And the King of Sodom went out to meet him at the valley of Saneh, which is the Kings Dale. Of this Saneh it was spoken before, v. 5. It was a City of the Emims near to Sodom, adjoining unto which was a spacious plain, called the plain or valley of Saneh, extended from the mountains of Gilboa and Hermon all along by the River Jordan even to the dead sea, according to Brocardus. Here it is likely, that the King was wont to exercise himself with his soldiers, for which cause it was called the Kings Dale. And accordingly the Chaldee Paraphrast saith, Ipse erat locus stadii Regis.

And Melchizedek King of Salem brought forth bread and wine, and he was a Priest of the most high God, &c.

Touching Melchizedek, what the divers opinions of Expositors are, and of Abram's paying of tithe unto him, I have spoken enough in my Expositions upon the New Testament, Heb. 7. so that I shall spare that labor here. The Hebrews generally hold him to have been Shem. The Hierosolym. Targum saith, this was Shem the great, so R. Eliezer and Talmud Babyl. but with what probability see upon Heb. 7. His bringing forth of bread and wine is thought by some to have been to refresh Abraham and his soldiers, by others both to offer sacrifice first unto God, and then for this end also.

And the King of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself. 22 And Abram said, I have lifted up my hand to the Lord, the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth, 23 That I will not take from thee a thread even to a shcelatchet, &c.

The King of Sodom hereby desired to express his gratitude unto Abram in that he offereth him all the recovered prey, which doubtless was great, forsomuch as these Cities were very rich, and fruitfully situated. But Abram although he had made this war at his own charge, doth utterly refuse to take any part thereof in way of satisfaction, and much less to enrich himself thereby; thus showing a mind most free from covetousness, contrary to that which is in mighty Victours. For the oath here taken by him, I have lift up my hand, &c. it may seem to have been needless, because without it he might well have refused these goods. Calvin saith, that some hold, that he sware thus, to instruct the King of Sodom in the knowledge of the true God, but indeed, there are two other reasons. 1 That he thought that the King of Sodom and others measuring him by themselves, would not have believed him without an oath, speaking of a thing so unusual amongst other great men in the like case. 2 That by interposing the name of God, he might bind himself against all temptations in this matter. And so his saying, I have lift up my hand, &c. is, as if he had said, I do lift up my hand in calling upon the Lord, and to do so to me and more also, if I take ought, &c. But for his describing God in this full manner, The Lord, the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth, he doth it to instruct the Heathen King in the knowledge of the only true God, lest thou shouldst say, I have made Abram rich: this is not spoken in disdain, but to show his affiance in God to be supplied with wealth sufficient. A good man will not be enriched by anything of the [Note.] Sodomites.

Save only that which the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men that went with me, &c. Although Abram would not take anything to himself of that, which by the law of arms he might, yet he will not make a law for others, but leaveth them to take their parts: so we must not require, that others should always do as we do in points of liberality, for this were too much morosity, as Musculus speaketh. But why did he not except the tithes [Quest.] also given to Melchizedek? Ans. A tithe was to be paid of custom to God in way of gratitude, and therefore there was no need to mention this: but some will have the tithes paid to be understood of the tithes of the goods of those four Kings whom Abram overthrew, and therefore, that Abram spake nothing of them. But he is said to have given to Melchizedek the tithe of all, and that in the presence of the King of Sodom, and so there was no need to except them.

CHAP. XV.

AFter these things, the Word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not Abram, I am thy shield, and thine exceeding great reward. That is, after the Victory before commemorated, and his refusing of any gain thereby, to confirm him against all other enemies, and in the contempt of these worldly things, in respect of which he had shown such an heroical mind. Some, as Calvin saith, imagine, that some ill accident had befallen Abram, making him to fear, and filling his mind with new troubles, because it is said, Fear not Abram; but this is only conjectural: more probably, he might conceive, that although he had gotten this Victory, yet those barbarous people might repair their forces again, and come upon him with a greater power. Moreover, the people of that Country might envy him for that his great good success, and forecasting, that in time he might assault them, and seek to get dominion over them, mutter something against him tending to a conspiracy, which might make him afraid. And lastly, his mind might happily upon this Victory be ready to enter upon new conceits of making himself great by the sword; wherefore to prevent this, or to confirm him against those other fears, the Lord apearing, spake thus unto him; to this effect Calvin. But this vision cometh so plainly upon his contempt shown of worldly gain offered unto him, as that I think it vain to seek after any other reason then that, which was rendered at the first. After these things, in the Hebrew is, after these words, whereupon Chrysostom expoundeth it accordingly, after that he had spoken to the King of Sodom, and by that speech of his calling God therein, the most high God, Possessour of heaven and earth, thus instructing the Heathen in the knowledge of the only true God, he appeared unto him, saying, Fear not Abram, fear not, that thy substance shall now be the less, because thou hast refused to increase it by the goods offered thee. But the Hebrews do not only set forth words, but things done, commonly by this phrase, and therefore that Father doth also add, after that he had paid tithes to Melchizedek, and performed all things before related.

Touching the time, it is uncertain, how long after, but by the Septuagint the words are rendered thus: The Word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision by night, which Chrysostom also followeth and many others, saying, that the night was the most quiet time, and fittest for this revelation, and that it was in the night, is most probable, because he biddeth him to look up to the stars, and number them if he could, saying, that so his seed should be. Yet some there are, that think this vision was in the day, because of that which followeth, where mention is made of the Sun going down, ver. 9, 10, 11, 12. But it may be, that Abram took those beasts, and divided them the next day, which was the fittest time for such actions. But Abram was not asleep, when the Lord spake thus unto him, as appeareth by their collocution. But whether did Abram [Quest.] now see any apparition? To this it is generally answered, that he did, an Angel of the Lord representing the Lord's person appeared and spake thus unto him, and that he saw something, is intimated in the word vision. Now that which the Lord said unto him in this vision, was, that he was his buckler and his exceeding great reward, that is, both a protector, as he had late experience in his war. And whereas he refused the gifts and rewards offered by the King of Sodom, he was and would be a great reward unto him. For to have God on our side is more, then to have all worldly wealth. And this may be a comfort to every faithful person, when by refusing to take the courses of gain [Note.] used by the world, he debarreth himself from any benefit, he gaineth hereby, for he hath God himself for his reward.

And Abram said, Lord God, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the Steward of my house is this Eliezar of Damascus, &c.

By this speech Abram seemeth to set light by the comfort in this vision given unto him by the Lord, as if he should have said, Thou promisest indeed great favor unto me, but I know nothing, which may be done more for me, wherein I can have any great comfort, unless I might have a child to possess the goods, which thou blessest me withal. For alas, I am now an old man, and going out of the world, if then I have no children, though I abound with wealth, as thy promise seemeth to imply, it will be nothing unto me. Now Abram spake not thus, as being ungrateful for so great a favor, but as putting the Lord in mind of that promise touching seed, and such seed, as wherein all the Nations of the earth should be blessed, he thinking it now high time, if ever, for the Lord to remember him herein, which indeed he prized above all Worldly wealth, not only out of a natural desire of issue, but because upon this other great promises of inheriting that Land, and of blessing upon all Nations did depend. I go childless, in the Septuagint's Translation it is: I am dismissed without children, that is, I being old die childless. Chrysostom according to this noteth, that to die for the servants of God is to be dismissed or let go, we being tied and bound, as it were, whilst we live in this world, and then let go free. So Saint Paul, desiring to be dissolved. And this word going, is often used for dying, so Luke 22. I go away, as it is written, and, Luke 2. Now lettest thou thy servant depart. And the Steward of my house is this Eliezar of Damascus. In the Hebrew these words are thus read, the son of Mesech of my house, &c. And by the Septuagint the word Mesech is retained, as a proper name. Vatablus expounding this word, rendereth it filius derelictionis domûs meae, that is, the son, to whom I have left all the care of my family-affairs, which is, if a man will render it in one word, according to our translation, the Steward of my house: & so it is rendered by