Commentary on Genesis and Exodus

QUEST. I. What the heaven and earth was, created in the beginning. verse. 1.

Vers. 1. IN the beginning God made heaven and earth, &c. 1. Moses here doth not only generally, or summarily set down the creation of the world, which afterward is described in particular, which was the opinion of Chrysostom, remembered by Augustine, lib. 2. cont. Manich. c. 3. 2. Nor yet do we understand a certain first matter, whereof the heaven and earth were afterward made, as Augustine seemeth to think. lib. 1. Genes. cont. Manich. c. 7. and one Philastrius Bishop of Brixia, doth affirm it to be heresy to say that this was the element of the earth, afterward created, but another earth, as the matter whereof other things were made: catalog. haeres. 3. Neither yet do we approve the opinion of the Schoolmen, which by the heaven understand only Coelum empyreum, the highest heaven above the starry sky, the seat of the Angels and blessed Spirits: and by the earth a confused substance, whereout other things were formed afterward: of which opinion were Alcuinus, Rabanus, Lyranus, Tostatus, Catharinus, with others: for Moses specially intendeth to set down the creation of things visible: and David expounding Moses, speaketh of these heavens here created, which should perish, Psal. 102.25. which are not those highest heavens subject to no change. 4. Neither yet do we here exclude the creation of those invisible heavens with Mercerus: but in this word comprehend as well the invisible, as visible heavens, Colos. 1.16. Iun. 5. This heaven and earth then here mentioned to be created in the beginning, are the same heaven and earth, which are now, comprehending the general matter and seed, whereout all other things in heaven and earth were made: first created in the matter, afterward perfected in form, and lastly beautified with their ornaments; this then was the order of the creation. First, the same heaven and earth were created in a confused substance, and unformed matter: then the form was added, in the first and second days works. Lastly, the ornaments produced, as trees and plants, and beasts in the earth, stars in the sky, fishes in the sea, fowls in the air.

Thus S. Paul expoundeth Moses, that God made the heaven and earth, Act. 14.15. God made the world. Acts 17.24. so that this heaven and earth, first made, was no other than the world, though not yet set in perfect order. Of this opinion are Basil, Ambrose, Theodoret, and most of the ancient Writers.

QUEST. II. What beginning Moses speaketh of.

Vers. 1. IN the beginning, &c. 1. This is neither to be understood, as John saith, in the beginning was the word: for there he speaketh of a beginning without a beginning, that is, from everlasting: but this was the beginning of the creation or being of things. 2. Neither is it to be understood causally, in the beginning: that is, for the beginning: as for Israel's cause, or for the law, as the Hebrews: for God created all things for himself, Prov. 16.4. It is also a forced exposition, by this beginning to understand Christ: although the doctrine be most sound, that all things were created by him. 4. Nor yet, as Abe • Ezra, is this clause in the beginning, used here, syntactice, in construction with the next word: as though this should be the sense, in the beginning of creating, or when God created: and so the sense should be suspended, till the second or third verse: for then he would have said bar • , in the infinite, not bara in the prae • ertence: as it is used, Chap. 5.1. 5. Wherefore Moses saith in the beginning, in respect of the things created: that in that beginning, when God purposed to create the world, he made first heaven and earth of nothing. Mercer. Junius.

QUEST. III. Hebrews curious observations.

Vers. 1. GOd created heaven and earth, &c. 1. The Hebrews have here many curious observations, which I will not stand upon: as 1. by the letters of the two first words, bereshith, bara, they note the time from the beginning of the world until the Messiah, Aleph and beth signify 3000. r • sh, shin, tau, 900. jod, 10. that is, • 910. which doth not much differ from the just time, according to the computation of some, from the creation to the Messiah. 2. They note the duration or continuance of the world, for 6000. years, because aleph is six times found in the first verse. 3. By the 7. words of the first verse, they would have signified the 7. days of the week, and the 7. planets. These observations are more curious than profitable. 2. So is that question which is controversed among the Rabbins, whether the heaven or earth were made first: they think, that heaven being first named, was first made: but that reason is not firm: for the earth is named before the heavens. Gen. 2.4. and the manner of the Scripture is to mention that last, which is treated of first: as in the second verse Moses beginneth again to speak of the earth. Paguin. Wherefore it is most like, that God made the heavens and earth together in their first matter: as the cup and the cover: as in an egg the yolke and the white, as in a circle the center and circumference. Mercer. And this first creating of the heaven and earth, was a part of the first days work. Luther. For otherwise the Lord had not made all things in six days, contrary to the Scripture. Exod. 20.11.

QVETS. IIII. How the earth is said to be without form and void.

Vers. 2. THe earth was without form. 1. The earth is here so called by way of preoccupation: for it was not yet so called till the third days work. verse. 10. Vatab. 2. The heaven was also without his form, though not altogether so confused as the earth: for there being no light yet created, both the heaven and earth were unformed and imperfect. 3. The earth is said as yet to be, tohu and bohu, emptiness and vacuity: this tohu, was not that materia prima, which the Philosophers dreamed of, and bohu to be the form of things not yet applied to the matter: as though the heavens and earth had been made of some precedent matter, whereas indeed God made the heaven and earth of nothing: which long continued not in this imperfect estate, the light being the same day created. 4. The darkness here spoken of, was neither the element of fire, as some Hebrews imagine, which if it be, is bright and transparent: neither is it the same with tohu before mentioned, as R. Levi: neither was it anything created, and a far greater darkness, than that which afterward was called the night, wherein there is some light of the stars: but it was a mere privation of light afterward created. 5. The waters here mentioned which covered the deep as a garment in the beginning, Psal. 104. 6. were before comprehended under the name of earth, as all the inferior elements beside, as the superior parts of the world are insinuate by the heaven. Mercer.

QUEST. V. What is meant by the Spirit moved upon the waters?

THe Spirit of God moved, &c. By the Spirit here 1. we neither understand an Angel, which is the dream of Cajetan, for God needed not the ministry of Angels in making the world. 2. Nor yet the wind, as Tertullian. lib. cont. Hermog. 3. Nor the air, as Theodoret. qu. 8. in Genes. If God had no use of the Angels to make the world, much less of inferior creatures. 4. But this was the Spirit of God, whereby the creatures were fostered and formed. Job. 26.13. His Spirit hath garnished the heavens.

QUEST. VI. What was the light created the first day?

Vers. 2. GOd said, let there be light, &c. Some do think that this was a spiritual, no natural or corporal light. August. lib. 1. in Genes. ad lit. c. 3. Rupert. 1. lib. de Trinitat. c. 10. but that cannot be, seeing this light made a visible and apparent difference between the day and night. 2. Some think it was the perfect light of the Sun, which was created the first day, but afterward rehearsed to be made in the fourth; Catharinus: but this is contrary to the text: for the Sun was made the fourth day. 3. Others think, that it was a bright and lightsome cloud, which was carried about, and gave light to the world, as Beda, Lyranus, Magister Sentent. &c. 4. Others, that it was a light without a subject, afterward fastened to the body of the Sun, as Basil. homil. in Genes. 6.5. Others, that it was an exceeding bright shining light, such as no mortal nature could behold, being whole and altogether, and therefore it was afterward dispersed into divers bodies of the Sun, Moon, and Stars: so Nazianzen, Theodoret; qu. 14. in Genes. 6. Some think it was the light of the Sun yet imperfect, afterward perfected, enlarged, and beautified, Aquinas part. 1. qu. 67. art. 4. Thus we see how variable and inconstant men's opinions are, when they search into curious matters, and inquire after hid things: but it sufficeth us to know that God made the light, before the Sun, that we should not attribute that to the creature, which was the work only of the Creator: what manner of light it was, where placed, how it moved, how long it continued, because in Scripture there is no certainty, busily to search it were curiosity: it is most like, that it was a certain light, which was not extinguished, when the Sun was created, but rather increased, Vatab. Mercer.

And it is not unlike, but that this light proceeded from the element of fire, (as thinketh Damascene, lib. 2. de sid. c. 7. and Junius, ) as an effect thereof: and whereas it may be objected, that this light was moveable from one hemispheare to another, as causing day and night, whereas the elements, as the air, are universally dispersed and spread: it is also probable, that this light might be gathered to that side of the earth where it was day, and so to continue for a time, as we see the water was afterward brought to one place, and so continueth: which light after the creation of the celestial bodies, might be drawn upward, and have his reflection upon the beam of the Sun and of other Stars.

QUEST. VII. How the evening and morning were the first day.

Vers. 4. THe evening and morning were the first day. 1. Some think that the evening is here taken for the day, because it is the end thereof, and the morning for the night, being likewise the end thereof, and that the artificial day was before the night. So Ambrose, Chrysost. hom. 3. in Genes. 2. Others affirm the contrary, that the evening and morning, are taken for the night and day, being the beginning thereof, the part for the whole, and do gather thereof that the night belongeth to the day following: of this judgment is Jerome, in cap. 2. Jonah: which I hold to be the sounder, for these two reasons: 1. because this is the use of the Scripture, to account the natural day from evening to evening, Levite. 23.32. From evening to evening shall you celebrate the Sabbath. 2. The morning is part of the day, and not of the night, Mark. 16.2. In the morning the first day of the week : the word is [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ,] the same which is here used by the Septuag: for if the morning were part of the night, and not of the day, Christ in no sense could be said to have risen the third day, and so one of the principal points of our faith should be shaken. 3. Further, we refuse Eugubinus conceit, which thinketh that in this first day, there was only an evening, not a morning, as in the rest; because the morning followeth after the night: but here no night went before, but the light was first: for the words of Moses are plain and evident, that the evening and morning were the first day: it consisteth of both these parts, as the other days did: and this first day had also a night going before: not that darkness, which was upon the earth, as Junius, but when God purposed to make the light, he first caused the night to go before, and brought forth the light of the day, Ramban, Mercer. 4. And the Sun not being yet made, which by his course and turning about maketh it day and night at the same time in diverse places: it may be thought, that it was day and night at the same instant now over the face of the whole earth. Mercer.

QUEST. VIII. How God is said to see the light to be good.

Vers. 4. GOd saw the light. 1. Not that God did not know the light to be good, before he made it: but Moses speaketh here according to our capacity, that God approveth and ratifieth that work now done, which before he purposed to make: and Ramban well referreth it to the steadfastness and continuance of this work, which God saw to be good. 2. God made a separation between light and darkness, not only in respect of their names, as Ibn Ezra: but in the things themselves, giving to each of them their determined time. Mercer. 3. And in that it is said, God called the light day, &c. 1. God only did not make and ordain the light to be the day, Iun. Muscul. 2. nor yet directed or taught men so to call it, Vatab. Mercer. 3. but beside God gave these names himself. Oecolamp.

QUEST. IX. Why it is called the first or one day.

Vers. 5. WEre the first day, or one day, as the Chaldee, Septuagint, and Jerome translate. It is called then one, and not the first day, 1. not as R. Sol. because there was but one God in the world, for so there was but one likewise in the rest of the days. 2. Neither, as Jerome, because unity is good, and two bringeth division: for after the first day, noxious and hurtful things were created. But the contrary is evident out of the text, that God saw that all which he made, was good. 3. Neither, as R. Moss. is it called one day, because there were yet no more: for it is so called in respect of the rest that follow. 4. Wherefore the reason is this: the Hebrews use, Cardinal numbers, for Ordinal, as the Grammarians speak: as one for the first: as Gen. 2.10. the name of the one, that is, of the first is Pishon: so likewise in the New Testament, Vna sabbati, one day of the week is taken for the first day. Mercer.

QUEST. X. Whether there are waters above the heavens.

Vers. 7. BY the firmament, which separated the waters which were under the firmament, from the waters above the firmament, divers of the ancient Writers understand the starry heaven, and that there are waters above those heavens which serve to mitigate the heat of the Stars, and from whence that abundance of rain came, wherewith the world was overflown: so Basil. hom. 3. Hexemer. Ambrose. lib. 2. in Hexemer. c. 2. Beda ▪ with others. But this cannot be so: 1. for that the waters being of an heavy substance, must be there kept against nature. 2. Neither could the great waters that drowned the world, come from thence, unless the heavens also should have been dissolved: the windows of heaven were opened, which was nothing else but the opening and loosing of the clouds, which as God's bottles did pour down rain abundantly. 3. Neither are we to imagine such heat in the celestial bodies (which are of no fiery or elemental nature) that they need to be refrigerated, or cooled. This firmament then is the spreading or stretching out of the air, as the word rachiang signifieth, which divideth the rain and waters in the clouds, and keepeth them from the waters below: as is expressed in Job. 26.6. which bindeth the waters in the clouds, and the cloud is not broken under them. Now whereas afterward, verse. 14. it is said, Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven: it followeth not, that the firmament before spoken of, is the starry heaven; for Moses here speaketh after the capacity of the vulgar people, who imagine the Stars to be in the firmament of the air, the eye being not able to distinguish between the region of the air, and the azure sky. And according to the vulgar opinion, Moses also calleth the Moon a great light, because it so seemeth to the eye, to be the next in greatness to the Sun: whereas many other, both of the wandering and fixed Stars, do exceed it in greatness.

And whereas that place is objected, Psal. 148.4. Praise him ye waters above the heavens: by heaven we are here to understand the lower region of the air, as Psal. 18.13. The Lord thundered in heaven, and gave his voice hailstones and coals of fire: but thunder, lightning, hail, come not properly from the heaven, but out of the air. Hereunto agreeth the name given unto heaven, which is called shamaiim, of sham and maiim: there is water: which agreeth first unto the inferior region of the air, where the rain is engendered. This name also is applied to the higher heavens also: because the eye maketh no difference between them: Mercer.

QUEST. XI. How the waters were gathered together that covered the earth.

Vers. 9. GOd said again: let the waters under heaven be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear, and it was so. Out of these words divers questions are moved, not unnecessary to be known, nor unprofitable to be handled, which shall be touched in their order.

First it is inquired how the waters, and whether they were gathered together, which before covered the face of the whole earth. 1. Some think, that the earth was this second day created, and by the earth mentioned v. 1. that matter is understood, whereof the world was afterward made. Of this opinion is the Master of sentences, and Hugo lib. 1. de sacramentis ; but we refuse it, because the Lord saith not, let there be earth, as when he maketh other things, but only, let the dry land appear: whereby it is evident, that the earth was made before, but now severed from the waters.

2. Some think that the earth was equal and plain without hills and mountains, that the waters might more speedily run together, and that this inequality that now is of the ground, begun after the flood: but this conceit is contrary to the Scriptures, Gen. 7.10. The waters prevailed fifteen cubits above the mountains. Prov. 8.25. Wisdom was begotten before the mountains and hills: therefore in the beginning there were both mountains and hills.

3. Others imagine, that the waters were dried up by the fervent heat of the Sun, and that the Northern parts of the earth began to appear first, as the higher ground, and the rest of the earth by little and little. Eugubinus in Cosmopeia.

4. Others, that the earth was dried by a mighty wind, as it was after the deluge: see Tostatus. But neither of these two opinions are probable: for the dry earth appearing all at once, was so prepared by a greater power, than either of the Sun or wind, which could not work it at once, and hardly in continuance of long time.

5. Some think, that the waters did run together, and cover the other part of the earth, opposite to this where we dwell, as Augustine seemeth to think, lib. 16. de civitate dei, c. 9. But the experience of skillful Navigators, as of sir Francis Drake, Master Candish, with others, (who by their famous travels have compassed the wide Ocean) hath found that part of the world to be habitable as ours is, and not to be under the water.

6. Paulus Burgens. hath a strange device of this matter: he thinketh that the water maketh a globe by it self, and hath his proper center, and so likewise the earth, and this is the cause why the earth appeared dry, because the water did forsake the land, and was gathered to his own center: in addition. ad postil. Nicol. de Lyra. But this opinion is very false and absurd: First, for that the text saith, that the water at the first covered the earth, v. 1. and so made but one globe with the earth, pressing to the same center: unless he will say, that God made a new kind of water the second day, and endued it with new qualities, which cannot be affirmed. Secondly, Isaiah 40.22. The Lord is said to sit upon the circle of the earth: the word is chugh, a sphere or circle: as Job 22.14. He walketh in the circle of heaven: But experience showeth, that the earth without the sea maketh not a round globe or circle.

7. Some think that the Sea is much higher than the land, and so the waters were gathered as it were to a great heap, that the dry land might appear. Thus Basil thinketh, and Ambrose in his Hexem • ron, l. 3. c. 2. but that this is not so, it shall be shown in the next question.

8. Wherefore leaving these uncertain opinions, I rather incline to think that these might be the means and causes of the appearing of the dry land, and separation of the waters. First the water while it compassed the earth, being of a lighter and thinner matter, might be coagulate together and thickened, as we see the sea water is of a grosser substance than the fresh water, & so be contained in a less compass than before: so Augustine, lib. 1. de Genes. ad literam, 12. and Beda in his Hexemer. Secondly, the clouds being made this second day, and the region or stretching forth of the air called the firmament brought into fashion, it is no other like, but that a great part of the water was extenuate and evaporate into the air and clouds, a daily experiment whereof we have by the conversion of the mists & clouds into water. Thirdly, the earth being much greater and deeper than the circumference of the water, which compassed the earth, might easily receive the water into the concavities and hollow places thereof, which were appointed of God to be receptacles for the water. And that the earth is of a greater depth than the water, that did at the first cover it, thus it may appear, by taking the just measure of the compass o • the earth, and so of the diameter, that is, the through measure thereof.

Then for the compass & circuit of the earth, Aristotle affirmeth it to contain 50000, Italian miles • ib▪ 2. de coelo: Hypparchus as Pliny witnesseth, 34625. miles: Eratosthenes 31500. miles: Ptolemy 22500. whom Basil followeth: Alphrag • nus 21500. Pharnelius 24514. But of late they which have compassed the whole Ocean, do find the circuit of the earth to be but 19080. nineteen thousand and fourscore miles. And the diameter thereof is found to be 7000. miles, the semidiameter or space from the center of the earth to the circumference 3500 miles. Now what the depth of the water was above the earth, may be conjectured by the height of the middle region of the air, which is found by Mathematicians not to exceed 60. miles, as they gather both by the twilights which extend no further, and by the distance of meteors and exhalations, which appear in the air.

Now the earth so far exceeding the water in depth, might easily receive it into the hollow places & concavities thereof, which also is insinuated by the Hebrew word, Kava, that here signifieth to congregate or gather together, from whence the latin word Cavus, hollow, may seem to be derived, as Pererius well noteth. And this lastly, is Ambrose conjecture, that God did enlarge the low places of the earth, and the force also of the waters might make them deeper, lib. 3. Hexem. c. 2. And this is agreeable to the Scripture, Ps. 104.8. The waters descend to the place which thou hast founded for them: the word Iasadh signifieth to lay a foundation; so that God did make a low foundation for the waters in the earth. And in the same place the Prophet showeth the manner how the waters were dispersed, that whereas they covered the earth as a garment, and stood upon the mountains: at the rebuke of God they did flee, and ascended by the mountains, and went down by the valleys, to the place appointed for them. 104. v. 6, 7, 8.

QUEST. XII. Whether the Sea be higher than the earth.

SEcondly, we are to inquire whether the Sea be higher than the earth, which was, as I shown, the opinion of Basil and Ambrose with others, that think that the waters are kept by God's extraordinary power and miraculous work, that they return not to cover the earth: and that place is alleged, Psal. 104.6. The waters stand above the mountains: v. 9. Thou hast set them their bounds, which they shall not pass, &c. and Ierem. 5.22. Will ye not fear my presence, which have set the sand for the bounds of the sea, by a perpetual decree, that it cannot pass it, and though the waves thereof rage, yet can they not prevail? &c.

For answer hereunto, we say, that in the first place the Prophet speaketh of the first situation of the waters above the earth and hills, before by God's commandment they went to their place. In the next the Prophet speaketh not of any myraculous work against nature, but of the ordinary providence of God by natural means, keeping back and bounding the Sea: as the Prophet giveth the like instance of the rain, verse. 24. They say not in their heart, let us fear the Lord, that giveth rain in due season, early and late, and reserveth the appointed weeks of harvest. All these works show the watchful providence of God, not by miracle, but by the natural course of the creatures preserving the world. Indeed, the water in the red sea, stood up like a wall, by a miraculous work, and in Noah's deluge, the sea overflowed the earth by an extraordinary work: but now the sea is kept in by his natural banks & bounds, as with swaddling bands, Job 38.9.

But whereas Ambrose, to prove the Sea higher than the earth, allegeth how Sesostr • s King of Egypt, and Darius afterward would have cut the earth, and joined the Egyptian and the red Sea together: they finding the red sea higher by three cubits than the land of Egypt, fearing the inundation of the whole country, left off from their purpose. Ambr. lib. 3. Hexemer. c. 3. First, it is true that these Kings attempted to bring Nile into the red sea, and ceased from their enterprise upon that erroneous conceit: yet afterward the Ptolomies, Kings of Egypt, as Strabo writeth, effected that work, and made a passage out of Nile into the red sea, without any such danger of inundation. Secondly, though it were granted, that the red sea were higher than the plains of Egypt, it followeth not that it should be higher than all the earth.

So then our opinion is, that the earth is higher than the sea, and that this is more agreeable to the Scripture, 1 Psal. 107.23. They are said to go down to the sea in Ships, as to the lower place. 2 Psal. 24.2. He hath founded the earth, super maria, above the Seas: ergo not under them. 3. Eccles. 1.7. All the rivers go into the Sea: but the water hath his natural course downward. Now whereas the ships sailing upon the seas se • me to one standing upon the shore, as floating aloft; the reason thereof is, because the sea being a plai •• 〈◊〉 liquid element, doth more easily show the round compass thereof rising to the fashion of a globe, 〈…〉 earth, being uneven full of hills and dales.

QUEST. XIII. How the waters were gathered into one place.

THe third question is, how the waters are said to be gathered into one place, seeing there be 〈…〉 lakes, rivers, and fountains that are far asunder: First, we may answer with Basil, that this 〈…〉 is not to be understood of every collection and gathering of water, but only of the sea, which though it be diverse in name, yet it is continued together, one sea being perpetually joined with another, unless it be the Caspian Sea, which some think to be filled by the Northern Ocean, as Strabo, Pliny, Basel ▪ others, that it is fed only by • ivers, and emptied again by the secret passages of the earth, as Herodotus in Clio. Aristot. lib. 2. Meteor. And Ambrose hereto agreeth, that like as all the earth, except certain Islands, maketh one continent, as Spain, Syria, Africa, so the sea being joined together, maketh but one general collectiō of water. Some other think, that the waters are gathered into one place, because as Solomon saith, All rivers (though they have divers heads) run into the sea, Eccles. 1.7. Or else we may say, that the waters are gathered into one place, that is, a place separated and divided from the habitable earth: so that the waters have not one place in respect of their divers divisions, but because they are severed from their earth, into their proper places.

QUEST. XIV. Whether the earth be founded upon the waters.

THe fourth question is, whether the earth be founded upon the waters, which was the opiniō of Thales among the Philosophers, & of Chrysostom among the Christians. Which opinion seemeth to be favored by two places of Scripture, Psal. 24.2. He hath founded it upon the Seas. 2 Pet. 3.5. The earth was of the water, & by the water, by the word of God. For the first place, Basil so understandeth it, that upon the Seas & floods should signify, in the waters, because the earth was first in, and under the water. Augustine referreth it to the Islands and promontories, that do hang over the sea, lib. 2. de G • nes. c. 5. Euthymius thinketh it is meant of the secret passage of the water, that run within the earth. But the meaning of that place is evident to be this, that the earth is founded not upon, but above the waters: so the Hebrew word gnal signifieth supra, above: and so we see, as wa • noted before out of Augustine, that the dry land hangeth over the sea.

For the other place of S. Peter, the earth is said to be of the water, not as though it was made of the water, but because it was made to appear out from the water which before covered it: the other part of the sentence is not well translated, by the water, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , but in the water: as 1 Pet. 3.20. Noah is said to be saved, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , not by the water, but in the water. And so the earth may be well said to be in the water, because the whole continent being less in compass than the Ocean, seemeth to be as a great Island in the sea.

But that the earth hath not his foundation upon the waters, it is evident both by experience, because we see the earth to be the heavier element, and so to have his situation lowest: as also by the Scripture, Job 26.7. He hangeth the earth upon nothing, then not upon the waters. Psal. 104.5. He hath set the earth upon her foundation, &c. that it cannot be moved: the earth hath no foundation, but of it own by the word of God▪ and seeing the earth is immovable, it is not like to be founded upon the waters, which are moveable.

QUEST. XV. Whether the dry land was caused to appear upon the second or third day.

Vers. 9. GOd said again. 1. Some think that this was part of the second days work, the causing of the dry land to appear: as Ibn Ezra, to whom subscribeth Mercerus ; their reasons are these: 1. because it is said. Gen. 2.4 that in one day God made the heavens and the earth. Ans. This is spoken of the heaven and earth which were made in the beginning on the first day. Gen. 1.1, 2▪ because the approbation of this work, omitted before in the second day, is inserted here. verse. 10. Answ. This approbation, God saw that it was good, is omitted before: not because Gehenna was made the second day, and th • Angels fell then, as the Hebrews imagine, nor because two is the beginning of division, as Jerome: for this division was good, whereas the creatures were in confusion before: nor yet for that the second days work was not yet ended, as Ibn Ezra: but because the work begun upon the second day, was finished upon the third. For the which cause, this approbation is omitted in the first verse, when as yet the heavens and earth were created in their • ude and imperfect state.

2. It is therefore more probable, that this appearing of the dry land was part of the third days work: and that the second days work was finished: not so much because this work beginneth with vaiomer, and God said: which is used sometime in the beginning of a new work upon the same day; as verse. 26. but for that, verse. 8. this conclusion is added; the evening and the morning was the second day, which is an evident distinction of the several days works. To say with Ibn Ezra, that an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , is here to be admitted, that to be set down last which was done first, is to force and rack the story.

QUEST. XVI. Of the divers kinds of trees and plants created out of the earth.

Vers. 11. THen God said, let the earth bud forth, &c. 1. God caused the earth to bring forth these things, without help of the Sun or Stars, which were not yet made: as he caused the light to shine in the first day, without the ordinary instrument thereof, the Sun: Iun. 2. Although God speaketh to the earth, yet it hath no understanding or will to obey, as some Philosophers imagine, but God worketh this by his power: Mercer. 3. Here are three kinds of plants and fruits brought out of the earth: the bud, the herb, the tree; which some distinguish into herbs, shrubs, and trees. Vatablus maketh the bud and herb to be all one: the first so called in the sprouting thereof, the other in the perfection: but they differ rather thus; desheh is that kind which the earth bringeth forth of it own accord: gnesheh, that which beareth seed, and is set and planted by the industry of man: gnetz, is that kind of greater plants, which are called trees: Iun. 4. Whereas the earth is bid to bring forth gnetz peri, the tree of fruit: Rob. Sel. his note is ridiculous, that God would have had the trees to be all fruit, and not only bearing fruit, and because the earth did not bring forth such, it was afterward accursed. Likewise R. Isaac his collection is curious, that would have this clause understood only of the trees of paradise, as though there were no fruit-bearing trees without paradise: Mercer. 5. Neither had the earth only power given to bring forth these kinds of fruits, but it both brought them forth in act, and had power given to continue the propagation of them: Mercer. Calvin. And therefore it is added, fruitful trees, bearing fruit, that is, which even then came forth with fruit for the present use of man: Iun. 6. Neither yet, as Basil thinketh, all trees were made fruitful in the beginning, which afterward became barren when the earth was cursed. But either Moses speaketh of the fruitful trees as more principal, or even those trees which bear not fruit, yet because they are profitable for medicine, or other uses, may also be numbered among the fruitful trees: or rather they may be comprehended among those trees, that bear their seed, though no fruit: of such kind are ashes, willows, and such like.

QUEST. XVII. Whether the world were created in the spring or autumn.

Vers. 12. ANd the earth brought forth the bud of herb. Some would prove by this▪ that the world was made in the Autumn, because the trees were created with ripe fruit. Concerning this matter there are three opinions.

1. Mercator thinketh that the world was made in July: and his chief reason is taken from Noah's flood, where the beginning of the year he would have to be in Julie; because in the eleventh month, which he supposeth to be in May, when the olive beginneth to put forth, the dove brought green olive leaves▪ Contra. 1. There is no mention made of green leaves. Gen. 8.11. the word is gnaloh, which Jerome translateth elsewhere frondes olivae, branches of olive. Nehem. 8.16. such as they made bowers of: and the Septuagint, calls it ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ,) a dry stalk: it might be then some branch of the olive tree, rather than the leaves. 2. Admit that the branch or stalk had leaves, this is no argument of the spring in May: for the olive loseth not her leaves, as other trees, Plin. lib. 16. c. 20. and therefore as Chrysostom thinketh, the olive might remain green under the water: for it is unlike, that the olive in seven days should have new leaves: for seven days before the dove was sent forth, and could find nothing.

2 Other do think, that the world was made in the Autumn, in the month Tisri. 1. because that month was the beginning of the year, as Josephus thinketh, before Moses by a new institution appointed Nisan (which answereth to part of March and April▪) to be the first month: and therefore it is called the end of the year, Exod. 34.22. from whence they began the account of the Jubile. 2. And beside they use this as another reason: because, in the autumn the fruit of trees and plants, as grapes, apples, are ripe, and not before. Contra. 1. It might be, that the Israelites accounted the beginning of their year according to the manner of the Egyptians, among whom they lived, who began their year in the month Ptho, which answereth to September: as the Athenians did in the month [ Hecatombaion, ] which is in June: but it cannot be shown, that this reckoning was observed from the beginning. It is indeed called the end of the year, because all the fruit of the year past was then gathered, and seed time began anew: and so it is with us: the autumn is counted the beginning of the year for matters of husbandry; and yet we in the computation of years begin in the spring at the Annuntiation. It is true also that the year of Jubile then took beginning; but it is notwithstanding called not the first, but the seventh month, Levite. 25.10. the reason is, why it began then, because all works of husbandry, and labors of servants, which then used to begin, did cease in the Jubile.

2. Concerning the other objection of ripe fruit, we shall not need to answer as some do, that the fruit did hang still upon the trees till the autumn, or that some trees in Paradise bare fruit in the spring, some in the autumn: or that they might bear fruit twice in the year, as Pliny reporteth of India, and Solin •• s of the Island Teprobane: but I rather think, this first bearing of fruit being supernatural, that the trees again bare fruit the same year according to their natural course. And this may seem to be gathered by S. John's allusion to the tree of life, that bare fruit every month, Revel. 22.2. that in the beginning, trees did bear fruit in the year more than once.

3. I think it therefore more probable, that the world was created in the spring, for these reasons. 1. Ambrose useth this reason, upon these words, germinet terra, let the earth bud forth the bud of the herb: Dedit formam fructus, &c. God gave and prescribed a form for the fruits to grow, ut initio cujusque anni, that in the beginning of every year herbs should sprout forth. This we see to be done only in the spring.

2. He useth also another reason: Vt ostenderet Scriptura veris tempora in constitutione mundi, ait, mensis hic vobis initium mensium: to show that it was spring when the world was made, the Scripture saith, this shall be unto you the beginning of months. Moses then brought in no new institution, but it is more like, he revived the old use of beginning the year from March, which was discontinued in Egypt by another custom of that country.

3. Further, whereas God blessed the creatures, and bid them increase and multiply: which blessing presently took effect: who knoweth not, that for most kinds of creatures, especially the fish and fowl, the fittest time to engender and increase is in the spring. And whereas God gave them the green herb for meat: it is not like, that presently the green herb with frost and cold began to wither and decay. Adam also was thrust out of Paradise to till the ground: but the spring time is apter for tilling, than the autumn or winter season.

4▪ Beda beside his own opinion, maketh mention of a synod holden in Palestine by Theophilus Bishop of Cesarea, wherein it was agreed, that the world was made in the spring, and that Christ was crucified the same day that Adam was created: at which time he also transgressed, that the first Adam herein might be a type of the second.

5. This also may be proved by comparing the time of Noah's flood with the time of the creation: for seeing there are accounted full years 1656. from the creation to the deluge, they must fall out both about the same season. But that the flood came in the spring, not in the autumn, may appear by divers reasons, which I reserve for that place. Chap. 8. quest. 10.

And of this opinion, that the world was made in March, Pererius nameth many, though he dissent from them: as Eusebius, Cyrillus, Hierosolym. Athanasius, Nazianzen, Damascene, Ambrose, Beda, with others. About this question there is a great controversy between two famous Rabbins, R. Joshua, who holdeth the world to be made in the spring, and R. Eleazar in the autumn: but the other opinion is more probable, as I have shown.

QUEST. XVIII. When the Sun and Moon were created.

Vers. 14. GOd said, let there be lights in the firmament, &c. 1. These lights then, were neither made the first day, and but placed now in the firmament, as the Hebrews think. 2. Neither was the Sun made the first day, the Moon the next, the Stars the third, as Eugubinus : but they were all made upon the fourth day. 3. Neither yet do we think that the celestial bodies were made in order, as Basil conceiveth, but rather, that they were created all at once. Mercer. 4. And whereas the light created the first day, is called, Or: but the Stars are called, meoroth, as of the light: hence it may appear, that these lightsome bodies were made the receptacles of that light then created, which was now increased and united to these lights: Mercer. rather than to think, that the element of fire was that first light, as Junius. 5. But we explode those Jewish fantasies: that the Sun and Moon were created of equal light in the beginning; but when the Moon envied the light of the Sun, God brought it into subjection, and ordered, that from thenceforth, the Moon should receive light of the Sun: and of the light star-beams, which the Moon was deprived of, they say, God made the rest of the lesser Stars: ex Mercer.

QUEST. XIX. Of the greatness of the Sun and Moon.

Vers. 16. GOd made two great lights.) That these two great lights are the Sun and Moon, there is no question: and that the Sun is the greatest of all the celestial bodies, it is also questionless. Anaxagoras did hold the Sun much greater than Peloponesus, a country in Grecia. Anaximander to be as big as the earth. Plutar. lib. 2. de placitis Philosophor. c. 21. but since the Mathematicians have found that the Sun exceedeth the earth in bigness 166. times, and none of the other Stars, which they call of the first magnitude, whereof there are 15. to exceed the earth above 18. times. The Moon, though some among the heathen have judged it bigger than the earth, as the Stoics, and equal to the Sun, as Parmenides, and some among the Christians have thought it in bigness next to the Sun, because it is here trained to be a great light, as Basil upon this place, and Augustine, yet since by more diligent search, it is found to be less than the earth. 39. times, and to be the least of all the Stars, except Mercury. Moses therefore here speaketh according to the opinion and capacity of the vulgar sort, to whose sight the Moon seemeth greatest, next to the Sun, because it is nearest of all the Stars to the earth, and for that it is greatest in operation, and hath the government of the night. The reason of the greatness of these lights, is their far distance from the earth. Empedocles saith, the Moon is twice so far from the Sun, as it is from the earth, but the Mathematicians say, it is 18. times so far from the Sun. Era • osthenes affirmeth the Sun to be 804000000. furlongs distant from the earth, that is, an hundred thousand thousand, and five hundred thousand miles, counting eight furlongs to a mile. And the Moon to be remote from the earth 780000. furlongs, almost an 100. thousand miles. Plutarc. de placitis Philosoph. l. 2. c. 31. The Hebrews make the distance of the starry heavens from the earth to be about 500. years journey: Aratus but 30. days journey: and the thickness of the earth, as much: the one maketh it too little, the other too much.

But not to stand upon these curious observations, Ambrose giveth sensible and apparent reasons of the greatness of the Sun and Moon by daily experience. First, saith he, by this their magnitude is evident, because they appear of the like quantity to all through the world, whereas herds of cattle being espied far off, seem as ants, and a ship discerned far in the seas, seemeth no bigger than a flying dove. Again, as soon as the Sun ariseth, all the Stars are hid: and further, if the Sun were not of such greatness, how could all the world be lightened by it? Ambr. l. 4. Hexemer. cap. 6.

QUEST. XX. How the Stars do serve for signs.

Vers. 14. LEt them be for signs and seasons, days and years: ] 1. By signs here we need not understand, those extraordinary signs, which it hath pleased God sometime to show, as in the Sun in Joshua, and afterward in Hezekiah's time: for in this place the ordinary use of these creatures is shown. 2. Nor yet are we forced to refer it to the Astronomical signs, though the Scripture do also approve the lawful use of them, Job 9.9. He maketh Arcturus, Orion, Pleiades, and the climates of the south: for this combining and conjunction of the Stars was afterward found out by art and experience. 3. But these celestial bodies do serve, both for political observations, as the computation of months and years, and the celebration of festivals among the Jews, as also to be signs of natural things, as for setting, sowing, planting, and discerning of the weather, and seasons of the year: as Orion bringeth rain, the Pleiades the spring. Job 38.31. We acknowledge then four lawful uses of these celestial bodies. 1. To distinguish the day and night, light and darkness. 2. To be for signs of weather. 3. To serve for times and seasons, as weeks, days, and years. 4. To give influence by their heat, light, and motion, to these inferior parts. Mercer. Iun.

But for moral matters, as to calculate men's nativities, and to discern of their dispositions to good or evil, or for supernatural, to foretell things to come, to discover secrets, find out things that are lost, or such like, these celestial signs have no use at all, neither hath the vain and superstitious invention of Astrology any ground at all out of this place, but is altogether repugnant to 1. the Scripture: 2. against reason: 3. vain: 4. impious.

These four points shall briefly be proved. 1. The Scripture thus testifieth, Isaiah 44.25. I destroy the tokens of the southsayers, and make them that conjecture fools, and turn the wise men backward, &c. Ierem. 10.2. Be not afraid of the signs of heaven, though the heathen be afraid of such. 2. The wise man saith, Prov. 27.1. Boast not thyself of tomorrow, thou knowest not what a day may bring forth. If a man know not his own way, neither can tell what shall happen to himself, much less can it be seen in the Stars: for the Spirit of a man best knoweth the things of man. 1 Cor. 2.11. and if we cannot be certain what shall befall the next day, much less, what may happen the next month, or year. Again, if by the aspect of the Stars judgment could be given of man, then should they have dominion over man, whereas they were created for man's use, Psal. 8.3.

3. It is a vain and deceitful study; neither are the predictions of Astrologers true, as it may thus appear; first, if there had been any certainty in this art, it is most like, that the Devil should have the best insight into it, both by reason of his subtlety of nature, and long experience: but it is certain that the Devil herein is deceived; for hereof it is, that the Oracles of Apollo ministered by spirits, directed by the aspect of Stars, were for the most part vain, false, deceitful. This testifieth Porphirius in his book of Oracles, cited by Eusebius, lib. 6. de praeparat. Evang. c. 1. that Apollo his Oracles were made by Astrology; and that they were false and vain, or ambiguous and deceitful, one Oenom • us a Philosopher among the Greeks, proveth at large, as Eusebius witnesseth, lib. 5. de praeparat. Evang. cap. 10. Again, if there were any certainty in these Astrological praedictions, it would chiefly appear in their Prognostications of the weather, which is the proper subject of the Planets operation: but herein daily experience showeth how grossly they are deceived, that foretell such things, neither agreeing with themselves, nor yet with the event of the weather: yet I deny not but that the fairness and foulness of the seasons may be conjectured, when as the time is near, and the natural causes have begun to work: as in the evening to guess of the weather the next day, and in the morning, of the afternoon weather; as that a cloud in the west will bring a shower, and the south wind heat: as our Savior saith, Luk. 12.55. But long before to declare these things, before there is any working in the natural causes, it is not in the art or skill of man. Ambrose to this purpose saith well: Cum pluvia expeteretur ab omnib. &c. when, saith he, vain was desired of all, and one said, the new Moon will bring rain, although we were very desirous of rain, yet I wished, that such speeches should not be true: yea it did me good that no rain fell, till it came at the prayers of the Church, that it might appear, that it came not by the influence of the Moon, but by the providence of the Creator. Hexem. lib. 4.7.

4. The impiety of this science is evident, because they ascribe all to the influence and operation of the stars, and so bring in a fatal necessity, and rob God of his honor and glory. One Petrus de Al • aco a magnifier of Astrology, doubteth not to say, that Noah's flood, and the birth of our Savior, might have been foretold by the knowledge of the stars. Maternus affirmeth, that when Saturn is in Leo, men are thereby long lived, and their souls go to heaven. Albumazar saith, that the Moon being joined with Jupiter in the head of the dragon, whatsoever a man asketh of God, he shall obtain: Thus reporteth of them Pererius, lib. 2. in Genes. cap. 1. Thus they attribute all things both good and evil to the stars, and thus the grace of God is made void: yea as Origen saith, while they make alias stellas beneficas, alias maleficas, some good, some bad stars, they open their mouth against heaven, making the creature faulty and culpable, whereas God created all things good: tract. 4. in Matth.

But if it shall be objected, that many things fall out according to the predictions of Astrologers: I briefly answer, that it cometh so to pass sometimes, not by the dexterity of their wit and knowledge, but either by the subtlety of Satan that foretelleth, what he himself is permitted to work, or by the credulity of such as consult with them, whereby their affections give way unto the effect: or by the secret disposing of God's providence, that such things should fall out for the probation of the faithful, and further confusion of misbelievers.

QUEST. XXI. Great Whales, how said to be created.

Vers. 21. GOd created great whales. 1. We need not, because God is said here to create the whales, which were made out of the water, to have recourse unto that indigested matter which was made the first day of nothing: Calvin. So not only that is said to be created, which is made of nothing; but that also, which is made new out of some matter, as man is said afterward to be created, yet made out of the earth. 2. But we deride that Jewish fable, that God when he had made two great whales, lest the increase of so huge a creature might tend to the destruction of the rest, he did geld the male, and salted the female to be meat for the just in the next world. As though God did not foresee everything before it was made, and approved it being made; and beside the Lord gave a blessing to all fishes, and so to the whales among the rest, to increase and multiply. Mercer.

QUEST. XXII. Of the great Whales.

Vers. 21. GReat Whales: the word turmin signifieth a serpent, dragon, or great fish. And this epithet great, is not added without cause: for the whale or great fish is the greatest of all living creatures, Job 41.24. In the earth there is none like him. It is almost incredible, what some writers report, of the hugenesse of these creatures: the Hebrews write, that whales have been found of 500. stadia or furlongs in length: Mercer. Some have appeared in the waters of the bigness of Islands: Muscul. Pliny writeth, that in the Indian sea there are certain fish called balaenae, whirlpooles, quatuor jugerum, of three or four akors or furlongs in length, and certain long fish called priests, of 200. cubits, and e • les in the river Ganges, of 300. feet in length: lib. 9. cap. 30. The same Author citeth Iuba King of Mauritania, who maketh mention, writing to Gaius Caesar son of Augustus, of whales in the Arabic coasts of 600. foot in length, and 300. in breadth: lib. 16. c. 40. Aelianus also writeth, lib. 15. c. 21. that Alexander found in a cave in India, a dragon supposed to be 70. cubits long: they saw only his head out of the caves mouth, not daring with the whole • oast to approach nearer, whose eyes appeared to be of the bigness of a Macedonian target or shield. These strange reports are found in foreign histories, the truth whereof I will leave to the credit of the authors, and the judgment of the readers. Ambrose saith, aequalia montibus corpora habere praedicantur: the Whales are reported to have bodies equal to Mountains. Hexemer. li. 5. c. 10. Certainly it is evident out of Scripture, that these creatures of the sea, are of a wonderful bigness: as it appeareth both by that description, Job 41. His jaws are likened to doors, v. 5. his scales to shields, v. 6. he maketh the sea to boil like a pot, v. 2 2. As also by the story of Jonah, where we read, that the Prophet was swallowed whole of a great fish, and cast up again. And not to search further, our own Chronicles make mention of great fishes, that have been taken, as of one that was in length 22. yards, being 12. foot broad between the eyes: some of his ribs were 16. foot long, his tongue 15. foot long: three men might stand upright one upon another in the opening of the jaws. Stow, ann. Elizab. 16.

QUEST. XXIII. Whether the fowls were made out of the water or earth.

Vers. 21. WHich the waters brought forth, &c. and every feathered fowl, &c. By these words it seemeth, that the fowls had their beginning out of the water: but the contrary is affirmed, c. 2. v. 19. So the Lord God formed of the earth every beast of the field, and every fowl of heaven, &c.

To reconcile these places, we neither affirm that the fowls were made of the thinner part of the water extenuated into the air, as Augustine, lib. 3. in Genes. ad lit. c. 3. and Rupertus: nor yet that they were made of mud or slime, and so partly of earth, partly of water, as the Hebrews; not yet that they were made of the element of the water, as Eugubinus in Cosmopeia: nor yet that the fowls were made part of the water, and part of the earth: as we see there are two sorts of them, some that live in the water, and some that keep the land, as Vatablus. But we think, that the fowls were created only out of the earth, Gen. 2.19. neither is the contrary affirmed here, that the waters brought them forth: but the Lord saith, let the fowl f • ye upon the earth. v. 20. so Iun. Cajetan, Catharin.

QUEST. XXIV. How and wherefore God is said to bless the fish.

Vers. 22. ANd God blessed them, &c. 1. God is not said before to have blessed the herbs and trees, as here he blesseth these living creatures; because the generation of living things, whether it be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in bringing forth young, eggs, or worms, is a more admirable work of nature, than is seen in the increase of plants. 1. In that the beasts of the earth are not blessed, as here the fishes and fowls, it is not because of the serpent, that was to be accursed, as the Hebrews imagine: but for that the abundance and number of the fishes exceedeth the other: yet it must be understood that God also blessed the rest, though it be not expressed. 3. The Lord here first of all speaketh to the creatures, because now he beginneth to create living things: Iun. he speaketh to them, as he did to the whale to cast up Jonah, not by any syllabicall voice, but by his omnipotent will and power, which the creature forthwith obeyeth. Mercer. 4. The fishes are said to fill the waters, the fowl to multiply; because the fishes are more in number, and they only live in the waters: but the fowls live not only upon the earth, but other creatures beside. 5. By the waters in the seas, all other gatherings together of waters are understood: but the Seas are named as the principal, wherein there is greatest store of fish. Iun. 6. Eugubinus here is deceived, that thinketh, that the fishes began to rise out of the water; as soon as the Seas were gathered together, and so every day their creation was in working till the fifth day: for this were to confound the works of the creation, which Moses precisely referreth to their several days works. Mercer.

QUEST. XXV. Whether all kind of creeping things were made in the beginning.

Vers. 25. EVery creeping thing. ] If every kind of worm and creeping thing were created in the beginning, then we refuse Augustine's conceit, that such creatures as are generated of dead bodies, were not then made, lib. 3. de. Genes. c. 14. For like as other perfect beasts were at the first formed out of the earth, yet afterward left to their usual generation, so these creeping worms, flies, and such like, might then have their creation as the rest, though now engendered by corruption of other matter. Likewise we reject Pererius conceit, that thinketh those creatures which do spring of corruption, and are noisome and offensive to man, not to have had their beginning then: for by this reason, neither should the serpent have been created: these creatures, though hurtful now to man's nature, if man had not fallen, should not have been so. We therefore rather allow Basils opinion, that even these small beasts, which do spring from corruption now, were produced in the first creation. hom. 7. in Genes. and this is more agreeable to the text, which mentioneth every creeping thing then to have been made: yet we do not think that there may not be, or is not in the world, any other form or fashion of fly or worm, than was in the first creation, but that the general kind was then formed of such several creeping things, and a general power and ability given to produce them out of such corruptible matter, as is fit for their generation.

QUEST. XXVI. Whether creatures of a mixed kind were made in the beginning.

ANother question also here ariseth, concerning those kinds of beasts which are brought forth by a mixed generation, as the mule by the mixture of the Ass and the Mare, the Leopard of the Libbard and Lioness, the Lynx of the wolf and hind: whether these mixed kinds were created in the beginning. Some do think that they were, but I hold rather the contrary with Rupertus, lib. 1. de Trinitat. c. 57. and for these reasons: 1. because these are no new kinds, but the first kinds made in the creation mixed and conjoined together, that we need not fetch their original from the creation. 2. Because we find it directly expressed in Scripture, that Anah the son of Sibeon first found out mules in the wilderness, as he fed his fathers asses, Gen. • 6.24. he was the first that found out the generation of mules, by the unnatural coupling of asses and mares. 3. The Lord directly forbiddeth to plow with an ox and an asse, Deut. 22.10. much more unlawful was it to couple divers kinds for generation, than to yoke divers kinds together for tillage. 4. By the same reason we might fetch the pattern of other monstrous births from the creation: as such whereof Plutarch maketh mention, as of one Onosc • lis, the daughter of one Aristonymus, begotten of an asse; and Epona begotten of a mare by Fulvius Stellus: Plutarch. parall. 29. But these monstrous generations 〈◊〉 never by God's creation or ordinance brought into the world, but by man's wicked invention.

QUEST. XXVII. How God made man according to his image.

Vers. 26. LEt us make man in our image according to our likeness. 1. We neither here approve the opinion of Ruper • us, who by image, here understandeth the second person of the Trinity, by likeness or similitude the third person, namely, the holy spirit, lib 2. de Trinitat. c. 2. for in that the Lord saith, let us make man in ou • image, the image of the whole Trinity is expressed, and not the image of the father only.

2 Neither are the words so to be taken, as though man was made according to the similitude of that human nature which Christ the Son of God was to assume: whereas the Scripture saith, that Christ took upon him the likeness of man, Phil. 2.7. and not man his likeness.

3. We also reject the conceit of Eugubinus and Oleaster, who think, that God took upon him an human shape, when he created man, and therefore said, Let us make him in our image: for neither did God the Father ever appear in any such shape, neither could it be said to be God's image, being assumed but for a time.

4. Neither yet do we distinguish these words, as some of the Fathers, Origen, Basil, Ambrose, who refer image to the natural gifts of reason, understanding, memory, the similitude to the supernatural gifts of grace, as of holiness, righteousness: for we see that the Apostle applieth the image to the work of grace in our renovation or regeneration. Coloss. 3.10. Let us put off the old man, &c. seeing we have put on the new, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him. We conclude therefore, that there is no difference in the sense and meaning of these words, but that one is the explication of the other.

QUEST. XXVIII. Wherein the image of God consisteth in man.

ANother great question is here briefly to be discussed, wherein this image of God consisteth, according to the which man was created.

1. Epiphanius judgeth it a matter incomprehensible, because he thought that the perfect image of God is here understood without any difference or dissimilitude: Epiphan, haeres. 70. whereas the Scripture saith not, that man absolutely was made like unto God.

2. Theodoret, thought that man only and not woman was created after the image of God: whereas the contrary is evident, verse. 27. God created man in his image: and then it followeth, male and female created he them: signifying thereby, that both were created according to his image. And whereas the Apostle saith, 1 Cor. 11.7. Man is the image and glory of God, the woman the glory of the man: he speaketh only of the authority and preeminence given unto man, wherein the image of God in that behalf is more expressed in the man, but not of the principal part of that image, which, as the Apostle saith, consisteth in righteousness and holiness: according to which image the woman was created as well as the man.

Basil, Chrysostom, do understand this image of the dominion which man hath over the other creatures.

Augustine of the immortality of the soul, where in it is like unto God, lib. de quantitat. anim. c. 2. Nyssenus in Hexemeron. ] herein saith this image consisteth, because the soul is capable of all goodness: Dam • scene, [ 3] because man hath free-will, lib. 2. de fide, c. 12. The Master of Sentences, distinct. 16. because [ 4] man hath reason and understanding, and therein excelleth all other creatures. Others, beside these [ 5] faculties of the soul, wherein the image of God is expressed, do further affirm, that the likeness is in [ 6] these respects: 1. Because that as all things originally are in God, so also man doth participate with the [ 7] nature of all creatures, of plants in growing and increasing, of beasts in sense and moving, of God and Angels [ 8] in understanding. 2. As God can do all things by his power, so man by wit, reason, and are, doth compass many difficult things. 3. As God is the principal end of all things: so man is the secondary end, for whose use all things were created, and he for the glory of God.

I will also set down more at large the divers conceits of Augustine, of this creating of man according to God's image.

1. He thinketh this image and similitude chiefly to consist in the soul, and secondarily in the body, because it was made to be obedient to the soul, and of an upright form to behold the heavens, lib. 83. quest. 51.

2 He placeth God's image in man in this, that as all things are of God, so all men had their beginning from Adam. qu. 45. ex vet. test.

3. He thinketh this image to consist in man's dominion over the creatures, de Genes. cont. Manich. c. 22.

4. The soul is like unto God, because it is whole in the whole body, and in every part thereof, it neither increaseth, nor decreaseth with the body.

5. The soul expresseth the image of the Trinity, in the understanding, will, memory, which are three faculties, yet make but one soul.

6. The soul liveth by it self, and doth also quicken the body, as God quickeneth all things.

7. The soul beareth the image of God in reason, the similitude of likeness of God in charity. lib. de spirit. & anim. c. 39.

Thus Augustine varieth placing this image sometime in one thing, sometime in another. But to put all out of doubt, the Apostle showeth, how we are to understand the image of God in man, Eph. 4.24. Which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. Coloss. 4.10. Put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him. This image then consisteth not so much in the substance of the soul, or in the natural faculties thereof, as of understanding, free will, memory, but in the knowledge and illumination, holiness and justice of the soul, which are now wrought in man by grace, and then were given by creation. Our reasons are these: 1. If this similitude and image were in the spiritual essence and substance of the soul, both wicked spirits and wicked men should have the image of God, for the substance of spirit and soul remaineth in them.

2. Ambrose thus reaso • eth: Deus non damnat imaginem suam, &c. God doth not damn his own image, or send it into hell fire. &c. but the souls of the wicked are damned: ergo, the image is not in the substance of the soul: imago illa, &c. that image wherein thou wast made after the likeness of God, is not condemned, but crowned Serm. 10. in Ps. 119. but the righteousness and holiness of the soul only is crowned.

3 That image, after which men are naturally begotten, is not the image of God: for it were absurd, if not impious, to say, that God's image may naturally be propagated: but men by nature receive the image of • he •• asonable soul, as Adam begat Seth in his own likeness after his image, Gen. 5.3. that is, like unto him both in soul and body: wherefore the image of God consisteth not in the substance of the reasonable soul.

4 That image of God, after the which Adam was created, is by his fall utterly lost and extinguished, for otherwise this image need not to be renewed and revived in us, as it is by Christ, as the Apostle showeth, Ephes 4.24. Coloss. 3.10. the fore-cited places: but the substance of the reasonable soul, with the natural faculties and powers thereof are not lost, therefore therein is not expressed this image. To this purpose Augustine: that the whole man both in his inward and outward part, inveteravit, is waxen old and decayed by sin, the inward man is renewed now by grace, the outward man shall be restored in the resurrection: lib. 24. contr. Faustum. Epiphanius therefore had no reason to note this as an heresy in Origen, for saying, that Adam had lost by his transgression the image of his creation, epist. ad Ioann. Hierosol. He might as well charge the Apostle with heresy, who saith the new man is renewed after the image of him that created him: but there need no renewing, where is not first a decaying; nor a restoring of that, which is not lost.

QUEST. XXIX. Why it is added, God created them male and female.

Vers. 27. TH •• God created man in his image, &c. 1. To take away all ambiguity, lest man might be thought to have been created according to his own image, it is added, in the image of God created he him. 2. Thrice in the same verse Moses maketh mention of the creation of man, left any might imagine with the Philosophers, that man had no beginning, but was eternal. 3. Mention also is made of male and female, that both man and woman should be known to be made according to God's image: though man first, and as the more principal. Iun. 4. And Moses saith, he created them male and female, not created him: contrary to the conceit of Plato, and some Hebrews, which think that Adam was at the first created both a man and woman, and afterward divided in twain, Mercer.

QUEST. XXX. Of man's rule and dominion over the creatures.

Vers. 28. RVle over the fish of the sea, the foul of heaven, and over every beast. Theodoret thinketh, that the great Whales were exempted from the dominion of man, q. 20. in Gen. but his conceit is contrary to the text, which giveth man rule overall the fish: and Basil reporteth, that he had seen great whirlpooles of the sea taken and subdued by the will and industry of man, hom. 10. in Genes. This rule and dominion of man was absolute before his fall, for then both man should have been of more excellent government, by reason of his excellent wisdom, to keep the creatures in subjection, and the beasts also by God's providence should have had a natural inclination to obedience: a president whereof we have Gen. 2. when all the creatures presented themselves before Adam, to receive their names of him.

Since Adams fall, this preeminence and dominion of man over the beasts is greatly diminished and impaired, that as he first disobeied his Creator, so they also have cast off man's yoke, yet not withstanding, though now men have not so absolute a command over the creatures, his Lordship and authority remaineth still, which he exerciseth over the creatures by these four ways and means.

First, there remaineth yet a natural instinct of obedience in those creatures which are for man's use, as in the ox, asse, horse, wherein God's mercy appeareth, that though man by his sin be deprived of his authority over the wild and great beasts, as lions, bears, yet the more necessary and serviceable creatures are kept in subjection still: such a natural inclination toward man appeareth in the Dolphins, of the which Plutarch reporteth strange things, as how the body of that ancient Poet Hesiode was borne up in the sea by the Dolphins, and brought to land: and how one. Evalus with a virgin, which was carried to be sacrificed, leaped into the sea, and were both preserved, being supported by the Dolphins, Plutarch. convival • . It is also most strange, that Pliny writeth of the Teutyrites, that inhabit by Nylus, that they are a terror to the Crocodiles, and leaping upon their backs to bring them as captives to the shore, Plin. lib. 8. c. 25.

Secondly, God by his extraordinary work and miracle subdueth the fierce and cruel beasts unto man: as when they all came unto Noah in the Ark: the lions mouths were stopped against Daniel, the viper had no power to hurt Paul.

Thirdly, this dominion lost by Adam is restored by Christ, and the beasts subdued to the faithful, when the Lord seeth it meet: as it is said, Job 5.23. The beasts of the field shall be at peace with thee. Thus by God's providence many of his children have been preserved, as Jonah by his faithful prayer was preserved in the belly of the whale: Jerome reporteth, or one under his name, in the life of Malchus, (if the story be true) how he being pursued of his cruel master, fled into a cave where was hid a lionesse with her whelps, which •• irred not at him, but as soon as the Pagan entered, sending his servant in before, they were both soon by the beast dispatched.

Fourthly, man sometime by his strength doth subdue the beasts, as Sampson did slay a lion, and David a bear: or, where strength faileth, by his wit and policy, as Saint James saith, c. 3.7. The whole nature of beasts and of birds, and of creeping things, and things of the sea, is tamed and hath been tamed of the nature of man: so Augustine saith, when all other beasts are tamed by man, he himself is tamed of none. de Genes. cont. Manich. c. 18.

QUEST. XXXI. How all things are said to be good that God made.

Vers. 13. GOd saw all that he had made, and loe it was very good. The Manichees here objected, that God created many things hurtful and pernicious to man, as herbs, and beasts, venomous and noisome, many things superfluous, whereof man hath no use, how then were all things created good? Augustine to this objection most fully in this manner answereth: 1. God hath made nothing superfluous, although we know not the use thereof: like as in an artificers shop, we condemn not those instruments and tools, which we are ignorant of, though we cut our hands with them. 2. We need not to complain of those things, which are profitable, or superfluous, for these hurt not, and the other are for our use, and by those which are pernicious, we are either punished, or exercised, or terrified: usurpa utilia, cave perniciosa, relinque superflua, use the commodious creatures, take heed of the pernicious, leave those which thou thinkest superfluous. de Genes. ad liter. c. 22. To this answer of Augustine, thus much may be added: that these noxious creatures, which now serve for the correction of man, should not have been hurtful, if man had not fallen by his transgression: and again, they are not now altogether unprofitable, for even those creatures, which are venomous, and not fit for food, are yet profitable for medicine.

There remaineth yet one question of weight concerning the creation of the Angels: first, it is not doubted of, but that God created the Angels, Coloss. 1.16. By him were all things created which are in heaven and earth: things visible and invisible, &c. But there are two other questions, wherefore Moses omitted the creation of the Angels, and when they are thought to have been created.

QUEST. XXXII. Why Moses omitteth the creation of the Angels.

FOr the first: 1. Moses neither passed over the creation of Angels in silence, for fear lest the Israelites should have committed idolatry in worshipping of them, as Chrysostom, and Theodoret think: for the Israelites could not be ignorant that the Angels had divers times appeared to their fathers the Patriarchs, and so could not be ignorant of them. 2. Neither are they omitted, because Moses only treateth of those things, which had their beginning with this material world, but the Angels were created long before the visible world, as Basil and Damascene think; for it shall even now appear; that this is a false supposition, that the Angels were created so long before. 3. Neither yet is the creation of the Angels comprehended under the making of heaven and the light, as Augustine and Beda think, for this were to leave the literal sense which is to be followed in the history of the creation. 4. But the only reason is this, because Moses applieth himself to the simple capacity of the people, and describeth only the creation of visible, and sensible things, leaving to speak of spiritual, which they could not understand: and this seemeth to be Jerome's opinion, epist. 139. ad Cyprian.

QUEST. XXXIII. When the Angels were made.

FOr the second: 1. We neither receive the opinion of those that think the Angels to have been made long before the world, as Origen affirmeth, tract. 35. in Matth▪ and Damascene. lib. 2. de fid. c. 3. with others. For the Scripture testifieth, that the evil angels fell, as soon as they were created. John. 8.44. He abode not in the truth: and as soon as the Angels had sinned, they were cast down to hell. 2 Pet. 2.4. But before heaven was made, there was no hell, neither any such distinction of place, before the world was founded. 2. Neither is their opinion currant, that think the Angels to have been created the same day with man: as Gennadius, and Achacius: because of that place, Job 38.7. Where wast thou, saith the Lord to Job, when the Stars praised me together, and all the children of God rejoiced? From hence it is evident, that when the stars were made, the Angels also had then their being, and rejoiced before God, which was upon the fourth day of the creation. 3. There is a third opinion, that the Angels were created, when in the beginning God created the heavens, Gen. 1.1. August. lib. 1. de Genes. ad lit. c. 4. And whereas it is said, that darkness was upon the face of the deep, Origen thinketh that was the deep, whither the Devil and his Angels were cast. This opinion seemeth most probable, because together with the heavens were created the heavenly host of Angels: c. 21. & 148.2. Where the same word tzaba host or army is used.

QUEST. XXXIV. Whether all trees in the beginning bare fruit.

Vers. 29. I Have given unto you every herb, &c. It shall all be to you for meat: likewise to every beast of the earth. &c. We mislike the conceit of Beda in Hexemer. upon these words, that before man's fall every tree did bear fruit, fit for food, none was barren or unfruitful, because the text saith, I have given you every tree, &c.

For 1. it is evident out of the Scripture, that divers kinds of trees were created in Paradise for beauty and ornament, which bare no fruit for food: as the Cedar, and Fir tree, Ezek. 31.8. The Ced • rs in the garden of God could not hide him, no Fir tree was like his branches. 2. This general permission to eat of every tree, concludeth not a necessity of fruit-bearing in every tree, but a liberty to eat of all which were fit for food, excepting only the tree of knowledge of good and evil, Gen. 2.17.

QUEST. XXXV. Whether the flesh of beasts were eaten before the flood.

LIkewise we refuse the opinion of Beda, that neither man nor beast did eat of any flesh, but only of the fruits of the earth before the flood: neither do we allow the judgment of Thomas Aquinas, who thinketh that the beasts which are now devourers of flesh, should have used that kind of food in the state of man's innocence. 1. part. quaest. 96. artic. 1.

The latter opinion we reject, because if man had not transgressed, there should have been no death in the world, Rom. 5.12. Sin entered into the world by one man, and death by sin: if there should have been no death in the world, because no sin, I see not how death should have entered upon other creatures, especially this violent death by slaughter: as the Apostle also saith, Rom. 8.22. That every creature groaneth with us, and travelleth in pain together to this present: so that this bondage of pain and corruption, which maketh man and beast groan together, was laid upon them together. Neither do I see how Basils opinion can stand, hom. 11. in Gen. that man in his innocence, though he should not have used the beasts for food, yet might have slain them, to take knowledge of their inward parts, and to help his experience that ways: or it should have been lawful unto him to kill them in hunting for his delight, as Pererius thinketh, lib. 4. in Gen. p. 663. for this slaughter, and killing of beasts, upon what occasion soever, whether for food, for knowledge or pleasure, belongeth unto the bondage of corruption, which by sin was brought into the world.

The other opinion seemeth probable, especially because of these two places of Scripture; first, for that the beasts and fowls lived in the Ark, not of flesh, but of other food than usual, as Noah is bidden to take of all meat that was eaten, Gen. 6.21. for there being only one couple of unclean beasts, and seven couple of clean preserved in the ark: out of these there could not be food of flesh sufficient for the rest: and after the cattle went out of the Ark, there was no other food for them, all flesh being destroyed, but only by the fruits of the earth. Secondly, the first permission to eat flesh, that we read of, was after the flood, Gen. 9.3. Everything that moveth and liveth shall be meat for you as the green herb.

But these objections may be easily answered. To the first we answer: 1. that the beasts which did devour flesh, did also feed of herbs: and so Noah might provide for them according to their eating: 2. Though they did use altogether to live of flesh, yet I think that for that present time, and some while after, all beasts might return to the first food appointed in the creation, this being a second creation and renewing of the world; so that upon this extraordinary occasion and urgent necessity, it cannot be gathered what was the ordinary food of beasts before, no more than it can be inferred, that because beasts of contrary natures, as the lion and calf, bear and cow, wolf and lamb, leopard and kid, did lie together, Isaiah 11.6. that there was no enmity between them before.

To the second place our answer is, that there that liberty is only renewed, as is the blessing to increase and multiply, verse. 1. and the prohibition of shedding man's blood: verse. 5. at the hands of a man's brother will I require the life of man: for before the flood, the blood of Abel was required at the hands of his brother Cain.

Notwithstanding therefore these objections, I think it more probable, that both man and beast after the transgression before the flood, did use indifferently both the fruits of the earth, and the flesh of beasts for food: the grounds of this opinion are these.

1. That one beast did not raven upon another in the state of man's innocence, two principal reasons may be given: one, because as yet no death was entered into the world; the other, for that man bearing perfect rule and dominion over the creatures, did keep them in order: but after man's fall, both these causes were taken away; for not only death entered upon man, but the other creatures were brought into the same bondage, and were killed for sacrifice: as Abel offered of the fat of the sheep, Gen. 4 3. if it were lawful then to slay beasts, why not to eat of their flesh? And again, man having lost his sovereignty over the creatures, they then began one to rage upon another, as not standing now in the like awe and fear of man as before: this cause is touched by the Prophet, Habbac. 1.14. Thou makest man as the fishes of the Sea, and as the creeping things that have no rule over them: that is, which do one consume and devour another, because they have no governor: this rule the beasts, fishes, and fowls, had shaken off immediately upon man's fall, and not only after the flood.

2. Seeing in the old world two great sins abounded, carnal lust, and concupiscence, Gen. 6.2. and tyranny and oppression: verse. 4. there were giants or tyrants in the earth: and tyranny and oppression brought forth bloodshed; for which cause the prohibition of shedding of man's blood is so straightly forbidden after the flood, that God will require it at the hands of every beast, and of a man's brother, Gen. 9.5. How is it like, that they would abstain from killing of beasts, that spared not to spill the blood of men? or from eating of flesh, which is more apt to provoke unto lust, than the simple fruits of the earth?

3. If the flesh of beasts was not eaten before the flood, what then became of the increase of cattle? how was not the earth over-run with them? This reason was given, why the Lord would not at once but by little and little destroy the Canaanites before the Israelites, lest the beasts of the field should increase upon them, Deut. 7.22. because they both helped to destroy the cruel beasts, and did eat the unclean, as swine and such other, both which by their multitudes otherwise might have been an annoyance to the Israelites. But greater fear was there, of overspreading the earth with increase of beasts before the flood, if no such provision had been made to diminish their number.

4. But that place most of all confirmeth our opinion. Gen. 7.2. where mention is made of clean and unclean beasts: which difference was observed before the flood, and continued by tradition; not in regard on • y of sacrifice, but also for their eating, as it may appear in the reviving of this law afterward. Levite. 11.47. That there may be difference between the unclean and clean, and between the beast that may be eaten, and the beast that may not be eaten: that then is said by the definition of the law to be a clean beast, that might be eaten, that unclean, that might not be eaten. So I conclude this question, with the sentence of Ambrose, Quico • vivium adornat, &c. he that prepareth a feast, doth kill his oxen and fat cattle before, and then biddeth his guests: so the Lord, ante homini caeterorum animalium praeparavit epulas, before prepared the meats of other beasts, and then as his friend invitavit ad convivium, bid him to the banket, Epist. 37. His opinion is, that the cattle were provided of God to be meat for man. Mercerus is of another judgment, that the eating of flesh was generally forborne before the flood, which is also the opinion of the Hebrews: 1. both because it was necessary for the preservation of the kinds of cattle: 2. as also herbs being then of greater virtue and strength before the flood and after, might suffice for man's sustenance. Mercer. in v. 29.1. ch. Gen.

But these reasons conclude not. 1. Like as after the flood, when liberty was granted to eat flesh, as the green herb, yet they did forbear for a time, till the breed of Cattle was increased, upon the like reason before the flood, immediately after the creation, they might abstain for a time from the eating of flesh, but not altogether. 2. The great virtue and strength of herbs concludeth, that the eating of flesh was not so general, or necessary, then as afterward, but the whole abstinence from all kind of eating of flesh, it concludeth not.

I rather prefer Musculus opinion, who upon the sacrificing of beasts, and wearing of their skins, inferreth, that beasts were killed before the flood, and consequently their flesh eaten. in 1. Gen. v. 29.

1. Doct. Of the Trinity proved.

1. AGainst the Jews that deny the Trinity, and the Sabellians, which affirm but one person in the Deity, we have evident proof in this chapter, verse. 1. where the word (God) or, in the hebrew elohim, gods, is joined to a verb of the singular number, [ bara ] created, noting the singularity of the Godhead, and plurality of the persons. But exception is taken against this argument by Cajetan, for the which he is reproved of Catharinus another Popish writer, lib. 4. animad ver. and by Bellarmine. lib. 2. de Christ. c. 6. for that it is the use of the Hebrews to join words of the plural, with a verb of the singular number, upon which reason this collection is misliked also by Calvin and Mercerus : but it may be replied, that it is not the use of the Hebrews to put in the plural number, that which hath no plurality in nature: as to say (God's) if there were but one person in the godhead.

But yet this argument for the Trinity is more evident, verse. 26. Let us make man after our image, &c. where God neither speaketh to himself, saying, let us make, not I will make: neither yet to the earth, as though that wrought together with God: nor to the Angels, for God only created man, verse. 27. nor yet doth God speak in the plural number, according to the fashion of great men, for that use of spee • h, was not yet known: but in this form of speech is set forth the consultation of the blessed Trinity, the Father, Son, and holy Ghost.

2. Doct. That the heavens and earth had a beginning.

2. OUt of the first verse we conclude, that the world had a beginning, and that it was created by God: contrary to the opinion of Xenophanes, who held the world to be without beginning or end: and of the Epicures, who did impiously hold, that the world was made by chance, by the concurrence of bodies together: and of Aristotle among the heathen, and Eugubinus in Cosmopeia among Christians, who affirm Coelum empyraeum, the highest and supreme heaven to have been eternal.

Likewise we condemn the folly of the lying Egyptians and Chaldees, who extend the age of the world many thousand years before it was made. The Egyptians boasted that they had a continual succession of Kings. 70. thousand years. Augustine maketh mention of a letter that Alexander writ to his mother Olympias, wherein he reporteth, that he heard of an Egyptian Priest, that the Kingdom of the Assyrians exceeded 5000. years: of the Persians, 8000. years. Pompeius Mela writeth, that they have chronicles of 13000. years. Diogenes Laertius, from Vulcan to Alexander, accounteth. 48860. years, August. lib. 12. de civitate. dei. cap. 10. The Egyptians also reckon 100. thousand years since they first learned Astrology, de civitat. dei. 18. c. 40. All these are lying fables, seeing by just computation of years it is found, that the world hath not yet continued since the first beginning thereof, 6000. years.

3. Doct. The word from the beginning.

3. Vers. 3. THen God said: hence Servetus would confirm his wicked error, that the word was not from the beginning, because the heavens and earth are here said to be made, before God spake. But we have an evident testimony, that the word was in the beginning with God, and that nothing was made without it, John. 1, 2, 3. and seeing the light was made by this word, the word must needs be before the light: the cause goeth before the effect: so that the heavens and earth were in the beginning made by the word of God: but in this place first only it is added▪ And God said, because now more manifestly the wisdom and power of God appeareth in the distinction and perfection of the creatures, which before were confused together. Calvin. Mercer. Further, another heresy of Servetus is confuted, who thinketh that this was a new quality in God to speak, which spake not before, for this speaking in God, was no quality in God, as in man, but it signifieth only his will and decree, though Ab. Ezra do without cause find fault with R. Saadian for so expounding: this word of God was nothing but God's decree and commandment, whereby the heavens also and earth were first made, Psal. 148.5. so that then God thus spake also. Calvin. Mercer.

4. Doct. Of the different beginning of the souls of man and beasts.

4. Vers. 24 LEt the earth bring forth every living thing: animam viventem, the living soul: from hence it was gathered, that not only the bodies of brute beasts, but their life also, and as it were soul, were derived out of the earth: whereby a manifest difference appeareth between the original of man's soul, which was breathed of God, and of the soul or life of beasts, which was produced out of the earth: contrary to the opinion of Porphirius, and the Pythagoreans, who taught that the soul of man took beginning from the elements, as the life of other creatures.

5. Doct. That God hath no human shape.

5. LEt us make man after our image. verse. 26. which image was shown before to be in the graces of the soul, and not in the body, against the heresy of the Anthropomorphites, who imagined God to be of a human shape like unto man.

6. Doct. God not the author of evil.

6. Vers. 31. GOd saw all he had made, and • oe it was very good. From hence we conclude, that God only is the author of good: and that whatsoever the Lord doth, is very good. Against the Manichees, who affirmed, that the God of the law was the Prince of darkness, and anchor of evil.

7. Doct. Marriage made free for all men▪

7. Vers. 28. BRing forth fruit and multiply ] This Scripture showeth, 〈◊〉 marriage had the institution in man's innocence, and that this blessing to increase, should have taken place though 〈◊〉 had not fallen: against the heresy of the Tati •• i and Ma • ichees, which condemned marriage as a work of the devil.

Again, seeing God giveth here a liberty to all men and women by marriage to increase and multiply, it maketh strongly against the Popish inhibition of marriage in Ecclesiastical persons, and Monastical enforced vows: for by both these, this general liberty given of God is restrained.

To this argument divers answers are framed. 1. That this precept of multiplying was only to hold • ll the world was replenished. Magister, lib. • . distinct. 2 • . 2. This precept was not given to all, but only to the multitude▪ Thomas 2.2. quast. 152▪ art. 2.3. This precept was not for all times, but only in case of necess • ty, when propagation failed, Scotus. 4. Some say this precept did hold only till Christ. 5. Some that this increasing is to be understood of ••• ctifying in the soul, not in the body. But all these answers mislike the moderne Papists. And therefore now their answer is, that these words, increase and multiply, contain not a precept, but an institution of nature, and a promise of fecundity • for the same words are uttered unt • other creatures, which are not capable of precepts; and if i • were • precept, i • should bind all to increase and multiply by marriage, and so injury should be offered to Christ, to Mary and other holy Virgins: thus Bellarmine de Clericis, lib. 1. c. 21. Pererius in Genes. lib. 4. p. 657.

Contra. 1. Our adversaries fight here with their own shadow: for neither do we say, that this is an absolute precept binding all to marriage: but a liberty granted to all that will marry, that thereby mankind may still be propagated: like as where Christ faith, if they persecute you in one City, fly into another: he doth not take away this liberty, that flieth not, having received a greater gift of strength and patience to stay and endure the utmost trial▪ but he, which shall deny this remedy to the weak. So they offend not against this grant of marriage for increase, that need it not, but are endued with a more excellent gift of continency, but they, which deny it to those that are apt to generation. 2. Though brute beasts are not capable of man's precepts, yet when God biddeth, the creatures understand in their kind and obey. Ion 2.10. God spake to • he fish, and it cast up Jonah upon the dry land. 3. If it be an institution of nature, then they tyrannize by their superstitious laws over the bodies of men, forcing them to single life against the general inclination of nature.

1. Confut. Against the Manichees and Atheists.

I Will briefly first set down the objections of the Manichees and ancient Pagans, concerning the creation, because they are suitable to the impious conceits of the Atheists in these days.

1. Object. If God in the beginning made the world: what did he before? was he weary in doing of nothing? Answ. God, as Augustine saith, nec cessando torpuit, nec operando laboravit, neither was idle in resting, nor weary in working: neither received he any happiness by the things created, without which he was happy: but when it pleased him, he made the world to manifest his glory, and declare his mercy. August. cont. aedvers. leg. lib. 1. c. 2.

2. Object. If God created light, he was before in darkness. Answer. God needeth no corporal light, which was made, but dwelleth in a spiritual and uncreated light. Aug. de g • n. cont. Manic. cap 4.

3. Object. If God made the light, who made darkness? Answer. Darkness is nothing, it need no creation, being but the absence of light, as nakedness is the want of clothing, silence the ceasing of a sound. ibid.

4. Object. If the spirit moved upon the waters, then were they the habitacle or mansion of the spirit. Ans. The Sun is carried above the earth, yet is not the earth the habitation thereof: and the spirit did so move upon the waters, as the workman over the work which he intendeth to make. Aug. ibid. c. 5.

5. Object. But who made the waters whereupon the spirit moved? Answ. It is comprehended under the name of the earth, which was covered with the waters, made at the first, as an unformed lump or matter, whereout other creatures were made. Aug c. 7.

6. Object. God saw that the light was good, it should seem he knew it not before. Answ. It followeth not, that because God approveth the light being made, he knew it not before. Christ wondered at the Centurions faith, which he himself had wrought: God saw it before in his intention, and now approveth it, brought forth in action.

7. Object. How could there be light, or the distinction of days and nights▪ before the Sun was made? Cels. lib. 6. Orig. and so object the Manichees. Ans. Augustine answereth, that there was a division of the day and night before the sun, but a more exact division afterward: de genes. cont. Manich. c. 15. Ambrose saith, the light of the day is one thing, the light of the sun another: as we see by experience, that there is a light before the sun rise, and after he is set, lib. 4. Hexemer. c. 3. But we do again say, that God is not tied to the creature, as though he could not make light without the sun: • ee that made the • unn • , was able to make light before and without the sun: see more hereof, in the Theological explanation upon verse. 3. I will now touch some of the Papists objections.

2. Confut. Sacraments do not confer • grace.

BEllarmine by the moving of the spirit upon the waters, enforceth, that the Sacrament of Baptism conferreth grace, as those waters concurred to the making of natural things, so the water of baptism toward spiritual regeneration: lib. 2. de sacram. ca. 4. Ans. This collection maketh against his opinion: for like as the waters were dead without the spirit, so we say that it is the spirit in baptism, and not the element that doth regenerate us.

3. Confut. Not lawful to make the image of God.

MAn is the image of God, but it is lawful to make the image of the image of God: ergo, to make the image of God, lib. 2. de imaginib. sanct. c. 8. Ans. Man is made according to God's image in his soul, not in his body: that therefore in man, wherein he is like unto God is spiritual and invisible, and therefore cannot be by a visible image deciphered.

4. Confut. Man created immortal.

BEcause the Lord said to man, increase and multiply, Bellarmine collecteth, that man was created of a mortal and corruptible nature, yet should he have been preserved by a supernatural grace, if he had not sinned, lib. de grat. primi hom. c. 9. Ans. 1. His collection is weak, for man should have increased in the state of innocence, where no corruption was, and Mary was increased with her holy Son Christ, whose flesh saw no corruption, Act. 2.27. 2. Neither needed Adam to have had any supernatural gift, beside his creation, to have been preserved from death, if he had not sinned: for death entered only by sin, Rom. 5.12.

5. Confut. Against the Anabaptists.

Vers. 26. LEt them rule over the fish of the Sea, &c. Hence the Anabaptists would prove their confused community and free use of all creatures: because God giveth unto Adam and all his posterity, rule, and dominion over them. But it is a gross collection: for the gift must be used according to the mind of the giver: now the Lord, who first gave this liberty unto man, hath also set an order, appointed Magistrates, forbidden to steal: that every man should content himself with his own portion, and not usurp upon another's right. Muscul.

6. The 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , places of exhortation and comfort.

1. THe great wisdom of God appeareth in the creation of the world, as the Prophet noteth, Psal. 104.24. In wisdom hast thou made them all, &c. for all things were ordained of God in excellent order, and disposed with great wisdom.

2. The great bounty of God appeareth toward man, for whose cause he hath made all these things, which the eye beholdeth: that we again should magnify the mercies of God toward us: thus the Prophet exhorteth, Psal. 8.3. When I behold the heavens, &c. what is man say I then, that thou art so mindful of him?

3. Seeing man was created after the image of God in righteousness and holiness, and since by his transgression he hath lost this image, Eccles. 7.31. God hath made man righteous, but they have sought many inventions: we should labor to repair this image, and to be renewed in the spirit of our minds, to put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and holiness, Ephes. 4.24.

4. As God hath given unto man rule over the creatures, verse. 28. as the Prophet saith, The ox knoweth his owner, &c. Isaiah 1.3. So man should endeavor to know his Creator and Maker, and to be obedient to him.

5. As God commanded light to shine out of darkness, so we should pray to God to illuminate our minds with the knowledge of Christ, 2 Cor. 4.6.

6. All things which God created were good, so we should delight in doing of good, and overcome evil with goodness, Rom. 12.21.

QUEST. I. How God is said to have rested.

1. GOd rested from all his work. • . Neither as being weary in working, but resting is here taken only 〈…〉 , or leaving to work. 2. Neither did he rest from his works, to receive any use thereof or benefit to himself: but the wiseman showeth how God taketh delight in his works: Prov. 8.31. I took my solace in the compass of the earth, and my delight is in the children of ma • : he made all things for 〈◊〉 use, and man for his own glory: not that by man there is any new accession of glory to God, which he had not: for infinite was the glory of the blessed Trinity before the world was. John. 17.5. but by man▪ God's glory in the world is manifested, not to God's benefit, but to his own everlasting reward. 3. Neither is God said simply to rest, but only from the works of the creation: by his providence he worketh still in the preservation of those things which he hath made. John 5.17. My father worketh hitherto▪ and I work.

QUEST. II. How the Lord is said to have made an end of his work the seventh day.

Vers. 2. IN the seventh day God finished his work, &c. 1. Not that God made any of his works upon the seventh day, as Jerome urgeth this place against the Jews: tradition. in Genes. 2. neither is it so said, because God in the last point of the sixth day finished his work, which therefore is counted of the seventh: as the Hebrews. 3. Neither need we with the Septuagint to read sixth for seventh; which were a corrupting of the text. 4. Nor yet with some Hebrews to understand the creation of the seventh day: for God had already appointed the days to follow in order: and the days are not properly said to be created, but the works made therein. 5. Neither yet do we approve the conceit of Ibn Ezra, who saith, that the end or absolution of a work is no work. 6. But without anymore controversy, the meaning is no more but this, that God had now already upon the seventh day finished his work: the finishing was done before, but now the Lord beheld it as complete and perfect. Mercer. Iun.

QUEST. III. The meaning of these words, verse. 3. which he created to be made.

Vers. 3. WHich he created, to be made. ] 1. This is neither to be referred to the eternal purpose of God to create those things, which after were made, as Rupertus, lib. 2. de Trinitat. c. 18. for God's decree and purpose to create the world, is of like eternity to himself: but the creation had a beginning. 2. Neither by these words [ to be made ] is signified the power of generation given to the creature, to make like to it self: for from this work God's providence ceaseth not still. 3. Neither is insinuated thereby the end to the which, and order wherein everything was made: as Cajetan: for this was done in the creation, that beside it, there need no new making. 4. But either it is a phrase of the Hebrews, who for more certainty and emphasis of speech, do use to double the word: as verse. 16. in eating thou shalt eat. verse. 17. in dying thou shalt die: that is, shalt freely eat, and surely die: so God created in making: that is, powerfully and wonderfully made: Mercer. or the words are inverted, and may be placed thus, in setting, making, before created, as Tremellius and R. Isaac: he rested from making the work which he had created. 5. Or if we make any difference, the creation was in the beginning of heaven and earth, as the matter and substance, the making was of the forming of the creatures on the six days out of that substance before by God created and prepared. Muscul. 6. But most ridiculous and blasphemous is that fable of some Hebrews, that this work which God created to make, and made not, were the Faunes and Satires, which God made in the evening upon the sixth day, and being short of time, could not finish them. ex Muscul.

QUEST. IIII. The Sabbath instituted of God, after the creation.

Vers. 4. GOd blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it. ] Here we have the institution of the Sabbath, which afterward was revived by the promulgation of the moral law. We refuse therefore the erroneous opinion of Tostatus and Pererius, two Popish writers, who do think that this sanctifying of the Sabbath, is here mentioned by way of anticipation, being not instituted till the time of Moses: for every day to man in the state of innocence should have been a Sabbath, neither was there any positive precept given to Adam in Paradise, but only that of not eating the forbidden fruit. Perer. in Genes. lib. 1. p. 223. But in this affirming they are grossly deceived. 1. Man had now transgressed, before the Sabbath was instituted as afterward shall be proved, and therefore they do out of time urge the state of man's innocence. 2. If man had continued in that state, seeing he was appointed to keep the garden, and not to live idly, no not in Paradise, it is most like, that even then he should have kept the Sabbath, as a rest & intermission even from such labor, as became that place, and as a symbol unto him of a further perfection to be attained unto. 3. That the Sabbath was instituted now, the creation finished, it may appear by the fourth commandment, Exod. 20.11. where this reason of the law is given: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, &c. 4. It is also evident, that the Sabbath was kept by godly tradition, before the moral law was given, as Exod. 16.23. To morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath to the Lord. 5. Thus the fathers ground the institution of the Sabbath upon God's example in this place: as Jerome, trad. in 2. Gen. Augustine, Psal. 80. and Origen thus answereth. Celsus, lib. 6. objecting, if God were weary, that he needed to rest. God rested (saith he) ut nos ab operibus quiescentes, &c. that we resting from our works should celebrate that day.

QUEST. V. Of the generations of the heaven and earth, how to be understood.

Vers. 4. THese are the generations, &c. 1. This word, generations, is not here to be taken actively, as some of the Hebrews, for those things, which the heaven and earth brought forth of themselves, but passively for the beginning and original of the heavens and earth. 2. The Masorites note that this word toldoth, which signifieth generations, is twice only found fully written, with vau in the beginning, in this place after the world was finished, and in the generation of Phares in the end of Ruth: and they yield this reason thereof, because this generation in the perfection of the world was complete, and that other whereof Messiah should come, but all other generations are imperfect, and therefore they are defective in letters: but these observations are curious: ex Mercer.

QUEST. VI. Of the name of God Jehovah.

Vers. 4. IN the day that the Lord God. 1. This is the first place of Scripture where the Lord is called by his name Jehovah. 2. The reason whereof the Hebrews make to be this: that as Elohim is a name of power and justice, given unto God in the creation: so now Jehovah a name of mercy, is attributed unto God, the whole work being finished, because therein his mercy appeared: or rather now after God had made his work full and complete, he is also set forth in his full and complete titles. Iun. 3. The Hebrews very superstitiously forbear the reading or naming of this word Jehovah, and use instead thereof Adonaei: which word we confess is soberly to be used, and that it conveniently cannot be pronounced, because it borroweth all the pricks from Adonai: and we condemn also the heathens profanation of this name. who derive from them the oblique cases of Jupiter, Iovis, Iovi. 4. This name Jehovah, some would have to express the Trinity, because it consisteth of three kinds of letters, some by He, double understand the two natures of Christ, but this is too curious. It is derived of haiah, which signifieth God's being and essence: and therefore he is called Jehovah, as by whom man and all things else have their being, ex Mercer.

QUEST. VII. The world made in six days, and not all at once.

Vers. 4. IN the day that the Lord made the earth and the heavens ] From this place Augustine would gather that all the wor • d was made in one day, and that Moses doth divide the creation into six days work, that it might be the better understood of the simpler sort. l. 4. de genes. ad lit. c. 21. the same was the opinion of Philo Judaeus, Procopius, and Cajetan, a Popish writer.

But this opinion cannot stand. 1. It is contrary to the Scripture, Exod 21.11. For in six days God made heaven and earth. And Moses writing the story of the creation, must be taken plainly as he writeth. For if the world was made at once, how can it be true, that it was made in six days? 2 Augustine other-where holdeth the contrary, that the world was not made in one day, but in order, and he giveth this reason, because if the creatures had been made together, non haberent sensum, infirmitatis, &c. they should not have the like sense of their infirmity, as now they have, one seeing another made before them. quaest. 106. ex vet. testam. Ambrose giveth the like reason: ne increata crederentur, the creatures were not made at once, lest they might be thought not to have been made. lib. 1. Hexem. c. 6. 3. Whereas Moses here saith, in the day: we will not answer with Gregory, that it is so said, because the matter or substance of the creatures was created at once in the beginning, Gen. 1. 2. though they received their form and perfection afterward. lib. 32. moral. c. 10. this also is Junius opinion in his last edition: for as yet the day was not created, nor the light, when the heaven and earth were made in the beginning: and Moses here directly speaketh of the plants and herbs, that were not made before the third day. I allow rather Tremellius judgment in the first edition, who translateth, for in the day, be • om: in the time: a part being taken for the whole: as afterward, verse 17. in • he day, thou eatest thereof, (that is, in the time, whensoever thou shalt eat thereof,) thou shalt die the death : so also Mercerus.

QUEST. VIII. Of the mist that went up from the earth.

Vers. 6. BVt amyst went up ] because the Latin text readeth a fountain, Augustine being unskillful of the original, much busieth himself about this matter, sometime thinking that one fountain is here taken for many, whereby the earth is overflown: other while that some great river, as Nylus, might water the earth. lib. 5. de genes. ad lit. c. 9. Others taking that to be impossible, do only understand Paradise to have been watered with this fountain, as Albinus, contrary to the text, which saith, it watered all the earth: yea, to make this matter more doubtful, the interlineary gloss saith, that there fell no rain before the flood, but that all the earth was watered with the fountains and springs of the earth. Wherefore to clear these doubts, we are to resort to the original word, gnedh, which signifieth a vapor, or a myst: and let it here be noted, that Per • tius a Jesuit writing upon Genesis in this place, forsaketh the vulgar latin text, and cleaveth to the Original.

It being then agreed, that we are to read, not a fountain, as Jerome's translation hath, and the Septuagint, but a myst or vapor, yet there remaineth another doubt: for some read affirmatively, but a vapor ascended, as all the interpreters, but Tremellius, who understandeth it negatively, joining it thus with the former verse, there was not a man to till the ground, or any vapor had ascended, &c. and so he would have the negative ( ain, not) used before, to be supplied here. This I take to be the best reading, both for that it is most agreeable to the text, which showeth that God created the plants without any natural help, either of rain or mysts, or artificial of man's labor: that neither rain had yet descended, nor vapors ascended. As also because the manner of Scripture phrase will bear it: as Exod. 20.4. Thou shalt not make to thee any graven image, or any similitude, &c. where throughout the whole verse, the negative particle, lo, not, must be supplied, which is but once in the beginning of the verse expressed.

This interpretation we prefer before either that of the Hebrews: 1. who refer this verse to that which followeth, and join it not with that, which goeth before, but make this sense: that as yet there were no plants or herbs that appeared above the earth, but lay yet hid, till God sent rain, whereby the earth was prepared for the creation of man, and the plants watered: so R. Sel. But this is a vain conceit: for upon the third day trees were made, which appeared above the earth: and the earth having been so lately covered with the waters, was yet moist enough. 2. Either that of Eugubinus, who saith it rained the second day, and then the plants were brought forth the third: for upon the second day the waters were gathered together from covering the earth, so that no rain was then needful. 3. Mercerus distinguisheth the times: the 5. verse he understandeth of the first growing of the plants in the creation, which was done without rain or dew: but the 6. verse he referreth to that ordinary course, which God appointed afterward, by dew and rains to refresh the earth. 4. Musculus will have the 6. verse, of the ascending of vapors, to be understood of the very time of creation: that God used those helps of nature, but this were to tie God unto means: wherefore I take it with Junius to be an explanation of the former verse: that it had neither yet rained, nor any mist had ascended, when God only by his word caused the plants to grow out of the earth: this is the exposition of R. Saadia, which Kim • i preferreth before all the rest.

QUEST. IX. Whether Paradise were terrestrial.

Vers. 8. THe Lord planted a garden eastward in Eden, &c. Jerome readeth for eastward, à principi • , from the beginning, whereas the word is Kedem, the East, translated by the Septuagint 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , so that Jerome's conceit that God made Paradise before the heaven and earth, tradit. in 2. gen. is grounded upon the false interpretation of this place: and how could Paradise which was upon the earth be planted, before the earth was founded? 2. Their conceit is removed, that imagine Paradise to be no terrene or corporal place, but to be spiritually understood: as Philo, lib. de mund. op • fic. and Origen, whom Epiphanius confuteth by this reason, that where there are true rivers, as Euphrates, which is confessed of all to be one of the rivers of Paradise, where were also very trees and plants, there Paradise must be a terrestrial place. epist. ad Ioann. Hieros • l. 3. Neither can the whole earth be taken for Paradise, as some have thought, because it is said here to be planted in Eden, which was the name of a special country. Esech. 27.23. Harah, Canneth, Eden, are joined together.

QUEST. X. Where Paradise was situate.

LIkewise for the situation of Paradise: 1. it was neither in a remote place beyond the Ocean, which opinion is attributed to Ephrem. 2. nor a place higher than all the earth, Damasc. lib. 2. de fid. orthodox. c. 14. 3. nor next unto heaven, as Rupertus, de Trinitat. c. 37. 4. nor reaching up to the Moon, as some other have imagined. 5. nor in the air, though not so high as the Moon, as Alexander, Hales, and Tostatus. 6 nor under the Equinoctial. Bonavent. in 2. senten. c. 17. for these rivers, Tigris, and Euphrates, which flowed out of Paradise, and the country Eden, where Paradise was, came not near the Equinoctial: and they are known to be in Asia, not in any remote and unknown country, in earth, not in the air, or next to the Moon. All these are ridiculous & childish fancies, and need no long confutation.

QUEST. XI. Of the tree of life.

Vers. 9. THe tree of life, &c. 1. This was a visible tree, planted in the midst of Paradise, in a visible place, not spiritually or▪ allegorically to be understood, as Origen thinketh. 2. neither is it called the tree of life, because it was able to give immortality, and to preserve from death forever, as Tostatus, or only because it was able to preserve man from death, till such time as he should be translated to immortality, as Scotus in 2. lib. sent. dist. 19. qu. 1. and Thomas, with others. 4. Neither need it be disputed, whether the tree of life had this power to preserve from death, by a supernatural gift, as Bonaventure: or by a natural faculty, as Hugo, Thomas, Pererius upon this place. 5. For it is evident that this tree had no power to give immortality at all, by the taste of the fruit thereof: 1. because that no corruptible food can make the body incorruptible: but the fruit of this tree could not nourish nature without corruption and alteration, and without nourishment it could not give life to the body. 2. Again, man had by his creation power given him to die, if he had not sinned wherefor immortality was the gift of his creation, not effect of the eating of the tree. 3. And if it could have givē immortality, it must have had a power to preserve from sin: for by sinning, man became mortal: so that if it could not defend him from sin, it was no more the tree of life in regard of the effect, than any other tree of the garden: for if he had not sinned, he should not have died, what fruit soever he had eaten of, that only tree of knowledge of good and evil excepted.

6. Then our opinion is this, that it was called the tree of life, not so much for the operation (though we confess it might give strength and virtue also to the body: Mercer. ) but chiefly for the signification, because it was both a sign of life received from God, and a symbol of Christ, who is our true life: and herein we approve rather the opinion of Augustine, Eugubinus in Cosmopeia, who thinketh it was called the tree of life, not effective, but significative, not effectually, but significatively, as a sign of true immortality, which he should receive of God, if he continue in obedience: First, it is the tree of life, as the other was of knowledge of good and evil, which was not so called, because it gave knowledge, but was a seal unto them of their miserable knowledge, which they should get by experience in their transgression, Magister. lib. 3. distinct. 17. therefore the tree of life must be so called, because it was a seal and pledge of life: secondly, thus the Scripture significatively and simbolically expoundeth the tree of life: Prov. 5.18. Wisdom (which is Christ) is a tree of life. Revel. 2.7. To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life: see more of this, Synops 17. cont. err. 5.

QUEST. XII. Of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

verse. 9. THe tree of knowledge of good and evil. First we affirm, that this was a visible material tree, not spiritually to be interpreted, as some have thought, because Eva was tempted with a visible object, it was pleasant to the eyes, Gen. 3.6. Secondly, we hold it a curious matter, to search what kind of tree it was. 1. whether a vine tree, as some think, because of the institution of the Sacrament, where wine is used: which is a sign of Christ's blood, not a remembrance of man's transgression. 2. or a fig-tree, as Theodoret. qu. 28. in Gen. because they made them aprons of fig-tree-leaves: whereas they had cause rather to abhor that tree of all other, and therefore not to use the leaves. 3. or whether any tree rather than a fig-tree, as Tostatus, or an apple tree, because it is said, Cant. 8.6. I raised thee under an apple tree, &c. which words have an allegorical sense. None of these certainly be affirmed, the Scripture having not expressed it.

Thirdly, it was called the tree of knowledge of good and evil: 1. Neither because it endued them with reason and understanding, as some of the Hebrews: and Oukelos translateth, of whose fruit they which eat shall know good and evil: for being created according to God's image, they are made reasonable souls. 2. Neither because it gave them indeed, sharpness of wit, as Josephus, 1. lib. antiquitat. for God then would not have forbidden man the use of it, being for his good. 3. neither, as Ramban, because before only by a natural instinct, as other creatures they were led: for then, as R. Moses well noteth, they should have gained and not lost, by eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 4. neither was it so called, because of the lying and enticing words of Satan, that promised they should be as God's, knowing good and evil: as Tostatus, Pererius upon this place: for it was thus called before the temptation, Gen. 2.9.17. and God forbiddeth them to eat of it under that name: so that it is most like to have been so called by God himself. 5. We think rather it was so called of the event, because by transgression of God's commandment, in eating of the forbidden fruit, they had an experimental knowledge, (a speculative knowledge of good and evil, they had before, as the rich man hath of poverty) what good they had lost, and what evil they were fallen into: and this is the sentence of most of the fathers. Neither doth that place hinder this interpretation, Gen. 3.22. because the Lord saith, man is become as one of us to know good and evil: that seeing man in knowledge was now become like unto God, (and this experimental knowledge is not in God) therefore it cannot be so taken: for here the Lord speaketh (ironically) not that man was now become like indeed in knowledge to God, (for it is not to be thought, that man's knowledge was increased by his sin, and if it were so, Satan had not lied, in promising them to be like unto God) but the Lord derideth man's folly, that was brought into such a foolish conceit to think by breaking the commandment, to be made like to God. 6. This tree of knowledge of good and evil may be also mystically understood of that perfect and absolute knowledge, which God hath reserved to himself: the which they are forbidden to search after, but to content themselves with that gift and portion of knowledge, which God had already abundantly given unto them. Mercer. in Gen. 2. v. 16.

QUEST. XIII. Of the river of Paradise.

Vers. 10. OVt of Eden went a river, &c. and from thence it was divided into four heads. 1. These four heads had not their beginning in Paradise, as some have thought: but the river out of the which these four heads of branches issued forth, came out of Eden, and is found to have his head or fountain in the mountains of Armenia the great: there this river Euphrates, is called Pac Perath, the flowing out of Euphrates. Iun. 2. Neither was this river divided into four heads in Eden before it came to Paradise, which seemeth to be the opinion of Eugubinus: for from thence, that is, when it had passed thorough the garden, it parted into four streams. 3. Neither do I think that the two great rivers Tigris and Euphrates, do first run together thorough Paradise, and then divide themselves into four brooks, as Mercerus thinketh: for this is but one river, that came out of Eden to water the garden: and beside the rivers Tigris and Euphrates touch not together, till they come to the Town Massica, not far from Babylon, and then they part again, and one stream runneth along by Seleutia, another by Babylon, Calvin. ex Plin. lib. 6. c. 26. but Paradise is supposed to have been situate more eastward than Babylon. 4. Neither can I subscribe to their sentence, that make Physon and Gihon, to be the two doors or passages, whereby the river Tigris entereth into the Sea: for they are too remote from Paradise, and therefore serve not fitly for the description of the river of Paradise. 5. Nor yet can we properly make these four heads, to be the two rivers Euphrates and Tigris, before they enter into Paradise, and the two streams, whereinto they are parted again beneath Paradise: which is the opinion of Calvin, and Junius edition 1. which else-where I have approved as most probable. But these reasons make against it. 1. we must have but one river that cometh out of Eden into Paradise, not two. 2. These too rivers joining together and parting again, are still not four but two streams. 3. The text saith, that from thence, that is, as the river runneth out of Paradise, it is divided into four heads: we must then seek for these four heads, at the coming forth, not at the entering. 6. Tostatus thinketh, that this river made a great lake, after it passed Paradise, and from thence branched forth into four streams: but then not the river, but the lake should be divided. 7. Barcephas hath this conceit, that this river ran under the Ocean, and so brake forth in divers places of the earth, lib. de Paradis. But Moses description is against him: who maketh this river immediately to divide it self from Paradise, and showeth what countries everyone of them compasseth▪ 8. Wherefore I think it more probable, that this river which runneth through Paradise, is the river Euphrates, which afterward streameth into four rivers, as they are here described by Moses. Of this opinion is Josephus, who best knew the situation of those countries, as he is cited by Ambrose, Josephus historiographus paradisum, &c. dicit rigari slumine, qui divid •• ur in 4. fluvi • s: Josephus the historiographer saith, that Paradise is watered with a flood, that divideth it self into four rivers. epist. 42. First then it is certain, that Euphra • es that great river, did send forth divers channels and streams out of it, more than one or two, as Junius proveth out of Ptolemy, lib. 5. Geogr. c. 23. C • lvin out of Arrianus, lib. 7. Secondly, it is evident, that there were such rivers so called, as Moses here describeth them. For Pliny maketh mention of a river called Phasitigris, lib. 6. c. 27. as compounded of Phasis (which seemeth to be derived of phishon) and Tigris: and a part of Tigris was called Digli • o, Plin. lib. 6. c. 27. for 〈…〉 , which was this Hiddekel. Thirdly, Junius very learnedly showeth which were these four streams issuing out of Euphrates: Pishon is that part which runneth with Tigris about Armenia, and was corruptly called Phasitigris: the same also is Nahar mal • ha, Ptolemy calleth it Basilaeon, the Kings river: Gihon is the river Naharsares, that emptied it self into the Chaldean fens: Hiddekel, is that branch, which above Seleucia falleth into Tigris, which was corruptly called Diglito: Perath is the river Euphrates, that ran along by Babylon, and at the first had his proper passage into the Persian gulf, but now falleth in with Tigris.

But whether these are those four heads or streams of Euphrates, it may be doubted: because the river Nahar malcha, the Kings river, was thought first to be cut out by Gabaris the governor of that province, to stay the swiftness of Euphrates, as it falled upon Babylon: which river was afterward scoured & ditched by Trajanus and Severus. It is certain then, if the current of this river were not natural, but made by the industry of man, and that long after Moses time, that it can be none of these four heads here described; unless we say with Calvin, that man's industry only here helped nature, and that G • baris caused the natural current, landed up, to be opened and enlarged. Wherefore I hold it the best resolution with Mercer •• , to say, that seeing not only the names, but the channels and currents of rivers and streams may be altered & changed in time, that it can hardly now be defined, which are these four streams of Euphrates: it sufficeth us to know, that sometime this river was so divided by branches, where the situation of Paradise was: the particular place whereof is not now known.

QUEST. XIV. Of the river Pishon.

Vers. 11. THe name of one is Pishon. ] Most of the ancient writers, as Jerome, Ambrose, Epiphanius, with others, did take this Pishon for the river Ganges in India, which they understand here by Havilah, from whence great store of gold is brought. But this cannot be so: 1. Ganges hath his original, as Strabo writeth, from the mountain Caucasus, lib. 15. and is found to be 70. degrees, that is, 4030. miles distant from Tigris and Euphrates, and therefore these rivers can have no concurrence together, as these are described by Moses to run through Paradise. 2. Havilah is not here taken for India, but for a country much nearer: as