Commentary on Genesis and Exodus

QUEST. I. Book of generation, how to be understood.

Vers. 1. THis is the book of the generation. 1. Moses setteth down the genealogy of the fathers before the flood, because of Christ's line, which Luke deriveth from Adam: Matthew goeth not beyond Abraham: not, as some think, because of the rest of that line beyond Abraham might easily be supplied out of Moses books, which were then well known, but for that the most conspicuous and manifest promises of the Messiah, were made to Abraham: all the generations to Matthew, supplying •• enty from Adam to Abraham, make but 72. but Luke reckoneth 77. The Reason is, because Matthew omitteth some of purpose, to make the numbers equal, which Luke supplieth, and Matthew maketh his account by Solomon, Luke by Nathan: so that there might be more persons in the one descent than in the other. 2. Moses beginneth now to set down Adams generation by Seth: because Cain was rejected, and Abel died without issue. 3. It is called a book, that is, an enumeration, for so Sepher signifieth a book, because things are rehearsed in it: not because, as R. Isaac, Carus, Moses beginneth his book here, and the other 3. chapters should be as a preface. 4. Generation is here taken actively, for the posterity of Adam increased by him: as in Matthew, the book of the generation of Jesus Christ, is taken passively, for the generations of whom Christ came. 5. And whereas it is added, in the day that God created Adam: we need neither with Lyranus, to understand day generally for time, and we refuse the opinion of the Hebrews, that hold that Adam in the same day of his creation began to have generations, for so they fable, that Adam and Eve had four or five children the same day they were created: but in the day ; is to be referred to the latter part of the verse, wherein mention is made, of Adams creation, according to the image of God. Mercer.

QUEST. II. How Adam begat a Son in his own likeness.

Vers. 3. ADam begat a son in his own likeness, &c. 1. which is neither to be understood of the shape and image of his body, for so Cain was in outward shape like to Adam. 2. neither is it to be taken for the image of virtue and piety in his soul, for Adam had lost that image: neither is virtue engendered by nature: and Abel had the image of his fathers virtue before Seth. 3. neither is it so said, because the image of mankind was continued and preserved in Seth: whereas both Abel died without issue, and Cain's posterity was extinguished in the flood; for this notwithstanding, seeing the world was increased by Cain, he might be said also to be after Adams image. 4. But hereby is signified that original corruption, which is descended unto Adams posterity by natural propagation, which is expressed in the birth of Seth, not of Abel, because he had no of-spring, nor of Cain, because it might appear, that even the righteous seed by nature are subject to this original depravation: and yet Seth was otherwise after the image of Adam, than Cain, because his seed was sanctified of God, who purposed in Seth and his seed to make good the promise made to Adam, as touching the seed of the woman, that should break the serpents head. Iun. 5. And whereas Adam was an hundred thirty year old before he begat Seth, we abhor the lewd fables of the Hebrews, that think in this mean space, that Adam companied with female spirits or devils, and begat male spirits, and Eva with male spirits, and brought forth masculine or male devils: neither do I think with Mercer, that in the mean time Adam begat other sons and daughters: but God by this means ( Adam staying so long without children) did try his faith in looking for the promised seed, and his patience in seeing the wicked stock of Cain so mightily to increase. Iun.

QUEST. III. Wherefore it is added, and he died.

Vers. 5. ALL the days that Adam lived, &c. 1. Neither were these years otherwise accounted than by 12. months, as it may appear in the story of Noah's flood, where mention is made of the 7. month, and 27. day of the month. 2. Neither did these righteous fathers only live thus long by miracle, as thinketh R. Moses, but it was usual in those days. 3. And the conclusion of every ones life is, & mortuus est, he died: not as some think, because it should appear, that they died not in the flood, but by their own natural death: and therefore they say, this clause is not added after the flood in the genealogy of the fathers: but it is thus said, to show what the condition of all mankind was after Adams fall. 4. It is said only of Adam, all the days that he lived: Whereby the Hebrews infer that Adam lived a godly life, and repented: his repentance we doubt not of, but not soundly hence gathered. Mercer.

QUEST. IIII. Whether Adam the longest liver.

NOw whereas Adam lived but 930. years, Mathuselah, 969. years, v. 27. yet may Adam be well supposed to have been the longest liver, because he was created in a perfect state of body apt to generation, which was not then under sixty years: for none of the Patriarchs began to have children under that age: Mahalalel begat at 65. years of age. v. 15. and none under: then add unto Adams years, 60. more, in what age and state of body he was created, and he will be found to have been the longest liver of the Patriarchs: and to exceed Mathuselahs age, 21. years.

QUEST. V. The years of the Patriarchs full and complete years, consisting of twelve months.

COncerning the long life of the aged Patriarchs. 1. Neither is the conceit of the Egyptians to be received, that a man cannot live above an 100. years; for they say, that a man's heart increaseth till he come to 50. every year two drachmaes in weight, and then decreaseth every year as much, till he come to an hundred, and then for want of heart he can live no longer. For this fancy of theirs is confuted by experience: for Pliny maketh mention, that in Vespatian the Emperors time; there were found in Italy, two men of an 105. years: four of an 130. three of an 140. and two of an 150. years. And in these days some are found far to exceed an hundred years: as I have seen myself an old man of 124 years of age, at Eversden in the County of Bedford, who died about ann. 1600. or, 601. he could remember Bosworth field at the coming in of Henry the 7. being then as he affirmed some 15. years old. 2. Neither is it to be thought, that the years of the Patriarchs were accounted, as the Arcadians reckoned their years by quarters, or the Egyptians by months, as some have thought, for then Enoch begetting children at 65. years, should by this reckoning not exceed six years and a half, when he had a child. And this Egyptian year consisting of the age of the moon, will not allow above two days and a half to a month, whereas mention is made of the 17. and 27. day of the month, Gen. 7.11. and 8.14. It is evident then that the years of the Patriarchs were numbered by complete and full years, consisting of twelve months, and not after the Egyptian account. And hereunto Pliny giveth testimony, who remembereth in the same place before recited, that Alexander, Cornelius, Xenophon do write that some lived 500. some 600. some 800. years, Josephus also allegeth Manethan, Berosus, Mochus Estia • s the Egyptian, Chaldee, Phoenician Chronologers, who testify, that those old fathers lived toward a thousand years.

QUEST. VI. The causes of the long life of men before the flood.

THe causes of the long life of the Patriarchs may be thought to be these four. 1. The natural cause, the sound constitution of their bodies, not yet decayed, and the wholesome air, not yet corrupted with terrene exhalations, as after the flood. 2. The moral cause, for the invention and finding out of arts and sciences, which as Josephus writeth, they caused to be graven in two great pillars, one of brick, another of stone, that if the world were destroyed with water, the second pillar might remain: if with fire the first, (for so had they learned of Adam, that the world should be twice destroyed) and he saith further, that the pillar of stone was to be seen in Syria in his time. 3. The civil or politke cause of the long life of the Patriarchs, was for procreation and peopling of the world. 4. The Theological, that God by giving them such long life, might make trial of their obedience, to see if they would use this benefit of long life to the glory of God, which they did not, and therefore he shortened the age of man. Yet the Lord, while they enjoyed this long term, would not suffer any of them to attain unto a thousand years: not for that as the Hebrews suppose, God granted of Adams thousand seventy years to David, not for that reason, which seemeth to be too curious, whereof Irenaeus maketh mention, to make good that saying to Adam, in what day soever thou eatest thereof, thou shalt die the death: because a thousand years with God is as yesterday. Psal. 90.3. And so Adam died in the first day, before he came to a thousand: But God hereby would put the fathers in mind of mortality, that although they lived many hundred years, yet none of them filled up a thousand, lest they might have too much flattered themselves in long life: and seeing a thousand is a number of perfection, God would have none of them attain to 1000. that we might know that nothing is perfect here. Mercer.

QUEST. V. Of the false computation of the 70. Interpreters, and whence it is thought to proceed.

FUrther, whereas the Septuagint do much differ in the account of years from the Hebrew text, adding to the age of the old world, which in true reckoning maketh but 1656. five hundred eighty six years more, so making the whole number of years 2242. It is diversely conjectured, how this error should arise. 1. Some impute it to the malice of the Jews, that of purpose corrupted the Greek text, that the Gentiles should not know the secrets of the Scriptures. 2. Some to the prudency of the 70. translators, or of the writers and scribes, who knowing that the Egyptians would count it but a fable, that the fathers lived so many Astronomical years, made a way for them to take it after the count of the Egyptian years, whereof ten make but one year, and therefore they added an hundred years to the fathers age before they begat children, to make them apt for generation. But where the years will serve without any such addition, they add none. As Iered lived an 162. years, which because it maketh by the Egyptian calculation sixteen years, and some what more, the Septuagint there alter nothing. This is Augustine's conjecture.

But howsoever the Septuagint came to be so corrupt, it is apparently in many points erroneous. 1. They add unto six of the Patriarchs ages before they begat children, to each of them, Adam, Seth, En • s, Cainon, Malaleel, Enoch, an 100. years, and detract them again in the remainder of their life, that the whole sum may agree. 2. They take away from Methusalems age before he had children 22. years▪ and add to Lamechs age 6. years, as is shown before. 3. They miss in their calculation, in Methusalems years: they make him to live an hundred sixty five before he begat Lamech, and 802. after in all 969. whereas the other numbers put together want two of this sum, making but 967. 4. They detract from Lamechs age 24. years: his whole age according to the Hebrew is 777▪ according to the septuagint, but 753. 5. By their computation Methuselah must live 14. years after the flood: for they make him to live 802. years after Lamech was borne: and Lamech lived 188. years before Noah was borne, and in the six hundred year of Noah's age came the flood. Lamech and Noah make but 788. years after the computation of the Septuagint: there remaineth yet 14. years of Methusalems life: who according to the Hebrew computation, died the same year in the beginning before the flood came: for in the ark he could not be, where only were eight persons, Noah and his wife, his three sons and their wives: Genes. 7.7. and S. Peter witnesseth, that in the ark eight souls only were saved. 1 Pet, 3.20. and to say that Methuselah was saved in the terrestrial Paradise with his father Enoch ; is a fabulous fiction without ground. Mercerus.

QUEST. VI. The reason of the inequality of generation in the fathers.

WHereas the Patriarchs at divers ages began to beget children, Mahalaleel and Enoch at 56. years, Iered at a hundred sixty two years: Lamech at two hundredth eighty two. Noah at five hundred. 1. Neither is it to be imputed to Noah's holiness, that so long abstained from marriage: see • ng Enoch, that for his godly life was translated, had children at 65. years. 2. Neither, as Pererius conjectureth, is it like that Noah had other elder sons, which were dead before the flood came: for whereas it is said of all the Patriarchs beside, that they begat sons and daughters, beside those, which are expressed, no such thing is mentioned of Noah, that beside these three he begat sons and daughters: and the Septuagint read: Noah begat three sons, &c. insinuating in so reading their opinion, that these were all their sons: yet it is evident. Genes. 6.9. That these were all Noah's seed: the words are, these are the generation of Noah, Noah begat three sons, &c. 3. I rather think, not that either Noah deferred his marriage till he was 500. years old, or that he being married, abstained from the company of his wife all that time: but that God so disposed, seeing he purposed to save Noah and all his sons from the flood, that Noah did not so abound with posterity as his fathers before him, lest they also should have followed the wickedness of that age, and so perish with the rest: the Lord saw that there might be sufficient for the replenishing of the world again: and it was more to God's glory to increase the world afterward by so small a number.

QUEST. VII. Wherein Noah was a comfort to his parents.

7. Vers. 29. THis same shall comfort us concerning the works and sorrow of our hands. 1. Not because the course of sin should be stopped, and the grievous works of sinners stayed by the destructions in the flood, as Chrysostom. 2. Or because Noah found out the use of the plow, whereby the earth was tilled with more ease, as R. Solomon. 3. or for that the use of flesh was granted to Noah after the flood, as some think. 4. Nor yet only for that, the seminary of the world was preserved in Noah's ark, which otherwise should have perished. 5. Nor yet only because God renewed his covenant with Noah, promising that the world should never be destroyed with waters again. 6. But the chief scope of this prophesy hath relation to Christ, in whom we find true rest to our souls, and who hath delivered us from the curse, Galath. 3.10. who was prefigured in Noah, and his baptism, wherein is exhibited the remission of sins, shadowed forth in Noah's ark as the Apostle showeth. 1 Peter 3.22.

1. Doct. Original sin by propagation, not imitation.

1. verse. 3. IN that Adam begat a son in the likeness of his own image, which before is interpreted of original corruption, the heresy of the Pelagians is confuted, who denied any such original sin or depravation of nature to be in infants, by propagation from their parents: but that it cometh only by a corrupt imitation: this was the heresy of the old Pelagians, who affirmed, Peccatum prima transgressionis in alios homines non propagations, sed imitatione transisset: that the sin of the first transgression passeth unto other men not by propagation, but imitation: which heresy seemeth to have been revived by Catherinus a Popish writer who denieth, that the sin of Adam is propagated or transfused to his posterity: But the Scripture evidently overthroweth this assertion. David confesseth he was conceived in sin, Psal. 51.5. the Apostle saith, That death went • ver all, in as much as all have sinned: children then if they had not sin, should not die: and here Seth is begotten in his fathers image.

2. Doct. Original sin not a substance.

2. THeir opinion is confuted, that hold original sin to be a substance: for like as the image of God, wherein Adam was created was not the substance of the soul, but the quality, as the Apostle expoundeth, which consist in holiness and righteousness, Ephes. 4.24. so the image of Adams corrupt nature, consisteth in the contrary qualities of impurity and injustice.

3. Doct. The state of original sin in soul.

3. THe opinion of Papists is refuted, who affirm, that this original corruption hath the seat and place in the flesh, not in the soul: for this image of corruption was in Adams soul: and therefore the Apostle saith, he renewed in the spirit of our minds, Ephes. 4 24. and put off the old man, &c. and put on the new, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him, Coloss. 3.10. there the corrupt image of Adam succeeded, where God's image is decayed, which was in the soul, for there the place of knowledge is.

1. Confut. Enoch was no licentious liver at any time.

IN that verse. 21. after the generation Enoch is said to walk with God, and not before, Procopius Gazeus thinketh, that Enoch was before a wicked liver, but after repented: But the contrary is • vident, in that it pleased God with such extraordinary favor to take Enoch out of the world, that he saw no death: that he was as a shining star for virtue and holiness in that age.

2. Confut. Enoch died not.

WHereas verse. 23. it is said all the days of Enoch were 365. Alb • n Ezra with other Hebrews, think that Enoch died: for if he were still alive, these should not be all his days, Cont. 1. The Scripture maketh mention only of the years of his life upon earth: his years with God are not to be accounted among men: as the Apostle saith of Christ: who in the days of his flesh, Heb. 5.7. he is now in his flesh in heaven: but these are counted the days of his flesh, when he walked in his flesh among men. 2. The Apostle evidently witnesseth, that Enoch was taken away, that he should not see death, Heb. 11.5. he therefore died not.

3. Confut. Enoch not alive in his flesh.

BEcause it is said that God took away or translated Enoch, the Popish writers do imagine that Enoch is yet alive in his flesh in Paradise together with Elias, Contra. seeing that Elias is said to be taken up into heaven, or that he went into heaven, 2 King. 2.11. where Enoch also walked with God: we cannot believe that they entered heaven in their whole humanity, but that prerogative was to be reserved for Christ: seeing the Apostle saith, that he hath prepared a now and living way into the holy place for us, by his veil, that is, his flesh, Heb. 10.20. Christ's flesh therefore must make a way into heaven before any man's flesh beside can enter.

4. Confut. Enoch not in the terestriall Paradise.

BUt because they also affirm, that Enoch liveth in his flesh, not in heaven, but in the terestriall Paradise, and it is against the faith as some of them say, to think otherwise, the vanity of this opinion shall easily appear. 1. Because the Scripture saith, that everything was destroyed upon the face of the earth, and only eight persons were saved in the Ark: therefore Enoch if he had been upon the earth, must have perished. 2. The waters prevailed fifteen cubits over the highest mountain, Genes. 7.20. therefore the earthly Paradise must needs also have been overflown and destroyed. 3. If they answer that Paradise might be hemmed in with the water, which might stand as a wall round about it, as the water in the red sea did, or that, though it were covered with water, it might be preserved, as the Olive tree, whereof the Dove took a branch, or that God might restore Paradise again after the flood: the first is presumptuous to imagine a miracle without warrant of Scripture, and if it had been so, Noah needed not to have made an ark, he and his sons and the cattle might have been preserved there: the second is not sufficient, for though Paradise, which is not like, had been so preserved, yet Enoch must have been drowned. The third is frivolous, for if the terrene Paradise had been planted again, seeing it was situated in a known place in Mesopotamia, it could not have been hid. In this question Pererius is an adversary to Bellarmine, Senens. and the rest, that yet dream of a terrene Paradise.

5. Confut. Enoch shall return into the world to die.

IT is also the constant opinion of the popish writers, that Enoch shall come again toward the end of the world, and then shall die, being to be slain by Antichrist. Pererius, cum Bellarm. Cont. But this is contrary to the Apostle, That Enoch was taken away, that he should not see death, neither was found, Heb. 11.5. Ergo, Enoch shall not see death, nor be found in a mortal state in earth: whereas they object that place, Heb. 9.27. It is appointed unto men that they shall once die. The answer is ready, like as they which are alive at Christ's coming shall not die but be changed, 1 Cor. 15. which notwithstanding shall be instead of death: so Enoch was changed in his taking up, though he died not a common death.

6. Confut. Enoch shall not return to preach repentance to the world.

COncerning the end and causes, wherefore Enoch was translated. 1. We admit that God hereby would put the righteous in comfort, that notwithstanding the sentence pronounced against Adam, there was a way of righteousness whereby to recover Adams lost state. 2. To minister comfort to the afflicted members of Christ, that they should not doubt, but that their reward is with God, as Abel, though he had an untimely end, yet lived with God as Enoch did: thus Theodoret. 3. We refuse not the collection here of Thomas Aquinas: that God both by Henochs translation before the law, and Elias under the law, would nourish the hope of life in his Church, as by types representing the ascension of Christ, in whom the promise of salvation should be accomplished: These causes of Henochs translation may safely be received. 4. But we neither think, as it is in the book of Wisdom (which is no Canonical Scripture, and therefore we may safely dissent from it) That he was taken away, lest wickedness should alter his understanding, for as he walked with God before, God kept him in his fear, and preserved him from evil, so he could have guided him still, as the Apostle saith: He shall be established, God is able to make him stand, Rom. 14.4. speaking of the faithful servants of God, as Mathuselah the son of Enoch, being the longest lived of all the Patriarchs, continued righteous to the end. 5. Neither is that surmise fit to be received, that Enoch is kept alive to preach repentance in the end of the world, and to maintain the Gospel against Antichrist, which is the common opinion of the papal professors. For of Henochs preaching in the end of the world there is no mention in Scripture, but only of the sending of Elias, which is not understood of Elias person, but of his spirit and zeal. And this Elias the Angel expoundeth to be John Baptist, who should go before Christ, in the spirit and power of Elias. And there is no such necessity, that Enoch should be preserved so many years by miracle to that end, seeing the Lord is able to raise up Prophets and Ministers, as he did John Baptist, in the spirit of Elias and Enoch, to maintain the truth against the Pope and Antichrist, which we see plentifully performed in these days.

7. Confut. Of the Prophesy and book of Enoch.

WHereas S. Inde in his Epistle, verse. 14. maketh mention of the Prophesy of Enoch, the seventh from Adam, which is not found in any other part of the Canonical Scripture, lest the adversaries might hereupon build their traditions and unwritten verities, I will briefly declare what is to be thought of this Prophesy of Enoch.

1. I neither think with Tertullian, that there was any such prophetical book of Enoch, then extant, who conjectureth that though it perished in the flood, yet it might be restored again by Noah, thereunto inspired. 2. Neither yet with Jerome, that this book of Enoch was an Apocriphall book, yet some part of it might be true, which the Apostle might allege. For it is not like that the Apostle would derive a testimony from an hidden and obscure book of no authority in the Church. 3. Neither yet is it like, as Michael Medina thinketh, that there was no such book at all under Henochs name: for the fathers, Origen, Jerome, Augustine, do in many places make evident mention, that such a book there was, but thought it to be forged. 4. And it is as unlike, that the true book of Enoch was extant in the Apostles time, which was afterward corrupted with fables, and so rejected of the Church; for then the Church would rather have purged the true book from such errors, and preserved the rest pure, as they did discern the true Gospels, from the forged and adulterate.

Our opinion then is, 1. With Augustine, that the book of Enoch, which in his time was produced by Heretics, was altogether forged, and no part of it of Henochs writing: Non quod eorum hominum, qui Deo placuorunt reprobetur authoritas, sed quod ista non creduntur ipsorum: not that, saith he, we refuse the authority of such men, as pleased God, but for that they were thought not to be theirs. 2. We judge it not unlike with Origen, that there might be such an authentical book of Henochs prophesy, out of the which Jude did take his testimony, which is now lost, as some other parts of the Canonical Scripture are: as the books of God, Nathan, Idd • , and other Prophets, mentioned in the Chronicles. 3. Or this prophesy of Enoch might be preserved by faithful tradition in the Church of the Jews, which is approved by the Apostle. But this is no warrant for other unwritten traditions, unless some had the like Apostlike spirit to judge of them, as Judas had: and further this prophesy of Enoch, is a greeable to the Scriptures, so are not many unwritten traditions urged by the Church of Rome.

QUEST. I. Of the greatness of the sin of the old world.

1. THe sin of the world was very great, seeing God could endure the wicked inhabitants no longer, but swept them away with the flood: which may appear by these several considerations, 1. their wickedness was universally spread, verse. 12. all flesh had corrupted his way. 2. Their sin exceeded in greatness, it was come unto the very height, verse. 5. God saw that the wickedness of man was great. 3. Not only the wicked race, but the righteous seed, the sons of God fell to folly, verse. 2. 4. They were exercised a long time in doing evil, a thousand years and more, that they were grown to such an habit, that they could do nothing but think evil in their heart. 5. Unto this may be added their graceless obstinacy, that having an 120. years given them by the preaching of Noah to call them to repentance, yet despised God's long suffering.

QUEST. II. When the world began to be so wicked.

2. THis overflowing of iniquity began when men began to be multiplied upon the earth, verse. 1. not so soon as the world began to be peopled, which might be within two or three hundred years after the creation: for then they began to build Cities. Ninus King of Assyria who reigned there some 230. years after the flood, is reported to have had in his army 70. hundred thousand footmen, and 200. thousand horse men: in the like time after the creation might the world be exceedingly replenished. 2. But it seemeth, that this great defection was about the seventh age: for then Lamech of Cain's race, took unto him two wives: then the Lord took away righteous Enoch, that he should be no longer grieved with the wickedness of the world. Then the world being replenished with great multitudes, which are ring-leaders for the most part unto evil, as it is written, thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil: began to give themselves to all kind of wickedness, adultery, oppression, cruelty, multiplicity of wives, unlawful lust even against nature, and to fill the earth with uncleanness. 3. And although in this seventh age iniquity was come to the full height, yet it began long before, even in the days of Enos, when as the righteous abhorring the great wickedness of Cain's posterity, separated themselves, and a part began to call upon the name of God. Iun. 4. The Hebrews note, that at the beginning women were not so multiplied as afterward, by whom they took occasion to sin: and therefore it is added, there were daughters borne unto them, &c. verse. 1. but this clause showeth not a more special multiplying of that kind, but that when the world began to be stored both with men and women, then they gave themselves to wantonness.

QUEST. III. The particular sin of the old world here noted.

Vers. 2. THey saw the daughters of men that they were fair, &c. 1. Their fault was not only in that they of the righteous seed matched into Cain's stock, Calvin. 2. Or that they respected only beauty, having no regard to their piety and virtue, Marlorat. 3. But they by violence took unto them, not to their wives, but women, for so with Mercerus and Junius I rather interpret the word nashim, from all men whatsoever, as Junius readeth: both virgins and wives, they cared not whom. 4. Some Hebrews here understand also the filthy sin of buggery: that they took all they liked, even from among the brute beasts: but Moses speaketh only of the daughters of men.

QUEST. IV. Who were these sons of God.

Vers. THen the sons of God. 1. These sons of God were not the Angels, which some have supposed to have fallen for their intemperance with women, and to have begotten of them spirits, as Joseph, Philo, Justin, Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertullian conjectured: who so expoundeth that place of S. Paul, that women should be covered, because of the Angels, lest they should be tempted with their beauty: This opinion is easily confuted: 1. Because the world was punished, and God was angry, not for the sin of Angels, but of men: verse. 3. My spirit shall not always strive with man. 2. Chrysostom urgeth that place, Matth. 22. in the resurrection, they neither marry, nor are married, but are the Angels: Ergo, Angels are not subject to carnal affections, as men are. 3. If Angels fell first for the love of women, then they sinned not for 1000. years after the creation, whereas the Scripture showeth, that the Devil was a murderer and a liar from the beginning, John. 8.44.

QUEST. V. Devils not corporal nor mortal.

IT is also absurd, and improbable, that these were devils which did company with women, and of them came Giants, as thinketh Franciscus Georgius, who affirmeth devils to have bodies, and a generative faculty, and to company with women. Of the like opinion is Psellus, that the devils have bodies, and they are nourished by sucking and attraction as sponges: and that they are males and females at their pleasures: some are of a fiery, some airy, some a watery, some of a terrene nature. But these are fables and fictions, fit rather to be laughed at, than worthy to be confuted. 1. The Devils are of a spiritual not corporal nature, it appeareth by that story, Luk. 8. where we read, that in one man, there was a legion, that is, six thousand Devils: how could so many spirits if they were corporal, be included in one body? 2. If they were of a fiery, watery, or earthly, & so of an elemental nature, they should be subject to corruption, mutability, and mortality: and so some have imagined also, as Plutarch writeth of the death of the great Pan, a famous Devil among the Pagans: and Cardane reporteth, that he heard his Father say, who was above thirty years familiar with the Devils, that he learned of them, that they do die, & decay, & revive again: but this fancy is contrary to the Scripture: which testifieth, that the Devil hath been a murderer from the beginning of the world, John. 8 44 Ergo, he hath continued from the beginning of the world: and how should the soul of man be immortal, if these spirits, which are of a more subtle nature were mortal? 3. Though it were granted, that Devils have a kind of airy bodies, yet could they not ingender: for the power of generation agreeth only to perfect bodies, which have their material and distinct parts, and receive nourishment. 4. And they being, as they say, male and female, should ingender among themselves in their own kind. 5. Or if they did company with women, they could not beget men, but multiply their own kind, or at the least a mixed kind, as the mule is engendered of an horse and an asse: and so some likewise have conceited, that the Faunes and Satires were the offspring of such generation. As Jerome in the life of Antony, reporteth▪ that such an one appeared unto him in the wilderness, with goats feet, long crooked nails, and horns upon his head, and spake unto Antony: but either this may be held to be a fable, foisted under Jerome's name, or if there were any such thing, it might be some monster of the wilderness, which the Devil used as his trunk to speak out of.

QUEST. VI. Spirits do not generate.

BUt much more absurd is the opinion of Paulus Burgensis, that thinketh these which companied with the daughters of men, were spirits, called Incubi, which do assume bodies of the air for a time, representing the shape sometime of men, sometime of women, in the act of generation, and then they are called Succubi: and thus saith he, were the Giants engendered: and Tostatus approoving this conceit of Incubi and Succubi, seemeth to give credit to that report of Merlin, that he was begotten by a spirit. In these assertions and uncertain conjectures of men, some what is true, some part false. 1. True it is, that the Devil may appear in the shape of man or woman, and dissemble and counterfeit the act proper to both: not that the spirits have any delight in such carnal acts, having no true but assumed and counterfeit bodies: but they do it more strongly to delude men and women, and entice them to that abominable sin of the flesh, which they know hath corrupted the hearts of many excellent men, as of David, Solomon. 2. Though spirits can take upon them the shape of bodies, yet they are but so to the eye, they are not true bodies, being easily discerned by the feeling: and therefore our Savior saith, feel and see, a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me to have. And some have reported, that they have felt such bodies assumed by spirits, as cold as ice, and of a divers substance from human flesh, as Alexander ab Alexandro, so writeth of another to whom a spirit appeared, and Cardanus of himself. If any man object, that Abraham washed the Angels feet, and yet discerned them not: I will not answer with Pererius whose judgment I refuse not in the rest, that Abraham's intent upon other things regarded it not. But I note a difference between the operation of good and bad Angels: that these never appeared with true bodies, and therefore were called Phantasmata, visions, fancies. Mark. 6.49. But unto the other God gave the use of true bodies for a time, during that ministry or service, as appeareth, in that they did eat and drink, were lodged, had their feet washed, &c. 3. But howsoever spirits may assume bodies, they are not such as can be instruments of generation, by conveying of human seed, as some have imagined: because the scripture saith, children are the inheritance of the Lord, Psal. 127.3. And Eve confesseth, when Cain was borne, that she had obtained a son of God, Gen. 4.1. and if that were true, which is fabled of Merlin, such kind of birth should be oftener seen in the world.

Wherefore by the sons of God in this place. 1. Neither do we understand Angels good or bad. 2. Neither men of tall and great stature: as such things as are excellent in their kind, are so called, as high and tall trees, are said to be the trees of God. Psal. 104.16.3. Nor yet the sons of Princes, and great men as the Chaldee readeth, to whom Mercerus subscribeth, which are called God's in scripture. Psal. 82.6. I said ye are God's, &c, 4. Neither yet are they so called, because they came of Seeth, who as Soudas thinketh, was in respect of his religion and great knowledge, saluted as a God in earth. 5. But they are here named the sons of God, that were of the righteous seed, and worshippers of the true God, as the wicked are called the sons of the Devil, and he their father. John. 8.44. ye are of your father the Devil: who although they were not indeed the sons of God in his eternal election, yet were they so in respect of their external calling.

QUEST. VII. The meaning of these words, My spirit shall not always strive, &c.

4. Vers. 3. MY spirit shall not always strive, &c. 1. Not as the latin text is, My spirit shall not always remain ; which some expound of God's wrath, some of his providence, some of the holy Ghost, some of the soul and spirit of man inspired of God: and then the sense to be, that God's wrath shall not always continue, but he will punish them at once, or he will no more protect them, or take care for them, neither his spirit shall be with them, or he will take away their life and spirit from them. For this variety of interpretation ariseth of the mistaking of the word, which signifieth to contend or judge, not to remain.

2 Neither is Pagmines interpretation so apt, my spirit shall not always be sheathed, as a sword in a scabbard; and so he would derive the word jadon, of neden, which signifieth a sheath. 3. The meaning then of these words, my spirit shall not always judge or contend, is neither as Jerome expoundeth, non eos ad • ternos servabo cruciatus, I will not punish them forever, but render unto them here that which they deserve: For S. Peter showeth, that their souls are now in the prison of hell, and so everlastingly punished, 1 Peter 3.19. Neither as Cajetan, that God would no more punish them spiritually, as he had done, by taking his grace and spirit from them, but now he would inflict a corporal punishment upon them: for God had not yet punished them, giving them the space of 120. years to repent. But either we may understand these words with Oleaster, that God would no longer strive with them, in reproving, and admonishing them, which they regarded not, or with Junius: God would no longer consult, or dispute the matter as it were with himself, what to do with them, but if they amended not within that space set, he would certainly destroy them.

QUEST. VIII. What these Giants were.

5. Vers. 4. THese were Giants, &c. Some think that these were called Giants, not for their greatness of stature, but their cruel and beastly conditions: so think, Philo, Joseph. Damas. Cyril, with others: so also Junius. 2. But beside their fierce and cruel nature, it is most probable, that they were of huge and great stature, Mercer. for such there were also after the flood: as the sons of Anak, in comparison of whom the Israelites seemed as grasshoppers, Num. 13.34. such were the Emmims and Za • zummims, Deut. 2.10, 17. and Og the King of Basan, whose bed was of iron, being nine cubits in length, and four in breadth, Deut. 3.11. and of this judgment are Ambrose, Augustine, Theodoret. 3. And these Giants huge in stature, men of great strength, as is shown after in this verse, did most abound before the flood, and such also was the offspring of this unlawful copulation between the sons of God and daughters of men. 4. And they were men of renown, that is, famous over all the world, because they did tyrannize over their neighbors, and brought them in subjection: of whom Berosius writeth, that they had a City called Enos, about the mountain Libanus, which ruled over all the world: they did eat man's flesh, and had unlawful company with their mothers, daughters, with mules, and brute beasts. 5. Some, as Rasi, do refer this generation of Giants to the times of Enos, further affirming, that the Lord sent the Ocean Sea, which destroyed the generation of these Giants, and the third part of the world: but the Giants which succeeded them, were as wicked as they. But of this inundation of the Ocean, no mention is made in Scripture: neither is it like that the generation of Giants began so soon in the world: neither with Ibn Ezra, do we understand this, of the generation of Giants after the flood: of whom came Og and the rest: as though any of the Giants had escaped the flood, to beget Giants afterward: and that Noah and his sons were Giants it is not to be thought. Mercer. Neither were these Giants only in Noah's time: but when this violent rage of lust began to reign in the world, then this offspring of Giants came in, which continued till the time of Noah. 6. Neither were these Giants only of Seth’s race, as some think, nor yet only of Cain, as R. Sel. but in both families there were Giants, after they thus coupled together without the fear of God, Mercer, Calvin. 7. So that the Nephilim here spoken of, so named of Naphal, which signifieth to fall, were not so called, either because they were fallen in stature from the hugenesse of the first Giants, as Ramban: neither as R. Sel. because they were the cause of ruin of falling to themselves, or others: nor yet only because they were Apostates and sell from God, Iun. but they were so called in respect of their great stature, the sight whereof caused men to fall to the ground for fear, Ab. Ezra. Mercer. 8. Neither was their talnesse or greatness of stature simply evil, but because they abused their strength to lust and violence, and so became both monstrous in their body and soul, and begat a monstrous generation like to themselves, Mercer.

QUEST. IX. The space of an hundred and twenty years how to be reckoned.

6. HIs days shall be 120. years, &c. 1. Which is not referred to the age of man, as Tostatus and Rupertus think, because Moses the writer hereof lived no longer: for although it be true, that man's life was shortened after the flood, and thrice halfed from 900. and odd, to 400. and odd, as in Arphaxad that lived 425. years, and then halfed again from 400. and odd, to 200. and odd, as in Serug, that lived 230. and then almost halfed to 100. and odd, as in Abraham that lived an 175. years: yet we see that many of these exceeded an 120. We rather with Jerome Chrysostom, and others, take this time set to be that space of years which God gave unto the old world for their repentance: which were not shortened by twenty years, as Jerome thinketh, because of their wickedness, for the flood came an 100. years after, when Noah was 600. years old, Gen. 7.6. Neither need we say with Augustine, that Noah was said to be 500. year old, when he was but 480. because he had lived the most part of it: for Sem was but an 100. year old two year after the flood, Gen. 11.10. but now he should be an 120. if Noah were then but 480. when he began to have his sons. Therefore this doubt is more easily reconciled, to say that this time was set before Noah was 500. years of age, but by way of anticipation, mention is made of Noah's sons before, because of the continuing of the story: as we see the like, Gen. 2. where the creation of the woman is recorded after the seventh day, being done the first. Mer. Per.

QUEST. X. Of the original of Giants.

7. NOw as touching the original of Giants, 1. first the opinion of Paulus Burgensis is to be refused, who thinketh they were Devils, called in Hebrew Nephilim, cadentes of falling, because they fell from heaven: for these Giants were destroyed by the flood, so were not the Devils: and the Giants were called Nephilim, both in respect of their terrible stature, which made men fall to the ground, and for their Apostasy in falling away from virtue and piety. 2. As absurd is the opinion of Franciscus Georgius, that these Giants were begotten of spirits companying with women, and that otherwise they are not engendered: and that these are the seed of the Serpent, between whom and the seed of the woman the Lord put enmity: for this cause (saith he) since the coming of Christ, who hath broken the Serpents head, we read of no such commixion of the spirits with women, nor of this generation of Giants. Thus Franciscus Georg. 6. tom. problem. 33. c. 33.1. But these fancies may be easily controlled. 1. For Giants to be procreated of men, is no more against nature, than for Pygmees and Dwarfes, that are as much admirable for their smallness, as the other are for their talnesse: such an one was one Canopas in Augustine's time, that was but two foot and a hand breadth high. 2. That spirits have used the carnal company of men and women since Christ, Augustine showeth, lib. 15. de Civit. Dei. c. 23. and experience confirmeth the same, though thereof there can be no generation. 3. And likewise it is evident, that there have been men and women of Giants stature since Christ: Augustine maketh mention of a woman of admirable talnesse, her parents being but of ordinary stature, lib. 15. de Civit. Dei. c. 23. and Pliny of a man in Augustus time, of nine foot and a half in height. 4. Neither are these Giants that seed of the Serpent: for they are also begotten of women: neither were all Giants, men of great stature, wicked persons: for it is not unlike but that Adam, Noah, and other Patriarchs before the flood, much exceeded the ordinary stature of men now: and the Ecclesiastical stories make mention of one Christophorus, a man of twelve cubits in height, that was put to death under Decius the Emperor, for the Christian faith. And further, all the natural seed of women are not at enmity with the Serpent, but many of them he useth as his agents and instruments. This place then is much abused to that purpose, wherefore it is alleged. These Giants then, were no other but the natural offspring of men and women in those days before the flood: not that all were such, but these were such, which were so borne by this unlawful conjunction between the seed of the righteous and the wickd race: for as the root was, so was the branch; the marriage unholy, and the issue ungracious.

QUEST. XI. How God is said to repent.

8. Vers. 6. IT repented the Lord. The ancient writers have diversely collected of these words, but all to good purpose. 1. Chrysostom saith, it is Verbum nostrae parvitati accommodatum: a word applied to our weakness, to express the greatness of their sins, Quae misericordem Deum indignari fecerunt, which compelled the merciful God to be angry. 2. Theodoret, It repenteth me, &c. that is, I have purposed to destroy man, as the Lord saith, it repenteth me, that I have made Saul King, that is, I have decreed to depose him: and so as Augustine well saith; Non est perturbati • , sed judicium, quo irrogaetur poena, it is no perturbation in God this repentance, but an imposition of punishment. 3. Rupertus: in that it repented the Lord: pietatis est, it showeth his piety, how loath the Lord is to punish: but in that the Lord purposeth to destroy them, severi judicii est, it showeth his just severity. 4. But Augustine more to the purpose saith, Paenitudo Dei est mutandorum immutabilis ratio: Repentance in God, is his unchangeable disposition of changeable things. God is not changed, but the things altered. 5. Justinus Martyr hath most plainly opened this point: God is immutable. Sed cum ii quos curat, mutantur, mutat ipse res prout • is expedit quos curat: but when they whom God careth for are changed, then God changeth the course of things, as he seeth expedient for them. For God immutabiliter ignoscit, unchangeably forgiveth those repent as the Ninevites, and immutabiliter non ignoscit, unchangeably forgiveth them not, which amend not, as Saul. So here the Lord holdeth on his unchangeable course of judgment in punishing sin, yet seemeth to repent in undoing his work, in destroying man, whom he had made, Perer.

QUEST. XII. Why the creatures are punished with man.

9. Vers. 7. I Will destroy from man to beast, &c. Not only man shall be destroyed, but the other creatures with him; and yet man only had sinned. The reason is, 1. as Chrysostom showeth, because all things were made for man's use: hic igitur cum e medio tollitur, quis illorum usus erit: and therefore when man is taken away, there should be no use of them. 2. Like as when the head is cut off, all the members die, so together with man the creatures, over the which he had power, are punished: not only he, but his. Hereby the severity of God's punishment appeareth, as also the greatness of man's sin, that brought destruction upon many, as David's sin in numbering the people, did upon the whole land. 3. Because beastly men had abused the creatures to their filthy pleasure and riotous excess, it standeth with God's justice to punish the instrument with the principal. 4. The fishes are not also here threatened to be destroyed, because they lived in that element wherewith God purposed to overflow the earth: neither had man so much abused them, as the other kinds: and beside it pleased God to spare them among other creatures: at other times the Lord threateneth also to take away the fish of the Sea, Hosh. 4.3. Mercer.

QUEST. XIII. How Noah is said to be perfect.

Vers. 10. NOah was a just and perfect man, &c. 1. Noah, not yet any man living can be said to be perfect in respect of God's justice, or in the sight of God, as the Psalmist saith: If thou O Lord markest what is done amiss, who shall be able to abide it? Ps. 130.3. 2. Neither yet in regard of that perfection, which the Saints shall attain unto in the Kingdom of God: as the Apostle showeth: Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect, Phil. 3.12. 3. Neither yet is any so perfect, as that he can be found in this life without sin; which was the heresy of the Pelagians: for the Preacher saith: there is not one just man upon the earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not, Eccles. 7.20. 4. Neither is any said to be perfect, because they can keep the commandments, and do more than is commanded, in observing the Evangelical counsel; as Pererius, and other Popish Writers. 5. But Noah is said to be perfect, in comparison of others: and therefore it is added, in his generation, or in regard of the perfection which may be attained unto in this life, which is rather in the will and desire to be perfect, and in increasing and going still forward, than in any actual accomplishment of the desire: and in this sense the Apostle having a little before denied himself to be perfect, yet saith to the Philippians, Let as many as be perfect be th •• minded, Philippians 3.15. and so our Savior biddeth us be perfect, as our heavenly Father is perfect, that is, that we should more and more labor for perfection. As Augustine saith, Ingredi sine macula non a • . surde dicitur, non qui jam perfectus sed qui ad ipsam perfectionem irreprehensibiliter currit: He is not amiss said to walk without spot, not who is already perfect, but runneth unto perfection without reproof. Thirdly, how Noah is said to be perfect, is expounded, verse. 8. Noah found grace in the sight of God: it was the perfection then of faith, whereby Noah was excepted as just and perfect in the sight of God being by faith clothed with the perfection and justice of Christ.

QUEST. XIIII. How the earth was corrupt.

11. THe earth was corrupt before God. 1. That is the inhabitants of the earth, where corrupt, as Chrysostom saith, Homo terra appellatur, quia totus terrenus, Man is called earth, because he was become wholly earthly. 2. Or, they had infected the very earth with their abominations, and made it accursed, Iun. as the Psalmist saith, A fruitful land is turned into barrenness, for the wickedness of them that dwell therein, Psal. 107.34. 3. The earth may be said to be corrupt, that is, defiled, with those sins of uncleanness, which they committed: as the Scripture testifieth, that the land is defiled with such abominations, Levite. 18.25. 4. The earth was corrupt before God, that is, they were grown to such impudency and boldness in their sins, that they would commit them, even as in the presence and sight of God, as the Prophet saith, They declare their sins as Sodom, they hide them not, Isaiah. 3.9.

QUEST. XV. Whether they which died in the flood perished everlastingly.

Vers. 13. I Will destroy them with the earth, &c. Here a great question ariseth, whether all they which were destroyed in the flood, perished everlastingly: that is, both in body and soul. 1. For answer to this question, we neither think that most of the old world were only temporally punished: which seemeth to have been the opinion of Jerome, that they which perished in the flood, as likewise the Sodomites, receperunt in vita malasua, received their punishment in this life. To the which purpose he urgeth that place, Nahum. 1.9. Non consurget duplex tribulatio: Affliction shall not rise the second time: and therefore it standeth not with God's justice, to punish twice for the same sin, both in this world, and the world to come. To this place I answer first: that the Prophet speaking of the destruction of the Assyrians, showeth only, that thei • overthrow should be final, that God should not need to smite them again. As Abishai said to David, when he found Saul asleep, Let me smite him and I will not smite him again, 1 Sam. 26.9. Thus Theohpylact, and Theodoret expound this place. Secondly, if it be expounded, as it is alleged, it must be understood only of penitent persons, that such being afflicted in this life, shall not need to be punished again: as we may see in the repentant thief: but concerning the the other thief, detemporali ad aeternum transvectus est supplicium: he was carried from temporal to eternal punishment, as Rupertus saith.

2. Neither do we approve their opinion, that think many of the old world, though incredulous before, yet when they saw the flood coming, in fine vitae poenetentiam egerunt, did repent them even in the end of their life: sic Lyranus, Bellarmine. For S. Peter calleth them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the world of the wicked, 2 Pet. • .5. They then that were wicked so continued to the end.

3. Neither is the opinion of Cajetan to be received, that thinketh, non fuisse simpliciter incredulos, id est sine vera Dei side, that they were not simply incredulous, that is, without the true faith of God, but only believed not Noah in this, that the flood should come, but trusting to God's long suffering, hoped, that it should not be so: for it is evident, Genes. 6. that beside this special point of incredulity, the old world was in many other sins outrageous: the earth was filled with cruelty, verse. 11. and in that they gave no credit to Noah, God's Prophet, therein they were incredulous against God, as our Savior saith of his Apostles: he that heareth you heareth me: and he that despiseth you despiseth me, Luk. 10.16.

4. Their opinion also is to be refused, which think, that though the wicked of the old world were condemned to hell, yet they might be redeemed from thence by the descension of Christ: who is said by S. Peter, to have preached to the spirits in prison, which sometime were disobedient: at which time also some have fabled, that Plato at the preaching of Christ, in hell believed: and that divers others have been delivered from hell, as the soul of Falconilla, by the prayer of S. Tacla, and of Trajanus the Emperor, at the intercession of Gregory: But these imaginations are contrary to the Scriptures: for out of hell is no redemption: as Abraham said to the rich man: They which would go from hence to you, cannot, neither can they come from thence to us, Luk. 16.26. And hell is thus described, Where their worm dieth not, and the fire never goeth out, Mark. 9.46. the worm of the conscience in everlasting fire, shall torment the wicked: that oration which goeth under the name of Damascene, is confessed by Bellarmine to be none of his: and that place of S. Peter hath no such meaning, as even now shall appear.

5. Neither is their conceit anything worth, who think, that some of them which perished in the flood, did repent them before they died, and so went not to hell, but to purgatory, from whence they were delivered by Christ's descending thither, according to that saying of Peter, but was quickened in the spirit, by the which he went and preached to the spirits in prison, which were in time passed disobedient, &c. But this place in Augustine's opinion cannot be understood of the descending of Christ's soul into hell. 1. Augustine objecteth, that Christ cannot be said to be quickened, or made alive in his spirit, that is, his soul, because it was not subject to death. And therefore by the spirit he truly understandeth the divine power of Christ, whereby he preached in Noah. 2. If there be preaching in hell, then it will follow, that there is a Church there, and repentance and conversion of souls. 3. The Apostle speaketh only of such as were disobedient, but they were not delivered by Christ. 4. It cannot be shown in all the Scripture, where the receptacle of the souls of the faithful and believers is called a prison.

6. Wherefore our opinion is: that all those which were disobedient and incredulous in the days of Noah, were first destroyed in their bodies in the flood, and after in their souls perished everlastingly: but from this number both infants must be excepted, such as were of the sons of God, who are not capable of faith and obedience, and therefore were neither unfaithful, nor disobedient; and such also as were ignorant of the preaching of Noah, and framing of the Ark. Of these God might have mercy. The rest continuing still in unbelief, everlastingly perished. For it is not like, that they which by the space of an hundred and twenty years would not repent, but remained obstinate, would relent in the instant of the flood. Herein therefore we refuse not the judgment and reason of Rupertus, Primo & ul • imo judicio soli reprobi condemnantur, & soli electi servantur, isto medio nec soli elects conservantur, nec soli reprobi suffocantur: In the first judgment, when the Angels fell, and the last only the reprobates shall be cens • red, the elect saved: but in this judgment coming between, neither the Elect only were pr • served in the Ark (for there was Cham accursed of his father) nor the reprobate only suffocated in the waters. And hereunto agreeth S. Peters comparison, that resembleth baptism to the Ark, 1 Pet. 3.21. but all dying without baptism are not damned, neither is it to be supposed, they were all reprobates which died without the Ark.

QUEST. XVI. Of what manner the Ark was made.

Vers. 14. MAke an Ark of Pine trees. ] 1. Some think that no certain kind of wood is expressed, but generally the matter whereof the whole Ark should be made, which was not one kind of wood, but divers, Perer. 2. But some take it for squared wood, as the 70. 3. Some for wood pitched: pro lignis bituminatis, Jerome. tradit. in Genes. 4. Some for the Pine or Pitch tree, because from the word gopher here used, seemeth to be derived gaphrith, taken for brimstone, Gen. 19. sic Oleaster: for gaphrith, brimstone, is digged out of the earth; pitch which cometh from the tree hath another name, it is called copher. 5. Some think the Ark was made of the Fir tree, which is the highest and straitest of all other, or the Cypress tree, because of the continuance. 6. But it is most like to be the Cedar, as the Targum readeth: which is commended in Scripture for the height, and therefore is called the Cedars of God, Psal. 104.16. and beside, it is most durable. Pliny maketh mention of Cedar beams in the Temple of Apollo at Utica, which continued from the first foundation until his time, almost 1200. years. 7. Neither need it be doubted where Noah should have timber of sufficient length to serve for the breadth of the Ark, for Pliny reporteth of a beam of the Larix tree, in Tiberius reign, seen at Rome an 120. foot long, and of a Cyprus tree, 120. foot long. He maketh mention also of the Indian trees to be so high, that unneath an arrow cannot be shot over them: Ex Perer.

QUEST. XVII. Of the measure of the Ark.

Vers. 15. THis length of the Ark shall be 300. cubits. ] The Ark was six times so long as broad, and ten times so long as high: after the proportion of man's body, as Augustine well writeth: for the length of man's body from the crown to the foot, is six times the breadth from one side to another▪ and ten times the thickness from the back to the chest: But many have doubted, that the Ark being described to be no larger, was not sufficient to contain all the beasts with their several food: and Apelles the disciple of wicked Marcion, took occasion hereby to cavil at the whole story. But this doubt may easily be removed: 1. Yet we are neither forced with Origen to make of one cubit six, which he calleth a Geometrical cubit: for neither is there any such cubit in use, which in length containeth six ordinary cubits: neither doth the Scripture in other places reckon according to such cubits: for whereas the Altar is prescribed to be made five cubits long, three cubits high, Exod. 27. by this account, taking one cubit (which containeth a foot and half) for six, it should be 27. foot high, and 45. foot long, which were no fit proportion for an Altar to sacrifice upon: and further, the Ark would now be as much too great, and too huge for any use, being by this computation 22800. cubits in length: that is, 900. yards. which almost maketh a mile: and in height an 180. cubits, that is 90. yards.

2. Augustine alloweth for everyone of the three lofts the same proportion for each: 300. cubits in length, 50. in breadth, 30. in height; so that the length of the whole should be 900. cubits, the breadth an 150. the height 90. but this agreeth not with the text, that saith, the length of the Ark (not of the lofts or divisions) shall be 300. cubits, the breadth 50. &c.

3. Some to help the matter, understand the cubit of the Sanctuary, which was much greater than the common and ordinary cubit. 1. Some think that the measure and weight of the Sanctuary, was no bigger than the ordinary, but more certain, and so as it were the standard to form other vulgar measures by: sic Perer. but this shall afterward appear to be otherwise. 2. Some would have the cubit of the Sanctuary, to be a cubit and an hand breadth, Ezek. 40.5. but that rather is understood to be regius non sacer cubitus, the Kings cubit, not the Temple cubit. By this reckoning the Ark shall be in length 350. in breadth 58. in height 35. cubits, or there about. 3. Some other think the Temple cubit was a foot larger than the common, and somewhat more, and so the Ark should contain in length 525. common cubits, and 87. in breadth, and 52. with an half in height: but of this opinion there is no good ground. 4. But it is more like, that the cubit of the Sanctuary was twice so much, as the common and usual cubit: as may appear by these reasons: 1. Because the weight of the Sanctuary, was double to the usual: as the sickle of the Sanctuary weighed 20. gerah, Exod. 30.13. Whereas the common sickle was esteemed at the one half. 2. Where the Temple of Solomon was but 60. cubits in length, and 20. in breadth, this had been too small a proportion for such a goodly place, if it had been but 30. yards long, and 10. yards broad, for two common cubits make but a yard: therefore a cubit of the Sanctuary could be no less than so many yards: and so by this estimate the Ark should be 600. common cubits, that is 300. yards in length, 50. yards broad, and thirty high.

4. Some do understand the ordinary cubit, which is the measure from the elbow to the top of the middle finger, but do think it to have been much bigger than it is now, because their stature of body before the flood was much greater, Mercerus. But it should seem, that Moses taketh the cubit for the measure of ordinary men, not of Giants, as Deut. 3.11. The bed of Og is said to be nine cubits in length, &c. after the cubit of a man: that is, not after Ogges arm, but the measure of ordinary men.

5. But we need not use any of these helps (though the third and fourth are not much to be misliked, any man that will may so account for the proportion of the Ark) for if we take the cubit here after the common estimation, the Ark will be found to be of sufficient capacity: three hundred common cubits make an 150. yards, which contain 400. and 50. foot, almost two furlong in length, which make the eight part of a mile; and multiplying the length by the breadth, 50. times 300. make 15000. cubits, which being increased by the height of 30. cubits, there will arise in the whole capacity of the Ark, thirty times 15000. cubits. Beside, if the Ark be divided into cels and cabbins, or nests, as the word chinnim signifieth, v. 14. there will be in one of the chambers or divisions, four hundred mansions, whereof everyone shall be six cubits in breadth, and as much in length, and the height eight or nine cubits: for every six cubits in length of the Ark, carrying fifty in breadth, will make 8. cabbins, and two cubits to spare. And in the length of 300. cubits, we find fifty times six: so shall we have fifty times 8. cubits, which maketh four hundred: which mansions will be sufficient for the divers kinds of beasts and cattle, and many will remain over for other necessary uses, as for passage from place to place, and such like.

QUEST. XV. Of the time how long the Ark was in making.

1. THe received opinion is, that the Ark was in preparing an hundred years, because Noah is said to have been five hundred year old, Gen. 5.32. before he was commanded to make the Ark, and the flood came, when he was six hundred year old, Gen. 7.6. Thus thinketh Origen, lib. 4. contr. Celsum. Augustine lib. 15. de Civitat. Dei, c. ult. Gregor. hom. 15. in Ezech. with others, Mercer.

1. But the truer opinion is, that it was an hundred and twenty years in making, Mercer: both for that this time is set for the repentance of the old world, Gen. 6.3. to the which they were invited by the preaching of Noah, as also because of S. Peters words, which in time past were disobedient, when once the long suffering of God abode in the days of Noah, while the Ark was in preparing, 1. Pet. 3.20. This time of God's long suffering, was 120. years, and all that while the Apostle saith, the Ark was in preparing.

2. It will be objected, that when Noah was commanded to make the Ark, he had sons borne unto him: for the Lord saith unto him, Thou shalt go into the Ark, thou and thy sons, &c. But Noah had no sons till he was 500. year old. Answ. There is mention made not only of Noah's sons, but of his sons wives: now wives it is like they had not before they were forty or fifty years of age, seeing Sem lived six hundred years; so that by this account, the Ark should not be above 50. years in making, their father being five hundred years old before any of his sons were borne. We say then, that either these words were not spoken to Noah concerning his entrance and his sons, and their wives, into the Ark, t • ll it was finished, or that the Lord provideth for his sons that should be borne, or that Noah was some long time in preparing timber and stuff before he began to build the Ark. Berosus conjecture is, that 42. yea • es were spent in that provision, and the residue of the 120. years in the building. But this is an uncertain conjecture: like enough it is, that the providing of the matter would ask a long time.

4. And whereas Noah is said to be five hundred year old, cap. 5. that is there expressed for continuing of the Genealogy. And the story following in the 6. chapter is set down by way of recapitulation: the 100. years there mentioned, taking beginning in the 480. year of Noah's age.

QUEST. XVI. Of the several chambers and divisions in the Ark.

Vers. 16. THou shalt make it with the low, second, and third room. ] 1. There were neither four rooms or regions in the Ark as Josephus supposeth, lib. 1. antiquitat. 2. nor yet five, as Origen thinketh: the first, for the dung of the cattle, the second for their food, the third for the cruel and savage beasts, the fourth for the tame & gentle, the fifth for man. 3. Neither were there beside the three regions in the Ark, certain cabbins without in the side of the Ark, for the beasts called Amphibia, that live both in the waters, and upon the earth, as the Crocodile, Sea-calf, and such like, as Hugo thinketh: for all the beasts came into the Ark, which were preserved, Gen. 79. 4. Neither beside the three partitions in the Ark, was there a bottom beside to receive the filth of the Ark, as Pererius: for conveyances might be made otherwise in the side of the Ark for that use, and it would have been a great annoyance to have kept the dung of the cattle one whole year in the Ark. 5. All these opinions are repugnant to the text, which prescribeth but three ranks, the lower second, and third: so is that Hebrew text, and Chaldee Paraphrast: and the Septuagint are so likewise to be understood: facies inferiora, bicamerata: tricamerata: thou shalt make the lower rooms, the second chambers, and third chambers: and so doth Augustine interpret them: taking these words not jointly, wherein Origen was deceived, as though there should be two chambers below, and three above, but distinctly and severally.

QUEST. XVII. Of the several use of the divisions in the Ark.

COncerning the distinct use of these chambers, 1. Some make the lowest for the dung, the next for the food, the third for the cattle, as Origen, and some Hebrews. 2. Some the first for the beasts, the second room for their food, which might be put down into their cabins with ease, as Pererius. 3. Some will not have the cruel and tame beasts together, but make two several regions for them, as Origen. 4. Some do place men and beasts together in the upper and third room, dividing it into three parts, leaving both the ends for the beasts, the middle for men: Sic Lyranus, Tosta • us. 5. Some do place the beasts together in the lowest, which they make also the draine of the ship, their food in the middle, and men together with the birds and fowls in the uppermost. Mercer. 6. It is most like that the food and provender was in the lowest room, and the beasts in the middle, because of the fresh and more open air, as also for the better conveying of their dung by the sides of the Ark into the water: for this second region was ten cubits from the bottom, (allowing for every partition as many) and so much of the Ark may be supposed to be under the water: otherwise if the cattle were in the lowest room, we must be forced contrary to the text to make a fourth place in the bottom, to be as the sink and draine of the Ark. But I rather subscribe unto Calvin's judgment, that the order and disposition of these three partitions is to us unknown.

QUEST. XX. Of the window in the Ark.

Vers. 18. A Window shalt thou make, &c. ] 1. This was neither a precious or shining stone, as the carbuncle, as some of the Hebrews think: for Noah is said to open the window, Gen. 8.5. 2. neither was it shut all the time of the flood, and gave no light, as Tostatus thinketh, for to what use should it then have been made? 3. Neither was this window, but of a cubit in length, as Oleaster following Ibn Ezra: for such a small window would not have sufficed for all the Ark: and those words that follow, in a cubit shalt thou finish it above, cannot be referred to the window, but to the Ark: because the gender agreeth not in the Hebrew, and otherwise the description of the Ark should be imperfect. 4. Neither was there one only window made, as Mercerus, Buteo, gesseth, and other parts to be lightened with candles. 5. But it is most like, that divers lights were made: for so the word Is •• ar signifieth, a clear light: but where mention is made of opening the window, Gen. 8.6▪ there another word Chalon, is used, which was some principal window which Noah opened. Iu • .

QUEST. XXI. Of the door in the side of the Ark.

THe door shalt thou set in the side thereof. ] 1. It was not in the end or the breadth of the ark, as Pereri •• conjectureth, but in the side: for the side of an hose is rather said to be in the length than the breadth: as in a man's body we call that his side, which is part of his length, the top of the head, and the foot, are the two extreme ends, not the sides of man's body. 2. Neither was the door so situate, as it might be even with the waters for the beasts to come swimming unto, as Hugo thinketh: for • he beasts • ere all come into the ark before the waters fell. Gen. 7.6. 3. Neither was the door five cubits from the bottom, as Pererius, but it was placed lowest of all, for the more easy entrance of the beasts, which being entered, might ascend by stairs and other passages to their cabbins: and the custom of building is such, to make the door and entrance lowest: and this door was after closed up, to keep out the waters: as it is said, that the Lord shut him up. Gen. 7. v. 16.

QUEST. XXII. Of the form and fashion of the Ark.

IN a cubit shalt thou finish it above. ] Concerning the form and fashion of the Ark, it was 1. neither like unto a ship, gathered in at the bottom, and so waxing wider: for it had not been of such capacity to receive such a multitude of creatures: and it is called Teebah ; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , an Ark, a chest: whereas a ship, is called annijah, in Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Gen. 49.13. Chrysostom giveth another reason: non dicere potes, quod fuerit ad modum navis, ut art quadam illius iter dirigi potuerit: you cannot say that it was like a ship, as though it should have been guided by art. 2. Neither was it square only in the bottom and gathered in a narrower both in length and breadth till it came to a cubit breadth in the top, as Origen. who might be deceived in the translation of the Septuagint, who read, v. 16. thou shalt make it gathering in, collegen • eam: which words are not in the Hebrew. 3. Neither was it gathered in long-ways from the bottom, till both sides touched within a cubit, as Cajetan: 4 Nor yet did it keep square 15. cubits, and then was gathered in 15. cubits more, as Hugo: for in all there forms the capacity and roumth of the Ark within should be much lessened: neither should the Ark hold out in every part to be 300. cubits long, 50. broad, and 30. high, according to the description. 5. Neither doth Lyranus fitly expound these words, in • ummitate latera non distabant, nisi per cubitum: that the sides were gathered in together in the top, being distant but a cubit: his meaning is, that in the top or ridge there should be left a certain plain or square of a cubit in breadth, which were to no use at all: and again, if he would have the sides gathered into this cubit, before they had risen the full height of 30. cubits, the Ark should not be so spacious, if after, the Ark should far exceed in height the measure prescribed of 30. cubits. 5. Some think that the Ark was gathered in the top every way like a pyramis, taper-wise: so that the very top was a cubit in length, and the sixth part of a cubit in breadth, as Buteo, Mercerus. But this is not like: for then the Ark should not hold his proportion to be 50. cubits high throughout, if it should so far be carried small and narrow toward the top. 6. Junius referreth this prescription of a cubit, to the eaves of the Ark, which he would have hang over an each side a cubit, for better defense from the weather. But it is more like, that the more principal part, namely, the cover and roof of the Ark should be prescribed what fashion to be made of, (which otherwise should be here omitted) than the less principal: likewise the word, which signifieth to consummate or finish, better agreeth to the top, where the work is finished. Like it is, that the eavings hanged over: but Moses described not every circumstance, and somewhat ought to be left to Noah's discretion: neither can this place be fitly so applied. 6. Wherefore for the body of the Ark, Augustine well conjectureth, rectis limeis longe la • eque porrectam, that it was built upright both in length and breadth: and then the cover was so made sloping, that the ridge all the length of the Ark was but a cubit higher than the sides or eaves of the Ark, which falling or declining to the roof by the distance of a cubit, was sufficient to shed the water: for the whole breadth containing but 50. cubits, the ridge being just in the midst was equally distant 25. cubits from each side: so that the roof on each side did rise for 25. cubits in breadth, one in height, which might fully suffice for the fall of the rain.

1. Doct. Even a carnal mind is flesh.

1. Vers. 3. BEcause they are flesh. ] here we learn, that not only the body but even the soul of carnal men is called flesh: quia se totos carnalibus operibus, dant: because they give themselves wholly to carnal works as Chrysostom saith: and Gregory, caro quippe homo efficitur quando sensui carnis ratio subjugatur: man is become flesh, when reason is subdued to the carnal sense: for two ways this word (flesh) is taken in scripture, as he well distinguisheth, secundum naturam, secundum culpam, according to nature, and according to the corruption of nature.

2. Doct. No free will to good by nature.

2 Vers. 5. ALL the imaginations of the thoughts of his heart, are only evil continually. ] From this place we conclude. 1. That original concupiscence is properly sin (which is denied by Bellarmine ) because the imagination of man's heart is only ev • ll. 3. That man hath no free will by nature to any good, seeing his thoughts are only evil. 3. That there is no good work so perfect, but that it is blemished with man's natural corruption: because it is said, their thoughts are continually evil, &c. all these conclusions are denied by the papists, and therefore they have devised two answers to this place: 1. That Moses useth here an hyperbolical speech, because men's thoughts were for the most part evil, not altogether and only evil. 3. He speaketh only of the wicked, not of the righteous, for Noah is here excepted, who is said to be a just and upright man. v. 9 This answer Bellarmine and Pererius: Contra: 1. This general speech admitteth no exception: for by nature men's thoughts are only evil: for our Savior saith, that which is borne of the flesh, is flesh. John 3.6. and in this chapter. v. 3. they are said to be flesh: all their thoughts then by nature, were carnal and fleshly. 2. Yea even Noah and other righteous men by nature, are altogether corrupt: as S. Paul saith, we were the children of wrath by nature as well as others. Ephes. 2.3. Noah his righteousness was by grace, not by nature.

1. Confut. None exactly perfect in this life.

Vers. 9. WHere Noah is said to be a just, upright, or perfect man: the Pellagians do use this and such other places, to prove that a man might attain to an absolute perfection in this life, to be without sin: But I have shown before, in what sense we are said to be perfect, either in respect of the wicked, because the righteous are not defiled with such gross sins, or for that they do still increase and go forward to perfection, as also because by faith they are clothed with the righteousness and perfection of Christ: so before, quest. 8.

2. Confut. The capacity of the Ark, sufficient to contain all that entered.

Vers. 12. THe length of the Ark shall be three hundred cubits. Apelles. Marcio • s scholar, cavilled at this, that the Ark could not be big enough to contain so many divers kinds of beasts, being hardly able to receive four elephants. Origen. hom. 2. in Genes. But this cavil I have answered before: quest. 14. where I shown that the Ark was of sufficient capacity, even after the measure of the common cubit, to hold all that entered into it.

Others took exception at the bigness of the Ark: tantae magnitudinis arcam non potuisse compingi, that an Ark of such greatness could not be made, Augustine, lib. 15. de civitat. cap. 27. and thus Celsus objected, Orig. l. 4. contra. Cels. But Augustine answereth: 1. that they need not wonder at this, seeing such huge cities have been built, and considering it was an hundred years in preparing. 2. And it need not seem strange that so many years were spent in this work: seeing Pliny writeth, that the temple of Diana at Ephesus was 200. year in building by the help of all Asia. 3. It was indeed too huge a vessel to be governed by the skill of man: and therefore Augustine saith, Quam nullus in mare mittat conatus hominum sed levet unda cum venerit, magisque divina providentia, quam humana pruden • ia natantem gubernet. It was so made, that it could not by man's help be set aflote, but lift up by the water, to be governed by divine providence, not human prudence. 4. And yet Athenaeus reporteth, that Hiero King of Sicily, caused a ship to be made of such bigness that there went unto it as much timber, as sufficed to make 60. other ships: three hundred workmen beside laborers were employed one whole year in this work: there were in it three divisions one above another, and twenty ranks of oars: it had also within it a fish-pond, wherein were great and small fish: the received report of this great galliasse, may move them not to be so incredulous concerning the Ark.

Vers. 10. Noah begat three sons, &c. Because Noah was five hundred year old, before he begat any children, and afterward abstained an hundred year, for so long it was to the flood, and begat no more children: hence Pererius inferreth, that the gift of continency is not impossible, against certain heretics, as he calleth them, meaning protestants: Contra. 1. It is untrue, that we affirm this g • ft to be impossible: but we say that it is rare, neither is in every man's power to obtain, as they teach, that any man that will, may have that gift: it followeth not, because Noah had that gift of abstinence, that all therefore are capable of it: S. Paul saith, every man hath his proper gift of god, one after this manner, another after that. 1 Cor. 7.7. it is then a proper gift to some, not common to all. 2. And though Noah was a chaste and temperate man in marriage, yet it may be doubted whether he continued so long unmarried, or did forbear so long after.

QUEST I. Why Noah prayed not for the old world, as Abraham did for Sodom.

Vers. 1. THey have seen righteous before me, &c. 1. He was not only righteous in respect of men, but before God: his righteousness was in truth. 2. Whereas before Moses added, that he was just and upright, Gen. 2.9. the Hebrews hence gather, because he is not here also said to be upright, but only just, that he is commended only, because he was not unjust and cruel towards men. But seeing it is said, he was just before God, the other addition need not: for God seeth the heart. 3. The Hebrews do further extenuate Noah's faith: some saying, that he thought not, that God would destroy the world, but that he threatened only some, that Noah only prayed for himself, and not for the world, as Abraham did for the Sodomites: and therefore for these his oversights he afterward offered sacrifice. But they blame Noah without cause: the reason why he prayed not, as Abraham did, for others, for that he saw them incorrigible, and already God had given sentence, that the world should be destroyed: but when Abraham prayed for Sodom, no sentence was as yet gone forth against them. The sacrifice which Noah offered afterward, was an oblation of thanksgiving for his deliverance, not a deprecation for any such particular offense. Mercer.

QUEST. II. Of the difference of clean and unclean beasts.

Vers. 2. OF every clean beast, &c. 1. Some beasts were counted clean, some unclean, not simpl • 〈◊〉 respect of their nature and creation, for God saw that all things were good: neither in regard only of man's use, because some were more fit for food than others, but chiefly by the institution of God, some were set apart for Sacrifice, and therefore were called clean. 2. And this distinction of clean and unclean beasts is not inserted by Moses by way of anticipation, as though he spake only in respect of the times wherein he writ: but this difference was known unto the Patriarchs by revelation from God, in some godly tradition delivered from one to another: as we see the use of sacrifice, the oblation of tithes, the observation of the Sabbath were practiced before the law. 3. Whereas this distinction of clean and unclean, is not repeated in the rehearsal of the fowls, v. 3. it is not for that, as some think, they were not so distinguished before the law: or for some mystical signification, that not in celestial things, but in terrene only, this distinction holdeth of clean and unclean: but this distinction must be supplied out of the former verse, which for brevity sake is omitted in the third: yet in that the fowls are sorted out by sevens, it is evident, that he meaneth only the clean.

QUEST. III. Why the clean are taken by sevens.

Vers. 2. TAke thee seven and seven: for so are the words in the original. 1. Not that there were of the clean fourteen, seven of the male and female, which seemeth to have been the opinion of Justin and Origen, with others, because they could not see how there should be an odd, if there were but seven: but it is certain there were but seven: three male, and three female, and the odd was for sacrifice. This is the opinion of Ambrose, Chrysostom, Augustine, with others. And this repetition, seven, seven: is not to be taken collectively, for many sevens of one kind, but distributively for divers kinds, according to the use of the Hebrew speech. 2. Neither were the clean taken by sevens, for any mystery in that number; as Ambrose saith, that numerus septenarius est sacer, that seven is a sacred number. But Chrysostom rereproveth those that observe numbers, and saith, they do but fabulari, & ex suo capite introducere fable, and devise such things of their own head. But therefore the clean were chosen by sevens, for the more plentiful breed both for man's food, and for sacrifice, and but two of the unclean were taken, left their number might increase to the annoyance of man, as Musculus well observeth: and yet God would have the kind also of hurtful beasts preserved, for the punishment of man. For the noisome beast is one of God's 4. great judgments, Ezech. 14.21. 3. Whereas before, chap 6.20. the Lord saith, two of every sort shall come unto thee; but here Noah is bid to take of the clean by sevens: the solution is easy: for there the kind and sex is expressed, that for every male there should be a female, they should come by couples: here the number is prescribed, they must be taken by sevens.

QUEST. IV. Whether Noah and his sons lived in abstinence in the Ark.

Vers. 7. SO Noah entered and his sons and his wife, &c. 1. It is but a point of curiosity to inquire how Noah and his sons wives were called, whether Noah's wife were named Noria, as the Gnostics, or Barthenon, as Epiphanius, or Tytaea, as Berosus Annianus saith: and his sons wives, Pandora, Noella, and Noegla, seeing the scripture is silent herein, it were a vain labor for us to search. 2. Whereas here Noah and his wife are not named together going into the Ark, but coming forth, they are joined together, chap. 8.16. Come forth thou and thy wife. Ambrose thus noteth, Non commiscetur sexus in ingressu, sed commiscetur in egressu, The sex is not mixed in the ingress, but in the egress. Whereupon he thinketh, that Noah and his sons refrained the company of their wives, all the while they were in the Ark: which his opinion is most probable, though not upon this ground, but upon better reasons, which he adjoineth in the same place; as he further saith, maroris tempus erat non laeticea, it was a time of sorrow, not of mirth. Again, because they knew that the deluge came because of the intemperancy of the world: as also the rest of the creatures generally did forbear the act of generation, (which I rather think than with Mercerus, that the cattle engendered in the ark) either because the place was not fit, or the seasons of the year were altered, it being as a continual winter for the space of an year, by the coldness of the over-flowing water, or God so disposing their natural inclination.

QUEST. V. Whether Noah gathered the beasts into the Ark.

Vers. 9. THere came two and two to Noah, &c. 1. Neither as Philo thinketh did Noah gather the creatures together, as the shepherd his sheep, for that had been an infinite labor: Neither (as Hugo ) did the beasts come swimming to the ark, seeking for succor from the water, for they were entered before the waters fell. But as God is said to have brought the beasts to Adam, Gen. 2.19. so the Lord caused them to come unto Noah: non fuit ista cura illius hominis, as Augustine saith, sed divina, This was not man's care but God's.

QUEST. VI. What creatures came not into the Ark.

NEither came there of every kind of living thing, for these are excepted. 1. All that liveth in the water, either wholly, or partly in the water, partly in the land: for such creatures only came which moved upon the earth. 2. Such creatures as come of corruption, not by generation, as flies of the water, worms of dung, bees of bullocks flesh, hornets of horse flesh, the scorpion of the crab, or crevice, moaths of putrefied herbs, and certain small worms of the corruption of wood and corn, &c. for those creatures only entered, which increase by generation, Mercer. 3. Such creatures are excepted, which are of a mixed kind and ingender by the male and female of divers kinds, as the mule which cometh of a mare and asse. Cardanus also maketh mention of a certain beast, which he saw at Papia, of the bigness of a fox, with feet like a bear, a tail feathered like a goose, with prickles upon the back like an hystrix or porcupine, barking like a dog, which appeared to be of no certain kind, but by a mixed generation. Concerning such mixed kinds, Augustine saith well; that they needed not to be preserved in the Ark, s • d ibi parents eorum faisse sufficeret, it might suffice their parents (that is, the several kinds, whereof they are engendered) to be there 4. R. Sel. because Noah is bidden to take of every living thing, Gen. 6.19. would infer that the spirits of the air were preserved in the Ark: but this is ridiculous, for neither are they to be counted among these living creatures, neither are they male and female: nor yet are spirits subject to the danger of waters; and their kind were to be wished rather to be extinguished, than preserved. 5. R. Levi also, because Noah is bidden to take of all meat that is eaten, would infer that Noah preserved of all kinds of plants and seeds in the Ark; but that was not needful, except only for present food: for the seeds of herbs might by God's providence be preserved in the earth: as plants were kept under the water, as was the olive: ex Mercer.

QUEST. VII. Of the Phoenix, whether there be any such.

COncerning the Phoenix, the question is, because there is but one of that kind, whether it were preserved among other fowls in the Ark: but I think it may be more worthily doubted, whether there be any such Phoenix, or no, 1. Plixy saith, this bird is in Arabia. Cardanus and Scaliger in the Mediterranean parts of India, being called Semenda. 2. Some say, that after 500. years it dieth. Pompon. Mela. lib. 3. c. 9. Ambrose: others, that it liveth 660. years. Plin. ibid. 3. Some, that the Phoenix having made her a nest of divers spices, intrare & emori, goeth in and dieth. Ambr. Pompon. ibid. other, that motu alarm with the flittering of her wings, she setteth the sticks on fire, and is burned to ashes. 4. Pliny addeth out of Cornelius Valerianus, that the Phoenix was brought to Rome, and openly shown when Ir. Plantius, and Sex. Papinius were Consuls, the 800. year of the City. As this may seem to be a fable, so also the rest. For if the Phoenix die upon her nest, how could she be brought to Rome. 5. Some also write, that the Phoenix hath rostrum trifistulare, a bill with three pipes, wherewith she singeth melodiously before she dieth: sic Cardanus. But Scaliger holdeth this to be but a fable. 6. No other like is that, which Pompon. Mela, and Pliny write, that of the ashes of the Phoenix cometh a worm, and thereof another Phoenix, which being now ready to fly, taketh the bones of the old Phoenix with the nest, and carrieth it to the City of the Sun in Egypt, called Heliopolis, and there layeth it upon the Altar, as it were solemnizing the funeral thereof: who seeth not how fabulous a fiction this is, devised to countenance Pagan Idolatry, and not agreeing with it self: for if the Phoenix be burned to ashes, how can the bones and nest be so carried? 7. But among the rest, this seemeth to be most unlikely, that there should never be but one Phoenix at once? for what species or kind of any creature can they rehearse, whereof there is never but one; and whereas the Lord said to all his creatures, increase and multiply, this benediction should take no place in the Phoenix, which multiplieth not: and beside, seeing of all creatures there came two and two, the male and female, into the Ark, the Phoenix by this means should have perished, seeing there was not of this kind male and female to be preserved in the Ark. 8. But whereas Ambrose thus writeth, Phoenix cum mortua fuerit, reviviscit, solos non credimus homines resuscitari: the Phoenix being dead, reviveth, can we think then that man only shall not be raised? Ambrose in so writing, delivereth not his opinion, but ex concessis, as we say, by the received report of the Phoenix among the heathen, out of their own grounds he proveth the resurrection.

QUEST. VII. Whether the Ark were sufficient to contain the beasts with their food for a whole year.

IT is further doubted, how the Ark could contain so many several kinds of beasts and birds, and beside sufficient food for them all. 1. For the divers kinds of beasts, they are reckoned not in all to be above an hundred and fifty: whereof there are 30. kinds of serpents and other creeping things, 40. kinds of ravenous beasts, which live with flesh, which one with another exceed not the bigness of wolves: there are 40. more of other great beasts, which one with another in quantity may be thought to be equivalent to oxen: and 40. kinds beside of small beasts, which may one with another in proportion answer unto so many sheep: the whole number maketh an 150. All these several pairs of beasts were lodged in the middle region of the Ark; which contained 400. cells or cabbins, being each in breadth 6. cubits as much in length, and nine in height, as I have shown before: these rooms are large enough to receive the greatest pair of beasts: or if some, as the Elephants require a large space, many of the rest might be received in a less: so that there were cabbins enough twice told to place all the beasts in. 2. And if the middle part of the Ark were large enough for the beasts, there is no doubt, but that the upper story being of the same bigness sufficed for the birds, which though they be more diverse and variable in their kinds, yet are they of far less quantity, and so might be contented with smaller cages. 3. And whereas of the clean beasts, there were seven taken of every sort, whereof there are ten several kinds reckoned, Deuter. 14. beside the pairs counted before, we must number five more for every sort of the clean beasts, which will make 50. single, and 25. couples: which added to the rest, will make 175. couples▪ which if they did arise unto 200: there might be found room enough for them all in the middle division, as before is said. 4. Now that there was capacity sufficient in the lowest region of the Ark, wherein to lay up food for the cattle, thus it may appear. 1. Let it be supposed, that there were about 60. pair of beasts, as great as oxen, 50. pair of the bigness of wolves, and 60. more of the like quantity unto sheep. 2. Allow to every wolf as much food in quantity because they are ravenous, as to an ox, and to 4. sheep, as much: we shall have as it were an 125. pair, and 250. single oxen. 3. Then admit, that all the beasts did eat of hey, which asketh a large room to lie in, whereas other food, as of grain and such other may be laid in a narrower compass. 4. Then allow for every ox, 40. l. of hey in a day, as Columella doth apportion it: lib. 6. de re Rustic. c. 3.50. and 40. l. of hey will easily be contained in the space of a solid or square cubit; so much hey then, as will serve 250. oxen in a day, will require for layer, 250. cubits: the layer then for so much hey, as will suffice a whole year, which consisteth of 365. days, will have no less room, than of 85250. cubits, it cometh not to 90. thousand cubits: 5. Now take the capacity of one of the chambers, being 300. cubits in length, 50. in breadth, 9. in height, (allowing one cubit for the partition above, for otherwise it should be 10. cubits high,) and it will arise to an hundred, five and thirty thousand square cubits: for every rank of cubits containeth 15. thousand, so much maketh the length of 300. cubits, multiplied by the breadth of 90. this sum of 1500. being multiplied by 9. which is the height, will produce the said number of an 135000. whereas fodder for the cattle occupieth not above 90000: ex Perer.

QUEST. VIII. Whether the ravenous beasts lived of flesh in the Ark.

WHereas it is also questioned, whether the ravenous beasts were fed with flesh according to their natural use, while they were in the Ark. 1. Neither is it like, that all the beasts did eat of one common food: for the text saith, Genes. 6.21. take with thee of all meat that is eaten: 2. Neither is it like, as Origen thinketh (of which opinion also is Bucer ) that Adam brought into the Ark a great number of cattle, to be food for the ravenous beasts; for there came no more but two of the unclean, and seven of the clean. 3. Neither is it probable, that these beasts did not live of flesh, but herbs and other fruits of the earth, before the flood: as I have shown at large: quest. 23 in 1. cap. of Genes. 4. Wherefore I approve rather Augustine's resolution, to the which Mercerus subscribeth, which is to this effect: 1. that these devouring beasts, as they do live of flesh, so also they use to eat of the fruits of the earth. 2. That it might be revealed to Adam, what food besides flesh was convenient and apt for them. 3. That hunger will enforce beasts to eat that, which otherwise is not usual. 4. But his best answer is, quid non suave faceret Deus, qui etiam, ut sine cibo viverent, divina facilitate donaret: What could not God make pleasant, who could have given them power to have lived without meat, much more then could God by his power dispose them to live for that time of other food than flesh.

QUEST. IX. How the year is to be counted wherein the flood came.

Vers. 10. SO it came to pass after seven days, that the flood was upon the earth in the six hundred year of Noah's life, in the second month, &c. 1. Noah went seven days into the Ark, before the flood came, not as the Hebrews conjecture, to lament for the death of Mathuselah: for it is certain that Mathuselah died the same year the flood came, so whether he died seven days or seven weeks before it is uncertain: but it is more like, that Noah entered before to dispose of everything in the Ark, before it should be tossed of the waters: as also as Ambrose noteth, that the rest of the world seeing him enter, before there was yet any apparent danger, might have been drawn to repentance. 2. Neither was the 600. year of Noah's age now only begun, as Lyranus, Tostatus, with others think, but complete: for otherwise there should not be 1656. years from the creation to the flood; neither should Noah have lived 900. and fifty years, whereof he lived but 350. after the flood, if he had not been full 600. year old before. 3. This second month, was neither the second month of the year considered a part from Noah's age, as Rupertus thinketh: for it hath a coherence with the 600. year of Noah's life, whereof mention is made immediately before: neither is it to be taken for the second of Noah's 600. year, without respect of the season of that instant year as Cajetan seemeth to think: but it was both the second month of the usual year, and of Noah's 600 year, which concurred both together, for Noah his 600. year was the 1656. year, of the age of the world from the Creation. Mercer.

QUEST. X. Whether the flood came in the Spring or Autumn.

THis second month some think to have been in the Spring, answering to the month of May. 1. That it might be the more grief to the wicked, to be taken away from their pleasure, as our Savior showeth, that they were taken away in the midst of their mirth, Matth. 24.37. Luther. 2. That the flood might not be imputed to any natural causes, but only to the power of God, the waters increasing in the time of Summer, which is a season of drought, and decreasing in Winter, when as the waters naturally increase. 3. And again, because the Dove brought the leaf of an Olive in the 11. month after the flood began; some do gather that the flood came in the Spring, Rupertus. 4. But better arguments than these may be produced to show it more probable, that the flood came in the Spring: because that then the world is supposed to have taken beginning, as is before proved, Quest. 10. in 1. chap. Gen. and from the creation to the flood are reckoned 1656. even years. 5. The flood came in the second month of the year: now it cannot be shown in any place of Scripture, where the months are accounted in order, the first, second, third, but from Nisan, which answereth to part of March, part of April: Moses ordaining this month to be the first, Exod. 12. doth make no new institution, but reneweth the old account, which was discontinued in Egypt, by reason that the Egyptians indeed begin their year from the month Ptho • ▪ which answereth to our September. And this reason, from the order and account of the months, I confess, hath much prevailed with me, to think it more likely that the flood came in the Spring. 6. And if it had been Autumn when the Cattle came forth of the Ark, when the herbs and plants do fade, whence should they have had food till the Spring? 7. As also, the cattle presently increasing and multiplying after their coming out of the Ark, this might seem rather to fall into the Spring time, which is the aptest season for the copulation and ingendring of cattle; but most especially of the fowls. Of this opinion are most of the Ecclesiastical Writers, though divers of the Hebrews hold the contrary: as Ambrose among the rest thus resolveth: Secundum mensem verni temporis fuisse non ambigitur, quando augentur nascentia, ager parturit, &c. tunc ergo fecit diluvium, quando dolor eorum major foret, qui in abundantia puniebantur, &c. It is not to be doubted but that the second month was in the Spring time, when things increase and grow, the field bringeth forth, &c. God therefore then sent the flood, when their grief should be the greater, to be punished in their abundance. The chiefest reason that moved Ambrose thus to think, was the account of the months, which always in Scripture are reckoned from the Spring: yea that month which some would have the beginning of the year, when the feast of blowing the Trumpets, and of Tabernacles was kept, is called the seventh month, Levite. 23.24.34. Of th • s opinion also is learned Mercerus, that when the second or third month is simply named, it must be accounted from Nisan, which is in the Spring.

QUEST. XI. What is understood by the great deep, and the windows of heaven.

Vers. 10. THe fountains of the great deep were broken up. 1. By the deep here is not understood the Tartarean waters about the center of the earth, as Plato imagined: for by this means the waters should ascend three thousand and 500. miles (for so far it is from the Center of the earth to superficies ) which is against the nature of water. 2. Neither was the Sea this great depth, which some think is higher than the earth, and kept in only by the power of God, which now was suffered to overflow the earth: for neither is it true that the Sea is higher than the earth, as is before declared: neither doth Moses make any mention of it: which might have been sufficient by the overflowing to have drowned the earth, if naturally it were so much above it. 3. Wherefore the fountains of the deep, were the deep heads and springs of water within the earth, which were opened and enlarged, to make this inundation: so that the Rivers that run in the earth were cast up, and the deep gulf gushed forth: and these may be the waters under the earth, mentionod; Exod. 20. verse. 4.

The windows also of heaven, signify not the irruption or breaking forth of any waters in the Crystal heaven, (as it is called) above the starry sky, as Eugubinus and Oleaster imagine: for neither are there any such wat • rs above the heavens, as hath been before declared: and if there were, how could they pass thorough the starry heaven without the dissolution and corruption thereof? and it would follow that the watery heaven should be now a vaca • t and empty place, the waters being descended from thence. But the opening of the windows of heaven, betokeneth the breaking of the clouds, where the water is contained: that whereas at other times, The Lord bindeth the waters in the clouds, and the cloud is not broken under them, Job 26.8. Now the Lord loosed the clouds, which being made as full of windows poured forth all the water that was kept in them, Mercerus. Perer.

QUEST. XII. Of the causes of the flood.

THese three were the causes of the flood: 1. The issuing forth of the waters beneath out of the earth. 2. The continual rain for forty, not only days but nights together, not only pouring from the clouds, but increasing by the liquefaction and distilling of the air into water. Seneca writing of the general deluge, which he speaketh of, not as past, but to come, addeth unto these three other causes: 1. Crescunt maria super solitum, &c. the extraordinary swelling and overflowing of the sea. 2. Incipit terra putrescere & laxata ire in humorem: The earth also it self did putrefy, and resolve into water. 3. He maketh the conjunction of the celestial bodies another cause, that like as he thinketh the world shall be burned when the stars shall concur in the sign Cancer, sic, inundationem futuram cum eadem siderum iurba in Capricornum convenerit: so he thinketh there shall be a general inundation when the same company of stars shall come together in the sign Capricorne: These causes may be admitted as helping and necessary, though not as principal, saving that, the conjunction of the stars in Capricorne, seemeth rather to be a curious inquisition, than to depend of any certain demonstration.

QUEST. XIII. Upon what day Noah entered into the Ark.

Vers. 13. IN the self same day, &c. 1. Lyranus reading according to the latin text, in the article of that day: thinketh that the noon point of day is hereby expressed, and so also Oleaster. 2. Tostatus taketh it rather for the morning or twilight, which is more properly a point, parcel, or article of the day. It betokeneth nothing else, but in the same day as I shown before in the interpretation. 3. Some Hebrews think that this was wednesday, when they say that the Sun is strongest, that Noah might have some rest before the Sabbath, but this is too curious. 4. Some do take this for the day before the flood, being the sixteenth of the month that Noah entered then, and his family before. 5. Others think, that Noah entered seven days before, according to the text, v. 1. Enter thou into the Ark. &c. v. 4. for seven days hence I will cause it to rain. v. 7. so Noah entered, &c. v. 10. and so after seven days, &c. And thus Ambrose expoundeth: so that here by way of recapitulation, mention is made of the entering of Noah : and Junius to make the sense more full, readeth thus: In the same day when Noah was entered, &c. v. 13. &c. God shut him in. v. 16. He maketh the 13, 14, 15. verses to depend upon that clause, in the 16. verse, whereby is shown how the providence of God watched over Noah and the rest, when they were entered, so shutting them up that the waters could not enter. 6. But Junius inserteth one word, v. 13. which is not in the Hebrew, quum ingressus esset, when he was entered (when) is added: so that according to the true reading; the self same day Noah entered, &c. it is evident, that Noah with his sons entered the same day, wherein the rain began to fall: God so providing that against that day all kind of cattle and fowls were present to enter with him. And whereas Noah is bid to enter, v. 1. before the seven days, that is to be understood of the preparing and making all things ready for his entrance: Mercerus. Now whereas Junius thinketh, that in the very seventh day the flood came, and so readeth, v. 10. I think rather, that the seven days were fully expired, and that upon the 8. day, it began to rain: because the text is, that after seven days the waters were upon the earth. Mercer.

QUEST. XIII. How Noah was shut up.

Vers. 16. GOd shut him up, &c. 1. Not that after Noah was come into the Ark, and his sons with their wives, and the rest of the creatures: God by the ministry of the Angels did shut the door without, and pitched it up: occlusit pro eo; God shut it up for him, as Tremellius and Cajetan read: that is, whereas Noah being within, could not shut up the door without God did it for him: for as Noah opened the door at his going out, so it is like he shut it at his going in: but hereby • s signified, that what was wanting in Noah's labor, was supplied by God's providence, and that it was God's work to preserve Noah in the Ark. Mercer. 2. And this was done not so much to keep him from the sight of the destruction of the world, which might have ministered grief unto him, as Chrysostom collecteth, for there was a window, out of the which he might behold that fearful spectacle, but to keep himself from the violence and rage of the waters, as also from the rage of men. Mercer.

QUEST. XIV. The 150. days must be reckoned from the beginning of the flood, whereof the 40. days are a part.

Vers. 24. THe waters prevailed an 150. days. ] This term must not be counted from the end of 40. days: mentioned v. 12. all which time the rain continued, as Tostatus and Cajetan think: but from the beginning rather including the 40. days: which seemeth to be the opinion of Ambrose: (and here unto assent Musculus and Tremellius) lib. de Noah & arc. 17. and it may thus appear: Genes. 8.4. it is said that in the 7. month, the 17. day, the Ark rested upon the mountains of Armenia, which was after the end of the 150. days, when the waters began to abate: v. 3. but if the 150. days be added to 40. which make in all an 190. the waters should not abate till the 27. day of the 8. month: for from the 17. day of the second month, when the forty days must take beginning, to the 17. day of the 7. month are but five months, that is days 150. (counting 30. days to a month) whereas, putting, 40. and 150. days together, we shall have 190. before the waters should begin to abate, which is contrary to the text: now whereas the Septuagint read the water 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was exalted an 150. days, and Chrysostom saith, tot dies mansit sublimis illa aquarum altitudo, the height of the waters continued so long: unless they mean indifferently of the rising and increase of the water upon any part of the earth, which began at the first when the rain fell within the 40. days, it cannot be agreeable to the text: for the waters increased by three degrees, first the Ark was lift up above the waters, v. 17. then it floted and went upon the waters, v. 18. then the waters prevailed so much: that the highest hills were covered, v. 20. this increasing, prevailing, and continuing of the water, was but an 150. days, from the first to the last; Mercer.

1. Doct. The flood not caused by any constellation.

1. Vers. 4. I Will cause it to rain upon the earth. ] This rain then was not caused only or chiefly by ordinary and natural causes, as by the constellation of the stars, which was foreseen by Noah: which seemeth to have been the opinion of Henricus Mechliniens. and Petrus ab Aliaco, and Gulielmus Parisiensis, cited by Pererius: Seneca also ascribeth inundations to a fatal necessity: and when the great deluge shall be, which (he believed was to come) he saith the stars shall concur together in Capricorne: But it is evident, that this flood was caused, not by natural and ordinary means, but by the extraordinary power of God: 1. The Lord saith, I will bring a flood of waters, Gen. 6. • 7. The fountains of the deep, and the windows of heaven were opened. This showeth that it was God's special work by the ministry of his Angels, that the heavens rained, the earth gave up water after an extraordinary manner. 2. The sins of that age were the cause of this destruction, Gen. 6.13. It was then their iniquity, not any fatal necessity, that procured that judgment. 3. And seeing God made all things in wisdom and order, he framed the world, that one part should concur for the preservation of another, not to their destruction. 4. No constellation of stars can have a general operation over the whole earth, but only in that place where their influence worketh: and when they are moved, they ce • se working. As Seneca rendereth this reason of the increase of some rivers in Summer, Quarta ratio est syderum, hac enim quibusdam mensibus magis urgent & exhauriunt flumina, cum longius recesserunt minus consumunt, &c. The fourth reason is in the stars, which in some months do more work upon rivers, but when they are gone farther off, they have not that force. Constallations then may exercise their strength upon some special rivers and places, but not universally upon the whole earth.

2. Doct. The highest mountains in the world covered with the waters of the flood.

Vers. 19. ALL the high mountains that were under the whole heavens were covered. They then are confuted, which think that some high hills, as Olympus, were not overflown: whom Augustine refelleth. lib. 15. de civitat. c. 27. and Cajetan, who would have the mountain of Paradise to be excepted from this inundation. 1. The words are general, all high mountains, under (not the airy heaven only, as Cajetan collecteth, but the whole heaven) were covered: yea the high mountains were surprised: whether Athos in Macedonia, which cast his shadow unto the Town Myrinum in Lemnos, the space of 86. miles, or Atlas, whose top is higher than the clouds: or Olympus, which Zinagoras by Mathematical instruments found to be ten stadia, or furlongs high: Or the mount Tabor, which riseth up 30. furlongs, as Josephus writeth, or Caucasus whose top is said to be lightened with the Sun, when day-light is shut in below. All these high mountains were covered with waters. 2. Augustine thus reasoneth, Non attendunt omnia elementorum crassissimam terram ibi esse potuisse, &c. They consider not that the earth the heaviest of all elements, is in the top of these high hills. It need not seem strange then, that the waters might ascend thither. 3. Where doth Cajetan find that Paradise was situate upon an hill? nay the contrary is gathered out of Scripture, for out of Eden went a river to water the garden. Gen. 2.10. But rivers use not to run upon hills. And Cajetan needed not to fear the drowning of Paradise because of Enoch: for he was with God taken up into Heaven, where the flood could not reach him. 4. Of the like conceit with Cajetan is Bellarmine, who thinketh that all the mountains were not overflowen, but these only where the wicked dwelt. And Josephus reporteth out of Nicholaus Damascenus, that there is a certain hill in Armenia called Baris, in quo multos profugos diluvii tempore servatos ferunt, wherein they say, many flying thither for succor in the time of the flood were preserved. But these dreams and devices are overthrown by the evident words of Scripture, that all high mountains under heaven were covered with the waters. 5. Likewise that fabulous dream of some Hebrews is here refelled, who imagine that beside Noah and the rest of the eight persons, Og King of Basan, who lived till Moses time, one of those Giants before the flood might be preserved; for beside, that none after the flood lived so long, where should Og have been kept in the flood? seeing the mountains were covered fifteen cubits high, which exceeded the stature of any Giant. For the Hebrews do but fable, supposing those Giants to have been an hundred cubits high. Neither is that report out of Pliny much to be credited, of a Giants body found in Crete of 46. cubits, 6. Further, Ab. Exra confuteth the opinion of some in his days, that held this deluge not to have been universal: for although it may be all the world was not inhabited before the flood, but only the East parts, because they wanted the invention of ships to transport them from place to place (for Noah was the first that used a ship) yet it is without doubt that the whole earth was overflown, seeing the highest hills were so far under the water. Mercer.

1. Confut. The general flood past, and not to come.

FIrst out of this Chapter, wherein the manner of the flood, the beginning thereof and continuance is set down, the error of Seneca is refelled, who dreamed of two destructions of the world, to come, by fire and water: he did not believe that the universal flood was past, sed inundationem futuram, that it was yet to come.

2. Confut. All perished not in the flood.

AGaine in that inundation, he imagined that all mankind, and beasts, should utterly be extinguished: for thus he writeth: Peracto exitio generis humani, extinctisque pariter feris, &c. omne ex integro animal gloriabitur, dabiturque terris homo inscius scelerum: the destruction of mankind being finished, and all beasts perished: every creature shall be renewed, and man restored to the earth without sin: But these fancies are refuted by Moses, who showeth how man and beast in the Ark were preserved.

3. Confut. The fish perished not in the flood.

Vers. 32. EVerie thing in whose nostrells the spirit of life did breath. ] By this that fancy of some of the Rabbin's is confuted, who think that the fish also were destroyed by the waters, which they suppose to have been hot in the flood: for only those things perished which breathed upon the dry land: sic Vatablus in hunc locum.

4. Confut. The truth of Noah's flood, proved by testimony of the heathen.

Vers. 20. Fifteene cubits upward. ] From hence some would gather that the flood did ascend to the middle region of the Ark: for it was higher than the mountains, whose tops do touch the middle region, and sometime are above the clouds: as they gave instance of the hill Olympus, which is so high, that the ashes left of the sacrifices, are neither dispersed by the wind, nor dissolved by the rain: if then the flood was higher than that place where the rain is engendered, the waters could not increase so high by the rain: and thus they would impair the credit of this story, and consequently infer, that there was no such flood.

Answ. 1. That report of Olympus is found to be untrue: as Lodovicus Vives affirmeth by the testimony of Philadelphius, who went up to the hill, of purpose to try the truth of the report, but found no such thing. 2. No mountain can be so high as the middle region, which is distant 50. mile from the earth, whereas no hill exceedeth 4. mile in height: 3. Solinus reporteth, that in the top of the mountain Atho, there was a town situate, and divers inhabited there which lived half again so long, as other men did: it seemeth then to have been a most wholesome place for air: then was it not in the middle region, which is full of clouds and foggy mists, and beside they affirm, that the top of the hill Atlas is always covered with snow, then it will follow that the snow is not there engendered. 4. Though it be granted, that the flood might rise to the nether and lowest part of the middle region, yet the upper part thereof was far remote, from whence rain might be ministered abundantly. 5. Lastly, this universal inundation of the world wanteth not testimony from the heathen: as Josephus allegeth out of Berosus, Hieronymus, (which writ the antiquities of the Phoenicians) Muaseas, and Nicolaus Damascenus, who writeth of one that was carried in an Ark, and did stick in the mountain Baris in Armenia: Eusebius reporteth out of Abidenus, how one Sissithras escaped in a ship to Armenia, being foretold of a great inundation by Saturn, and how by sending out of birds he searched whether the earth were dry. Pererius in his learned commentaries citeth, beside Cyrillus who allegeth Alexander Polihistor for the same, and Plato in Tima • : Plutarch also maketh mention, how Deucalion sent a dove out of the Ark: Pompon Melae, Plinius, Solinus, writ that Joppe was thought to be the most ancient City in the world, and to have been before the flood: which must be understood of the general flood in the time of Noah: for Ogyges flood was only in Attica, and Deucalions in Thessalia; which came not near Palestine where Joppe was; and many Cities in the world were more ancient than those floods: that of Ogyges being 500. years and more after Noah's flood, about the 90. year of Jacob's age: the other of Deucalion 230. after that, about the 50. year of Moses age, as Pererius showeth out of Eusebius, and Orosius: thus the heathen were not ignorant of this great judgment of water upon the world: but they obscured the truth with their fables, giving oth •• names unto Noah, as of Sissitheus, Ogyges, Deucalion. &c.

Vers. 21. And every man perished. ] Like as from this general proposition, some were excepted, as Noah, and the rest, which were with him: so notwithstanding, all high mountains are said to be covered with the waters, v. 19. yet some may be excepted, they only are mentioned, where the wicked inhabited: sic Bellarm. de gratia primi hominis, c. 14.

Contra. The comparison is not alike, between these two general propositions: for from the first, Noah, and his company are by special words exempted, v. 23. Noah only remained, and they that were with him in the Ark : but no such thing concerning the hills is expressed in Scripture, that any of them were privileged from the waters.

6. v. 2. Of unclean beasts thou shalt take of by couples. ] From these words the Canon doth conclude most corruptly: Non esse bonum duplicem numerum, qui praefigurat foedera nuptiarum▪ &c. that a double number is not good, whereby marriage is prefigured: whereupon all the beasts that enter by two and two are unclean, impar numerus est mundus, the old number is clean.

Contra. 1. But the clean and unclean entered by couples: v. 8. of the clean and unclean, there came two and two: therefore this is a false note. 2. The unclean are not such, because of their number, but for their kind. 3. By this rule, Noah and his sons should have been unclean, that went into the Ark by couples, namely with their wives.

QUEST. I. How God is said to have remembered Noah.

Vers. 1. GOd remembered &c. not that there is oblivion or forgetfulness with God, but then God is said to remember, when he showeth by the effects that he hath care of man: so God is said to remember man's sins, when he punisheth them, Mercer. as the widow said to the prophet, art thou come to call my sin to remembrance, and to slay my son? 1. King. 17.20. 2. God also remembereth the cattle: wherein Moses is not contrary to Paul: doth God take care for oxen? 1. Cor. 9. where the Apostle denieth not that God's providence watcheth over cattle, but that his care toward man is greater, and that he careth for beasts, for man's cause. 3. So then as the cattle perished in the flood together with the wicked, so they are preserved for the righteous sake. 4. Some of the Hebrews think that God is said to remember the beasts, not the fowls, because they were not made the same day with man: but the reason is, because Moses having made so often mention of the birds, that were likewise preserved in the Ark, as Gen. 6.20. Gen. 7.3.14. needed not to speak of them here. 5. R. Sel. noteth, that God remembered the beasts, because they did not couple together in the Ark. I will not answer with Mercerus, that the beasts engendered in the Ark, both that they might be for sacrifice and for food afterward: for there were enough beside for sacrifice, seeing seven of the clean entered into the Ark: and concerning food, they might for a while forbear the eating of flesh, till the creatures were increased: but if both clean and unclean beasts should have engendered in the Ark, neither would the Ark have contained them, nor the food by Noah provided have sufficed them. We answer then, that God remembered them, not for any such thing, but for man's cause.

QUEST. II. What manner of wind it was that God sent.

GOd made a spirit or wind to pass. 1. which was not the spirit of consolation, wherewith Noah was comforted, Rasi. 2. Nor yet the holy Ghost, as Ambrose and Theodoret suppose, Ambrose reason is, quomodo non evacuaretur mare ventorum vi: if it were then wind that dried up the flood, much more is it able to dry up and empty the sea: but this followeth not, because this was an extraordinary wind, not such as usually bloweth in the sea. Theodoret saith further, non solent ventis aquae imminui, sed potius turbari, &c. the wind useth to trouble the water, not to dry it up: so did this wind cause the water to go and come, but it had also a drying faculty, otherwise than ordinary winds have. 2. Neither was this wind the spirit and heat of the Sun, as Rupertus thinketh: but this was extraordinary caused, whereas the Sun kept his ordinary course still. 3. It was then a wind indeed, that was raised by the extraordinary power of God: for by exhalation out of the earth, (whereof winds are usually engendered,) it being covered with waters, this wind was not caused: and God gave it also an extraordinary power, both to dry the waters, by rossing them to and fro, and to force them by going and coming, (as the property of the water is to ebb and flow,) to their proper place, into the deep fountains from whence they came. And these two properties the Scripture ascribeth to the wind: 1. to force the waters, as in the division of the red sea, and to purge the air, to disperse the clouds, and dry up moisture. Prov. 25.23. as the North wind driveth away the rain. Perer.

QUEST. III. When the fountains began to be stopped, and the rain to cease.

Vers. 2. THe fountains of the deep were stopped, &c. The rain ceased, and the current of the water was stopped immediately after the forty days, as Augustine thinketh: 2. not after the 150. days spoken of before, as Oleaster imagineth: for then the waters had not continued in their height any time at all, but should presently have begun to decrease, for after the 150. days they began to abate: and Moses saith, that the rain was upon the earth forty days, and forty nights, chap. 7.21. then not an 150. days and nights. 3. Wherefore I rather approve the opinion of some other Hebrews, that it ceased to rain at all, after the forty days expired, then of Ibn Ezra, to whom Mercerus seemeth to subscribe, that it rained though not continually, an 110. days, after the 40. days, that is in all, 150. days. 4. R. S • l. noteth, that where it is said, all the fountains of the deep were stopped, not all the fountains, as before it is said, all the fountains, &c. were opened: that some fountains remained unstopped for the procreation and sending forth of rivers and springs: so also Iun. But it is more like that all the fountains which were extraordinarily opened to augment the flood, were stopped: the ordinary springs of water continued still, as before the flood.

QUEST. IV. How the seven month is to be counted.

Vers. 4. IN the seventh month, the seventh day, &c. 1. Whereas the Latin text and the Septuagint read for the seventeenth day, the seven and twenty day; which reading is received of the popish interpreters, that are addicted to their vulgar latin text, and hereupon some of them reckon from the beginning of the flood seven months, that is, 207. days (counting twenty nine days and a half to a month,) whereof the flood continued one hundred ninety, and so there should be seventeen days between the beginning of the waters to abate, & the resting of the Ark: sic Tostatus. Others beginning their reckoning from the beginning of the flood, till the waters abated, which make five months, and two days and a half, (accounting but twenty nine days and a half to a month,) and hereunto they put eight days more (which was the space between the abating of the water, and the resting of the Ark) which added to the two days, make up those ten, which the latin hath more than the Hebrew: sic Lyranus, Pererius. But we refuse all these collections, which go about to justify the vulgar latin against the original veri • y wherein S. Augustine giveth us a good rule: ei lingua potius credatur unde est in aliā per interpretes facta translatio: that tongue is rather to be credited, out of the which the interpreters have translated into another.

2. Receiving then the Hebrew text, that the Ark rested upon the 17. not the 27. day of the 7. month yet we refuse the opinion of Cajetan, who therein followeth R. Sel. that would have this month the seventh from the beginning of the flood, not the seventh of the year: and the reason is, because he maketh not the 40. days of the rain, part of the 150. days, as it is to be truly taken, as is shown before, cap. 7. quest. 14. but he putteth them together, making of them both 190. days; which is the space of six months and sixteen days (counting but 29. days to a month) so that upon the 191. day after the beginning of the flood, which is the 17. of the 7. month of the flood, the Ark rested, &c. But this account cannot stand, to make this seventh month, the seventh from the beginning of the flood, not from the beginning of the year: seeing both the second month, chap. 7.11. and the tenth month, chap. 8.5. must of necessity be referred to the year, not to the continuance of the flood. And this were to breed a confusion, in the story, to take some months according to the season of the year, and some according to the time of the flood: for seeing the months both before and after, are numbered according to the course of the year, there is no reason to understand the seventh month otherwise.

3. Neither do we approve Lyranus conceit, that whereas he maketh the 150. days to determine the 19. of the seventh month, after which time the waters began to decrease, he would have the Ark to rest upon the 17. day according to the text: but how is it like, that the Ark should rest, before the waters began to abate without a miracle?

4. Neither can I condescend to Mercerus judgment, wherein he followeth a certain Hebrew in his book of the binding of Isaac: that the waters began to decrease before the 150. days expired; though the decrease was not so sensible as afterward: and so the waters might abate so much by the end of the 150. days, as that the Ark might well be staid from floating: but the text favoreth not this collection, which saith, that the waters prevailed an 150. days: but when they abated, they prevailed not: and again, v. 3. after the end of 150. days the waters abated, Ergo, not before.

5. Wherefore we took this seventh month according to the order of the year being the sixth in number from the second month wherein the flood began, and making in all but five complete months, that is an 150. days from the 17. of the second, to the 17. of the seventh: so that we make the 40. days of continual rain to be a parcel of the 150. days mentioned chap. 7.24. All which time the waters prevailed: so then upon the same day, the 151. from the beginning of the flood, which was the 17. of the seventh, the waters abated, and the Ark rested upon the mountains of Armenia: this exposition best agreeth with the text: and thus Tremeliu • and Musculus do truly expound.

But two objections are made, 1. saith Pererius, by this exposition the Ark shall rest the very first day of the abating of the waters, which is not like, seeing that it was above two months after, (the 1. day of the 10. month) when the tops of the mountains appeared: thus also objecteth Mercerus. Answer 1, This doubt is easily removed, 1. seeing that the waters exceeded not the highest mountains above 15. cubits: and the Ark might draw at the least a 11. cubits of water, as R. Sel. thinketh, so that the bottom of the Ark was but 4. cubits above the tops of the high mountains: it is not unlikely but that the waters might abate 4. cubits in depth the first day, that the Ark might well touch the tops of those high mountains: which may very well be supposed to be the highest of the rest, because the Ark first touched there. 2. And that this great abatement the first day may seem probable, let it be considered, that in the sp • ce of an 160. and odd days from the 17. of the 7. month, to the 1. of the first month in the 601. year, v. 13. the very lowest parts of the earth were dried. Now the highest hills are thought to be 3. miles at the least higher than the low places, (as mount Tabor is 30. furlongs high) that is, 3000. yards, which maketh 6000. cubits the eight part of that number, the eight part of the height of water must abate, which is 750. cubits: that is every day 37. cubits and an half, or thereabout: Now be it admitted, that every day the waters were not wasted alike: for the higher the water, and the greater the compass or circumference, the smaller was the abatement, yet according to this proportion, the waters might very well sink so much the first day, that the Ark might well be stayed upon the high mountains of Ararat, or Armenia.

3. And if we say that these mountains, whose tops appeared the first day of the 10. month, were the lower and inferior hills, as some Hebrews think, whom Mercer. followeth: then there remaineth no doubt at all: but that there might be the space of two months between the appearing of the tops of the highest, and of the lowest hills.

QUEST. V. How many days are to be counted to a month.

SEcondly, it is objected, seeing an 150. days make five months, and two days with an half (reckoning 29. days and an half after the computation of Hebrews to a month) it will be found that the Ark rested two days and an half before the waters began to abate, which was not till an 150. days expired: but this is not like.

Answ. 1. We are not forced here, to add ten days more, as the latin text, for 17. readeth 27. which is a corrupting of the Scripture. 2. Neither need we say as some, that the waters did abate indeed before the 150. days expired, but that abatement was not sensible, evident, or apparent, and therefore it is not accounted of: for this were to contradict the text, which saith, after the end of the 150. days the waters abated: Ergo, not before: and beside, seeing the Ark rested and stayed at the very first abatement upon the mountain, how was it not apparent and sensible?

3. Neither for the solution of this doubt, are we driven to take this seventh month according to the term of the flood, and not after the order of the year; which were to confound the story, as is before shown.

4. But our answer is, that a month here is neither taken for the space of 29. days, as Cajetan, nor of 29. and a half, as Pererius affirmeth, but for thirty days complete, Junius: and so shall we have an 150. days just, from the second to the seventeenth of the seventh month: for unless this be admitted, we shall neither find a sufficient answer to this objection propounded, all those other conjectures being too weak. And beside, unless the Hebrews should account 30. days to a month, and rather more, their years consisting of twelve months, should be very imperfect: for whereas a year according to the course of the Sun containeth 365. days: if there be but 30. days in a month, there will be but 360. days: if but 29. days and an half, there will be but 354. so that by this reckoning the Hebrews year should want 11. days, of a perfect year, which would work a great confusion in the computation of years, and is not to be admitted.

QUEST. VI. What mountain the Ark rested upon.

THe Ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat, &c. Some think that the Ark rested upon the mountain Taurus, from whence cometh the River Araxis, which some understand hereby Ararath, and upon that part of Taurus which hangeth over Silicia: and the rather, for that the City Tarsus is there situate, which seemeth to be derived of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which signifieth to dry, because that part and tract of Silicia, was soonest dried after the flood, Perer.

But the Chaldee Paraphrast calleth that part of Armenia where the Ark rested, Kardu: Curtius Cordaeos, the Cordeans, or Gordians, as Ptolemy: where is one hill higher than the rest, not called Baris, as Josephus allegeth out of Nicholaus Damascenus, which Junius out of Epiphanius showeth must be read, Lubaris, which in the Armenian tongue signifieth a place of descending: because there was the place where Noah first descended out of the Ark: and this is most probable. But whether part of the Ark remained so long time after, as Josephus, Berosus, Hieronymus, say it continued till their time, it is uncertain, Marlorat.

QUEST. VII. How the tenth month is to be accounted.

Vers. 5. THe waters were going and decreasing till the tenth month, &c. This cannot be the tenth month from the beginning of the flood, as Cajetan thinketh: for seeing there was one month, and 16. days of the second month past before the flood came: by this reckoning this first day of the tenth month, when the tops of the mountains began to appear should be the seventeenth day of the eleventh month: which cannot be, seeing after this, Moses accounteth 40. days. verse. 6. and thrice seven days, according to the thrice sending of the Dove, verse. 10.12. which are in all sixty days, which make two months before the beginning of the six hundred and one year, verse. 14. But there should only remain after Cajetanes computation a month and a half, about forty five days. Wherefore this tenth month is to be accounted from the beginning of the year, and not of the flood.

QUEST. VIII. How much water the Ark drew.

COncerning the depth of water, which the Ark is supposed to have drawn. 1. I neither think that it went so small a depth in water, not above two or three cubits, as Ramban, whom Mercerus followeth: for the burden of the ship was great, and must cause it to sink down deeper: neither need we fear with Ramban, if the water took up the third part of the Ark, it being a flat bottomed vessel, lest it might have been drowned: for who knoweth not, but that such vessels may be loaden within a third part of the brim, and yet not sink. 2. Hugo thinketh it drew nine cubits, wherein he followeth Rasi, another Rabbin. 3. Lyranus maketh it to draw thirteen cubits, but that is too much: fo • the Ark floating but two cubits from the tops of the mountains, might be in danger of dashing against the ground. 4. I subscribe rather to R. Sel. that the Ark did sink an eleven cubits: so that it was lifted up four cubits from the tops of the hills, which was a sufficient distance.

QUEST. IX. Whether all the days of the year of the flood are summed by Moses.

Vers. 6. AFter the end of 40. days, &c. Cajetan thinketh, that all the days of this year, wherein the flood prevailed, are numbered by Moses: as first 46. days before the flood came: 40. days, wherein the rain fell: 150. days, while the waters prevailed: then 70. days from the 17. of the seventh month, to the first of the tenth month: then 40. days here mentioned: and lastly, 14. days spoken of, verse. 10.12. when the Dove was twice sent forth: which in all make 300. days: for in the year of the flood, there were just so many days: and whereas there is in every year, five days and a quarter above that number, of ancient time they used to every sixth year to put in mensem intercalarem, an odd month to make up the number: sic Cajetan. First Cajetan erreth in the reckoning of the days: 1. The forty days wherein the rain fell, are part of the 150. days, wherein the water prevailed, as I have shown before: 2. after the forty days meant •• ned, chap. 8.6. there are not twice but thrice seven days to be accounted, according to the thrice sending of the Dove, as it may appear, verse: 10. Secondly, concerning the Hebrew computation, for the days of the year, whereas the Egyptians Grecians, and Romans, used three divers accounts for the days and months: for the first, in the end of the year beside the twelve months added five days, and every fourth year they put in a day more, as we use to do in our leap year, as witnesseth Macrobius: the Greeks counted precisely but 360. days to a year, but then they every third year put in a month, as Herodotus testifieth: the Romans so divided the months of the year, giving to some 31. days, that they together made up the whole number of 365. days, it is most like, that the Hebrews followed the ancient Calender of the Egyptians, making their year even with the course of the Sun, saving that they had also their leap year, and so doth Moses here: and thus thinketh Ibn Ezra, though other Hebrews are of opinion, that there are ten days above a year added, to make it equal with the course of the Sun. Wherefore he numbereth not all the days of the year, (for from the first of the tenth month, to the first of the first month of the next year, are 90. days, whereas there are but 40. and thrice seven days spoken of) but only those days are registered, wherein something fell out of special note and remembrance.

QUEST. X. Whether Noah opened the door or window, and wherefore.

Vers. 6. NOah opened the window of the Ark which he made. ] 1. This was neither the door of the Ark, as some Greek copies read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which signifieth a door: as Chrysost. hom. 27. in Gen. for the door could not be opened without danger. 2. Neither as Cajetan thinketh, was this another window, beside that mentioned in the description of the Ark, because there the word ( • zohar) is used, which signifieth a light, here the word (chalon) which is a window: for it is no unwonted thing in Scripture, to express one thing by divers names. 3. Neither, as Oleaster conjectureth, did Noah beside the window, make a cleft or rift in the ship to look out: for that had been dangerous, in respect of the rage and violence of the water. 4. Neither doth Noah send out, rather than look forth himself, either for fear to behold the terrible waters, as Chrysostom, for his heart was not so timorous; or for that the window was too little for him to look out, as Tostatus thinketh: but because the fowls sent forth could give notice by their return of the remote places, which Noah could not so easily see, Perer. 5. Now whereas the tops of the mountains are said to be seen, verse. 5. before Noah opened the window, the question is, of whom they were seen: for besides Noah and those which were in the Ark, there was nobody to see them: the answer is, 1. that Noah might have opened the window before, though it be not expressed: as many things beside are not, which Noah is supposed to have done in the Ark: 2. Or it is so said, because the tops of the hills were to be seen, though no man saw them. 3. Likewise Noah might know it by revelation, as he did other things: as that the waters were 15. cubits above the hills, which no man could know but from God, Mercer.

QUEST. XI. Of the coming and going of the Raven.

Vers. 7. HE sent out a Raven. ] The Hebrews text hath, which went and came, the Septuagint and Latin, which went and came not, and so many of the Fathers do read. 1. It is here no wise to be admitted, that the Hebrew text is corrupted: for neither could the Jews conspire altogether to corrupt the Scriptures, but their falsehood would have been spied: neither doth this place make anything for the Jews against us, and therefore they had no cause to corrupt it: and beside it is well known, that the Jews are most careful to preserve the Scriptures, having all the words in tale, that are used in the text, and how often every letter of the Alphabet is found in the Scripture. 2. We also refuse their conjectures, who to justify this erroneous reading, would have the Septuagint and Latin to keep the sense, though not the words: as now the Crow is said not to return, because he came not again into the Ark, bur only rested upon it: or for that he returned without giving notice of that, wherefore he was sent, as the Dove did,