Commentary on Genesis and Exodus

QUEST. XLII. Whether the Israelites asked to borrow of the Egyptians their jewels.

Vers. 35. ANd they asked of the Egyptians, jewels of silver. The first question here, is, whether the Israelites did ask to borrow these things, and in so doing how they can be excused from lying, seeing they did not restore them again. 1. One answer is, that God only commanded the Israelites to ask these things of the Egyptians, but the manner to ask to borrow, was not prescribed them, yet they were permitted so to do: so Augustine: Fortasse secundùm voluntates suas magis permissi sunt ista facere quàm jussi: It may be, that according to their own minds, they were rather suffered thus to do, than commanded. And so sometime in the Scripture, a thing is said to be bid to be done, which is only permitted: as Christ said unto Judas, What thou doest, do quickly: John. 13. which was no commandment or bidding of him to do it, but a permission only, and giving of way to his working: Perer. But this answer is not fit in this place, for the Israelites do here no other thing than Moses bad them, They did according to the saying of Moses, verse. 35. and Moses said none other thing than God commanded him, chap. 11.2. To speak to the people that everyone require or ask of his neighbor, &c. they were not bid then to do one thing, and they did another: and to what end should they ask to borrow, being simply bidden to ask? for they needed not to doubt to have their asking, seeing God gave them favor in the eyes of the Egyptians.

2. Another answer is, that they did but ask to borrow, but afterward when the Egyptians brake their faith and pursued after the Hebrews, they did not think themselves bound to restore them. Perer. But it is evident, that the Israelites when they carried these things out of Egypt, had no mind to restore them again, for the text saith that even then, when they went out, before the Egyptians set forward after them, they spoiled the Egyptians, verse. 36.

3. Some answer, that the Israelites craving these things to borrow them for the service of God, and to use in their sacrifices, lied not, for afterward a great part of them was converted to the use of the Tabernacle. Calvin. But yet this excuseth not their pretence of borrowing, for howsoever after they were employed, they brake their promise in withholding them still, and not restoring them.

4. Some say further, that in their borrowing this condition must be understood, that they would restore them at their return, now seeing they returned not, (most of the Egyptians being drowned in the red sea, to whom they should have restored them) they were freed of their promise. Simler. But all this helpeth not the matter, for if they promised to restore them at their return, and never purposed or thought to come again into Egypt, as they did, then was it a fraud in them: neither is it like, that all those Egyptians of the meaner sort, of whom they borrowed, perished in the sea, and though all had there died, yet they had children or friends remaining to whom they might have made restitution.

5. Ferus thinketh that they did not borrow them at that very instant of their departure, but had asked them before, for it is not like that they would have lent them at their going away. But there need no question be made of the Egyptians willingness to lend them, seeing the text saith that God gave the people favor; now if they had borrowed them before, which is not like, yet at their going away not to restore them, had been no faithful dealing.

6. Therefore to put this matter out of doubt, the Israelites did not ask to borrow of the Egyptians, but simply asked of them to give such things as they required: for both the word here used, shaal, signifieth to ask: not to borrow, or to ask to borrow: and beside whereas the Egyptians, as most do translate, commodabant eis, are said to have lent unto them: yet the word properly signifieth petitum dare, to give the thing asked, as Vatab. or petentibus dare, to give to them that ask: Iun. And the same word is used, 1. Sam. 1.18. where Anna saith she had given or lent Samuel unto God: she did not give him, to require him again, but absolutely bequeathed him unto God during his life Piscator. And so here the Egyptians do frankly give unto the Hebrews those things which they demanded.

And say that the Egyptians did purpose but to lend them, yet the Israelites did simply ask them, and they upon their asking gave them. Perer. Beside, whereas it is said, that the Lord gave them favor, this special grace and favor which the Lord wrought for them, is rather seen in frank gifts than in loanes.

QUEST. XLIII. Whether the Israelites did any wrong in spoiling the Egyptians of their jewels.

Vers. 36. SO they spoiled the Egyptians. That the Israelites did no wrong unto the Hebrews, in carrying away their ornaments and jewels, now it shall be made manifest.

1. Josephus thinketh that the Egyptians did voluntarily give these things unto the Israelites unasked, honorabant Hebraeos donis, they did honor the Hebrews with these gifts, Some to hasten them to be gone, some because of their acquaintance and neighbourhood. But the words of Scripture both in this place, and before chap. 3. and chap. 11. do show that the Israelites first required and asked them.

2. Tertullian lib. 2. contra Marcion. maketh mention of a certain tradition, that after the Hebrews were gone over the red sea, the Egyptians sent messengers to the Hebrews, to require of them their jewels and ornaments, which they had lent them: And that Moses with the Elders of Israel returned this answer, that they would so do, so that the Egyptians would pay and recompense them for all their labor and service in their brick-works, in building of them houses and Cities: whereupon the Egyptians casting up their account, and finding that their wages, at a very mean rate, would far exceed the value of their jewels, were contented that the Hebrews should enjoy them. Now if this were so, then the equity of this fact will easily appear: but because this tradition is uncertain, neither is there thereof any mention made in Scripture, it is not to be stood upon, a better satisfaction may be found out.

3. Therefore first of all: this is sufficient to excuse the Israelites▪ that they did herein as they were commanded: and whatsoever the Lord biddeth it is no sin to do, nay it is sin not to do it, as Augustine well saith, Quod sane faciendo Moses us{que} adeo non peccavit, ut non faciendo peccaret: Moses in doing so was so far from sinning, that in not doing of it he had sinned: thus also answer Calvin. Simler. Iun. with others.

4. But the equity of this fact may further be evident, though it sufficeth only to stand upon God's will, which is always just, Et rectissimum est quicquid facit, and it is most right whatsoever he doth: Calvin. or willeth to be done: yet divers other reasons may be yielded, to justify this fact of the Israelites: beside, I say the authority of the Lord in commanding, which excuseth the Israelites, who were bound to be obedient in whatsoever was commanded: as Augustine showeth by this example; like as in a commonwealth the minister or executioner of the Judge in putting him to death that is adjudged to die, offendeth not, who if he should do it of himself were a man-slayer: so, saith he, Deo jubenti ministerium prabuerunt: they did but yield their service and ministry to the commandment of God. Beside this justification, other reasons may be alleged, both on God's behalf and on the people's.

First on God's behalf: 1. He is the supreme and chief Lord of all, and may by his imperial right not only give the substance of one to another, but remove and dispossess Kings, and transpose Kingdoms from one to another. Simler. And therefore as Calvin saith: Quae Deo placuit ad suos transferri, aliena censeri non debent: What God thinketh good to convey over unto his, are not to be counted as belonging to another. 2. The Egyptians abused their gold and other jewels, in serving their idols therewith: and so as Augustine saith, Dei creatura male utentes ad Creatoris injuriam: they wickedly abused the creature to the wrong of the Creator: and therefore the Lord might most justly deprive them of that which they abused to his dishonor. 3. Their intolerable contumacy and disobedience in refusing so often to obey the Lord's commandment, to let his people go, deserved no less, than that they should be punished with the loss of their precious substance: seeing the Lord for the like stubbornness and obstinacy of the Canaanites, dispossessed them of their country, and gave it to the Israelites. Perer.

Secondly, in respect of the Israelites, these reasons also may be rendered: 1. The Israelites might detain these things, which the Egyptians gave them as their wages, for their long labor and service in Egypt, as it is said, Wisdom. 10.17. she gave the Saints the reward of their labors: and as Philo further amplifieth: Nec par est jactura libertatis & pecuniae; there is not the like reason of the loss of liberty, and the loss of money: the Israelites lost their liberty, the Egyptians lost but part of their substance. So the Lord promiseth unto Nebuchadnezzar, Egypt, for the wages of his army, for the service they did in subduing of Tyrus, Ezech. 29.18. Thus Israel had the substance of the Egyptians given them for their service. Iun. 2. Beside the labor and toile of the Israelites in Egypt, they were most cruelly oppressed, their children most pitifully slain and murdered, therefore this was instead of some recompense and satisfaction made for the wrongs which they had done them. Perer.

3. Philo addeth this reason also, Vt in bello victores victos bonis spoli • v • rant, as being conquerors in battle they spoiled their enemies of their substance: for they were as conquerors of the Egyptians, not by stroke of battle, but by the stroke of the Lord's hand, in these mighty miracles plagues and judgments, whereby the stout and stubborn heart of Pharaoh was subdued. Simler.

4. Irenaeus saith further: Debitores erant Hebraeis non solùm rerum, s • d & vitae suae, propter patriarchae Ios • phi praecedentem benignitatem: They were debtors to the Hebrews, not only of their substance, but of their life also, for the former kindness and goodness of the patriarch Joseph shown unto them: who delivered the Egyptians and their land from perishing by famine, and governed the country 80. years in all justice, peace and tranquility.

5. But the best reason on the behalf of the Israelites is, that the Egyptians did voluntarily give them these things as a redemption of their lives, and did wage them thereby to be gone, as Josephus saith, they gave them these things, quo celeriùs discederent, to hasten their departure the sooner: this also may be gathered out of the text, chap. 11.8. and 12, 13. Iun.

QUEST. XLIV. When the Israelites asked the jewels, before the last plague or after.

ANother question is, when the Israelites asked these jewels of the Egyptians, at the very instant of their departure, or before: 1. Augustine, and Cajetan consenting with him, Ferus, Pererius, all these are of opinion that this was done before the last plague of the first borne; Augustine's reason is this, Quomodo fieri posset, ut in tanto luctu, ex mortibus suorum commodarent ista filiis Israel? How could it be that in so great heaviness for the death of their children they would lend these things to the Israeli • es? quaest. 45. in Exod. But this might be a reason to make them willing to let them have what they desired to be rid of them, for they were afraid all of them of their lives, if the Israelites had stayed still, for they said, we die all. verse. 33.

Cajetan would gather that they had borrowed these things before, (and the Egyptians through grief forgetting to demand them again, the Israelites also being in haste carried them away) because it is said they spoiled the Egyptians, that is, by carrying away the things, which they had formerly borrowed. But these words rather make against him, for in that the Israelites are said then at their going away to have spoiled the Egyptians, it showeth, that then they received the things of them, whereof they spoiled them, for otherwise they had spoiled them before, when they received the things, not purposing to restore them again.

Ferus reason is, because it is not like they would lend the Israelites their jewels, at their going away. But this doubt is removed, because the text saith, That God gave them favor in the sight of the Egyptians, neither did the Israelites borrow these things, but they simply asked them, and the other frankly gave them.

Pererius thinketh, that the Israelites asked these things between the ninth and the tenth plague, because when there was one plague yet behind, the Lord bad Moses to speak to the people to ask of the Egyptians, chap. 11.2. But in that place only it is shown what the Lord commanded Moses to do; he spake to the people then to do it, but it was not acted then: as likewise in the same place, mention is made how the Lord would go forth at midnight and smite all the first borne, which was not done then, but afterward.

2. Wherefore I rather think with Calvin and Junius, that the Israelites asked these things of the Egyptians after the last plague, immediately before their departure: the reasons are these: 1. The Egyptians seeing their first borne slain, were afraid of their own lives, and therefore in respect thereof they regarded not their substance: Tanquam si hoc pretio animas redemissent: As if they had redeemed their lives with this price: Iun. And as Calvin: Hinc clamor ill desperationis index, omnes mortui sumus, hinc facilitas illa in dando supellectile: Hence came that desperate cry, we are all dead men: hence that facility in giving their house-hold stuff.

2. That this asking of the Egyptians came after all the plagues it is shown chap. 3.20. I will smite Egypt with all my wonders, &c. after that shall he let them go: then it followeth in the next verse, I will make this people to be favored of the Egyptians, &c. for every man shall ask of his neighbor &c.

3. The text saith that they shall put the jewels and raiment upon their sons and their daughters: that is, shall load them with them and lay them upon their shoulders: it is like then they were upon going, when they made their burdens.

4. If they had asked them before, it had been only to borrow them, not to have them of gift; but it is shown already that they did not borrow them, quest. 42.

5. They had no color to borrow their jewels and costly raiment before, for they asked them to set forth the service of God which was upon their going, for Pharaoh said, Go serve the Lord, as ye have said, verse. 31.

QUEST. XLV. What kind of favor it was which the Lord gave the Israelites in the sight of the Egyptians.

Vers. 36. ANd the Lord gave the people favor, &c. 1. Some think that this favor was by reason of some supernatural grace, and amiable quality, which was given unto the Israelites whereby the Egyptians were allured unto their love, as the book of Judith saith, was given unto Judith, an extraordinary comeliness whereby she was commended to all that saw her, Judith chap. 10.

2. Another opinion is, that this favor was wrought rather in the hearts of the Egyptians toward the Israelites, that the Lord who overruleth men's hearts did incline the affections of the Egyptians toward his people: and this is the truer opinion: as both may appear by the use of the same phrase elsewhere: as it is said, that Joseph found favor in his masters sight, Gen. 39.3. which was not caused so much by Joseph's amiable person, as by the working of his masters affection: for the reason is there shown of this favor: his master saw that the Lord was with Joseph: so that the cause of this favor was not the external object of Joseph's person, but the internal effect of his masters affection: likewise this is evident by the contrary, for as it is said, He turned their hearts to hate his people, Psalm. 105.25. so their hearts were turned again to love and favor his people.

3. Yet was it not such favor as Cajetan supposeth, that the Egyptians prevented the people's asking, and forced them to ask, as he would infer upon the signification of the word Vajashilum, which in hiphil, he saith, signifieth to cause or compel to ask. But neither is the word so taken in hiphil, but rather signifieth to lend, or give one his asking: as Anna using the same word, 1. Sam. 1.28. saith, she had given or lent her son unto the Lord, where hishilti in hiphil cannot be translated, She had caused the Lord to ask. And beside, what needed that circumstance, for the Egyptians to have forced the Israelites to ask, and then to have given them their asking? they might at once have given them unasked.

4. Neither was this a work of regeneration of the Egyptians, whereby they suddenly of wolves became lambes, as Master Calvin very well noteth, but it was a special work of God's power only at this time, thus to sway their affections, for they were soon changed again when they pursued the Israelites with all hostility.

5. And although this inclining of the Egyptians hearts and bending of their affections was God's special work: yet it pleased the Lord to use some subordinate means to procure it, and give occasion thereof, as namely these two: the one was the great reputation and estimation which Moses was in both with Pharaoh and with his people, which reason is yielded of this favor, chap. 11.3 Calvin. The other because the Egyptians by the death of their first borne, were in such perplexity and fear, that they were glad to give them anything to redeem their lives: Thostatus. So it is said in the Psalm. 105.38. Egypt was glad at their departure.

QUEST. XLVI. Why the Lord enriched his people with the Egyptians substance.

NOW the reasons wherefore the Lord gave the Israelites such favor, and thereby enriched them were these:

1. To accomplish the promise made to Abraham, Gen. 15.14. That the people should come out with great substance: Osiander.

2. For the comfort of the Israelites, whom the Egyptians before had stripped of that they had, and divers ways oppressed: now some amends is made them, by possessing the precious jewels of the Egyptians. Ferus.

3. As also by this means, the Egyptians were animated to pursue and follow after the Israelites to their own confusion and destruction. Ferus.

4. And hereby the Israelites were furnished with many rich ornaments, which afterwards served for the adorning and beautifying of the Tabernacle. Ferus.

QUEST. XLVII. Of which Egyptians they asked, and who of the Israelites and what.

Vers. 35. THey asked of the Egyptians. 1. These were not the Egyptians inhabiting out of the land of Goshen, as some think: because it is like if any had inhabited among the Israelites, they should have been exempted from the plagues of Egypt which is not to be thought. But this followeth not, for such plagues as befell either the persons of the Egyptians, or their proper substance might as well be laid upon the Egyptians dwelling among the Israelites, as upon others, as is shown before, quest. 33. in 7▪ chap. And that these Egyptians of whom the Israelites asked these things were such as cohabited among them, it is evident, both because everyone is bidden to ask of his neighbor, chap. 11.2. and for that they being in haste could not upon the instant of their departure go far to fetch anything. 2. Neither yet is Oleasters opinion probable, that few of the Israelites had their proper and several houses and dwellings, but most of them were servants in the Egyptians houses, as the Saracens and Mores are in Spain, and so they asked jewels of their mistresses, as the use is in Spain in their festivals, to attire themselves with jewels and other ornaments: and so Oleaster would expound these words ( chap. 3.22. Every woman shall ask of her neighbor, and of the stranger or sojourner of her house ) of her, in whose house she was a stranger, not of the stranger in her house. Contra. 1. It is not unlike but that many Hebrew men and women were servants with the Egyptians, and that they also had favor with their masters and mistresses: but that most of them had their proper houses, it may thus appear, both because it is said, Gen. 47.27. that they dwelt in Goshen and had their possessions there: and beside, whereas they were commanded to take a lamb for every house, this could not have been done conveniently in the Egyptians houses, that would not have suffered them to kill a lamb or goat for sacrifice, which thing they abhorred: and to what purpose served that note of distinction to mark their houses with blood, if the Israelites and Egyptians had for the most part cohabited together in one house? 2. The word gerah, sojourner of her house, may be either taken for the neighbor or dweller next the house, as the Chaldee Paraphrast, and as Augustine taketh it for cohabitation, not in the same house, but in the same place, quest. 39. in Exod. or else it may be taken for cohabitation in the same house, as the Septuagint read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , shall ask of the cohabiter in the house: as the word is taken for an inhabitant, Job. 28.4. So that they had two sort of neighbors to ask of, either they which dwelt in the next houses, or that sojourned with them in the same house. But it cannot be understood of the Hebrews sojourners and servants in the Egyptian houses, for mention is made of their sons and daughters, whom they should put their jewels upon: it is not like that being servants, they had sons and daughters borne in the Egyptians houses.

3. Therefore the Egyptians, of whom the Israelites asked these Jewels, were their neighbors chiefly, and acquaintance, as they are called by the name of reagh, a companion, a friend: yet other Egyptians also might give them, to hasten them away, as Josephus showeth, that the Egyptians bestowed upon them for these two reasons: Alii quo celerius discederent, alii propter vicinitatis consuetudinem: Some that they might be gone the sooner, other because of their neighbourhood and acquaintance.

4. As they were the Egyptians their neighbors, whom they chiefly asked of, so, they that asked were both men and women, chap. 11.2. but the women are only mentioned chap. 3.22. because the Jewels and ornaments which they asked specially belonged to the care of women: Simler.

5. And though jewels of silver and gold, and raiment only be mentioned, yet they had other precious things beside, as scarlet, purple, silk, fine linen, precious stones: for whence else should the Israelites have those things which afterward they bestowed upon the Tabernacle? Simler. And they received these precious things in such abundance of the Egyptians, that they did put them upon their sons and daughters: that is, not only adorn them therewith, but loaded them: Calvin.

QUEST. XLVIII. Of the mystical application of the Israelites spoiling of the Egyptians.

NOw for the mystical sense and spiritual application of this enriching of the people of God with the ornaments of Egypt. 1. Augustine understandeth it of the liberal arts, and commendable human sciences which were invented by the heathen, but taken from them as the spoil of Egypt, and converted to the true service of God, and the setting forth of Christian religion. The idolatrous and superstitious inventions of the heathen, he resembleth to the lumber, and cumbersome things of Egypt, which the Israelites did not meddle with; the Arts and Sciences to the jewels and ornaments which were conveyed over from the superstitious Egyptians to the people of God. As he giveth instance, of Lactan • iu • , V • ctorinus, Hilarius ; and before them, of Cyprian, Quanto auro & arge • to & vest suffarcinatus exierit ex Egypto? With how much gold and silver and raiment was he loden when he came out of Egypt? that is, when he was converted from Paganism to the Christian faith. 2 This Porphyrius, as Eusebius writeth, objected against Origen, that he borrowed of them, to set forth the fables of his religion, as he impiously calleth them: Graecorum doctrinam ad peregrinas & commentitias Iud • orum fabulas confirmand •• tanquam subsidium sibi comparavit: He took as an help unto him▪ the learning of the Grecians, to confirm the strange devised fables of the Jews. As he showeth how he was conversant in the writings of Plato, Numenius▪ Chronius, Apollophanes, Longinus, Mod • ratu • : that of Nicomachus, and other Pythagoreans, of Chere ••• , the Stoike, and Cor •• tus, he learned to allegorize. Thus he imputeth that to Origen as a fault, which shown his great learning and wisdom, that knew how to grace the Christian faith even with the ornaments of such as were adversaries unto it. 3. Hereupon • ul • an the Apostate knowing what a benefit unto the Christian religion, the liberal Arts and Sciences did bring, seeing that by cruelty the Gospel of Christ could not be suppressed, did by this subtle practice seek to hinder it: Sancivit legem (as Socrates writeth, ne Christiani literis h • manioribus ins •• tuerentur: he made a law that no Christians should be instructed in human arts: and his reason was, that they should not be able by the help of Logic or other human learning to defend their faith. 4. Thus we see at this day, that whereas the Heathen were the first inventers almost of all human arts: as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, of Philosophy; Euclides, Archimedes, Ptolomaeus, of the Mathematikes; Isocrates, Demosthenes, Cicero ▪ of Rhetoric; Homer, Pindarus, Virgil ▪ o • Poetry; Herodotus Thucydi • es, Livi • s, of Histories; now none of these professions are to be found among the Pagans and Infidels, but they flourish only among Christians. The learned books and writings of • ustinus Mar • yr, Tertull • an, Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Arnobius, Lactantius, Cyprian, Jerome, Augustine, with the rest do evidently show how the spoils of Egypt are now possessed only by the people of God. 5. And not only these learned Fathers, and teachers of the Church, have made use of the Egyptian ornaments, but even the holy Prophets also and Apostles have taken of those spoils, as Moses was instructed in all the Egyptian learning: And so was Daniel in the wisdom of the Chaldeans: S. Paul in his Epistles citeth the saying of Aratus, Epimenides, and Menander: Perer.

QUEST. XLIX. Of the number of the Israelites that went up out of Egypt.

Vers. 37. ABout six hundred thousand men of foot. 1. Because the Latin translator readeth fere, almost six hundred thousand, Pererius thinketh that there wanted some of this number: But that is not like: for seeing within one year, they were numbered to six hundred thousand, three thousand, five hundred and fifty men, Exod. 38.26. it is like that at their coming out of Egypt, they were not under that number. 2. Neither yet do I consent unto Thostatus, who thinketh there were about 635000. and odd: for he to justify this number, allegeth the corrupt Latin text, which readeth, Exod. 32.28. that there fell of the people, which were slain of the Levites, viginti tria millia, three and twenty thousand (which number he would have added to this sum here set down:) whereas in the original mention is made only of three thousand; and so also the Chaldee and Septuag. read: and it must be admitted for a great oversight in the Latin interpreter to read three and twenty thousand, for three thousand: to say that Jerome followed the true Hebrew coppy, which might since be corrupted, and that the Latin is in many places more perfect now than the Hebrew, as Thostatus allegeth, is to ground an uncertain conceit upon mere imaginations and supposals: for is it not like that the Hebrew Scriptures should be kept freer from corruption, than the Latin, seeing that the Jews, which are otherwise adversaries to the Christian faith, have been most diligent keepers of the Old Testament? and if this be admitted, that the fountains are corrupt and impure, there will be no certainty of the Scriptures. And further, that place of the Apostle, 1. Cor. 10.8. That there fell in one day, three and twenty thousand, doth not help Thostatus: for there the Apostle speaketh of those that were slain for the fornication committed with the daughters of the Midianites at Baal Peor, Numb. 25. where though the number agree not in show with the Apostles account; for Moses maketh mention of 24. thousand, the Apostle nameth 23. thousand, the right solution is, not to say with Thom. Aquin. that it is the fault of the writer, or with Lyranus and Cajetan, that the number of 24. thousand includeth also 23. thousand, as the greater number containeth the less: but the Apostle only comprehendeth those, which were slain with the sword, whereas Moses putteth together not only them, but those also of the chief which were commanded to be hanged, which might be about a thousand: Iun. 3. Therefore I think rather with Josephus, that there were full out 600. thousand not fewer, but rather more, for as Thostatus therein well collecteth, there were numbered not long after, within a year and 14. days in the first day of the second month, 603550. men of war from 20. years and upward, Numb. 1.46. in which number the Levites were not counted, who from 30. year old to 50. year made 8580. Numb. 5.48. 4. This number also is only of these which were fit for war as appeareth in the sums of the people taken afterwards, Exod. 38.26. and Numb. 1. so that the women and children are excepted out of this number. Now according to the common estimate, they that are fit for war in any country, are as two first partes of the whole, as forty is to an hundred, then • y this proportion as 40. is to an 100. so six is to fifteen; there being then 600. thousand fighting men, the whole sum comprehending women and children will amount to 1500. thousand: beside the great numbers of other people, and strangers among them, which might make the whole number above 2000. thousand. 5. Herein appeareth the wonderful blessing of God, in increasing seventy persons to such a multitude in the space of 215. years: for so long was it and no longer from the coming down of Jacob into Egypt, unto their going out. And thus the Lord made good his word unto Jacob: I will there make of thee a great nation, Gen. 46.3. Iun. 6. And further, as God herein abundantly shown his mercy, in so greatly multiplying the Israelites, so his justice and severity appeared, that of all this great multitude, which came out of Egypt, only two of them, Caleb and Joshua entered into the land of Canaan, all the rest, because of their idolatry and disobedience, died in the wilderness, as the Lord threatened them, Numb 14. 7. Hence also appeareth the error of Manethon, and Cheremon, two ancient Writers, who affirmed, as Josephus reporteth, lib. 1. cont. Appionem, that the Israelites at their coming out of Egypt were but 250000. men, whereas they were six hundred thousand, as Moses here writeth.

QUEST. L. Of Rahmesis from whence the Israelites went.

Vers. 37. THen the children of Israel took their journey from Rahmesis to Succoth. 1. This Rahmesis • s the same which is mentioned Gen. 47.11. divers from that spoken of Exod. 1.11. For the first Rahmesis is with shevah under ain, the other Rahmesis with p • tach under ain ; and beside, the first is called the land of Rahmesis, the other the City of Rhamesis. Rahmesis then seemeth to be the name of the whole country from the which the Israelites went, not of a City, for one City could not contain such a multitude. Pelican: and whether that country were capable of them, is uncertain: it is like the Israelites were dispersed into some other parts of Egypt before, but hearing that they were shortly to go out of Egypt, they might gather into this country: the other Rahmesis seemeth to have been a chief City of this province: see before quest. 11. v. 1.

QUEST. LI. Of Succoth where the Israelites pitched their tents going out of Egypt.

TO Succoth. 1. This Succoth is a divers place from that which Jacob so called when he came out of M • sopotamia Gen. 33.17. Piscator. 2. Yet both that place and this have the same derivation of the name, so called of Boothes and Tents, which Jacob there, and the Israelites here pitched: as Levi • . 23.43. Iun 3. But this place is so named by anticipation, for it was not yet called Succoth, before the Israelites came thither; it afterward had that name given of the rearing of Tents and Tabernacles there: Piscator. 4. It is thought to be a part of the region Troglodytis by the red Sea: Simler. 5. Josephus calleth it La •• polis, where he saith Babylon was afterward built, when Cambyses invaded Egypt: Joseph. lib. 2. Antiq. cap. 5.

QUEST. LII. What this mingled company was that went out with the Israelites.

Vers. 37. ANd a great mingled company. 1. These were not like to come of those servants which Jacob might bring down with him into Egypt: for it is like the famine being so great, that Jacob had no great number of servants in his family, beside his children: as Abraham had who was able to army three hundred and eighteen persons of h • s own house, Gen. 14. Simler. 2. It is probable this mixed company consisted partly of Egyptians and other nations sojourning in Egypt, that were converted to their religion, partly of their servants: Calvin. 3. This mingling of divers other nations with the Lord's people, was a lively type and evident demonstration of the calling of the Gentiles: Borrh. Osiander. And beside, whereas this confused company seemed to consent with the Israelites in their religion, and come out of Egypt with them, yet were they not truly called: for they afterward fell a lusting and murmuring, Numb. 11. 4. This showeth that many are called to the outward society of the Church, but few are chosen. Ferus.

QUEST. LIII. What moved those divers sorts of people to go out of Egypt with Israel.

THis confused company came forth with the Israelites: 1. not so much because of the tyranny and oppression of the land, which being chiefly intended against the Israelites, might be grievous also unto others. Simlerus: nor yet being weary of Egypt, which now in a manner, of a fertile and pleasant country, became barren and desolate with the late plagues laid upon it. Calvin: as for that they being moved and prepared with those mighty wonders and miracles, which they saw in Egypt, were thereupon resolved to join themselves to the people of God: Iun. 2. And it need not seem strange that the Egyptians suffered so many to go out with Israel: for either they through fear and grief minded it not: or else these having a long time dwelled among the Israelites, and so skillful in their language, could hardly be discerned from the Hebrews. Perer.

QUEST. LIV. Whether the Israelites went out of Egypt in the evening, in the night, or in the morning.

Vers. 42. THis is a night to be diligently kept unto Jehovah, &c. 1. Sometime the Scripture seemeth to say, that the Israelites went out of Egypt in the night, as in this place: and Deut. 16.1. In the month of Abib, the Lord thy God brought thee out of Egypt by night: yet did they not go out in the very night, for they were charged that none should go forth of their doors till the morning, verse. 22. Cajetan thinketh, that Moses gave this charge, not then knowing what time would be spent in the slaughter of the first borne, nor at what hour the Israelites should be bid to go out: but afterward when the first borne were slain, and Pharaoh called to Moses in the night to be gone, and the Egyptians hastened them forward, then Moses gave the people liberty not only to go out of their houses, but to address themselves to depart out of Egypt. Con • r. 1. It is not like that Moses, when he gave that charge, was ignorant of the counsel of God: for the time was assigned when the Lord would smite the first borne, about midnight, which work the Lord would not be long about: neither is it to be thought, that Moses would reverse the first charge, neither is it safe so to imagine, the Scripture affirming no such thing. 2. Therefore Rupertus solution is rather to be received, that because the night was now spent, and it was toward day, when the Israelites set forward out of Egypt, therefore they were bid not to go forth of their houses until the morning.

2. Sometime the Scripture seemeth to affirm, that the Israelites went out of Egypt in the evening▪ about the Sun set, when they killed the Passover, as Deut. 16.6. There shalt thou offer the Passover a • even about the going down of the Sun, in the season that thou camest out of Egypt. But this could not be, that they departed in the evening, both because they were charged not to go out of their houses till the morning, and afterward about midnight the first borne were slain, till which time the Israelites were not dismissed by Pharaoh. And therefore the word (mogned) which signifieth an appointed time or season, is not to be restrained to that very instant of the killing of the Passover, but generally it betokeneth the time of their going out, and so comprehendeth the whole night, in the beginning whereof they eat the Passover, and in the end thereof they departed. Perer.

3. Therefore the truth is, that it was toward day, the night being well nye spent when the Israelites departed, as it is evident, Numb. 33 3. where it is said that they departed the morrow after the Passover, and in the sight of the Egyptians, and while they were burying of their dead, which it is like they did not before the day appeared. Beside, the order of the history showeth as much, for it was midnight before the first borne were slain, then there was a cry in Egypt, and, as Josephus writeth, they ran unto the Kings palace unto Pharaoh, and he called to Mos • s and Aaron, and the Egyptians then hastened them, and gave them their precious jewels, and they trussed them up and laid them upon their sons and daughters: while all this was in doing a great part of the night must needs be spent. Further, that the type and shadow may be answerable to the body: as our blessed Savior arose for our redemption out of the grave betimes in the morning, when it was yet dark, John. 20.1. before the Sun was risen, Mark. 16.2. so the Israelites did about the same time rise as it were out of the grave and prison of their servitude, and were redeemed about the same time. Pelican. Ferus.

4. Now how the Israeli • es could be ready themselves with their cattle and substance upon so short warning, Ios • phus well showeth, that Moses had before willed them to be in a readiness for their journey, and thereupon they were gathered as near as they could into one place. Perer.

QUEST. LV. Whether the Israelites dwelt in Egypt more than 430. years.

Vers. 40. SO the dwelling of the children of Israel while they dwelt in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years. First it will be questioned whether the Israelites dwelled no longer in Egypt than four hundred and thirty years, seeing the Lord said unto Abraham, Thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs four hundred years and shall serve them, Gen. 15.13. For if the Israelites were in servitude four hundred years, which time of their servitude began not until after Joseph's death, who lived after the coming of Israel into Egypt 71. years, being then 39. years old, and he lived in all an hundred and ten years, then the whole sum will make 471. But this doubt is easily removed: for that prophesy delivered unto Abraham concerning the hard usage of his seed, consisting of three branches, shall be a stranger in a land, and shall serve there, and be evil entreated, must be understood, conjuncte, not disjuncte, jointly together, and not sunderly: that they should not all that time be in servitude, but partly all that while sojourn, and partly be in servitude: Pererius. And so Augustine giveth the solution of this place: Non itaque, quod ajit, in servitutem redigent eos, &c. ad quadringentos annos referendum est, &c. In that it is said, they shall hold them in servitude, it must not be referred to the four hundred years: as though they kept them in servitude so many years, but the four hundred years must be referred to that which is said, thy seed shall be a stranger in a land not theirs. August. quaest. 47. in Exod.

QUEST. LVI. That the Israelites dwelt not 430. years in Egypt only.

SEcondly, it is not to be supposed that the Israelites dwelt in Egypt all this space of 430. years, which is the opinion of Genebrard, who thinketh that this term taketh beginning from the coming of Jacob into Egypt, and expireth with the time of their deliverance and departure thence; his reasons are these: 1. Because in this place it is so affirmed that the Israelites dwelt so long in Egypt. 2. As also, that it is not like that in the space of 215. years, which is the time according to the common opinion of their abode in Egypt, of seventy persons they could increase into so great a multitude.

Contra. 1. In this place a figurative speech must needs be admitted: for we must understand not only the time of Israel's sojourning in Egypt, but of their fathers also in the land of Canaan, as Augustine saith these words must be expounded: Manifestum est computandum esse tempus Patriarcharum Abrah • , &c. It is manifest that the time of the Patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, must be accounted when they began to sojourn in the land of Canaan: quaest. 47. in Exod. But of this more afterward. 2. Neither is it impossible or improbable, even without a miracle, for so many thousands in the space of 215. years, to be multiplied as is shown before at large quest. 5. in chap. 1. And Augustine giveth two reasons thereof: Si f • cunditas hominis consideretur, adjuvante illo, qui illos valde voluit multiplicari, reperietur non esse mirum: The fecundity of men considered, God also helping, who would have them exceedingly to increase, it will be found not to be strange.

Now that the Israelites could not continue 430. years in Egypt, these two arguments do evidently convince. 1. Whereas Caath was one of those which came with Jacob into Egypt, who lived 133. years, and his son Amram 137. years, and Moses his son was 80. year old at the departure of Israel out of Egypt; all these years put together make but 350. from which sum must be deducted, the years wherein they lived together. Genebrard answers, that their years are only reckoned after they begat children: and that some may be omitted that came between, as S. Matthew leaveth out in his genealogy three Kings, Ahaziah, Joash, and Amasiah. This answer of Genebrard may easily be taken away; for neither is it the use of Scripture, when it setteth down the years of a man's life, to name only the years when he begat children; and seeing in that line from Levi to Moses no other persons, are elsewhere named that came between beside Caath and Amram, it is a conjecture without ground to imagine any other. But the omission of these three in S. Matthews genealogy, is evident, because we find them elsewhere in the stories of the Kings to be set down: Perer.

2. S. Paul beginneth these 430. years from the promise and covenant that was made to Abraham, Galath. 3.17. Therefore Israel stayed not all those years in Egypt. Genebrard here answereth, that where the Apostle saith, the law which was 430. years after, this word after, is not referred to the covenant, but to the law that came 430. years after, that is, from the departure of the Israelites.

Contra. But this is a manifest wresting of the Apostles words, who of purpose maketh a comparison between the law and the covenant of grace, showing that salvation dependeth not of the law, but of the grace and promise of God, which came 430. years before. And whereas the Apostles words, in that order which he set them down are these: This I say that the covenant 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , confirmed afore of God, the Law made after four hundred and thirty years could not disannul: what other sense can be made of these words, but that the law was given so many years after the promise? for after must of necessity have relation to that which is said to have been before, which was not the departure of the Israelites, not here so much as mentioned, but the covenant said to be before ratified and confirmed of God. Pererius.

QUEST. LVII. The Israelites dwelt in Egypt 215. years only.

FUrther, that the Israelites neither stayed in Egypt under 200. years, as Chrysostom thinketh, nor yet 210. only, as the Hebrews, to whom Lyranus and Cajetan give consent, nor yet 230. years, as Calvin, but 215. years only, it may be thus made to appear:

First from the first promise made to Abraham, unto the going of Israel out of Egypt, are 430. years, according to the Apostles account: of this sum there were 215. years gone, before Jacob descended into Egypt: Abraham at 75. received the promise, 25. years after; when Abraham was 100. year old, was Isaac borne; he at 60. begat Jacob: Jacob at 130. went down into Egypt; these years put together, 25.60.130. make in all 215. years: there remaineth then the other half of the sum, 215. years more for the sojourning of Israel in Egypt: Thus Augustine reckoneth, approving Eusebius account, quaest. 47. in Exod.

Secondly, whereas the years of Coath, Amram and Moses, when Israel came out of Egypt, do make, as is before shown, all together 350. years: but from this sum must be subtracted the years wherein they lived together, as from Coaths age of 133. years, who at 65. years begat Amram, as Epiphanius thinketh, the residue, wherein he lived together with Amram, that is, 68. years, must be deducted: and from Amrams age of 137. who at 70. years begat Moses (as Epiphanius ) the residue must likewise be defaulked, which are 67. years: add unto these years 65. of Coath, and 70. years of Amram, 80. years of Moses life, and we shall have the said sum of 215. years, all the time of the sojourning of Israel in Egypt.

QUEST. LVIII. That the Israelites were not in bondage and servitude in Egypt all the foresaid term of 215. years.

THis being then made plain, that the Israelites after Jacob's coming down thither, continued in Egypt 215. years, yet were they not so long in servitude and bondage. 1. Augustine thinketh that they served in Egypt 144. or 145. years, for from the whole sum of 215. years he only deducteth 71. years of Joseph's life, after Israel came into Egypt, after whose death he thinketh their bondage immediately began. But that cannot be, for not only Joseph, but all his brethren also were first dead, Exod. 1.6. of the which Levi being about four year elder than Joseph, who died at 110. year, and Levi at 137. survived Joseph 23. years: all which time the Israelites were not oppressed with servitude. 2. Rupertus thinketh that the Israelites served 144. years after the death of Joseph, until the going forth of the Israelites, so recompensing tenfold the 14. years of Joseph's servitude in Egypt, who was 16. year old when he was sold into Egypt by his brethren, and there served till he was 30. year old. But Rupertus is in two things deceived, for Joseph was not sixteen, as the vulgar Latin corruptly readeth, but 17. year old when he was sold into Egypt, Gen. 37.2. so that he served but 13. years in Egypt, neither was the time of their servitude so long, as is shown before. 3. Some think that after Levi his death, who lived 23. year after Joseph, their affliction began, which continued 121. years. Neither can this be so, for not only Levi and the rest of Joseph's brethren, but all that generation also died before their servitude and affliction entered, of which generation Pharez being one, supposed to be one year old, when he went down with Jacob into Egypt, and to have lived 130. years according to the usual age then, it will be found that their affliction endured not an hundred years, if the age of Pharez being supposed to be 130. be deducted from the sum of 215. the full time of the Israelites sojourning in Egypt. See before quest. 12. in chap. 1. Exod.

QUEST. LIX. Moses understandeth all the time of the sojourning of Israel and of their fathers in Egypt and in Canaan.

NOw then for the right understanding of these words of Moses. 1. A double figure called Synecdoche is to be admitted, both in the persons, and in the place, a part being taken for the whole: for not only the sojourning of the Israelites, but of their fathers also, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob must be understood, and not only the sojourning in Egypt, but in Canaan also and other places: Thus the Septuagint very well interpret this place: The dwelling, which the children of Israel dwelt in Egypt, and in the land of Canaan, both they and their fathers, was 430. years: so also Augustine expoundeth it, quaest. 47. in Exod. and Josephus lib. 2. de Antiquit. Iudaic. cap. 6. 2. Eugubinus doth disdainfully reject this opinion, with this reason, that if it be taken for the time of their sojourning, not only in Egypt, but elsewhere, there will be found to be many more years. Contra. 1. It shall even now appear that in a precise and strict account, there are just so many years, from the first promise made unto Abraham, when he came out of Chaldea into Canaan, unto the return of Israel out of Egypt. 2. This figure Synecdoche, to name part for the whole, is not unusual in Scripture, as Gen. 35.26. all the sons of Jacob, Benjamin being also reckoned among them, are said to have been borne in Padan Aram, because most of them were there borne. Junius.

QUEST. LX. Why the dwelling only of Israel in Egypt is named, the rest being also understood.

THe reasons why their sojourning and dwelling in Egypt is only mentioned, the other being also understood, are these: 1. Lyranu • giveth this reason, because their dwelling in Egypt was the last, and things do commonly take their denomination from the end. 2. But these reasons rather may be yielded, first because their sojourning did not only end in Egypt, but there it began, for thither Abraham at his first coming into Canaan was constrained to flee in the time of famine, Gen. 12.2. there was the longest time of their sojourning, the other Patriarchs at divers times sojourned in Canaan 295. years, and Jacob in Mesopotamia 20. years, but in Egypt Israel continued 215. years. 3. Their habitation in Egypt was more famous than any of the rest, both for the honorable advancement of Joseph in Egypt, the wonderful multiplying and increase of the Israelites, and the strange signs and wonders there wrought for their deliverance. Perer.

Some question also there is, when this computation of 430. years should begin. 1. Epiphanius would have them begin, at such time as the Lord told Abraham what should befall his seed, and how hardly they should be entreated: so also Ferus, Pelican. But that cannot be, for both in that place the Lord nameth another sum of 400 years. And S. Paul counteth this space of 430. years from the promise made to Abraham, unto the giving of the Law.

QUEST. LXI. Where the 430. years must take beginning.

2. ZEiglerus in his Commentaries beginneth this term of 430. years from the tenth year after Abraham's coming into Canaan, when he saith the Lord made a covenant with him. But this computation cannot stand. 1. We do not find that Abraham received any promise about that time, but then, when he had been ten years in Canaan, Sarah gave unto him his maid Agar, Gen. 16.2. 2. Also by this account we shall want ten years of the whole sum of 430. from Abraham's 75. when he first came into Canaan, unto the 80. year of Moses when the Israelites went out, are just 430. years, as is shown before: if then this term should begin ten years after, in the 85. year of Abraham, we shall want ten years of 430.

3. Beside, Zeiglerus to make this computation good, committeth apparent errors in Chronology, as that Jacob went down into Egypt 207. years after the covenant, which was 215. years, and if it began 10. years after, as he reckoneth, then it could be but 205. years; further he saith, that Joseph died 285. years after the covenant, which cannot be after his own account, for Joseph lived 71. years after Jacob's descending into Egypt, being then 39. years old, which two sums of 71.39. make up the whole age of Joseph an 110. if then there were but 207. years gone after the covenant made at Jacob's coming into Egypt, then at Joseph's death 71. years after, there were but 278. years run, not 285. as he collecteth; here then he addeth 7. years too much to make his account agree. 3. Procopius, as Pererius collecteth, thinketh that the 430. years should begin at the birth of Isaac. But that cannot be, for from thence the other sum of 400. years taketh beginning.

4. Genebrard reckoneth them from the time of Jacob's going down into Egypt, whose opinion is refuted before, quest. 55.

5. Junius and Borrhaius account these 430. years from the departure of Abraham out of Vr of the Chaldes, from whence to the birth of Isaac were thirty years, and Junius supposed that he stayed 5. years in Haran. Contra. 1. It is not like that Abraham being called of God to go out of his country, would stay 5. years in Haran, but that he made all haste to obey the calling of God. 2. If the account of 430. years should begin 30. years before Isaac's birth, we shall have 435. years in all; for from the 75. year of Abraham, which was but 25. years before the birth of Isaac, until the time of Israel's departure out of Egypt, are just 430. years, as is shown before, quest. 56.

6. Wherefore the best computation of all is to begin the 430. year from the 75. year of Abraham's age when he came into the land of Canaan: both because, while he remained with his father and kindred in Haran, he could not be said to sojourn, or be a stranger: and for that, if we begin the account before the 75. year of Abraham's age, there will arise more than 430. years. Thus Josephus reckoneth these 430. years, Postquam Abraham in Canaan venit: After Abraham came into the land of Canaan: so also Eusebius: A septuagesimo quinto anno Abrahae us{que} ad egressum Hebraeorum ex Egypt • supputan • ur anni quadringenti triginta: From the seventy five year of Abraham, unto the going of the Hebrews out of Egypt, are counted four hundred thirty years ; and this computation Augustine followeth, quaest. 47. in Exod.

QUEST. LXII. When the term of 430 years ended.

AS we have seen where this term of 430. years must take beginning, so it is to be considered, when they were to determine and end. 1. Epiphanius hath here a singular conceit by himself, who extendeth these 430. years unto the time of the Israelites entering into the land of Canaan, as Pererius thus collecteth. Epiphanius terminat in eo tempore, quo terram promissionis intrarant: Epiphanius doth determine them at that time, when they entered into the land of promise. But this cannot be: for the Israelites continued 40. years in the desert, before they were admitted to the possession of Canaan: ( Epiphanius saith they were in the desert 50. years, but he is therein also deceived) if this term of 40. years be comprehended in the 430. years: it will follow that from Jacob's coming down into Egypt, until the Israelites return from thence, are not above 175. years, which were indeed 215. years, as is shown before, quest. 56. 2. Therefore these 430. years do determine and expire, at the very time of the Israelites departure out of Egypt, as Moses here saith: When the 430. years were expired, even the self same day departed all the hosts of the Lord out of the land of Egypt. And S. Paul also extendeth these years but unto the giving of the Law in mount Sinai, Gal. 3.17. Thus Eusebius, and Augustine following him, quaest. 47. in Exod. define these years; so also Iun. Simler. Osiander, Pererius, Ferus, with others.

QUEST. LXIII. How the term of 400. years foretold to Abraham and Moses sum of 430. years, do agree together.

NOw whereas the Lord telleth Abraham that his seed should be a stranger in a land not theirs, and be evil entreated 400. years, Gen. 15.13. and the same is repeated by S. Stephen, Acts 7.6. that sum of years very well agreeth with this number of 430. for this sum beginneth at Abraham's first coming into Canaan when he was 75. years old, 25. years before the birth of Isaac: for there the Lord speaketh of the sojourning and hard usage of his seed: and even then the first manifest affliction of Abraham's seed in Isaac began by Ishmael of Agar the Egyptian. 2. But from Isaac's birth unto the going down of Jacob into Egypt are in precise account 220. years, and so the whole time is 405. years from Isaac's birth unto the going out of Israel from Egypt: for if from Abraham's 75. year: there are 430. years from Abraham's 100. year when Isaac was borne, are 405. years: to make the sum even, the od 5. years are omitted: which thing is not unusual in Scripture: as in one place David is said to have reigned in Hebron 7. years, and 6. months, 2. Sam 5.5. in another place, the years of his reign in Hebron, are counted 7. year, even, and in Jerusalem 33. years▪ 40. year in all, 1. King. 2.11. the odd months are omitted. Augustine also hereof thus writeth: Non mirum si qua • ringentos & quinque annos sumae solidae quadringen • es voluit appellare scriptura, &c. No marvel if the Scripture call 405. years in one round sum 400. year which useth so to set down the times, that what is over or under the perf • ct number is not counted, quaest. 47. in Exod. Hence then both Lyranus and Cajetan are found to be in an error, who therein following some Hebrews, do account but 210. years for the time of the Israelites abode in Egypt, reckoning but 400. years strictly from Isaac's birth unto the departure of Israel out of Egypt. 3. But Procopius would thus reconcile these two sums, he would have both the 400. years and the 430. begin together, and that the Lord saith not, that after 400. years expired, the Israelites should return, but simply after 400. years, so that the other 30. years also may be included. M. Calvin also somewhat to the same effect saith, Restabant plures anni quàm quadringenti, nempe viginti, vel circiter: There remained more years than four hundred, as twenty or thereabout: but because the Lord purposed only to prepare them unto patience, he defineth not a certain number of years. But herein is their error, they would extend these 400. years beyond the time of their deliverance out of Egypt: whereas the Lord setting the end of this time saith: The nation whom they shall serve will I judge, and afterward shall they come 〈◊〉 with great substance, Gen. 15.14. then immediately after the expiration of these 400. years, the Israelites must come forth of the land of their bondage with great substance.

QUEST. LXIV. When the 400. years prefixed to Abraham must take their beginning.

NOw concerning the beginning of these 430. years, here cometh to be examined and discussed, a singular and private opinion of Zeiglerus, who beginneth the account of these 430. years, from the 10. year of Abraham's sojourning in Canaan, 15. years before the birth of Isaac, and he endeth them in the tenth year of Moses exile in the land of Midian, where he continued 40. years, when he saith the captivity of Israel should have ceased: but because Moses would have prevented the time, and delivered Israel ten years before, when he slew the Egyptian, the Lord did punish his presumption with 40. years exile, and deferred the deliverance of Israel 30. years longer, both to fulfill the 40. years of his penance, and because the Lord purposed to appoint no other Captain of his people, but Moses. Thus we read that the Lord hath observed this proportion and number of forty at other times, also for the time of penance, as the Israelites wandered 40. years in the wilderness: it rained 40. days upon the old world: 40. days are set for the repentance of Nineveh: sic Zeigler.

Contra. 1. This term of 400. years limited for the sojourning and servitude of Abraham's seed, cannot begin before Abraham had seed, and therefore not 15. years before the birth of Isaac. 2. God's purpose and determination altereth not, man's infirmity cannot make the counsel of God of none effect: therefore seeing the Lord, who foreseeth all things, did set unto Abraham this term of 400. years, • ee no doubt most faithfully kept his promise, and as he had decreed, so after 400. years expired he delivered his seed from their oppressors. 3. Moses act in killing the Egyptian was an act of faith, not of presumption: as both S. Stephen witnesseth, Acts 7.25. He supposed 〈◊〉 brethren would have understood, that God by his hand should give them deliverance: as also the Apostle to the Heb. 11.25. By faith Moses when he was come to age refused to be called the son of Pharaohs daughter, and chose rather to suffer adversity with the people of God: and again verse. 27. By faith he forsook Egypt, &c. If Moses then of faith shown himself to be the deliverer of his people, as when he killed the Egyptian, and cares not for the favor and honor of Pharaohs court, then was it not a presumptuous act, for the which he should be punished. 4. And how standeth it with God's justice to punish all the people of Israel with the captivity of 30. years longer for the sin and presumption of one man, if Moses had offended and trespassed therein? 5. Neither is that observation of forty perpetual: neither David for his sin, nor Peter for his denial of Christ, nor the incestuous young man among the Corinthians were enjoined any such time of penance: and Nebuchadnezzar's time of repentance far exceeded this proportion which continued seven years, Dan. 4.20. for true repentance is not measured by the number of days, but by the weight of the contrition and sorrow of heart: neither is it found in Scripture, that any one man had 40. days penance imposed upon him. There was another reason of the 40. years wandering of Israel in the desert: for according to the time wherein the spies searched the land, which was 40. days, they have a year set for a day for the punishment of the sin of the spies in raising a slander upon that good land (all but Caleb and Joshua ) and of the people in giving no credit unto them: see Numb. 14.34.

QUEST. LXV. The time of the Hebrews departure out of Egypt compared with the Chronology of the Heathen.

NOw in the last place it shall be declared how this time of the departing of Israel agreeth with the • orren computations, according to the Chronology of the Heathen. 1. They therefore observe five notable periods of times, from whence they use to make supputation of their years: from the monarchy of Ninus and Semiramis in Abraham's time: from the flood of Ogyges, and from Inachus, and Ph • r • neus, about the time of the Patriarke Jacob: from the battle of Troy, which fell out in Samson's days, or under Hel • the high Priest: from the beginning of the Olympiades which began in the 8. year of the reign of Ahaz: from the building of Rome in the 1. year of the seventh Olympiad, which concurreth with the 16. year of the reign of Hesekiah.

2. According then to these divers kinds of computations, there are also divers opinions concerning the time of Israel's departure out of Egypt. Apion the Gramarian a professed adversary to the Jews, against whom Josephus wrote two books, will have Moses to bring the Israelites out of Egypt, in the time of the seventh Olympiad when the City Carthage was built by the Tyrians in Africa: thus Josephus reporteth the opinion of Apion in his 2. book. But this to be apparently false Josephus showeth, proving that the Temple of Solomon was built 143. years before Carthage, and the Israelites came out of Egypt 480. years before that, 1. King. 6.1. so that their leaving of Egypt was above 600. years before the building of Carthage.

3. As Apion cometh far short in his computation, so Porphyrius goeth as much beyond: who in the fourth book of those which he wrote against the Christians, will have Moses to be before the times of Semiramis, which is a gross error: for it is without all question, that Abraham was borne under the monarchy of Ninus ▪ and from Abraham's birth until the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt are 505. years, whereof an 100. are counted from Abraham's birth to Isaac's: and 405. from thence unto Israel's redemption, as hath been shown.

4. Lactantius lib. 4. cap. 5. thinketh that Moses was 900. years before the battle of Troy: whereas it will be found, that he was only 356. years or thereabout elder than those times.

5. Manethon an ancient Writer of the Egyptian affairs maketh Moses more ancient by 393. years▪ than when Danaus went to Argos, that is, about a thousand years before the battle of Troy. But that cannot be, seeing the Trojan war is held to have been in the time of Sampson or Hel • , not above 356. years after the return of the Hebrews out of Egypt.

6. Some Christian Writers think that the Hebrews were delivered out of the Egyptian Captivity in the time of Ogyges flood, as Justinus Martyr, Clemens Alexandrinus, 1. lib. Stromatum Julian Africanus. But that is not like, for the same Julian African. by the testimony of divers Heathen Writers showeth that Ogyges flood was 1020. years before the beginning of the Olympiades. But from the departure of Israel out of Egypt, until the Olympiades began, which was in the 8. year of the reign of Ahaz, are counted but 760. year, or thereabout: so that Moses should be above two hundred and fifty years after Ogyges flood.

7. This is then the right computation, compared with the Chronology of the Heathen, that the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt was 356. year before the Trojan battle: and 764. years before the Olympiades: 788. years before the building of Rome: 910. years before the Captivity of Babylon: 980. years before the reign of Cyrus: 1200. years before Alexander the Great: 1496. years before Herod, under whose reign Christ was borne. And according to the sacred Chronology, this redemption of Israel from the Egyptian bondage was 2453. years after the creation of the world: 797. years after Noah's flood: 505. years after the death of the Patriarke: Joseph 480. years before the building of Solomon's Temple; and 1536. years before the birth of our blessed Lord and Savior Christ Jesus. Ex Perer.

1. Doct. How the Lord's holy days should be kept.

Vers. 16. IN the first day shall be an holy convocation. The word is mikra, which also signifieth reading: which showeth how holy and festival days ought to be spent, in assembling the people together, and in reading and preaching unto them the mercies and benefits of God: Pelican. And this was the use among the people of God, as S. Peter saith: Moses hath of old time, them that preach him in every City, seeing he is read in the Synagogues every Sabbath.

2. Doct. A particular application of our redemption by Christ's death needful.

Vers. 21. CHuse out of every of your households a lamb. God would as it were by a special application have every private house and family admonished of this singular benefit and mercy: Calvin: whereby we learn, that it sufficeth not only to have a general apprehension of our spiritual redemption, but a particular application is necessary: as the Israelites everyone in particular eating of the pascal lamb in their private families, had a proper and particular sense and feeling of the benefit, as they severally did eat and taste of the lamb. This particular application of the redemption of Christ, S Paul showeth, saying, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who hath loved me and given himself for me, Galath. 2.20.

3. Doct. How the pascal Lamb prefigured Christ.

Vers. 21.12. TAke a lamb and kill the passover &c. Take a bunch of hyssop and dip it in the blood, &c. Because Christ was prefigured in the pascal lamb, as is evident John. 9.36. 1. Cor. 5.7. the particular resemblances are to be considered, wherein the lamb prefigured Christ. 1. The lamb was without blemish, verse. 5. and Christ was without sin, and so the unspotted lamb, 1. Pet. 1.19. 2. The lamb must be killed; so Christ was sacrificed for us, 1. Cor. 5.7. 3. As the posts of the house must be sprinkled with the blood of the lamb; so our hearts must be dipped by faith in Christ's blood to deliver us from eternal death, as they were from a temporal, Heb. 12.24. 1. Pet. 1.2. 4. As the lamb was to be roasted with fire; so Christ did feel the wrath of his father for our sins, being made a curse for us, Galath. 3.13. 5. As they were to eat unleavened bread with the lamb; so we that eat Christ by faith must study for newness of life, 1. Cor. 7.8. 6. As they were to eat it with sower herbs▪ so we must frame ourselves to suffer affliction for the faith. 7. As the Lamb should be eaten whole, so we must receive the whole doctrine of Christ, omitting nothing, Heb. 1.1, 2, 3, 4. 8. As no stranger was to eat of the lamb, being uncircumcised, so no unbeliever can be partaker of Christ: Piscator.

4. Doct. Divers sorts of men in the visible Church.

Vers. 38. ANd a great multitude of sundry sorts of people went out with them. As among the Israelites there were many other people mingled, which were to have no part in the inheritance of Canaan: so there are many hypocrites and carnal men in the visible Church▪ which shall have no part in the Kingdom of God: for many be called but few are chosen. And as there were fewer companies in that great multitude: the first of those which were fighting men: the second, of weak persons, as women and children: the third, of strangers: the fourth, of their beasts and cattle: so in the Church of God there are, first, such as are strong in the faith: secondly, the weak and frail: thirdly, Hypocrites, which in outward show join themselves to the Church, as those strangers did: fourthly, carnal and worldly, which may be compared unto beasts. Ferus

1. Confut. Against reservation of relics.

Vers. 10. YE shall reserve nothing of it until the morning. This was commanded to take away all occasion of superstition, lest they might have superstitiously abused these relics of the pascal lamb: which charge given unto the Israelites may reprove the superstition of those professing Christianity, which do reserve the relics of Saints, and do fondly yield adoration unto them. So in time past a superstitious use was taken up in reserving part of the Sacrament, and carrying it about unto sick folks. The Lord therefore foreseeing what inconvenience might arise by such reservations, forbiddeth anything at all to be kept of the lamb: Iun. in Analys.

2. Confut. That the bread in the Sacrament is not the body of Christ carnally but only a seal and pledge of it.

Vers. 11. FOr it is the Lord's Passover. That is, it did signify it: for Sacraments are not the things which they represent, but signs and seals of them: Genevens. So in the Gospel the bread is called the body of Christ, being a sign and representation of it: Pelican. So is circumcision called the Lord's covenant, Gen. 17.11. yet was it only a sign and seal thereof. Then as neither the lamb was the Passover it self, nor circumcision the covenant it self: so it is but weakly inferred by the Romanists upon these words of our Savior, that the bread should be the very body of Christ.

3. Confut. Against the carnal or raw eating of Christ's flesh in the Sacrament.

Vers. 9. EAt not thereof raw. Ferus upon these words hath this note: Crudem comedunt qui tantum ast • mant id quod viderint, & quia solum panem viderint, solum panem • redunt: They eat the lamb raw, which only esteem that which they see, and because they see nothing but bread, they believe nothing but bread. In which words he seemeth to glance at the Protestants, that do not believe the bread to be turned into Christ's flesh, and yet they believe that there is more present than bread, that the very flesh of Christ is exhibited to the faith of the worthy receiver. But upon this point Pellicans note is more agreeable: Non cru • us, id est Christus non est carnaliter, substantialiter vel sensibiliter comedendus: Christ the pascal lamb is not to be eaten raw; that is, carnally, substantially, sensibly. For who may be better said to eat Christ raw, they which deny the carnal presence of Christ's body, or they which hold that they do eat with their mouth and teeth the very flesh, body and bones of Christ? they most properly may be said to eat Christ raw: both in respect of their own opinion, of the carnal presence, and for that they come not prepared with a true lively faith to the Sacrament, but with an erroneous persuasion. All they therefore that come unprepared, and so do eat and drink unworthily, may be said to eat Christ raw: for as raw flesh is offensive to the stomach, and he may be said to eat his own death: so they that eat and drink in the Sacrament unworthily, are said by the Apostle to eat and drink their own damnation, 1. Cor. 11.28.

4. Confut. Against the Anabaptists that allow no allegories in the Old Testament.

Vers. 46. YE shall not break a bone of him. In that the Apostle, John. 19. applieth this unto Christ, it i • evident that he was the true Lamb of God, shadowed and prefigured by the pascal lamb, and therein divers ways represented and resembled, as is before shown doct. 3. This therefore maketh against the Anabaptists, which will not have any proofs alleged out of the Old Testament, for confirmation of anything in the new: and take away the use and explication of the types and figures of the Old Testament, allowing no sense of any place, beside the historical and literal sense: whereas it is evident, that Saint Paul doth allegorically apply the histories of the Old Testament, as that of Sarah and Hagar, Galath. 4. and the pascal lamb he maketh a figure of Christ, 1. Cor. 5.7. Iun. in Analys.

1. Observ. To cut off the occasion of sin.

Vers. 16. IN any case ye shall put away leaven the first day out of your houses. As they were straightly charged not to eat unleavened bread, so they must also avoid the very occasion, le • t they might trespass unawares. So we must not only flee from manifest sins, but beware of every occasion, as our Savior bid his Apostles take heed of the leaven of the Pharisees. There is another kind of leaven of corrupt manners, as the Apostle showeth, 1. Cor. 5.7. Both these kinds of leavens, we must not only forbear to eat ourselves, but we must cast them out of our houses: we must both abhor them in ourselves, and remove all occasions which any might stumble at: Simler. and so, as the Apostle saith, abstain from all appearance of evil, 1. Thess. 5.22.

2. Observ. Favor in the lender toward the borrower cometh of God.

Vers. 36. ANd the Lord gave the people favor. As the Egyptians affections were inclined by the Lord to lend, or rather to give unto the Israelites what they asked: so when a man is driven to borrow of his neighbor, if he find favor in his eyes, he is to acknowledge it as a mercy from God: if the Lord do shut up his affection toward him, he must think, that some sin of his hath made a bar and stopped the way: Pelican. Thus was the heart of righteous Job wrought toward the poor: If I restrained the poor of their desire, or caused the eyes of the widow to fail, Job. 31.27.

3. Observ. God can turn men's affections to hatred, or favor, as it pleaseth him.

AGaine, as it is said in the Psalm. 105.25. He turned their heart, so that they hated his people: like as the Lord so worketh, that the patience of his servants is tried by the disfavour and hatred of men: so he can turn their affections to love and favor. This teacheth us, that we should depend upon God, and when we see the countenance of any to be estranged from us, that we pray unto God, who hath the ruling of all men's hearts, to incline their heart toward us: as Jacob prayeth for his sons, God almighty give you grace in the sight of the man, Gen. 43.14. Calvin.

4. Observ. We must be as pilgrims and dwellers in tents in this world.

Vers. 37. THey took their journey from Ramesis to Succoth: Succoth signifieth tabernacles: So they that go out of the Egypt of this world to the heavenly Canaan, must dwell in tabernacles here. Pelican. We must be as pilgrims and strangers in this world, 1. Pet. 2.11. and the Apostle saith▪ that here we have no abiding City, Heb. 13.14.

5. Observ. No unbelievers to be admitted to the Sacraments.

Vers. 43. NO stranger shall eat thereof. That is, no uncircumcised person, that is a stranger from the faith of Israel: so neither are the mysteries or Sacraments of religion to be given unto Infidels, or profane persons. Calvin. As our Savior will not have us to cast holy things unto dogs, or pearls among swine, Matth. 7.2.

6. Observ. The Gospel is to be professed not for lucre or honor sake, but for love to the truth.

Vers. 45. AN hired servant shall not eat thereof. As they which served the Israelites only for their hire and wages, were not true members of Israel, and therefore not fit to be partakers of their mysteries, for they joined themselves unto them, rather for a reward, than for love of their religion: So neither are they true professors of the Gospel, which do profess the same for any love of lucre or preferment, rather than of conscience, and good will to the truth. Pelican. Likewise, it showeth, that neither is God to be served only for hope of reward, but for love and true filial affection: for as they which obey for fear, are servants, and not children; so they which do all for hope of reward, are hirelings and mercenaries, rather than domestical: God therefore is to be served and loved for his own sake, without any other respect.

1. The Method and Argument.

I N this Chapter, there is a prescription of certain solemn rites to be observed of the people, in remembrance of their deliverance out of Egypt, unto verse 17. and a description of their manners of proceeding in their journey, to verse 22.

In the prescription two things are enjoined the people; the annual keeping of the Passover, and the consecrating of the first borne: which are briefly propounded, verse▪ 2. and 3. and afterward more at large declared.

In the ample declaration: 1. The Passover is prescribed: both the place where they should keep it, in the land of Canaan, verse. 5. the time, for seven days, verse. 6. the manner, with unleavened bread, verse 7. the use, which is double, in respect of their children, to instruct them, verse. 8. of themselves, to be a sign of remembrance unto them, verse. 9. the perpetuity, they must keep it yearly.

2. Concerning the consecration of the first borne: the place is assigned where they shall set them apart, when they are come into the land of Canaan, verse. 11. what they shall set apart, all their first borne of man and beast, verse. 12. with an exception of two kinds, of the asse among the unclean beasts, which must be redeemed or killed, and the first borne of man, which must be simply redeemed, verse. 13. then the reason of this institution is shown, because the Lord for his people's sake killed all the first borne in Egypt, v. 14, 15. Lastly, the end of this institution is to call to their remembrance that the Lord brought them out of Egypt, verse. 16.

Then followeth the second part of the Chapter, showing the proceeding and going forward of the Israelites in their journey: wherein is declared: 1. Which way they went, not by the way of the Philistines, and why but by the way of the wilderness, verse. 17, 18. 2. How they went out, well appointed, verse. 18. 3. What they carried with them, Joseph's bones, verse. 19. 4. Whither they removed, unto Etham, verse. 20. 5. How thy were guided both by day and night, verse. 21.22.

2. The divers readings.

Vers. 3. Out of the house of bondmen. I.V.A.P. rather than, of bondage. G.S.L.B.G. the word is ghabadi • , of servants: though the sense much differ not in either.

Vers. 5. And it shall be when the Lord hath brought thee. I.A.P. C. S. not, when the Lord hath brought thee. B.G. cum caeter. for here vehajah, it shall be, is wanting.

Vers. 6. And in the seventh day shall be a feast unto the Lord. A. P. cum caeter. not, and in the seventh day being an holy day to the Lord. I. as though the meaning should be, that they should eat unleavened bread upon the seventh day also: for that is said before, in that they are commanded seven days to eat unleavened bread: but the seventh day rather is enjoined to be a principal feast day unto the Lord, 〈◊〉 chap. 12.16.

Vers. 8. For this cause did the Lord this unto me, when he brought me. I.V.C. or, that he brought me, &c. S. This is that which the Lord did unto me, where &c. L. but here the word baghabur, for, or, because, is omitted: this is done, because of that which the Lord did. A.P.B.G. This last seemeth to be the best reading. See the 6. question following.

Vers. 12. Thou shalt s • t over unto the Lord. I.V. cause to pass. A.P.C.H. separate. L.S. set apart. G. appoint. B. The first rather best agreeth: that is, he shall deliver it out of his hand unto the Lord, as having now no more power over it.

Vers. 15. Therefore I do sacrifice unto Jehovah. B.G. cum caeter. macte. I do kill. I. but the other word is more fit, because things holy unto God are rather said to be sacrificed than killed: Zabach more usually is taken to sacrifice.

Vers. 13. Thou shalt cut off his neck. I.A. better than kill it. C. L. or, break his neck. B. G.P.V. gharaph signifieth to strike off the neck, as Deut. 21.4.6.

Vers. 18. The children of Israel went up well appointed, or girded, P. not, armed. A.B.G.C.L.V. for whence should they have so much armor? nor, in battle order. I. that is, five in a rank. I. for the word signifieth fived: they would so have taken up a great length of ground: nor, in the fifth generation. S. for that is contrary to the Lord's promise, Gen. 15.16. that they should come forth in the fourth generation: the word chamushim is derived of chomesh, taken for the fifth rib, 2. Sam. 2.18. The meaning then i • , that their loins were girded up, as they were commanded to eat the Passover, chap. 12.11. and so they went forth as appointed for their journey.

3. The explanation of difficult questions.

4. Places of Doctrine.

5. Places of Confutation.

6. Moral observations.

1. The Argument and method.

I N this Chapter is described the most miraculous and admirable passage of the children of Israel over the red Sea: there are two parts of the Chapter, the bringing of the Israelites unto the Sea, to verse. 14. their passing over the Sea, with the destruction of the Egyptians, to the end of the Chapter.

In the first part is set forth, first the counsel of God unto Moses ▪ containing first a commandment where they should campe, verse. 2. then a reason thereof taken from the vain consultation and opinion of Pharaoh, that they were tangled in the land, verse. 4. then the execution thereof, in following after them, which is amplified by the overruling cause, God's providence and justice in hardening his heart, and the end thereof, the glory of God, verse. 4.

2. Then followeth the execution, first in the behalf of the people, they did as the Lord commanded them: secondly, on Pharaohs part: 1. Both in pursuing and following after them, with the occasion thereof, the report that was brought, and their repentance in letting the people go, verse. 5. The manner thereof, he made ready his horse and chariots, verse. 6.7. and the ordering and disposing cause, God's justice in hardening his heart, verse. 8. 2. As also in overtaking them, verse. 9.

3. Afterward the events hereof are declared: 1. The fear of the people, verse. 1. 2. The crying of the people unto God, verse. 10. 3. Their murmuring and expostulating with Moses, because he had brought them out of Egypt; amplified both by their present fear of death, and their former foolish prediction in Egypt, verse. 11 12. 4. The confident answer of Moses, wherein he exhorteth them not to fear, with a promise of deliverance, and destruction of the Egyptians, grounded upon God's assistance, verse. 13.14.

In the second part there is first the counsel of God to Moses, containing both a commandment, that they should go forward, verse. 15. and a promise both of the safe passing of the Israelites thorough the red Sea, with the instrumental means prescribed, the stretching out of Moses hand with the rod over the Sea, verse. 16. and the destruction of their enemies, with the end thereof, God's glory, verse. 17. and the effect, the confession and acknowledgement by the Egyptians themselves of God's power, verse. 18.

2. The performance and execution followeth: first on the part of the Israelites, where the causes are expressed of their safe conducting thorough the Sea, both the principal, God's presence, and working, testified by the removing of the cloud, verse. 19.20. and the instrumental, either voluntary in the stretching out of Moses rod, or natural, which was the East wind, verse. 21. then is expressed the manner of their passing thorough the Sea, verse. 22. Secondly, the other part of God's promise is effected concerning the Egyptians: where we have first the occasion, the pursuit of the Egyptians, verse. 23. 2. The causes of their subversion, first the hand of God upon them in striking them with fear, and taking off their chariot wheels, verse. 25. with the efficient thereof, the Lord looked toward the host of the Egyptians, verse. 24. and the effect, the flight of the Egyptians, verse. 21. Secondly, the returning of the waters, with the principal cause, the power of God in commanding, the instrumental cause, the ministry of Moses. Thirdly, the effect followeth, Pharaoh and his host are drowned, verse. 28.

3. The events follow: first, the saving of Israel in passing safe thorough the red Sea, verse. 29. Then the overthrow of their enemies, whose carcasses they saw upon the Sea bank, verse. 30. Lastly, the people believe God, and reverence his minister Moses ; with the cause thereof, the beholding of the great power of God, verse. 31.

2. The divers readings.

Vers. 2. Campe before the streits of Chiroth. I. Piscat. not, before Pihahiroth. A.P.B.G. cum cater. for ( pi ) is here no part of the proper name, as is evident. Numb. 33.8. where (pi) is omitted: mippe • e hachiroth, from the face or sight of Hachiroth, where also Ha is the article prefixed, no part of the name, as the Septuagint read Eroth, and the Chaldee in that place Hiroth.

Vers. 5. and 11. What is this that we have done? I.C.V. rather than, why have we done this. A.P. cum cater. as Gen. 42.28. What is this that the Lord hath done unto us?

Vers. 9. All the horses and chariots of Pharaoh. B. G. cum cater. rather than, the chariot horsemen. I. for seeing the horses were the chief strength of the chariots, who had not everyone a rider, but chariot men to guide them, the original word and sense is better retained.

Vers.. 12. Is not this the thing that we said unto thee? V. or, did we not tell thee this thing? B.G. is not this the word or saying. I. cum caeter. dabar signifieth both a word, or thing: their meaning is, that the thing now answereth to their words then.

Vers. 17. And concerning me, behold I will harden. I. Piscat. rather, And I behold I will harden, B.G.A.P. cum caeter. vaani, and I. He the nominative case, is put absolutely, though in this place it agree with the construction following, yet elsewhere it doth not, as Gen. 17.4. And I, behold my covenant is with thee: where unless it be read, concerning me, or some such word supplied, the nominative case (I) will not agree with the sentence following.

Vers. 30. And the Israelites saw the Egyptians dead upon the Sea banks. B.G.C.V. cum caeter. rather than; the Israelites saw the Egyptians dying, in the Sea bank. I. that is, the Israelites standing upon the bank saw the Egyptians dying in the Sea: for the word meeth signifieth dead, rather than, dying, as chap. 12.33. we are all meet him, dead men: and the Hebrew comma, or imperfect distinction, at Egyptians, showeth that the last words, on the shore, are referred to the Egyptians dying, not to the Israelites beholding: and further, the preposition ghal signifieth on, or upon, rather than in: and the Sea useth to cast up the dead bodies on the shore: Also if the Israelites saw the Egyptians yet alive, how should Moses speech be true, that they should never see them again? verse. 13. that is, alive.

3. The Explanation of doubtful questions.