AN EXPOSITION ON THE FOURTEENE first Chapters of GENESIS, by way of Question and Answer.  
collected OUT OF Ancient and Recent Writers: Both briefly and subtly▪ propounded and Expounded.  
BY ABRAHAM ROSSE of Aberden, Preacher at St. MARY'S near South-Hampton, and one of his Majesty's Chaplains.  
LONDON.  
Printed by B. A. and T. F. for Anth: Vpphill, and are to be sold at the White-Lyon▪ in Paul's Churchyard. 1626.   

TO THE RIGHT Honourable, FRANCIS, Lord VERULAM, Lord high Chancellor of ENGLAND, etc.  
In this Universe (Right Hon:)  
THere are only two things that are the objects both of Contemplation and of Admiration, that is, the Creator, & the creature: amongst the Creatures only two, Angels and Men; in Man only two parts; the body and soul; in the soul, only two faculties, the mind and the will; 〈◊〉 the mind, two things only; GOD 〈◊〉 his word: the Word of God is twofold; internal and external: the external word is twofold; spoken and written: the written word hath two parts; the old, and new Testament; the old containeth two, Moses and the Prophets; and Moses speaketh of these two we formerly mentioned, which only are the objects of our contemplations; even the Creator, and the creature: the Creator we know via negationis, eminentiae, & causalitatis? but we know the creatures, if they be sensible, Cognition sensitiva? if not, intellectiva: but properly in this life we know not God, in regard of his Essence, (for how shall we know him, of whom there can not be framed either Species intelligibiles or sensibiles, seeing that knowledge is perspecies;) yet in part we know him, in regard we have some knowledge of his personal and essential properties, of his effects and operations.  
Which knowledge is but small, because our finite science cannot comprehend that infinite Essence. For if a shell cannot contain the Sea, which is a creature; much less can our souls him, that is our Creator. The cause then why the Owl can not behold the Sun, is in the eyes of the Owl, not in the Sun: so, that we cannot know God perfectly is not in God, who is most perfect, but in us that are imperfect? & quidquid recipitur, recipitur admodum recipientis, non ad modum recepti. Then our knowledge is so weak, that we neither know the first effector, whose essence is most excellent; neither his first effect (I mean the first matter) whose existence is most impotent.  
Yet a more eminent knowledge of our Maker have we than the Pagans, who only know him by his works, but we by his words: they by contemplation; we by inspiration: they by senseless Images, we by his essential Image: they by painted and carved stones; we by that stone which the builders did refuse, which became the head of the corner, which was cut out of the mountain without hands, which broke all ●…heir Images to powder, upon which are seven eyes, even that tried and precious stone, that was laid in Zion: by him (I say) in whom the Godhead dwells bodily, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and know ledge, have we the knowledge of our Creator; without whom, our science is but ignorance, and our meditations, vexations.  
This is that internal word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by whom, and by whose spirit was spoken and written this externell word contained in the Scripture, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the which word, the Creator and the creature is only to be known, not only in all, but in every part thereof, no less than the soul is all, in all the body, and all in every part of the same: so is knowledge in this word. Now this external word differeth from Christ the internal word of the Father, as in us the word, which is in our mind, doth differ from that, which is in our mouth and books: our internal speech and reason, is generated in the soul, and of the soul, and is coetaneall with the soul: so is Christ begotten in the Father, and of the Father, and is coeternal with the Father; but the word that is in out mouth and books, is accidental, and the effect of our internal word; so is that word, which is in the Scripture, and in the mouth of Christ's servants accidental, and the effect of Christ the internal word of the Father; who is both ratio & oratio patris, for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is both our souls, cognition directa, do understand many things that are without the soul, but cognition reflexa, she understandeth herself, and then, idem est intelligens & id quod intelligitur; so God doth know all his creatures, which are but his effects: but in understanding himself from all eternity, he doth beget that knowledge of himself, and in himself, which is himself, even Christ▪ his own wisdom and knowledge.  
Yet there is great relation between Christ, God's internal Word, and the Scripture, his external word, for as none knoweth the Father but by the Son, his word internal; so none knoweth the Father & the Son, but by the Scripture, his Word external. As the internal word was, Principium essendi, the beginning of the creatures; so the external is Principium cognoscendi, the beginning of knowledge. As nothing did exist before the word internal, so nothing was spoken before the word external. As by the internal Word the world was created: so by the external word the world is instructed. As that word was conceived of the holy Ghost: so this word was inspired by the holy Ghost. As that word was persecuted by the jews, and crucified by the Roman Pilate: so this word hath been falsified by the jews, and wounded by the Roman Prelate. As it was held unlawful for the People to converse with that Word●… so it was held unlawful, for the Lay people to converse with this word. As the jews did more regard their traditions than that word; so the Romans do more regard their unwritten lies, than this Word. As that Word was bu●…ied in a garden▪ and kept sure from his Disciples: so was this word buried in an unknown tongue, and kept close from Christians: & as this word, in despite of the jews▪ was restored to life; so this word, in despite of the Popes, is brought ●…orth again to light.  
This is that word, the Author, object, subject, end, and ground whereof, is God, for verity admirable; for antiquity ●…enerable; for sanctity incomparable; for ●…tility inestimable: here is light for the ●…lind, life for the dead, food for the ●…ungry, drink for the thirsty: here is the ●…ee of life, the fountains of living wa●…rs, Manna the food of Angels, pearls and other rich jewels; here is a banquet of many dishes; an Apothecary's shop with many medicines; a sweet garden▪ of many flowers; an Armour-house with many weapons; here is salt to season, milk to strengthen, wine to comfort, and honey to sweeten; here the cold may be warmed, the weary refreshed, the naked clothed, and the filthy cleansed. If thou desirest light and perfection, here is V●…im and Thummim; if the sight of thy sins, here is the golden candle stick, if thou wilt wash thy hands and feet, here is the brazen laver? wilt thou be Purged from they Leprosy? here is the river jordan; wilt thou flourish▪ like a Bay tree? thou must be planted by this riue●…▪ wilt thou bring forth much fruit? thou must be sown with this seed; wilt thou sacrifice thy sins to God? thou must kill them with this sword; wilt thou go to the kingdom of heaven? this is the only way; here is the fiery Pillar and the cloud to conduct thee to Canaan; and ●…ere is the Star that will lead the to find out the Son of righteousness, jesus Christ that bright morning Start, with whom we shall shine in eternity of glory, as Stars in the firmament.  
In this word than must we conucrse both day and night, not in curious ●…earching, and prodigious speculation; but in serious weeping, and religious a●…oration; neither must our minds be op●…ressed with terrestrial and infernal occupations: but they must be filled with ●…elestall and supernal meditations. Therefore if we will profit here, we must last off all carnal affection, that we ●…ay receive for our weary souls eternal refection: for if no beast could ●…uch the mountain, and hear God's ●…aw: why should beastly minds touch ●…e bible, and read God's Law? And in ●…arching this Word, let us not in it ●…arch for riches and honour to our selves, which is to seek for dirt among●… jewels, and poison amongst medicaments, to overthrew ourselves: but l●… us search for him, who only is sufficien●… to content our souls within our bodies▪ as he was the only efficient to presen●… our souls into our bodies. Therefore w●… conclude with Augustine, Scriptur●… & creatura ad hoc sunt, ut ●…pse qu●…ratur, ipse diligatur, & qui ipsam creavit, & q●… illam i●…spirauit.  
The internal and eternal generation of the word, was not known to th●… Gentiles: but was obscured with an obscure fable of Minerva, begotten of I●…piters brain, by the which also they di●… signify learned notions conceived i●… the mind, & expressed by word or writ.  
Then, to be short (right Honourable) here I do offer to your tuition an●… fruition my Miner●…a, not begotten o●… my brain, but in my brain; neither i●… she armed with a helmet, 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 spear to terrify M●…mus; and therefore ●…e more desirous she is to shelter her●…lfe under the shadow of your Honour's ●…tronage, being persuaded that you ●…e both a Patron & a pattern of lear●…ng, the fruits whereof have not only ●…freshed the-hearts and ears of great ●…rittaine: but with Dedalean wings they ●…ue been transported beyond the Ocean; 〈◊〉 that Rhodan●…s, Betis, and Rhen●…s, have ●…asoned their silver streams with the ●…licious taste of your learned fruits. ●…hen what remains, quam ut ocior Icar●…  

Visas gementis littora Bosp●…ri,  
Sirt●…sque Getulas c●…norus,  
Alice Hypereb●…rosque campos?   
Moreover, your Honour being a Father ●…d Patron of justice, if any wrong be ●…fered to her by M●…mus, she may bold●… fly to the Chancery for succour: there●…re, I hope, that as your Honour hath ●…rmitted your glorious titles to grace ●…r Frontispiece; so you will not refuse to beautify her with your gracious aspec●… and respect. That GOD, which hat●… exalted you to so great dignities in thi●… world, preserve your body and soul, and crown you in the World to come with blessed Immortality.  
Your Honours, in all duty, ever to command▪ ALEXANDER ROSS●…   

THE ARGUMENT.  

Q. WHo wrote these books of Moses?  
A. Himself: proof; he was the first ●…at writ in the world. Secondly, The holy ●…host testifieth the same, Exo. 24. 4. Deu. ●…1. 9 and Christ, john 1. 45. and 5. 46.   

Q. When wrote he this first book;  
A. Before the Israelites went from E●…ypt: R●…as. 1. Because then, feeding his ●…ather in-lawes sheep 40. years, in Ma●…ian, he was most at leisure to write. Rea. 2. ●…o comfort the Hebrews, being oppressed ●…ith Egyptian servitude; for in this Book 〈◊〉 read the life and death of their Anceours; their courage; patience; virtue affliction, God's promises to Abraham, that after 400. years serui●…de in Egyp●… they should be delivered, and enjoy the la●… of Canaan.   

Q. How came Moses to the knowledge of these things contained in th●… Book?  
A. Either by revelation from God, 〈◊〉 by tradition of his Ancestors: for the knowledge of these things Moses ●…ad from josephs' children; they of joseph; he of jacob; jacob of Isaac; he of Abraham and he of Shem; Shem of No; h●… 〈◊〉 Methusalem; and he of Adam, with wh●… be lived 243. years.    

Questions on the first Chapter.  
Questions.  

WAs the world created, or eternal?  
Answ. Created. 1. There can be but one eternal. 2. Almost all the Philosophers are against the eternity of the world. 3. They that hold it ●…ternall, can bring no sound reason. 4. Th●… most ancient monuments or records amongst ●…he heathen, are not so old as the f●…ood of Noah.   

Q. Can God make more worlds than one?  
A. Yes: for he is Almighty, and he made it ●…ot of any matter: for that should have been ex●…austed: but more he would not, because he ●…eing one, delights in unity.   

Q. Why in Hebrew saith Moses, God's created? joining the noun plural, with the verb singular?  
A. To signify the mystery of the Trinity, one essence in three persons. 2. It is the property of the Hebrew phrase.   

Q. Why in the beginning of this book, speaketh Moses only of heaven and earth?  
A. Because by the name of heaven, he comprehends all celestial bodies, and by the name of earth the 4. elements: for water is in the earth, & fire and air, as witness the springs, exhalations, or earthquakes, and burning mountains, or hot waters.   

Q. Did God create the earth movable or not?  
A. Immoveable▪ job. 38. Psal. 39 and 104. this is understood, in respect of the whole earth: yet it is moved in respect of parts, by earthquakes. job. 9   

Q. Of what figure is the earth?  
A. Round, Esay the 40. This figure is most perfect, capable, ancient.   

Q. Is the earth under the water or not?  
A. Under, because heaviest: yet Exo. 20. Ps. 24. and 136. it seems the water is under the earth; but it is to be understood, that a great part of the earth was made higher than the waters, for man's habitation.   

Q. Why cannot the whole earth move?  
A. Because he is in his natural place, which if it should move, it should ascend: and this is against the nature of the earth.   

Q. What is understood by the spirit that moved upon the waters?  
A. A wind, which often in Scripture is called a spirit, or the holy Ghost, or the power and mighty operation of God: which also is often called by the name of Spirit: in this sense the Spirit of God is said to carry Elias to heaven; and to have caught away Philip, Acts 8.   

Q. Why is God brought in, speaking in the creation?  
A. To show his absolute power, whose word is his work. 2. The second person in Trinity, the word essential of the Father, by whom the world was created.   

Q. Why was the light first created?  
A. To beautify all the rest of the creatures. 2. The world was created in 6. days, which could not be distinguished without the light and darkness.   

Q. Was this light spiritual, such as God is said to inhabit, as Christ is called the light of the world, and the Apostles light, the regenerate light?  
A. No: but corporal and sensible, first, the darkness that went before, was sensible: ergo, light. 2. By this light the 3. days were distinguished before the creation of the Sun: but they were sensible. 3. This Narration of Moses is historical, not allegorical.   

Q. Then what light was this?  
A. Not the light of the elemental fire, nor of a light cloud, nor of water, but of the Sun: which was the first day diffused through the whole hemisphere: the 4. was collected into the globe of the Sun we see. The 1. day this light had but one common property to illuminate: the 4. it had particular virtues to bring out particular effects. 3. The light, the 4. day began to be cause of generation and corruption, the measure of time, the cause of increase, and decrease in the Moon.   

Q. How did this light before the 4. day, distinguish the day from night?  
A. In moving from cast to west; and from west to east, by the motion of the 1 sphere.   

Q. In what place of heaven was the light ●…reated?  
A. In the East, for this light returning to this same point of the east, from which it went, made a natural day.   

Q. When was heaven and earth created?  
A. Before the first day, in respect of their substance and matter, but in the six days, in respect of their form and perfection.   

Q. What is meant by the firmament that separateth the waters from the waters?  
A. The air, and starry heavens, with all the spheres between, which do separate the watery clouds, from these waters below: but properly the lower region of the air doth separate these waters, which are generated in the single region, from the waters below, which low region is called by the name of the whole firmament.   

Q. What are these waters above the firmament?  
A. Not Angels, as Origon, not waters properly so called, above the stars, as Basil would have: for their natural place is below, and there is no use of them above the stars: neither the heaven called the Crystalline, which hath neither the substance, similitude, or qualities of water: but by these waters we understand the watery clouds, above this lower region in the air. These waters in other places are said to be above the heavens, that is, above the air, which in Scripture is called heaven.   

Q. How made God dry land to appear?  
A. By causing the earth, which before was plain, to swell with mountains. 2. By the waters which before were spread over the whole earth, to betake themselves to one place.   

Q. Then were there mountains before the flood?  
A. Yes: for the flood rose 15. cubits higher than the mountains: the mountains are called eternal, Psa. 76. Wisdom is ancienter than the mountains, Pro. 8. They make the earth the comelier, more fruitful, more commodious for man and beast: they hold out the seas from overflowing the earth: out of them springs and Rivers proceed: they defend the Valleys from the raging of the winds, that without them, the earth could not be before the flood.   

Q. Is the earth or seas highest?  
A. The earth: for all rivers run into the seas naturally, because they flow downwards. 2. Men are said to go down into the seas in ships, Psal. 107. Again▪ if the seas were higher, ships should sail swifter to the land then from it. 4. The farther we were in the sea, we should see the land the better.   

Ob. But Psal. 104. and 33. it seems that the waters are higher than the earth.  
A. In Psal. 104. David speaks of the springs that are generated in the mountains, or of the watery clouds that cover the hills: in Psa. 33. David speaks of the miraculous standing of the red sea.   

Q. Were briers, thorns, and poisonable herbs created before man's fall?  
A. Yes: because these are parts of this world. without which it is not perfect: and although poisonable herbs are not fit for meat, they are good for physic.   

Q In what time of the year was the world created?  
A. In the Autumn, because the jews before they departed from Egypt, began their year in Autumn, and also before the flood: for the flood began in the second month, that is, about the month of November. 2. The jews Exod. 23. are commanded to keep the feasts of Tabernacles in the end of the year, that is, in Autumn, when fruits are ripe: and also this same feast in the beginning of the year, Chap. 35. nature also shows, that Autumn is the end of the year, by the maturity of the fruit, and falling of the leaves from the trees. It is also the beginning of the year, as the young seeds budding out of the earth do testify. Lastly, in the creation the fruits of the trees were ripe, and ready to be eaten.   

Q. Were the stars created the fourth day?  
A. Yes, in respect of their light, motion's, and operations: but they were made the 1. day in respect of their substance, for they are the thicker part of the spheres.   

Q. Why were the stars created after the planets?  
A. Because God will show his power, which in producing of plants, doth not depend on the stars. 2. To keep the people from Idolatry, whom he knew would be bend to worship the stars, when they consider their beauty, motion and operation, in producing herbs: now they are inexcusable, because this virtue they have in producing herbs, is from God, who in the beginning did create herbs and plants, without the help of stars.   

Q. Did God create the Moon in the Full, or in the Change?  
A. In the Full, because God created his works in perfection: now the moon is perfitest in the Full. 2. She was ordained to illuminate the night, which she doth most perfecty in the Full.   

Q. Have the stars their light wholly from the Sun?  
A. No: because they have different effects, therefore different light. 2. There is one glory of the Sun, and another of the Moon, and another of the stars, 1 Cor. 15.   

Q. Why are the Sun and Moon called great lights?  
A. Not in respect of quantity: for some stars are greater: but because they appear to be greater. 2. In respect of their light, which is greater than the light of other stars.   

Q. Of what figure is the heaven?  
A. Round: for this figure is most apt for motion. 2. The Scripture witnesseth the same. Eccl. 1   

Q. How many heavens are there?  
A. The Philosophers speak of ten heavens, the Scriptures only of three, to the which, the former ten may be reduced.   

Q. Shall the heavens be abolished in the day of judgement?  
A. Not in respect of their substance which is uncorruptible, but in respect of their motion, influence, and diverse operations in this inferior world: for of these then there shall be no need, because man shall be translated to a better life, and other living creatures shall be abolished.   

Q. Are the stars innumerable?  
A. Not in themselves: for they are natural bodies, but in respect of our ignorance. 2. These stars of greater note are unnumerable: for the Mathematicians have reduced the 1022. stars, to six degrees of magnitude: for these of lesser note are not numbered, because not known.   

Q. Is the Sun hot or cold?  
A. Neither: but he begets heat here below, because of his great light, and not because of his motion.   

Q. Have the stars life reasonable, because God is brought in, speaking to them in Scripture?  
A. No: if they had, they should be capable of virtue and vice, life or death eternal. God is brought in, speaking to them in Scriptures, and so he is to insensible creatures▪ as the earth, seas, wind, etc. to signify our stupidity, which are duller to hear, and obey him, then senseless creatures.   

Q. Do the stars move of themselves, as it seemeth by these places, Psa. 19 job 9 jos. 10. or are they moved by the spheres▪  
A. By their spheres: but the Scripture speaketh rather of the stars then their spheres, because the stars are better known to us, for the spheres we see not.   

Q. Is the heaven and the earth corruptible or not?  
A. They are incorruptible in regard of their substance: so witnesseth the Scripture, Eccle. 1. and 3. chap. Psal. 149. and therefore shall not be abolished, but renewed to a more perfect state: for the fervent desire of the creature waiteth when the sons of God shall be revealed. Those Scriptures that speak of the destruction of the world, are to be understood of the alteration of some qualities to better.   

Q. Shall the Sun and other stars move as they do now, after the day of judgement?  
A. No: for now they move, to distinguish night and day, Summer and Winter: but then of these things there shall be no need to man glorified.   

Q. How are the Sun and Moon signs?  
A. They are natural signs of fair and foul weather, health and sickness, sowing and mowing, etc. and supernatural signs of God's wrath: for there shall be signs in the Sun, and Moon, and Stars, before the last day. Luke 21.   

Q. Were the stars made for signs to the Astronomers, to foretell things to come?  
A. They neither should, nor can foretell by the stars. 1. They should not, because prohibited by the word of God, jere. 10. Deut. 18. Leu. 20. Secondly, condemned by the Canons, decrees and Counsels of the Church, and refuted by the Fathers. 3▪ They cannot foretell by these Scriptures, Esay 41. 44. and 47. Chap. Eccle. 8. and 10. Chap. Prou. 27. 1 Cor. 2. Again, the most part of Apollo's oracles were false, as witnesseth Porphirius. lib. de oraculis.   

Q. Why is this kind of Astrology condemned?  
A. Because it everts God's providence, abolisheth the liberty of our will, makes all the mysteries of Christian Religion to depend on the stars; it is the cause of all villainy and neglect of God's works; yea, it makes all the miracles of the old and new Testament, such as the flood of Noah, the fire of Sodom, the birth, actions, and death of our Lord, to depend on the stars.   

Q. Can the Astrologers foretell things to come by the stars?  
A. No: because they know not the form, matter, motions force and effects of the stars in the things here below, they cannot explain the hid causes, and properties of herbs, stones, and living creatures: yea, they know not what is doing now in other countries: and if they know not things present, much less things to come.   

Q. But if they had the perfect knowledge of the stars, could they no●… tell what is to come?  
A. No: because we cannot have perfect knowledge of particular effects, except we know their particular causes: now the stars are but general causes. 2. If this doctrine were true, than twins borne under the same star at the same time, should be of the same nature and disposition: but this is false, as witnesseth the birth of jacob and Esau. 3. It should follow, that all those that are killed in the wars at the same time, should be borne at the same time: which is most false. 4. That all those that live according to the same laws and religion, should be borne at the same time, under the same star. 5. That all the actions of man's free will, should be known to them: which cannot be, seeing man can alter and change his will▪ when he list. 6. If men could tell by the stars what is to come, they should be had in great esteem: but it fares otherwise with them; for the greatest, both Divines and Philosophers confute them, Kings and Magistrates condemn and punish them. 7. If they can tell what befalls to man, much more can they foretell what shall befall herbs and trees, which are more subject to the stars than man: but this is false: for they cannot foretell how many Pears a Peartree shall bring forth.   

Q. Are not then the stars natural signs of things to come?  
A. Natural signs are rather the causes or effects of that they signify, but the stars are neither. 2. How can the stars which are still the same, be the signs of so many innumerable accidents as fall out in the world? yet I except Comets, which are not natural stars, but Meteors generated of natural causes, yet they are supernatural signs of things to come.   

Q. Can the Astrologers foretell nothing true?  
A. Yes: oftentimes ehey foretell things truly, but that is not because of the stars, but by the instinct of Satan, with whom they have commerce: and he can foretell many things, partly, by Revelation from God, and partly, because he is a subtle spirit, and of long experience, and he makes those men foretell things to come, rather by moving their fantasies, or by dreams, or by offering to their eyes the shape, or to their ears the words of those things he will foretell, or by characters. 2. They can foretell things to come, because God permits them, for the greater destruction of those that curiously consult soothsayers: so he suffered Balaam and his Ass to prophesy. 3. Men that are of subtle spirits, may foretell some things by looking diligently into the life, manners, and dispositions of men: as one may foretell, that a tyrant oppressing his subjects, shallbe killed. 4. They may foretell some things which may fall out true, because of the credulity of those that consult with them; for if they foretell good success to any, this ofttimes falls out, because of the fervent desire, and using of all means to attain the same: which doth fall out, not because it was foretell, but because he to whom it was foretell, used the means to have it.   

Q. Is it not lawful then to consult with Astrologers and soothsayers?  
A. No: because in consulting with them, we derogate from God's glory, and honour them, in thinking that they can foretell all things; which is proper only to God. 2. If it be unlawful to converse with an excommunicate person, much less should we have commerce with Satan, who is excommunicated from heaven to the place of darkness, and is the pernicious enemy of God and man.   

Q. Whether are the beasts or fishes perfectest?  
A. The beasts, because they have more perfect senses, beget more perfect blood in our bodies, than fishes, have more commerce with men, and are docible in many things; fishes are not.   

Q. Why then were they created before the beasts?  
A. As nature gins at that which is most imperfect in generation, so God in the creation did keep this course: for man the little world and pattetne of all the creatures, was not created till the sixth day. 2. God keepeth that course in the 3. last days, which he did in the 3 first: in the first he created heaven, and in the 4. did replenish it with stars: the 2. he made he seas, the 5. replenished it with liuin●…g creatures.   

Q. Why speaketh Moses of the creation of some particular fishes, and not of trees and beasts?  
A. Because these fishes are greater than any earthly creatures, therefore we should the more extol God's glory in considering them.   

Q. How do the waters bring forth the fishes?  
A. The waters are not the efficient cause of the fishes, but the material, yet but in part, for fishes are compounded of the four elements, notwithstanding the waters are the predominant matter of the fishes, not in respect of their substance, for that is earth: but in respect of quality, moist and cold. Secondly, the temperature of the fishes are waterish. Thirdly, Water is the place of habitation, generation, and conservation for the fishes.   

Q. Why were the birds created the fift day with the fishes, and not the sixth?  
A. Because they were created of the water as the fishes. Secondly, because of the great resemblance between the birds, and fishes, both in respect of their place, water and air: for both these elements are perspicuous, humid, movable, and easy to be changed one into the other. Secondly, In respect of their bodies, for both are light and swift: the fins of the fishes answer to the birds wings, and their scales to birds feathers; they both want ears, paps, milk, bladder. Thirdly, Many kinds of birds dwell in the waters, as the Sea-meawes, Swans, etc. Fourthly, their moving is alike: for as the fishes swim, so the birds fly. Fiftly, They both use their tail, to guide their flying and swimming.   

Q. Were the Birds created of the Water?  
A. Yes: but not of the thickest of the water, but rather of a watery vapour, between water and air, therefore the Birds converse in the water and air.   

Q. But it seems the birds were created of the earth the sixth day, by these words of the 2. chapter. (And the Lord having form out of the ground every beast of the field, and every bird of the air, brought them to Adam.)  
A. If God had created them the sixth day of the ground, Moses had not spoken of them the fift day. Secondly, in these words alleged, the conjunction (and) hath no reference to the word ground, as though both had been form of the ground: but to the word form: so the meaning is, that not only the beasts that were form of the ground: but the Birds also which God had created, were brought to Adam.   

Q. How doth the earth bring forth living creatures?  
A. Not actively, but passively: for the earth is not the efficient, but the material cause of earthly creatures.   

Q. What difference is there between the beast▪ cattles, and creeping thing? verse 25.  
A. By behemah, in Hebrew, is understood the great beasts, as job 40. 15. By chaiah, the wild beasts, in whom there is seen most livellnesse: by remesh, creeping things, such as have no feet at all, as Serpents; and they that have short and little feet, as Ants.   

Q. Why did not God bless the earthly creatures, as he did the fishes?  
A. Moses did omit this for brevity's sake. Secondly, the blessing of the fishes doth belong also to the beasts. Thirdly, man is blessed, and in him the beasts, as when he was cursed▪ the earth was also, Gen. 3. And when he was punished, the beasts were punished also, Genesis▪.   

Q. Why was man particularly blessed?  
A. Not only for multiplication: but also because of the elect. And thirdly, because man's copulation is oftentimes sinful, and inordinate.   

Q. Did God create in the beginning, imperfect creatures, as Bees, Wasps, and such like?  
A. He did not create them actually, as he did the perfect creatures, but he created them in their causes, as he gave that faculty to the flesh of an horse, to beget Wasps being dead.   

Q. Were Mules now created, or not?  
A. They were not. First, because they were found out by Anah, Genes. 36. Secondly, they are barren: but God created all creatures with his blessing to be fruitful, etc. Genes. 1. Thirdly, this kind of procreation is against nature, but God created every thing according to his kind, Genes. 1. Fourthly, this is against his own law, Levit. 19   

Q. Why was man and the cattles created in the same day?  
A. First, Because they both dwell in the earth. Secondly, The earthly creatures are more familiar with man than others. Thirdly, they are more profitable to man then other creatures. Fourthly, They are most like to man of all other creatures.   

Q. How doth God's goodness and wisdom appear in the creatures?  
A. Many ways. First, In the variety of so many thousand diverse kinds of creatures. Secondly, In the comely order that is seen amongst them. Thirdly, in that all things that serve for the perfection of the world, is in the world; nothing can be added, or impaired. Fourthly, In the sympathy and concord that is amongst some, and the discord and hatred that is amongst others of the creatures. Fiftly, In the pulchritude and comeliness that is in every creature, as may be seen in the body of man. Sixtly, In the admirable government and administration of the world, in the which there is nothing so evil (whether it be natural evil▪ as the defects of nature, or voluntary evil, such as is the evil of punishment, and of sin:) but all serves for the glory of God, and the perfection of this Universe.   

Q. How is the power of God seen in the world?  
A. First, By creating it of nothing. Secondly, By sustaining it with his power, Heb. 1. Thirdly, By working many things miraculously, above the course of nature; in which we see, that God doth not work of necessity. Fourthly, He is not tied to the second causes.   

Q. Can God have made the world better than it is?  
A. Yes, for his power is not limited: therefore he might have made it sooner than he did, and larger, and fuller of Creatures.   

Q. Why was man the last of all the creatures created?  
A. Because God would make all things fit and prepared for him. Secondly, because he is the Lord and end of all other creatures. Thirdly, Because he is most perfect: and in order of generation, that which is most perfect, is last.   

Q. Wherein did man exceed all other creatures?  
A. First, In that he had dominion over them all. Secondly, In that God prepared a most pleasant place for man to dwell in, to wit, Paradise. Thirdly, Because of his knowledge and wit, in giving names to the creatures according to their natures. Fourthly, In respect of his holiness and innocency. Fiftly, Because he was made immortal. Sixtly, Because God took special care in the creating of man above the other creatures. Seventhly, Because the whole Trinity doth consult about the making of man, as about a matter of great weight.   

Q. Why speaketh God in the plural number, Let us make man?  
A. Here is the mystery of the Trinity: for, the Father doth not here speak to himself, as the jews, nor to the Angels, as some heretics think; but the Father speaketh to the Son and holy Ghost.   

Q. But how do we know that he spoke not here to the Angels?  
A. Easily: Because the Angels cannot create neither soul nor body, for they are but creatures. Secondly, There is no mention in the Word, that Angels created, but that God only created man. Thirdly, Man was created according to God's Image, and not according to the Similitude of Angels. Fourthly, God says, To our Image: but the Image of God and Angels are not the same, but infinitely divers.   

Q. Was man only created to the Image of God?  
A. The Image of God doth shine in every creature in part, but in man most perfectly of all other creatures; for, he hath not only existence and life, but also reason and wisdom.   

Q. Wherein doth the Image of God consist?  
A. The Image of God is most in the soul, which hath existence: secondly, life; thirdly; sense; fourthly, reason: again, it is incorruptible; secondly, immortal; thirdly, it is endued with understanding, will and memory; fourthly, it hath free will; fifthly, it is capable of wisdom, grace and glory; sixthly, it hath power of all other creatures: in all which consisteth the Image of God.   

Q. Whether is the Image of God most to be seen in Angels or men?  
A. In Angels, if we respect their nature absolutely: for they are of a more excellent nature than Man; but if we respect the dignity of Man's nature (the which is sanctified and assumed by jesus the essential image of the Father,) the Image of God is most to be seen in Man.   

Q. If man be created to the Image of God, may he not be called the Image of God?  
A. No: for Christ is only the Image of God, because he is of that same nature with the Father, but Man is of another nature; and therefore, he is not the Image of God, but created to the Image of God.   

Q. Is the Image of God seen in the woman as in the man?  
A. Yes, equally in both, if we respect their nature; yet the Image of God is seen in man more perfectly; in respect that man is both the beginning and end of the woman. Et finis est praestantior finito.   

Q. Can the Image of God be abolished by sin?  
A. If we take his Image for that righteousness wherein Adam was created, than we say, that God's Image was abolished by sin; but if by the Image of God, we understand man's reasonable soul with the faculties thereof, than his Image is not utterly abolished, but defaced by sin.   

Q. Why did God create man to his Image?  
A. First, to manifest his singular love and goodness to Man: Secondly, that all creatures might reverence Man the more, in that he carries the Image of God, as his badge and arms: thirdly, that Man might love and serve God the more, for he wears God's Image as his Livery: sourthly, that Man might know the nature and properties of God more perfectly; for there is no creature wherein we may contemplate the nature of God more fully, than in ourselves: fiftly, that God might have some of his creatures with whom he might be familiar, for his delight is with the sons of men, Proverbs 8. Sixtly, that Man might be the more capable of eternal felicity, and more assured of God's love: sevenly, that God's power might appear the more, in that he created such an excellent piece of work, at which all the creatures may admire.   

Q. Had Man before his fall, dominion over the creatures?  
A. Yes, Genesis 1. Psalm 8. Secondly, he gave names to them, in token of his power over them: thirdly, Euah conferred freely with the Serpent, without fear: fourthly, it stood with the order of Nature, that some should be superiors▪ and some inferiors; and man was fittest to govern, because of his Reason and Wisdom.   

Q. Had man also dominion over the creatures after the Fall?  
A. Yes, Genesis 9 Secondly, because we kill them, and make them serve for our diverse uses: thirdly, all kind of creatures were subject to Noah in the Ark: fourthly, the Lions were familiar with Daniel, but man's dominion over them before the Fall▪ was natural, this miraculous: secondly, that should have continued, this is but a while: thirdly, that did belong to all men, this only to some.   

Q. Should not man have had rule over man in the state of innocence?  
A. Yes: because amongst multitudes there can be no order, where there are not some superiors, and some inferiors: but the subjection of man to man then, had been voluntary, pleasant, civil, not servile, and by constraint.   

Q. Why then doth not God speak of this domn ion of man over man, but of man over beasts?  
A. Because the dominion of man over the beasts, is a part of God's Image, and did belong to all men, as men; but the dominion of man over man doth not agree unto all, as they are man, but as wiser▪ or better, etc.   

Q. Should the wife have been subject to the man in that state of innocence?  
A. Yes: but this subjection of the wife should not have been unwilling, bitter, trou, blesome, as it fell out afterward by sin.   

Q. Should mankind have been multiplied by carnal copulation, as now?  
A. Yes: but without sin, for the soul and her faculties should have been subject to God, and the body to the soul; therefore God distinguished in man, male and female: secondly, he saith, Increase and multiply: thirdly, it is said, They shall be both in one flesh: which is only in respect of copulation.   

Q. Should man have only eaten of the herbs, and not also flesh in Paradise?  
A. Only herbs: first, because God's permission is only extended to the herbs: secondly, the herbs were most natural and simple food for that happy estate, and man was not made for food, but food for man: thirdly, the herbs were sufficient, because, before the earth was cursed, there was great store of all sorts of herbs; and those very powerful, and good to feed man: but after the Fall, they lost their force and former goodness.   

Q. Should the wild bedstes, such as Lions, have fed on flesh, before the Fall, as they do now?  
A. No: but on the herbs only: first, because here is no flesh mentioned, but only herbs: secondly, if it had been permitted to them to eat flesh before the Flood, than those ravening beasts that were in the Ark, should have eat flesh: but in the Ark there was no flesh for them: therefore they did feed on the herbs.   

Q. How comes it now, that these kind of beasts do not feed on herbs now, but on flesh?  
A. Because the earth doth not yield such comfortable and nourishing herbs as then: secondly, the temperature of the creature is not so sound now as it was before the Flood.   

Q. How is it understood, that all which God made, was very good?  
A. All things were good: first, in respect of their substance which is unchangeable: secondly, in respect of their perfect estate they were created in: thirdly, in respect of their accidents or properties: fourthly, because of their operations, which brought forth perfect effects.   

Q. Why did not God see that all things were very good, till man was created?  
A. Because man is the eud of all the creatures: secondly, in him, as in a little world, ●…n to be seen all the creatures: thirdly, becaus●… Christ, who is essential goodness, was to sanctify the nature of man, in taking upon him his flesh.    

Questions on the second Chapter.  

Q. DId God create the world at the sa●… instant, or in the space of six days?  
A. In the space of six days: first, because Moses narration is historical, and therefore he speaketh of six distinct days: secondly, Moses, Exodus 20. and 31. urgeth the jews to work six days, and rest the seventh, because God created the world in six days, and rested the seventh; this reason had been ridiculous, if GOD had made the world in an instant▪ thirdly, if we understand Moses in this place allegorically, than we must make this whole history an allegory: fourthly, if the seventh day had been the first (and in it God had created the world) then how is it understood that God rested the seventh day? fifthly, how could so many diverse kinds of creatures be created in the same instant of time? yea, than we must say, that man was created and brought into Paradise, and was cast asleep, and E●…ah was form of his rib the same instant.   

Q. How then is that understood. Ecclesiast. 18. He that liveth for ever, created all things together?  
A. It is to be understood of that confused mass that God created in the beginning: out of the which afterward he created the rest of the creatures in their distinct days.   

Q. Why did God spend so much time in making the world?  
A. Not because he was weak, and could not make it in less time, but that we might the more seriously consider the order of the creation, distinction, and replenishing of the world; and in these, the omnipotency, wisdom and goodness of God.   

Q. Did God make the world of necessity, or of his own accord?  
A. Of his own free will, because he made it at that time and manner he thought fittest: secondly, because he, in creating, wrought otherwise than the course of Nature doth; for he made the heavens without light, than made light: first, imperfect; afterward, perfect: and he made the herbs before the Sun.   

Q. Can it be gathered from hence, that as God created the world in six days, and rested the seventh: so likewise the world shall continue si●… ages, or six thousand years, and after shall be 〈◊〉 perpetual Sabbath?  
A. No: for this computation is but a conjecture, or fixion of Elias▪ not the Prophet, but the Rabbin, having no ground. Secondly, 〈◊〉 this were true, we should know how long the world should continue, and fully know the time of Christ's coming: which cannot be: for his coming shallbe as a thief in the night, as Lightning; his coming shall be a●… the coming of the flood: of this hour knoweth no man, not the Angels; the Father hath put in his own power the times and seasons.   

Q. Were the Angels created, or are they eternal?  
A. Created, Psal. 149. Reuel. 4 & 10. Col●…s. 1. The Church confesseth; the Fathers confirm; and general Counsels establish this point. Secondly, only God is eternal. Thirdly, They are parts of the world, therefore created.   

Q. Are the Angels real substances, or only good and bad motions in the mind, as thought the Sadduces?  
A. They are individual substances. First, Their names do show this, for they are called Messengers, watchmans, etc. Secondly, their actions and operations, which only belong to personal substances: for, they serve God; come to us; comfort us; gather together the Elect; an Angel wrestled with jaacob; conferred with Abraham; they were received by Lot, etc. Angels declared Christ's Nativity to the shepherds, his Resurrection to the women. Thirdly, some of them stood, some fell, therefore substances. Fourthly, we shall be like them: Ergo, they are not bare motions.   

Q. What is meant here by the Host of Heaven and earth?  
A By those of Heaven, is meant the Angels, for they are called the heavenly host, Luke 2. also the Stars, Esay 34. Therefore the Stars in their courses fought against Sisera, judges 5. By the host of Earth, is meant all the earthly creatures: therefore God is called the Lord of hosts.   

Q. Were the Angels created before this visible world?  
A. No: because God created all things in the beginning: ergo, Angels, and not before, or else this had been no beginning. Secondly, They were created for the use of man, but man was not before the beginning: ergo, nor Angels.   

Q. Were they created after the six days?  
A. No: for God rested from all his work the seventh day.   

Q Then what day were they created?  
A. The first, that they might be the beholders and admirers of God's power and wisdom in creating the World. Secondly, They are called Angels of Heaven in Scripture; not only because they inhabit, but also because they were created with the heaven the first day. Thirdly, this is manifest in job 38. where it is said, that the Sons of God (that is, the Angels) did sing and shout when God laid the foundations of the earth.   

Q. Where were they created?  
A. In Heaven: for some of them fell from thence; And Christ saw Satan like Lightning fall from Heaven: therefore they are called the Host and Angels of Heaven.   

Q. Why doth not Moses speak distinctly of the creation of An●…els?  
A. Because he did accommodate himself to the rude capacity of the jews; therefore he doth only speak here of the creation of visible creatures.   

Q. What is meant by God's rest on the Sabbath day? was he weary?  
A. No: but by his rest, is understood his desisting and ceasing to make other creatures.   

Q. Did God rest from all his works?  
A. Yes, of creation, but not of preservation: for yet the Father worketh with the Son, john 5.   

Q. Did God create no other creatures since the Creation?  
A. No: for whatsoever seomes to be created since, it was created before, either in the matter thereof (as Worms, Flies, Bees, and such like) or else, in that God gave faculty to some creatures of diverse kinds, to produce a third kind, as Mules of the Horse and Ass; & power he gave to the Stars, to produce some creatures of putrified matter: yet some creatures he doth still produce, either by generation, as all particular men, and other creatures that are generated, or by creation, either ordinary, as the souls of men, or extraordinary, as the Star that appeared to the Wise men, and the Dove that descended on Christ: so than God rested from creating new kinds of creatures, but not from producing the individual creatures of those kinds that were made in the Beginning.   

Q. Why is it said here that God ended his work the seventh day, seeing they were ended the sixth day?  
A. The creatures were perfected the sixth day, in respect of their substance, qualities, and properties; but in respect of their operation, they were not perfected till the seventh day, for they did not begin to produce effects till after the sixth day: and seeing operation is the end of the form, they were not fully perfected till they began to work.   

Q. How do you understand that God sanctified the Sa●…bath?  
A. In that he separated it from the other days, and consecrated it for holy uses, he would have this to be a Day of rest, and wherein we might wholly addict ourselves for his service.   

Q. Did God enjoin Adam to keep this day holy?  
A. No: but this was afterwards commanded by Moses: for in that happy ●…state it had not been needful to appoint one day for God's service, seeing every day should have been a day of rest, and Sabbath for Adam to meditate on God's works. Secondly, it was not needful for man then to rest from servile worket, because in that happiness, man's labour should not have been wearisome. Thirdly, we read of no commandment that was given to Adam: but only one, concerning not eating the ●…orbidden fruit. Fourthly, if this law had been given to Adam▪ it should have tied, all his posterity to the observation thereof: but we do not read, that any one of the Fathers before Moses, did observe the Sabbath. Fiftly, if the Sabbath had been kept by the Fathers, Moses would have mentioned the same, as a strong argument to persuade the jews to kee●…e it▪ Sixtly, the soundest of the Fathers are of this opinion.   

Q. What is meant here by she day wherein God made the heaven and the earth?  
A. By the day is meant, the whole 6. days: so, often in the Scriptures, day signifieth time, as the day of salvation, the day of judgement.   

Q. What is meant by a mist that watered the earth?  
A. Not a fountain: but a vapour, which is the matter of rain.   

Q. What is me●…nt by this, that God made man of the dust of the earth?  
A. By man is understood his body: by dust, the matter of his body, to put us in mind of humility, and of this body's frailty: by earth, is understood the 4▪ element's: for man is perfectly composed of all: but ea●…th is only expressed, because in man's body there is more earth than any other element. Secondly, when man dies, his body is desolued into earth. Thirdly, he life's upon the earth. Fourthly, he taketh his clothes and food from the earth.   

Q. Why was not the body of man rather made of heavenly then earthly substance, seeing the soul is so excellent?  
A. Because the soul of man did require such a body as was capable of senses, by the which as by instruments she might work in the body: but the celestial bodies are not capable of senses: for they are not capable of the first qualities.   

Q. Wherein doth the body of man exceed the bodies of other creatures?  
A. First, in that the body of man is made strait: that he may behold heaven his country, that his senses might use their function the better, his hands might be employed in working, not in walking. Secondly, in that his senses are more perfect than of other creatures, not in the quicker apprehension of the sensible object: for other creatures have perfecter senses in this regard: but that man can discern more perfecter by his senses, the differences of objects than other creatures. Thirdly, in that man's body is more perfectly compounded of the 4. elements, than other bodies: for the bodies of the creatures are more earthly, or more waterish.   

Q. Of what age created God Adam and Eva?  
A. In the prime and flower of their age. First, because God created all things in their perfect estate. Secondly, because God commanded them to increase and multiply, which they could not have done, if they had not been created of a ripe age.   

Q. Whether was the body or the soul of man created first?  
A. The body: for God did keep the same course in man's creation, which nature doth now in man's generation: for first, the body is form in the mother's womb, and then the soul is infused.   

Q. Why is the creation of man's soul called a breathing?  
A. First, to show us that the soul was not taken out of the power of the matter: but was created of nothing, and infused in the body. Secondly, to teach us Gods power, who did as easily create the soul, as man doth breathe. Thirdly, to show the excellency of man's soul, which seemeth as it were the breath of Gods own mouth.   

Q. Is the soul of man, of the essence of God?  
A. No: if it were, it should be either a part thereof, or the whole: it is not a part; for God's essence cannot be divided in parts, neither is it the whole: for then all men should be but one soul. Secondly, if man's soul were a part of God's essence, than a part of God's essence should be sinful, and subject to the wrath of God, and pains of hell   

Q. Why did God breathe the soul, rather in the face, then in any other part of man?  
A. Because, in the face are all the senses, which are the organs of the soul.   

Q. Why in the nostrils rather than in any other part of the face?  
A. To teach us, that he is the only author of our breathing: secondly; to show the weakness of our life, which dependeth from the nostrils: thirdly, because the nose is the most commodious instrument of breathing, by which the soul is kept in the body.   

Q. Did God create one soul in man, or three?  
A. Only one: first, because one body can have but one essential form: secondly, the power of growing▪ feeling, and reasoning, are not three souls, but three faculties of one soul: thirdly, the Scripture never speaks but of one soul.   

Q. Were the souls of men created long before the body, as thought Plato and Origines?  
A. No: for God created all things perfect, but the soul of man, being a part of man; without, the body could not be perfect: secondly, now in generation the body is no sooner form, but God infuseth the soul; the same order did God keep in man's creation: thirdly, the souls in all that time should have either done good or evil: but jacob and Esau did neither good nor evil before they were borne, Rom. 9 11. Ergo.   

Q. Seeing the soul doth exist, after the corruption, why did she not exist before the creation of the body?  
A. She doth exist after the dissolution of the body, of necessity, being immortal: but it was not fit she should exist, before the creation of the body, seeing she is the natural form, and essential part of man.   

Q. Whether are the souls of men infused in the bodies, or are they derived and propagated one of another?  
A. By creating they are infused, and by infusing created: for man's soul being incorporal and indivisible, cannot be propagated of any other soul, nor multiplied, that is plain by Zach. 12. 1. and Coloss 12. 7.   

Q. Is the soul of man immortal?  
A. It is, because a simple essence void of contrarieties, and bodily accidents: secondly, It is created to God's Image: and man's soul is not like God, only in that it is capable of all sciences, and in that it hath an appetite infinite, which cannot be filled, but with God; and that it hath a will free and indifferent to all particular good: but also in that desire which it hath of immortality: thirdly, man hath dominion over the creatures, which consisteth also in this, that his soul is immortal, theirs are not: fourthly, Man's soul is not produced of any matter by generation, but is induced in the body by creation, the souls of all other creatures were procreated of the Elements, for the earth brings out beasts; and the waters fishes: this is also manifest by many places of Scripture.   

Q. Is the soul of man immortal by nature, or by grace?  
A. Internally: that is, as it is a simple immaterial substance, it is immortal by nature: but externally, as it depends on God, hath it being and subsistence in him, it is immortal by grace.   

Q. In what place of the world was Paradise?  
A. Not in any other earth separated from ours, by the Ocean; nor higher than the supreme region of the air, as some Father's thought: but in Mesopotamia and the bordering countries to it: for Paradise was planted on the East side of Eden, which is in Mesopotamia: secondly, that is manifest by the Rivers Tignis and Euphrates, which spring out of the mountains of Armenia, and flow thorough the countries of Mesopotamia, Assyria, and Chaldea, and run into the Persian gulf, and these are the Rivers of Paradise.   

Q. Should man have remained in Paradise only, if he had not sinned?  
A. No: for Paradise was not so large as to contain all mankind, being comprehended within the limits of these country's aforesaid: secondly, man had power over the whole earth; and all the herbs of the ground were given to him for food; and therefore he was to replenish the whole earth: thirdly, how should the earth be trimmed, manured and made fruitful, if man had dwelled in paradise?   

Q. Then to what end did God make Paradise, seeing he knew that man should presently fall, and be cast out of it?  
A. He made it, that Adam, so long as he obeyed God, might enjoy it: secondly, that it might be a figure and type of the heavenly Paradise, and joys of the life to come: thirdly, to put him in mind, after his fall, what great blessings he had lost, by losing Paradise.   

Q. Is Paradise yet extant, ●…r not?  
A. It is not extant: for Paradise was in these Countries of Mesapotamia, Assyria, etc. through the which Tigris and Euphrates the Rivers of Paradise) did flow: but those countries are still populous, and no sign now of Paradise: secondly, the Flood, Genesis 7. was fifteen cubits higher than the mountains, therefore it was also defaced with the flood.   

Q. Why was the tree of life called so?  
A. Because it was the Sacrament or sign of life, both natural in Paradise, and spiritual in heaven: or as some think, because it had power, being eaten, to preserve the life of man, a long time▪ but not for ever: for man was not to live still a natural life. Again, the body of man was corruptible, because it was made of matter the subject of corruption, of contrary elements and parts; as also because the natural heat of the body, by degrees is extenuated, and the radical humour exhausted: and in these respects, although this tree had that virtue to preserve the life of the body a long time, yet not for ever.   

Q. Why did God forbid man to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil?  
A. Not because it was evil in itself, or hurtful to man: but because by this command, God would try man's obedience.   

Q. Why was the tree, called the tree of knowledge of good and evil?  
A. Not because it had power either to beget knowledge in Adam, or to augment his knowledge, as the Hebrews and josephus do think: for Adam was created with perfect knowledge: neither can corporal fruits produce spiritual effects in the soul: but it was so named from the event: for man knew now what was good and evil by experience, having transgressed in eating of this tree. Secondly, it was so named, because of Satan's false promise, who enticed them to eat of it, promising they should be as Gods, knowing good and evil.   

Q. What rivers were those, that Moses calls here Phison and Gehon?  
A. They were parts of Tigris, and Euphrates, which river is sometimes named one, because they flow together, and are joined in one below Babylon: sometimes two, in respect of the place, from whence they spring and where they end. Sometimes four, in respect of their four heads, whereof two spring out of the mountains, and other two empty themselves in the Persian sea.   

Q. Then Phison is not Ganges of India, nor Gehon, Nilus of Egypt?  
A. No: for Ganges springeth out of Caucasus of India, Nilus out of the mountain of inferior Mauritania▪ but Phison and Gehon, out of Armenia: Nilus exonerateth herself in the Mediterranean sea: but Phison and Gehon into the Persian Gulf.   

Q. What country is this Havilah?  
A. Not a country in India, but bordering upon Palestine, and Assyria, as may be gathered out of Gene. Chap. 25. 18.   

Q. What is Bdellium?  
A. It is a black Tree, the bigness of an Olive tree, from the which there runneth a kind of sweet Gum. Plinius. lib. 12. Chapt. 9   

Q. How is that understood, that God did put Adam into the Garden?  
A. Either by the inward persuasion of God he was led thither, as Christ was led to the wilderness, Math. 4. or he was caught by the Spirit, as Henoch, Habh●…cuc, and Philip, or else by an Angel, in the shape of man, he was led to Paradise.   

Q. Why did not God create Adam in Paradise?  
A. To let him know that Paradise did not belong to him by nature, but by grace. Secondly, to teach him to be the more circumspect in obeying God, considering he might be as well put out of it, as he was brought in, if he broke Gods Law. Thirdly, that he should have no cause to accuse God of cruelty, in putting him out of that place, which by nature was due to him; therefore he returns to the place from whence he came.   

Q. Then why was Euah created in Paradise?  
A. Because Adam, out of whose side she was taken was now in Paradise. Secondly, she is not now properly created, but form and framed out of Adam's rib: for when Adam was form, she was created potentia in him, in respect the body of Adam was the matter of her body.   

Q. Should man have wrought in Paradise?  
A. Yes: but not for need, and with trouble as now: but with pleasure, to keep himself from idleness. Secondly, thereby to stir him up the more to contemplate heavenly things. And thirdly, to try the diverse natures of grounds, and of those things that grow on the ground.   

Q. Doth these words, You shall eat of every tree of the Garden, contain a precept or a permission?  
A. Not a precept, but a permission: for if God did command Adam to eat of ●…uery tree, he should have been tied to it▪ Secondly, man hath no need to be commanded to eat, when he is hungry: for he can do that by nature. Thirdly, he knew that all the trees were created to that use, therefore he needs no commandment to eat.   

Q. Was this commandment of not eating the tree of Knowledge of good and evil, enjoined to Eva also?  
A. Yes: for so she confessed to the Serpent. Secondly, if she had not been commanded to abstain from it, she should not have sinned in eating of it.   

Q. How could this precept belong to Eva, seeing she was not yet created?  
A. It was first given to Adam, and then by Adam it was delivered to Eua.   

Q. Why did God forbid Adam to eat of this tree?  
A. First, to let him know, that he was but a creature and servant, and therefore had a Lord whom he must serve and obey. Secondly, to let him see, that he had freewill and power both to choose and refuse any thing he pleased▪ Thirdly, to exercise him in obedience.   

Q. But seeing God knew that Adam would violate this precept, and bring himself and his posterity to perpetual misery, why would God enjoin it to him.  
A. To make him inexcusable: for he made him upright, and gave him grace to obey, if he would: dedit Adamo posse, si vellet; non, & velli, & posse. Secondly, Although God knew that man would sin, yet he did permit him, because he was to convert that sin of Adam to his greater good, in sending his Son into the world. Thirdly, he suffered him to fall, that his Mercy and justice might appear the more.   

Q. How is it understood, that whatsoever day Adam should eat of the Forbidden tree, he should die?  
A. He did not die actually, as soon as he had eaten the forbidden fruit but now he was subject to death, and the necessity of dying is laid upon him▪ Secondly, he may be said to dye actually that day, because then the infirmities of body and soul, which are the forerunners & causes of death actual, did seize upon him: & so mortuus est morte inchoata, sed non completa.   

Q. Why did not God expressly threaten Adam with death eternal?  
A. Because God in the old Testament speaketh but sparingly of death eternal, and under shadows. Secondly, death corporal is better known to man (not only by faith and reason, but also by experience) than death eternal, which only is known by faith. Thirdly, he would speak of such a death, as did not only belong unto him, but to all his posterity, although they did repent: and this is the death of the body, whereof all are partakers.   

Q. Why did God threaten Adam with death?  
A. Because death is the greatest and most fearful misery that can happen to man. Secondly. The name of death comprehends all the miseries and afflictions that do befall man in this life, because they are preparations to death: Nam ut via ad generationem est generatio, sic via ad interitum est mors.   

Q. Then what death is mean●… here?  
A. Both of body and soul, temporal and eternal.   

Q. How can death corporal be a punishment for sin, seeing it proceeds of natural causes, as of contrary qualities?  
A. It is not the punishment of sin, as it proceeds of natural causes, but in respect that God ordained Adam to live immortally, if he had not sinned: now having sinned, death follows as the stipend of sin.   

Q. Why was it not good that man should be alone?  
A. Because man without the woman could not procreate children, and so mankind could not be multiplied. Secondly, Christ could not have come in the flesh. Thirdly, the Elect and Church of God could not have increased, if Adam had been alone.   

Q. How were the creatures brought to Adam?  
A. Either by the help of Angels, or by that natural instinct which the Greeks' call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by the which every creature perceiveth what is good and bad for them.   

Q. Why did God bring the creatures to Adam?  
A. First, To let him see how much he did excel them, and how much the more he should be thankful. Secondly, Because he was the Lord of the beasts, God would have him to see his servants. Thirdly, that he might name them. Fourthly, that posterity might know, what excellent knowledge Adam had, in giving names to the creatures according to their kinds.   

Q. Why were not the fishes brought to Adam?  
A. Because they do not so much resemble man as the beasts: secondly, because they could not be such a help to man as the beasts: thirdly, because they could not live out of the water.   

Q. Had Adam the knowledge of all things, as soon as he was created?  
A. Yes, because he was created perfect, as well in regard of the gifts of his mind, as of his body: secondly, he was to be the Father, Teacher, and Governor of mankind, which he could not have been without excellent knowledge: thirdly, knowledge was a part of Adam's happiness, and he could not have been perfectly happy, if he had been at any time ignorant: fourthly, if God prepared food and all things needful for his body; then much more, science and understanding, which is the food of the soul.   

Q. Should Adam's Pesterity▪ in the state of innocence, have knowledge engrafted in them without labour?  
A. No: for it is natural to man to attain to knowledge by his senses and experience, therefore the soul hath received a body with senses, which the soul may use as organs, to beget knowledge; yet man in that happy estate should have attained to knowledge sooner, and with greater ease than now, because the wit was most excellent, the senses more perfect, the life longer, the body healthier and stronger, and there should have been no impediment to learning as now▪   

Q. Had Adam the knowledge of supernatural things?  
A. Yes, or else his knowledge had not been perfect: secondly, without this knowledge he could not have known God, nor the Angels, nor the end of his own creation.   

Q. Had Adam more wisdom than any man ever since?  
A. Yes: except Christ. And Adam's wisdom did excellours: first, in that he knew all natural things, we but some: secondly, his knowledge did proceed of the causes of natural things, but ours from the effects: thirdly, his knowledge could not be lost, but ours is often; partly through the infirmity and corruption of our natural senses, partly by idleness and ceasing to study; and partly by the contrary habit of ignorance and false opinions.   

Q. Had Adam the knowledge of the heavens, and their operations, as he had of earthly creatures?  
A. Yes, because his mind was perfect: and knowledge is the perfection of the mind: secondly, the power, wisdom and providence of God is seen in the heavenly bodies as in the earthly: thirdly, Adam could not have had the perfect knowledge of earthly things, if he had not had the knowledge of heavenly: for the knowledge of the earthly things, depends from the knowledge of the heavenly.   

Q. What were the effects of that original righteousness, in the which Adam was created?  
A. The effects thereof are many, especially these four: first, the holiness of his will and reason, which was wholly subject to God: secondly, the uprightness of the inferior part, that is, of the flesh and senses, which were perfectly obedient to the superior part of the soul; thirdly, perfect inclination to do good, and eschew evil: fourthly, a perpetual joy of the mind, and peace of conscience, raising from this holiness.   

Q. Hath Christ brought us more happiness by his jucarnation, than Adam lost by his transgression?  
A. Yes: for although sin did abound, yet grace did more abound, as the Apostle disputeth, Rom. 5. Therefore▪ Foelix fuit Ada culpa cuius delendae causa, tantum habemus Redemptorem: saith Gregorius.   

Q. Was Adam mortal or immortal before his Fall?  
A. He was immortal, not simply, but conditionally, if he did obey God, if not, than he should die.   

Q. How was he immortal?  
A. Not as God, who is altogether immortal, both internally and externally, because in him there is no mutability: nor as the Angels, who are immortal, because they are not compounded of a matter, which is the subject of corruption: nor as the heavens, which though they have a material substance, yet this is not the subject of contradiction and contrary qualities, as the sublunary and elemental bodies are: but Adam was immortal by grace, and the power of God, who would have preserved him supernaturally from corruption, although naturally he was subject to corruption.   

Q. Then this gift of immortality which Adam should have enjoyed, was not naturally due to him?  
A. No: for if it had been natural, it should not have been taken from Adam: but sin did neither abolish nor diminish man's natural gifts. Secondly, that which is against nature, cannot be due to nature: but for the body to be immortal, is against the nature of man's body, seeing it is compounded of contrary qualities.   

Q. Why would God form Eva of Adam sleeping?  
A. That Adam should not feel any pain in losing his rib. Secondly, to signify a great mystery: for as Eva was form out of the side of Adam sleeping: so the Church was reform by water and blood, out of the body of Christ dying.   

Q. Why was Eva made rather of the side, then of any other part of the body?  
A. Because the side is the middle of the body; to signify that the woman must be of equal dignity with the man, therefore she was not made of the head, nor of the foot, for she must neither be superior, nor inferior to him.   

Q. Of what side was she taken out?  
A. It is probable, that she was taken out of the left side, for the heart inclineth to that side●… so man and woman should embrace each other with hearty love. And as the left side is weakest, so is the woman the weaker vessel: also the males are conceived in the right side, the females in the left; and as the sides are defended by the arms, so must the woman by the husband.   

Q. Why was Eva made of the man, and not of the earth, as Adam was?  
A. Because Adam should love his wife the more, not only because she is of that same nature with him, that she is joined with him by carnal copulation, that she doth bring him forth child●…en: but also because she is a part of his own substance. Secondly, Eùa was made of Adam, to show that Adam is the beginning of the woman, and of all mankind. Thirdly, that we might learn from hence, that mystical conjunction betwixt Christ and his Church.   

Q. What is meant by the rib?  
A. Not the bare bone: but bone with the flesh thereof, as Adam testifieth: Thou art bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh.   

Q. How did God of one rib make a whole woman?  
A. Either by rarefaction, or multiplication of the same rib, or by some addition of some new matter: as Christ did feed 5. thousand men with 5. loaves: for God can of nothing, or of every thing make any thing.   

Q. Was this rib, whereof Eva was created, one of Adam's natural ribs, or was it a superfivous rib?  
A. It was one of Adam's natural ribs: for ●…ow elsé could he have said of Eva, Thou art bone of my bone? or how could Eva be said, to be form of Adam? Neither was Adam imperfect, although he wanted his rib: for God did fill up that place with flesh.   

Q. If Adam lost one of his ribs, how comes it▪ that the posterity of Adam have all their 24. ribs?  
A. Although Abraham was circumcised: yet he begot his children uncircumcised; and a maimed man doth beget a whole man: for nature, if she be not hindered, retains her own force and vigour, and brings forth the perfectest effects she can.   

Q. How come it, that Adam▪ in losing his rib, did not feel pain?  
A. Either in regard of his deep sleep, for those that are in a lethargy. do feel neither stripes nor wounds; or else, because God did suspend, and hinder the act of feeling, which is in the nerves.   

Q. Why doth not Moses speak as well of the creation of Eua's soul, as of her body?  
A. Because her body was otherwise created, than the body of Adam: but the manner of the creation of her soul, is all one with that of adam's, therefore there was no need of repetition.   

Q. Why was Eva brought to Adam?  
A. To signify, that she was Adam's companion. Secondly, a help to him to beget children. Thirdly, that the man is not for the woman, but the woman for the man. Fourthly, this bringing signifieth, that they are now contracted and married.   

Q. Had Eua ●… reasonable soul as Adam had?  
A. Yes: because she was made for a help to man, which she could not have been without a reasonable soul: secondly, both receive a Law, upon both was inflicted punishment for the breach thereof; both their bodies are alike: redemption is promised to both; and both do expect glory.   

Q. Why did not God create Eva as soon as Adam?  
A. That Adam living a private life a while, might the better perceive the comforts of the married life. Secondly, that he might love God the more, who provided such a comfort to him, when he was alone.   

Q. Is man and woman of the same kind?  
A. Yes: for male and female make no essential difference. Secondly, if they were not of the same kind, how could they procreate children? Thirdly, they both have the same definition and essential properties. Fourthly, we read that maids have become boys, which could not be if they were of diverse kinds, Plinius lib. 7. Cap. 4. Gellius. lib. 9 Cap. 4. etc.   

Q. How could Adam and Eva be married, seeing they were so near a kin?  
A. The nearness of kin, which forbiddeth matrimony, is that which ariseth of carnal copulation, and Eva was not begotten, but created of Adam: therefore she was not his daughter, but his wife.   

Q. Why was there but one woman created?  
A. Because that one woman is sufficient to be a help to one man. Secondly, to teach posterity, that God doth hate Polygamy. Thirdly, that the love of man might be the greater to his wife.   

Q. How is man and woman one flesh?  
A. Because they are joined together to live one commonlife. Secondly, in respect of their carnal copulation. Thirdly, in respect of procreation of one flesh: for the child is the flesh and substance of the father and mother, and both their flesh is united in their children, Fourthly, because of the right and power the Husband hath over the body of his Wife, and the Wife over her Husband, 1. Cor. 7.   

Q. Why was not Adam and Eva ashamed of their nakedness?  
A. Because that externally, neither heat nor cold, nor any thing else could hurt their body, internally there was no inordinate affection in the soul: but perfectly the inferior part of the soul did obey the superior. And thirdly, because there was nothing to be seen in their bodies, but that which was comely and decent; and therefore, Nihil putabant velandum, q●…ia nihil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Aug. 〈◊〉. 11. de Gen. Cap. 1.    

Questions on the third Chapter.  

Q. WHat is meant by the Serpent?  
A. Not the devil: for so these words should be metaphorically understood: but this is a history, and no allegory, nor the image of a Serpent, for it was not a picture, but a real Serpent that was cursed, neither was it a natural Serpent that did speak: for speech and reasoning do naturally belong to men, not to beasts: for they neither have reasonable souls, nor the instruments of speech: but it was the devil that spoke in the Serpent, using the same as his instrument to deceive. So then, there was both a Serpent, which is proved both by the speech of Moses, and the punishment inflicted on the Serpent; and beside, the devil, which is known both by his speech and reasoning with Eva, as also by the testimony of Christ, calling the devil a manslayer from the beginning. john 8.   

Q. Why was not Eva afraid to confer with the Serpent?  
A. Because the serpent (as all other creatures) was subject and obedient to man, neither durst they, nor could they afray him or hurt him, neither was there any place for fear in that happy estate.   

Q. Why did Satan use rather the Serpent, than any other creature?  
A. First, because God did not suffer him to take any other creature. Secondly, because the Serpent, of all other creatures, is most subtle, deceitful, prone to hurt, and deceive a man: the Serpent is prudent to save itself: therefore it is said, Be wise as Serpents, Math. 10. and crafty to deceive others, as Paul saith, The Serpent by his craftiness deceived Eva, 2. Cor. 11. Chap.   

Q. Seeing it was the devil in the Serpent, that deceived Eva, why doth not Moses signify so much?  
A. Because Moses writeth a history, and not a commentary, therefore all that is spoken here, he doth attribute to the Serpent, because Eva saw the Serpent, and conferred with the Serpent: but Satan we saw not.   

Q. What do these words mean, Your eyes shall be opened▪  
A. This is meant of a further degree of knowledge, which Eva had not as yet: for the eyes of the body were opened already, and good and evil is not the object of bodily eyes, but of the mind, which is the eye of the soul.   

Q. What is that, You shall be as Gods?  
A. By Gods, may be understood Angels, which are called Gods in Scripture: But here is rather meant the persons of the Trinity: as vers. 22. Behold, Adam is become as one of us.   

Q. Did not Eva see that this tree was good till now?  
A. Yes: she saw before but simply, but now she seethe it with an ardent desire to eat of it.   

Q. Why did God suffer Eva to be tempted?  
A. That there might be an occasion for the manifestation both of God's justice in punishing the wicked, and of his mercy in saving the repentant. Secondly, to show us, that although she had all happiness in that estate. yet she should not have been free of temptations. Thirdly, that we might learn to arm ourselves against Satan: for if he durst tempt in the estate of innocency, and in Paradise, what will he not do to us now, being driven out 〈◊〉 Paradise?   

Q. What was the first sin of Eva?  
A. Incredulity, in not believing God threatening. Secondly, Pride, desiring to be like God. Thirdly, ally, saying, that Godd forbidden to touch the tree. Fourthly, Gluttony, desiring the fruit which was forbidden. Fift●…▪ scandal, in drawing Adam to the same sin. Sixthly, a foolish excusing of her sin to God.   

Q. Why was the Devil so earnest to tempt Eva?  
A. Because he hated God, and would not have man to glorify, but to anger him. Secondly, because of his pride and envy: for he could not abide that man should be in such happiness, himself being in misery.   

Q. Why did Adam eat of this fruit?  
A. Partly, through the instigation of his wife; partly, through curiosity, desiring to try what kind of fruit this should be, which God did prohibit: so  N●…timur in vetitum semper cupimusque negata.  

Q. Was Adam deceived also, as the woman was?  
A. No: Adam was not seduced, but the woman, 1. Timo. 2. For Eva did not deceive Adam, because she thought all was true that Satan spoke: but Satan deceived Eva, because he made her believe that, which he knew himself was false. Secondly, Eva confessed that she was deceived, but Adam doth not say that he was deceived, but, The woman gave to me, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

Q. Was the same of Adam and Eva the greatest, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉?  
A. If we do consider one sin with another, than we say, that Adam's sin was not the greatest, for the sin against the holy Ghost i●… greater; but if we respect the circumstances of Adam's sin; to wit, the place, Paradise, where no occasion of sin was; the time when he sinned, immediately after his creation, at the first encounter yielding to his enemy; the excellency of the person that sinned, Adam, being created to Gods own Image: if we regard also that infinite hurt and misery that hath fall'n upon mankind, by that sin of Adam; we must confess, that it is the greatest sin that ever man committed.   

Q. Whether was the sin of Adam or Eva greatest?  
A. If we consider both their persons, than Adam did sin more grievously, because he was wiser and stronger than Eva, and he was the head of the woman: for this cause saith the Apostle, that by one man sin entered into the world, Rom. 5. yet in two respects, Eua's sin was greater than Adam's: first, in that she did believe the Serpent more than God; which Adam would not have done: secondly, in that she did entice Adam to the same sin.   

Q. How were their eyes opened after the eating of this fruit?  
A. They were not blind before, nor ha●… they now more liberty of will than they had, or greater knowledge: but now they know ●…uill by experience, which before they knew by science; and their eyes are said to be opened, because they perceive, their nakedness is ignominious, and their affections inordinate, which before were decent and holy.   

Q. Why did they cover their members, after the eating of the forbidden fruit?  
A. Because they were ashamed of their nakedness: secondly, by this they thought to hide their sin, but in vain: for none can hide sin but God; therefore blessed is he whose sin is covered, Psal. 32.   

Q Why did they cover their privy members?  
A. Because their inordinate lust began most to appear here: secondly, these are the instruments of generation, which then became sinful; therefore all people are ashamed to see those parts, because sin comes by generation. Hence circumcision (the sign of generation) was on this part of the body, Genesis 17.   

Q. Why did they 〈◊〉 the leaves of the Fig tree?  
A. Because the leaves of the Figtree are broadest, or else, because their guilty consciences accusing them; and being in fear, they took of the leaves of this tree which was nearest.   

Q. What is meant here by the noise of God?  
A. This sometimes signifieth thunder, Exodus 9 sometimes any sound. Ezek. 12. sometimes Gods distinct voice like thunder, john 12. here it signifieth some fearful noise and sound, by which God would signify; that now he was coming to encounter with Adam.   

Q. What signifieth the wind of the day?  
A. This is a description of the evening: for at the going down of the Sun in those places, that are near the Mediterranean Sea, commonly the wind doth blow from the Sea; and as God came to judge Adam in the evening, so will he come to judge all mankind in the evening of the world, with the sound of the Trumpet.   

Q. How did God speak to Adam here  
A. God speaketh in Scripture sometime internally by his Spirit, sometimes externally, either by Angels, or by men. Here than it is like, that Christ spoke in the form of man; for in this form he did oftentimes appear to the Fathers of old; and in the fullness of time, this word was made flesh, and dwelled with us.   

Q. Why did not God accuse Satan, as he did the man and the woman?  
A. Because Satan was already condemned for his pride, but the other two were to receive the sentence of condemnation; therefore he would not condemn them, till he had convicted them.   

Q. Whether did God curse the Devil, or the Serpent?  
A. He cursed both: the Devil mystically, and the Serpent literally; the Devil as the principal agent, and the Serpent as his instrument: but this Curse is pronounced of the Serpent only, because it was the Serpent that Eva did see and speak to, and the Devil did lurk within the Serpent.   

Q. How could the creeping on the belly, and the eating of the dust, be a punishment and a curse, seeing this was natural to the Serpent before man's fall?  
A. The Serpents creeping before, was pleasant, now it is painful; than it was comely, now it is base, execrable, and contemptible.   

Q. Why did God curse the Serpent?  
A. To augment Satan's grief the more, who used him for his organ in this wicked tentation. Secondly, because the Serpent being Satan's instrument, was the occasion of man's fall; as the beast with whom any man did lie, was to be stoned, Levit. 20. Thirdly, because by this God will show, how much he abhorreth sin, in punishing for man's wickedness dumb and senseless creatures: therefore the Earth was cursed, for Adam's sin; the beasts and fowls were drowned, for the sin of the first World; the Cities that entice the Israelites to Idolatry, must be burnt; yea, the Cattles, and every thing in those Cities, Deut. 13. yea, the dumb creatures, for man's sin were daily offered up in sacrifice.   

Q. What is meant by the Woman's Seed, and the Serpent's seed?  
A. By the Woman's Seed, is meant especially Christ, the Woman's Seed, according to the flesh; and with him, all the faithful: by the Serpent's seed, are meant both the ravenous beasts, which naturally hate mankind, as also wicked men, which are called Serpents in Scripture, and generation of Vipers.   

Q. What is meant here by the Head, and the Heel?  
A. By the Head of the Serpent, is meant the power of the Devil, sin and death; by which he woundeth us: by the Heel, is meant the humanity of Christ, and his members, which Satan did hurt, by the death of the Cross; and woundeth yet, by persecuting his members.   

Q. How can the multiplication of the woman's consceptions be a punishment for sin?  
A. The conceptions of the woman are a punishment, because sometimes their conceptions are imperfect and deformed: secondly, many children being conceived, do perish before they come to maturity: Thirdly, many children are wicked and rebellious, not regarding the womb that bore them with anguish, nor the paps which suckled them with danger. These are great punishments inflicted on women for the sin of Eva: fourthly, her conceptions are a punishment; for many infirmities do accompany a woman that is with child, as swimmings in the head, tooth-aches, perturbations in the mind, vitiosities in the stomach; as to refuse good and wholesome meres, to desire to eat those things which Nature (being sound) abhorreth.   

Q. What is the reason that women do bring forth their children in sorrow?  
A. God's decree in punishing the sin of Eva: secondly, the narrow passage of the belly, with a dilatation and stretching out of the internal parts thereof, causeth most sharp and sensible pains: hence the Scripture compares exquisite sorrow and pain, with the sorrows of the child birth, Psal. 48. Mica. 4. Reu. 12. but this pain should not have been in the state of innocency.   

Q. Wherein was the ground cursed for Adam's sake?  
A. In that it did not bring forth fruit of it own accord, as it should have done, if Adam had not sinned, or at least, with little labour. Secondly, in that it brought forth noxious, and fruitless, and poisonable herbs after the Fall.   

Q. Why did Adam call his wife Eva, the mother of living?  
A. Because by this name he would testify his faith, in believing that Christ, the Seed of the woman, should bring that life again to man, which he had lost by his sin.   

Q. Did God make coats of skins for Adam and his wife?  
A. Yes: but whether God killed some beast, or whether he created the skins of nothing, or of some matter, it is uncertain; howsoever, by those skins he did put Adam in mind of his mortality, and that he had need of clothing, both for his body, which now was to be subject to infirmities, as also for his soul, which now was defiled with sin, and therefore must be clothed with the righteousness of Christ; which garment he did put on by believing that Christ, the Lamb of GOD, should be killed to cloth his naked soul, as this beast was killed to cloth his naked body. These skins also do signify our mortification; for, as these beasts were killed, so we must kill our sins: for this cause, the skins of the Sacrifices were given to the Priests, Levit. 7. Elias and john Baptist with many other Saints, did wear skins, Hebr. 11.   

Q. Why did God cloth them with skins?  
A. First, to show them that it was lawful for them to kill beasts, although not to eat, yet to cloth their bodies. Secondly, to teach us sobriety; for those were Skins, not Silk, Purple, or Cloth of Gold, which are not worn so much for necessity, as for pride. Thirdly, that this first Adam might in some sort be a type of the second Adam, JESUS: for this was clothed with the skins of dead beasts, so Christ with our dead sins; for he became sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him: and so our jacob took our flesh and skin, and in it received the blessing for us.   

Q. Was it needful that Adam should be clothed now after his Fall?  
A. Yes: first, to hide his nakedness: secondly, to descend his body from the injuries of the air: thirdly, to assure him, that although he was a sinner, yet God would not quite forget him, and cast him away.   

Q. Why did God say, that Adam was like to him?  
A. By these words, God would show how worthy Adam was to be scorned, who thought to be like to any or the three Persons in the Trinity, for eating of the forbidden fruit: so this word (us) doth not signify Angels, but the three Persons of the Trinity.   

Q. Why did God drive Adam out of the Garden?  
A. To let him see how foolishly he had done, in giving more credit to his Wife, than to him. Secondly, to keep the Tree of Life from him, lest he should abuse it, by thinking to have life by it, seeing he had now violated God's Law: for although this Tree was a sign of life before his Fall, now it is none. Thirdly, that by driving him from this Tree of Life, he might seek for a better life than this Tree could yield, even that heavenly life, which is hid with Christ in God.   

Q. When was Adam cast out of Paradise?  
A. That same day he sinned: for he being now a sinner, and rebellious against God, was not fit to stay any longer in that holy place: but what day of the week●… he was cast out, is uncertain; yet it is thought, the eighth day after his creation, he was cast out, in the evening of that day: for Satan did not suffer him to stay long there untempted: yet I do not hold that he was cast out that same day he was created: for so many things as fallen out between his creation and casting out of Paradise, could not be done all in such a short space as a piece of a day; for the beasts were created the sixth day, before man was. Secondly, in such a short time Adam could not have perceived the pleasures and happiness of that place; therefore he was not cast out that same day he was created.   

Q. Why would God have Adam to till the ground?  
A. Because now the ground was cursed, and would not yield fruit without hard labour. Secondly, by this servile work, he would put him in remembrance of his sin, which brought him to this misery: yet afterwards God mitigated his hard labour, in freeing every seventh year from his tillage, to put them in mind●… of that ease they lost by sin, which was restored again spiritually by Christ.   

Q. What is meant here by the Cherubins and the fiery Sword?  
A. Not fearful visions, nor the torrid Zone, nor a fire compassing Paradise like a wall, neither the fire of Purgatory, as Treodorotus, Aquinas, Lyranus, and Ambrose do imagine but by the Cherubins we understand the Angels which did appear often times with wings as Daniel 1. 9▪ and the figures of these were wrought in the tabernacle, Exo. 25. By the fiery sword we understand most sharp and two edged swords which the Angels in the form of men did shake by the which shaking and swift motion the swords did seem to Adam to glister like fire for more terror lest he should attempt re-entrance there the Angels also have appeared at other times with swords in their hands as we read Numbers 22. of the Angel that met Balaam: and of that Angel that David did observe with a sword in his hand▪ 1. Chro. 21. 16.   

Q. Why are these Angels called Ch●…rnbins?  
A. Because they did appear with wings in the Tabernacle and the Temple they were wrought with two wings: they appeared to Esay, with 6. wings, who are called in the 6. of Esay, Seraphins because they are inflamed with the love of God: they appear with wings to signify there swiftness and diligence in executing Gods commandments.    

Questions on the fourth Chapter.  

Q. WHat is the subject of this Chapter?  
A. Concerning the propagation of mankind, especially of Cain and Abel; in who●…e persons were to be seen the wicked, and the Church of God. Cain signifieth Possession: this is a fit name to the wicked; for they seek nothing else but Possessions and Honours in this world; and therefore Came built a City: so the wicked laboureth to be secure, to have rest and ease in this world. But Abel signifieth Vanitio and Sorrow: so is the estate of the godly, their life hee●…e is but vanity, and they account all things but vanity; their life is sorrow, they weep for their sins, and for the vanities of this world, and because they are persecuted by the posterity of Caine.   

Q. When was Cain borne?  
A. After Adam was cast out of Paradise; for the●…e ●…ee remained but a short while: neither was it ●…it, that in Paradise, a place holy, and the type of Heaven, any carnal copulation, which now was sinful, should be committed.   

Q. Why did Eva say, I have obtained a son of the Lord?  
A. Because she was glad, thinking she had borne the promised Seed, that should tread down the Serpent's head: but she was deceived; for he was rejected, although he was the first borne, and therefore a King and Priest; and Abel, whom she counted vanity, was chosen, and his sacrifice accepted.   

Q. Why is it said, that Abel was a feeder of sheep?  
A. To signify that Abel was the figure of Christ: for as he was killed by his brother Cain, so was Christ of his brethren the jews: as Abel's sacrifice was received, so was that perfect Sacrifice of Christ accepted of the Father, as a full Propitiation for our sins: and as Abel was a shepherd, so was Christ the true Shepherd, that laid down his life for his sheep sake.   

Q. Wherein was Abel's sacrifice better than Caines?  
A. In that it was of the best and fattest; signifying, that the best things must be given to God: secondly, it proceeded of faith and love that Abel carried to God, Heb. 11.   

Q. How did Cain know, that God respected the sacrifice of Abel?  
A. By some visible sign, as by fire from heaven consuming the sacrifice; for so he used to show afterward, that he liked the sacrifice by sending fire, as Leisit. 9 jud. 6. 1. Chron. 21. 1. Kings 18.   

Q. Why doth God say, that Abel's desire should be subject to his brother?  
A. Because Cain was the first borne, and therefore, by nature, had great privileges over his younger brethren; which words God speaks, to restrain him from hurting Abel▪ for though God accepted Abel's sacrifice, yet he would not take away the honour of Cain's Birthright, and the privileges that followed the same.   

Q. Why did Cain kill his brother Abel?  
A. First, for Envy, because God accepted his sacrifice; and therefore he thought, that Abel should have obtained his birthright: secondly, by the instigation of Satan; who considering the holy life of Abel, thought, that of him should com●… the promised S●…de; so he began 〈◊〉 to persecute Christ.   

Q. Wherein was Cain's answer to God, evil?  
A. In ●…hree things: first, in that it was a lie: secondly, in that it was impious; for he lied not to m●…, but to God: thirdly, in that it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Am I my brother's keeper?   

Q. Why is it said, that Abel's blood did cry to God?  
A. To express the wickedness of this sin. In Scripture four kinds of sin do cry to God: first, Murder, as in this place: secondly, that fearful sin of Sodom, Gen. 18. thirdly, the oppression of the poor, Exodus 3. fourthly, the keeping back of the labourer's hire, james 5.   

Q. What is Cain's punishment?  
A. First, he was accursed; that is, deprived of God's love and favour, and hated of all good men, and he was the first man that was cursed: as the Serpent his father was the first creature that was cursed, because both the Devil and Cain were murderers; Adam was not cursed, but the Earth for him. Secondly, the Earth also is cursed for Cain's sin, and made unfruitful. Thirdly, he is made a vagabond, and fugitive; signifying, that he should be so troubled with the sting of his guilty conscience, that he should be in continual fear.   

Q. Was Cain's sin●…e greater than he could hear?  
A. No: for his sin was not greater than God's mercy, and his punishment was not greater than God's justice could inflict: and so, by these words he either accuseth God of injustice, in saying his punishment is greater than he can bear; or else he despaireth, if he say, his sin is greater than he can bear: and so he sinneth now more fearfully than before; for before, he sinned against his neighbour, here he sins against God.   

Q. What meaneth Cain, when he saith, he shall be cast out from God's face?  
A. By Face, either he means his presence in the Church; and in this sense, to be cast out from God's face, is to be excommunicated out of the Church: or by his Face, we may understand his favour and protection, as often in Scripture: also in this sense, to be cast out from God's face, is to lose his love, care, and favour; as to have his face, is to have all blessings.   

Q. Why wa●… he afraid to be killed, seeing there were no more men now but Adam?  
A. Although Moses doth not mention other men at this time, because his drift is to speak only of the propagation of the Church, yet we must know, that now when Abel was killed, mankind was multiplied; for he was killed the 129. as some, or the 130. year of the World, as others do think.   

Q. What is meant by the sevenfold punishment, that they shall suffer who shall kill Cain?  
A. By this is either understood, that they shall be punished to the seventh generation; or else, by sevenfold is understood manifold, as often in Scripture▪ So then, he that did kill Cain, should be most severely punished, not only for murdering a man, but also for murdering such a man as was marked by God, that he should not be murdered.   

Q. But why would not God have Cain killed?  
A. First, to show that he abhors murder: secondly, he would have him to live long in fear and torment: thirdly, that by him, living so long in torment and misery, others might be warned to abhor murder: fourthly, that he might have the longer time to repent him for his sin.   

Q. What mark was this, that God set upon Cain?  
A. Whether it was a mark on his body, or madness, and fear in his mind, it is uncertain; yet it was some real and visible sign, that men might be warned by, not to meddle with him.   

Q. How is it understood, that Cain went out from God's presence?  
A. Hear his presence doth not signify his knowledge and power; for none can flee from that: as, Whither shall I ●…lee from thy presence? Psalm 139. and jonas thought to have fled from this presence, jonas 1. But his presence doth signify here, the place of his worship, where he shown his presence, and that is his Church; or else, he went out of God's presence, that is, he was deprived of God's love and favour.   

Q. Why did Cain build a City?  
A. For his better security, for he was in continual fear: secondly, because he was worldly-minded, placing his happiness in the cities and forts of this world, and not looking for that city whose builder and maker is God: thirdly, that he might the more securely tyrannize and pray upon other men's goods and lands: for he is the first King and Conqueror in the world: and therefore Kings should not delight in Conquering kingdoms with blood, lest they be counted the suc●…ssours of Cain and Nimrod, that mighty Hunter; for, Magna imperia sunt magna latroci●…ia.   

Q. When did Cain build this City?  
A. Not when Henoch was borne; for then there was no great need to build, seeing there were but few persons in the world: but in his old age; for Cain lived a long time, and now mankind was greatly multiplied.   

Q. Why did ●…ee call his City Henoch, and not by his own name, Cain?  
A. Because his own name was odious to the world, in respect of his murder; therefore he would not disgrace his City, and those that dwelled therein: secondly, because he loved Henoch exceedingly; therefore he would immortalize his name.   

Q. How is it understood, that jabel was the father of them that dwelled in Tents, and had Cattles?  
A. He was the inventor of Shepheardry, and of feeding of Cattles now Abel being dead: for Tents here signify such Tents as Shepherds do use, and not those that Soldiers do use in Wars.   

Q. Who were the first Inventors of Music, and Smith's Craft?  
A. Not Pythagoras, Linus, Orpheus, or Vulcan; but jubal, and Tubal-Caine, the posterity of Cain: so we see, that in external things, Cain and his posterity were blessed, as the wicked are generally in this life; but the inheritance of the Saints is in heaven.   

Q. Was it lawful for Lamech to have two wives?  
A. No: for it was against the first institution of Marriage: secondly, against the Law of Nature; which doth show, that one should be content with one: thirdly, this plurality of wives did arise of incontinency and lust, and not of desire to propagate to the increase of the Church, as many Saints have done.   

Q. What is meant by these words, I would slay a man in my wound, & c?  
A. Heer●… Lamech perceiving that he was hated for his cruelty, b●…aggeth to his wives of his strength, That although he were wounded, yet he were able to kill a man: this he did speak, to make his wives and others fear him the more. The Hebrews think, that Lamech did kill Cain in the Wilderness, thinking him to be a wild beast; and perceiving that it was Cain, he killed also the young man that deceived him.   

Q. What meaneth these words, If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, then Lamech etc.  
A. Either he speaketh this, to affray others from killing him, although he was a murderer, and so making a derision of God's judgement he had laid upon Cain; as if he would say, If he that killeth Cain, shall be punished sevenfold, than he that killeth me, shall be punished seventy sevenfold, that is, a great deal more: or else, by these words he seemeth to repent for his murder; as if he would say, Was Cain punished so hardly for his murder? then I am worthy of a seventy sevenfold worse punishment.   

Q. Was Sheth the third son of Adam? or had he any more besides those three mentioned in Genesis?  
A. It is credible, that in the space of an hundred and thirty years, (for in the hundred and thirtieth year Sheth was borne) Adam had many more children than those three; because that Adam and Eve were created perfect, and apt for procreation: So also it was necessary that the world should be multiplied, according to God's Decree, Increase and multiply. But these three Moses only nameth, because of all the rest, they were most eminent: Abel, the type of Christ, and the Church, which are Abel's, that is, mourners in this life: Cain, the type of the Devil, and his Church, and the father of the wicked: Sheth, the origin and root of the Church, the Father of Christ; yea, the origin of all mankind, after the flood: for Abel was killed, and Cain's posterity drowned.   

Q. Why doth Eva say, that God hath put another Seed to me, in stead of Abel; speaking of Sheth, and not of any other of her sons?  
A. Because Sheth was likest Abel. of all Eua's children, both in Religion toward God, uprightness of life towards men, and in love and reverence towards his Parents.   

Q. What did Enoch signify?  
A. Sorrowful, or miserable: he also was a type of the Church; which is pressed, although not oppressed with sorrow and misery in this life.   

Q. Why doth Moses say, that in his day's men began to call on the Name of the Lord?  
A. To signify, that now men began to worship God more publicly than they did before, to exhort the people to repentance, to preach openly. But we must not think, that God was not worshipped at all, till now: for Adam did worship God, and taught his sons Abel and Came to sacrifice; and Sheth also was an holy man, and a type of Christ, and of the Church.    

Questions on the fift Chapter.  

Q. WHy doth Moses rehearse the ten generations of Adam?  
A. First, to show the Genealogy of Christ, the promised Seed: Secondly, because he is to speak of enoch's translation, therefore he would show his generation: Thirdly, to show that amongst these multitudes▪ God had his Church, although it was then small; for God hath never wanted some, since the Creation, who do worship him, and call upon his Name.   

Q. Why doth Moses say here, that God did both create and make man? and what is meant by Adam here?  
A. He doth distinguish creation from making: for to be made, is to be form of some pre-existant matter; but to be created, is to be produced of nothing: then both these words he used, to signify the diverse producing of the soul and body. The soul is created, because it is produced of nothing; the body is made, because of something. And by Adam, he meaneth both the man and the woman▪ giving them one name, to signify that they are both of one flesh.   

Q. How is it understood, that Adam begat a son after his image?  
A. First, by his image, we understand his nature and substance; secondly, his reason and power he had over all other creatures; thirdly, the corruption of his nature: so that now Adam being sinful and mortal, begetteth sinful and mortal children. Then Sheth was begotten after the image of Adam▪ a man endued with reason, and dominion over the creatures; subject to sin and death, as Adam.   

Q. Why is it not said, that Adam did beget Cain and Abel after his image?  
A. Because a part of this image doth consist in bearing rule over the creatures; which dominion Abel had not, being taken away by untimely death: and from Cain this power was taken away, because he was accursed; and the Earth commanded, not to yield her increase.   

Q. What doth this name Sheth signify?  
A. To be set, or appointed in stead of Abel; and as Abel was the type of mortality, so Sheth is the type of our resurrection: for Adam seemed to be dead▪ Abel being killed, and Cain accursed; but in the birth of Sheth, he seems to revive again: and as he in Sheth was revived, so we all in Christ shall be made alive; and in that Adam giveth the same name to his son that Eva did, they both testify their faith and hope they have in the promised Seed.   

Q. Why are the years of Adam and the rest called Days?  
A. To signify, that although our life be never so long, it shall consume as days; for all years are composed of days: therefore every day we should be mindful of Mortality, and think, that every day is the last; and we must beseech God, that he would teach us to number our days.   

Q. What is the cause, that Adam, and the rest here named before the Flood, lived so long?  
A. First, because they lived soberly, and were contented with simple diet; not pampering their bellies, as now, with variety of Dishes. Secondly, the constitution of their bodies were better than ours, stronger, and not subject to Diseases. Thirdly, they had more experience and skill in the nature of Herbs and Fruits which they did eat, than we have. Fourthly, the Earth then brought forth excellenter Herbs for the food of man, than it hath done after the Flood: Fiftly, God would have them live so long▪ that Mankind might the more be multiplied. Sixtly, that man might the more commodiously find out Arts and Sciences; which they could not do, without long experience. Seventhly, the moderate temperature of the air was then greater. Eightly, they did live so long, that Adam night teach them the Creation of the World, his happiness in Paradise, and rejection from thence, etc. that the knowledge of God and Religion might the better be established amongst them, and propagated by them.   

Q. What kind of years were those that Moses mentioneth here?  
A. Not the years of the Moon, which we call Months: for by this computation, we should confess, that Kenan and Enoch did beget sons and daughters before they were seven years old; and that Abraham being 17. years of age, was a very old man: but Moses meaneth the years of the Sun, which were equal with our years; as we have proved in the Preface, upon the second book of our jewish History.   

Q. Why did Moses subioyne unto every one of their lives this Particle (and he died?)  
A. First to show the inevitable punishment and consequent of sin upon all Mankind. And from hence we may conclude, that every one that dyeth, is a sinner, even children; for death is the wages of sin: I except Christ; who died, not because he sinned, but because he came to destroy sin, and death, and Satan, that hath the power of death. Secondly, to show the vanity of this life, which is so short. Thirdly, to put us in mind of our mortality, that we might prepare ourselves for our end. All must die; even those are gone, that lived so long: and although that we think they lived many years, yet we may truly say, that they did not live one whole day; for none of them lived 1000 years, which to God is as one day.   

Q. What is the cause of the great difference between the Hebrew Copies, and the translation of the Septuagints, in the computation of the years between Adam and the Flood?  
A. We cannot say, that those seventy Interpreters, which Ptolomey did employ in translating the Hebrew Bible into the Greek Tongue, did err in their computation, seeing they use no figures, as the Greeks' and Latins do in this computation, but they use the names of their numbers. But rather we think, that those that copied out the translation of the Septuagints out of Ptolomeus Library, did err, in mistaking the Greek figures; for one letter, or figure, may easily be mistaken for another: or else they were somewhat negligent, because they thought these numbers of years not to be necessary. But we must adhere to the Hebrew verity: or else, if we follow the Septuagints in their computation, we must yield, that Methusalem did live after the Flood sixteen years, which is directly against the truth of God's Word; which affirmeth, that eight souls did only escape the Flood, that is, Noah and his Family.   

Q. Did Henoch die▪ or not?  
A. He did not die: so witnesseth Paul. Heb. 11. and Moses also in this place: for he subioynes to every one of their lives that lived before and after Henoch, until the Flood (and he died;) but of Henoch he speaketh no such thing.   

Q. Why did God translate Henoch, that he should not see death?  
A. First, that he might assure the faithful of their resurrection, and life eternal: secondly, because the World did degenerate, and came as it were to the height of impiety; therefore he took him away, lest he had been defiled with their wickedness, and so be made partaker of their plagues: thirdly, because God would show the World, how highly he esteemeth those that walk with him; that is, that obey, love, and fear him.   

Q. Whither was Henoch translated?  
A. Not to the earthly Paradise; for that was destroyed with the Flood: but he was translated to that heavenly Paradise, whereof Christ speaketh to the good These on the Cross, and whither Elias was caught: now, although he died not, yet his translation was in stead of death.   

Q. What signifieth No?  
A. Rest: which name his father Lamech gave him, because of the comfort he should have of him, thinking that he was the promised Seed, that should tread down the Serpent's ●…ead; or rather, because that he perceived by the Spirit of Prophecy, that he should be the type of Christ: for as No restored the World after the Flood; so did Christ, after the flood of his Father's wrath, restore the World to spiritual life: secondly, as No did build the Ark; so hath Christ built the Church: thirdly, as No offered sacrifice, whereby God smelled a savour of Rest, and said he would curse the ground no more; so in Christ's Sacrifice which he offered on the Cross, is the Father well pleased, and he will not be angry with his Church for ever.   

Q. How was No a comfort to Lamech, concerning the sorrow and work of his hands, and touching the Earth, which the Lord cursed?  
A. By Sorrow, and the works of our hands, may be understood Sin, which is our own work, as holiness is the work of God; by the Earth, which was cursed, we understand the barrenness of the Ground and the hard labour of the Husbandmen: for the Ground was cursed twice; once for Adam's sake, and once for Cain's: but now Lamech comforteth himself, that No shall be acceptable to God; who▪ for his sake, appointed times and seasons for sowing and reaping, and gave No the skill to find out Wine, that comforts the heart 〈◊〉 man: and also, in his time, God did sweep 〈◊〉 way the sins of this age, which did grieve 〈◊〉 mech, with an universal Flood.   

Q. Which of noah's three sons were eldest?  
A. japheth is the eldest; as it is plain, Gen. 10. 21. I'm the youngest, Gen. 9 24. but Shem is first named: First because in dignity he is preferred before his brethren, Gen. 9 26. so Abraham is named before his elder brother, Gen. 11. 26. jacob before Esau, Gen. 28. 5. Ephraim before Manasses, Gen. 48. 20. Secondly, Shem is first named; because of him, Abram and his posterity, the Israelites, descended: of which Moses is purposed to speak most.   

Q. Why did the Patriarches here named, ●…staine so long from begetting children; as No, till he was 500 years old, & c?  
A. As they lived longer than we, so they were not ready so soon to beget children, as we are: for now, when a man is thirty, he is in the prime of his years; but then, none was said to come to man's estate, till he had been a hundred years and more. Secondly, Moses drift here is not to set down the names of all the sons of these Fathers, but of such as Abraham and the Israelites came; and therefore he omits those first borne, of whom Abraham came not, and ●…peakes of the youngest: as Matthew, in describing Christ's Genealogy, speaketh of Isaac, not of Ishmael; of jacob, not of Esau; of judas and David, not of their elder brethren, because of them came not the Lord.    

Questions on the sixth Chapter.  

Q. WHat is understood by men, that began to multiply?  
A. By men, we understand the sons of Cain: who, because they took many Wives, did increase faster than Sheths' posterity; and as they multiplied, so did their sins multiply: for the multiplication of mankind is a blessing; but we see, the more blessings God bestoweth on us, the worse we are.   

Q. What is meant here by the sons of God?  
A. Not Angels, neither good nor bad, neither with bodies, nor without bodies: for they being spirits, are not moved with carnal lust; neither was it to drown them, that God sent the flood, but to destroy man: therefore by the sons of God, is understood men; for of them only doth God speak here, throughout all the Chapter.   

Q. What sort of men were these, that are called the sons of God?  
A. Some think, they were very tall an●… mighty men: therefore they are called the sonn●… of God▪ as the Mountains of God, the Cedar●… of God, that is, high and tall Hills, and Cedars▪ others think they were the sons of Princes▪ and judges, which are called gods in Scripture●… others again say, that they are those whereo●… Paul speaketh, Rom. 8. They that are led by th●… Spirit of God, they are the sons of God▪ that they were holy and just men: but they are of soundest judgement, that by them understand the posterity of Sheth; who although they degenerated, yet Moses giveth them that honourable title, to show their ingratitude, in forsaking their heavenly Father.   

Q. Why is the posterity of Sheth called the sons of God?  
A Because God had separated them from the rest of the World, as a peculiar people to himself; they did serve him and reverence him as their heavenly Father: secondly, because Sheth, their father, was an holy and just man, and by consequent, the son of God, both by ad●…ption, and imitation; therefore God doth honour his posterity, in calling them the sons of God, for their father Sheths' sake: So we see what an honour it is, to have holy Parents.   

Q. Was it unlawful for the sons of God to take to themselves wives of the daughters of men?  
A. Yes: for those daughters of men were Cain's posterity, excommunicated from the Church; for they were the sons of old Adam, because they were not borne again by the immortal Seed of the Word: now it was unlawful for Sheths' posterity to marry Cain's daughters, being of a contrary Religion. This kind of Matrimony was forbidden afterwards, Exodus 34. and Deuteronomy 7. For this cause, Abraham and Isaac would not have their sons marry with Canaanites. Secondly, they took those wives, not for multiplication of Mankind, but to satisfy their immoderate lust; therefore this copulation was unlawful: for they should not have defiled their bodies; as knowing they are the Temples of the Holy-Ghost.   

Q. How do we know, that these were not Angels, which are called here the sons of God?  
A. Because Angels are Spirits, not composed of any Physical matter, nor enclosed into bodies, as the souls of men▪ therefore they cannot be moved with carnal lust.   

Q. Some do think they have bodies, and therefore are here understood to have taken them wives of the daughters of men: how then is it, that they have no bodies?  
A. If they had bodies, they should be either Celestial, or Elemental. Celestial they are no●… for heavenly bodies have but one kind of motion, which is to turn round; but Angels ascend and descend, & have all other kinds of moving. Elementary they are not: for whatsoever i●… composed of Elements, is corruptible; but the Angels are not. If they say, that Angels have in them but one Element; then I would know, which it is: again, they should grant, that the bodies of Angels are more ignoble than the bodies of men; because in sublunary bodies, the more Elements they are composed of, the nobler and perfecter they are: and if their bodies are base, than their minds are imperfecter; for there is a proportion between the form and the matter.   

Q. Cannot Angels beget children?  
A. No: for they have no seed fit for procreation, because they feed not; for seed is a part of our food. Again, if they could procreate children, they should be distinguished in male and female; for both these must concur in procreation.   

Q. What is meant by these words. My Spirit shall not always strive with man?  
A. By the word Spirit, is not understood God's providence, nor God himself, taken essentially; nor his wrath and indignation; nor man's soul: but Spirit is taken for God himself personally, or for the Holy Ghost, the third person in the Trinity; by which Spirit, Christ preached in No, to the disobedient spirits of the old World, 1▪ Pet. 3. The meaning than is, My holy Spirit shall not contend always (or a long time) with sinful man, by exhorting, convincing outwardly, and inwardly by the checks of conscience, because he is but flesh, that is, fleshly-minded; walketh after the flesh, and not after the spirit.   

Q▪ What then is meant by flesh here?  
A. Not flesh properly so called: secondly, nor as it is taken for the nature of man, as john 1. 14. Christ the Word, is said to be made flesh; but here it is taken for the corruption of man's nature. Here then God calleth man, whom he hath made to his own Image, flesh, to make him ashamed that he hath so miserably fall'n from his first integrity: for Adam was made a living soul.   

Q. Why saith God, that the days of man should be an hundred and twenty years, seeing that after the Flood, many did live till they were above?  
A. It is true, that Sem lived five hundred years after the Flood, some four hundred, some two hundred; and many, till Moses time, lived an hundred and thirty years. So that these words must not be understood, as though God, after the Flood, did prolong man's life only to an hundred and twenty years; but these one hundred and twenty years, are meant of that time that God gave to the first world to repent in: so long No preached, and builded the Ark.   

Q. It seems there was an hundred years from the uttering of this speech, till the Flood: for Sem, after the Flood immediately, was an hundred years old; and he was borne when this speech was uttered.  
A. From the uttering of this speech, until the Flood, there was an hundred and twenty years: but this was spoken when No was four hundred and fourscore years old, that is twenty years before he was five hundred▪ and before Sem was borne: yet Moses speaketh of Sems' generation, before the uttering of these words; because speaking of the generation of the Fathers, from Adam, until the Flood, he would not leave out the generation of Sem, although he was borne twenty years after the uttering of these words of God.   

Q What were these Giants that are here mentioned?  
A. They were men of great stature of body, and therefore strong and powerful; as also cruel, wicked, ambitious: in Greek they are called Gigantes, that is, engendered of the Earth; not as though they were the sons of the Earth, as the Poet's thought, but because of a great deal of earthly substance they carried about in their bodies; as also, in respect of their minds, being earthly-minded: in Hebrew they are called Nephilim, from falling, because as Apostates they fell from God; and being cruel, they fell on men, and caused many, by fear, to fall before them.   

Q. Then is it true, that there have been such mighty men of great stature, which we do call Giants?  
A. Yes: both sacred and profane Histories do testify so much. Augustine saith, Lib. 15. de Civitate Dei▪ That he saw a Tooth of a man as great as an hundred of ours. Pl●…nie recordeth in his seventh book, That in Creta, out of a Hill, was digged the body of a man, of six and forty cubits. The Spies that were sent to Canaan, reported, That they seemed Grasshoppers, In comparison of the Giants of that I and, Num▪ 13. The y●…on Bed of Og▪ King of Bas●…an, was nine cubits long, and four cubits broad, Deuteronomy 3. Goliath of the Philistines, was a mighty great Giant: And many more examples might here be alleged.   

Q. But were these Giants begotten of Devils and women, as some have thought?  
A. Seeing these Giants were of the same substance and nature that other men are, differing only in the quantity of their bodies from others, which is no essential, but accidental difference, they were men, and begotten of men and women▪ secondly, if devils had begotten them of women, they had been neither men nor devils, but a third kind, different from both; for when two of diverse kinds couple together, they bring forth a third kind, different from both: as the Horse and the Ass beget a Mule, which is neither Horse nor Ass: now, devils and women being much more different in nature, could not bring forth Giants, seeing these were men: thirdly, devils being spirits, cannot procreate, as is already proved.   

Q. What was the sin of the first World?  
A. Moses in the fift verse of this Chapter describes their wickedness, that it was great: secondly, it was universal, and not amongst a few: thirdly, it was volu●…tary, of purpose; their whole s●…udy was bend to wickedness: fourthly, it was not for a while, but all the days of their life. So then, it was not without cause that God sent a flood of water, to cleanse the earth from that flood of sin, with which it was overflowed.   

Q. How is it understood, that God was sorrowful, and repent?  
A. God properly repenteth not, 1. Sam. 15. for it is contrary to his prescience: neither is he moved with sorrow, because he is unchangeable, jam. 1. 17. But these, and such like speeches, are attributed to him, after the manner of men: for man, when he reputes, changeth his deed; so God is said to repent, when he changes that which he did before: and as man, when he destroyeth that which he loveth, is grieved; so God is said to be moved with sorrow, because he cometh to destroy man, whom he so highly loved, and advanced over all the creatures.   

Q. Why did God say he would destroy the beasts and the fowls?  
A. Not because they sinned: but because they being created for man's use, man their Lord and master being punished, they must also suffer with him: for by this, God will show how he abhorreth sin, in punishing dumb beasts for man's sin: so the beast that lieth with man, must be killed, though it have no wit, Leu. 20. 2. When man was drowned, there was no use for the beasts. Thirdly, to augment man's punishment, and make it the more fearful; when not only he, but all his goods and possessions are seized upon by God's wrath.   

Q. What mean these words; Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord?  
A That is, God was favourable and merciful unto him. So this phrase is used of Lot. G●…n. 19 of Moses, Exo. 33. of David▪ Acts 7. of Mary, Luke 1. Hear we see, God's children shall not want their commendations, howsoever the World despiseth them: No is here hated of the World, but he found grace in God's eyes. Secondly, we see, that God will not destroy all mankind, but will save a few, for propagation of his Church. Thirdly, there was no time so corrupt, in which God had not some to worship him.   

Q. Wherein did No find grace in God's eyes?  
A. In that he was preserved from the flood, when the World was destroyed. Secondly, in that Mankind was preserved and restored by him. Thirdly, in that his dominion over the creatures was restored, as it was to Adam. Fourthly, in that he received a larger Patent than Adam had, to eat flesh. Fiftly, in that God did smell a savour of Rest in his Sacrifice. Sixtly, in that God maketh a Covenant with him, conf●…ed by the Rainbow, that he will never destroy the World again with Water-seventhly, in that he was a type of Christ and his Church. And many other prerogatives had No, which were as many pledges of God's favour to him. In Hebrew, No signifieth Grace, the order of the Letters being changed.   

Q. What is meant here, by the Generations of No?  
A. His offspring, and things that befell him: of which he doth not speak immediately, but of his virtues, that he was a just and perfect man, etc. And at these words the Hebrews do begin a new Section, which reacheth to the 12. Chapter: so that they divide the whole Law into 54. Sections, or Lectures, which they read in 52. Sabbaths; and Genesis is divided into 12. Chapters, or Lectures.   

Q. How is No called a just and perfect man?  
A. Not absolutely so, but in respect of that ●…roward generation. Secondly, because he endeavoured to be so, and made a conscience of his ways: for God accepts the will, for the deed; and a part, for all. Thirdly, because of his Faith: for we are justified by Faith, and the just liveth by Faith. Now No was made heir of Righteousness, which is by Faith, as it is in the Hebrews 11. And this doth the more commend noah's righteousness, that in such a ●…roward age, he was just and perfect.   

Q▪ H●…w is ●… understood, that the Earth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before God?  
A. By the Earth, we understand Men, both because they are the inhabitants of the Earth, as also because they were earthly-minded: and here▪ to their disgrace, they are called Earth, as before, Flesh, who should have been spiritually and h●…auenly-minded (before God) that is, openly, in his sight. Or Elohim may signify Princes and judges, here: so that in the open sight of their judges, they wrought wickedness. Hence than we see, that it was not the Stars, or any natural causes, that raised the ●…oud; but only God, being provoked by sin.   

Q. Why is it said now, that God looked on the Earth?  
A. Not, as though he did not look before, (for all things are naked before his eyes:) but now he is said to look on the Earth, because he cometh to punish the Earth. And this showeth us, that God did not rashly and unadvisedly punish the Earth, but he looked upon it first; that is; he did seriously consider, there was great cause to punish Mankind?   

Q. What is meant here, by all Flesh?  
A. Mankind, 〈◊〉, and not the beasts also, as the jews thought; for they cannot properly be said to corrupt their way, because they want reason. Laws are not made for them; they are not capable of life eternal, they are not subject to sin, and not liable to punishment.   

Q. What is meant by Way?  
A. Their Religion, and Faith; as Acts 18. secondly, their Manners, and course of Life: as Malice is called the Way of Cai●…; I●…de, verse 11. Covetousness the Way of Balaam. 2. Pet. 2. 15.   

Q. How is it understood, that God destroyed the Earth?  
A. The Earth was destroyed for the sin of man; as in other particular judgements, men's goods perished with them, Numb. 16. 32. jos. 7. 15. yet the Earth was not destroyed, in respect of her substance, but of her ornaments and fertility; which was much diminished by the salt water.   

Q. Why would not God save No by some other means, but by the Ark?  
A. Because, by this means, God would have the World to see, that his judgements were coming, when they beheld the Ark preparing: and if they would not repent, they might, at least, be made inexcusable; who both seeing the Ark in making, and hearing No preaching, did not repent. Secondly, because by this means he would exercise noah's Faith the more, which was very great; that although the rest of the World did scorn him, and followed their own courses, yet he believed that God would perform his promise. Thirdly, although God at all times may work miracles, yet most times he worketh by natural causes: therefore in the Desert he fed his people with Manna, when he might have fed them with nothing; so he might have given them Canaan, without their own help, yet he would have them fight for it: and here he might have preserved N●… more miraculously, but this way he thought fittest.   

Q. Was this Ark like our Ships?  
A. No: but this was like a Chest or Cos●…in, made not to sail, but to swim; and this form was most commodious, and capable of so many kinds of creatures: and this Ark was admirable, both in respect of the long time it was in building, in respect of the greatness thereof, of the end, it was made to preserve all kind of creatures; of the wonderful preservation thereof in that dangerous Flood; as also of many things, whereof it was the type. Concerning this Ark, the Poets have stolen much out of this place.   

Q. What kind of Tree was the Ark made of?  
A. The word Gopher doth signify the Cedar, Fir, and Pine-trees; so it is uncertain which of those it was made of, neither is it much material: but this word is not found in any other place of Scripture.   

Q. How large was the Ark?  
A. The length was 300. cubits, the breadth 50. and the height was 30. cubits. Now a cubit is the measure from the elbow to the finger's end, containing a foot and a half: but if the men of that time were bigger than now (as it is like) then the cubit was also bigger. Then we must not think with Origen, that those were Geometrical cubits, whereof every one contains 6. common cubits; for Moses doth not speak here of any other cubits, than he doth elsewhere: and of no other kind of cubit do we read in Scripture, then of those common cubit's abovenamed▪ as Ex●…. 27. Deut. 3. 1. King. 17. etc. So then the Ark, by this reckoning, was six times as long as it was broad, and ten times so long as it was high. But how so many creatures could be contained in so little room, was not impossible for him, that miraculously sent the Flood, and delivered No from the ●…ame: yet if we duly consider the bigness of the Ark, we shall find there was room sufficient for them all.   

Q. How could No and his three sons build so great an Ark?  
A. Although they were the chief builders, yet we must think, there were many more under them hired, who laboured in building for their wages, although they believed not, and so they perished with the rest.   

Q. Was there a Window in the Ark?  
A. Yes; but the Hebrew word is Zohaer, which signifies Light: therefore the Hebrews thought that this was no Window, but some precious Stone that was hanged in the Ark, to give light to the creatures therein. Yet we must not deny, but that there was a Window; for No, in the eight Chapter, is said to open the Window, and let out the Raven and Dove. Others say, that this Zohar was a Lamp, or Candle, appointed to burn so long as No was in the Ark, because the Sun did not shine all that time: but this is fabulous.   

Q. What is this (And in a cubit thou shalt finish it above?)  
A. That is, Thou shalt bow the roof of the Ark but a cubit, so that it may be almost flat; but yet so, that the water may easily slide off.   

Q. How many Rooms, or Stories, were there in the Ark?  
A. Three Rooms: the highest, for Man and the Fowls; the next, for all kinds of meat and provision for the creatures; the lowest and third room, for the beasts. These three are only mentioned here: therefore Origen was deceived, that thought there were five Rooms. As in this Ark there were three Rooms, so in Moses Tabernacle, and salomon's Temple, were also three. The Church also (figured by the Ark) hath three states; before the Law, under the Law, and under Christ.   

Q. Why would Gool establish his Covenant with No, before the Ark was built?  
A. To confirm noah's Faith the more: for he had need of such a promise, that went about such a hard and dangerous work, as the building of the Ark was. And here we see, that God never employeth his servants in any hard work, but he giveth them comfort, strength, and courage to perform it: And so it is our part, to rely on God's promises, with No, and not to incline either to the right or left hand.   

Q. What Covenant was this, that God made with No?  
A. That he would preserve him and his Family in the Flood: and this is a type of the Covenant which God hath made with us in Christ. Now this Covenant belongeth to No, and his Family: so all God's Covenants to the faithful, and their children also. As for noah's sake, his Family was saved: so for the company of one holy man, many shall escape in the day of God's wrath. For Paul's sake, all that were in the ship were saved. Here, this is called God's Covenant, because he binds himself to save us: so elsewhere it is called our Covenant, Zach. 9 11. because on our part, we are bound to believe and obey him.   

Q. What sorts of creatures was No commanded to receive within the Ark?  
A. All those that could not live in the water; as Men, Beasts, and Fowls: Fishes then and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, those creatures that can live both on the land and in the water, were not received. Secondly, the perfect creatures; that is, such as are procreated by commixture of male and female (for the male and female are here mentioned.) Then Mice, and such like, as are engendered of corruption, were not received. And here No is commanded to receive two of every sort, which in the next Chapter is better explained: for of the unclean, two are received; of the clean, seven; three males and females for generation, and one male for the Sacrifice. Here we see, that God, for noah's sake, saveth all those sorts of creatures; extending his mercles even to the beasts, for his servant's sake.   

Q. How did No gather together all these creatures? did he hunt for them?  
A. No: but they came of their own accord, the Lord leading them thither; and here they are brought to No, as before to Adam: yet, although God brought them to the Ark, notwithstanding, No must bring them within, and place them in the Ark. No is the type of Christ's Ministers: who do not lead Christ's Sheep to the Church; because, being moved by God's Spirit, they come of their own accord●…: yet the Minister gathereth them together, and doth unite them by the Word and Sacraments.   

Q. If all kinds of meat were laid up in the Ark for the creatures; then whether, or not, was there also flesh for those creatures, that lived only on flesh?  
A. First, before the Flood, neither man nor beast did eat flesh; but this power of eating flesh, was given after the Flood: secondly, we do not read of any beasts that were brought into the Ark, for meat, but only for generation and sacrifice: thirdly, if there had been beasts in the Ark, for eating, and so many as might serve for a whole year, surely there could not be room enough for them; beside, their flesh would have putrified, and that had been filthy and loathsome to man: therefore they did not eat flesh at that time, but either grass, fruits, or seeds; for these they fed upon, when flesh was wanting. Besides, God, that caused them to come to the Ark, of their own accord, and to remain so long obedient to No, could also sustain them so long without flesh, only upon herbs; for those were better, at that time, then now, and the temperature of those ●…easts was sounder.   

Q. Why was God so careful to provide food for those dumb creatures?  
A. To let us know and admire his infinite Goodness, in not only creating them for man's use, but also, in preserving them to the same end: secondly, that by this carefulness of his, we may be enduced to love him the more: thirdly, to depend on him in our extremities; for if he had a care of them, when they could not care so themselves, much more will he be careful of us, in our necessities: fourthly, he would not save them in the Ark, as he did the Israelites in the red Sea, and as jonas in the Whale's belly▪ miraculously; but he would have here both man and beast, to use the means of the Ark, and of the food he gave them, for the preservation of their life: to teach us, that we should not despise the ordinary means that God hath apppointed for the conservation of our life: fifthly, to teach all Christians that have children, wife, or family, to provide for them things that may sustain their natural life: seeing God had such care to maintain the life of these creatures, which are not so dear to God as men are.   

Q: What is the commendation that No hath here in the end?  
A. That he did according to all that God commanded him; therefore he became heir of the Righteousness that is by faith, Hebr. 11. Then here was his glory, not in that he knew God's commandments, but in that he did them: secondly, he did not a part, but according to all that was commanded him: thirdly, his faith and obedience was wonderful: if we should consider the circumstances thereof; as the bigness of the Ark, the long and tedious space of an hundreth years, cutting and bringing together so many trees, the taunts and scorns he did endure of men, the fear he was in, for preaching they should all be drowned, the care and solicitude he had, to gather together so much provision for man, beasts and fowls: yea, to bring into the Ark so many sorts of wild beasts; and lastly, to enclose himself therein for a year, as in a Sepulchre: all these being considered, shall make us acknowledge, that his Faith and Obedience was worthy of eternal commendations   

Q Whereof was No and the Ark a ripe or figure?  
A. Of Christ and of the Church: for No was the type of Christ, in that No is rest: so Christ is our rest, & in him we have rest for our souls, our consciences have rest from the gilt and punishment of sin, from the condemning and commanding power thereof, and after this life, we shall rest from our labours, even in the bosom of Abraham Secondly, as No preserved some from the flood, so hath Christ from the floods of God's wrath. Thirdly, as No in the Ark of wood did save them, so Christ upon the Cross of wood, hath saved us. Fourthly, as out of the Ark there is no safety, so out of the Church there is no salvation. Fiftly, as the Ark was made of diverse sorts of trees, so is the Church of diverse sorts of men. Sixtly, as the Ark was a long time in building, so hath the Church a long time in making. Seventhly, as in the flood God drowned s●…nners, so in baptism●… (whereof the flood was a type) God drowneth our sins. Eightly, as the planks of the Ark●… were joined together with pitch? so should the member●… of the Church be joined together with love. Ninthly, as No not only built the Ark, but entered therein▪ so Christ not only built the Church, but dwells therein▪ Tenthly, as in the Ark were all sorts of creatures, so in the Church are all sorts of Christians. Eleventh, as in the Ark were more beasts than men, so in the Church are more bad th●…n good. Twelftly, as in the Ark was all kind of corporal food for the creatures, so in the Church is all kind of spiritual food for Christians. 13. As in the Ark was a window to give light to the eyes, so in the Church is the word to give light to the minds. 14. As there was a door for the creatures to enter into the Ark, so Christ is the door, by whom we enter into the Church 15. As in the Ark were diverse rooms or stories, so in the Church are diverse degrees & orders. 16. As the Ark was great and large for all sorts of beasts▪ so is the Church for all sorts of men. 17. As there was out one Ark, one door, one window? so there ●…s but one Church, one Christ, one Scripture. ●…8. As the Raven went out and came not again, but the Dove could find find no rest, till 〈◊〉 returned to the Ark? so the wicked care not for the Church: but the godly, who represent the nature and qualities of the Dove, can ha●… no rest for their souls but in the Church. 19 A●… the Ark was tossed up and down in the water with the wind, yet was upheld by God: so the Church is tossed up and down in the sea of this world, with the winds of Satan, of sin, of wicked men and of the flesh: yet the Lord upholds her. 20. A●… the Ark at last rested on the mountains of Armenia? so shall the Church on Moun●… Zion, in the Kingdom of glory, when the waters shall settle, and the winds shall cease? then those that seemed to be dead in the Ark, shall come out of the graves? and with joy shall enjoy that happy Immortality.   
FINIS.   

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE, AND REVEREND FATHER in God, JOHN Lord Bishop of Lincoln, Lord Keeper of the Great Seal of England, and one of his Majesty's most Honourable Privy Council.  
RIGHT HONOURABLE,  
THE Athenians while they were in doubt whom they should choose to be the Patron of their City, at last 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was preferred, because of her wisdom and learning to Neptune the rich god of the great Ocean, for they thought their could be no greater glory then to have a learned Patron, therefore they preferred her peaceable Olive, to his warlike horse, her pear to his threeforked Sceptre, her virginity, to his ample authority, her Dragon to his Triton, and her learning to his vast dominion, and good reason, for according to the Comic: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Even so this little Book could not find a fit Patron to grace and defend her, than your Lordship, in whom wit and learning, greatness and goodness, science and conscience have met together. Truly, God hath enriched your Honour, with a great measure of learning and other excellent parts, that it was not without just cause, that our great Maecenas and immortal glory of the Muses hath advanced your Lordship, that under him you might see learning advanced. Whose Life so long as the God of jacob doth continue we need not fear, that illiterate Lacedæmonians, or ignorant Thracians, shall bear rule either in our Church or Commonwealth, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, no Marius shall be countenanced, to condemn the Greek, Latin and Hebrew tongues; no Caligula to abolish the verses of divine Virgil and Homer, or the works of Livius and Seneca; no Caracalla to persecute Philosophers and burn the works of great Aristotle; no Licinius to account learning the pestilence of the state, but the Muses shall sit and sing securely upon Helicon, and knit garlands of Laurel to Crown his sacred head, and sing eternal Paeans to the honour of there great Peacemaker, Qui Musis haec otia fecit, and amongst the rest,  

Si quid mea carmina possunt,  
Nulla dies unquam memori eum eximet ●…uo.   
Receive then Right Honourable, this Athenian client unto your tuition, in whom although there be neither 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, yet if your Lordship be pleased to approve her, she cares not who reprove her. So beseeching God who hath made you great in this kingdom, to make you also great in his Kingdom; I humbly take my leave and will continue,  

Dum res, & aetas, & Sororum,  
Fila trium patiuntur atra.   
Your Honours to command, Alexander Rosse.   

To the Reader.  
Wasps we know can sting, although they can neither make honey nor wax: so now adays there are many carpin●… Critics, who can reprove and censure the works of other men, when in the mean while, either they can not, or at least they will not bring forth the like fruits, whereby they may profit the Church and Commonwealth. Nil tam facilè quam otiosum & dormientem de aliorum labour & vigilijs disputa●…e. Hieron. in Oseam. These men saith Augustin, Magis amant vituperare 
Aug. 〈◊〉 dom. in mo●….  & damnare quam emendare & corrigere, quod vitium vel est superbiae vel invidiae. Therefore I doubt not but such Vitilitigatores will give their censure of this book, before they read it: affirming that because some have written already of this subject, therefore there is no use of it, but I desire them first to read and confer this with others, for according to the Greek proverb, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, then after they have read and conferred let them censure. For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a foul vice, and let them remem●… that the proverb is true: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

QVESTIONS ON THE SEVENTH CHAPTER.  

Question. WHY would God have Noah and his family to enter into the Ark?  
Answ. First, to preserve them from the flood: For this was the ordinary means which God used to Save Noah, although he could have saved him; without this means, and as out of the Ark they could not be preserved; so out of the Church we can not be saved. Secondly, God by this doth show his care to his Saints, that in their greatest dangers he is readiest to help them; for now the flood was at hand, and No had most need of comfort now. Thirdly, he saves the family for noah's sake. So then God for one just man's sake doth bless a great many.   

Quest. How was Noah righteous before God?  
Ans. Not by the works of the Law, for so no flesh is just before God, Rom. 3. but by Faith, Heb. 11. believing in the promised Seed, and that God would perform his promise in sending the flood, and Noah was just, not before men, as hypocrites are, who desire only to please men, but he was just before God, only studying to have his approbation, now God saved him not because he deserved it, but because he would crown his own work.   

Q. How many clean beasts were rear and in the Ark?  
A. Not fourteenth of every kind as justinus Martij, Origen, and others do think, but seven of every kind, that is three couple for p●…ocreation, and one Male for sacrifice, ●…ow to think that fourteen were brought into the Ark, is vain, both because so many of every kind would have overcharged the Ark, as also because seven were sufficient.   

Q. Why would God have more clean than unclean beasts in the Ark?  
A. The unclean were preserved only for propogation, but the clean. First, for propogation. Secondly, for man to eat. Thirdly, for sacrifice. Therefore God would have more clean than unclean, beside, by this God would teach us two things. First, that there should be more clean than unclean in the Church, as there was in the Ark, that is, more good than bad; for we are chosen to be holy and without blame. Ephes. 1. although it falls out otherwise that in Christ's field there are more weeds than corn. Secondly, his love and care, in that he will have but few of the unclean saved, because the most part of them are wild and cruel to man; and hurtful to the clean beasts, therefore there are more Doves than Hawks, Sheep than Wolveses, yet some of these Savage beasts he would preserve, that he might use them as instruments to punish man's rebellion.   

Q. How is it understood that some beasts are clean some unclean?  
A. By nature all beasts are clean because good. Gen. 1. 31. and there is nothing unclean of itself, Rom. 14. 14. but some are called unclean, because men do account them so. Secondly, because they are not used for meat. Thirdly, because afterward by Moses Law they were excluded from being offered up in sacrifice. Fourthly, because in them are some evil qualities and properties which God will have us to shun.   

Q. Was there any distinction of clean and unclean beasts before the flood?  
A. Yes, Moses indeed did establish this distinction, but it was in use amongst the fathers before him, and many things else. As, offering of the first fruits, Gen. 4. building of Altars. Gen. 8. paying of Tithes to the Priest. Gen. 14. yet all things that Moses commanded, were not observed by the Patriarches. For Moses did forbid to marry with two sisters: yet jacob did with Leah and Rachel. Gen. 29. and he commanded to abstain from some kinds of flesh, yet God gives permission to No to eat of every kind of flesh. Gen. 9   

Q. How kn●…w the fathers before Moses which were clean and which unclean?  
A. Either by tradition of their Ancestors, or by revelation from God, and not by any positive law; yet we must observe that this distinction was not in use, in regard of meat, for it was lawful to eat of any flesh. Gen. 9 but in regard of Sacrifice, and so Beefs, Sheep, and Goats were only clean for Sacrifice of beasts, and of fowls, only Turtle-doves, and Pigeons.   

Q. Why would God have seven clean beasts saved, and neither more nor less?  
A. Besides that the number of seven signifieth sufficiency and perfection in the Scripture, especially in sacrifices, as Numb. 23. 1. 14. ●…9. 1. Chron. 15. 26. etc. these seven did contain three couples and one odd: one couple for procreation, an other for food, and the third for sacrifice, the odd one which was a Male was ordained for that sacrifice which No was to offer presently after the flood: which was rather a Male than a Female, because the Male is perfecter, and so all that we offer to God must be perfect.   

Q. Why in the sixth Chapter speaketh Moses but of two, and here of seven?  
A. Here he speaketh of the number of the clean which is seven; there he spoke not of the number, but of the order how they should be received, which was two and two, that is, the Male and his Female; and not either more Males or more Females.   

Q. How were so many kinds of creatures brought into the Ark?  
A. No did not wander up and down the world to gather them as Philo thought, for that required long time, and intolerable labour; neither did they swim to the Ark when the flood came as others think, for they were in the Ark before the flood came, and the door of the Ark was shut upon them also before the flood, but they were driven thither by the power of God, and the ministry of Angels, Non hominis actu, Sed dei natu says Augustin. lib. 15. de Civit. cap. 17.   

Q. Why was God so careful that every Male should have his Female?  
A. By this, God doth the second time confirm marriage, for he hath ordained it in Paradise, and confirmed it now; which to prohibit is impious, Christ did honour it with his first miracle, it is that type of that Union between Christ and his Church, it is the means to propagate mankind and enlarge the Church, and a remedy against fornication, etc. therefore as here every Male hath his Female, so every man must have his wife.   

Q. Why doth God give to No yet 7. days?  
A. Not that Mathusalem should be honourable buried and mourned for seven days as the jews do babble; but first that No now may make all things the sooner ready knowing the certain day of the flood: secondly, to show how unwilling God is yet to destroy the world, if they will ●…epent, therefore he giveth yet seven days, to see if they will forsake their evil ways.   

Q. Why would God have it rain forty days.  
A. So long time God did send rain because he would destroy all the creatures with water: secondly, he would not drown all the world at an instant, but in the space of forty days, that they might now have the more time to consider how just God was in performing his promise, and that it was no Fable that No did preach to them concerning the coming of the flood, and as God was forty days in pouring down his wrath, so was Moses, Elias and Christ forty days in fasting, forty years did the people wander in the Desert, forty days respite was given to Ninive, forty days did Ezechiel bear the sin of juda, forty days did Christ converse with his Disciples after his resurrection, and thrice forty years, that is a hundred and twenty were given to the old world to repent.   

Q. What year of the world was the 'slud s●…nt?  
A. The 1656 year of the world, which was the 600. year of Noah in the which year Mathusalem died, than the computation of the Septuagints is false, which maketh their year to be the 2242. year of the world.   

Q. What month was this which Moses calleth the second month?  
A. Some do think that this is not the second month of the year but the second month of Noah's life, So that now Noah was 600. year old and two months. Others again think that this is the second month of the year, the which had two beginnings, the one at the moon which was next the equinoctial vernal:— the other at the equinoctial autumnal, that beginning of the year was sacred and appointed by God. Exod. 12. 2. this beginning wa●… civil, then in ecclesiastical matters, April was the second month, but in civil affairs, October was the second, and which of these two Moses means here it is uncertain, yet it is most probable that he meaneth of April. 1. to ex●…ol God's power the more, who did then send the ●…lood when naturally the springs do begin to dry, and the air to be clearer from clouds. 2. to aggravate their punishment the more, who then were drowned when the earth began to be most pleasant and glorious. 3. to ●…each us, never to be secure but still watching, for Christ will come as a thief in the night, and when the wicked do say peace then shall sudden destruction come.   

Q. What is meant by the great deep?  
A. The deep sometimes in Scripture signifieth the Ocean sea. job 38. 16. Psal. 106. 9 Sometimes the waters that are under the earth. Deut. 8. 7. Psal. 33. 7. but in this place the deep signifieth both.   

Q. What is meant by the windows of heaven?  
A. This speech is metaphorical and it signifieth the wondered falling of the violent waters from above, these (windows) then may signify the clouds, and (heaven) the middle region of the air. Some have thought that these waters were above the heavens, but it is absurd to think that waters can be above the heavens, and that they should break through so many heavens of the planites, and that of the fixed stars, for it is against the nature of the waters to consist so high, seeing the lower parts of the world are his place, and it is against the nature of the heaven to be broken or opened with rain.   

Q. What doth this flood signify?  
A. 1. The afflictions of the Church, for as this flood lasted but for a while, so doth afflictions; as this flood was sent only by God, so are afflictions, the higher the flood lifted the Ark, the nearer it was to heaven, so the more we are afflicted, the more we loathe this world and seek for heaven. Noah is saved and the wicked are drowned in this flood, so afflictions are means to save the Godly but destroy the Wicked, therefore great afflictions are called waters, Psal. 69. 1. 2. 15. verse. Secondly it is a type of our baptism, 1. Pet. 3. 21. and both the flood and our baptism are types of our▪ spiritual regeneration, for as Noah was saved and the wicked drowned. So we are saved and our sins are drowned in the blood of Christ.   

Q. How high was the water of the flood?  
A. 15. Cubits it was higher than the mountains, yea Olympus Atho and other mountains of whose incredible height many false things hath been recorded, were drowned in the flood, so then God's wrath spareth not the mountains, neither will he spare the mighty potentates, learned and ●…ise men of the world, how great and emi●…ent soever they seem to be, when his anger 〈◊〉 kindled.   

Q. Did all the creatures die that were not 〈◊〉 the Ark?  
A. The Rabbins think that the fishes also ●…erished because the waters did wax hot, ●…ut this is uncertain, we know that all that ●…id breath died, but the fishes do not breath, because they want the instruments of breathing. 2. There is no air in the water for them to breath. 3. If they would breathe in the water, so could men and other creatures. 4. If they did breath air in the water, than they would not dye when they come out of the water into the air, therefore it is probable that they were not killed; but whether these men that were drowned were also condemned eternally or not, it is not for us to inquire, yet those that did repent were doubtless saved; as the thief on the cross.   

Q. Was this flood all one with that of Ogyges and Deucalion.  
A. No, for this flood was universal, that of Ogyges was only in the country of Attica, and that of Deucalion in Thessalia. 2. The flood of Noah was in the 1656. year of the world, but that of Ogyges was almost 540. years after, which was about the 90. years of the Patriarch jacob, and the flood of De●…calion was almost 770. years after the deludge of Noah, that is 230. after the flood o●… Ogyges about the 50. year of Moses.   

Q. Was this flood sent by God's immediate power, or was it wrought only by natural causes?  
A. It was not wrought by nature, 1. because that which nature worketh, cometh to pass of necessity, without any intent of good or evil, now this flood was sent because of the iniquity of that time, which nature knoweth not. So that if this flood had only depended upon nature, it would have come whether the world had sinned or not; 2. if the stars were the cause of this flood, than they may be the cause of an other universal flood; but they cannot. For God hath promised that he will not destroy the earth any more with water, Ergo. 3. the stars cannot extract, and the earth cannot yield such a quantity of vapours as may suffice to make anuniversal flood to rise 15. cubits higher the the mountains: 4. as the flood did not cease by the power of nature, but by the power of God that sent out a wind to dry the ground, so it was not sent but by the power of God, 〈◊〉. in this narration God is only nominated ●…s the sole author of this flood, the refore it ●…as by his power only that the flood was ●…ent.   

Q. How long did the flood prevail upon the ●…arth?  
A. A hundred and fifty days, but whether these days are to be reckoned from the beginniug of the flood, as Lyrane, Ambrose and others have thought, or else from the end of these 40. days, in the which it did ●…aine as Chrysostome, and some of the jewish Rabbins do think is uncertain, but if we mean the mountains and all other parts of the earth, over which the waters did prevail, than we must not reckon these days from the beginning of the flood, for all the earth was not so suddenly overflowed with water, but by degrees, therefore God did cause it to rain forty days, at the end of which forty days these hundred and fifty take their beginning, for so long did the water prevail over all the parts of the earth.    

Questions on the eighth Chapter.  

Q. HOw did God remember Noah and the creatures?  
A. Remembrance is the knowledge of things past, but to God all things are present, therefore properly he doth neither remember nor forget, but these words are used for our better understanding, then because God did suffer Noah to remain so long in the Ark as in a dungeon amongst stinking beasts, and tossed with the flood, he might be said to be forgetful of him: and now because he helps and delivers him from his troubles and miseries, he is said to remember him, here we see the Lord will not forsake his Saints altogether, he may leave them for a while, but in his own good time, he will come again to them for their everlasting comfort.   

Q. Why did God remember also the beasts?  
A. Not for their own sakes, but because they were ordained for the use of man: yet two ways God remembers the creatures. First as they are the works of his hands, so his providence is extended to all things, for a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without the will of our father. Mat. 10. Secondly, as they are made for the use of man, and so God hath a more special care of them then if God remember the beasts, much more will he be mindful of man.   

Q. Was this a wind that God used to dry the earth, or was it the immediate power of the holy Ghost?  
A. The Hebrew word Ruach signifieth both a spirit and the wind, but here it signifieth a wind only, which he useth to dry up the waters, as afterwards he did to divide the red sea for the people of Israel; yet we cannot say that this wind was generated of natural causes, as other winds are; or that naturally it had that power to dry up all that huge quantity of water, but this wind as it was sent extraordinarily by God's immediate power, so it had an extraordinary and miraculous force to drive away the waters from the face of the earth, yea contrary to the quality of other winds which causeth the water to rage, but this wind did assuage them.   

Q. Why did God stay the rain and stop the windows of heaven?  
A. First, because now it was time, and he had sufficiently revenged himself upon that rebellious world: secondly, to show his wonderful goodness, and to teach us that he will not shut up his mercy in displeasure for ever: thirdly, to show his mighty power, for at his command the fountains of the deep, were broken: and the windows of heaven opened, and at his command they are stopped and the rain restrained: fourthly, to teach us obedience, for if these dumb, deaf, and senseless creatures do with such alacrity obey God's command, much more ought man endued with sense and reason: fifthly, to show us what we should do with our sins, as God stopped the fountains that the water should flow no more, so should we stop the fountains of sin, lest they burst forth into great floods and drown both body and soul in everlasting perdition.   

Q. What mountains are these which are called Ararat?  
A. They are hills in Armenia, which country lieth near Assyria and Mesopotamia, these are thought to be certain tops of the hill Cancasus, and though the Ark rested there, yet it followeth not that these were the highest hills in the world. And it is also ridiculous to think that some fragments of the Ark were found here in Hieromes time.   

Q. How do we reckon this seventh month in which the Ark rested?  
A. Some reckon it from the beginning of the flood, but it is more probable, that it is to be understood from the beginning of the year, for so Moses doth use it every where in this narration, and to think that Moses should elsewhere in this natration speak of the months of the year, but hereof the months from the flood, were to make him speak ambiguously and doubtfully.   

Q. Why did Noah open the window for the Raven and the Dove, and did not look out of it himself?  
A. First, because he was so stricken with fear of that fearful judgement that he durst not: secondly, because he could not see fare and remote places, whether they were free from the wait or not, but these fowls could fly abroad and so discern.   

Q. Why did Noah send out the Raven, rather than any other fowl?  
A. Because the Raven delighting in dead bodies, would be alured by their smell to fly abroad, and so to give a sure warrant of the settling of the water.   

Q. Did the Ravine return again into the Ark or not?  
A. The Latin and Greek translations have, that she returned not, but by the Hebrew it is doubtful, yet it is thought of the most learned that she did not return. The Ravine doth resemble the Law which giveth no evidence to man's conscience, that the waters of God's wrath are settled, because we cannot fulfil the Law; but the Dove resembleth the Gospel; who returning with an Olive leaf doth signify the glad tidings of peace, and reconciliation, which Christ on whom the holy Ghost descended in the form of a Dove, hath brought into the world.   

Q. How is it understood that the Dove could find no rest for the sole of her foot?  
A. Indeed the tops of the mountains were seen forty days before, yet although the waters were diminished and gone, the earth notwithstanding was slime, and mire as yet, therefore the Dove would not rest in the ●…e, and dirt, and she resembleth God's Saints, that can find no rest, but in the Church. Again here is the spectacle of God's fearful judgement, that the Dove can not have so much room as to rest her foot, where before there were so many pleasant rooms for all the creatures to rest themselves, so the end of sin is God's wrath, and the end of this is desolation.   

Q. What sign did the Dove give to Noah that the waters were abated?  
A. She brought in her mouth one Olive branch in the evening. That Dove resembleth the Preachers, the Olive branch the Gospel, which is the tidings of peace; her mouth the preaching thereof, and the evening, this latter age of the world, now it is thought because of Hieromes translation that this branch was green, and this is probable enough, for though the waters did all this while prevail upon the earth and deface the same, yet the Olive might be preserved, because it is one of these kind of trees that are still green, the jews prate that the Dove flew to Paradise and got this branch, because that only was free from water, so Rab. Lenni. babbles that this branch was brought from the mount of Olives, because that judea was not drowned with the flood, but these dreams are scarce worthy of recitation, much less of refutation.   

Q. Why did Noah send out the Dove so often?  
A. Because he will not venture to come abroad till he be fully assured that the earth is dry, which now he knows fully, because the ' Dove returned not, so he would not rashly cast himself into danger, although he had been so long in the Ark as in a stinking dungeon; but patiently did wait till the earth was dry, and the Dove was often employed because of his good service; this should teach servants to be faithful to there Masters as the Dove was to Noah, and not to be like the Raven. 2. This oft returning of the Dove doth show us that when God is reconciled with us, he will make his dumb creatures to comfort us rather than we shall want. 3. This practice of the Dove doth teach us gratitude, for he labours to comfort and bring good news to Noah, because of the care he had of him being in the Ark, so we should never forget a good deed. 4. We must be loving and merciful even to the beasts, for we know not what extraordinary comfort they may afford us. 5. As the Dove returned no more into the Ark, having done her message, so when we have finished that service which God hath enjoined to us, we shall leave the Ark of this Militant Church and shall go thither where our reward is reserved for us.   

Q. How can this stand, that the ground was dry in the first day of the first month of the 601. year, as it is set down in the 13. verse, and the next verse showeth that the earth was dried on the 27. day of the second month?  
A. Both is true, for the first day of the first month the earth began to dry, so that the waters were quite removed, but the earth was not perfectly dry till the 27. day of the second month, and by this reckoning also we see that Noah was in the Ark a full year, that is, 365. days: for he entered the Ark the 17. day of the second month in the 600. year, and there continued till the 27. day of the 2. month in the year 601.   

Q. Why did not Noah go out of the Ark till God spoke to him?  
A. Although it was now time for him to go, seeing the earth was dry, yet such was his modesty and obedience, that as he did not enter the Ark without a warrant from God, so he will not go out without the same warrant, so should we depend on God's mouth and do nothing but what he commandeth: for obedience is better than sacrifice: secondly, we see that many are the troubles of the righteous, but the Lord desivereth them out of all; Noah had suffered much grief, sorrow, and fear, but now behold here is an end.   

Q. Did the beasts also come out of the Ark at Noah's command?  
A. Yes, for these dumb creatures were obedient to Noah, because he was obedient to God. Again, the beasts came out that they might increase and multiply, this blessing was given to the creatures in the creation, and the same is now renewed in the restauration of the world, and in that none of the creatures did wag till Noah gave way, and came out first himself, in this we have the pattern of a well-ordered family, for there is the grace of God where the servants obey their Masters, the Master feareth God, and all are joined together in love and concord.   

Q. What is the mystical signification of the coming out of the creatures?  
A. The Ark may signify the Synagogue, the beasts clean and unclean, the jews and Gentiles, their coming out doth signify that both jews and Gentiles which believed in Christ, should come out of the Synagogue, that is, forsake the jewish ceremonics.   

Q. Why did Noah build an Altar to God?  
A. That by offering sacrifice on it, he might testify his thankful mind unto God, 2. to teach his posterity how they should serve God for any blessing received, he offered sacrifice for his deliverance upon an Altar of earth, and we must offer the sacrifice of prayer and thanksgiving upon our Altar Christ. He offered to God the clean beasts, and we must offer to him clean souls and bodies, which is our reasonable serving of him, his sacrifice was a burnt offering, and ours must be a broken spirit.   

Q. Of what matter was this Altar made?  
A. It is most like that it was made of earth, for this law was given after by Moses; Exod. 20. verse 24. An Altar of earth thou shalt make to me: secondly, this kind of Altar was most usual, even amongst the Gentiles, Hic viwm mihi cespitem, hic verbenas pueri ponite thuraque, Horat. lib. 1. od. 19 thirdly, by this Noah will teach us, that God delights not in external pomp and splendour; he loveth the giver more than the gift, and the widow's mite more than the rich man's sins. For nunquam est manus vacua à munere, si area cordis repleta sit bona voluntate. Gregory in Hom.   

Q. Had Noah any express command to build an Altar?  
A. We do not read that God did expressly command this, yet we may gather by consequence that Noah did not this without warrant. First, it was ancient to serve God after this manner, as we see in the persons of Cain and Habel. Secondly, Noah did nothing without Gods warrant, without this he did not build the Ark, nor enter therein; nor come out from thence, much less would he build an Altar. Thirdly, we see that God smelled a savour of rest in his sacrifice, which could not be if it had been offered without God's direction. Fourthly, Noah knew that the seaventh beast was received into the Ark not for procreation but for Sacrifice. Fifthly, he did questionless believe in Christ our perfect Sacrifice, therefore he could not testify his faith better than to build an Altar and offer a sacrifice.   

Q. Why would God be worshipped by Sacrifices?  
A. First, because he will have them by this kind of exercise, to use themselves to be thankful to him, for though he be a spirit and delighteth more in a contrite spirit, then in burnt offerings, yet because of their dulness, he would have them worship him with visible offerings. Secondly, these sacrifices were types of Christ, whose body was to be offered for them; and no sacrifice without relation to Christ could be acceptable. Thirdly, Lest the people wanting these visible signs, should fall to idolatry, seeing other nations used sacrifice and they not.   

Q. Where did Noah offer this sacrifice?  
A. The jews think it was upon Mount Zion, where Cain and Abel did offer before; and on which Isaac was to be sacrificed, but it is more probable that this was done upon the mountains— of Armenia, where the Ark rested.   

Q. What doth it signify that God melled a savour of rest in Noah's sacrifice?  
A. That it was acceptable unto him, not in respect of the offering itself (for it is impossible that the blood of calves and goats should take away sin. Heb. 10. 4.) but God did accept of it; because it was offered in faith, secondly, with a willing mind, thirdly, because it had relation to Christ, who had given himself to be an offering and sacrifice of a sweet smelling savour unto God. Eph. 5. 2.   

Q How is it understood that God would curse the earth no more for man's sake?  
A. That is that God would not at any time over whelm the earth with water; deprive her of her fertility, inhabitants and ornaments as he had before, yet this doth not exclude particular cursings upon particular houses, towns, or countries, nor that universal fire by which the world shall be purged in the last days; and this covenant that God made with Noah concerning the waters, is the figure of that everlasting covenant of peace which the father hath made with us in Christ.   

Q. Which is the imagination of man's thought evil from his youth?  
A. Because of original sin; which all men draws from Adam, for he was the root of mankind, and such a nature we have from him, as he had himself; that is corrupted with sin: then all mankind is subject to this evil, because all are from Adam. Secondly, all the nature of man, that is his body with the parts thereof, his soul with the faculties thereof are defiled. Thirdly, it binds all men to death both temporal and eternal. Fourthly, it deprives us of God's image and of all his blessings, and is the cause of all our infirmities and of all our actual sins.   

Q. Why will not God destroy all living things as he did?  
A. Because man's imagination is so evil from his youth, that if he should punish him as he deserved, he should every age send a flood, for there is none that doth good, no not one. Psal. 12. So than that he spareth us, it is to be attributed to his mercy, not to our merits.   

Q. Is God the cause that man's imagination is evil from his youth?  
A. No, he made man holy, but he fell of his own accord, God then is the cause of man's heart and of his imaginations, but not of the corruptions and vitiosity thereof, and yet he doth permit sin, because he useth it for a scourge to the wicked, and for a means to advance his own glory.   

Q. What doth God besides promise Noah?  
A. That all the days of the earth, seed time and haeruest heat and cold, etc. should not cease, in which words he showeth us the renovation of the world, which answers to the creation. Before the creation there was confusion and darkness, and so likewise before this renovation, in the creation God made the lights of heaven, now he restores them: then he gave man dominion over the creatures, now he restores the same, as God gave man food then, so he doth now, man was then created to God's image, and the same is now mentioned, God made a law then that man should not eat of the forbidden tree, and here he commands that man shall not shed blood, they received a blessing then to increase and multiply, the same they now receive?   

Q. Shall there be summer and winter, night and day, etc. so long as the earth remaineth?  
A. Yes, so long as the earth remaineth in that state it doth now; subject to generation and corruption in the parts thereof, and obnoxious to many imperfect qualities, which at the last day shall be abolished, the substance remaining for ever, and then the summer and winter shall cease. Again, that which is spoken here, is meant of the world in general, and not of particular countries and times, for there was neither seed time nor harvest for the space of three years six months in Eliahs' time, and in the land of Egypt there was no distinction of day and night for three days, because all that time there was darkness, and in the days of josua the sun stood still a whole day.   

Q. Why doth God speak only of summer and winter, and not of the other two parts of the year?  
A. Because these are the two principal parts of the year and most opposite, the other two depends on these, and participates of their qualities, the spring then and harvest being both hot and cold, in the one they agree with Summer, in the other with Winter. So likewise here is mentioned only heat and cold, because these two qualities are more active and forcible in generation, and because more sensible, then moist or dry, so seed time and harvest are only named, because sowing and mowing are the most usual and profitable actions amongst men.   

Q. Doth God promise to Noah only these temporal blessings, as heat and cold, summer and winter, and not spiritual?  
A. He promiseth these temporal blessings, and under them spiritual. For as the stability of the world is promised, so the stability of grace in Christ is included, and usually in Scripture under earthly shadows spiritual blessings are covenanted. Canaan was a type of heaven. David's kingdom of Christ's spiritual kingdom. Solomon's temple of Christ's Church, therefore altars, priests, and sacrifices of Christ our golden Altar, our high priest, our sweet smelling sacrifice, again we must note that oftentimes God altereth the seasons and qualities of the air, but it is for our sins, therefore when we see cold summers, hot winters, raging storms, excess of heat and cold, dryness and moistness, let us leave to trouble God without sins, and he will leave to trouble us with his plagues, moreover let us not fix our chiefest happiness in these temporal blessings. But let us look to him that is the giver and the end of all, even jesus Christ the author and finisher of our faith. And lastly, let not these blessings be motives of security, but rather stir us up to be thankful to him, that provides all things necessary for this life, and a crown of righteousness for the life to come.    

Questions on the ninth Chapter.  

Q. Why doth God first of all bless Noah with increase of children?  
A. Because of earthly blessings this was the greatest, the earth being now void of mankind, and Noah knew not till now, whether it was lawful to beget children, seeing God had destroyed mankind. Secondly, to teach us to account our children chief effects of God's blessing, and to be thankful to him for them, behold children are the inheritance of the Lord, and the fruit of the womb his reward. Psal. 127. 3.   

Q. Is this blessing all one with that which Adam had in paradise?  
A. Yes, in respect of the matter, but not of the manner, for then procreation of children should not have been painful. Secondly, not inordinate, thirdly, not imperfect.   

Q. How could this blessing belong to Noah, seeing he had no children after the flood?  
A. Although this blessing was fulfilled in his children, yet it is given to him, because he being the root, their increase was his increase. Secondly, because he was found righteous before God, and God smelled a savour of rest in his sacrifice. Thirdly, to let his children know that this blessing did belong to them only for their just father's sake.   

Q. Is every increase the blessing of God?  
A. All that are lawfully procreated are God's blessings both in respect of the child begotten, and in respect of the manner of begetting, but those that are not begotten in marriage do not proceed of God's blessing, in regard of the manner of procreation, howsoever in themselves they may be the effects of God's blessing. Secondly, the increase of all other creatures do proceed of God's blessing, but for man's sake for whom they were created.   

Q. Which is the second prerogative that God giveth now to Noah and his sons?  
A. That their fear and terror may be upon all the beasts, fowls, fishes and creeping things, this dominion had Adam, but after a more excellent manner, for the creatures were subject of their own accord, now of fear and by constraint, and although that man hath power to rule over the beasts with fear, yet great men must not rule their inferior brethren with fear, but rather with love, for Viri sancti non praeesse gaudent hominibus sed prodesse. Greg. mor. lib. 21, cap. 11.   

Q. Hath man this dominion over all the creatures and at all times?  
A. No: For the wild ass derideth the multitude of the City, and heareth not the cry of the driver, job 39 10. the Unicorn will not serve, nor will he tarry by the crib, verse 11. the hawk doth not flee by our wisdom; neither doth the Eagle mount up at our command, vers. 29. and 30. we cannot draw out Leviathan with an hook, neither pierce his jaws with an angle Chap. 40. ver. 20. and 21. Again, many beasts are fearful to man, and often times noy some, as Lions, Wolveses, Bears, etc. God threatneth to send wild beasts amongst his people which should spoil them. Leu. 26. 22. the Prophet was slain by a Lyon. 1. King. 13. 24. two Bears did tear in pieces 42. children, 2. King. 2. 24.   

Q. Then how is it that the fear of man is upon the creatures?  
A. First, in that they cannot do that harm to man which they would, because God restrains their power: secondly, they do not offend man but when he offends God: thirdly, in respect that every nature of wild beast, etc. hath been tamed of the nature of man. jam. 3. 7. fourthly, even the most savage beasts stand in fear of man; they flee his company, they shun his arts and snares, they fear his voice and shadow: fifthly, because they serve man and submit themselves to his will, the Horse yields his mouth to the bridle, the Ox his neck to the yoke, the Cow her dugs to our hands, the Sheep her wool to the sheerers, etc.   

Q. Seeing then God hath delivered the creatures into our hands, may we use them as we lust?  
A. We may use them, but not abuse them: first, we must not cause them to travel on the Sabbath day, Exod. 10 10. secondly, we must not covet our neighbour's beast. Exod. 20. 17. thirdly, we must not use them unmercifully, for we shall not muzzle the Ox when he treadeth out the corn. Deut. 25. 4.   

Q. Which is the third prerogative that Noah hath?  
A. That it shall be lawful for him to use every living thing for meat: whereas before the flood it was not usual to eat flesh, because the herbs were sufficient, and the people were then of a stronger constitution of body; but now God giveth liberty to eat flesh: first, because man's strength began to decay: secondly, the earth was not able to yield that increase of herbs which it did before: thirdly, because God will encourage Noah and his family the more, being out of heart to see the miserable state of the earth▪ fourthly, because he will tie them to be more thankful to him; for the more blessings we receive, the more are we bound to serve God: fifthly, because he will by this teach man that it is abomination to worship any beast in respect that we must eat them, and that which we eat cannot be God.   

Q. Is flesh more convenient for man's body then herbs?  
A. Yes, else it had been no great blessing to have received the use of flesh, and that flesh doth nourish more it is known by the Physicians, who prescribe flesh to their patients but not herbs: secondly, we see by experience that those who feed most on flesh, are more lusty and strong, than they who feed on herbs: thirdly, that is best food which is most near to the nature of him that eats it, but flesh is nearer to the nature of man's body, than herbs: fourthly, that food is best, which is most temperate in heat and cold, because mansbody is of this temperature, but this is flesh; for herbs do exceed in the qualities of heat and cold, dryness and moistness: fifthly, those that do macerate their bodies, do use commonly to abstain from flesh and not from herbs and fruit.   

Q. Is it lawful then to eat flesh?  
A. To him that is pure all things are pure; Gods children may eat any thing if it be received with thankes, for the beasts were created not only to serve but also to feed man; and good reason hath man to kill the beasts for his food: both because God hath given him authority so to do. As also, because Noah preserved in the Ark the beasts from drowning, and man doth yet preserve their life in providing and caring for them. Therefore he should receive this benefit of them; but as for the wicked they have no interest other then civil in any of God's creatures, they eat and drink not by right, but by usurpation, if we consider the freedom of grace.   

Q. Was it not lawful before the flood, to eat flesh?  
A. In my opinion it was lawful, because there was no law against it: secondly, the beasts were created to be eat: thirdly, their flesh then was as nourishing as now: fourthly, they before the flood had their flocks of sheep not only to clothe their nakedness with their skins: but also to satisfy their hungers with their flesh: but although it was lawful, yet it was not much usual, especially amongst the Saints: first, because they had no positive law to eat flesh as now: secondly, the earth then being in her full vigour yields store of excellent herbs: thirdly, man's nature then was stronger, but now after the flood his strength gins to decay and his years to shorten. For before the flood some lived till they were 900. years and upward; but after the flood, Arphaxad who was first borne, lived little more than 400. years, and after Abraham none lived longer than Isaac, and he did not exceed 180. years, and Moses confesseth that in his time their years were 70. Psal. 90. 10.   

Q. How shall we lawfully eat flesh?  
A. First, if we eat it with thanksgiving, acknowledging God the benefactor. Secondly, if we eat it with sobriety, not with riot. Thirdly, if we eat it not at these times which are prohibited by the Church and the Magistrate. Fourthly, if we eat it so that we be not unmindful of Christ when he is hungered in his members. Fifthly, if we remember that God gave us power to kill and eat flesh after the flood, that we may learn to kill and destroy our fleshly nature, after our Baptism.   

Q. How is it understood that blood is the soul or life of the creature?  
A. Blood is not properly the life, but because it is the sign of life, therefore it is called life figuratively: as bread is called Christ's body. Secondly, because the animal life is in the blood, and preserved by the blood: therefore here continens is taken for contentum.   

Q. Why is the life preserved in the blood?  
A. Because the life consisteth in heat and moisture, and such is the temperature of the blood: secondly, the vital spirits wherein the life doth most consist are generated of the blood: thirdly, because the life cannot continue without nourishment: but blood is the last and chiefest nourishment of the creature.   

Q. Why did God prohibit the eating of blood?  
A. Because by this he will teach us to abstain from murder and cruelty: secondly, in that the life consisteth in the blood, he will teach us that he hath only power over the life, and therefore over the blood: thirdly, to shun Idolatry and offering of blood to images. For if we must not eat the blood much less may we offer it: fourthly, to teach them sobriety in eating: fifthly, by interdicting of blood he will accustom them to be obedient to him, to acknowledge him as their Lord. Therefore he will have them to eat that which he pleaseth, and to abstain from that which he prohi●…its; for this cause he did forbid Adam to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil: sixthly, because he hath given it to be offered upon the Altar to make an atonement for our souls. Levit. 17. 11.   

Q. Is it not lawful for Christians to eat blood?  
A. Yes, for abstinence from blood was ceremonial amongst the jews, which is abrogated by Christ's coming: therefore not only have we power to eat blood, but Christ also saith, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, ye can have no life in you. joh. 6.   

Q. Then why did the Apostles prohibit eating of blood. Act. 15.  
A. Because the jews did abhor the eating of blood: therefore lest they should give an occasion to the jews to separate themselves from the Church; they in wisdom thought it fit that the Christians for a while should abstain from blood, so then in matters indifferent we must be careful that we offend not our weak brethren, otherways that which entereth in at the mouth cannot defile the man. Matth. 15.   

Q. What is meant by this, that God will require the blood of our lives?  
A. This is the reason why he will not have them to eat blood: because he will not have them to shed man's blood: which if they do he will require it, that is, he will seek it out and punish the shedding of it; so then God is he that maketh inquisition for blood. Psal. 9 12. And by this we see his fatherly care of us, who is our defender and the revenger of our blood: secondly, that none hath power to revenge shedding of blood, but God and his vi●…gerent the magistrate: thirdly, that it is a fear full sin to shed blood, whether it be our own or the blood of others. For God will surely inquire and punish it.   

Q. May we not then shed our own blood upon a just occasion?  
A. No occasion should cause us to shed our own blood. For if we cannot murder our brother, much ●…esse ourselves: neither must we murder ourselves because Samson did so; for he did not intent to kill himself by pulling down of the house, but to kill the enemies of God. Again, he was an extraordinary person, and the type of Christ in this, and therefore not to be imitated, neither must we kill ourselves upon pretence to be with Christ, because we must so long remain in this warfare till our captain jesus commandeth us to departed.   

Q. How is it understood that God will require our blood at the hands of beasts?  
A. By the beasts here we understand not the devils, as Origen●…s, nor cruel and savage men as others do think, but these words are to be understood of beasts so called properly, that if they shed man's blood, they shall be killed, as it was afterward ordained by Moses law, if an ox gore a man, he shall be stoned, etc. Exod. 21. 28. and this should teach us to abhor shedding of blood, for if the beasts shall be killed for shedding blood, much more shall man.   

Q. How will God require the life of man at the hand of a man's brother?  
A. By brother here is meant any other man, for God made all mankind of one blood. Act. 17. 26. and this word brother doth teach us mercy and love, for it is unnatural for one brother to kill another, and if all men be brethren by nature, much more are Christians in jesus Christ, and therefore hatred and murder amongst them is more fearful then amongst others that knows not Christ.   

Q. Shall his blood be shed that sheddeth the blood of man?  
A. Yes, it should be shed both by the laws of God and man; this same is mentioned. Mat. 26. Reu. 13. yet oftentimes it falleth out that murderers do escape the magistrate, notwithstanding they cannot escape the hand of God; for men of blood shall not live out half their days, Psal. 55. 24.   

Q. Then what shall we say of the magistrate that sheddeth blood, and of him that sheddeth blood against his will?  
A. The magistrate is God's vicegerent appointed not to shed the blood of man, but the blood of the manslayer, he beareth not the sword in vain, for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil. Rom. 13. 4. as for him that killeth unawares, the Cities of refuge were provided that they might fly thither. Num. 35. 11. but he that presumptuously killeth, must be taken from the Altar that he may dye. Exod. 21. 14. and if this kind of murder be prohibited, much more is that whereby we murder our brother's soul, either with poisoning them with false doctrine, or else by provoking them to sin, therefore Satan is called a manslayer from the beginning.   

Q. Why must not the blood of man be shed?  
A. Because he is made in the image of God, therefore he that spoils and abuses the King's image disgracefully, doth abuse the king himself, and much more is God abused when his lively image is defaced. Secondly, we see that the image of God in man after the fall is not utterly abolished, but some relics yet do remain. Thirdly, it is not for any worthiness in man that God will have his life preserved; but because of his own image. Fourthly, if man be made to God's image, then let not the rich despise the poor; nor the learned the ignorant, nor the wise the foolish, nor great men their inferiors, because they were all made in the image of God.   

Q. Why doth God again repeat this blessing of increase and multiplication?  
A. To signify that even for this he doth abhor murder, because it is an hindrance to multiplication. Secondly, to teach us that as multiplicgtion proceeds of his blessing, so destruction and mortality doth ensue of his wrath. Therefore when God hinders multiplication, either by famine, plague, or sword, we may be sure that he is angry with us.   

Q. Why did God make a covenant with Noah?  
A. To confirm his faith the more, although his word is sufficient, yet for our comfort and strengthening he many times is forced to confirm his promises by oaths and covenants. Therefore he will not have Noah and his posterity to think, that suppose he sends clouds and rain many times, that he will destroy the earth any more with water. Secondly, by this covenant he signifies and represents the internal and eternal covenant of grace, made and confirmed by the blood of Christ. For if he be careful to save our bodies from water, much more to save our souls from eternal fire. Thirdly, in that he maketh his covenant, not only with Noah, but with his seed. It showeth that our children are not excluded from the covenant of grace. Fourthly, in this covenant we see the largeness of his love who is not contented to make it with one person, family or country, but withal Noah's posterity, than who is able to comprehend the breadth and length and depth and height of the love of God.   

Q. Why did God make a covenant with the beasts and fowls?  
A. Not for their own sakes, but for man, for as God made them for his sake, so for his sake he blesseth them and makes his covenant with them; Secondly, to teach us that if he hath such care of the beasts; fare greater care will he have over us, Oh we of little faith.   

Q. Why did God confirm his covenant with a sign?  
A. For the confirmation of our faith and strengthening of our memory, as commonly he useth; so he confirmed our mortification by circumcision, heaven by Canaan, the death of Christ by sacrifices, our regeneration by water; our spiritual food by bread and wine, etc. and these are the signs of grace, or rather seals different from these miraculous signs of glory, as the fiery pillar, the cloud, the fiery bush, the rod of Moses; the drying of the red sea, the rock that yielded water.   

Q. Which was this sign of the covenant?  
A. The rainbow which is called his bow. First, because he made it, secondly, because of the wonderfulness thereof; therefore it is called by the Poet Thaumantia proles, thirdly, because he by his special ordinance did ordain it; to be a sacramental sign of mercy; again it is called the rainbow, because it is in the cloud, in the day of rain. Ezech. 1. 28. Secondly, because it signifies that the world shall never be drowned any more with rain, moreover, it is called a bow, because of the likeness it hath with a bow. Secondly, because as a bow in Scripture is used for a sign of wa●…s, so the rainbow naturally is the sign of waters, although God hath now made it a sign not of waters, but of deliverance from waters.   

Q. Why did God set his bow in the clouds?  
A. That it might be the more conspicuous and in the sight of all. Secondly, because it is a watery meteor generated in the clouds by the reflection of the sun. Thirdly, for our greater comfort, for there God would place it, where the greatest fear and danger of water is, to wit in the clouds. Therefore now we need not fear the clouds, because their waters are sealed with this bow, that they shall not any more drown the earth. Fourthly▪ the clouds are oftentimes the sign of God's presence and favour, as here the bow is set in the clouds, a cloud went before the Israelites, the Lord gave the law in a cloud upon mount Sinai, the Tabetnacle was filled with a cloud, and in a cloud God appeared in salomon's Temple, the clouds are his pavilion, Psal. 18. and his chariot. Psal. 104. Christ was transfigured in a cloud; in a cloud he ascended, and in the clouds of heaven he shall come again to judge the quick and dead.   

Q. Is that opinion of Ambrose sound, who thinketh that this bow is not meant of the rainbow, but rather figuratively of the secret power of God?  
A. No: for here it is expressly meant of that bow which is in the clouds, which is none else but the rainbow; Secondly, this narration of Moses is historical, but that opinion of Ambrose is allegorical. Thirdly, his opinion is contrary to the opinion of all the greek and latin Fathers.   

Q. Doth the rainbow naturally signify that the earth shall not be drowned with water?  
A. No: for although the rainbow in respect of the matter and generation thereof be natural, yet as it is a sign of God's mercy and deliverance from water, it is supernatural, then there is no natural relation between the rainbow and an universal flood, because such a flood cannot proceed of natural causes but only by God's power, yet naturally it doth signify some moderate rain to follow, because it is generated not when the whole face of heaven is covered with thick clouds, but when there are some thin and dewey clouds opposite to the sun.   

Q. Why did God rather make the rainbow the sign of his covenant, than any thing else?  
A. Because amongst the celestial bodies, there is none more wonderful, conspicuous and glorious than this; and therefore fittest to be the sign of such a covenant between God and us; Secondly, the covenant is, that God will restrain the waters from drowning the earth again; this is seen in the bow, wherein there is water but temperated with light, with light heat is joined, and heat is that which restrains immoderate rain: thirdly, the effect of his covenant is peace and reconciliation, and this is signified by the Rainbow; which wanteth both string and arrow. For he shot his arrow against the first world, and hath broke the string because he is reconciled to us: fourthly, the Rainbow naturally signifieth a moderate rain, therefore it was fittest to signify supernaturally restraint from inordinate rain; fifthly, the flood proceeded from the clouds, and this Bow is generated in the clouds: therefore fittest of all to assure us that we shall not be drowned with the immoderate raining of the clouds.   

Q. Was the Rainbow before the flood or not?  
A. It was in respect of the matter thereof. For seeing before the flood, the Sun and the Clouds were, which are the causes of the Rainbow, it could not be but that the Rainbow was also. Yet it was not till now, in respect of that sacramental relation it hath with God's mercy, for it was no sign of the covenant till now.   

Q. Shall there be no Rainbow as some have thought, forty years before the last judgement?  
A. If this were true, than the time of the last judgement should be known; but of that hour and day knoweth no man: secondly, if in that space there should be no Bow, than there should be neither rain nor clouds: but famine, misery and mortality, but Christ testifies the contrary, for men shall be eating and drinking, marrying, etc. and therefore there shall be great joy and plenty: thirdly, the Rainbow is the sign of that covenant which God made, not only with Noah, but with all his posterity, and therefore shall continue till the end of the world.   

Q. What relation is there between the Rainbow and Christ?  
A. As the Rainbow is the sign of that old and temporary covenant, so is Christ the Angel of the new and eternal covenant: secondly, as the Rainbow is generated of the light of the Sun, which light is all one with that, which is in the body of the Sun. So is Christ begotten of the substance of his Father, light of light, God of God, from all eternity: thirdly, as the Rainbow doth consist of the light of the Sun, but somewhat▪ obscurer, because covered with a cloud: So Christ doth consist of the nature of God, which for a while did lurk under the veil of his humanity: fourthly, as God did manifest himself unto Ezechiel in the Rainbow; so he hath revealed himself to us in his Son Christ: fifthly, as the generation of the Rainbow is wonderful; so is the twofold generation of Christ more wonderful. Yea his name shall be called wonderful, Isaiah 9 6. sixthly, as in the Rainbow there are three colours, so in Christ there are three offices, to wit of a King; of a Priest, and a Prophet: seaventhly, as in the Rainbow there is the colour of fire and water, so in Christ there is fire to purge us, and water to cool and manure us: eighthly, as the Rainbow (Reuel. 4.) did compass the throne round about: so doth Christ, with his power and providence defend the Church which is his throne: ninthly, as we should look upon the Rainbow, and comfort ourselves, when we fear any inundation of waters; so should we with the eyes of faith, look upon our Redeemer when we fear the inundation of his Father's wrath.   

Q. What use should we make of the consideration of the Rainbow?  
A. First, it should comfort: for if God was so careful to confirm this temporal covenant with a sign, much more careful will he be to confirm that covenant which he hath made with us in Christ: secondly, when we see it, let us with the jews lift up our hands and hearts to him; that not only made the covenant, but hath also ever kept it till now: thirdly, let us learn to fear him, and avoid sin; that as we have escaped the s●…ood, which is signified by the waterish colour; so we may escape that devouring fire which shall destroy the beauty of this world, represented to us by that fiery colour which we see in the rainbow. Fourthly, let us acknowledge our own imbecility and incredulity seeing God is compelled to confirm his covenants and promises by such like external signs. Fifthly, as the rainbow hath no light nor beauty, but that which it hath from the sun. So let us acknowledge, that we have no grace nor perfection but that which we receive from the son of righteousness. Sixthly, let us in beholding of the rainbow, acknowledge that the mercy of the Lord is above all his works, for in a little wrath and for amoment he hide his face from us, but with everlasting kindness he hath had mercy upon us. Es. 54. 8.   

Q. How will God remember Noah when he seethe the bow?  
A. God doth not properly remember, because he doth not forget, and he cannot forget, because he is most perfect, and all things are present to him; yet for our better understanding he is said to remember and forget after the manner of men, yet this and such like attributes are in God not subiective as they are in us, but Causaliter; then he will remember, that is, he will cause us to remember.   

Q. Nhy doth Moses make mention of the three sons of Noah?  
A. First, to let us see the effect of God's blessing in the multiplication of mankind, how that of these three the whole world was so suddenly replenished. Secondly, to let us know the propagation and increase of the Church, which is his chiefest drift. Thirdly, to let us see the wickedness of Cham to his father, and the cruelty of his posterity against the Church of God. Fourthly, that we might know that the propagation of mankind doth not depend on fortune, or the stars, or that they were from eternity.   

Q. Had Noah any more sons besides these three?  
A. No: for if he had, the Scripture would have named them, as well as the children of other patriarchs, at least in general, that they begat sons and daughters. Secondly, Moses in this and the next chapter showeth that these three did multiply the world, therefore it is not likely that he had any more.   

Q. What was the cause that Noah had no more children?  
A. Not because he was gelded by his son Cham as the Hebrews think, for that is fabulous. But first because these three were sufficient. Secondly, he was now very old & not fit for procreation. Thirdly, he did enjoy the blessing of multiplication in his children Fourthly, because of his chastity and temperance which he did more regard than the propagation of children.   

Q. Why amongst all the children of Cham, only Canaan is named here?  
A. Because amongst all Chams children, Canaan and the Canaanites were most notorious in wickedness. Secondly, because Canaan and his posterity were cursed, of which he speaketh here, verse 25. Thirdly, to animate the jews (for now the time was near, that they should take possession of their land) to go with courage against them, seeing they were an accursed nation.   

Q. Was Canaan borne in the Ark as Chrysostome thinketh?  
A. No: for eight persons only went into the Ark, and only eight came out from thence; Secondly, in that doleful time that they were in the Ark, neither man nor beast did give themselves to procreation.   

Q. How is it understood that Noah began now to be an husbandman?  
Q. Not that he was none before, but that now he began again after the flood to follow that calling, so we read that Christ began to say, Luk. 12. 1. and he began to cast out them that bought and sold in the Temple. Mark. 11. 15. that is, he did say, and did cast out, etc. or, he began to be an husbandman, that is, he invented some other way to till the ground then before, or thirdly, he began, that is, he did more painfully till the ground then before, because it was made more barren by the flood: here than we see, that although Noah was righteous and an old man, yet he doth not give himself to idleness, and neglecteth his calling, so no pretence should hinder us from following our vocation so long as we are able.   

Q. Was Noah the first inventor of drinking wine?  
A. Yes: for if it had been in use before the flood, Noah had not been overtaken with it immediately after the flood. Secondly, we do not read that there was any drinking of wine till now. Thirdly, seeing the earth did bring forth most excellent and comfortable herbs, and the fountains did yield most pleasant waters, and the bodies of men were stronger, there was no such need of wine before the flood as after; yet we deny not but there were grapes before the flood, and men did eat of them, as they did of other fruits?   

Q. But seeing the earth was spoilt with the flood, whence had Noah vines?  
A. As other herbs and trees did spring out of the earth being warmed by the sun. So questionless did vines, although not so excellent as before the flood; and Noah by his tillage and husbandry made them better, but we must not think that he gave himself altogether to planting of vines neglecting other trees and herbs, but here is only spoken of vines, because Moses is to speak of Noah's drunkenness, and the effects thereof.   

Q. Why was Noah so desirous to plant a vineyard?  
A. Because he knew that the strength of man's body began to decrease, and wine doth strengthen. Secondly, the earth did not yield that increase which it did before. Therefore wine would supply in a manner the defect of herbs and plants. Thirdly, he knew that wine did comfort the heart, and at that time he stood in need of it, because questionless he was much given to sorrow and grief to see the desolation of the earth.   

Q. Did Noah ill in drinking of the wine?  
A. No: for who planteth a vine and doth not eat of the fruit thereof? 1. Cor. 9 7. it is lawful to use the creatures of God with thanksgiving, for every creature of God is good, etc. 1. Tim. 4. 4. Wine was created to comfort man's heart. Psal. 104. Yea Paul desireth Timothy to use a little wine for his stomaches sake. 1. Tim. 5. 23. Christ did drink wine himself, and ordained that in the sacrament under the sign of wine, we should drink his blood, than Noah did not sin in drinking, but he sinned in not regarding the manner no●… the measure of his drinking?   

Q. Did Noah drink wine a purpose to make himself drunk, as our Priests of Bacchus now adays do, that altogether do sacrifice their throats and bellies to him?  
A. No: for he till now, knew not the force of wine, but they know it by daily experience. Secondly, he was exceeding old and weak at this time, therefore was quickly overcome, but the most part of them are young and strong to drink wine. Thirdly, he never drinking wine before, knew not how much he should drink, therefore was suddenly overtaken, but they by drinking every day do know what should be their measure; and yet do drink beyond all measure. Fourthly, he was drunk but once, but they are drunk daily. Fifthly, he repent for his sin and was ashamed, but they both glory in their sin, and do defend it.   

Q. Is Noah then to be excused for his drunkenness?  
A. No: for although he had been ignorant of the effect and force of the wine, yet ignorance excuseth no man. Secondly, he being a learned man doubtless and wise, could not be altogether ignorant of the virtue and power of grapes; as of other herbs and fruits. Thirdly, excess in eating and drinking in all creatures is a sin. Fourthly, if he had been excusable, then God had not punished him by suffering his own bowels to mock him, yet because he did not drink of intemperance, but to comfort his heart, neither had used to drink wine before, he may be partly excused, for ab in experientia profecta est ebrietas, No, non ab intemperantia, Theod. q. 65. in gen.   

Q. Seeing Noah a just man fell into this sin but once, and that partly of ignorance, why would not Moses conceal it?  
A. As the virtues of the Saints are set down in Scripture for us to imitate, so their vices are not omitted, that we might learn to slay and eschew them: secondly, that we may all learn to see our own imperfections; for the justest man that is, doth fall seven times a day; our righteousness is like a stained cloth: thirdly, that we might see what a damnable vice drunkenness is, even a short fury and a voluntary devil, as Chrysostome calls it: Yea cause of sickness in the body, disquietness in the mind, poverty in our goods, negligence in God's service, want of reason, and in a word, the root of all mischief: fourthly, that we may see from whence proceeded the misery of the Canaanites, even from Noah's drunkenness: for drunkenness was the cause of his nakedness▪ nakedness of derision, derision of Canaan●… curse: fifthly, to show the sincerity of God's word, that neither for fear nor favour will conceal the truth.   

Q. What relation is there between the sin of Adam, and this of Noah?  
A. Adam the father of the first world, sinned shortly after his creation, and Noah the father of the second world, sins shortly after his preservation: secondly, Adam transgressed by eating the fruit of the forbidden tree, and Noah transgresseth by drinking the fruit of the vine tree: thirdly, the sequel of Adam's sin was nakedness, and the sequel of Noah's sin is the same: fourthly, Adam was ashamed, and the shame of Noah is delivered: fifthly, Adam's nakedness was covered with skins, and Noah's nakedness is covered with a garment: sixthly, a curse upon Adam's posterity, is the effect of Adam's eating, and a curse upon Canaan, Noah's posterity, is the effect of Noah's drinking.   

Q. Wherein did the greatness of Cham's sin consist?  
A. First, in that he did not reverence his father, in covering his nakedness: secondly, in that he took pleasure in seeing those members, whereof all men by nature are ashamed: thirdly, in that he mocked him that was not only his father, an old man, and him who was righteous before God, but also him, for whose sake he was preserved from the flood: fourthly, in that he had so soon forgot the judgements of God upon the first world for such like sins: fifthly, in that he did not only mock his father, but also told his brethren of his father's nakedness: sixthly, in that Cham at this time was no child, but a man of an hundred years and upward, therefore should have had more grace and discretion: seventhly, he was a father himself, therefore should have known what was the duty of a child: eighthly, in that he was so quick to spy the moat in his father's eye, and could not see the beam that was in his own, I mean his witchcraft, malice, contempt of religion, lechery, and other vices which are recorded of him.   

Q. Wherein were Shem and japheth worthy of commendations?  
A. First, for their piety in covering their father's nakedness: secondly, for their modesty in going backward lest they should defile their eyes in seeing of his filthiness. Wherein we see that Sem the younger is first named: because it seems he was principal in this business: secondly, we see the difference of Noah's children, and suppose he was a good man, yet he is plagued with a wicked son: thirdly, in these children we see the state of the Church. For if amongst these eight persons that were delivered from the stood, there was one hypocrite, what wonder is it to find in the Universal Church many thousand hypocrites: fourthly, in Cham we see the type of wicked children, and in Sem and japheth a pattern for good children: fifthly, if Sem and japheth were so careful to honour their earthly father, then much more diligent should we be to reverence our heavenly Father.   

Q. How could Noah know what his younger son had done to him?  
A. Either by revelation from God, or else by the relation of Sem and japheth: and here we see that as Cham is younger in years, so he is younger in grace and manners: secondly, in Noah's awaking we see the state of the godly, that though they sleep and fall, yet they awake and rise again: thirdly, in Noah's sleeping we see the state of the world, for when men are drunk with wine, that is, filled with worldly blessings, than they fall asleep and wax careless and secure: fourthly, in that Noah awoke and knew what was done: we should learn to do good to all men, and not to harm them either sleeping or waking, for there is nothing so secret which shall not be revealed.   

Q. What reward had Cham for scorning his old father?  
A. He was accursed by his own father's mouth, which curse he uttered not of malice or in his anger, but being moved by God's spirit, did speak it by way of prophecy: secondly, we must consider that he uttered this with no small grief of mind; that he should be compelled to curse his own child for his wickedness, who not only was his child, but his youngest, whom he loved most dearly, and having but these three, who were with him wonderfully preserved in the Ark, and that he should utter this curse not only against him, but also against the Canaanites his posterity: thirdly, here we see the zeal and constancy of Noah, that makes no bones to curse his child because he dishonoured God, yea more zealous than Brutus that killed his son for the love he carried to his country: fourthly, in this we see what a fearful thing it is for children to dishonour their parents: who to them are instead of God, certainly the fruit of this sin is a curse.   

Q. Why is Canaan cursed and not Cham?  
A. In that Canaan is cursed, I'm the father is not exempted, but rather his curse is aggravated, as Sem is not exempted from the blessing in the verse following: although God be named, so jacob is said to bless joseph. Gen. 48. 15. when properly he blessed josephs' children. verse 16. and Canaan's name is here used, not Cham's, to let him see the greatness of the curse; which did not end with him, but did increase as his posterity increased: secondly, because Canaan did follow his father's footsteps in wickedness: thirdly, for our instruction, that we may learn to fear him, for his judgements are a great deep, they are passed finding out, his wrath is like a consuming fire, and when he curseth, he will not only curse us, but also the fruit of our body. Deut. 28. 18.   

Q. Wherein was Cham accursed?  
A. Not only in that he was a servant, but also a servant of servants, and that unto his brethren, and although this servitude could not be presently seen in the posterity of Cham, yet at last it was fully manifested, when the posterity of Sem had the full possession of the land of Canaan.   

Q. Is it then a curse to serve?  
A. There is a fourfold service. 1. divine, which all creatures own to God by right of creation. 2. natural, which is nothing else but the subjection of inferiors to their superiors proceeding of love for order sake, and this should have been in the state of innocence: thirdly violent, when men are constrained to serve, and this kind of service is hateful and bitter: first, because it is contrary to the liberty of man's nature: secondly, because it is contrary to the end of man's creation, for man was created to rule and not to serve: thirdly, it is repugnant to the image of God, a part whereof doth consist in ruling and commanding, and this service is a curse laid upon man for sin: the fourth kind of service is diabolical, when a man doth serve his sins and mancepate himself to his own affections, for whosoever committeth sin, is the servant of sin. joh. 8. 34. and he that serveth such masters may be called a servant of servants, and such servants were the Canaanites, serving not only their brethren, but also their own abominations, for which their land did spew them out.   

Q. Seeing then involuntary service is the effect of sin, is this a pretence for servants to reject altogether there service?  
A. No, for many things have and do proceed of evil causes, which God doth turn to good uses: secondly, service is a punishment for sin, and therefore should not be rejected, but with patience endured: thirdly, it is a means to beat down our pride, and contempt of God; and this means God used against the Israelites, when he caused them to serve the King of Aram eight years, and Eglon King of Moab 18. years. judg. 3. Servants than should comfort themselves, that though in external and civil matters they are inferior and subject to there masters; yet in spiritual blessings, and in respect of Christ, they are equals: secondly, Masters should not be cruel to their servants, seeing they also have a Master in heaven. joh 6.   

Q. What reward hath Sem for covering his father's nakedness?  
A. First, he is blessed of his father, which is no small matter. For the blessing of the father establisheth the houses of children. Eccle. 3. 9 Secondly, he hath this honour, that he is the first man that is blessed under the name of God expressly: thirdly, by calling God the God of Sem, he shows that only Sem and his posterity shall only worship and know the ●…true God: fourthly, of Sem came Christ according to the flesh; who here is called the God of Sem: fifthly, in this blessing is included the land of Canaan, which then Sem in his posterity did enjoy, when Canaan became his servant: sixthly, in that he doth not bless Sem in his own name, but under the name of God, it showeth that eternal life is implied herein; for God hath prepared for them a City of whom he is not ashamed to be called there God. Heb. 11. 16.   

Q. What is the reward that japheth hath for his duty to his father?  
A. First, that God will enlarge him, that is, multiply his posterity, for he had more sons, then either Sem or Cham, and these sons of his did spread over more nations than Sem or Cham's children: to wit over Galatia, Scythia, Media, Graecia, Italy, Spain, Mosco●…ia, Thracia, and many more countries: secondly, that japheth shall dwell in the tents of Sem, that is, that the Gentiles japheths' posterity, shall embrace the religion of the jews Sem's posterity: and this was accomplished when the partition wall was broken down by the preaching of the Gospel, than the Gentiles that were afar off were made nigh by the blood of Christ. Eph. 2. then, as Christ foretold, joh. 10. there was but one Shepherd and one sheepfold: thirdly, that Canaan should be his servant, which then was fulfilled when the Grecians and Romans japheths' posterity had subdued the most part of the world habitable, but if by Canaan we understand the wicked; and by Sem and japheth the Church; than it is most true, that the wicked nill they will they, are but servants to God's children.   

Q. What is meant here by the Tents of Sem?  
A. The Church of God, which is called Tents: first, because Tents are movable, and not still in one place, so is the estate of the Church in this life, for here we have no continuing City Heb. 13. 14. secondly, Tents are most used in wars, and our life is a warfare, job 7. 1. thirdly, Tents are weakly built, and not able to resist those injuries of the a●…re that houses can: so the Church in herself is weak, though in the Lord she be strong, and these weak things God hath chosen to confound the things that are mighty. 1. Cor. 1. 27. fourthly, the Church is called a Tent, in relation to Moses Tabernacle. For as there God was worshipped, sacrifices were offered, and the presence of the Lord was to be seen: so in the Church we worship God, offer up spiritual sacrifices, and do enjoy the presence and comfort of his spirit. Again the Church is called the Tents of Sem, because he was the father of the jews, amongst whom God only had his visible Church; so she is called the Tents of judah. Zach. 12. 7. the Tents of jacob. Mal. 2. 12. and also the Tents of the Saints. Reu. 20. 9   

Q. Wherein was Noah the type of Christ?  
A. As Noah built an Ark, so did Christ the Church: secondly, as Noah did offer a sacrifice, whereof God smelled a savour of rest, so did Christ: thirdly, as God for Noah's sacrifice did curse the ground no more, even so for Christ's sacrifice, God did curse the Church no more: fourthly, as Noah planted a vineyard, so did Christ plant the Church which is his vineyard. 5. as Noah was drunk with wine, so Christ who is the true wine, and who trod the winepress alone, who turned water into wine, and who was counted a drinker of wine, was drunken with the wine of his father's wrath, in commemoration whereof he hath commanded us to drink wine in the sacrament: sixthly, as Noah after his drinking fell asleep, so Christ after he had drunk of the Cup which his Father gave him, died; for death is a sleep: seventhly: Noah was made naked in his sleeping, and so was Christ in his suffering: eighthly, Noah was mocked by his own son, and so was Christ by his own people the jews: ninthly, Noah fell asleep in his own Tent, and Christ's died in his own country judea. tenthly, Sem and japheth covered Noah's body with a garment, so joseph and Nicodemus covered Christ's body with linen clothes: eleventh, Noah awoke from his sleep, and so did Christ from his grave: twelfthly, Cham was cursed for scorning his Father, and the jews are yet accursed for killing their Saviour.   

Q. How long lived Noah after the flood?  
A. Three hundred and fifty years, even till Abraham was about fifty years of age, or 58. as the Hebrews, and others do think, and in that Noah lived so long after the flood, it showeth us, that long life doth neither depend from the stars, the temperature of the air, the constitution of the body, the excellency of meat and drink, nor any thing else, except from God's blessing, for neither had the Stars that influence, nor the air that temperature, nor man's body that strength, nor the herbs that nutriment, which they had before the flood, yet Noah lived after the flood 350. years, and his son Sem 500 secondly, God would have him live so long after the flood, not only to see the effect of God's blessing in the multiplication of his posterity, but also to instruct the world with the knowledge of the true God; and of these things that were done before the flood.   

Q. How old was Noah when he died?  
A. Nine hundred and fifty years, the oldest man that ever lived, except Iared that lived 962. years, and Methus●…lah that lived 969. years, yet for all his long life, he is not exempted from death; Nam omnes una manet nox, & calcanda semel via lethi Again, what was all this long life of Noah, but a long tragedy full of sorrow and misery, he was vexed with the wickedness of the world before the flood; and made a mocking stock, in the Ark tormented with the horror of that fearful judgement; after the flood, mocked by his own son, and grieved with the idolatry not only of Cham and japheths' posterity, but also of Sems' family, whom he had so highly blessed, and this was not a small grief to see wicked Cham whom he had cursed with his posterity, so to flourish and abound in wealth and power. Surely we are made saith job, to possess months of vanity, and wearisome nights are appointed to us, therefore let us learn to contemn this foolish world, for the grave at last must be our house, and our beds must be made in the darkness. job. cap. 7. 3. and cap. 17. 13.    

Questions on the tenth Chapter.  

Q. WHat is meant by this word Generation, which is so often used in the Scripture?  
A. First, it signifieth the original and beginning of things, as Gen. 2. 4. these are the generations of heaven and earth: secondly, the history of a man's life and of those things that doc befall him, as Gen. 6. 9 these are the generations of Noah: thirdly, a genealogy or supputation of ones posterity, as here in this Chapter, these are the generations of the sons of Noah: fourthly, it is taken for the people that do live in such or such an age; as Gen. 15. 16. in the fourth generation they shall come again: fifthly, for an age itself as Matth. 24. 34. this generation shall not pass, etc. sixthly, for ones nativity, as Mat. 1. 18. the generation of Christ was thus, seaventhly, for a nation as Matth. 12. 39 an evil generation seeketh after a sign, eighthly, for a kind or fashion, as Luke 16. 8. the children of this world are wise in there generation, etc.   

Q. Why doth Moses set down this genealogy, seeing Paul doth command us not to give heed to genealogies. 1. Tim. 14.  
A. Paul doth condemn these genealogies that are endless, and which minister questions, not edifications: secondly, he doth command us not to give heed to them; neither to account them apart of God's worship as the jews did, but this Genealogy of Noah and such like in Scripture, are profitable for us to know, and therefore are not condemned.   

Q. What profit is it for us to know the generations of Noah's sons?  
A. They are profitable. First, because by them we see how the world is multiplied. 2. by them we may refute the fabulous genealogies of Poets, Philosophers, Egyptians, Aethiopians and others that do brag of their antiquity. 3. in this genealogy we see the effect of God's blessing in multiplying mankind. 4. by this genealogy we know so much the better what these nations are, that are often named in the Scripture. 5. we know also from hence how Christ came of Sem according to the flesh, and how Noah's curse took effect in the posterity of Cham.   

Q. Was this propagation of mankind by Noah's three sons in so short a time, miraculous?  
A. Miracles are those works which do exceed the power and force of nature, and these are of two sorts, pure miracles which in all respects exceeds the course of nature, as the standing of the sun in the days of losuah, his going back in the dial of Achaz. the conception of the Virgin, etc. or else they are mixed miracles, which in respect of the thing itself which is produced are natural but in the manner of producing, and in respect of other circumstances are supernatural: such as the thunderings that discomfited the Philistines at samuel's prayer. 1. Sam. 7. 10. the rain that fell at the prayer of Elias, 1. King. 18. 45. and such like, than this propagation of mankind in so short a space is a mixed miracle, for it is natural in respect of the work itself, but in respect of shortness of time, and the multitude that were begotten, it is supernatural.   

Q. Doth Moses rehearse here all the heads or fathers of the Nations?  
A. No: but those only that were most famous; Then of Sems' progeny he reckoneth 26. of Cham's 31. of japheths' 14. which in all are 71. and many of these names here mentioned, were changed by the Greeks, who not only changed their rites and ceremonies; but also in sign of servitude altered their names.   

Q. What order keepeth Moses in rehearsing this Genealogy?  
A. He beginneth first at japheth, because he was last spoken of in the precedent chapter; and here he speaketh last of Sem, because the rest of this history is spent about his posterity, and in the middle Cham is placed, which doth represent to us the state of the Church visible in this world, which hath in her bosom many hypocrites and reprobate Cham's.   

Q. What was Gomer?  
A. The father of the Cimmerians as Herodotus thinketh, or rather as josephus the father of the Galatians, who first were called Galls, and having left their own country, seated themselves in Asia-minor, where being mingled with the Greeks, they were called Gallogreci, and afterwards Galatae; unto these Galatians, Peter writ his first epistle; in this country Paul traveled sundry times and preached, afterward he being captive at Rome, from thence writ an epistle to them. Gomer also was the name of Diblaims daughter the wife of Hosea, Host 1.   

Q. What was Magog?  
A. The father of the Scythians, a rude and barbarous people, inhabiting many countries in the north part of the world, from them the Turks have their original, which now to the great shame of Christians, and overthrew of our religion, have by our unnatural discords, obtained those kingdoms and glorious Churches in Europe and Asia: sometimes famous and sanctified with the presence of Christ, and preachings of the Apostles; beautified with miracles, adorned with all arts and sciences, illustrated with the learned pens of many orthodox fathers, and besprinkled with the blood of many thousand martyrs but now alas their habitation is desolate, their Churches are become habitations for devils, the holds of every foul spirit, and cages of vnc●…ane and hateful birds. Magog is taken for the hid and secret enemies of the Church. Eze. 38. 2. and 39 6. Reu. 20. 8.   

Q. What people came of Madai?  
A. The Medes, a mighty people, who did inhabit the country lying between the Caspian sea and Persia, they were first subject to the Assyrians, afterward refusing the government of the effeminate Sardanapalus, they made Arbactus their King, who with his successors for the space of 350. years did govern Media until Cyrus the Persian, who obtained the Empire of the East. Then Media was annexed to Persia and Assyria; in the cities of the Medes the Israelites were kept as captives. 2. King. 18. 11. to the Medes and Persians the Babylonian Monarchy was given. Dan. 5. 28. the Medes who were at jerusalem with many other strangers heard the Apostles speak in their own language. Act. 2. 9   

Q. Of what people was javan the father?  
A. Of the Greeks, a people sometime infamous for their inconstancy and vanity, yet glorious for their laws and government, their arts and sciences, their mighty towns and cities, for the Monarchy of the world that was established the●…, but especially for the light of the Gospel, but now in stead of science there is nothing but ignorance, in stead of civility, light and liberty; barbarity, darkness and thraldom have seated themselves there, so that they have forgot to speak their own language, and where the Muses sometimes did reign, now there is not a school to be seen. First, they were a free people, till they warred one with another, than they were made servants; for Cyrus, Xerxes and other persian Kings did vex them; the Macedonians did subdue them, afterward the Romans, than the Empire being divided, they became to be under Constantinople, till the Goths, Bulgares and Saracens had wasted them; and at last they are subdued and live in slavery under the Turk the Christians scourge, except a few Lands subject to the Venetians. The Grecian King is resembled by a Goat, Dan. 8. 21. unto the Grecians the Israelites were sold. joel 3. 6.   

Q. What people came of Thubal?  
A. The Italians as the jews think, and Spaniards as josephus, which people inhabited that country which of old was called Hesperia, which name was common both to Italy and Spain; it hath been fatal for these many years, for Thubals posterity to be great; the Italians in subduing the old world, and the Spaniards in subduing of the new, not known nor heard of by the ancient Romans. So then we see that God hath enlarged lapheth, and not only▪ hath persuaded him to dwell in the tents of Sem: for now jesus Christ the son of Sem is known amongst the barbarous Indians, but as Thubal was an enemy against the jews in Ezechiels' days. Ezech. 38. 2, 3. so Thubal is an enemy still against the Christians, who do not approve of their doctrine and ceremonies.   

Q. What people came of Meshec?  
A. The Moscovians, who first dwelled in Asia, afterward they removed farther North; and do at this day inhabit that great continent lying between Tartary, Livonia, Polonia and the North sea, they are of the graecian religion, they give the sacrament in leavened bread, and do not deny the cup to the lay-people; they think it in vain to pray for the dead, they believe no purgatory, they read the bible in their own language, Augustine, Ambrose, Hierome and Gregory, are in great request amongst them, their Metropolitan is subject to the Patriarch of Constantinople, and above all things they cannot abide to here Rhetorical sermons in their pulpits, accounting these verbal preachers, which do study more for fine words then true divinity, not worthy of the name of preachers, and I wish they were so accounted amongst us; who no●… being contented with the plain and simple style of God's word do spend much time in filling the itching ears of fantastical people with their own words.   

Q. Who were the sons of Thiras?  
A. The Thracians, a people sometimes famous for their strength in wars, they do inhabit the country Thracia, otherwise called Romania, where Constantinople is situated, the Gospel shined sometimes in this country, and happy might they have been, if they could have known their own happiness, but by their miserable discords they have lost their ancient glory, and Constantinople which was the Queen of the Eastern Cities and sometimes the house of God and vineyard of jesus Christ, is become now a cage for Mahomet, the devil and his excrements, the Turks who as it seems were only borne to be a plague to God's people.   

Q. Which are the three sons of Gomar here mentioned?  
A. Ascanaz of whom came a people which did inhabit▪ Ascania, a country in Asia-minor, in which there was a lake of the same name, even in the time of the 〈◊〉 Kiphath of him came the Paphlagons, a people also in Asia, which name they had of Paphlagon, the son of Phi●…eas. Thogar●… of him came the Phrygians, a people in Asia▪ near to Bithynia, Lydia and Misia▪ they are called by the Hebrews, as josephus saith, Thygrammanes from this Thogarma.   

Q. Which are the four sons of javan?  
A. The first is Elishah, of him came the Aeolians, a people of grease, who leaving their country went to Asia, and seated themselves in Mysia, which they called Aeolia, from their own name. Elishah sold blue and purple to the Tyrians, Ezech. 27. 7. His second son is Tharshish▪ whose posterity inhabited Cilicia, now called Turcomania, where that famous City Tarsus was built as is thought by Sardrnapalus, in which Paul was borne. Act. 21. 39 hither 〈◊〉 fled, 〈◊〉. 1. 3. the people of Tharshish were famous for shipping. Ezech. 27. 12. therefore Pompeius used their help in his sea fight against Caesar, and the medeteranean sea is called Tarsis, from them, Psal. 48. 7. The third son is Citti●…, of whom came the Cyprians, who did inhabit the Island Cyprus, not fare from Syria and Cilicia, therefore the Island was called Citica, the Hebrews call it Chitti●…, and here was the city Citiu●…. This Cyprus was many years under the government of the Venetians, but now they are under the servitude of Magog the Turk. His fourth son is D●…danim, of whom the Rhodiant came, who inhabited Rhodus an Island in the Carpathian sea, famous for the city Rhodos, which was possessed by the Christians many years. But at last proud Nabuchadnezzar the Turk, by our negligence took both the city and the Island.   

Q▪ What is meant by the Isles of the Gentiles?  
A. Not only the plots of ground which are compassed about with the sea, but also countries and regions within the continent, for the whole earth may be called an Island, because it is all compassed with the sea; the Isles are given them with the rest of the earth to the sons of men, the Isles are invited to praise God. Isa. 42. 10. The Isles shall wait for Christ. Isay 51. 5. the kings of the Isles shall offer gifts to Christ. Psal. 72. 10. and this was accomplished when God persuaded japheth to dwell in the tents of Sem. God's children in this world may be likened to Isles, for as Isles are separated from the rest of the earth, so Christ hath chosen his Saints out of the world. joh. 15. Secondly as Isles are compassed about with the sea, and most subject to storms, so the the Saints in this world are most subject to afflictions. joh. 16.   

Q. Which was Cham's first son?  
A. C●…sh, the father of the Aethiopians, of whorn mention is made. Isa. 11. Ezec. 29. and 30. Amos 9 Nah●…m. 3. Soph. 2. and elsewhere, but the name of Aethiopia is sometime given to Arabia, sometime to India, because of the commerce that was between the Aethiopians & these countries; as also because they in s●…merare both black, but Aethiopia properly 〈◊〉 in Africa, under which name not only the country of the Abyssines is comprehended, but also the Southeast part of Africa, from the meridional line, to caput bon●… spei, and this confusion of the name hath caused many errors amongst the learned, than this name of Cush and Aethiopia so often used in Scripture, is rather to be understood of Arabia which was near to India, then of the remote countries of Africa, therefore Moses wife being a Madianite is called an Aethiopian, Numb. 12. Theodoretus thinketh that the Queen of Saba who came to see Solomon, was Queen of Aethiopia. Quest. 22. in Num. The Aethiopians did use to call their Queen's Candaces, whose chief governor the Eunuch was converted by Philip. Act. 8. Mathiac the Apostle did preach the Gospel to the Aethiopians as thinketh Sophronius?   

Q. What was Mizraim?  
A. The father of the Egyptians, who are still called by this name in the new Testament; but in the old Mizraim, and because Mizraim was Cham's son, therefore in Scripture▪ Egypt is called the land of Ch●…. Psal. 105. 23. and 78. 51. If Mizraim was the father of the Egyptians, they need not brag so much of their antiquity. This country was first governed by their own kings, wh●… they called Pharaoh, than they were subdued by the Aethiopians in the days of Hezekias. After that Cyrus the Persian overcame them. But under Darius Nothus, they fell away from the Persian and were governed by their own kings, till Alexander subdued them. After his death it fell to Ptolomeus, by whose name their kings were called, till Cleopatra, after whose death the Romans made it a Province, after them the Saracens had it, and now it is under the Turkish slavery. This country was famous for Abraham, joseph, the Patr●…kes, the birth of Moses, the delivery of the Israelites, for arts and sciences, fruitfulness and riches, towns and schools, for Christ and his mother who fled thither, for many Martyrs and Christian professors, for the first Monks and Eremites who from thence did overspreade all Europe. But as before it was infamous for idolatry, so now it is for Mahomet●… blasphemous heresy.   

Q. What people came of Phut?  
A. The Lyrians, a people in Africa, near Mauritania, where there is a river called Phut. They are called by this name. Eze. 27. and 38. cap. But they are called by the name of Lybia. Act. 2. and Dan. 11. in Lybia there hath been famous Churches, but especially Carthage renowned for that learned Bishop and glorious Martyr Cyprian.   

Q. What was Canaan?  
A. The cursed son of Cha●…▪ of whom came the Canaanites, which did inhabit that land, which was called Canaan, the land of promise, judea, and now the holy land, it was divided in judea, Samaria and Galilee, in it God was once well known, but now instead of God Mahomet is worshipped.   

Q. What was Seba?  
A. The son of Cush, and father of the Sabeans, a people in Arabia-felix, but there is a twofold Sheba; the one in Arabia, the other in Aethiopia, this in Hebrew is written with S●…mech, that with Shi●…, from this the Queen of Saba came to Solomon, from that the wise men came to worship Christ, both these places are mentioned. Psal. 72. 10. the Kings of Sh●…ba and 〈◊〉 shall give gifts?   

Q. What other sons had Cush?  
A. Havilah the father of the Getulians', Sabtah of whom came a people called Sabath●…i dwelling in Arabia-felix, Raamah and Sabtecha, whose posterity also did inhabit Arabia-felix, and mingled themselves with the Sabeans.   

Q. What sons had Raamah?  
A. Sheba, whose posterity dwelled in Aethiopia, and Dedan whose offspring did possess a part of Arabia-felix, not fare from Idumea, of Ded●…n mention is made. jer. 49. 8. Ezech. 27. 15. and 38. 13.   

Q. What was Nimrod?  
A. He was also the son of Cush, and the first tyrant in the world, who is mentioned here apart, not because he was a bastard, as some think, but because Moses is to speak of his tyranny and greatness. Secondly, Nimrod here is said to be mighty in the earth, that is, bloody and cruel, for power and greatness is from God, and therefore good, if it be free from cruelty and blood: but so was not Nimrods' greatness, and all bloody conquerors are Nimrods' successors. Thirdly, Nimrod being of the posterity of Cham, should have rather been a servant then a Lord, but it falls out many times that the wicked in this world do flourish like a green bay-tree, when as the godly are appointed as sheep to the slaughter.   

Q. Why is Nimrod called a mighty hunter before God?  
A. Because he was a persecutor and oppressor of his brethren, for such are called hunters in scripture, and sometimes fowlers; for as hunters and fowlers use all the snares and tricks they can to take away the life of the beasts and fowls, so do the mighty tyrants to kill and destroy men. Of these fowlers, David speaks. Psal. 61. 3. & Psal. 1●…4▪ 7. of the hunters, jer. 16. 16. where such persecutors are called alfo fishers (before God) that is openly and without fear of God, so that now he became shameless in oppressing, and cared not though God took notice of his wickedness, this is the quality of impudent Liars.   

Q. Is Nimrod all one with Belus, of whom profane histories make mention?  
A. Yes: for both are said to build Babylon: Secondly, both were mighty men and oppressors: thirdly, they are both said to live about 200. years after the flood in Babylon: fourthly, they were both the inventors of idolatry: fifthly, as the histories acknowledge no king in Babel before Ninus but Belus, so the Scripture acknowledgeth none but Nimrod.   

Q. Which are the four●… cities that were subject to Nimrod?  
A. Babel the chiefest city of Chaldea, where Nimrod began the Tower. Belus his successor built the city which was amplified by Semiramis the wife of Ninus, and at last Niniveh being conquered, was re-edified by Nabuchadnezzar. The second i●… Erech a city beyond Euphrates, otherwise called Edessa and Hie●…. The third is Accad, otherwise called Nisibi●…, a city upon the river Tigris. The fourth is Caln●…th a city of great note as we may see, Amos 6. 2. this was called Seleucia and Cresiphon: in this town the Parthian kings did use to winter, and these cities were built in Chaldea and Mesopotamia called here the land of Shinar, and Mich. 5. 6. the land of Nimrod.   

Q. Who was the builder of Niniveh.  
A. Assur the son of Sem, who to avoid the cruelty of Nimrod left Shinar, and for his greater security built Niniveh, which afterward was the chiefest city of the Assyrian Monarchy, and here we must not think that Assur was a mighty hunter like Nimrod, in that he built a strong city; for he did not build it to that intent, that Nimrod built Babel; but only to secure himself from the cruelty of Nimrod.   

Q. When was Niniveh built?  
A. Three hundred years after the flood, and 2000 before Christ, about the time that Abraham was borne, by Assur whom the histories call Ni●…; this City was famous for the greatness, beauty, and riches thereof; a●…d for the preaching of jonas. It did continue in great glory for the space of 1400. years and more, till it was destroyed by Nabuchadnezzar, at this day Niniveh hath many goodly buildings and spacious streets in it, compassed about with walls, the inhabitants thereof are for the most part Nestorians.   

Q. What other cities built Ashur besides the great city Niniveh?  
A. Recoboth, a city by the river Euphrates mentioned also Gen. 36. 37. Chalah the chiefest city of the country Calacina in Assyria Resen, the city Bess●…ra also in Assyria.   

Q. What sons had Misraijm?  
A. He begat Ludim or the Lydians mentioned. jer. 46. 9 who inhabited the country of Lydia in Asia-minor, famous for that rich King Croesus, and the river Pactol●…: secondly, Anamim, they did inhabit as it is thought the country Pentapolis in Lybia: thirdly, Lehabim, they possessed Libya in Africa: fourthly, Naphtuhim, they were the people Napatei in Aethiopia: fifthly, Pa●…sim, they were the people Pharusijs in Africa beyond Mauritania, mentioned Esay 11. Ezech. 29. sixthly, Casl●…him, they inhabited the country Casiotis in Syria, from them the Philistims came who possessed the land of Canaan. Amos 9 7. where they remained, not cast out to the great grief of the Israelites: seaventhly, Caphtorim a people called Cappadoces, who did destroy the Philistims and dwelled in their land. Deut. 2. 23. jer. 47. 4.   

Q. What posterity had Canaan?  
A. Of him came Sidon father of the Sidonians, he built the city Sidon in Phenicia, which was after allotted to the tribe of Asser: secondly, Cheth of him came the Chethites, or Hittites, who inhabited the places about Bersabae●…, and of whom there were Giants, their land only is promised to the Israelites. jos. 1. 4. because they were most afraid of them: thirdly, jebus or the jebusite, he founded the City jebus, which after was called Salem, and last of all jerusalem. judg. 19 10. Gen. 14. 18. they were not utterly subdued by Israel, but continued till salomon's time, who made them Tributaries. 2. Chron. 8. 8. fourthly, the Emorite or Amorites, a people high as Ceders and strong as Okes, Amos 2. 9 whose King was Og, they were dispersed into diverse parts of the land, for some of them possessed Libanus, some Mount Galaad, and others the hilly country of Pharan. Therefore the whole country beareth their name, Gen. 15. 16. when the Prophet would express the sins of Israel, he says their father was an Amorite. Ezech. 16. 3. fifthly, the Gergasite or Gergasins. Matth. 8. and Gadarens. Luke 8. sixthly, the Hiuit●… of whom came the Gibeonit●…s whose lives were spared by josua. josh. 11. 19 seaventhly, the Arkit●… who dwelled in the city of Arc●… in mount Libanon: eighthly, the Sinite or the people of Sinai mentioned by josephus, 1. Antiq. 6. ninthly, the Aruadite, from them a part of Canaan was called Aruad, mentioned in Ezech 27. 8. tenthly, the Zemarite, they inhabited ●…emarim which after fell to the Beniamites. Iosu. 18. 22. eleventh, the Hamathite from whom two cities bear the name, the one is Annochia, which Amos cap. 6▪ calleth Hamath Rabath, or Hamath the great, once the Metrapolitan of Syria, the other is Hamath the less, called also Epiphania from Antiochus Epiphanes, this city stood on the north side of the Israelites ground. So these are the eleven nations that came of Canaan: in the 15. chapter of this book, there are reckoned up but ten, and Deut. 7. 1. Act. 13. 19 there are counted but seven, for it seemeth that some were wasted or mixed confusedly with the rest, before the Israelites did possess the land.   

Q. Which were the borders of the land of Canaan?  
A. Sidon on the Northwest allotted to the tribe of Aser. Gaza on the South-west, a city which befell the tribe of juda. Sodom with the other cities that were destroyed. Gen. 19 on the Southeast, and these are the bounds of the whole land of Canaan. joshua only describeth the West part thereof. josh. 13. 3.   

Q. Why is Sem called the brother of japheth here, and not also of Cham?  
A. Some are called brethren by nature, as jacob and Esau, some by nation, as the jews were Paul's brethren, some by affinity as Christ and his kinsfolks. Matth. 12. and some by religion and affection as all Christians. Then japheth and Sem are called brethren, because they were not only so by nature, but also in affection. So Si●…eon and Levi brethren for their affection in evil. Gen. 49. Then though I'm by nature were Sem's brother, yet God accounts him not so, because he was not of his affection and religion, even so wicked and profane Christians though they are accounted our brethren in the judgement of the world, yet they are not so in the judgement of God.   

Q. Why is Sem called the father of the sons of Heber only, seeing he had more sons than Heber?  
A. As Cham is called the father of Can●…an only▪ because his curse was visibly executed on him, so here Sem is called the father only of Heber's sons, because his blessing was visibly poured on them. Gen. 14. 19 Secondly, because they only retained the faith and religion of Sem: thirdly, by this God will show that Sem's blessing did not belong to all his posterity, but only to those that retained his faith. Neither can we be partakers of the blessings of our Elder brother Christ, except we be followers of him, and holy as he is holy.   

Q. Which are the sons of Sem?  
A. Elam of whom came the Elamites, so called from him, but afterwards Persians from Perseus their governor: secondly, Assur, father of the Assyrians who were enemies to Israel. Assur is also the name of a city in judea built by Solomon: thirdly, Arphaxad, his genealogy and country are not spoken of in Scripture, but that he is the Father of Christ. Luk. 3. yet it is thought that Chasdin or the Chaldeans are of him: fourthly Lud, of him came a people in Africa near Aethiopia: this I know is contrary to the received opinion, for this Lud is thought to be the father of the Lydians in Asia, and Lud the son of Mizraim is thought to be the father of this people in Africa: but we must not think that the world was so divided among the sons of Noah, as though Sem's posterity did only possess Asia. japheths' Europe, and Cham's Africa precisely without entermingling, for as Madai thought japheths' son did inhabit Media in Asia, and Canaan who came of Cham did possess Palestina in Asia; so why may not Lud though Sem's son inhabit Lydia in Africa: fifthly, Aram of whom came the Syrians, called Aramites from him, and their land Aram in the old testament, but Syria in the new; the chiefest city of this land is Damascus.   

Q. What sons had Aram?  
A. Hus whose sons possessed the land of Hus: jobs country, job 1. 1. which was a part of Idumea. Lam. 4. 21. secondly, Chul he inhabited Armenia: thirdly, Gether he dwelled in Caria a country in Asia-Minor, between Licia and jonia: fourthly, Mash whose posterity inhabited the hill Masius above Nisibus and they were called Masiani.   

Q. What sons had Arphaxad?  
A. In the Hebrew text Selah is called his son, but the Greek hath Caman which Luke followeth in his 3. chapter, for there as also here in the Greek Selah is called the son of Cainan and Cainan the son of Arphaxad, some think that Selah was the adopted son of Cainan, and the natural son of Arphaxad, but it is like that Luke in a matter of so small moment would not disagree from the Greek text, because it was in great account amongst the people: then according to the Hebrew text, Selah is the son of Arphaxad and father of Heber.   

Q. What sons had Heber?  
A. Peleg, in whose days the earth was divided, that is, the inhabitants of the earth who before were of one tongue, and one country, are now divided into diverse tongues and regions, and therefore because when he was borne this division fell out, he is called Peleg, which signifieth diuision●… some think this name was given to him before he was borne by way of prophecy, but it is like he had it from the event that fell out when he was borne, neither is their opinion sound, who think this division to have been in the end of his days, which was in the 48. year of Abraham's age; and 38. years after the death of Ninus, for at that time the world was replenished with people, with diverse languages, Kings and kingdoms, and therefore this division was long before the last year of Peleg. His other so●… is Iokta●…, who hath here 13. sons reckoned, but because they seated themselves in remote and unknown regions beyond the East-Indies and fell away from the God of Heber to worship unknown Gods, therefore they are little mentioned in God's word, and they do yet remain unknown to us.   

Q. What countries did Ophir and Havilah possess?  
A. Ophir did possess the land which from his name is called Ophir, doubtful whether it be Cephala in Aethiopia, or Chersomsus in India, or Peru in America; but we know that salomon's ships fetched store of fine gold from this Ophir. 1. Kings 9 and 10. chapped. Havilah did possess India, as josephus and Hierome do affirm.   

Q. What are Mesha and Sephar?  
A. Mesha is a country in India where the sons of 〈◊〉 dwelled, so called as it is thought from Mash the son of Aram. Sephar is a hill in India also, and Luther conjectureth that this may be the hill Ararat or I●…anus.   

Q. Was there such a division of nations befor●… the flood, as now is after?  
A. Before the flood their was a division amongst men in respect of qualities, for then some were good, some bad, etc. Secondly, in respect of religion, for the posterity of Set●…, who are therefore called the sons of God, did only worship the true God▪ but cain's posterity were Idolaters, or rather Atheists. Thirdly, in respect of place. For Cain removed from the place where he was, and dwelled on the East-side of Eden. Gen. 4. and there his posterity planted themselves apart from Seths' progeny, yet their was not so great a division before the flood as after; because after the flood the world was divided in diverse tongues and speeches, sects and religions, laws and governments, towns and regions, arts and occupations, orders and degrees, etc. And in this we may see the providence of God. By whom and not by fortune these things come to pass: for it is he that hath made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation. Act. 17. 26. Secondly, although amongst us there be many divisions in religion, in laws, in speech, etc. yet because we came all of one stock, we should all study to unity; for these divisions came of sin, but unity is more ancient, for it was from the beginning, before sin came into the world.    

Questions on the eleventh Chapter.  

Q. WHat was that one speech that was spoken before the confusion of tongues?  
A. Not the Egyptian tongue, as the Egyptians, nor the Phrygian, as the Phrygians▪ nor the Syriac as Theodoretus. quest. 59 in Gen. nor the Chaldee as Philo lib. de confus. ling. would have: but the Hebrew. For the Syriac and Chaldee tongues, are but Dialects of the Hebrew. Secondly, the names that are mentioned in Scripture before the confusion of tongues are Hebrew and significant. Thirdly, there are many words which all other tongues have borrowed from the Hebrew, as Sac, Babel. etc. Which do testify that this tongue is most ancient. Fourthly, the most of the Fathers, and all the Recent writers are of this opinion.   

Q. Did the Hebrew tongue remain in use after the confusion?  
A. Yes, but only in Heber's family, therefore it is called the Hebrew tongue: Yet all Heber's posterity did not use this tongue, but only Peleg and Reu, and those that were in the strait line of whom Christ came, and it seems in that this language was not changed; that Heber did not consent to the building of Babel. This then is that tongue in which God spoke and gave his Oracles, both before and after the flood. It was spoken also by Angels, and by his own people the jews; it did not proceed of sin, as other tongues, but was from the beginning even in Paradise; it is that tongue that doth contain the mysteries of our salvation, and like enough it shall be that tongue which we shall speak in heaven: yet though this tongue was not confused at the building of Babel, it was notwithstanding confused in the captivity of Babel. And since that time Hebrew did cease to be in common use among the jews; and Syriac or mixed Hebrew came in place: so that the tongue which Christ and the Apostles used amongst the jews, was not Hebrew but Syriac.   

Q. Why did the people remove from the East into the plain of Shinar?  
A. They removed from the East, that is, from the hilly country of Armenia, where the Ark rested, into the plain of Shinar or Chaldea. First, because they were now exceedingly increased, and an 100 years had been pinned up in that country, therefore now seeing all fear of the flood was gone, they thought good to descend to the plain and enlarge their habitation. Secondly, because the plain was more fertile, pleasant and commodious for them. Thirdly, because their minds were not content with their present estate, therefore they begin to covet for more ground and a richer soil; and this covetousness hath been the cause of so many wants, transmigrations and confusion of tongues?   

Q. Of what matter did they build their Tower and City?  
A. In stead of stone they used brick, because in that plain country stones were scarce▪ and because of the abundance of clay they had matter enough to make brick of. Secondly, in stead of mortar artificial; they used natural mortar, or a kind of slime that was found in their pits & rivers, of the nature of brimstone, which Se●…iramis did use for the building of Babylon; and here we may see their forwardness in exhorting one another to this wicked work. A shame for us, who are not so earnest to build up the Church of Christ, the heavenly jerusalem, as they were to build up their earthly Babel. Secondly, although they wanted matter, that is, stone and mortar to build their Tower with, yet rather than they will give over, they will make matter to themselves, and in this we see the nature of the wicked, who will leave nothing un▪ attempted to bring to pass their wicked designs. A●…dax omnia perpetigens ●…umana ruit per ve●…itum nef●…. Thirdly, this sin is most fearful; for it is intolerable pride against the Majesty of God; and it is not amongst a few, but universal, and that so soon after the flood.   

Q. Of what height did they inte●…d to build their Tower?  
A. It is Hyperbolically spoken here, that the top thereof may reach to heaven, as the cities of the Anakims' are said to be walled up to heaven. Deut. 1. 28. 〈◊〉 tree to reach up to heaven. Dan. 4. 18. Caper●… to be exalted to heaven. Mat. 11. 23. That is exceeding high, for it is not like they were so foolish, as to think they were able to raise a tower to the heaven. For as Phil●… saith, the earth being the Centre, cannot either in the whole or in the parts thereof, touch the heaven which is the circumference, and in respect of the huge distance between earth and heaven, though the whole earth should be set on an heap, it could not reach to heaven; much less a Tower; yet it is like they did resolve to build it so high that the top thereof might exceed the highest mountains; that so they might be preserved from the flood. And this counsel is thought to have proceeded from wicked Nimrod, to whom the rude multitude gave speedy consent, now how fare they proceeded in their work, none is able to define: the jews have idly conjectured that it was 27. miles in height; but it is probably recorded, that in Hieromes time, some part of this huge building was yet extant.   

Q. For what end did they build so high a Tower?  
A. For two, the one to get a name, that is, to be made famous to posterity, or rather infamous, as he that burned the Temple of Diana. For such is the desire of glory in man, that rather than he will be buried in oblivion, he will do those things that are most odious both in the sight of God and man, that he may be spoken of after death: & this sin is derived from Adam to all mankind, for he desired to be like unto God, and we do all desire that glory which is only due to God. For this cause so many Pyramids and Towers, Collassus and triumphant arches have been erected; yea whatsoever noble ●…orke is done, yet amongst men it is for this end: and what will not a man do to immortalize his name. For, Pulchrum est digito monstrari, & dicier hic est, but we ought rather to consider what the Prophet saith. Psal. 49. Man being in honour abideth not, he is like the beast that perisheth, like sheep they are laid in the grave, death shall feed on them, their beauty shall consume in the grave from their dwelling, when he dyeth, his glory shall not descend after him, etc. The other end why they build this Tower is, lest they be scattered abroad: a fear which did arise from their guilty consciences, for the wicked fly when no man pursueth. Prou. 28. 1. Yet though this building of this Tower proceeded of pride, and the intent of the builders was to dishonour God, and get themselves a name, we must not for this condemn the building of Towers and Forts, which are for ornament and defence.   

Q. What doth the Tower and City of Babel signify?  
A. As jerusalem is the type of Christ's Church, so is Babel of the devil's Synagogue▪ and therefore as Christ's Church and Satan's Synagogue are contrary, so is jerusalem and Babel. jerusalem signifieth the vision of peace because the King thereof is the Prince of peace, & the subjects are at peace with God, with men, and with their own consciences. But Babel signifieth confusion, for as there is nothing amongst the wicked but disorder and confusion, so to them there is no peace. Secondly Nimrod out of his pride built Babel to glorify himself, but Christ by his humility builded the Church to glorify his father. Thirdly Babel is built in a low plain, for the wicked seek those things that are below; but jerusalem is a city built upon a hill, for the conversation of the godly is in heaven. Fourthly Babel is built with brick and slime, but jerusalem is built with gold and precious stones. Reu. 21. Fifthly, diversity of tongues was a means to leave off the building of Babel: but diversity of tongues was a means to begin the building of jerusalem. Act. 2. Sixthly▪ the building of Babel was the cause why the people were dispersed and separated, but the building of jerusalem is the cause why they are conjoined and united: seaventhly Babel is fallen and is found no more, for the memorial of the wicked shall perish, Prou. 10. 7. But jerusalem shall dwell from generation to generation, joel. 3. 20. For they that trust in the Lord shall be as Mount Zion, etc. Psal. 125. 1. Eighthly Babel is the hold of every fowl spirit, and a cage of every hateful bird, Reu. 18. But jerusalem is that holy city coming down from God out of heaven, Reu. 21. Therefore let us come out of Babel, lest we be partakers of ●…er sins, and receive of her plagues, Reu. 18. 4.   

Q. Did God descend locally from heaven to see the Tower?  
A. No: but when he brings out some extraordinary effect of his power and providence, whether it be of justice or mercy, he is said to descend: so he descended to see Sodom, Gen. 18. 21. He descended to deliver his people from Egypt, Exod. 3. 8. He descended on Sinai, Exod. 19 11. So he is desired to descend, Psal. 144. 5. Esa. 64. 1, etc. So here because he would manifest the effect of his justice in confounding their tongues and dispersing of them▪ he is said to descend, but if we say with many of the ancient fathers that Christ oftentimes did assume the form of man before he had fully united it to himself in the Virgin's womb, than we must also say that God here did descend locally, though not as God, but as man. But howsoever here we see that God will not strike till he descend and see their wickedness: that is, make it be seen and openly known, both a notable example of patience, and an excellent precedent for judges, who first must examine before they condemn.   

Q. Why are the builders of the Tower called here the sons of Adam?  
A. To put them in mind of their base original, which was red earth, that their pride might be cast down, who being but dust and ashes, yet durst attempt to build a Tower against the God of heaven their maker: secondly to teach us and all posterity, that we do not arrogate any part of divine honour to ourselves, or attempt any thing against him, who may redact us to nothing; for he is Almighty and we are but the sons of Adam: therefore when we do forget ourselves, he can drown us with 〈◊〉, kill us with 〈◊〉, turn us into beasts with 〈◊〉, and resolve our bodies into louse with Herod: thirdly, that we do not too much admire and adore the Potentates of this world; for let their power be never so great, yet they are but the sons of Adam: therefore Vide unde es homo et erubesce.   

Q. How is it understood that the people 〈◊〉 one?  
A. Not only in place and speech, but also in consent and affection; and this union made them the more forward to begin that work; so that they would not willingly be restrained from that which they had imagined to do: and here we see that the wicked have their unity▪ but it is altogether against the Lord and against his anointed, Psal. ●…. Therefore such union cannot stand, and if the children of darkness be at such union amongst themselves, much more should the children of light, who have but one father, one mother, one head, one redeemer, one spirit, one word, one baptism, one bread which we eat, one cup which we drink, one common enemy, and one hope of inheritance. Secondly we see their steadfast resolution that they think nothing can restrain them from their building: so confident are the wicked in works of darkness. Thirdly we see that God is not idle, he notes and observes their doings, he that sitteth in the heavens doth laugh them to scorn, Psal. 2.   

Q. How, and to whom did God speak here, when he says let us go down?  
A. Properly speech belongs not to any thing but to man, who only hath the instruments of speech, yet there is an internal and mental speech in spirits, which is nothing but the reasoning and discoursing of the mind; and this speech is imperfect in respect of man; for none understands what is in the mind of man but himself; in Angels it is more perfect, for they understand one another by this mental speech; but in God it is most perfect, for after an incomprehensible manner, he speaks to himself, and the three persons in the glorious Trinity do understand one another after that manner which we cannot conceive, much less express. Then as our minds internally and spiritually can speak to God although our tongues do not move, so can the Angels speak to one another, so can God both to them and us. In times past God spoke so to the Prophets, and oftentimes by his Spirit he speaks so to his Saints still, yet God may be said to speak, when he frames audible voices in the air, as Mat. 3. Or when his Angels assuming men's bodies, do speak in his name, as often in Scripture and most excellently did he speak when his only begotten Son did assume the whole nature of man. By this essential word he hath spoken to us in these last days. Now because the Father speaks here to the Son and Holy Ghost, we can neither define nor divine how he spoke; yet this we know, that he being eternal and incomprehensible, did speak after an eternal and incomprehensible manner.   

Q. To what end did God come down?▪  
A. To confound their language, for this was a speedy way to overthrew their building, which he might have done other ways, but this way he thought fittest: both because it was a means to disperse them abroad, as also in that he would have this diversity of speech to be a testimony to all ages of their intolerable pride. And this confusion of tongues did take away that union which was amongst men, and hath been the cause of hatred and contempt amongst nations. Therefore when we cannot understand one another, let us call to mind the pride of these builders, for whose sin God hath laid this great labour on the sons of men.   

Q. Were their tongues so divided that every man who was there did speak a particular language?  
A. No: for so there had been no society amongst men, if none could have understood another's speech, and so the world could not have been replenished with people but it is probable according to the opinion of the Ancients, that their tongues were divided according to the number of the families, so that every family spoke a language, which those that were of another family could not understand. Now this confusion of speech is the third universal punishment with which he doth correct the world, for the first was mortality, denounced against Adam and his posterity: the second was an universal flood: and this an universal confusion of tongues; and that division of tongues is a great judgement, we may see in the 55. Psal. 10. where David doth wish it against his enemies.   

Q. What relation is there between this division of tongues, and that which was visibly done upon the Apostles?  
A. This division was the punishment of pride, but that of the Apostles was the reward of their humility▪ secondly as this division was a means to disperse men abroad and fill the world with inhabitants, so that division was a means to disperse the Apostles abroad, and fill the Church with Christians: thirdly in this division one speech was divided, amongst many men, but in that division many speeches were united in the mouth of one man: fourthly by this division the people were separated into diverse regions, by that division the people were ●…nited into one Church: fifthly in this division God comes down in his wrath to punish these builders, but in that division the holy Ghost comes down in mercy to comfort the Apostles.   

Q. What did follow upon this division of tongues?  
A. They were scattered abroad upon the face of all the earth; so than the evil is brought on them, which they sought to prevent: for that which the wicked feareth shall come upon him. Prou. 10. 24. Again, as God came down and dissolved this wicked communion, so Magistrates and Ministers must destroy the works of the Devil▪ and although they leave off from building their City, yet about an 100 years after it was repaired and amplified by Semiramis.   

Q. Why was this tower called Babel?  
A. It is so called not from Belus, but from Balal, that is confusion, and this name God gave it, to be a perpetual monument of their wicked attempt; and because this name of Babel or confusion, hath been ever hateful, let us in all our actions shun it; but especially let the Church be free from it; and let all things there be done with order and decency. Again, let us fear and tremble to attempt any thing against the God of heaven, for he is not fare from every one of us, he that planted the ear, shall he not hear? He that form the eye, shall he not see. Psal. 94. Truly the Lord looketh from heaven, he beholdeth all the sons of men: he considereth all their works. Psal. 33. Yea he knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity. Psal. 94. Therefore as he came down now to punish these builders, so he will come one day, but with the sound of the trumpet and the Angels of heaven, there shall he render to every man according to his works.   

Q. Why are the generations of Sem set down here?  
A. As in the fifth chapter of this book Moses rehearseth ten Patriarches from Adam to Noah; so in this he reckoneth ten from S●…m to Abraham. First, to let us see that even in these most corrupted times God hath his Church, although but small, therefore we need not doubt to call the Church Universal in respect of time, for it hath been even from the beginning, although not still apparent in the eyes of men. Secondly, that we may know the age of the world, therefore to every one of these names, the years of their life are subjoined: for else we should not have known how much time was between the flood, and the making of the covenant with Abraham. Thirdly, that we may know that Christ came of these father's according to the flesh. Fourthly, although many more descended of Sem, yet here they are not thought worthy to be reckoned in God's book, because they did not continue in the faith of Sem. Fifthly, although Arphaxad be here named, and in the tenth chapter, after Elam and Assur. Yet it followeth not that he is younger than they (for so we must grant that Noah had these three sons in two years, which is not needful,) but Arphaxad is rather the elder: For the Scripture doth not observe the order of times in setting down names.   

Q. Whether shall we hold with the Hebrew text, that Selah was the son of Arphaxad, or with the Greek which affirmeth that Selah was the son of Cainan, and grandchild of Arphaxad?  
A. Rather with the Hebrew, for that is the original fountain and of undoubted verity, the Greek is but a translation, and therefore the Translators might have mistaken themselves in putting in Cainan, between Arphaxad and Selah. Secondly, all the Hebrew copies affirm that Selah was the son of Arphaxad, but all the Greek copies do not affirm Caman to be Arphaxads son, for there are some Greek copies, which in the 1. of Chron. 1. 18. Make no mention at all of Cainan, but only have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arphaxad begat Selah. Thirdly, although Luke chapt. 3. mention Cainan, yet some Greek copies there are which in that place do not at all mention Cainan, as Beza witnesseth in his annot. upon Luc. cap. 3. Fourthly, the putting in of Cainan here, hath for the most part changed the time of each father's procreation in the Greek, lest the Gentiles (as it is thought) for whom the Bible was translated first, should know their true genealogy.   

Q. How many years li●…ed Sem, after he begat Arphaxad?  
A. Five hundred years, even till Isaac was fifty years old, and so he saw ten generations after him, before he died. Then true it is, that he who honoureth his father, etc. his days shall be long in the land, etc. And although good Sem was vexed to see not only others, but also his own posterity fall to idolatry, yet he is comforted before he dyeth to see the Church renewed again in Abraham and Isac, and no less comfort was it for Abraham and his son to enjoy the society of old Sem, who saw the first world, the flood, the building of Babel, who questionless did instruct them with the knowledge of the true God, and of those things which he had both received of his father Noah, and which he had seen by his own experience.   

Q. What sons had Terah?  
A. Abraham, Nachor, and Haran, where Abraham though youngest is first placed for honour and dignities sake, as before, Sem is put before his elder brethren. Secondly, Abraham is not only mentioned here, but also Nachor and Haran, for the better understanding of the history of Lot the son of Haran, and of Rebeccah isaack's wife who was of Nachors house.   

Q. How do we know that Abraham was the youngest of these three?  
A. Because he was borne when his father Terah was a hundred thirty years old, for Terah died two hundred five years old, vers. 32. of this cap. Then Abraham departed from Charran 75. years old. Gen. 12. 4. therefore if Abram was 75. years old at the death of his father, it is manifest that he was borne the 130. year of his father's age, and so consequently he was younger than Nachor and Haran who were borne before this time: for Milcah Nachor's wife was the daughter of Haran. verse 29. therefore questionless Haran was the eldest. Again Haran died before his father. verse 28. If then he died and had a daughter who was married before Abraham was 75. years old, then doubtless he was the eldest, if then Abraham was borne when Terah was 130. years old, Haran must needs be borne when Terah was 70. For at that time he begat, that is, he began to beget children. verse 26. Therefore by this also we may gather that Nachor was elder than Abraham.   

Q. What shall we say to the Hebrews: who hold that Abraham's age of 75. years, is not counted from his birth, but from his departure from Vr of Chaldea?  
A. If this were true, that Abraham was borne when his father was 70. years old, we must admit that he was 135. years old, when he departed from Charran; which is contrary to Gen. 12. 4. Again, by this supputation it would follow that Isaac was born 35. years before Abraham came to Canaan; for Abraham was 100 years old when Isaac was borne. Gen. 21. But that is false, for Isaac was borne in Canaan. Yea if this fiction of the Hebrews were true, we must be forced against the Scripture to admit that Abraham was 160. year old when Isaac was borne, and that he lived 100 years, whereas he lived but 175. Gen. 25. Neither need we with Augustine, Quest. 25. in Gen. That Abraham came twice to Canaan, once when his father was living, and then he remained there 60. years, and another time after his death; for the Scripture both here, and Act. 7. Mentions only of once coming to Canaan, and that after his father's death.   

Q What signifieth Vr of the Chaldees here?  
A. It may either signify fire properly, and so the Hebrews think that Haran died in the fire, but that Abraham was wonderfully delivered from thence, which savours of a fable because neither mentioned by Moses, nor Paul. Heb. 11. Neither by josephus nor Philo, who have written much of Abraham. Secondly, This Ur may signify metaphorically, persecution and affliction; which often in Scripture is called fire, as Psal. 66. 12. Lam. 1. 13. And so Abraham was delivered from the afflictions of the Chaldees. Thirdly, it may be here the name of a City, as the Chaldee paraphrase taketh it; or a country as the Greek translateth it, and this is most proper: then Vr was a City or Country in Chaldea, so called either from the fire which they saw come from heaven upon the father's sacrifices, or else from the sacred fire which was kept there, for fire was holy amongst the Gentiles, especially amongst the Chaldeans, Persians and Romans, or it might have been called so, because it stood in a low place or valley, which the Hebrews call Vr. In this country then or City Haran died, before his father, that is, his father being yet alive, and from hence Terah took Abraham, Lot, and Sarai, to go to Canaan.   

Q. Was Sarai Abraham's half sister, by his father Terah, and not by his mother, as thinketh Clem. Alexand. lib. 2. Strom.  
A. No, but she was the daughter of Haran, and sister to Lot and Milcha, which Milcha was grandmother to Rebecca Isaaks wife. Gen. 22. 20, 23. Then though properly she was his brother's daughter, yet she is called his sister. Gen. 20. 12. As Lot is called his brother. Gen. 13. 8. For the Hebrews use to call their kinsfolk's brethren and sisters; and though properly she be Terahs' grandchild, yet according to the Scripture phrase, she may be called his daughter. For grandfathers, are called fathers in Scripture, as jacob calleth Abraham his father. Gen. 48. 15. 16. She was then Abraham's sister, that is, his brother Harans daughter by the same father Terah; but not by the same Mother, for Haran was Terahs' son, by an other woman: so that he was but half brother to Abraham. Here than we see how careful Abraham is now, and other fathers here after, to take them wives of their own kindred, and not strangers being Idolaters, and this they did, when as yet there was no positive law, to forbid them, as afterward it was commanded by Moses. Deut. 7. 3.   

Q. What was Iscah, whom Moses calleth the daughter of Haran?  
A. This Iscah is no other woman but Sarai, for else it had been impertinent▪ to have spoken of her in this place, the signification also of the word so much importeth. For both Ischai and Sarai signify the same thing: to wit, principality or rule. Then Sarai we see had two names, as many other in the Scripture, and though Abraham married her being his mother's daughter, yet we must not think that marriage unlawful in him, for it was not exhibited by law, yea after the law we see it was in use, by the practice of Othniel, for he married with Achsah the daughter of his brother Caleb. judg. 1. 13. Yet although this marriage was not unlawful in Abraham and Othniel, because it was permitted them, being extraordinary persons, we must not put it in practice, for many things were lawful to them which to us are unlawful. And though Moses doth not expressly forbidden it, yet by analogy and consequence it seemeth to forbid such kind of marriage. Moses Leu. 18. doth not in express terms forbidden the grandchild to marry with the grandmother; or with the wife of his grandfather, or a man to marry with his mother's brother's wife, and yet these marriages by proportion are unlawful. Moses only there sets down expressly a few unlawful marriages, that by those we may judge of the rest that are unlawful in such distances.   

Q. Why is there mention made here of Saries' barrenness?  
A. To put us in mind of the wonderful birth of Isaac, that so we may the more admire the power of God. Secondly, to make a way for the subsequent history of isaack's birth; & in this we may consider the state of the Church. For as God out of barren Sarai brought out Isaca, so he did out of her, as out of a dry stock procreate his church: therefore when the Church seemeth to us as it were utterly lost, let us not despair, for God of stones can raise children to Abraham, Mat. 3. When we doubt, then let us look unto Abraham our father, and unto Sarah that bore us, Esa. 51. 2.   

Q. Was Terah the cause why Abraham took his journey to Cainan?  
A. No: but Abraham was rather the cause that moved Terah, for the calling did especially belong to Abraham, Gen. 12. 1. Therefore his faith is particularly commended, Heb. 11. 8. And though Abraham acquainted his father with God's oracle, and so under God moved him to go, yet because Terah was his father, this honour is given to him, that he is said to take Abraham, etc. from Chaldea. Secondly, in that Abraham went with his father and kindred. We learn what was his love to their good, and what our care and love should be to our friends, in drawing them from Chaldea, that is from the world. But as Abraham was resolved if they had not gone, to have forsaken them: So must we forsake parents, friends, country, yea all we have, to follow Christ. Thirdly, these fathers before they departed from Chaldea were Idolaters, as we may see, josua 24. 2. And in them we may behold what we are before our calling, even the children of wrath. Fourthly, in that not only Abraham, but the rest also went out from Vr. We see that this was no fire but the name of a city, for if they had all been saved from the fire, the Scripture had ascribed it to the power of God, which it doth not, as we see afterwards it doth, speaking of the three children in the fiery furnace. Fifthly, Sarah here is called Terahs' daughter in law, therefore she could not be his own daughter. Sixthly, Sarah is called here Abraham's wife, therefore could not be his sister, for such a marriage were altogether unlawful.   

Q. Whether went Nachor with Abraham and the rest of his kindred from Vr, ornot?  
A. If he had gone with them, he had been here named, as well as the rest, therefore it seems he stayed behind and would not leave his Idolatrous country. In whom we see the nature of the wicked who cannot be persuaded to leave the world; and though he went not at this time, yet afterwards being either troubled in his conscience, or else banished from that place as Augustine thinketh, lib. 16. the civet. dei. cap. 13. He departed from thence, but went no further than Mesopotamia, for he dwelled in Nachor. Gen. 24. 10.   

Q. Why did Abraham and the rest of his company stay at Charran, and went not immediately to Canaan?  
A. Because his father being old not able to travel so fare as Canaan; therefore he was driven to stay there with his old father till he died, but after his father was dead, he removed from thence to Canaan Act. 7. 4. In Nachor, Terah and Abraham we may see the threefold estate of men; some like Nachor remain in Chaldea, and will not forsake the vanity of this world. Others again are like Terah who in their journey from Chaldea to Canaan, from the dominion of Satan and power of sin to the kingdom of grace, stay in the middle way, and so dieth, but the third sort are those true Christians, who with Abraham do not stay in Chaldea; or if they do, it is but a short while, but run on with patience the race that is set before them. Let us then with Abraham walk towards Canaan while we have the light, least darkness come upon us, joh. 12. 35. I mean that darkness of death where the light is as darkness, job 10. 22. For he that goeth to the land of darkness, that is to the grave shall come up no more, job 7. 9    

Questions on the twelfth Chapter.  

Q. IN that God doth call Abraham particularly from Chaldea, doth it follow that there was more excellency and worth in him then in the rest?  
A. No: for before our calling we are all by nature the children of wrath. Abraham was an Idolater, as well as the rest of his kindred, jos. 24. 2. For how could he else choose, being borne of Idolatrous parents; and bred amongst an idolatrous people, and wanting the means to know the true worship of God, till God himself did wonderfully call him. Yea if he had been free from superstition, wherein had the mercy of God appeared in calling him? then Abraham being in the same estate of misery that others were, is the more bound to God for his merciful calling: for it was of his mere love that he called both him and his seed, because he loved their fathers, therefore he chose their seed after them, saith Moses, Deut. 4. 37. And as God called Abraham from Chaldea, so doth he call us from the power of Satan, not because of our foreseen merits, but because it was his pleasure, for it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy, Rom. 9 16.   

Q. How and to what end was Abraham called?  
A. He was called effectually, for he is not of the number of those who are called but not chosen. Mat. 20. 22. But of these who called in time, predestinated before time, and shall be glorified ofter time, Rom. 8. 30. Secondly, he was called not by violence, as Paul, nor by affliction, as oftentimes the Israelites were, nor by present benefits, as those who were healed by Christ and the Apostles, nor by working of miracles as many in the Gospel, but by the bare word of God, Get thee out of thy country, etc. Thirdly, he was called not because of his foreseen faith, much less because of his foreseen merits, for both these follow calling; Non praecidunt iustificandum, sed sequuntur iustificatum. But he called him, because it was the good pleasure of his will, Ephes. 1. 5. Fourthly, he is not called only to a private office or function, as Saul was to the kingdom, and judas to the Apostleship, and neither of them to grace: but he was called both to be a Father and Prince on his people, as also to be a member of that City which he looked for; whose builder and maker is God, Heb. 11. 10. Fifthly, he is not called as he was, who first desired to bury his father. But as Peter and Andrew, Iames and john were, who leaving their ships, their fathers and their nets followed Christ, Mat. 4. So Abraham departed as the Lord had spoken.   

Q. How often did God appear to Abraham?  
A. Nine times. First, now in Chaldea, where he is bid leave his country. Secondly, when he came to Canaan, than God promised to give his seed that land, Gen. 12. 7. Thirdly, when he departed from Egypt to Canaan; being separated from Lot, than the Lord promised to him and to his seed the land of Canaan, Gen. 13. 14. Fourthly, in a vision, when God promised to multiply his posterity, as the stars, Gen. 15. 1. Fifthly, when Abraham was 99 years old, than he changed his name from Abram to Abraham, and instituted circumcision the seal of the covenant, Gen. 17. 1. Sixthly, in the plain of Mamre, setting in his tent door, than he received the three Angels, Gen. 18. 1. Seaventhly, when he was commanded to cast out Ishmael, Gen. 21. ●…2. Eighthly, when he was commanded to sacrifice his son Isaac, Gen. 21. 1. Ninthly, when he stayed him from offering of his son, Gen. 22. 11. And by all these apparitions we may see how highly God did account of his servant Abraham, and how happy and honourable they are whom God loveth, although they are contemptible to the world. Secondly, God appeared oftentimes to Abraham, and so he doth still to his Saints, although not after that manner, that he did to Abraham, yet in his spirit he is with us to the end of the world.   

Q. How did God appear to Abraham and the Prophets?  
A. Here it is not expressed how God appeared or spoke, but we know that God hath been both seen and heard of his people, not in regard of his essence, which is most simple, free from accidents, infinite, incomprehensible, neither must we imagine with the Anthropomorphits, that God hath a body and members by which he is made visible, for no man hath seen God at any time, joh. 1. No man can see him and live, Exod. 33. No: in the kingdom of heaven we shall not see his essence with our bodily eyes. We may see him with the eyes of our minds as the Angels do now, for we shall be like to them. Yet we shall see him perfectly with our bodily eyes, but in the person of his Son our mediator; for the godhead dwelleth bodily in him; then neither Abraham nor any Prophet hath seen or heard God in himself, but only they have enjoyed his presents in external signs, as Moses in the fiery bush, the Israelites in the cloud and fire▪ in smoke and voices, thunders and lightnings, the Priests in the mercy seat, in the Ark, in Vrim and Thummim. The Prophets sometimes in the shape of a man, sometime they did enjoy him without any external sign, immediately by his spirit working upon the understanding and will, and they have seen him sometimes by dreams, sometimes awaking, sometimes in a trance, as his Majesty thought good, but there never was, nor is, nor shall be a more excellent way to see him, then in his son jesus. For he that hath seen him, hath seen the Father. joh. 14. Then we know not how he appeared and spoke to Abraham, it is sufficient for us to know that he appeared in some external image. Quam voluntas eligit non quam natura creavit▪ Ambros▪   

Q. Why doth God command Abraham to teave his country?  
A. Because he will try his faith and obedience. Secondly, because he will wean him by degrees from the love of the world. Thirdly, because he will have him to be a Preacher amongst the Canaanites, to show them the knowledge of the true God. That he may win some to salvation; and make the obstinate inexcusable. Fourthly, that he may take possession of that land in the name of his posterity. Fifthly, that he may flee from the Society of the Idolatrous Chaldeans, and shun all those that were hinderers to him in God's service; especially his friends and acquaintance. Sixthly, to teach us what we should do, when we are called; even leave our own country, kindred and father's house, that is, the world, our sins which are so dear unto us, and the dominion of Satan, that we may follow Christ to the heavenly Canaan. Seaventhly, that God's power might appear the more, in defending Abraham, in preserving and multiplying his posterity, amongst the midst of their enemies in a strange land, and at last giving them the full possession of it, then for these reasons Abraham forsook his country, friends and acquaintance, which was hard for flesh and blood to do, yet by faith he went out, not knowing whither he went. Heb. 11. 8.   

Q. Is it lawful then for us to forsake our countries and friends, if they ●…inder us in God's service?  
A. Yes, for if we prefer father or mother, or any thing to Christ, we are not worthy of him, for this cause therefore Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country. Heb. 11. 9 Lot forsook Sodom, the Israelites Egypt; Moses refused to be called the son of Pharaohs daughter. Heb. 11. 24. Elias and john Baptist lived in the wilderness. Christ also did retire himself commonly to the ship, the mount and the desert: the Disciples forsook all and followed Christ. Math. 18. 28. And many holy men in the Primitive Church, of whom the world was not worthy, as th'Apostle saith, wandered in deserts and mountains, in dens and caves of the earth. Heb. 11. 38. And truly as the society of the wicked, hinders the service of God, so nothing fit to advance it, than a private life, free from the multitude. Amongst whom we both see and here these things, which do not bring us to God, but draws us from him; yet here I do not commend the idle life of the Monks, which is undertaken more for superstition then religion, for the belly then the soul, amongst whom for the part: gluttony; covetousness and intemperance do reign, instead of sobriety, meekness and continency, as Helias Abbas did complain, although I find nothing in that kind of life contrary to true Christianity, if so be it were purged from error and superstition, and corrected according to the pattern of that life, embraced by the Primitive Church, and so highly commended by the fathers. For indeed their Monasteries were the seed-plots and seminaries of the Church, and free from these errors and abuses, which now adays have filled our Monasteries. Now, though Abraham left his country, yet this must not be a precedent for us upon every occasion, to forsake our country and friends, or to think that God can only be served abroad and not at home, truly many holy men, who never forsook their country and friends, have served God sincerely. And it was the praise of Noah, that he was righteous before God, in that wicked generation wherein he lived. But if we see that we cannot live amongst our friends without endangering our salvation▪ let us rather lose and forsake all, then lose our souls.   

Q. In what country was Abraham now when God called him?  
A. Not in Mesopotamia, or in the way between Chaldea and Charran, as Augustine thinketh, lib. de civet. Dei. 16. cap. 15. For he is called out of his country▪ which is not Mesopotamia, though S. Steven saith, that he was in Mesopotamia, but there he calleth all the country beyond Euphrates, Chaldea, Syria, Babylonia by this name. Secondly, no●… in Charran, for this was not his country, and to say that he was twice called, once in Chaldea▪ for that was his country, and from Vr in Chaldea he was called. Gen. 15. 7. Then to think that he was commanded to leave his country, after that he had left it already is ridiculous, neither must we think that either Mesopotamia strictly taken, or Charran, could be Abraham's country, seeing he did but sojourn there but a while like a stranger, his mind in the mean time being still in Charran.   

Q. How did Abraham leave his kindred, seeing they went with him?  
A. Of all his kindred, none went to Ca●…an with him but Let his brother's son, for Terah died in the way of Charran, Nachor went not from Chaldea. Secondly, suppose his father went with him to Charran, either because he hated the Chaldeans Idolatry, or else because he would not lose the society of his son Abraham. Yet Abraham was so disposed and resolved, that although his father had not gone, or if he had laboured to dissuade him, yet he would have gone whether the Lord did call him. And in this he showeth a singular faith and obedience, both in that he was so resolute to go, howsoever his friends were disposed, as that he would leave a certainty for incertainties, his own friends and country, for a land he knew not: for although in the former chapter Moses nameth Canaan. Yet it doth not follow, that Abraham as yet, knew that he was to go thither, for Moses of himself doth ●…ame it by the figure Prolepsis.   

Q. What are the blessings that God doth promise to Abraham?  
A. First, that he would make of him a great nation, which he performed in his children by Agar, but more wonderfully in the Israelites by Sarah, being old and barren, but above all in the spiritual Israelites. For he is the father of all them that believe, Rom. 4. 11. Secondly, That he will bless him, and so he did in earthly things. For he was very rich in cattles, in silver and gold▪ Gen. 13. 2. and 24, 25. But specially in spiritual things. Gal. 3. 14. Eph. 1. 3. Yea in all things God blessed Abraham. Gen. 24. 1. Thirdly, he will make his name great; (not as the Hebrews think by putting to the letter (He) and of Abram, making it Abraham, for this conjecture is ridiculous) but he will make his fame and person glorious. For the name is often taken for the person itself, as thou hast a few names in Sardis, that is, a few persons. Reu. 3. 4. And God's name is in Scripture taken for himself, than Abraham was great and famous, for his faith and obedience, for God's care to him for many blessings he had of God, in his son Isaac, in barren Sarah, in his posterity the Israelites, in the faithful, whose father he is; in that God calleth himself, the God of Abraham. But specially in that Christ came of Abraham according to the flesh, so then Abraham's name shall be so great, that he shall be a blessing to others. Fourthly, he will bless them that blesseth him, and curse them that curse him; so Lot and Ishmael were blessed for his cause; Pharaoh was plagued, the four Kings overthrown, and Abimelec terrified for his sake; but this cursing and blessing hath been always seen executed upon the friends and enemies of the Church; the Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, Roman Monarchies, have been cursed for cursing her. But the midwives in Egypt, the whore Rachab, the widow of Serepta, and many others have been blessed for blessing her. Fifthly, in him all the families of the earth shall be blessed, that is in his seed. Gen. 22. 18. Which the Apostle expoundeth of Christ. Gal. 3. 16. For the blessing of God is come to the Gentiles through jesus Christ. Gal. 3. 14. God hath sent Christ to bless us, in turning every one of us from our iniquities. Act. 3. 26. Yea in Christ God hath blessed us, with all spiritual blessings, etc. Eph. 1. 3. Hear than we see how bountiful God is to Abraham for his imperfect obedience, thus he deals with his Saints, for brass he brings gold, and for iron, silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron, etc. Isay 60. 17. And we must observe, that from the promise to the law are four hundred thirty years, Gal. 3. 17. And all this while the Israelites dwelled as strangers in Egypt, Exod. 12. 40. Yet not in Egypt only, but some part they spent in Canaan, and because they did spend the most part of it in Egypt, therefore Moses only mentioneth Egypt.   

Q. How old was Abraham when he went from Charran?  
A. Seaventy five years old, and in this he deserveth singular commendations, that although now he was old and feeble, yet he would not descest from going his journey. Secondly, in that he went as the Lord spoke unto him, we do learn how to guide our actions, for this is true piety, to undertake nothing, but what God hath commanded, and▪ to do it no other ways, then as he hath commanded; this is only true obedience, which God more regardeth then sacrifice, 1. Sam. 15. 22. Thirdly, in that Lot went with him, we may see what his affection was to true religion, who being but a youth, and having Nachor in Chaldea his uncle, who like enough did dissuade him from going, yet he had rather go with Abraham although he knew not whether, then to remain amongst idolatrous company.   

Q. What company took Abraham with him to Canaan?  
A. Sarai his wife, a notable precedent for women, who should not with Lot's wife look back to Sodom when they are called, nor hinder their husbands from going to the wedding feast as she in the Gospel, Luk. 14. 20. Nor infect their husbands with idolatry, as salomon's wife, nor deceive them with flattering words, as Sampsons' wife, nor induce them to break God's commandment as Eve; nor desire them to curse God as jobs wife, but rather let them imitate Sarai, Rebeccah, Lia, Rachel, Deborah, Ruth, Abigal, the Queen of Seba, the widow of Serepta, the blessed Virgin Mary, the widow Anna, Elizabeth, Lydia, the women in the Gospel who ministered to Christ, who accompanied him to the cross, and did visit him in the grave, and many other holy women mentioned in Scripture, in whose lives they may see a pattern of devotion to God, love to their husbands, faith, wisdom, patience, charity, and many other excellent virtues. Secondly, he took Lot his brother's son, a notable youngman, whom the young men of this age should imitate, who are so fare from following Abraham for religions sake to a strange country, that they will neither follow the holy life of the Saints, nor the counsel of their preachers in their own country. Thirdly, he took all the souls, that is, those persons or servants, whom he and Lot had gotten in their possessions, in Charran, where we may see that Abraham was no base fellow, but a man of might, for he had many servants, even 318. trained soldiers, Gen. 14. Again, here we see his care to their souls, who would bring them with him, a pattern for masters, who must be careful to procure the weal of their servant's souls, and in that, they went with him, we have here an example for servants, who should be ready to follow their masters in goodness.   

Q. Did Abraham well in taking with him to Canaan, all the substance that he had gathered?  
A. Yes: for God would neither have him beg, not be burdensome to those amongst whom he was to dwell, our calling then doth not hinder the lawful use of riches lawfully gotten; for those that were called by the Apostles, did not altogether leave their possessions, but sold them as well for the use of others as for their own, Act. 2. and Abraham as all the Saints may lawfully possess riches, for they are the gifts of God, the effects of God's blessings; and the instruments of learning, virtue and alms, yet we must take heed, that our riches be not unlawfully gotten. Secondly, they be not abused to luxury and pride. Thirdly, that we do not put our confidence in them. Fourthly, that we do not hide them, with that unprofitable servant, when we should use them to the comfort of ourselves and poor brethren. Fifthly, that we do still acknowledge God to be the Author and giver of them. Sixthly, that whensoever occasion serveth, we be ready to leave them, if God do so require of us for the greater advancement of his glory and true religion, and so it is to be understood that the Apostles forsook all, and they are promised to be highly rewarded, who leaveth these things for Christ's sake. Mat. 19   

Q. How fare traveled Abraham through the land?  
A. To the place where Sichem afterward was built, a city in the tribe of Manasses, belonging to the priests and not fare from the hills Hebal and Garizim, where the Israelites heard the blessings pronounced, Deut. 27. 12. This place in Abraham's time was called the plain or Oak of Moreth, for it seems that here was a grove of Okes. And here we see that Abraham even in this promised land, is but a pilgrim, for he is driven to wander as fare as Sichem, which is toward the desert. Truly God would teach both Abraham and us by this, that our lise hear on earth is but a peregrination.   

Q. Did this land belong of right to Abraham, Because he descended of Sem?  
A. The Hebrews think that Canan by Noah was given to Sem and his posterity, but Canans' sons took it by violence from them, which is false. First, because the Scripture mentioneth no such thing. Secondly, if this country had belonged to Sem, and so consequently to Abraham, this had been no free gift. Thirdly, is the Canaanites had taken it violently, than this had been cause sufficient to have driven them out, but we read only that their wickedness was the cause of their expulsion, Leu. 18. 24. Fourthly, God would not have deferred four hundred years to drive them out, but presently would have put Abraham's seed in possession of it, which he did not, for their iniquity was not yet full. Fifthly, Moses mentioneth no other cause, that moved God to bring his people to Canaan, but only because he loved them, Deut. 4 37. And as God brought Abraham now to Canaan, the country being replenished with Canaanites; so did he afterwards to his posterity, for when they they were brought hither from Egypt, they did find the Canaanites in the land. Again, as the Canaanites was in the land, so the Canaanites are in the Church, and as Abraham lived a stranger amongst them, so do the Saints amongst the wicked, but as there came a time when the Canaanites were driven out, so the day shall come when the wicked shall be cast out into utter darkness, Mat. 8. 12.   

Q. Which of the persons of the trinity appeared here to Abraham?  
A. Not the father, for as he is of none, so he is sent of none▪ nor the holy Ghost, for he visibly only appeared in a done on Christ in jordan, and on the Apostles in fiery tongues, but Christ the second person, the Angel of the covenant, who hath from the beginning been a mediator and the ambassador of his Father. Some to uphold image-worship, do think this wasian Angel Personaliter: but God by representation; and therefore he is called Lord. But this is false, because the name jehovah which is in the Hebrew text, is never given to any creature, for it is Gods proper name, Esay 54. 5. Amos 4. 15. If the name Elohim had been used here, they might have had some show for their opinion, for that name indeed is sometimes given to the creatures, Psal. 82. 6. But the essential name of jehovah is here expressed, which is only proper to the creator. Secondly, if this had been an Angel, it is not like that Abraham would have built an altar to him; for building of Altars was a part of divine worship.   

Q. To whom then did Abraham build thi●… Altar?  
A. To jehovah that appeared unto him, and in so doing, he testifies his piety to God, even amongst the midst of Idolaters without fear, Religio esse non potest, ubi metus est. Lact. Firm. lib. 4. Love driveth out fear. Secondly, he shows a thankful mind to God, not only in building an altar, but building it without command of his own accord. Thirdly, he did not build it to any of the Idol▪ gods, he knew his God to be a jealous God, and who would give his glory to none. Fare otherwise do they who build Churches and Chapels to the honour of dead men, Hon●…randi sunt sancti propter imitationem non adorandi propter religionem Augustin. I deny not but any religious house may bare the name of a Saint or Martyr deceased, provided always that we derogate nothing from the Lord, or arrogate any thing to them contrary to God's word.   

Q. Whether removed Abraham from Sichem?  
A. To a mountain on the East of Bethel, so called by jacob, but otherwise it was called by Luz, Gen. 28. 19 This mountain was between Bethel and A●…, a city which josuah destroyed, jos. 8. And upon this mountain, a Temple was built by the permission of Alexander Macedonia, of which hill the woman of Samaria speaketh, joh. 4. It had two tops, Hebal and Garizim, whereon the blessings and cursings were pronounced. Here then Abraham stays a while, and yet not long, for he is forced to travel towards the South, as having no certain abode enen in that promised land, he was then, and the godly are still but strangers in this world, and as he went towards the South as towards the Sun: so do the godly in faith and grace, the way of the righteous shineth as the light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day, Prou. 4. 18. But the wicked travel towards the North, from whence a plague shall be spread upon them, jer. ●…. 14. Because the way of the wicked is as darkness, Prou. 4. 19   

Q. Why went Abraham down to Egypt?  
A. Not because he disinherited of God's providence, for he was assured that God could miraculously feed him, as afterward he did the widow of Serepta and Eli●…h. Secondly, not because he was inconstant and movable, as many are, who can never settle themselves in one place, but like wand'ring stars, and carried up and down from place to place. Thirdly, neither fled he for any villainy he had committed or murder, as Moses did from Egypt. Fourthly, nor to increase his stock as merchants do. Fifthly, nor curiously to increase his knowledge in humane sciences, as Pythagoras, Emsedocles, Democritus and Plato, who for this end traveled so fare countries; but he went, first because of the famine in the land, therefore he would not tempt God by neglecting lawful means. Secondly, because he would propagate the knowledge of the true God in Egypt, as Saint Chrysoftome thinketh, Hom. 30. in Gen. And for this end the Apostles traveled through the world, now although this was a very fruitful land, Deut. 8. 7. Yet God made it barren for the wickedness of them that dwelled therein, Psal. 107. 34. Barrenness and mis●…ery are the fruits of sin, let no man glory in their fruitful Lands, for sin will make them barren as Sodom and Gomorrha. Again, when Abraham thought to have ●…ase and wealth he is frustrated▪ for he is fain to fly for hunger, so God doth exercise his children wiith such punishments, that his care and their faith may appear the more: so he did pinch Isaac, jacob, joseph, Elias, Eliseus▪ and other Prophets, Paul and other Apostles with hunger. Moreover Abraham for the sins of this land fared the worse; and so many times Gods children dwelling with the wicked are partakers of their plagues?   

Q. What did the going down of Abraham into Egypt signify?  
A. That as he went thither so should his posterity after him, and the most part of the circumstances do agree. First, as famine was the cause that Abraham went to Egypt▪ So famine was the cause that moved jacob and his sons to go thither. Secondly, as Abraham was now troubled: so afterward Israel was more afflicted. Thirdly, Pharaoh for Abraham's sake is plagued, and Pharaoh for Israel's sake was drowned. Fourthly, Abraham was used ●…ell for Saraies sake, and so was Israel for josephs' sake▪ Fifthly, Sarai Abraham's wife was fair to look upon, therefore she was e●…ticed to lie with Pharaoh, so joseph▪ Israel's son was a fair person, therefore was enticed to lie with Po●…iphers wife. Sixthly, Abraham departed rich from Egypt, having sheep, beefs, asses and Camels, so did the Israelites having spoilt the Egyptians of their silver, gold, and raiment.   

Q. Wa●… Sarai beautiful at this time?  
A. Yes: and her beauty was extraordinary, seeing it was not diminished, neither by her long journeys, nor by her age, for now she was 6●…. year's old, ten years younger than Abraham. And as Sara●… was beautiful in the eyes of Abraham, so is the Church fair in the eyes of Christ her well beloved. But this beauty of the Church doth not so much consist in external splendour, as in internal grace, for the king's daughter is all glorious within, Psal. 45. 13. This beauty of Sarai made Abraham give her counsel to say that she was his sister, and not his wife, for he knew what danger there is to have a beautiful woman. And truly oftentimes beauty hath been the cause of murder and mischief, the wife of Vriah, Lucretia, Helina, and many more can testify, therefore beauty is not so much to be regarded as virtue. Abraham then had good cause to fear the Egyptians, because they are blacker than the Canaanites, and when they see a fair woman, which is scarce in that hot country, they are exceeding prone to deflower her, he knew also that the abundance and plenty in Egypt, brought out incontinance and intemperance among them.   

Q. Did Abraham sin in persuading his wife to say she was his sister?  
A. He did not sin in saving his own life, seeing nothing is more precious than the life, especially abraham's, because all nations should be blessed in his seed. Secondly, neither altogether did he lie in saying she was his sister, for she was his brother's daughter; and such as are near a kin, the Hebrews did use to call brethren & sisters. Thirdly, no●… yet did he sin ●…in giving this hard censure of the Egyptians, for what he spoke of their cruelty and lust, he spoke it by experience, though not in himself, yet in others he knew what the nature and qualities of barbarous people are, without the knowledge of God, yea it seems by the event he speaks this as a Prophet. Fourthly, neither can we altogether say that he sinned in hazarding his wife's chastity, if we look to his faith. For we may think that he who in greater matters depended upon God's providence, did also in this; and was assured that God would rather deliver her, then suffer her chastity to be abused, as the event showeth: yet we will not deny but some humane infirmities are mixed with this action of Abraham, for he did not call Sarai his sister in that sense that Pharaoh understood her to be. Secondly, in that he did seem too much to hazard his wife's chastity, having no such warrant from God. Thirdly, in that he was too fearful of death, when he should have rather assured himself, that God who had preserved him hitherto, would not leave him now destitute. Fourthly, in that he gave an evil example to others by counselling his wife to dissemble. Yet these and such like infirmities in the Saints, are not to us matter of imitation, but of humiliation rather, considering that there is a law in our members, warring against the law of the mind, Rom. 7. 23.   

Q. What happened to Abraham when he came to Egypt?  
A. His wife Sarai is commended by the Princes to Pharaoh, and she received into his house, here then we see that Sarai did as Abraham desired her, and in this she shown herself a loving and faithful wife, who will rather hazard her chastity, then suffer her husband to be killed. Secondly, in that the Princes commended her, we have here the nature of flattering courtiers set down, who accommodate themselves to the humours and vices of their king. Thirdly, we see in the Egyptians the nature of carnal men, who are more moved with external shows and beauty, then with internal virtue and grace. For Sarai is sought not for her virtue, but for her beauty. Fourthly, in that Abraham is the first of Heber's posterity who went to Egypt, we gather from hence that the Hebrews are not descended of the Egyptians, as josephus in his books against Apton doth prove. Fifthly, from hence also we gather, that the name of Pharaoh is every ancient, seeing the Egyptian kings were generally called Pharaoh. In the time of Abraham, and this name remained amongst them till the return of the people from Babylon, then in the beginning of the Grecian Empire, they were called Ptolomees till Cleopatra being overcome, Augustus did redact it into the form of a province; but after the Empire was divided, Egypt being governed a while by the Grecian Emperors; and weary of that servitude, they did choose Calipha the captain of the Saracens to be their King; from whom the Egyptian kings for almost the space of 447. years were called Caliphae, afterward the kings of Egypt were called Sultan's after the death of Melechsala.   

Q. How was Saraies chastity preserved?  
A. By the hand of God, for Pharaoh and his house were plagued with great plagues because of her; then questionless●… as God had a care to keep her chastity from Abimelech, so now he hieth to keep it from Pharaoh, though here it be not directly expressed as there, because shortly after mention is made of isack's birth, whom some would have thought to have been Abimelechs' son, and not abraham's. Secondly, here we see the care that God hath of his children in their extremities, he suffereth no man to do them wrong, Psal. 105. 14. Thirdly, Kings must take heed by this Pharaoh, that they do not oppress and offend God's children. for he hath reproved kings for their sakes, Psal. 105. 14. Fourthly, we may see here the fierceness of God's judgements, who for this sin of Pharaoh did plague his whole house: so many times for the wickedness of a king, the whole land is punished, Quicquid delirant reges plectuntur Achivi. Fifthly, God plagued Pharaoh for Abraham's wife: even so whore-mongers and adulterers God will judge, Heb. 13. 4. Examples we have of Pharaoh here, Rubin. Gen. 35. The Beniamites, judg. 19 David, 2. Sam. 11. The Israelite with the Moabite woman, Num. 25. 6. If God plagued Pharaoh who ignorantly took Sarai, what plagues must they look for, who take a pride and pleasure in committing adultery. Seaventhly, not only Pharaoh, but the Princes that counselled him are plagued: even so shall all wicked counsellors be handled, Malum consilium consultori pessimum, Then let none wonder why they are also punished, Quid mirum ●…os regiae penae fuisse participes, qui regis in patrando flagitio fuerunt adiutores, Chrysostom.   

Q. Did Pharaoh commit adultery with Sarai?  
A. No: for he is plagued before he touched her, or else to what end had he been plagued after he violated her. Secondly, it was not the custom amongst these nations for kings to take them wives before they had purified themselves certain days, yea a whole year as we may see in the book of Hester. Thirdly, although Pharaoh had touched her, yet properly we cannot call that copulation adultery, because she yielded not of her own accord, but was compelled both by her husband to save his life, as also by Pharaoh. So Abraham did lie with Agar, and yet we cannot say he committed adultery, seeing he did not of lust, but by the counsel of his wife to beget children, yet the surer way is to hold that she was not touched. Fourthly, we may collect here by Pharaohs words, that if he had known Sarai to be Abraham's wife, he would not have taken her, Qui prat●…ndit ignor antiam condemnat intemperantiam, Ambros. lib. de Abr. cap. 2. This profane king had learned so much continency, even by the law of nature. Fifthly, it is like that Pharaoh was warned by God in a dream, as afterward Abimelech was, that Sarai was the wife of Abraham.   

Q. Why did Pharaoh give charge to his men concerning Abraham?  
A. Because he would not have any to do him wrong, and like enough the Egyptians did envy him, because for his sake the king and court was plagued: as also, because he grew very rich amongst them in that short time he remained there. Secondly, because he would not have any violence offered to Sarai, for he knew how prone to lust his people were. Here than we see that the hearts of kings are in the hands of the Lord, Prou. 21. 1. Secondly, Abraham in this tentation lost nothing, but gained both riches and honour, then true it is that all things work together for the best to them that love God, Rom. 8. 28. Now whether Abraham taught the Egyptians astrology or not, is uncertain, yet like enough he did, although he did not remain their long, for it is very probable that Abraham did labour to bring them to the knowledge of the true God, which he could not better do, then by the knowledge of the visible celestial creature; and truly no man fit to teach them then Abraham, being bred amongst the Chaldeans the only astrologers in the world, having also himself the true knowledge of God; and none fit to learn this science, than the Egyptians, who were naturally invited thereto, because of the perpetual serenity of their air, being altogether free from clouds, which do take away the light of these celestial bodies oftentimes from us.    

Questions on the thirtenth Chapter.  

Quest. HOw is it understood that Abraham went up, out of Egypt into the South?  
A. He is said to go up out of Egypt, because this country lieth lower than Canaan. So in the precedent chapter, vers. 10. He is said to go down to Egypt. Now Abraham going to Canaan from Egypt▪ is said to go unto the South, not as though Canaan did lie Southward from Egypt, for it is Northward. But by the South here Moses understandeth the Southern parts of Canaan. As Canaan was a type of heaven, so is Egypt of the kingdom of Satan. Abraham came out of Egypt to Canaan, so must we from the power of Satan to the kingdom of grace; he went up from Egypt, so we must ascend by faith, and seek those things that are above, he went unto the South, as to the sun, so we must follow the son of righteousness, and walk in the light while it is day, he took his wife and Lot with him, so we must help forward our friends in this spiritual journey, he was very rich when he went up, so we must be rich in faith, jam. 2. 5. Rich in good works, 1. Tim. 6. 18. Rich in understanding, Col. 2. 2. Rich in all utterance and knowledge, 1. Cor. 1. 5.   

Q. Why did Abraham return again to Bethel, where he was before?  
A. Not to pay his debts, which he had contracted going to Egypt, as Rabbi Salomo prateth, but because he knew this place better than others. Secondly, he had more acquaintance here then elsewhere. Thirdly, he received here some blessings from God: therefore his affection is more bend to this place then to any other. Fourthly, this place had been consecrated already by building an altar and calling upon the name of the Lord: therefore he would not seem to neglect that place which was once consecrated for God's worship, teaching us not to despise the public places dedicated to God's service. Fifthly, he would not seem to be a vagabond roving up and down when there was no need, teaching us that upon every trifle we must not remove from place to place, for that which he enjoined the Apostles, Luk. 10. He also enjoineth us to do, that we remain in the same house, where we are received, and that we go not from house to house. Sixthly, as Abraham returned to his first altar, and there served God: so must we remember from whence we are fallen, and repent, Reu. 2. 5. And forsake the Idols of Egypt, Ezech. 20. 8.   

Q. Why could not Abraham and Lot dwell together?  
A. Because their substance was great, where we see that Lot also had great riches, and questionless the more for good Abraham's sake, with whom he still did keep company till now. Secondly, these two whom neither poverty, long journeys, nor famine, could separate their great substance and wealth, do separate, such is the nature of riches, when Rome was poor, there was great concord, but when it waxed potent and rich, than followed division and rent of the Empire, so there was no distinction and heartburning between juda and Israel, till they waxed rich, and the Christians while they suffered persecution and poverty, they did maintain love and concord amongst them, they were of one heart and mind, yea had all things common, Act. 2. But after the Church grew rich, they who should have beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks, did beat their plough shares into swords, and their pruning hooks into spears. Thirdly, in that Abraham must departed from Lot his kinsman, whom he loved so dear, it was no small grief to him, thus God did cast him down, lest his riches should too much puff him up. Fourthly, the cause of this strife was without doubt scarcity both of pasture ground and water for their cattles. Fifthly, servants oftentimes do breed quarrels amongst themselves, which are the cause of strife between their masters, as we may see here in these herdsmen. Therefore let masters take heed that they take not too much pride in the multitude of servants, for too many servants brings but confusion: nor too rashly to credit their servant's reports.   

Q. Why is it added that the Cananite and Perezite were in the land?  
A. To signify that this was a main reason that moved Abraham not to strive with Lot: because having then such strong enemies as these were, it had been their utter ruin to have contended. Secondly, lest by their idle contention they should be given to go to law before the unbelievers, which Paul doth dislike in the Corinthians, 1. Cor. 6. Thirdly, lest Abraham should give them any occasion of offence or scandal, seeing he was in some account amongst them for his learning and wisdom, it seemeth that the Perezites were not a several nation distinct from the Canaanites, but rather a family of the Canaanites, for they dwelled with them in that part of the cowtry which fell to the tribe of juda, judg. 1. 4 Now as Abraham was loath to strive with Lot, because they had strong enemies, so let us take heed lest we give occasion to our spiritual Cananits and Perezites, to overthrew us by our contentions. And truly we have greater cause to maintain love and concord amongst ourselves, than Abraham and Lot had. For our spiritual enemies are more and stronger than the Canaanites and Perizites were.   

Q. Why saith Abraham to Lot, let there be strife, for we are brethren?  
A. Because he would by these words move Lot to give over contending with him, and in this he showeth both wonderful wisdom and meekness, who although in all respects he was Lots better. Yet he doth submit himself for concord's sake unto him. Secondly, he shows his exceeding love to peace, when not only doth he labour to maintain peace, between himself and Lot: but also between their servants, which all good peacemakers should do. Thirdly, he brings a reason why they should not contend, because they are brethren, that is, natural kinfemen. Yea brethren in faith and affection, if then Abraham was so careful to maintain peace, lest he should offend the Canaanites: how should not we maintain the same, lest we offend weak Christians. Secondly, as he thought it no disparagement to submit himself for peace sake, so should not kings and great men, but they ought to be meek and humble as Christ was. Thirdly, if they would not contend because they were brethren, much less should Christians, who are not only the sons of God and brethren with Christ, but also the members of the same body.   

Q. Wherein is the plain of jordan commended?  
A. In that it was well watered every where; even as the garden of the Lord, that is, earthly paradise wherein Adam was placed, watered with Euphrates, and like Egypt watered with Nilus, and hereby is signified that this plain was very fruitful: as all grounds are which are watered with fresh rivers; but this plain did not continue long pleasant. For God destroyed it with fire from heaven about a year before the birth of Isaac, and 20. years after Lots coming thither, so then God turned this fruitful land into barrenness, for the wickedness of them that dwelled therein, Psal. 107. 34. And as this plain was once pleasant and well watered with jordan. But now there is nothing to be seen but barrenness and a stinking lake, so was judea once well watered with the Oracles of God, the doctrine of Prophets, of Christ and his Apostles, but now it lieth waste and barten, being overflowed with the stinking puddle of Mahomet's doctrine.   

Q. Why did Lot choose the plain of jordan?  
A. Because of the fruitfulness and pleasantness thereof, and in this he seemed to regard too much his profit, looking too much to the goodness of the ground, and not considering the wickedness of that people, therefore he was twice punished for it; once when he was taken prisoner, the other time when God destroyed the cities of this plain with fire. Then was he fain for secure to ●…lee to the mountains, and as he was as it seemeth to greedy to settle himself here by jordan, so afterward were the tribes of Rubin and Gad, who did solicit Moses to give them the country on this side jordan, before the other tribes had passed over the river: so they regarded their profit more than their safety: for although that country was ●…at and pleasant, yet of all the countries in judea: it was most dangerous, because most obnoxious to the neighbour enemies. Numb. 32.   

Q. Wherein did the river jordan exceed all other Rivers?  
A. Not in power, riches, deepness and largeness, for Tiber, Nilus, Euphrates, Da●…, and others have in these respects been more famous than she, but in miracles and mysteries she yields to none, for she divided herself to let the Israelites pass over. josh. 3. In her Nahaman was cleansed from his leprosy. 2. King. 5. She was divided twice with Elias mantle. 2. King. 2. In her the iron did rise from the bottom, and swim at the command of Elisha. 2. King. 6. In her many were baptised by john, confessing their sins. Matth. 3. Yea Christ himself did sanctify her with his bodily presence, being baptised there, and in her the holy▪ Ghost descended upon him; and lest he was there, the heavens were opened, and the voice of the Father heard. Matth. 3. This. jordan flowed from two springs in the foot of Libanus, the one is jordan, and the other Dan, and emptieth herself into the dead sea, so called because no creatures can live there, the very fowls that fly over it, fall down dead: this lake is about some 36. miles long, and in some places 8. or 12. miles over: whatsoever is cast into it doth swim not sink, as Vespasian made trial, upon the banks groweth fruit, fair to the sight, but being touched, are nothing but dust within.   

Q. Why would Cod have Abraham and Lot to be separated?  
A. For the further good of them both. First, to prevent that discord which was like to arise, by their dwelling together. Secondly, that the knowledge of God may the further be defused in Canaan by Abraham, and to the five Cities by Lot, so we read Acts 15. That when Paul and Barnabas could not agree about Mark, they departed asunder. Paul to Syria and Cilicia, and Barnabas to Cyprus, and so the Gospel by this means was enlarged. Thirdly, God would have Abraham to stay in Canaan, but Let to departed, because Abraham's posterity the Israelites was to enjoy this land, but not the Moabites and Ammonites, who came of Lot. And here we may observe that Lot did not choose the better part: for though that country was pleasant, yet the inhabitants were wicked; and where he thought to have found pleasure, he met with trouble and sorrow, for he vexed his righteous soul from day to day, with their unlawful deeds. 2. Pet. 2. 8. Such is the foolishness of this world: for whiles men hunt altogether for pleasure, they fall into grief and sorrow. Vbi mel, ibi fel. Again, in Abraham we may observe singular wisdom, who though he loved Lot most dearly, yet rather than by his company he would offend God, he doth most willingly suffer him to departed, and so must we cast away every thing, that is offensive to God, be it never so near and dear unto us. If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, for better it is for one of the members to perish; then that the whole body be cast into hell. Matth. 5.   

Q. How is it understood that the Sodomites were sinners before the Lord?  
A. That is openly and boldly, without either shame of men, or fear of God, even as the earth. Gen. 6. 11. Is said to be corrupt before God, and Nimrod, (Gen. 10. 9) Is called a mighty hunter before the Lord, the sins then of Sodom were many and fearful, as pride, fullness of bread, abundance of Idleness. Ezech. 16. Even that unnatural sin of Sodomy. Gen. 19 Yea they were contumelious against men, impious against God, unmerciful to the poor, cruel to strangers, josep. lib. 1. Antiq. And questionless Idolatry did reign amongst them, and many more sins, and here they are called sinners, not as though they only were sinners, (for by the disobedience of Adam we are all made sinners. Rom. 5. 19) But because they were notorious and open sinners: therefore this title is given them, so Psal. 104. 35. Let the sinners be consumed, etc. and Matth. 26. 45. The son of man is betrayed into the hand of sinners, and 1. Tim. 1. 9 The law is made for sinners, and here we see that though these Sodomites enjoyed pleasant and fruitful grounds: yet they sinne exceedingly against the Lord. Thus the wicked do abuse Gods external gifts, and the more they have, the more unthankful and sinful they are, when the Israelites waxed fat, they spurned with their heel. Deut. 32. 15. This made Solomon unwilling to seek riches, lest he should deny God. For it is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. Secondly, let not the godly envy the riches and pleasure of the wicked, but behold the end, and they shall see them consumed with Sodom. Thirdly, let not the wicked rejoice in their riches, and pleasures, for though God spare them a while, yet the day will come, when with Sodom they shall be consumed with fire and brimstone.   

Q Did Abraham's posterity enjoy no more ground, then that which Abraham did now see?  
A. Yes, a great deal more, even from Dan to Be●…rsheba, which Abraham at once could not see, than Abraham did not only enjoy that which he saw, but that also which he went through in length and breadth. verse 17. And as God showed the land now to Abraham, so did he afterwards to Moses, but neither of these could at once see all the land, but God points out the limits and corners of it to them both, and as Moses saw the land upon Mount Pisgath: So it is like that Abraham saw it upon Mount Garizim, they both see this land, but neither of them do possess it, now Abraham is grieved; doubtless for the want of his dear friend and brother Lot, but behold God comes to comfort him, showing him the land, thus God deals with his Saint's heaviness may be for a night, but joy shall come in the morning. Secondly, we see here that Abraham did well in parting from Lot, or else God had not come to comfort him: thirdly, God came not to Abraham till this strife with Lot was ended: neither will he come to us, so long as we are at variance. Fourthly, Abraham saw the land now, but did not enjoy it, so we by faith do see the heavenly Canaan, but hereafter we shall possess it.   

Q. Why doth God again renew the promise of giving to him this land?  
A. To confirm his faith, which was often assaulted with many crosses, and such is the weakness of our faith, that of it be not often confirmed with the word of God, it will faint, and although Abraham had no inheritance here except that field and cave which he bought to bury Sarai in; yet he did possess it all in hope, even as we are now already saved by hope. Rom. 8. Again, he did possess it, if not in himself yet in his posterity, so jacob was Lord over his brethren. Gen. 27. 29. Which was accomplished not in him, for jacob doth call himself Esaves servant, and Esau his Lord. Gen. 33. 14. But in his posterity the Israelites, who were Lords over the Edomites Esau's posterity; so jacob foretold many things. Gen. 49. Which should befall his children, which did not happen to them; but to their posterity, than Abraham being the chief head of the Israelites, receiveth this blessing for his posterity, which they did begin to enjoy 370. years after the death of Abraham, but they did possess it not for their own worthiness, but for the faith and obedience of Abraham.   

Q. Whether was Abraham heir only of this land, or ●…ls heir of all the world, as Paul scemeth to affirm▪ Rom. 4.  
A. The seed of Abraham is twofold, some after the flesh, and some by promise, Gal. 4. These who were only after the flesh, possessed only Canaan, but the spiritual seed, those that are Abraham's sons by promise, and heirs of his faith, are also heirs of the whole world, for to them the world doth belong of right, although the wicked have the possession of the most part thereof, yea we may say, that Abraham's spiritual seed hath possessed the whole world from the beginning, for the Church which is Christ's kingdom, and the seed of Abraham by promise, is universal: neither is it tied to any particular place according to these Scriptures. I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost part of the earth for thy possession, Psal. 2. 8. He shall have dominion from sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth, Psal. 72. 8. He shall reign over the house of jacob for ever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end, Luk. ●…. 33. This is that stone cut out of the mountain without hands, which became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. Dan. 2. 35.   

Q. How long was Abraham's seed to enjoy this land?  
A. For ever, that is a long time, for so this word is often used in Scripture, so in this sense circumcision is called an everlasting covenant, Gen. 17. The Sabbath a sign between God and his people for ever, Exod. 31. The servant whose ear is boared must serve his master for ever, Exod. 21. Now this cannot be understood of eternity, for the Israelites are long ago expelled from Canaan, circumcision, the Sabbath, and other ceremonial laws were abolished by the coming of Messyas, the servant was tied to serve his master no longer than the year of Iubili●…, then so long did they possess this land, as they walked obediently before God, for it was given to them upon condition of legal obedience, otherwise if they did not obey, the land was to spew them out, Leu. 18. 28. Abraham and his seed were to enjoy this land for ever, but Abraham was to keep God's covenant, he and his seed after him for ever, Gen. 17. 9 If then they have not enjoyed this land for ever, they must not accuse God, but themselves, who have not kept his covenant for ever; Gods promises do then still include the condition of our faith and obedience, as, whosoever believeth in the Son, shall not perish but have everlasting life, but he that believeth not, is condemned already, joh. 3. And here we cannot deny but that under this earthly Canaan, promised to Abraham's carnal seed, is understood heavenly Canaan, which belongeth to his spiritual ●…eede: then this word (ever) is attributed to ●…he sign which doth properly belong to the ●…hing signified, and thus the Scripture useth ●…n all sacramental speeches, to ascribe that to ●…he type and figure, which doth only belong to the thing signified, as the lamb is called the passover, the blood of goats and calves ●…s said to hollow and purge, the bread is called Christ's body, and here Canaan is promised to Abraham's seed for ever, which yet shall not continue for ever, for the world shall be destroyed, and all the works therein, then earthly Canaan was possessed of the carnal Israelites for ever, that is, a long time, but the true Israelites shall possess the heavenly Canaan for ever and ever.   

Q. Why saith God that he will make Abraham's seed as the d●…st of the earth?  
A. God doth use this hyperbolical speech to stir up the mind of Abraham, for he knoweth how dull and hard by nature we are to hearkento him: for which cause the Scripture doth use many such kind of figurative speeches, as the top of Babel is said to reach to heaven, the cities of the anakims to be walled up to heaven, to birds of the air are said to carry our words, if we speak ill of the king, the world cannot contain the books which might be written of Christ; and many such like, therefore they are foolish who think that there is no figurative speech in the Scripture; but that all must be understood simply. Secondly, by this speech God would signify ●…nto Abraham, that out of his loins should proceed an exceeding great multitude of people, which was fulfilled in Moses time, for he says, they were as the stars of heaven in multitude, Deu. 1. 10. & 10. 22. And Balac said that they covered the face of the earth, Num. 23. 5. Yea Balam is forced to acknowledge their great number when he says, Num. 23. 10. Who can count the dust of jacob, and the number of the fourth part of Israel. Thirdly, although Abraham's carnal seed were great in number; yet his spiritual seed is greater; the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured, Host 1. 10. Which is meant of the spiritual Israelites, and john saw a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people and tongues before the rhroane, etc. Reu. 7. 9 Fourthly, as the carnal seed of Abraham considered in themselves were many, yet but few in respect of all other nations, for the Canaanites, the Hittites, etc. Were greater and mightier than the Israelites, Deut. 7. 1. Even so the spiritual children of Abraham, though many in themselves, yet are but few in respect of the wicked, for many are called, but few are chosen, Mat. 22. 14. The way that leadeth to destruction is broad, and many go in thereat; but the gate that leadeth to life is narrow, and few there be that find it, Mat. 7. 13. Fifthly, although the seed of Abraham be innumerable to man, yet it is not to God, who telleth the number of the stars. Psal. 147. 4. And from hence we may collect that increase of children, and a great posterity, is a special blessing of God, as we may see, Psal. 128.   

Q. Why would God have Abraham to walk through the land, in the length and breadth of it?  
A. To augment both his faith and joy, in that his children should have the possession of that land, whereof he had now made a full survey. Secondly, this continual walking up and down, God would exercise his patience, and let him know that he was but a stranger in his own land. Thirdly, that by this means the knowledge of God might be the further propagated. Fourthly, that by the consideration of the length and breadth of that land, he might be able to comprehend the breadth and length, and depth, and height, and know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, Eph. 3. 18. Now, as all the life of Abraham consisted in walking, so doth the life of a Christian. Enoch walked with God, Gen. 5. Abraham is commanded to walk before God. Gen. 17. Noah walked with God, Gen. 6. Abraham confessed that he walked in the sight of God▪ Gen. 24. jacob confesseth that Abraham and Isacke walked in the sight of God, Gen. 28. God requireth Israel to walk in his ways. Deut. 10. They are blessed who walk in the law of the Lord, Psal. 119. Even so we must walk in the newness of life, Rom. 6. We must walk honestly as in the day, Rom. 13. We must walk by faith, 2 Cor. 5. We must walk in the spirit, Gal. 5. We must walk worthy of our vocation, Eph. 4▪ In love, as children of the light▪ Eph. 5. Worthiness of God, Col. 1. And if we pass our life in walking, so we shall hereafter walk with him in white, Reu. 3. Who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks, Reu. 2.   

Q. What plain was this, which is here called the plain of Mamre?  
A. It is a plain or an oak groave not fare from Hebron, which city of Hebron was also called Mamre, Gen. 23. 19 Therefore from the town this plain is so called, and this town was called Mamre from a certain Amorite of the same name, with whom Abraham made a covenant, Gen. 14. 13. Where there is mention made of him and his two brothers Eschol & Aner. In this Mamre, Abraham lived a long time, and near to it, he and his wife Sarai, Isaac and his wife Rebecca, jacob and his wife Leah were buried in one grave, Gen. 49. 31.   

Q. What was Hebron?  
A. A city in Canaan, which was built seven years before Zoan in Egypt, Num. 13. 22. Which Zoan is thought to be Tanis, and it is supposed that this Hebron was builded by Heth the son of Canaan, whose posterity the Hittites inhabited in it till josuahs' time; it was sometimes possessed by Giants, whom Caleb driven out, jos. 15. 14. It was a chief city in the tribe of juda, and after called Kiriatharba, jos. 14. 15. From one▪ Arba a grea●… man amongst the Anakims'. This town became the inheritance of Caleb, jos. 14▪ 14. And was made a city of refuge. jos. 20. 7. Here David was first anointed king, and reigned there seven years, 2. Sam. 2. This town than was both a seat for the kings and the priests also, and it was called Hebron, from Hebron the son of Caleb, and some think it was to this city that Mary came to visit Elizabeth, which Luke calleth a city of juda in the hill country. Beza in annot. in Luc. cap. 1.   

Q. What did Abraham when he came to the plain of Mamre?  
A. He built an Altar to the Lord, both to sacrifice thankfully to God, as also to sanctify this place where he was to remain, and this is the third Altar we read that Abraham built. He hath set up three altars, as three testimonies of God's love to him▪ and his thankfulness to God, and that in three famous places, one at Sechem, the other at Bethel, and the third at Hebron. Now as Abraham whether soever he went, did build altars and sacrifice thereon to the Lord: so should we at all occasions be ready to offer up spiritual sacrifices, praise and thanksgiving, the calves of our lips, Orationum hostias, et miserecordia victimus, saith Lyranus, To pray every where lifting up pure hands without wrath and doubting, 1. Tim. 2. 8. For God delighteth not in outward sacrifice, nor in burnt offerings, for the sacrifice of the Lord are a broken spirit, he is pleased with the sacrifice of righteousness, Psal. 51. 16, etc.    

Questions on the fourtenth Chapter.  

Quest. Why doth Moses so carefully set down the wars of these kings?  
A. That we might consider the excellent carriage, and happy success of Abraham, in warring with so many kings, with so few men, and that with such a happy event, that both he overcame them, and took their goods; and rescued Lot. Secondly, that we might see the reward that Lot hath, for desiring to dwell with such wicked company himself is taken prisoner, and his goods taken from him. Thirdly, that we might see how merciful God is, and slow to destroy those cities in the plain because of their crying sins, had already deserved fire from heaven. Yet God by this small overthrow will warn them, if they do not repent, a greater punishment is at hand. Fourthly, that we may see the cause of this, and all other wars for the most part, to wit, pride and ambition; for ambition moved Chedorlaomer to subdue so many nations, and pride moved those nations to shake of his government. Fifthly, to teach us how God oftentimes, useth the service of the wicked, to punish the wicked, that the punishers themselves may be punished; as Assyria the rod of God's anger, is sent to punish hypocrites, but God will punish the stony heart of Assyria. Isa. 10. Sixthly, that we might know that the Sodomites were justly overcome, because they resisted the ordinance of God, and refused to be subject to the higher powers, for there is no power but of God. Rom. 13.   

Q. What kings came against Sodom, and the other cities of the plain?  
A. Amraphel king of Shinar, that is, of Babel, and this is thought to be Ninias the son of Semiramis. Secondly, Artioch king of Elasser, that is, of Persia as some think, and not of Pontus. Thirdly, Chedarleomer king of Elam; the Elamites were a people that dwelled in the upper part of Persia. Fourthly, Tidal king of nations, that is, of a people gathered together of diverse nations, so Galilee is called Galilec of the nations. Esay 9 Matth. 4. These four kings came against the five cities of the plain, which here are forewarned of God, by these warns, but afterward were burned with fire from heaven, except Zoar, which was spared for Lot's sake. Gen. 19 And for the smallness of it was called Zoar: for this cause also it seemeth that Moses doth not here name the king of this City, because it was so small.   

Q. Where did these kings join battle together.  
A. In the valley of Siddi●…, which is the salt sea, and it was so called afterward from the event, for at this time it was a pleasant plain, but afterward it was turned into a salt sea or lake, for the Hebrews call every collection of water, sea, and as this part of Canaan was turned into a barren lake, so now that whole land is made barren of all spiritual graces: and as this plain for sin is turned into a sea of salt, so was Lots wise for looking back, turned into a pillar of salt; because neither this country nor she were seasoned with grace and obedience, to teach us how we should be seasoned; we must have salt in ourselves. Mar. 9 10. All our sacrifices must be seasoned with salt. Levit. 2. 13. Yea our speech must be seasoned with salt. Col. 4. 6.   

Q. May kings lawfully and with a good conscience make war.  
A. If their cause be good, their affection sanctified, their authority lawful, and if they find there is no other means to suppress the enemy, to secure themselves, and advance God's glory, they may lawfully raise wars, for if it is lawful to defend the poor, to relieve the oppressed, to punish the wicked, to preserve ourselves, friends, children and goods, if the Magistrate beareth not the sword in vain, if God himself hath prescribed the manner and form of fight, if Abraham, Moses, josuah, David and other holy men have made wars; than it is lawful for Kings and Princes to raise wars, the former conditions being observed, but because peace is better than wars, as saith the Poet. Pax una triumphis innumeris potior; Kings must be slow to undertake wars: as Hozekias was with the kings of Assyria, and some injuries must be winked at, which doth show the magnanimity of a King, not for every small injury to be inflamed with wrath, but rather to forget them, as Caesar by Cicero was commended that he did use to forget nothing, except injuries, and above all things cruelty in wars is to be hated; for Pax homines: suas trux decet iraferas.   

Q. But may Christians under the Gospel raise wars?  
A. Yes, but they must be very careful to avoid wars, and to use all the lawful means they can to maintain peace. For Christ the Prince of peace, hath left his peace with us. joh. 5. It was foretold that we should beat our swords into plough shares, and our spears into pruning hooks. Esay, 2. It was Christ's commandment that we love one another. joh. 15. We must not resist evil, Matth. 5. We must not revenge, but give place to wrath. Rom. 13. Our greatest strife and wars must be against our spiritual enemies, therefore we are exhorted to put on the whole armour of God. Eph. 6. This spiritual armour did the Christians use in the Primitive Church, to subdue the greatest Monarches in the world, and to propagate the Gospel▪ Peter is commanded to put his sword into his sheath. Matth. 26. And we are all commanded to love our enemies, to bless them that curse us, to do good to them that hate us. Matth. 5. Which testimonies do allege, not altogether to condemn wars in case of necessity, but to show how loath Christian Princes should be to raise wars, and how rather they should lose some of their right and dignity, then to trouble the peace of jerusalem, to shed the blood of their brethren, whom Christ hath bought with his own blood; to bereave parents of their children, & wives of their husbands, to deflower virgins, overturn Churches and Chapels, destroy religion, extinguish learning and discipline, laws and justice, and to make away for the Turk, the Devil's eldest son, the professed enemy of our Saviour, the scourge of Christians, & the rod of God's indignation, to sweep away that little remnant of the Christian world which is left, and to overthrew all with that, not Egyptian, but Tartarian darkness of Mahomet's doctrine, as he hath already done these glorious Countries and Churches, which we have shamefully lost, through our pride and contention. Heu quo discordia ciues perduxit miseros?   

Q. Why did Chedorlaomer raise armies against these other kings?  
A. Because they rebelled against him, and here we may see, that it is not lawful for any people to rebel against their kings, although their government be unjust. Secondly, they deserved to be tributaries and servants to a strange king, because they were the servants of filthy and strange sins, neither are they worthy to be a free people, whom the son hath not made free. Thirdly, the truth of Noah's prophecy may here be seen, that Canan is Sems' servant; Chedorlaomer of Sem is king at this time over the Canaanites. Fourthly, here we may see what a dangerous thing it is, for a people to rebel against their kings, for by this means unity is broken, order and discipline is everted, laws and religion are extinguished, and all things turned upside down; and therefore the authors of rebellion, have been most fearfully punished, as the examples of Core, Dathan and Abiram, against Moses and Aaron: Absalon and Seba against David, and many more can witness. Therefore kings must be obeyed in all matters indifferent, but not in those things that are against the glory of God▪ for it is better to obey God then man, and they who do not obey their kings in matters against God are not to be accounted rebels, except we will make Moses and Aaron, who resisted Pharaoh: Christ, john Baptist, and the Apostles, who resisted the jews, the Christians who resisted Idolaters to be rebels, which to think is impious.   

Q. Why did the king of Elam with his confederates, kill the Rephaims?  
A. These Rephaims or Giants with the Zuzims, Emims, and Horites took part as it is thought with the Sodomites, and did hinder the king of Elam from taking Sodom, and Moses here mentioneth their overthrow, to show us of what great power the king of Elam was then, that he was able to overthrew so many nations, now these Rephaims were a people then dwelling in Canan. Gen. 15. And are here overthrown in Ashteroth, a city in Basan, where Og afterward was king, josh. 13. 31. The Zuzims are these people as it is thought, who in Deut. 2. 20. Are called Zamzummims, and they are overthrown at the city Ham where they dwelled, the Emims were a great people and accounted Giants, Deut. 2. 10. These are overcome in Shaneth or the plain of Kiriathim, the Horites were a people that dwelled in Seir, where they are now overcome. Esau and his sons afterward driven them out from thence, and this mount was called not Seir at this time, but afterward had this name from Esau. Seir signifieth Heary, these than were chased by Chedorlaomer his confederates unto El-paran, or the plain of Paran, which is a barren or comfortless wilderness near to the desert of Sinai, and here the Israelites wandered thirty eight years.   

Q. What was En-mishpat?  
A. The name of that place where the Israelites were judged and reproved by God, because they murmured for want of water, for En-mishpat doth signify the well of judgement, this is called also Cades, which is a city in Arabia, where Mirian Moses sister was buried; the desert next adjacent is called Cades, and Cadesbarne, from whence Moses sent the twelve spies to Canaan. Hither Chedorlaomer returned with his confederate kings, and smote the Amalakites and Amorites in Hazezon Thamar a city in Canaan, which afterward fell to the tribe of juda, and was called Engedi, jos. 15. 62. Here we may see what happy success Chedorlaomer hath over his enemies, which is neither to be ascribed to fortune or his courage, but to him who is the Lord of hosts, there is no king saved by the multitude of an host, a mighty man is not delivered by much strength, Psal. 33. 16. Yet this we must commend in him, that he used such diligence and expedition in suppressing these rebels before they grew stronger. It was the praise of Alexander Macedo, that whatsoever battle he undertook, he did it with wonderful celerity and expedition, Curtius, lib. 5. And that was a means that in so short a time he did subdue so many nations; and from hence we must learn with all expedition to subdue our sins. for, Periculum est in mora.   

Q. What success hud Chedorlaomer and his confederates against the Kings of Sodom and Gomorrha?  
A. The kings of Sodom and Gomorrha fled and fell into the slime pits, not of ignorance, for they were better acquainted with that ground then their enemies, but of purpose, that so they might escape the fury of their enemies: in these pits questionless a great many perished, and others of them fled to the hills. Secondly, all the goods and victuals of Sodom & Gomorrha were taken, which was a very great spoil, because in Sodom there was both riches and abundance of bread. Thirdly, Lot is taken captive, and his goods taken from him, which was the cause that Abraham made war against them and overcame them. Here than we see that many are killed in the judgement of God, and some escape in his mercy. Secondly, the goods and the victuals of Sodom, are made a prey to the hungry soldiers in Gods just judgement; because they did not use them either to God's glory or the comfort of the poor; but to pride and riot. Thirdly, Lot is taken, and so he is partaker of their misery, because he desired to be partaker of their fruitful country.   

Q. What league made Abraham the Hebrew with Mamre, Eschol and Aner?  
A. Abraham the Hebrew (for so he is called from Heber, because he retained his faith, or else from Habar, because he passed over Euphrates, from which his posterity are called Hebrews, to put them in mind of their original) made a covenant with these three men, or rather they with him, because he was so highly beloved of God, which covenant was not of the nature of those covenants that conquerors make with the conquered, which are nothing else but laws, which the conquered must obey according to the pleasure of the lawmakers: neither was this covenant to desist from wars, and maintain peace, for there was no wars between them, but it was only a partition between themto defend and maintain one another's right against their enemies; and questionless this covenant was made by the special direction of God, for the comfort of Abraham, who being a stranger there, had notwithstanding the aid and assistance of these great men when occasion served, and we must note here that Abraham is called an Hebrew, and his posterity Hebrews, which name signifieth a pilgrim and stranger, to put us in mind what the children of God are in this life, even pilgrims and strangers. By which they show that they seek a country, Heb. 11.   

Q. But did Abraham well to make a covenant with these Amorites being infidels?  
A. Whether these three were infidels or notit is uncertain, and I rather hold that they were not, both because Abraham made 2 covenant with them, rather than with others, as also because we cannot deny but there were some in these parts, who knew the true God. As Melchisedech who conversed in these countries, was both a king and priest of the most high God, it is very like that his servants and many more were of his profession; and if there were, why should we think that these three who were Abraham's special friends to be infidels, seeing the holy man made a covenant with them, but suppose they were infidels, yet we cannot reprove Abraham for this covenant made with them because as yet there was no positive law to the contrary. Secondly, the iniquity of the Amorites was not yet full. Thirdly, Abraham could not live amongst them if he had not had mutual commerce and made some covenants with them. Fourthly, in this covenant Abraham did not offend God, seeing otherwise he could not have lived peaceably among them, and in this he gave no advantage to the Idolaters to blaspheme God. Fifthly, many holy men have made such covenants with infidels, and are not reproved, as jaeob with Laban, Gen. 31. Isaac with Abimelech, Gen. 26. Solomon with Hiram, 1. King. 5. Yea the Israelites themselves had power to make covenants with their neighbours nationst except with those seven mentioned, Deut. 7.   

Q. Was it lawful for Abraham being both a private man and a priest, to raise wars?  
A. A private man cannot raise arms, except he will be counted seditious, now Abraham was no private man, because by Gods own mouth, he was appointed Lord of this land; and it was his by right, although not by possession, neither were these three brethren private men, with whom Abraham was confederate. Yea although Abraham had been a private man, yet this fact of his is no precedent, for private men to raise arms, except they have the same measure and direction of the Spirit that he had, for if he had not been directed by God, it is unlike that with three hundred and eighteen domestic servants he would pursue four mighty kings. Moreover, although Abraham was a priest, and a prophet also, yet he raiseth arms lawfully, being called by God, so did Moses and the Levites fight against the worshippers of the golden calf, Moses killed Og king of Sihon, and Samuel Agag king of Amelec, yet these are not precedents for the ministers of the Gospel to raise arms, for they were called extraordi●…arily unto this function, but the preachers ●…f the Gospel are not. Again, the prea●…ers of the Gospel must eschew all things ●…hat hinder them in discharging of their fun●…tion, especially wars, which if they follow, ●…hey must neglect prayers, preaching, and ec●…lesiasticall discipline. Besides, the Apostle ●…heweth, that the weapons of our warfare ●…re not carnal, but mighty through God, ●…asting down every strong hold, 2. Cor. 10. Yet I deny not but the preachers may ex●…ort the magistrateto raysearmes against the enemies of God, for the priests under the law ●…ounded the trumpets and carried the Ark, when the people went to battle.   

Q. How fare did Abraham pursue his enemies?  
A. As fare as Dan, a place in the North of Canaan, and one of the springs of jordan, a hundred and four miles from jerusalem, it was of old called Leshem, but being won by the Danit●…s it was called Dan. jos. 19 47. And it seems that either Moses now giveth it this name by way of prophecy, or else Ezer as who set the books of the old Testament in order, did change the old name being out of use into this other name D●…. Here it was where jereboam set up the golden calf, and Peter confessed Christ to be the Son of God, and where the woman was miraculously healed of her bloody flux, in memory of which miracle the woman caused a pillar to be erected in that city, on which the image of Christ was set, and the woman behind him, touching the hem of his garment; but julian caused this Image to be pulled down, and his own to be erected in the same place, which shortly after was thrown down with thunder from heaven. Euseb. lib. 7. eccles. hist. cap. 14. This town was also called Cesaria-Philippi, by Philip Tetrac●… of Traco●…ites, in honour of the Roman Caesar's, Agrippa also enlarged this City, and called it Neronia in honour of Nero. josep. ant. 20. cap. 6. Now we must not think that this was rashness and temperitie in Abraham, with so few men to follow so great an army so fare; but rather true courage and fortitude, because he was led by God's spirit, and because he was assured of God's help, therefore he knew there were more with him then against him, besides the justness of the cause, the good end, that Abraham did aim at in this fight; his upright life, and the testimony of his conscience made him bold to despise death itself. Sapiens non metu frangitur, non potestate mutatur, non extollitur prosperis, non mergitur tristibus, Amb. ad Simpl. And if any thing make a man fear, it is the guiltiness of his conscience, Nam ●…imidum nil facit animum nisi reprehensibili●… vitae conscientia. Sen. 4. de virtut.   

Q. What success had Abraham in this battle against the four kings?  
A. He smote them and pursued them to Hoba, he rescued Lot and his goods, the Sodomites and their goods, and here we may see Abraham's policy in dividing his servants, and that in the night: to teach us that it is lawful to use policy and subtlety against our enemies, if there be no falsehood and unjustice ●…ound in it. We know that God commanded joshua, to lay an ambush behind the City Ai, for to take it. josh. 8. 2. He came suddenly upon the five kings in the night. josh. 10. 9 Gedion used the stratagem of trumpets, pitchers and lamps, to overcome his enemies. judg. 7. 16. And David the means of an Amalekite to overcome the Amalekites, 1. Sam. 30. 15. For if it be lawful upon just occasion to raise wars against our enemies, it is also lawful to use such stratagems, as may further us in obtaining the victory. Secondly, we must not attribute this victory of abraham's to his strength or policy, but to the Lord who made him rule over kings, and gave them as the dust to the sword, etc. Isay 41. 2. Thirdly, God would have Abraham to bring back the Sodomites and their goods, that both God might show his wonderful mercy and patience, as also make them inexcusable. Fourthly, this Hoba into which Abraham pursued his enemies, was a village in Hieromes time, where certain Ebeonite Hebrews dwelled. Fifthly, as the four kings troubled Canaan, but are overcome by Abraham. So, the four great kingdoms of the world have troubled the Church, but are overcome of Christ the Son of Abraham.   

Q. What was Melchisedec?  
A. Not the holy Ghost, as some heretics have affirmed, for the holy Ghost is not a man; nor king of Salem, nor a priest, nor priest of the most high God, except we will make him inferior to God. Secondly, not an Angel, for the Scripture showeth no such thing, neither is an Angel a priest, for every high priest is taken from amongst men, Heb. 5. 1. Thirdly, not the Son of God, for he is not Melchisedech the priest, but a priest after the order of Melchisedech, Psal. 110. 4. Fourthly, not Sem the Son of Noah, as the Hebrews affirm, rather of malice then sound judgement, because they cannot endure any stranger should be thought superior in any thing to their father Abraham, for is Sem was Melchisedech, Moses had not concealed it, being an honour to have such a noble progenitor. Secondly, Melchisedechs' genealogy is not mentioned in Scripture, but Sem's is. Thirdly, Melchisedechs' descent is not counted from the Hebrews progenitors, Heb. 7. 6. Which plainly showeth he descended of another stock than the jews did who came of Sem. Fourthly, all this country in which Melchisedech reigned, was possessed by Canaan's posterity. Therefore Sem could not bare rule here, to be both a king and a priest among them. Fifthly, if we should yield that Melchisedech was Sem, we must be forced to deny a chief relation between Melchisedech and Christ, which Paul toucheth, Heb. 7. Which is this, as Melchisedech being a stranger from the family of Sem, was notwithstanding a priest and king; so Christ though a stranger from the tribe of Levi, which only was appointed for the priesthood, is notwithstanding a king and priest for ever. Sixthly, Melchisedech had no successor in his priesthood, but Sem had, for Abraham was a priest, so was Isaac, jacob, and the children of Levi. Seaventhly, if Melchisedcch was Sem. Then, whereas Levi paid tithes being in the loins of Abraham, he being also in the loins of Sem, (because Abraham came of Sem) did pay tithes to Sem, which is absurd. Eighthly, if this be true, than we must confess that in the person of Sem, both the priesthood of Aaron and Melchisedech was joined together, for Aron was in the loins of Sem, and so we must yield that Christ in that he was a priest after the order of Melchisedech, he was also after the order of Aaron. Ninthly, if Melchisedech had been Sem, it it is very like that Abraham all this while that he was in Canaan, would not neglected to have sought him out, and conversed with him, both for his further comfort, strength and instruction, than the fift opinion is soundest, which holdeth Melchisedech to have been a Cananite, yet a true worshipper of God, for it is very like, that as God had his priests amongst the jews, so he had some amongst the Gentiles, and as Aaron among the jews was eminent, so Melchisedech among the Gentiles, for God is the God of the Gentiles, as well as of the jews, and besides that Philo and josephus are of this opinion, the chiefest of the ancient Fathers do defend the same.   

Q. Where did Melchisedech, and the king of Sodom meet Abraham?  
A. At the valley of Saveth, not fare from jerusalem, where Absolom set up his pillar, 2. Sam. 18. 18. This valley is called the king's dale, either because the kings and princes did use to exercise themselves here in running, or else because of the excellency and pleasantness thereof, being a place fit for kings. Herein the king of Sodom though a profane man, we see great humanity and thankfulness, that he would go to meet Abraham, and rejoice with him at his happy success, humanity and gratitude are commendable in all, for, Be●…eficiorum memoria non debet senescere, Senec. lib. de benif.   

Q. Of what place was Melchisedech king?  
A. He was king of Salem, which afterward was called jerusalem, from jereth and Salem, that is, the vision of peace, for Abraham called the hill on which he would have sacrificed his Son jebovah jereth, Gen. 22. Then jereth being put to the old name Salem is made up jerusalem, after Melchisedech the jebusites had the dominion of this city, and from them it was called jebub, jos. 18. 28. jud. 19 10. But afterward David conquered it, and did enlarge it with many goodly buildings, so that it became the most famous city in all the east, Plin. lib. 5. cap. 14. This is that city governed by Melchisedech, repaired by David, beautified by Solomon, with the goodliest temple in the world, adorned with the miracles and preaching of the Prophets, sanctified with the life, miracles, doctrine, blood and resurrection of our Saviour; and with the sending down of the holy Ghost, honoured to be the figure of Christ's Church militant in the old Testament, and of the Church triumphant in the new, watered with the blood of Steven, james, and other holy Martyrs, and happy in that the light of the Gospel did first shine there; for out of Zion came the law, and the word of the Lord from jerusalem, but most unhappy in that she killed the Prophets, and stoned them that were sent to her, in that she would not be gathered under the wings of Christ, therefore many years ago she is left desolate, Mat. 23.   

Q. Wherein was Melchisedec the type of Christ?  
A. Melchisedec was a king, so is Christ the king of kings. Secondly, Melchisedec was a priest, so is Christ a Priest after the order of Melchisedec. Thirdly, he was King of peace, so is Christ the Prince of peace. Fourthly, he was King of righteousness, so is Christ jehovah our righteousness. Fifthly, he was without father and mother, so is Christ, as God without a mother, as man without a father. Sixthly, as he was without generation, so none can declare Christ his generation. Seaventhly, as he was without beginning, or end, so is Christ, because he is the beginning and the end. Eightly, he was an extraordinary Priest, not being in the line of Sem, so was Christ not being of the tribe of Levi. Ninthly, he was a greater priest than Aaron, and so was Christ. Tenthly, he was not anointed with external oil, neither was Christ, but but with the oil of gladness. Eleaventhly, he refreshed Abraham with bread and wine; so hath Christ with his own body, which is that bread of life that came down from heaven. Twelfthly, he in his Priesthood had no successor, neither Christ, but hath an everlasting Priesthood. Thirtenth, he blessed Abraham; and so hath Christ us withal spiritual blessing. Fourteenth, he was made like to the Son of God, and Christ is the true and only begotten Son of God. Fifteenth, he was king of Salem which is jerusalem, so was Christ anointed king upon the holy hill of Zion, which is jerusalem. Sixteenth, he did not bless Abraham till he returned from the slaughter of his enemies, neither will Christ us, till we have overcome our spiritual enemies; Seventeen, Melchisedec▪ did use to sacrifice at jerusalem, so did Christ sacrifice his blessed body on the cross at jerusalem.   

Q. Why did Abraham give tithes to Melchisedec?  
A. To testify his thankfulness to God, who had sent such an excellent Priest to bless him, for he was bound to minister to him in carnal things, seeing he was partaker of Melchisedechs' spiritual things. Rom. 15. 27. Secondly, he gave tithes in sign of homage, and to show how inferior he was to Melchesedec, consider how great Melchisedec was, to whom even the Patriarch Abraham gave the tenth, Heb. 7. 4. Thirdly, he gave tithes because he knew, (although not by a positive law as yet, but by divine inspiration) that the tithes did belong to God; and to his Priests, and therefore was sacrilege to keep them back, for we must give unto God, that which is Gods. Matth. 22. 21. Fourthly, because it was the custom even before the law amongst holy men, to pay their tithes, even as sacrificing, building of Altars, distinction of clean and unclean beasts, therefore we read here not only of Abraham, but also of jacob that promised to pay tithes of all he had to the Lord. Gen. 28. 22. Fifthly, he paid his tithes as other holy men use to do, because he knew that those who serve at the Altar, must live by the Altar. 1. Cor. 9 13. Sixthly, he paid his tithes, because he knew that God would give an hundred fold more than his tithes were worth, according to that, bring yea all your tithes unto the store-house, and prove me saith the Lord; if I will not open to you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room y●…ough to receive it. Malac. 3. 10.   

Q. What kind of tithes were used amongst the Hebrews?  
A. Hierome upon Ezechiel cap. 5. & 40. Affirmeth that there were some tithes which the people did owe to the Levites. Again, there were other tithes which the Levites, that is, the inferior order of ministers, out of their tithes, did owe to the Priests, also there were other tithes which every one of the people put a part in their barns, appointed to be eat by the Priests, Levites and people together, in the entrance of the Temple; moreover there were other tithes which were laid up for the poor, but Vincentius in spec. moral. lib. 1. distinct. 66. Maketh mention only of three sorts of tithes, used in the old Law: the one sort were these which were paid to the Levites, spoken off Numb. 18. 24. The other sort were these which were publicly eaten in the Temple, mentioned Deut. 14. 23. The third sort were these which were laid up at the end of every three years, for the poor & strangers, spoken of Deut. 14. 28. Of these three sorts of tithes, the first only remaineth amongst Christians, the second sort which were publicly eaten and sacrificed, are abolished, being a mere ceremony, the third sort also for the proportion is taken away, for we are not bound to give the tithes of our goods to the poor, but to relieve them according to our ability, and give them such as we have. Luk. 11. 41.   

Q. Then is it lawful to pay tithes to the preachers of the Gospel?  
A. It is not only lawful to pay them, but sacrilege to withhold them, for we must give unto God that which is Gods, and he who bestoweth all things onus, doth require no more but his tithes of us, for the tithes do not principally belong to the preachers, but to God; and he who setteth them a work is their paymaster. Therefore he who withholdeth the tithes from the preachers, doth not so much wrong the preachers as God, to whom they properly belong. Moreover, the precept of paying tithes is not altogether ceremonial, but partly moral, partly judicial: moral, in that the labourer is worthy of his hire, especially they who labour in the word are worthy of double honour, for he that serveth at the Altar must live by the Altar. judicial, in that the paying of tithes to the labourers in the word, belongs to the external government of the Church and common wealth, and therefore Christian Kings and counsels have established, that under pain of excommunication the tithes should be paid to the ministers, as a due which God himself hath demanded. Constantine and Charles the great did command the same, the counsels Ma●…isconense held anno. 587. can. 5. Duriense, an. 779. can. 10. Moguntinum, an. 813. c●…n. 38. And other famous synods have most strictly enjoined the paying of tithes, then seeing tithes are both commanded by God to be paid, as also by the civil magistrate, it is both sacrilege and contempt against the magistrate (whom we must obey for conscience sake) not to pay them, truly if it had not been the special will of God, even in the time of the Gospel, to pay tithes to the preachers, Christ had not commended the Scribes and Pharises for paying of them, which he doth, Mat. 23. 23. Again, it was necessary in the old law to pay tithes to the Levites, much more needful is it now in the Gospel, for the preachers are not only the Levites successors, but also their calling is more honourable, and their charge is greater. Besides our righteousness must exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharises, or else we cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, but their righteousness was so great, that they did not omit to pay their tithes, even of the least things; therefore much more careful must we be to let the preachers have their due; the Gentiles also led by the law of nature, were careful in this practice, as Cyrus' king of Persia, having overcome the Lydians, paid the tithes of his spoil to jupiter, saith Herodotus lib. 1. The Romans paid tithes to Hercules, Cicero lib. 2. the office. The Arabians paid tithes of their incense to Sabis. Plin. lib. 12. cap. 14. Lastly, the punishments executed upon these, who have defrauded the Church of her right, are sufficient testimonies to prove how dangerous it is, to withhold the tithes from her, famine and poverty, are the effects of this sin, Hierome in Malach. 3. They are guilty of the murder of souls, before God's tribunal, who are partakers of it, August. de doct. Christ. they are punished with present and eternal plagues. Chytre●… in cap. 7. josuae. eagle's feathers being mingled with the feathers of other fowls, are said to consume these and themselves also, even so the tithes have eat up and consumed patrimonies, and estates of many men, as daily experience teacheth every where, but especially in the kingdom of Scotland. Truly, to meddle with the Church goods after this sort is to meddle with aurum Tolosanum. Eras. in Adag.   

Q. Why is God called the possessor of heaven and earth?  
A. That by this title, he might be distinguished from false gods, therefore these and such like titles are given him in Scripture, he is said to sit in the heavens. Psal. 2. To make the heaven and earth. Psal. 124. To stretch out the heavens above. Esay, 44. To stretch them out like a garment. Psal. 104. To lay the foundations of the earth and the corner stone thereof, job. 38. He is called the Lord God of heaven, jon. 1. The earth is said to be his, and the fullness thereof, the world, and they that dwell therein, Psal. 34. And jeremy concludeth that these gods who have not made the heavens and the earth, shall perish from the earth, jer. 10▪ 11. Now by the heaven and earth are understood all things therein contained, and this may abate the pride of these who have great possessions, which if they be compared with heaven and earth they are nothing. Again, they are not permanent, for when man dyeth, he shall carry nothing away, his glory shall not descend after him, Psal. 40. 17. Besides, let a man's possession be never so great, yet as Philo saith, the right of possessing all things belongs unto God only, man hath but the use of these things which he doth possess. Secondly, if God be possessor of all, than the Sons of God have right and interest in all the creatures, the wicked have none. Thirdly, because he hath the possessions of all nations, we must wish well to all, and despise none. Fourthly, if he be possessor of all, than he is by his power and providence in all things, he is not far from every one of us, Act. 17. 27.   

Q. Did Abraham well to swear that he would take nothing from the king of Sodom?  
A. Yes: for by this oath he both satisfieth the king, that he dealt simply and plainly with him in delivering the perso●… and the goods, as also the people who●… might have thought that Abraham for hi●… own gain did undertake this war, and not for love of his brother Lot; in such cases than it is lawful to swear, both for the advancement of God's glory, and confirmation of the truth, for we honour and love God, when we swear thus, Qui iur●…, aut veneratur, aut diligit eum per quem iur●…, Aquin. in Math. Then seeing swearing is commanded by God himself, Exod 22. Yea oftentimes used by him & by Christ also. By the Saints and by the Angels, for we read that all these have sworn Christ did not reprove the high Priest for adjuring him: swearing also tendeth to the honour of God and the profit of our neighbours: therefore the Anabaptists are ridiculous, who oppose this doctrine, yet we must take heed that we do not swear at all times rashly for every trifle, so God's name shall wax vile and common. Secondly, that we swear not to do any thing contrary to Gods will, for such an oath is evil, but the action is worse; as we may see in jephthes now, and Herod's oath. Thirdly, that we do not forswear or swear to confirm a lie, for that is highly to dishonour, God if we make him a witness of our lies. Fourthly, that we do not swear by the creatures, for that is to attribute God's glory unto them, neither can that be an oath properly which is sworn by the creature, because men swear by the greater, Heb. 6. 16. But there is no creature greater than man. Fifthly, that we do not swear deceitfully, using ambiguous words, speaking one thing, & thinking another, for an oath is used to make an end of strife, Heb. 6. 16. But such oaths do increase strife. Sixthly, that we swear not by the name of Idols, or false Gods, for that is also to attribute God's glory unto them, and they that swear by them do seem to put their trust and confidence in them, if then we swear at all, let us swear only by God, as Abraham did here, who lifted up his hand in testimony thereof, for we know that the Gentiles did honour their false gods by using their names to confirm their oaths, as the Romans by Fides Plut. in numa. The Vestal Nymphus by Vesta, the Carthaginians by their country gods, some by jupiter and Hercules, others by Castor and Pollux did use to swear, much more should we then seek the glory of the true God by calling upon him in our lawful oaths.   

Q. Did Abraham well to refuse the king of Sodomes' offer?  
A. Yes: because he would not have him think that it was for his own profit he undertook this battle, neither would he have any think, that he would be so much beholding to a profane king, neither did he stand at this time in need, because he was sufficiently rich. Besides he would let him and all ages see how little he did regard riches, and how little we should, seeing our treasure is laid up in heaven. Yet this fact of abraham's is no precedent for any to refuse gifts when they may lawfully take them, for Abraham did not refuse the gifts of Pharaoh, nor joseph the present of his brethren, nor Solomon the gifts of the Queen of Seba, neither did Ezechia refuse to take gifts from the king of Babel, nor jeremy from the captain of the guard, nor Daniel from Nabuchadnezzar, nor Christ from the wise men. Notwithstanding, we must know, that taking and giving of gifts, is not always lawful, for it is dangerous and suspicious for any subject to receive any gift from a for●…aine king, because no man can serve two masters. It is also unlawful to receive gifts from the poor, and those that cannot spare them, for we must give to the poor and not take from them: no less preposterous and impious it is for a judge or magistrate to receive gifts to do injustice, for, Oblatio muneris tinea est regiminis, Cassiod. in epist. But most of all intolerable it is to take or give gifts for remission of sins, for deliverance from purgatory, for heaven and for the graces of the holy Ghost, as that old verse showeth, Templa sacerdotes, etc. And not much inferior are these gifts, that are given and taken for spiritual benefices; truly we live in a golden age according to that, Aurea nunc vere sunt saecula, plurimus auro, venit honos, auro conciliatur amor, To many now adaiss are like to Midas, who desire that whatsoever they touch may be gold. But I will not seem too much to exclaim against this abuse, because the time will come, when the reeds will proclaim it, as they did the long ears of Midas. Besides Harpocrates teacheth me that, Tutum est silentii praemium, Now to return to the matter, no gift is to be given or taken which is contrary to true piety, or God's glory, for such a gift blindeth the wise and perverteth the words of the righteous, Exod. 23. 8. Secondly, it perverteth the natural affection of men, so that judas for a gift sold his master, the soldiers for a gift did belly Christ, saying, that his disciples stole him by night, and Dalilath for a gift betrayed Samson, Quid non mortalia pectora cogis, auri sacra fames? Thirdly, it is an enemy to liberty, for he that is corrupted with gifts, hath his hands bound from doing good, and his mouth from speaking truth. Fourthly, it is the cause of injustice, therefore cursed be he that asketh a gift to slay an innocent person, Deut. 27. 25. And woe to them which justify the wicked for a gift, Esay 5. 23. 5. It is a hindrance to true happiness, for, not he that taketh bribes, but he that shaketh his hands from taking of bribes, shall dwell on high, etc. Esay 33. 15. Sixthly, the reward of these that take such rewards is fire, fire shall consume the tabernacles of bribery, job 15. 34. For these causes therefore many holy men have refused gifts, as the man of God refused to take a gift from jeroboam, Eliseus from Naaman, David from Araunah, Daniel from Belthashar, and Peter from Simon the sorcerer. And here I end this second book, in which I have not set down every question that can be moved, for I know that many frivolous questions may be moved, which are not worthy the answering, Plura potest Asinus interrogare, quam respondere Philosophus. Yet I have not omitted these questions which are most eminent and worthy of our pains, notwithstanding I have passed by as much as I could, these which have been handled by others, lest I should seem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   
FINIS.