THE SECOND book OF questions AND ANSWERS VPON GENESIS.  
Containing those questions that are most eminent and pertinent, from the sixth to the fiueteenth Chapter of the same book.  
Collected out of ancient and recent Writers: Briefly propounded and expounded.  
BY ALEXANDER ROSSE, of ABERDEN, Preacher at Saint Maries near Southampton and one of his majesties chaplains.  
LONDON, Printed by John Legatt, for Francis Constable, and are to be sold at his shop in Pauls Church-yard, at the sign of the White lion. 1622.   

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 majesties 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 {αβγδ} that {αβγδ} 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 haue a learned Patron, therefore they preferred her peaceable olive, to his warlike horse, her pear to his three-forked sceptre, her virginity, to his ample authority, her Dragon to his Triton, and her learning to his vaste dominion, and good reason, for according to the Comic: {αβγδ}. even so this little book could not find a fitter Patron to grace and defend her, then your Lordship, in whom wit and learning, greatness and goodness, science and conscience haue 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 Lacedemonians, or ignorant Thracians, shall bear rule either in our Church or Common-wealth, {αβγδ}, 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 vpon Helicon, and knit garlands of laurel to crown his sacred head, and sing eternal Peans to the honour of there great Peace-maker, Qui Musis haec otia fecit, and amongst the rest,  
Si quid mea carmina possunt,  
Nulla dies unquam memory eum eximet aeuo.  
receive then Right honourable, this Athenian client unto your tuition, in whom although there be neither {αβγδ} nor {αβγδ}, yet if your Lordship be pleased to approve her, shee 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 carping 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 Common-wealth. nile tam facilè quam otiosum& dormientem de aliorum labour& vigilijs disputare. Hieron. in Oseam. These men saith Augustin, Magis amant vituperare 
Aug. serm. dom. in mote.  & 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 haue 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, {αβγδ}, then after they haue red and conferred let them censure. For {αβγδ} is a foul 'vice, and let them remember that the proverb is true: {αβγδ}.   

questions ON THE SEVENTH CHAPTER.  
Question. WHY would God haue 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 haue 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 Noe had most need of comfort now. Thirdly, he saves the family for Noes sake. So then God for one just mans 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 onely to please men, but he was just before God, only studying to haue 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 procreation, and one Male for sacrifice, now to think that fourteen were brought into the ark, is vain, both because so many of every kind would haue overcharged the ark, as also because seven were sufficient.  
Q. Why would God haue more clean then unclean beasts in the ark?  
A. The unclean were preserved onely for propagation, but the clean. First, for propagation. Secondly, for man to eat. Thirdly, for sacrifice. Therefore God would haue more clean then unclean, besides, by this God would teach us two things. First, that there should bee more clean then unclean in the Church, as there was in the ark, that is, more good then bad; for we are chosen to be holy and without blame. Ephes. 1. although it falls out otherwise that in Christs field there are more weeds then corn. Secondly, his love and care, in that he will haue 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 then hawks, sheep then dwarves, yet some of these savage beasts he would preserve, that he might use them as instruments to punish mans 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 meate. 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 haue 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 monarch. 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 Noe to eat of every kind of flesh. Gen. 9.  
Q. How knew 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 meate, for it was lawful to eat of any flesh. Gen. 9. but in regard of Sacrifice, and so beeves, sheep, and Goates were only clean for Sacrifice of beasts, and of fowles, only Turtle-doues, and Pigeons.  
Q. Why would God haue 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. 29. 1. Chron. 15. 26. &c. 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 Noe was to offer presently after the flood: which was rather a Male then 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 spake 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. Noe 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 vpon them also before the flood, but they were driven thither by the power of God, and the ministry of Angels, Non hoins actu, said dei natu says Augustin. lib. 15. de civit. cap. 17.  
Q. Why was God so careful that every Male should haue 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, &c. therefore as here every Male hath his Feamale, so every man must haue his wife.  
Q. Why doth God give to Noe yet 7. daies?  
A Not that Mathusalem should be honourable butted and mourned for seven dayes as the Iewes do babble; but first that Noe 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 repent, therefore he giveth yet seven dayes, to see if they will forsake their evil ways.  
Q. Why would God haue it rain forty dayes.  
A. So long time God did sand 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 dayes, that they might now haue the more time to consider how just God was in performing his promise, and that it was no Fable that Noe did preach to them concerning the coming of the flood, and as God was forty daies in pooring down his wrath, so was Moyses, Elias and Christ forty dayes in fasting, forty yeares did the people wander in the desert, forty dayes respite was given to ninive, forty daies did Ezechiel bear the sin of Iuda, forty daies did Christ converse with his Disciples after his resurrection, and thrice forty yeares, that is a hundred and twenty were given to the old world to repent.  
Q. What year of the world was the flood sent?  
A. The 1656 year of the world, which was the 600. year of Noah in the which year Mathusalem died, then 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 Noahs life, So that now Noah was 600. year old and two moneths. 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 was 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 extol Gods power the more, who did then sand the stood 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 bee most pleasant and glorious. 3. to teach 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 wonderful falling of the violent waters from above, these( windows) then may signify the clouds, and( heaven) the middle region of the air. Some haue thought that these waters were above the heauens, but it is absurd to think that waters can be above the heauens, and that they should break through so many heauens 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 onely 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 wee 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. vers. 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 then the mountaines, yea Olimpus Atho and other mountaines of whose incredible height many false things hath been recorded, were drowned in the flood, so then Gods wrath spareth not the mountaines, neither will he spare the mighty potentates, learned and wise men of the world, how great and eminent soever they seem to be, when his anger is kindled.  
Q. Did all the creatures die that were not in the ark?  
A. The rabbis think that the fishes also perished because the waters did wax hot, but this is uncertain, wee know that all that did 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 breath in the water, so could men and other creatures. 4. If they did breath air in the water, then they would not die when they come out of the water into the air, therfore 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 onely in the country of Attina, 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 yeares after, which was about the 90. year of the Patriarch jacob, and the flood of Deucalion was almost 770. yeares after the deluge of Noah, that is 230. after the flood of Ogyges about the 50. year of Moses.  
Q. Was this flood sent by Gods immediate power, or was it wrought onely 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 onely depended vpon nature, it would haue come whether the world had sinned or not; 2. if the stars were the cause of this flood, then 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 anvniuersal flood to rise 15. cubits higher thē the mountaines: 4. as the flood did not cease by the power of natuare, 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, 5. in this narration God is onely nominated as the sole author of this flood, therefore it was by his power onely that the flood was sent.  
Q. How long did the flood prevail vpon the earth?  
A. A hundred and fifty dayes, but whether these dayes are to be reckoned from the beginning of the flood, as Lyrane, Ambrosius and others haue thought, or else from the end of these 40. dayes, in the which it did rain as Chrysostome, and some of the jewish rabbis do think is uncertain, but if wee mean the mountaines and all other parts of the earth, over which the waters did prevail, then we must not reckon these dayes 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 dayes, at the end of which forty dayes 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 wee 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 onely, which he useth to dry up the waters, as afterwards he did to divide the read 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 Gods 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 vpon 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 Gods 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, least they burst forth into great floods and drown both body and soul in everlasting perdition.  
Q. What mountaines are these which are called Ararat?  
A. They are hills in armoniac, which country lieth near Assyria and Mesopotamia, these are thought to bee certain tops of the hill Cancasus, and though the ark restend 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 wee reckon this seventh month in which the ark restend?  
A. Some reckon it from the beginning of the flood, but it is more probable, that it is to bee understood from the beginning of the year, for so Moses doth use it every where in this narration, and to think that Moses should else-where in this narration speak of the moneths of the year, but hereof the moneths 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 strike with fear of that fearful iudgement that he durst not: secondly, because he could not see far and remote places, whether they were free from the water or not, but these fowles could fly abroad and so discern.  
Q. Why did Noah sand out the raven, rather then any other fowle?  
A. Because the raven delighting in dead bodies, would bee 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 haue, that shee returned not, but by the Hebrew it is doubtful, yet it is thought of the most learned that shee did not return. The ravine doth resemble the Law which giveth no evidence to mans conscience, that the waters of Gods 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 mountaines were seen forty daies 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 mire, and dirt, and she resembleth Gods Saints, that can find no rest, but in the Church. again here is the spectacle of Gods fearful iudgement, that the dove can not haue 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 Gods wrath, and the end of this is desolation.  
Q. What sign did the dove give to Noah that the waters were abated?  
A. Shee 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 vpon 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 Iewes prate that the dove flew to Paradise and got this branch, because that onely was free from water, so Rab. Lenni. babbles that this branch was brought from the mount of Oliues, 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 sand 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 seruants 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 then we shall want. 3. This practise 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 bee loving and merciful even to the beasts, for we know not what extraordinary comfort they may afford vs. 5. As the dove returned no more into the ark, having done her message, so when we haue finished that service which God hath enjoined to us, wee shall leave the ark of this Militant Church and shall go thither where our reward is reserved for vs.  
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 quiter 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. dayes: for he entred 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 spake 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 Gods mouth and do nothing but what he commandeth: for obedience is better then sacrifice: secondly, wee see that many are the troubles of the righteous, but the Lord delivereth 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 Noahs 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 haue the pattern of a well-ordered family, for there is the grace of God where the seruants 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 Iewes and Gentiles which believed in Christ, should come out of the synagogue, that is, forsake the Jewish ceremonies.  
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 vpon an Altar of earth, and we must offer the sacrifice of prayer and thanksgiving vpon our Altar Christ. He offered to God the clean beasts, and wee 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 viuum mihi cespitem, hic verbenas pueri ponite thuraque, Horat. lib. 1. odd. 19. thirdly, by this Noah will teach us, that God delights not in external pomp and splendour; he loveth the giver more then the gift, and the widows mite more then the rich mans 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 Alter?  
A. We do not read that God did expressly command this, yet wee 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 Gods direction. Fourthly, Noah knew that the seventh beast was received into the ark not for procreation but for Sacrifice. Fifthly, he did questionless beleeue in Christ our perfect Sacrifice, therefore he could not testify his faith better then to build an Altar and offer a sacrifice.  
Q. Why would God bee worshipped by Sacrifices?  
A. First, because he will haue them by this kind of exercise, to use themselves to bee 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 haue them worship him with visible offerings. Secondly, these sacrifices were types of Christ, whose body was to bee offered for them; and no sacrifice without relation to Christ could be acceptable. Thirdly, Least 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 Iewes think it was vpon Mount Sion, where Cain and Abel did offer before; and on which Isaac was to be sacrificed, but it is more probable that this was done vpon the mountaines— of armoniac, where the ark restend.  
Q. What doth it signify that God smelled a savour of rest in Noahs 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 goates 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 mans sake?  
A. That is that God would not at any time overwhelm the earth with water; deprive her of her fertility, inhabitants and ornaments as he had before, yet this doth not exclude particular cursings vpon particular houses, towns, or countries, nor that universal fire by which the world shall bee purged in the last dayes; 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 mans thought evil from his youth?  
A. Because of original sin; which all men draws from Adam, for he was the roote of mankind, and such a nature wee haue 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 Gods 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 mans imagination is so evil from his youth, that if he should punish him as he deserved, he should every age sand a flood, for there is none that doth good, no not one. Psal. 12. So then that he spareth us, it is to be attributed to his mercy, not to our merits.  
Q. Is God the cause that mans 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 mans heart and of his imaginations, but not of the corruptions and vitiositie 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 dayes of the earth, seed time and harvest heat and could, &c. should not cease, in which words he sheweth 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 Gods image, and the same is now mentioned, God made a lawe then that man should not eat of the forbidden three, 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, &c. 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 yeares six moneths in Eliahs time, and in the land of Egypt there was no distinction of day and night for three dayes, because all that time there was darkness, and in the dayes of Josua the sun stood still a whole day.  
Q. Why doth God speak onely 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 could, in the one they agree with Summer, in the other with Winter. So likewise here is mentioned onely 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 onely name, because sowing and mowing are the most usual and profitable actions amongst men.  
Q. Doth God promise to Noah onely these temporal blessings, as heat and could, 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. Dauids kingdom of Christs spiritual kingdom. Solomons temple of Christs 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 wee see could summers, hot winters, raging storms, excess of heat and could, dryness and moistness, let us leave to trouble God with our 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 Iesus 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 Gods blessing, and to bee 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 haue 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 roote, 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 onely for their just fathers sake.  
Q. Is every increase the blessing of God?  
A. All that are lawfully procreated are Gods 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 Gods blessing, in regard of the manner of procreation, howsoever in themselves they may bee the effects of Gods blessing. Secondly, the increase of all other creatures do proceed of Gods blessing, but for mans 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 bee vpon al the beasts, fowles, 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 said 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 noisome, as lions, dwarves, bears, &c. God threateneth to sand wild beasts amongst his people which should spoil them. lieu. 26. 22. the Prophet was slain by a lion. 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 vpon 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, &c. hath been tamed of the nature of man. Iam. 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, &c.  
Q. Seeing then God hath delivered the creatures into our hands, may wee use them as wee lust?  
A. We may use them, but not abuse them: first, wee must not cause the travell on the Sabbath day, Exod. 10. 10. secondly, we must not covet our neighbours beast. Exod. 20. 17. thirdly, wee 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 bee lawful for him to use every living thing for meate: 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 mans 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 bee 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 mans body then herb  
A. Yes, e●●e it had been no great blessing to haue received the use of flesh, and that flesh doth nourish more it is known by the Phisitians, 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, then 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 mans body, then herbs: fourthly, that food is best, which is most temperate in heat and cold, because mans body 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 also, because Noah preserved in the 〈◇〉 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 haue no interest other then civil in any of Gods creatures, they eat and drink not by right, but by usurpation, if wee 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 cloath 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, mans nature then was stronger, but now after the flood his strength begins to decay and his yeeres to shorten. For before the flood some lived till they were 900. yeeres and vpwar●● but after the flood, Arphaxad who was 〈◇〉 born, lived little more then 400. yeeres, and after Abraham none lived longer then Isaac, and he did not exceed 180. yeeres, and Moses confesseth that in his time their yeeres 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 wee eat it so that we bee not unmindful of Christ when he is hungered in his members. Fifthly, if wee 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 Christs 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 onely 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 aclowledge him as their Lord. Therefore he will haue them to eat that which he pleaseth, and to abstain from that which he prohibits; for this cause he did forbid Adam to eat of the three of knowledge of good and evil: sixthly, because he hath given it to be offered vpon the Altar to make an atonement for our souls. Leuit. 17. 11.  
Q. Is it not lawful for Christians to eat blood?  
A. Yes, for abstinence from blood was ceremonial amongst the Iewes, which is abrogated by Christs coming: therefore not onely haue 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 haue no life in you. joh. 6.  
Q. Then why did the Apostles prohibit eating of blood. Act. 15.  
A. Because the Iewes did abhor the eating of blood: therefore least they should give an occasion to the Iewes 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 bee 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 haue them to eat blood: he will not haue them to  shed mans 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 wee see his fatherly care of us, who is our defender and the revenger of our blood: secondly, that none hath power to reuenge shedding of blood, but God and his vicegerent the magistrate: thirdly, that it is a fearful sin to  shed blood, whether it bee our own or the blood of others. For God will surely inquire and punish it.  
Q. May wee not then  shed our own blood vpon a just occasion?  
A. No occasion should cause us to shed our own blood. For if we cannot murder our brother, much less ourselves: neither must we murder ourselves because samson did so; for he did not intend 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 bee imitated, neither must we kill ourselves vpon pretence to bee with Christ, because we must so long remain in this warfare till our captain Iesus commandeth us to depart.  
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 divels, as Origenes, 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 mans blood, they shall be killed, as it was afterward ordained by Moses law, if an ox gore a man, he shall be stoned, &c. Exod 21. 28. and this should teach us to abhor shedding of blood, for if the beasts shall bee killed for shedding blood, much more shall man.  
Q. How will God require the life of man at the hand of a mans 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 Iesus Christ, and therefore hatred and murder amongst them is more fearful then amongst others that knows not Christ.  
Q. Shall his blood bee  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 murtherers do escape the magistrate, notwithstanding they cannot escape the hand of God; for men of blood shall not live out half their dayes, 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 Gods 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 vpon 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 die. Exod. 21. 14. and if this kind of murder be prohibited, much more is that whereby wee murder our brothers 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 Kings image disgracefully, doth abuse the king himself, and much more is God abused when his lively image is defaced. Secondly, wee 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 haue his life preserved; but because of his own image. Fourthly, if man bee made to Gods 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 samine, plague, or sword, we may be sure that he is angry with vs.  
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 haue 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 onely with Noah, but with his seed. It sheweth 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 withall Noahs posterity, then 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; far greater care will he haue 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, &c. 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 read 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 wonderfulnes 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 warres, 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 bee 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 Gods presence and favor, as here the bow is set in the clouds, a cloud went before the Israelites, the Lord gave the law in a cloud vpon mount sinai, the Tabetnacle was filled with a cloud, and in a cloud God appeared in Salomons Temple, the clouds are his pavilion, Psal. 18. and his charet. 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 bee drowned with water?  
A. No: for although the rainbow in respect of the matter and generation thereof be naturally, yet as it is a sign of Gods 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 onely by Gods 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, then any thing else?  
A. Because amongst the celestial bodies, there is none more wonderful, conspicuous and glorious then 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 broken 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 wee shall not bee 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 Gods mercy, for it was no sign of the covenant till now.  
Q. Shall there be no rainbow as some haue thought, forty yeeres before the last iudgement?  
A. If this were true, then the time of the last iudgement should bee known; but of that hour and day knoweth no man: secondly, if in that space there should bee no Bow, then 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, &c. and therefore there shall be great ioy 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 betweens 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 vail 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 two-fold 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: eleventhly, as in the rainbow there is 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 ( ●euel. 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 vpon the rainbow, and comfort ourselves, when we fear any inundation of waters; so should we with the eyes of faith, look vpon our Redeemer when we fear the inundation of his Fathers 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 wee see it, let us with the Iewes 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 haue escaped the flood, which is signified by the waterish colour; so wee 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 aclowledge 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 aclowledge, that we haue no grace nor perfection but that which we receive from the son of righteousness. Sixthly, let us in beholding of the rainbow, aclowledge that the mercy of the Lord is above all his works, for in a little wrath and for a moment he hide his face from us, but with everlasting kindness he hath had mercy vpon vs. Es. 54. 8.  
Q. How will God remember Noah when he seeth 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 subiectiue 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 Gods 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 haue name them, as well as the children of other Patriaches, at least in general, that they begot sons and daughters. Secondly, Moses in this and the next chapter sheweth that these three did multiply the world, therfore 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 Hebrewes 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 then the propagation of children.  
Q. Why amongst all the children of Cham, onely Canaan is name 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 born in the ark as Chrysostome thinketh?  
A. No: for eight persons onely went into the ark, and onely 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, &c. 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 then 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 glister 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 fuits?  
Q. But seeing the earth was spoyled 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 onely spoken of vines, because Moses is to speak of Noahs drunkenness, and the effects thereof.  
Q. Why was Noah so desirous to plant a vineyard?  
A. Because he knew that the strength of mans 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, &c. 1. Tim. 4. 4. Wine was created to comfort mans heart. Psal. 104. Yea Paul desireth Timothy to use a little wine for his stomachs sake. 1. Tim. 5. 2. Christ did drink wine himself, and ordained that in the sacrament under the sign of wine, wee should drink his blood, then Noah did not sin in drinking, but he sinned in not regarding the manner nor 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 bee their measure; and yet do drink beyond all measure. Fourthly, he was drunk but once, but they are drunk daily. Fifthly, he repented 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 bee partly excused, for ab in experientia profecta est ebrietas, Noe, 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 flee and eschew them: secondly, that wee 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 cloath: thirdly, that we might see what a damnable 'vice drunkenness is, even a short fury and a voluntary divell, as Chrysostome calls it: Yea cause of sickness in the body, disquietness in the mind, poverty in our goods, negligence in Gods service, want of reason, and in a word, the roote of all mischief: fourthly, that wee may see from whence proceeded the misery of the canaanites, even from Noahs drunkenness: for drunkenness was the cause of his nakedness, nakedness of derision, derision of Canaans curse: fifthly, to show the sincerity of Gods 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 three, and Noah transgresseth by drinking the fruit of the vine three: thirdly, the sequel of Adams sin was nakedness, and the sequel of Noahs sin is the same: fourthly, Adam was ashamed, and the shane of Noah is delivered: fifthly, Adams nakedness was covered with skins, and Noahs nakedness is covered with a garment: sixthly, a curse vpon Adams posterity, is the effect of Adams eating, and a curse vpon Canaan, Noahs posterity, is the effect of Noahs drinking.  
Q. Where in did the greatness of Chams 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 vpon the first world for such like sins: fifthly, in that he did not onely mock his father, but also  told his brethren of his fathers nakedness: sixthly, in that Cham at this time was no child, but a man of an hundred yeeres and upward, therefore should haue had more grace and discretion: eleventhly, he was a father himself, therefore should haue known what was the duty of a child: eighthly, in that he was so quick to spy the moat in his fathers eye, and could not see the beam that was in his own, I mean his witchcraft, malice, contempt of religion, lcacherie, and other vices which are recorded of him.  
Q. Wherein were Shem and Iapheth worthy of commendations?  
A. First, for their piety in covering their fathers nakedness: secondly, for their modesty in going back-ward least they should desile their eyes in seeing of his filthiness. Wherein we see that Sem the younger is first name: because it seems he was principal in this business: secondly, we see the difference of Noahs 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 flood, 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 Iapheth a pattern for good children: fifthly, if Sem and Iapheth were so careful to honour their earthly father, then much more diligent should wee bee 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 Iapheth: and here we see that as Cham is younger in yeeres, so he is younger in grace and manners: secondly, in Noahs awaking we see the state of the godly, that though they sleep and fall, yet they awake and rise again: thirdly, in Noahs sleeping we see the state of the world, for when men are drunk with wine, that is, filled with worldly blessings, then they fall asleep and wax careless and secure: fourthly, in that Noah awoke and knew what was done: wee 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 fathers mouth, which curse he uttered not of malice or in his anger, but being moved by Gods spirit, did speak it by way of prophesy: secondly, wee 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 onely against him, but also against the Canaanites his posterity: thirdly, here wee see the zeal and constancy of Noah, that makes no bones to curse his child because he dishonoured God, yea more zealous then Brutus that killed his son for the love he carried to his country: fourthly, in this wee 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, Cham 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 name, so jacob is said to bless joseph. Gen. 48. 15. when properly he blessed Iosephs children. verse 16. and Canaans name is here used, not Chams, 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 fathers footsteps in wickedness: thirdly, for our instruction, that wee may learn to fear him, for his judgements are a great deep, they are past finding out, his wrath is like a consuming fire, and when he nurseth, he will not onely curse us, but also the fruit of our body. Deut. 28. 18.  
Q. Wherein was Cham accursed?  
A. Not onely in that he was a seruant, but also a seruant of seruants, 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 owe to God by right of creation. 2. natural, which is nothing else but the subiection of inferiors to their superiors proceeding of love for order sake, and this should haue been in the state of innocency: 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 mans nature: secondly, because it is contrary to the end of mans 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 vpon 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 seruant of sin. joh. 8. 34. and he that serveth such masters may be called a seruant of seruants, and such seruants were the Canaanites, serving not onely their brethren, but also their own abominations, for which their land did spew them out.  
Q. Seeing then inuoluntarie service is the effect of sin, is this a pretence for seruants to reject altogether there service?  
A. No, for many things haue and do proceed of evil causes, which God doth turn to good uses: secondly, service is a punishment for sin, and therefore should not bee rejected, but with patience endured: thirdly, it is a means to beate 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 yeeres, and Eglon King of Moab 18. yeeres. judge. 3. Seruants then 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 seruants, seeing they also haue a Master in heaven. joh. 6.  
Q. What reward hath Sem for covering his fathers 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 onely Sem and his posterity shall onely 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 seruant: 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 Iapheth 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 then Sem or Chams children: to wit over Galatia, Scythia, Media, Graecia, italy, spain, Moscouia, Thracia, and many more countries: secondly, that Iapheth shall dwell in the tents of Sem, that is, that the Gentiles Iapheths posterity, shall embrace the religion of the Iewes Sems posterity: and this was accomplished when the partition wall was broken down by the preaching of the gospel, then 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 seruant, which then was fulfilled when the grecians and Romans Iapheths posterity had subdued the most part of the world habitable, but if by Canaan we understand the wicked; and by Sem and Iapheth the Church; then it is most true, that the wicked nill they will they, are but seruants to Gods 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 haue no continuing city. Heb. 13. 14. secondly, Tents are most used in warres, and our life is a warfare, Job 7. 1. thirdly, Tents are weakly built, and not able to resist those injuries of the air that houses can: so the Church in herself is weak, though in the Lord shee be strong, and these weak things God hath chosen to confounded 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 Iewes, amongst whom God onely had his visible Church; so shee 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. Where in 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 Noahs sacrifice did curse the ground no more, even so for Christs 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 troad the winepress alone, who turned water into wine, and who was counted a drinker of wine, was drunken with the wine of his fathers 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: eleventhly: 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 Iewes: ninthly, Noah fell asleep in his own Tent, and Christs died in his own country judea, tenthly, Sem and Iapheth covered Noahs body with a garment, so joseph and Nicodemus covered Christs body with linen clothes: eleventhly, Noah awoke from his sleep, and so did Christ from his grave: twelfthly, Cham was cursed for scorning his Father, and the Iewes are yet accursed for killing their saviour.  
Q. How long lived Noah after the flood?  
A. Three hundred and fifty yeeres, even till Abraham was about fifty yeeres of age, or 58. as the Hebrews, and others do think, and in that Noah lived so long after the flood, it sheweth us, that long life doth neither depend from the stars, the temperature of the air, the constitution of the body, the excellency of meate and drink, nor any thing else, except from Gods blessing, for neither had the stars, that influence, nor the air that temperature, nor mans body that strength, nor the herbs that nutriment, which they had before the flood, yet Noah lived after the flood 350. yeeres, and his son Sem 500. secondly, God would haue him live so long after the flood, not onely to see the effect of Gods 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 yeeres, the oldest man that ever lived, except Jared that lived 962. yeeres, and Methuselah that lived 969. yeares, yet for all his long life, he is not exempted from death; Nam omnes vna 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 iudgement; after the flood, mocked by his own son, and grieved with the idolatry not onely of Cham and Iapheths 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 moneths 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 mans life and of those things that do 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, &c. sixthly, for ones nativity, as Mat. 1. 18. the generation of Christ was thus, eleventhly, 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, &c.  
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 Gods 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 Noahs sons?  
A. They are profitable. First, because by them we see how the world is multiplied. 2. by them we may refute the fabulour genealogies of Poets, philosophers, Egyptians, Aethiopians and others that do brag of their antiquity. 3. in this genealogy we see the effect of Gods blessing in multiplying mankind. 4. by this genealogy we know so much the better what these nations are, that are often name in the Scripture. 5. we know also from hence how Christ came of Sem according to the flesh, and how Noahs curse took effect in the posterity of Cham.  
Q. Was this propagation of mankind by Noahs 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 dayes of losuah, his going back in the dial of Achaz. the conception of the Virgin, &c. or else they are mixed miracles, which in respect of the thing itself which is produced are natural but in the maner of producing, and in respect of other circumstances are supernatural: such as the thunderings that discom fited the Philistines at Samuels prayer. 1. Sam. 7. 10. the rain that fell at the prayer of Elias, 1. King. 18. 45. and such like, then 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 onely that were most famous; Then of Sems progeny he reckoneth 26. of Chams 31. of Japheths 14. which in all are 71. and many of these names here mentioned, were changed by the Greeks, who not onely 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 Iapheth, 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 Chams.  
Q. What was Gomer?  
A. The father of the Cimmerians as Herodotus thinketh, or rather as Iosephus 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 Gallo-greci, 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, Hos. 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 Turkes haue their original, which now to the great shane of Christians, and overthrow of our religion, haue 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 besprinckled with the blood of many thousand martyrs, but now alas their habitation is desolate, their Churches are become habitations for divels, the holds of every foul spirit, and cages of unclean 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. yeares 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 Iauan 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 there, 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 haue seated themselves there, so that they haue 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, then they were made seruants; for Cyrus, Xerxes and other persian Kings did vex them; the Macedonians did subdue them, afterward the Romans, then 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 Jlands subject to the Venetians. The graecian 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 Iewes think, and Spaniards as Iosephus, 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 yeares, 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 Iapheth, and not onely hath persuaded him to dwell in the tents of Sem: for now Iesus Christ the son of Sem is known amongst the barbarous Indians, but as Thubal was an enemy against the Iewes in Ezechiels daies. 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 Moscouians, who first dwelled in Asia, afterward they removed farther North; and do at this day inhabit that great continent lying between Tartaria, Liuonia, 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 beleeue no purgatory, they read the bible in their own language, Augustine, Ambrose, jerome 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 not being contented with the plain and simplo style of Gods 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 warres, they do inhabit the country Thracia, otherwise called Romania, where Constantinople is situated, the gospel shined sometimes in this country, and happy might they haue been, if they could haue known their own happiness, but by their miserable discords they haue lost their ancient glory, and Constantinople which was the queen of the eastern Cities and sometimes the house of God and vineyard of Iesus Christ, is become now a cage for Mahomet, the divell and his excrements, the Turkes who as it seems were only born to be a plague to Gods 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 romans. Kiphath of him came the Paphlagons, a people also in Asia, which name they had of Paphlagon, the son of Phineas. Thogarma of him came the Phrygians, a people in Asia, near to Bithinia, Lydia and Misia, they are called by the Hebrewes, as Iosephus saith, Thygrammanes from this Thogarma.  
Q. Which are the four sons of Iauan?  
A. The first is Elishah, of him came the Aeolians, a people of greece, who leaving their country went to Asia, and seated themselves in Mysia, which they called Aeolia, from their own name. Elishah sold blew 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 born. Act. 21. 39. hither jonas fled, jonas 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 Cittim, of whom came the Cyprians, who did inhabit the island Cyprus, not far from Syria and Cilicia, therefore the island was called Citica, the Hebrewes call it Chittim, and here was the city Citium. This Cyprus was many yeares under the government of the Venetians, but now they are under the servitude of Magog the turk. His fourth son is Dodanim, of whom the Rhodians came, who inhabited Rhodus an island in the Carpathian sea, famous for the city Rhodos, which was possessed by the Christians many yeares. But at last proud Nabuchadnezzar the turk, by our negligence took both the city and the island.  
Q. What is meant by the Iles of the Gentiles?  
A. Not onely 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 Iles are given them with the rest of the earth to the sons of men, the Iles are invited to praise God. Isa. 42. 10. The Iles shall wait for Christ. Isay 51. 5. the kings of the Iles shall offer gifts to Christ. Psal. 72. 10. and this was accomplished when God persuaded Iapheth to dwell in the tents of Sem. Gods children in this world may be likened to Iles, for as Iles are separated from the rest of the earth, so Christ hath chosen his Saints out of the world. joh. 15. Secondly as Iles 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 Chams first son?  
A. Cush, the father of the Aethiopians, of whom mention is made. Isa. 11. Ezec. 29. and 30. Amos 9. Nahum. 3. Soph. 2. and else-where, 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 summerare both black, but Aethiopia properly is in Affrica, under which name not only the country of the abyssines is comprehended, but also the Southeast part of Affrica, from the meridional line, to caput bonae spei, and this confusion of the name hath caused many errors amongst the learned, then this name of Cush and Aethiopia so often used in Scripture, is rather to bee understood of Arabia which was near to India, then of the remote countries of Affrica, therefore Moses wife being a Madianite is called an Aethiopian, Numb. 12. Theodoretus thinketh that the queen of Saba who came to see Salomon, was queen of Aethiopia. Quest. 22. in Num. The Aethiopians did use to call their queens Candaces, whose chief governor the Eunuch was converted by Philip. Act. 8. Mathias 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 Chams son, therefore in Scripture egypt is called the land of Cham. 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, whom they called Pharaoh, then they were subdued by the Aethiopians in the dayes 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 Patriarkes, 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 ouerspreade all Europe. But as before it was infamous for idolatry, so now it is for Mahomets blasphemous heresy.  
Q. What people came of Phut?  
A. The Lyrians, a people in Affrica, 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 Cham, 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 in stead 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 Samech, that with Shin, from this the queen of Saba came to Salomon, from that the wise men came to worship Christ, both these places are mentioned. Psal. 72. 10. the Kings of Sheba and Seba shall give gifts?  
Q. What other sons had Cush?  
A. havilah the father of the Getulians, Sabtah of whom came a people called Sabathei 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 off-spring did possess a part of Arabia-felix, not far from Idumea, of Dedan 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 bee 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 haue rather been a seruant then a Lord, but it fals 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. 124. 7. of the hunters, jer. 16. 16. where such persecutors are called also 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. yeeres after the flood in Babylon: fourthly, they were both the inventors of idolatry: fifthly, as the histories aclowledge 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 is Erech a city beyond Euphrates, otherwise called Edessa and Hierapolis. The third is Accad, otherwise called Nisibis, a city vpon the river tigris. The fourth is Calneth a city of great note as wee 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 onely to secure himself from the cruelty of Nimrod.  
Q. When was niniveh built?  
A. Three hundred yeeres after the flood, and 2000. before Christ, about the time that Abraham was born, by Assur whom the histories call Ninus; this city was famous for the greatness, beauty, and riches thereof, and for the preaching of Jonas. It did continue in great glory for the space of 1400. yeeres 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 Bessera 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 Craesus, and the river Pactolus: secondly, Anamim, they did inhabit as it is thought the country Pentapolis in Lybia: thirdly, Lehabim, they possessed Libia in Africa: fourthly, Naphtuhim, they were the people Napatei in Aethiopia: fifthly, Pathusim, they were the people Pharusij in Africa beyond Mauritania, mentioned Esay 11. Ezech. 29. sixthly, Casluhim, they inhabited the country Casiotis in Syria, from them the philistines came who possessed the land of Canaan. Amos 9. 7. where they remained, not cast out to the great grief of the Israelites: eleventhly, Caphtorim a people called Cappadoces, who did destroy the philistines 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 Bersabaea, and of whom there were giants, their land onely is promised to the Israelites. Ios. 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. judge. 19. 10. Gen. 14. 18. they were not utterly subdued by Israel, but continued till Salomons time, who made them Tributaries. 2. Chron. 8. 8. fourthly, the Emorite or Amorites, a people high as Ceders and strong as oaks, Amos 2. 9. whose King was Og, they were dispersed into diuers 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 Hiuite of whom came the Gibeonites whose lives were spared by Iosua. Josh. 11. 19. eleventhly, the Arkite who dwelled in the city of Arce in mount Libanon: eighthly, the Sinite or the people of Sinaei 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 Zemarim which after fel to the Beniamites. Josu. 18. 22. eleventhly, the Hamathite from whom two cities bear the name, the one is Annochia, which Amos cap. 6. calleth Hamath Rabba, 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 North-west allotted to the tribe of Aser. Gaza on the southwest, a city which befell the tribe of Iuda. Sodom with the other cities that were destroyed. Gen. 19. on the South-east, and these are the bounds of the whole land of Canaan. Ioshua onely describeth the West part thereof. josh. 13. 3.  
Q. Why is Sem called the brother of Iapheth here, and not also of Cham?  
A. Some are called brethren by nature, as jacob and Esau, some by nation, as the Iewes were Pauls brethren, some by affinity as Christ and his kins-folkes. Matth. 12. and some by religion and affection as all Christians. Then Iapheth and Sem are called brethren, because they were not onely so by nature, but also in affection. So Simeon and levi brethren for their affection in evil. Gen. 49. Then though Cham by nature were Sems 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 iudgement of the world, yet they are not so in the iudgement of God.  
Q. Why is Sem called the father of the sons of Heber onely, seeing he had more sons then Heber?  
A. As Cham is called the father of Canaan onely, because his curse was visibly executed on him, so here Sem is called the father onely of Hebers sons, because his blessing was visibly powred on them. Gen. 14. 19. Secondly, because they onely retained the faith and religion of Sem: thirdly, by this God will show that Sems blessing did not belong to all his posterity, but onely 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 Salomon: 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 lord, of him came a people in Africa near Aethiopia: this I know is contrary to the received opinion, for this lord is thought to be the father of the Lydians in Asia, and lord the son of Mizraim is thought to bee the father of this people in Africa: but wee must not think that the world was so divided among the sons of Noah, as though Sems posterity did onely possess Asia. Iapheths Europe, and Chams Africa precisely without entermingling, for as Madai thought Iapheths son did inhabit Media in Asia, and Canaan who came of Cham did possess Palestina in Asia; so why may not lord though Sems son inhabit Lidia 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: Iobs country, job 1. 1. which was a part of Idumea. Lam. 4. 21. secondly, Chul he inhabited armoniac: thirdly, Gether he dwelled in Caria a country in Asia-Minor, between Licia and Ionia: 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 Cainan 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 daies the earth was divided, that is, the inhabitants of the earth who before were of one tongue, and one country, are now divided into diuers tongues and regions, and therefore because when he was born this division fell out, he is called Peleg, which signifieth division: some think this name was given to him before he was born by way of prophesy, but it is like he had it from the event that fell out when he was born, neither is their opinion sound, who think this division to haue been in the end of his dayes, which was in the 48. year of Abrahams age; and 38. yeeres after the death of Ninus, for at that time the world was replenished with people, with diuers languages, Kings and kingdoms; and therefore this division was long before the last year of Peleg. His other son is Ioktan, 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 Gods word, and they do yet remain unknown to vs.  
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 Chersonesus in India, or Peru in America; but we know that Salomons ships fetched store of fine gold from this Ophir. 1. Kings 9. and 10. chapped. havilah did possess India, as Iosephus and jerome do affirm.  
Q. What are Mesha and Sephar?  
A. Mesha is a country in India where the sons of Iaktan dwelled, so called as it is thought from Mash the son of Aram. Sephar is a hill in India also, and Luther coniectureth that this may be the hill Ararat or Imanus.  
Q. Was there such a division of nations before 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, &c. Secondly, in respect of religion, for the posterity of Seth, who are therefore called the sons of God, did onely worship the true God; but Cains 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 diuers tongues and speeches, sects and religions, laws and governments, towns and regions, arts and occupations, orders and degrees, &c. 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, &c. yet because wee 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 haue: 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 haue borrowed from the Hebrew, as Sac, Babel. &c. 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 onely in Hebers family, therefore it is called the Hebrew tongue: Yet all Hebers posterity did not use this tongue, but onely 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 spake and gave his Oracles, both before and after the flood. It was spoken also by Angels, and by his own people the Iewes; 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 bee in common use among the Iewes; and Syriac or mixed Hebrew came in place▪ so that the tongue which Christ and the Apostles used amongst the Iewes, 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 armoniac, where the ark restend, into the plain of Shinar or Chaldea. First, because they were now exceedingly increased, and an 100. yeeres 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 ston they used brick, because in that plain country stones were scarce, and because of the abundance of day 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& riuers, of the nature of brimstone, which Semiramis did use for the building of Babylon; and here we may see their forwardness in exhorting one another to this wicked work. A shane 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, ston and mortar to build their tower with, yet rather then they will give over, they will make matter to themselves, and in this we see the nature of the wicked, who will leave nothing vn-attempted to bring to pass their wicked designs. Audax omnia perpetigens humana ruit per vetitum nefas. 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 intend 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. Nabuchadnezzars three to reach up to heaven. Dan. 4. 18. Capernaam 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 Philo saith, the earth being the Center, 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 mountaines; that so they might bee preserved from the flood. And this counsel is thought to haue proceeded from wicked Nimrod, to whom the rude multitude gave speedy consent, now how far they proceeded in their work, none is able to define: the Iewes haue 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 then he will be butted 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 wee do all desire that glory which is onely due to God. For this cause so many pyramids and Towers, Collassus and triumphant arches haue been erected; yea whatsoever noble work 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 dieth, his glory shall not descend after him, &c. The other end why they build this Tower is, least they be scattered abroad: a fear which did arise from their guilty consciences, for the wicked fly when no man persueth. 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 Christs Church, so is Babel of the divels Synagogue: and therefore as Christs Church and Satans Synagogue are contrary, so is jerusalem and Babel. jerusalem signifieth the vision of peace because the King thereof is the Prince of peace,& the subiects 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 vpon 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: eleventhly 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, Ioel. 3. 20. For they that trust in the Lord shall be as Mount Sion, &c. Psal. 125. 1. Eightly Babel is the hold of every fowle spirit, and a cage of every hateful bide, Reu. 18. But jerusalem is that holy city coming down from God out of heaven, Reu. 21. Therefore let us come out of Babel, least we be partakers of her 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 iustice 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, &c. So here because he would manifest the effect of his iustice 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 Virgins womb, then 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 president for iudges, 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 read 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 wee do forget ourselves, he can drown us with Pharaoh, kill us with Senacharib, turn us into beasts with Nabuchadnezzar, and resolve our bodies into lice with Herod: thirdly, that we do not too much admire and adore the Potentates of this world; for let their power bee never so great, yet they are but the sons of Adam: therefore Vide vnde es home et erubesce.  
Q. How is it understood that the people are one?  
A. Not onely 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 haue their unity, but it is altogether against the Lord and against his anointed, Psal. 2. Therefore such union cannot stand, and if the children of darkness bee at such union amongst themselves, much more should the children of light, who haue 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 heauens 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 onely 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; it 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. Thē 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 vs. In times past God spake 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 mens bodies, do speak in his name, as often in Scripture and most excellently did he speak when his onely begotten son did assume the whole nature of man. By this essential word he hath spoken to us in these last dayes. Now because the Father speaks here to the son and Holy Ghost, wee can neither define nor divine how he spake; 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 confounded their language, for this was a speedy way to overthrow their building, which he might haue 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 haue 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 wee 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 haue understood anothers speech, and so the world could not haue 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 spake 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 iudgement, 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 vpon 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 diuers regions, by that division the people were united 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 vpon this division of tongues?  
A. They were scattered abroad vpon the face of all the earth; so then the evil is brought on them, which they sought to prevent: for that which the wicked feareth shall come vpon him. Prou. 10. 24. again, as God came down and dissolved this wicked communion, so Magistrates and Ministers must destroy the works of the divell; and although they leave off from building their city, yet about an 100. yeeres 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 far from every one of us, he that planted the ear, shall he not hear? He that formed 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 monarch from Adam to Noah; so in this he reckoneth ten from Sem 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, therfore to every one of these names, the yeeres of their life are subjoined: for else we should not haue known how much time was between the flood, and the making of the covenant with Abraham. Thirdly, that wee may know that Christ came of these fathers according to the flesh. Fourthly, although many more descended of Sem, yet here they are not thought worthy to bee reckoned in Gods book, because they did not continue in the faith of Sem. Fifthly, although Arphaxad be here name, and in the tenth chapter, after Elam and Assur. Yet it followeth not that he is younger then they( for so wee must grant that Noah had these three sons in two yeeres, 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 haue mistaken themselves in putting in Caeinan, 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 Cainan to bee Arphaxads son, for there are some greek copies, which in the 1. of Chron. 1. 18. Make no mention at all of Cainan, but onely haue {αβγδ} Arphaxad begot Selah. Thirdly, although Luke chapped. 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. vpon luke. cap. 3. Fourthly, the putting in of Cainan here, hath for the most part changed the time of each fathers procreation in the greek, least the Gentiles( as it is thought) for whom the Bible was translated first, should know their true genealogy.  
Q. How many yeeres lived Sem, after he begot Arphaxad?  
A. five hundred yeares, even till Jsaac was fifty yeares old, and so he saw ten generations after him, before he dyed. Then true it is, that he who honoureth his father, &c. his dayes shall be long in the land, &c. 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 dieth 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 hoour and dignities sake, as before, Sem is put before his elder brethren. Secondly, Abraham is not onely mentioned here, but also Nachor and Haran, for the better understanding of the history of Lot the son of Haran, and of Rebeccah Isaacks wife who was of Nachors house.  
Q. How do we know that Abraham was the youngest of these three?  
A. Because he was born when his father Terah was a hundred thirty yeares old, for Terah dyed two hundred five yeares old, vers. 32. of this cap. Then Abraham departed from Charran 75. yeeres old. Gen. 12. 4. therefore if Abram was 75. yeeres old at the death of his father, it is manifest that he was born the 130. year of his fathers age, and so consequently he was younger then Nachor and Haran who were born before this time: for Milcah Nachors 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. yeeres old, then doubtless he was the eldest, if then Abraham was born when Terah was 130. yeeres old, Haran must needs be born 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 then Abraham.  
Q. What shall we say to the Hebrewes: who hold that Abrahams age of 75. yeeres, is not counted from his birth, but from his departure from ur of Chaldea?  
A. If this were true, that Abraham was born when his father was 70. yeeres old, we must admit that he was 135. yeeres 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. yeeres before Abraham came to Canaan; for Abraham was 100. yeeres old when Isaac was born. Gen. 21. But that is false, for Isaac was born in Canaan. Yea if this fiction of the Hebrewes were true, wee must be forced against the Scripture to admit that Abraham was 160. year old when Isaac was born, and that he lived 100. yeeres, 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. yeeres, and another time after his death; for the Scripture both here, and Act. 7. Mentions onely of once coming to Canaan, and that after his fathers death.  
Q. What ur 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 Iosephus nor Philo, who haue 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 ur was a city or country in Chaldea, so called either from the fire which they saw come from heaven vpon the fathers 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 haue 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 Abrahams half sister, by his father Terah, and not by his mother, as thinketh Clem. Alexand. lib. 2. storm.  
A. No, but she was the daughter of Haran, and sister to Lot and Milcha, which Milcha was grand-mother to Rebecca Isaaks wife. Gen. 22. 20, 23. Then though properly shee was his brothers daughter, yet shee is called his sister. Gen. 20. 12. As Lot is called his brother. Gen. 13. 8. For the Hebrewes use to call their kinsfolks brethren and sisters; and though properly shee be Terahs grandchild, yet according to the Scripture phrase, shee may be called his daughter. For grandfathers, are called fathers in Scripture, as jacob calleth Abraham his father. Gen. 48. 15. 16. Shee was then Abrahams 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 then 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 haue 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 mothers 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 practise of Othniel, for he married with Achsah the daughter of his brother Caleb. judge. 1. 13. Yet although this marriage was not unlawful in Abraham and Othniel, because it was permitted them, being extraordinary persons, wee must not put it in practise, for many things were lawful to them which to us are unlawful. And though Moses doth not expressly forbid it, yet by analogy and consequence it seemeth to forbid such kind of marriage. Moses Lev. 18. doth not in express terms forbid the grand-child to mary with the grand-mother; or with the wife of his grand-father, or a man to mary with his mothers brothers wife, and yet these marriages by proportion are unlawful. Moses onely there sets down expressly a few unlawful marriages, that by those wee 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 away for the subsequent history of Jsaacks 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: therfore 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 bare 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 Gods 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, &c. from Chaldea. Secondly, in that Abraham went with his father and kindred. Wee 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 haue forsaken them: So must we forsake parents, friends, country, yea all we haue, 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 wee are before our calling, even the children of wrath. Fourthly, in that not onely Abraham, but the rest also went out from Vr. Wee 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 Abrahams 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 ur, or not?  
A. If he had gone with them, he had been here name, 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. de civit. dei. cap. 13. he departed from thence, but went no further then 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 travell so far as Canaan; therefore he was driven to stay there with his old father till he dyed, but after his father was dead, he removed from thence to Canaan Act. 7. 4. In Nachor, Terah and Abraham wee 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 death, 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 wee haue the light, least darkness come vpon 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, Ios. 24. 2. For how could he else choose, being born of Idolatrous parents; and bread 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 choose 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 sheweth 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, &c. Thirdly, he was called not because of his foreseen faith, much less because of his foreseen merits, for both these follow calling; Non praecedunt iustificandum, said sequuntur iustificatum. But he called him, because it was the good pleasure of his will, Ephes. 1. 5. Fourthly, he is not called onely to a private office or function, as Saul was to kingdom, Judas to the Apostleship, and neither of them to grace: but he was called both to bee 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, lames 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, then God promised to give his seed that land, Gen. 12. 7. Thirdly, when he departed from Egypt to Canaan; being separated from Lot, then 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. yeares old, then 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, then he received the three Angels, Gen. 18. 1. eleventhly, when he was commanded to cast out Ishmael, Gen. 21. 12. Eightly, when he was commanded to sacrifice his son Isaac, Gen. 21. 1. Ninthly, when he staved him from offering of his son, Gen. 22. 11. And by all these apparitions wee may see how highly God did account of his seruant 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 spake, but we know that God hath been both seen and heard of his people, not in regard of his essence, which is most simplo, free from accidents, infinite, incomprehensible, neither must we imagine with the anthropomorphites, 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 wee 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 shal 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 onely they haue 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 urim 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 vpon the understanding and will, and they haue seen him sometimes by dreams, sometimes awaking, sometimes in a trance, as his majesty thought good, but there never was, nor is, nor shal be a more excellent way to see him, then in his son Iesus. For he that hath seen him, hath seen the Father. Joh. 14. Then we know not how he appeared and spake 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 leave 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 haue him to bee 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 Gods service; especially his friends and acquaintance. Sixthly, to teach us what we should do, when wee are called; even leave our own country, Rindred and fathers house, that is, the world, our sins which are so deere unto us, and the dominion of Satan, that we may follow Christ to the heavenly Canaan. eleventhly, that Gods 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 giuing 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 hinder us in Gods 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 mountaines, in dens and caues of the earth. Heb. 11. 38. And truly as the society of the wicked, hinders the service of God, so nothing fitter to adunace it, then 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 abbess 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 haue filled our Monasteries. Now, though Abraham left his country, yet this must not be a president for us vpon every occasion, to forsake our country and friends, or to think that God can onely be served abroad and not at home, truly many holy men, who never forsook their country and friends, haue 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 wee see that wee cannot live amongst our friends without endangering our salvation, let us rather loose and forsake all, then loose 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 civit. 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, nor 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 ur 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 Abrahams 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 Canaan with him but Lot his brothers 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 loose 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 haue gone whether the Lord did call him. And in this he sheweth 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 name 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 beleeue. Rom. 4. 11. Secondly, That he will bless him, and so he did in earthly things. For he was very rich in cattle, 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 Hebrewes think by putting to the letter( He) and of Abram, making it Abraham, for this conjecture is ridiculous) but he will make his famed 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 Gods name is in Scripture taken for himself, then Abraham was great and famous, for his faith and obedience, for Gods 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 Abrahams name shall bee so great, that he shall bee 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 vpon the friends and enemies of the Church; the Babylonian, Persian, graecian, roman Monarchies, haue been cursed for cursing her. But the midwives in egypt, the whore Rachab, the widow of Serepta, and many others haue 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, &c. Eph. 1. 3. here then 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, &c. Jsay 60. 17. And wee must observe, that from the promise to the law are four hundred thirty yeares, Gal. 3. 17. And all this while the Israelites dwelled as strangers in Egypt, Exod. 12. 40. Yet not in Egypt onely, but some part they spent in Canaan, and because they did spend the most part of it in Egypt, therfore Moses only mentioneth Egypt.  
Q. How old was Abraham when he went from Charran?  
A. twenty five yeares 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 spake 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 onely 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 president for women, who should not with Lots wife look back to Sodom when they are called, not hinder their husbands from going to the wedding feast as she in the gospel, Luk. 14. 20. Nor infect their husbands with idolatry, as Salomons wife, nor deceive them with flattering words, as Sampsons wife, nor induce them to break Gods commandement as eve; nor desire them to curse God as Iobs wife, but rather let them imitate Sarai, Rebeccah, Lia, Rachel, Debora, 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 brothers son, a notable young man, whom the young men of this age should imitate, who are so far 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 seruants, whom he and Lot had gotten in their possessions, in Charran, where wee may see that Abraham was no base fellow, but a man of might, for he had many seruants, even 318. trained souldiers, 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 seruants souls, and in that, they went with him, wee haue here an example for seruants, who should bee 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 haue him beg, nor bee 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 Gods blessings, and the instruments of learning, virtue and alms, yet we must take heed, that our riches bee not unlawfully gotten. Secondly, they be not abused to luxury and pride. Thirdly, that we do not put our confidence in them. Fourthly, that wee do not hid them, with that unprofitable seruant, when we should use them to the comfort of ourselves and poor brethren. Fifthly, that we do still aclowledge 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 aduancement 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 Christs sake. Mat. 19.  
Q. How far 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 far from the hills Hebal and Garizim, where the Israelites heard the blessings pronounced, Deut. 27. 12. This place in Abrahams time was called the plain or oak of Moreth, for it seems that here was a grove of oaks. And here we see that Abraham even in this promised land, is but a pilgrim, for he is driven to wander as far as Sichem, which is toward the desert. truly God would teach both Abraham and us by this, that our life here on earth is but a peregrination.  
Q. Did this land belong of right to Abraham, because he descended of Sem?  
A. The Hebrewes 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, if the canaanites had taken it violently, then this had been cause sufficient to haue driven them out, but wee read onely that their wickedness was the cause of their expulsion, lieu. 18. 24. Fourthly, God would not haue deferred four hundred yeares to drive them out, but presently would haue put Abrahams 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 onely because he loved them, Deut. 437. 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 onely appeared in a dove 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 was an angel Personaliter: but God by representation; and therefore he is called Lord. But this is false, because the name Iehouah 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 haue had some show for their opinion, for that name indeed is sometimes given to the creatures, Psal. 82. 6. But the essential name of Iehouah is here expressed, which is onely proper to the creator. Secondly, if this had been an angel, it is not like that Abraham would haue built an altar to him; for building of Altars was a part of divine worship.  
Q. To whom then did Abraham build this Altar?  
A. To Jehouah that appeared unto him, and in so doing, he testifies his piety to God, even amongst the midst of Idolaters without fear, Religion 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 bee a jealous God, and who would give his glory to none. far otherwise do they who build Churches and chapels to the honour of dead men, Honorandi 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 wee derogate nothing from the Lord, or arrogate any thing to them contrary to Gods 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 Ai, a city which josuah destroyed, Jos. 8. And vpon 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 travell 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 travell towards the North, from whence a plague shall bee spread vpon them, Jer. 1. 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 Gods providence, for he was assured that God could miraculously feed him, as afterward he did the widow of Serepta and Eliah. Secondly, not because he was inconstant and movable, as many are, who can never settle themselves in one place, but like wandring 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 marchants do. Fifthly, nor curiously to increase his knowledge in human sciences, as Pythagoras, Emsedocles, Democritus and Plato, who for this end traveled so far 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 Chrysostome 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 miseery are the fruits of sin, let no man glory in their fruitful islands, for sin will make them barren as Sodom and Gomorrha. again, when Abraham thought to haue ease and wealth he is frustrated: for he is sane 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 Abrahams sake is plagued, and Pharaoh for Israels sake was drowned. Fourthly, Abraham was used well for Saraies sake, and so was Israel for Iosephs sake. Fifthly, Sarai Abrahams wife was faire to look vpon, therefore she was enticed to lie with Pharaoh, so joseph, Israels son was a faire person, therefore was enticed to lie with Potiphers wife. Sixthly, Abraham departed rich from Egypt, having sheep, beeves, asses and camels, so did the Israelites having spoyled the Egyptians of their silver, gold, and raiment.  
Q. Was 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 65. yeares old, ten yeares younger then Abraham. And as Sarai was beautiful in the eyes of Abraham, so is the Church faire 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 kings daughter is all glorious within, Psal. 45. 13. This beauty of Sarai made Abraham give her counsel to say that shee was his sister, and not his wife, for he knew what danger there is to haue a beautiful woman. And truly oftentimes beauty hath been the cause of murder and mischief, the wife of uriah, 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 then the canaanites, and when they see a faire woman, which is scarce in that hot country, they are exceeding prove 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 then the life, especially Abrahams, because all nations should be blessed in his seed. Secondly, neither altogether did he lie in saying shee was his sister, for she was his brothers daughter; and such as are near a kin, the Hebrewes did use to call brethren& sisters. Thirdly, nor yet did he sin in giuing this hard censure of the Egyptians, for what he spake of their cruelty and lust, he spake 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 wifes chastity, if we look to his faith. For we may think that he who in greater matters depended vpon Gods providence, did also in this; and was assured that God would rather deliver her, then suffer her chastity to be abused, as the event sheweth: yet we will not deny but some human 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 wives chastity, having no such warrant from God. Thirdly, in that he was too fearful of death, when he should haue 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 counseling 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 ws see that Sarai did as Abraham desired her, and in this shee shewed 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 haue here the nature of flattering courtiers set down, who accommodate themselves to the humors 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 Hebers posterity who went to Egypt, we gather from hence that the Hebrews are not descended of the Egyptians, as Iosephus in his books against Apton doth prove. Fifthly, from hence also wee 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 graecian 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 graecian Emperours; 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. yeeres were called Caliphae, afterward the kings of Egypt were called Sultans 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 bee not directly expressed as there, because shortly after mention is made of Isacks birth, whom some would haue thought to haue been Abimelechs son, and not Abrahams. 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 Gods children. for he hath reproved kings for their sakes, Psal. 105. 14. Fourthly, wee may see here the fierceness of Gods 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 Achiui. Fifthly, God plagued Pharaoh for Abrahams wife: even so whore-mongers and adulterers God will judge, Heb. 13. 4. Examples we haue of Pharaoh here, ruby. Gen. 35. The Beniamites, judge. 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. eleventhly, not onely Pharaoh, but the Princes that counseled him are plagued: even so shall all wicked counsellors bee handled, Malum consilium consultori pessimum, Then let none wonder why they are also punished, Quid mirum cos 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 dayes, yea a whole year as we may see in the book of Hester. Thirdly, although Pharaoh had touched her, yet properly wee 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 Abrahams wife, he would not haue taken her, Qui pratendit ignorantiam 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 haue 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 haue any violence offered to Sarai, for he knew how prove to lust his people were. Here then 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 fitter to teach them then Abraham, being bread amongst the Chaldeans the onely astrologers in the world, having also himself the true knowledge of God; and none fitter to learn this science, then 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 vs.   

Questions on the thirteenth 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 then 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 wee 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, Iam. 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 then others. Secondly, he had more acquaintance here then else-where. Thirdly, he received here some blessings from God: therefore his affection is more bent to this place then to any other. Fourthly, this place had been consecrated already by building an alter and calling vpon the name of the Lord: therefore he would not seem to neglect that place which was once consecrated for Gods worship, teaching us not to despise the public places dedicated to Gods service. Fifthly, he would not seem to be a vagabond roving up and down when there was no need, teaching us that vpon every trifle wee 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 wee 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 Abrahams 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, then followed division and rent of the Empire, so there was no distinction and heart-burning between Iuda and Israel, till they waxed rich, and Christians while they suffered persecution and poverty, they did maintain love and concord amongst them, they were of one heart and mind, yea and all things common, Act. 2. But after the Church grew rich, they who should haue beate their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks, did beate their plow shares into swords, and their pruning hooks into spears. Thirdly, in that Abraham must depart from Lot his kinsman, whom he loved so dearly, 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 cattle. Fifthly, seruants 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 seruants, for too many seruants brings but confusion: nor too rashly to credite their seruants 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 haue contended. Secondly, lest by their idle contention they should be given to go to law before the vnbeleeuers, 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 country which fell to the tribe of Iuda, judge. 1. 4 Now as Abraham was loathe to strive with Lot, because they had strongenemies, so let us take heed lest we give occasion to our spiritual Cananits and Perezites, to overthrow us by our contentions. And truly we haue greater cause to maintain love and concord amongst ourselves, then Abraham and Lot had. For our spiritual enemies are more and stronger then 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 concords sake unto him. Secondly, he shows his exceeding love to peace, when not onely doth he labour to maintain peace, between himself and Lot: but also between their seruants, which all good peacemakers should do. Thirdly, he brings a reason why they should not contend, because they are brethren, that is, natural kinsmen. Yea brethren in faith and affection, if then Abraham was so careful to maintain peace, lest he should offend the canaanites: how should not wee maintain the same, lest wee 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 onely 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 riuers; 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. yeeres 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 wast and barren, being overflowed with the stinking puddle of Mahomets 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 succour to flee to the mountaines, and as he was as it seemeth to greedy to settle himself here by jordan, so afterward were the tribes of ruby 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 then their safety: for although that country was fat 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 Riuers?  
A. Not in power, riches, deepness and largeness, for Tibris, Nilus, Euphrates, Danubius, and others haue in these respects been more famous then shee, but in miracles and mysteries shee yeeldeth to none, for shee divided herself to let the Israelites pass over. josh. 3. In her Nahaman was cleansed from his leprosy. 2. King. 5. Shee 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 baptized by John, confessing their sins. Matth. 3. Yea Christ himself did sanctify her with his bodily presence, being baptized there, and in her the holy Ghost descended vpon him; and whils he was there, the heauens 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 fowles 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 Vespatian made trial, vpon the banks groweth fruit, faire to the sight, but being touched, are nothing but dust within.  
Q. Why would God haue 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 wee 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 haue Abraham to stay in Canaan, but Lot to depart, because Abrahams 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 haue 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. Vbimel, ibi fel. again, in Abraham we may observe singular wisdom, who though he loved Lot most dearly, yet rather then by his company he would offend God, he doth most willingly suffer him to depart, and so must we cast away every thing, that is offensive to God, be it never so near and deere unto vs. 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 shane 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 onely 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, &c. 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 wee see that though these Sodomites enjoyed pleasant and fruitful grounds: yet they sin exceedingly against the Lord. Thus the wicked do abuse Gods external gifts, and the more they haue, the more unthankful and sinful they are, when the Israelites waxed fat, they spurned with their heel. Deut. 32. 15. This made Salomon 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 bee consumed with fire and brimstone.  
Q. Did Abrahams posterity enjoy no more ground, then that which Abraham did now see?  
A. Yes, a great deal more, even from Dan to Beersheba, which Abraham at once could not see, then Abraham did not onely 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 vpon Mount Pisgath: So it is like that Abraham saw it vpon Mount Garizim, they both see this land, but neither of them do possess it, now Abraham is grieved; doubtless for the want of his deere friend and brother Lot, but behold God comes to comfort him, showing him the land, thus God deals with his Saints heaviness may bee for a night, but ioy 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 wee shall possess it.  
Q. Why doth God again renew the promise of giuing 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 Esaues seruant, and Esau his Lord. Gen. 33. 14. But in his posterity the Israelites, who were Lorrds over the Edomites Esaus posterity; so Jacob foretold many things. Gen. 49. Which should befall his children, which did not happen to them; but to their posterity, then Abraham being the chief head of the Israelites, receiveth this blessing for his posterity, which they did begin to enjoy 370. yeeres 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 onely of this land, or else heir of all the world, as Paul seemeth 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 onely Canaan, but the spiritual seed, those that are Abrahams sons by promise, and heires of his faith, are also heires of the whole world, for to them the world doth belong of right, although the wicked haue the possesion of the most part thereof, yea wee may say, that Abrahams spiritual seed hath possessed the whole world from the beginning, for the Church which is Christs 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 haue 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. 1. 33. This is that ston cut out of the mountain without hands, which became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. Dan. 2. 35.  
Q. How long was Abrahams 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 seruant 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 messias, the seruant was tied to serve his master no longer then the year of Jubilie, then so long did they possess this land, as they walked obediently before God, for it was given to them vpon condition of legal obedience, otherwise if they did not obey, the land was to spew them out, lieu. 18. 28. Abraham and his seed were to enjoy this land for ever, but Abraham was to keep Gods covenant, he and his seed after him for ever, Gen. 17. 9. If then they haue not enjoyed this land for ever, they must not accuse God, but themselves, who haue not kept his covenant for ever; Gods promises do then stil include the condition of our faith and obedience, as, whosoever believeth in the son, shall not perish but haue everlasting life, but he that believeth not, is condemned already, joh. 3. And here we cannot deny but than under this earthly Canaan, promised to Abrahams carnal seed, is understood heavenly Canaan, which belongeth to his spiritual seed: then this word ( ever) is attributed to the sign which doth properly belong to the thing signified, and thus the Scripture useth in all sacramental speeches, to ascribe that to the type and figure, which doth onely belong to the thing signified, as the lamb is called the passeouer, the blood of goates and calves is said to hallow and purge, the bread is called Christs body, and here Canaan is promised to Abrahams seed for ever, which yet shall not continue for ever, for the world shal 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 Abrahams seed as the dust 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 wee are to hearkento him: for whichcause 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 unto 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 aclowledge 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 Abrahams 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, Hos. 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, &c. 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, &c. Were greater and mightier then 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 wee may see, Psal. 128.  
Q. Why would God haue Abraham to walk through the land, in the length and breadth of it?  
A. To augment both his faith and ioy, in that his children should haue 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. Wee 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, run. 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 groaue not far 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 yeares before Zoan in Egypt, Num. 13. 22. Which Zoan is thought to be Tanis, and it is supposed that this Hebron was builded by heath the son of Canaan, whose posterity the Hittites inhabited in it till Josuahs time; it was sometimes possessed by giants, whom Caleb drove out, Ios. 15. 14. It was a chief city in the tribe of Juda, and after called Kiriatharba, Ios. 14. 15. From one Arba a great man amongst the Anakims. This town became the inheritance of Caleb, Ios. 14. 14. And was made a city of refuge. Ios. 20. 7. Here david was first anointed king, and reigned there seven yeares, 2. Sam. 2. This town then 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 Iuda in the hill country. Beza in annot. in luke. 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 Gods 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, &c.   

Questions on the fourteenth Chapter.  
Quest. WHy doth Moses so carefully set down the warres 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 wee 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 wee may see the cause of this, and all other warres 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 Gods 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 vpper part of Persia. Fourthly, Tidal king of nations, that is, of a people gathered together of diuers 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 Lots 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 Siddim, 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 Hebrewes 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 wife for looking back, turned into a pillar of salt; because neither this country nor shee were seasoned with grace and obedience, to teach us how we should be seasoned; we must haue salt in ourselves. Mar. 9. 10. All our sacrifices must be seasoned with salt. Leuit. 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 Gods 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 fighting, if Abraham, Moses, josuah, david and other holy men haue made warres; then it is lawful for Kings and Princes to raise warres, the former conditions being observed, but because peace is better then warres, as saith the Poet. Pax vna triumphis innumeris potior; Kings must be slow to undertake warres: 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 warres is to be hated; for Pax homines: suas trux decet ira feras.  
Q. But may Christians under the Gospel raise warres?  
A. Yes, but they must be very careful to avoid warres, and to use all the lawful means they can to maintain peace. For Christ the Prince of peace, hath left his peace with vs. joh. 5. It was foretold that wee should beat our swords into plow shares, and our spears into pruning hooks. Esay, 2. It was Christs commandement that wee love one another. joh. 15. We must not resist evil, Matth. 5. Wee must not reuenge, but give place to wrath. Rom. 13. Our greatest strife and warres must be against our spiritual enemies, therefore we are exhorted to put on the whole armor of God. Eph. 6. This spiritual armor did the Christians use in the primitive Church, to subdue the greatest monarchs in the world, and to propagate the Gospel, Peter is commanded to put his sword into his sheathe. Matth. 26. And we are all commanded to love our enemies, to bless them that curse us, to do good to them that hate vs. Matth. 5. Which testimonies do allege, not altogether to condemn warres in case of necessity, but to show how loathe Christian Princes should bee to raise warres, and how rather they should loose 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 iustice, and to make away for the turk, the divels eldest son, the professed enemy of our saviour, the scourge of Christians,& the rod of Gods indignation, to sweep away that little remnant of the Christian world which is left, and to overthrow all with that, not egyptian, but Tartarian darkness of Mahomets doctrine, as he hath already done these glorious Countries and Churches, which wee haue shamefully loft, through our pride and contention. Heu quo discordia cives 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 seruants to a strange king, because they were the seruants 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 Noahs prophesy may here be seen, that Canan is Sems seruant; 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 euerted, laws and religion are extinguished, and all things turned upside down; and therefore the authors of rebellion, haue been most fearfully punished, as the examples of Core, Dathan and Abiram, against Moses and Aaron: Absalom and Seba against david, and many more can witness. Therefore kings must be obeied 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 Iewes, 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 overthrow 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 drove them out from thence, and this mount was called not Seir at this time, but afterward had this name from Esau. Seir signifieth hairy, these then 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 yeares.  
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 iudgment, this is called also Cades, which is a city in Arabia, where Mirian Moses sister was butted; the desert next adjacent is called Cades, and Cades-barne, 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, Ios. 15. 62. Here wee 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 wee must learn with all expedition to subdue our sins. for, Periculum est in mora.  
Q. What success hvd 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 then we see that many are killed in the iudgement of God, and some escape in his mercy. Secondly, the goods and the victuals of Sodom, are made a prey to the hungry souldiers in Gods just iudgement; because they did not use them either to Gods 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 Hebrewes, 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 law-makers: neither was this covenant to desist from warres, and maintain peace, for there was no wars between them, but it was onely a partition between them to defend and maintain one anothers 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 wee must note here that Abraham is called an Hebrew, and his posterity Hebrewes, 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 not it is vncerten, and I rather hold that they were not, both because Abraham made a covenant with them, rather then with others, as also because wee 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 seruants and many more were of his profession; and if there were, why should we think that these three who were Abrahams 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 haue lived peaceably among them, and in this he gave no advantage to the Idolaters to blaspheme God. Fifthly, many holy men haue made such covenants with infidels, and are not reproved, as Iaeob with Laban, Gen. 31. isaac with Abimelech, Gen. 26. Salomon with Hiram, 1. King. 5. Yea the Israelites themselves had power to make covenants with their neighbour nationst excepr with those seven mentioned, Deut. 7.  
Q. Was it lawful for Abraham being both a private man and a priest, to raise warres?  
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 president, for private men to raise arms, except they haue 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 seruants 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 presidents for the ministers of the gospel to raise arms, for they were called extra ordinarily unto this function, but the preachers of the gospel are not. again, the preachers of the gospel must eschew all things that hinder them in discharging of their function, especially warres, which if they follow, they must neglect prayers, preaching, and ecclesiastical discipline. Besides, the Apostle sheweth, that the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God, casting down every strong hold, 2. Cor. 10. Yet I deny not but the preachers may exhort the magistrate to raise arms against the enemies of God, for the priests under the law sounded the trumpets and carried the ark, when the people went to battle.  
Q. How far did Abraham pursue his enemies?  
A. As far 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 Danites it was called Dan. Ios. 19. 47. And it seems that either Moses now giveth it this name by way of prophesy, or else Ezeras who set the books of the old Testament in order, did change the old name being out of use into this other name Dan. Here it was where Jereboam set up the golden calf, and Peter confessed Christ to bee 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 bee 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 bee 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 Tetrach of Traconites, in honour of the roman Caesars, 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 far; but rather true courage and fortitude, because he was lead by Gods spirit, and because he was assured of Gods 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 simple. And if any thing make a man fear, it is the guiltiness of his conscience, Nam timidum nile facit animum nisi reprehensibilis 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 Abrahams policy in dividing his seruants, and that in the night: to teach us that it is lawful to use policy and subtlety against our enemies, if there bee no falsehood and unjustice found in it. We know that God commanded Ioshua, to lay an ambush behind the city Ai, for to take it. josh. 8. 2. He came suddenly vpon the five kings in the night. josh. 10. 9. Gedion used the stratagem of trumpets, pitchers and lamps, to overcome his enemies. judge. 7. 16. And david the means of an Amalekite to overcome the Amalekites, 1. Sam. 30. 15. For if it be lawful vpon just occasion to raise warres against our enemies, it is also lawful to use such stratagems, as may further us in obtaining the victory. Secondly, wee must not attribute this victory of Abrahams to his strength or policy, but to the Lord who made him rule over kings, and gave them as the dust to the sword, &c. Isay 41. 2. Thirdly, God would haue 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 Hebrewes dwelled. Fifthly, as the four kings troubled Canaan, but are overcome by Abraham. So, the four great kingdoms of the world haue troubled the Church, but are overcome of Christ the son of Abraham.  
Q. What was Melchisedec?  
A. Not the holy Ghost, as some heretics haue 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 Hebrewes affirm, rather of malice then sound iudgement, because they cannot endure any stranger should be thought superior in any thing to their father Abraham, for if Sem was Melchisedech, Moses had not concealed it, being an honour to haue such a noble progenitor. Secondly, Melchisedechs genealogy is not mentioned in Scripture, but Sems is. Thirdly, Melchisedechs descent is not counted from the Hebrewes progenitors, Heb. 7. 6. Which plainly sheweth he descended of another stock then the Iewes did who came of Sem. Fourthly, all this country in which Melchisedech reigned, was possessed by Canaans 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, wee 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 onely was appointed for the priesthood, is notwithstanding a king and priest for ever. Sixthly, Melchisedech had no successor in his priest-hood, but Sem had, for Abraham was a priest, so was Isaac, jacob, and the children of levi. eleventhly, if Melchisedech 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, then 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 haue sought him out, and conversed with him, both for his further comfort, strength and instruction, then the fift opinion is soundest, which holdeth Melchisedech to haue been a Cananite, yet a true worshipper of God, for it is very like, that as God had his priests amongst the Iewes, so he had some amongst the Gentiles, and as Aaron among the Iewes was eminent, so Melchisedech among the Gentiles, for God is the God of the Gentiles, as well as of the Iewes, and besides that Philo and Iosephus 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 far from jerusalem, where Absolom set up his pillar, 2. Sam. 18. 18. This valley is called the kings 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 al, for, Beneficiorum 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 Iereth and Salem, that is, the vision of peace, for Abraham called the hil on which he would haue sacrificed his son Iehouah Iereth, 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, Ios. 18. 28. Iud. 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, beautisied by Salomon, 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 bee the figure of Christs Church millitant 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 Sion 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 bee gathered under the wings of Christ, therefore many yeares 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 Iehouah 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. eleventhly, 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 then Aaron, and so was Christ. Tenthly, he was not anointed with external oil, neither was Christ, but but with the oil of gladness. Eleauenthly, 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. thirteenth, he blessed Abraham; and so hath Christ us withall spiritual blessing. Fourteenth, he was made like to the son of God, and Christ is the true and onely begotten Son of God. Fifteenth, he was king of Salem which is jerusalem, so was Christ anointed king vpon the holy hill of Sion, which is jerusalem. Sixteenth, he did not bless Abraham till he returned from the slaughter of his enemies, neither will Christ us, till we haue 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 wee read here not onely 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 then 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 poure you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it. Malac. 3. 10.  
Q. What kind of tithes were used amongst the Hebrewes?  
A. jerome vpon 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 inferiors 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 onely 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 yeares, for the poor& strangers, spoken of Deut. 14. 28. Of these three sorts of tithes, the first onely 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 wee 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 wee haue. Luk. 11. 41.  
Q. Then is it lawful to pay tithes to the preachers of the Gospel?  
A. It is not onely lawful to pay them, but sacrilege to withhold them, for wee must give unto God that which is Gods, and he who bestoweth all things on us, 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 pay-master. 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 haue established, that under pain of excommunication the tithes should bee paid to the ministers, as a due which God himself hath demanded. Constantine and Charles the great did command the same, the counsels Matisconense held anno. 587. can. 5. Duriense, an. 779. can. 10. Moguntinum, an. 813. caen. 38. And other famous synods haue 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 pharisees 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 onely 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 pharisees, 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 haue their due; the Gentiles also lead by the law of nature, were careful in this practise, as Cyrus king of Persia, having overcome the Lydians, payed the tithes of his spoil to jupiter, saith Herodotus lib. 1. The Romans paid tithes to Hercules, Cicero lib. 2. de office. The Arabians paid tithes of their incense to Sabis. Plin. lib. 12. cap. 14. Lastly, the punishments executed vpon these, who haue defrauded the Church of her right, are sufficient testimonies to prove how dangerous it is, to with-hold the tithes from her, famine and poverty, are the effects of this sin, jerome in Malach. 3. They are guilty of the murder of souls, before Gods tribunal, who are partakers of it, August. de doct. Christ. they are punished with present and eternal plagues. Chytreus in cap. 7. Josuae. Eagles feathers being mingled with the feathers of other fowles, are said to consume these and themselves also, even so the tithes haue 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 heauens. Psal. 2. To make the heaven and earth. Psal. 124. To stretch out the heauens above. Esay, 44. To stretch them out like a garment. Psal. 104. To lay the foundations of the earth and the corner ston thereof, job. 38. he is called the Lord God of heaven, Ion. 1. The earth is said to be his, and the fullness thereof, the world, and they that dwell therein, Psal. 34. And ieremy concludeth that these gods who haue not made the heauens 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 haue great possessions, which if they bee compared with heaven and earth they are nothing. again, they are not permanent, for when man dieth, he shall carry nothing away, his glory shal not descend after him, Psal. 40. 17. Besides, let a mans possession be never so great, yet as Philo saith, the right of possessing all things belongs unto God onely, man hath but the use of these things which he doth possess. Secondly, if God be possessor of all, then the sons of God haue right and interest in all the creatures, the wicked haue 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, then 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 persons and the goods, as also the people who might haue thought that Abraham for his own gain did undertake this war, and not for love of his brother Lot; in such cases then it is lawful to swear, both for the aduancement of Gods glory, and confirmation of the truth, for wee honour and love God, when we swear thus, Qui jurat, aut veneratur, aut diligit eum per quem jurat, 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 haue 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 wee do not swear at all times rashly for every trifle, so Gods 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 wee may see in Iephthes now, and Herods 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 wee do not swear by the creatures, for that is to attribute Gods 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 then 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 Gods 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 Nymphs 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 wee then seek the glory of the true God by calling vpon him in our lawful oaths.  
Q. Did Abraham well to refuse the king of Sodomes offer?  
A. Yes: because he would not haue him think that it was for his own profit he undertook this battle, neither would he haue any think, that he would bee 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 Abrahams is no president 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 Salomon 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, wee must know, that taking and giuing of gifts, is not always lawful, for it is dangerous and suspicious for any subject to receive any gift from a foreign 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 wee 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 sheweth, Templa sacerdotes, &c. And not much inferior are these gifts, that are given and taken for spiritual benefice; truly we liuein a golden age according to that, Aurea nunc vere sunt saecula, plurimus auro, venit honos, auro conciliatur amor, To many now adais 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 bee given or taken which is contrary to true piety, or Gods glory, for such a gift blindeth the wise and peruerterh the words of the righteous, Exod. 23. 8. Secondly, it perverteth the natural affection of men, so that Iudas for a gift sold his master, the souldiers for a gift did bely Christ, saying, that his disciples stolen 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, &c. 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 haue 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 haue 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 haue not omitted these questions which are most eminent and worthy of our pains, notwithstanding I haue passed by as much as I could, these which haue been handled by others, lest I should seem {αβγδ}.  
FINIS.