Commentary on Genesis and Exodus, Book 2 · Chapter 7 · Questions 3 – Doctrines
Of the first particular plague, of turning the waters into bloud.
QUEST. XXXVII. Why Aaron is sometime the minister of the plagues and not Moses.
Vers. 20. HE lift up the rod. That is, Aaron. 1. Not as the Hebrewes, because it was not meete that Moses, who was saved out of the waters should bring a plague upon the waters: for Aaron also was the minister of the other plagues 2. Neither was it for …his (as Ferus) that Moses should not be thought to doe it also by sorcery: for they might have had the like suspition of Aaron. 3. But this was God… institution and appointment that Moses should speake to Aaron in the name of God: and Aaron should be his Prophet, chap 7.1 both to speake unto Pharaoh and to shew the signes: which both belonged unto Prophets. And therefore whereas vers. 19. Moses is bid to take the rod, it was to deliver unto Aaron: Iun. 4. Beside also this might be some reason thereof: Aaron was minister of the plagues, and of judgement, Moses of merciemercy: for he specially prayed unto God to remove the plagues, as chap. 8.12. and 30. chap. 9.33.
QUEST. XXXVIII. Why the first plague beginneth in the water.
HE smot… the water. The first plague beginneth in the water. 1. Philo thinketh because the Egyptians held the water to bee the beginning of all things, therefore the Lord causeth his plagues to begin there. 2. Rather, because they put their confidence in Nilus, and gave divine honour unto it, and superstitiously adored the Crocodile therein, therefore the Lord doth punish them there, where their confidence and supposed strength was: Perer. 3. As also because water is one of the most necessary things, that belongeth to mans life, and specially Nilus in Egypt, whereby their grounds were watered, the plagues begin there, to shew the power and severity of God: Simler. 4. As also this plague hath some correspondencie with their sinne of cruelty: 1. As they sinned in the water by the murdering of the innocents, so are they punished by water. 2. Because they caused the infants to dye in the water, the fish also dye there. 3. As they abhorred the Israelites, so the waters become horrible and loathsome. 4. As they shed the bloud of Innocents, so they are constrained to drinke bloud. Ferus. Unto this story doth the Evangelist allude in the Revelation, where the third Angel powreth out his viall, and crieth: For they shed the bloud of thy servants the Prophets, and therefore hast thou given them bloud to drinke, chap. 16.6. 5. This turning of the waters into bloud did also portend the destruction of the Egyptians, which last of all was fulfilled, but first of all threatned, Fer.
QUEST. XXXIX. The greatnesse of this first plague.
THe greatnesse of this plague appeareth: 1. Because it was generall over all Egypt, only the land of Goshen excepted, where the water was not changed, as Iosephus thinketh: this is more than Satan can doe, for he is but in one place at once, and only worketh where he is present, but here the power of God changeth all the water of Egypt at once, whereas Aaron stretched out his hand but over one place. Fer…. 2. Philo maketh this corruption of the waters more generall: he thinketh that all Nilus was turned into bloud, even from the first head and spring thereof: but that is not likely, for Nilus springeth from certaine Mountaines in Aethiopia, and runneth a great way thorow the Aethiopians land: then by this meanes Aethiopia should have beene plagued as well as Egypt, whereas the Scripture onelyonly maketh mention of the land of Egypt to be thus plagued. 3. Beside, not onelyonly the river but all lakes and pondes and vessels, where they used …o gather the water of Nilus to refine and cleanse it, and to make it more potable were corrupted. Sim. 4. The waters were changed into very bloud, such as commeth out of the body, insomuch that many died of thirst: Philo. And they that dranke of it were exceedingly pained: Iosephus. 5. Yea, because not bloud, but water is the element of fish, they also are choked, and by them the water was more putrified, which judgement was so much the greater, because the Egyptians doe most feede of fish. Simler. 5. And this maketh the miracle more strange: that the water of Nilus running cleere along thorow a great part of Aethiopia, when it came to the coasts of Egypt, it there changed, both his colour and substance, being turned into bloud. Perer.
QUEST. XL. Whence the Sorcerers had the water which they also turned into bloud.
Vers. 23. ANd the Enchanters of Egypt did likewise. Whence the Magicians of Egypt should have this water which they turned into bloud, all the waters of Egypt being converted, and altered already, much question there is, and great diversity of opinion. 1. Yet doe I not thinke with Theodoret ▪ that they had these waters out of the sea, which was not farre off: for that was no potable water, apt for drinke, and those kinds of waters Moses changed not: they are said to doe the like, therefore in the same kind of water. 2. Neither yet is it like, as some Hebrewes thinke, as Lyranus saith, that beside the rivers and lakes, which were changed, there were certaine fountaines of water beside, from whence they might fetch their water: for this is contrary to the text, which includeth all pooles of water: vers. 9. 3. Some admit here a synecdoche, that all is taken for the most part: and that we need not understand, that all the waters in generall were converted. Borrh. But the generall speeches of Scripture are not so to be restrained, where no cause is. 4 Cajetanus thus resolveth, that all the waters were not changed at once, but first the rivers, then the lakes and pooles, and standing waters, and last of all the waters kept in vessels of stone, and of wood: vessels of mettall are excepted: But what should let, why by the power of God, to make the wonder greater, all the waters should not be changed at once? and by these kinds of vessels named, all other are signified, unlesse it was the manner of the Egyptians to use none other vessels, than of stone or wood. 5. Iustinus Martyr, to whom consenteth Osiander, doth thinke that the Sorcerers had this water out of the pits, which they digged about the river: But it seemeth that these waters were changed also, by the generall words, and that they laboured in vaine: For if the Egyptians could so have helped themselves, they needed not to have we …ried themselves, in assaying to drinke of the waters of the river, as it is said, vers. 8. 6. Some thinke that the Sorcerers turned some of the water changed into bloud, as it was before, and then turned it againe into bloud: but this is altogether unlike, that they had power to undoe Moses worke, or to destroy his miracle. 7. Ferus thinketh that it was but water in shew, as the conversion of it into bloud was but counterfeit likewise: but as the Sorcerers rods were very rods, though the conversion of them into serpents were but imaginary: so the water here, which they used, was true water, though their worke were counterfeit. 8. Thostat. and Lyranus thinke that the Devill did minister unto them water brought from some other place, out of the land of Egypt: but in that the text saith they did the like, it must be understood of the waters of Egypt, wherein they did like unto Moses. 9. Augustine hath two solutions: the first, that the Sorcerers might stay seven dayes, till the waters returned to their first nature, and then they shewed their cunning also. But it is not like that they stayed so long, for then their power should have seemed to be small, and Pharaohs heart was hardned, before the seven dayes were expired upon this practice of the Sorcerers. 10. His other solution is, that the Sorcerers tooke this water from the land of Goshen, where the Israelites dwelt, for there the water was not changed, as Iosephus well conjectureth: and this is most like: so also Iunius, Simler. But Pererius thinketh, that even the waters in the land of Goshen were also turned into bloud, and that to the Egyptians they were noisome, to the Israelites they were pleasant and sweet as before. Contra. Seeing in other plagues the land of Goshen, and the Israelites were excepted, as in the fourth, fifth, seventh and ninth plague, it is not to be doubted, but that they were privileged in the rest: and seeing the substance of the water was changed, and became very bloud, a second miracle must be admitted to make it sweet, and pleasant to the Israelites: beside this would have extenuated the miracle, that it had beene but a deceit, if the one could drinke of it, and not the other. Wherefore it is most like, that the waters which the Israelites used, were not become bloud, but that they had an exemption both from this, and from the other plagues.
QUEST. XLI. What shift the Egyptians made for water during the continuance of the first plague.
Vers. 25. ANd seven dayes were fulfilled. What shift then did the Egyptians make all this while for drinke? 1. Eusebius C…s…riensis thinketh, that this plague of bloudy waters lasted but one day, and the space of seven dayes is set betweene the first and the second miracle: but if this had beene so, the Egyptians, if they had wanted water but one day, should not so greatly have beene distressed, neither needed they to have toiled themselves in digging of wels. 2. Iustinus Martyr respon. ad quaest. Orth. 26. thinketh, that the Egyptians dranke of the water of the pits which they digged: but it is more like that they digged in vaine for water, as Ferus judgeth: for neither could the plague sent of God, by humane wit or labour be prevented, & if the Egyptians could thus have helped themselves, their distresse & necessity had not beene so great. 3. Thostatus thinketh that they found water in the pits which they digged, not altogether pure, neither yet wholly bloudy, but yet by the veines and pipes of the earth somewhat refined from the thicke bloudy grossenesse, as we see that salt sea water is strained and clensed by putting the same into certaine vessels: and with this water the Egyptians (necessity so compelling them) contented themselves. Contra. There is not the like reason of naturall things and supernaturall: this turning of water into bloud being supernaturall, how is it like, that it could by naturall meanes be qualified? 4. Therefore I thinke rather, that the Egyptians were driven to drinke of the water of the river, they had no other shift, and therefore it is said, vers. 18. That they should be weary, or labour (as the word signifieth) to drinke of the river, which they needed not to have done, if there had beene any other shift. And as Philo writeth, it is like that many in the space of these seven dayes, some died of thirst, some were poisoned by the stinking waters, so that they lay dead on heapes, and the living scarce sufficed to bury them.
QUEST. XLII. Whether the raine that fell was turned into bloud, as the Latine translator readeth.
BUt whereas Psalm 78.44. the Septuagint reade foreign, and the Latine translator following them,Psal. 7….4… ▪ interpreteth imbres, that he turned their raine or showers into bloud; Augustine here moveth a question how this should be, (Moses making no mention of raine water) and resolveth, that the word foreign signifieth as well waters that flow from below, as that fall from above, and so Ianseni… deriveth it of foreign and foreign, to flow together: but this doubt will easily be removed, if we consult with the originall, where the word is nozli…, which signifieth flouds and rivers, of Nazal to flow; so Vatablus translateth, …ivos; Paguin. and Montan. fluenta: for it is notoriously knowne, that in Egypt falleth no raine, as Philo testifieth, lib. 3. de vita Mosis, and Plinie lib. 6. Mela. lib. 3. cap. 9. and so much the Scripture insinuateth, Deut. 11.11. where Moses sheweth a difference betweene the land of Canaan and Egypt, where they watered their fields with their feet, as a garden, that is, they conveyed the waters of Nilus by trenches and furrowes to their fields, which overflowing their grounds serveth in steed of raine: and therefore the Egyptians did more honour Nilus than heaven Perer.
QUEST. XLIII. Whether the Sorcerers did turne the waters into true bloud.
NOw whether the Sorcerers brought forth true bloud, as Moses did, though it need bee no question, as is before shewed, Quest. 21. yet there are divers opinions about it: 1. Augustine thinketh that the Sorcerers, by the Devils helpe, did change the water into very naturall bloud, lib. 83. qu…st 79. But that cannot be, for the Devils have no power to change or transforme one substance into another immediatly, without naturall meanes: and seeing true bloud is not ingendred but in the body, and that not immediatly, but by certaine degrees and preparations, Satan could not in truth doe any such thing. 2. Pererius thinketh, that this bloud was cunninly conveyed by the Devils helpe from some other place, and not made out of the water. But this is not likely, for it was no small quantity of bloud, which seemed to be changed by the Sorcerers: out of how many bodies could the Devill draw and sucke so much bloud? and if the bloud were brought, what came of the water that must bee conveyed away also? Beside the text saith, that the enchanters did likewise: then as Moses turned water into bloud, they must, to make their worke like, turne water also into bloud, or seeme to doe it. 3. Wherefore I subscribe rather to Iustinus: Sanguinem à Magis exhibitum, non fuisse verum, sed fallacem & praestigiosum: That the bloud brought forth by the Magicians, was not true bloud, but deceitfull and counterfeit: quaest. Orthod. 26. Ferus reason is, because naturas mutare solius Dei est: it only belongeth unto God to change natures. Osiander saith, Videntur ad breve tempu… conversae: The waters seemed to be changed by the Sorcerers, but for a short time: but Moses miracle continued seven dayes, which sheweth that it was a true miracle. So Ambrose concludeth,Ambros. in …. cap. ad Rom. Si arte sua quis sublimitate astutiae aliam creaturam fingat ad horam, sicut finxerunt Iannes & Iambres: If any by his cunning and deepe deceit can faine another creature for a time, as Iannes and Iambres did, &c.
QUEST. XLIV. How this first plague was stayed.
HOw this plague ceased is not expressed. 1. Philo thinketh, that at the supplication of the Egyptians made to Moses, and his prayer unto God, the waters returned to their first nature. But if it had beene so, it is not unlike but that Moses could have expressed so much, as hee doth in the other plagues, that were stayed by that meanes. 2. Iosephus writeth, that Pharaoh seeing the miserable state of the Egyptians, did give leave to the Israelites to depart, and so the plague ceased, but presently after hee repented him; but the Scripture seemeth to be contrary, for Pharaohs heart was hardened at the first, and not mollified at all, neither did this plague enter into his heart, vers. 23. 3. Therefore it is most like that this plague contined untill the beginning of the second, which is the end of the first, and so it ceased neither at the entreatie of Pharaoh, or the Egyptians, or by the prayer of Moses, but by the will of God. Thostat. Perer.
QUEST. XLV. Of the application and use of this first plague.
FOr the mysticall application of this plague: 1. Augustine comparing the ten plagues of Egypt, and the ten Commandements together, doth referre the first plague to the first Commandement, applying it thus: The water out of the which commeth the generation of many things, signifieth God the beginning of all: the turning of this water into bloud, is the corrupting of the divine worship by humane and carnall inventions of flesh and bloud. 2. But I preferre rather Ferus applications; the one propheticall, that this plague did portend, the bloudy end and destruction of Pharaoh and the Egyptians; the other morall: that wherein a man sinneth, thereby in the justice of God is he punished: as Adonibezek by the cutting off his fingers and toes, as he had served others; Absalon by his haire which hee was proud of: so the Egyptians are punished in the water, wherein they had destroyed so many innocent babes. Pererius.
4. Places of doctrine.
1. Doct. Of the institution of the princely and priestly calling.
Vers. 1. I Have made thee Pharaohs God, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy Prophet. Here we have the institution of two most necessarie callings among the people of God, the princely power in Moses, whose commission was to give edicts and lawes; and the Ecclesiasticall in Aaron, to whom it appertained to interprete and expound the Law, as the Prophet saith, Aske the Priest concerning the law. Borrh.
2. Doct. Of the hardning of the heart, how it is said to proceed from God.
Vers. 3. I Will harden Pharaohs heart. Mans heart is hardened two wayes, either by it selfe internally, or by some externall accident that moveth the inward cause or the instruments thereof: the externall agents, are either efficients, and so the Devill as an efficient and working cause moveth the heart of man unto evill, being corrupt of it selfe: or they are only disposing and ordering: so the Lord is said to harden the heart: which he doth three wayes: 1. By leaving the will of man, being destitute of good, to it evill nature and disposition. 2. By some occasion given by the Lord, which in it selfe is good, the heart of the wicked becommeth more obstinate, as by the Lords commandement by Moses Pharaoh was more hardened: so the Apostle sheweth that some take occasion by the law, which is good, to bee more evill, Rom. 7. like as tender and weake eyes, by the brightnesse of the Sunne, doe dazle the more and become blinder. 3. The Lord seeing the will of obstinate men to be thus hardened and bent upon evill, he in his justice also driveth them to that end, whither of themselves they runne headlong: Iun. Like as the primum mobile, in the heavens, the utmost sphere▪ carrieth all the other inferiour orbes of the planets about, yet every one of them doe keepe their contrary course, by the which the eclipses of the Sunne and Moone fall out: yet so as by the first overruling motion, they are whirled about and brought to their Eclipse, which is properly caused notwithstanding by their owne particular motion: so there is an overruling power of God, that bringeth every thing to the end appointed: yet the defects and eclipses of our will doe proceede of our owne corrupt nature. See more of this point how the Lord is said to harden the heart, chap. 4. quest. 19.
3. Doct. That no man sinneth of absolute necessitie.
Vers. 22. HE did not hearken unto them as the Lord had said. It was necessary that Pharaoh should not hearken unto Moses, because the Lord had foretold so much, who cannot be deceived. But Pharaoh was not forced or compelled thereunto: there is then an absolute or violent necessity, which forceth and compelleth; there is a conditionall and hypotheticall necessity, when a thing is said to be necessary another thing presupposed: so Pharaohs disobedience and obstinacy was the second way necessary, upon the presupposall of Gods prescience; but the first way it was not necessary; the first necessity is coactive, but the second is voluntary, the other neither justifieth a man if he doe well being forced, no… condemneth him if hee doe evill: but the second hath place in both: both the righteous have praise, whose obedience in respect of Gods ordinance is necessary and infallible, and the wicked are justly condemned, who sinne willingly, though Gods prescience considered in some sort also necessarily. Borrh.