Commentary on Genesis and Exodus, Theological treatise · Chapter 23 · Questions · Question 21 – Question 27
QUEST. XXI. Whether the seventh yeere were generally neglected in Israel, 490. yeeres together, as Tostatus thinketh.
NOw concerning the observation of this seventh yeere of rest, Tostatus hath here a singular opinion by himselfe, that it was neglected generally of the Israelites for the space of 490. yeeres, and kept only during the time of 380. yeeres, as he thus would gather: from the going up of the Israelites out of Egypt till the captivity of Babylon under Nabuzaradan, Nebuchadnezzars chiefe Captaine, he counteth yeeres 867. which are thus divided: from their departure out of Egypt, unto the building of Salomons Temple, were 480. yeeres, 1 King. 6.1. from the which he would have aba…ed 40. yeeres, the time of the Israelites being in the wildernesse, so there remaine 440. from the building of Salomons Temple untill the captivity, he counteth 427. yeeres more: so the whole maketh 867. of this time, 490. yeeres they neglected the seven Sabbath of yeares: and therefore they were 70. yeeres in captivity: for omitting 70. Sabbaticall yeeres, which fell out just in 490. yeeres, as it is said, 2 Chron. 36.21. To … of the Lord by the mouth of Ieremy, untill the land had her f…ll of Sabbaths: for all the dayes that … desolate she kept Sabbath to fulfill seventy yeeres, Tostat. quaest. 1….
Contra. 1. But it is not like, that this observation of the seventh yeere of rest was so long time, or generally neglected: for part of this terme of 490. yeeres will reach Davids reigne: for all the yeeres of the reignes of the Kings after David, untill the captivity, make but 440. the other 50. yeere will comprehend all Davids reigne, and ten yeeres before, some part whereof might extend to … time: but it is not like that such an evident Law under those faithfull Prophets and Kings would have beene omi… ted altogether.. 2. In the corrupt times under the idolatious Kings, it is true that this yeere of remission was neglected, as may appeare, Ierem. 36.8.14. when as the King and Princes proclaimed liberty to their servants according to the Law, and afterward revoked it againe: for the which the Prophet th…re sharply reproveth them. Neither would the faithfull Prophets of God have spared to tell the Princes and people of this great negligence, if that the Sabbaticall yeere had altogether beene discontinued. 3. In Hezekiah his time, this yeere of rest was not intermitted: for while the City was besieged by Senacherib, for two yeeres together the land brought forth fruit without sowing, 2 King. 19.29. which blessing was conditionall in respect of their keeping of the seventh yeere of rest, Levit. 25.6.21. They therefore enjoying the promised blessing did in all likelihood performe their due obedience. 4. Beside, captivity is threatned for the neglect of their Sabbaths of all sorts, Levit. 26.…5. both the Sabbath of dayes, of weekes, of moneths, yeeres, and seven yeeres. It is as like that they neglected the Sabbath of dayes, which was the seventh: of weekes, which was Pentecost: of moneths, which was the seventh as well as of yeeres: yee the Sabbath of seven yeeres, which was the Jubile, was also intermitted, if the seventh yeere, from which they accounted it, were not remembred. 5. Further, if they suffered not the land to rest in the seventh yeere, they likewise abandoned other privileges incident to that yeere, as the remission of debts, the setting free their servants: which apparent transgressions, nay rebellions, should not have beene suffered to slip without some reprehension by the Prophets, and correction from God, especially under the vertuous Kings of Judah.
QUEST. XXII. Why the Law of the Sabbath is so oft repeated.
Vers. 12. SIx dayes thou shalt labour. …1. Some thinke that this precept concerning the observation of the Sabbath is repeated by reason of the former Law concerning the seventh yeere of intermission; lest that the Hebrewes, because that whole yeere was a time of rest, might have taken unto themselves greater liberty in the keeping of the Sabbath, Lyran. But this seemeth to be no sufficient reason: because although they rested from the workes of husbandry all that yeere, yet they attended other … nesse and labour, Tostatus. 2. Some thinke that the Sabbath is here mentioned in respect of the civill … thereof, the rest and relaxation of the servants: whereas before it was urged as a part of Gods service, Gallas. Siml. 3. But the best reason is, that the Law of the Sabbath is repeated, because it chiefly concerned the worship of God: and therefore so often is this precept i…crated; as chap. 20. Deut. 5▪ Exod. 31. … and in divers other places, Tostat. quaest. 13. 4. And such respect the Lord hath to the seventh day of rest, which he himselfe consecrated by his owne example, that according to this rule he did proportion the other festivals, as the seventh weeke, the seventh monethmonth, the seventh yeere: yea in naturall experiments the seventh day is observed: as the seventh, fouretenth, and twenty one are the criticall dayes for diseases, as Hippocrates and Gal… have written, Hierome. 4. The benefit of this day the Lord would have extended to their servants, strangers, yea to the labouring cartell. R. Salomon thinketh,In Amo… cap. that in the next clause, Yee shall take heed to all things, &c. the implements and instruments which are used to any businesse or worke are understood, as the sword, a…e▪ cutting knife, and such like: that all these things should rest in like manner. But this is too curious, and beside it were superfluous, seeing the men are forbid to labour, without whose hands these things cannot stirre or move: therefore this clause either is to be referred to the former duties which concerned the Sabbath, Lyran. or in generall to their obedience to the whole Law, and all the former precepts which were delivered have it, Simler.
QUEST. XXIII. What manner of mention of strange gods is here forbidden.
Vers. 14. AN… ye shall make no mention of the name of strange gods. 1. The Latine Translator readeth, Thou shalt not sweare: but the word zachar signifieth to remember: which is more than to sweare, which is too strictly taken: they must make no mention, non solum jurando, sed landand…, probande, abtestande: not only in swearing, but in praising of them, approving, protesting by them, Lippoman. 2. The Jewes doe run into another extreme, making this precept too generall: they thinke it not lawfull at all once to pronounce the names of the Gentiles Idols: but the Prophets which inveighed against them, could not but pronounce their names with their mouth: the meaning then is, nullus loquatur honorabiliter, none should make honourable mention of them, Cajetane. 3. This phrase then is to be understood, as S. Paul would not have fornication once named among them, Ephes. 5.3. that is, that more should be committed, none named with desire or delight, Simler. therefore here only is forbidden …onesta …, &c. non inhonesta & cum detestatione, &c. the comely and reverent mention of their gods, not the i… reverent mention with detestation. 4. Cajetane thus distinguisheth the sentence: the first part biddeth, ut praeteriti d… non memorentur, that the former strange gods should not be remembred, but be forgotten, as though they never had beene: the other part, neither shall it be heard out of thy mouth, sheweth, ut de moderuis diis nemo honorabiliter loquatur, and of the gods present none should speake honourably. But indeed the meaning is, that generally the memory of all false gods should be extinguished: as they … commanded to abolish the very names of them, Deut. 12.3. that neither in their oathes, nor in their familiar talke they should revive the memory of them: see the practice thereof, Psalm. 16.4. Neither will make mention of their names within my lips. So the Lord saith by his Prophet, I will take away the … of Baalim out of her mouth, and they shall be no more remembred by their names, Hos. 2.17. Iun. 5. By the name of strange gods are here understood, all which the Heathen worshipped, whether by images or without, whether things in heaven, in the earth, or under the earth: which are called strange gods; not because they are gods at all, but so reputed in the opinion of their idolatrous worshippers: and strange they were, because such were worshipped onelyonly of strange nations, and not of the people of God, To… tat. quaest. 13.
QUEST. XXIV. Why it is forbidden to sweare by the name of strange gods.
Vers. 13. YE shall make no mention of the name of other gods, &c. 1. If it be unlawfull to make any honourable mention at all of the names of strange gods, no not in usuall talke, much lesse is it lawfull to sweare by them, because in taking of an oath, invocatur Deus tanquam testis veritatio, God is called upon as a witnesse of the truth: so to sweare by the name of God, is actus …reiae, an act of divine worship, and therefore it cannot be given unto any other beside God: and againe, one Idols, because they are false gods, non possunt esse testes veritatis, cannot be witnesses of the truth, Lyran. 2. … observeth here this difference betweene the Law and the Gospell: there, per nomen Dei jurure non …, they are not forbidden to sweare by the name of God: Evangelica veritat non recipit juramentum ▪ But the Evangelicall truth admitteth no oath, because the speech of a faithfull man ought to be in stead of an oath, &c. He thinketh that by this Law the Hebrewes had liberty given them to sweare at their pleasure, so they did sweare only by the name of God. But I rather here approve Calvins annotation, Non incit…t Deus p…p… l… ad jurandi licentiam, &c. God doth not hereby incite his people to swe…ing, or give them liberty to sweare: sed ubi opus fuerit, & vel necessitat & justa ratio id posta…bit, but where need it, and necessary, or just cause doe so require, &c. otherwise the Law doth forbid all unlawfull swearing, as well as the Gospell. 3. And the reason why they ought not to sweare by strange gods, is, ne frequenti juramento i…cantur ad cult… …, &c. lest that by often swearing they be induced to worship them, Glos. interli…. 4. And as an Hebrew then, and so a Christian now, was not himselfe, so neither were they to compell a Gentile to sweare by them: yet as Augustine determineth it is lawfull for a Christian, recipere ab eo juramentum in Deo suo, Augustin. ad ….&c. to receive an oath of a Gentile by his god, to confirme some covenant or contract: se Gentilis obtularis se facturum, if the Gentile doe of himselfe offer it, Lyran, Tostat.
QUEST. XXV. Whether a Christian may compell a Iew to sweare by his Thorah, which containeth the five bookes of Moses.
VPonUpon this occasion, how farre a Christian may compell another of a contrary religion to sweare, as a Jew or Turke, Tostatus bringeth in divers questions, which it shall not be amisse here briefly to touch: as first, whereas it is an usuall thing with the Jewes at this day to sweare upon their Thorah, which is nothing else but a volume containing the five bookes of Moses, yet bound up in silke, and laid up very curiously in their Synagogue, whereout they use to read the lectures of the Law: the question is, whether it be lawfull for a Christian Judge to urge a Jew to take his oath upon his Thorah; for upon the Gospels, he will rather dye than take an oath. For the resolution of this doubt, divers things are to be weighed and considered.
1. That there is great difference betweene the Idols, and … gods of the Heathen, and the Jewes Thorah: for this … a part of Gods word, and containeth nothing but the truth and it is all one, as if the Jew did lay his hand upon the Pentateuch or five bookes of Moses: as any Christian may take his oath upon the Gospels, or any other part of Gods word.
2. And like as a Christian laying his hand upon the Gospels, doth not … by the book…, for … were unlawfull, in giving the honour due to the Creator unto a creature: but hath relation unto God, whose verity and truth is contained in that booke: So a Jew swearing upon his Thorah, yet sweareth by God the Author of the Law, and in so doing sinneth not.
3. Yet it may so fall out, that a Jew may sinne in swearing upon his Thorah, as having an opinion, that all the contents of that booke, as namely the ceremonials, are yet in force, which are abolished in Christ: and yet the Judge may not sinne in requiring the Jew to sweare upon his Thorah: for he doth not consider of those things, quae sunt in voluntate agentis, sed de ipso actis, which are in the minde and intent of the doer, but of the act it selfe: therefore the act of it selfe being lawfull, a Jew may be required to doe it: Sic Tostat. qu. 14.
QUEST. XXVI. Whether a Iew may be urged to sweare in the name of Christ.
BUt as the Jew may be urged to sweare upon his Thorah, which they hold to be a booke of truth, as Christians doe, yet the case is not alike, if a Christian should compell a Jew to sweare in the name of Christ; for although Christ be in deed and in truth very God, yet the Jewes hold him to be worse than any Idoll: and therefore the Jew in taking such an oath should doe against his conscience, and consequently commit a great sinne: or if a Jew should require a Christian to sweare by the name of Christ, whom he holdeth to be no God, nor yet a good man, therein the Jew should also sinne against his conscience: for it skilleth not a thing to be so or so indeed, dum aliter concipiatur, as long as a man otherwise conceiveth and is perswaded in his minde, Tostat. qu. 15.
QUEST. XXVII. Whether a Saracene may be urged to sweare upon the Gospels or in the name of Christ.
NOw, although a Jew cannot be compelled without sinne to sweare in the name of Christ whom he holdeth worse than an Idoll, or upon the Gospels which they thinke containe nothing but fables; yet the reason standeth otherwise for a Saracene or Turke: he may be required to sweare in the name of Christ, or upon the Gospels. And the reason is, because the Saracens have a good opinion of Christ, and beleeve that he was sent of God, and that he was a great Prophet, and a good man: and for the most part they doe assent unto the Gospels, and beleeve that Christ spake the truth. And therefore they in taking such an oath doe not against their conscience, and therein sinne not. Now if it be objected, that the Saracens differ more from the Christians than the Jewes, and therefore can no more lawfully take an oath in the name of Christ than the Jewes: the answer is, that although the Jewes consent with the Christians touching the canonicall bookes of the old Testament, as the Saracens doe not: yet as touching Christ they doe totally dissent from the Christians, and so doe not the Saracens, Tostat. qu. 17.