Exposition of Job 4-7, Commentary on Job · Chapter 4 · Verse 18

Exposition of Job 4-7 · Commentary on Job · Chapter 4 · Verse 18

p. 124JOB. Chap. 4. Verſ. 18.

Behold he put no truſt in his ſervants, and his Angels he charged with folly.

ELiphaz having laid the dignity of man (comparing with God) in the duſt, by thoſe humbling queſtions, in the former verſe, what is man that he ſhould be just? and ſhall man be more pure than his Maker? He now ſtrengthens it further, that there is no compariſon between God and mortall man, by a direct aſſertion, that there is no compariſon between God, and immortall Angells. p. 125Behold he put no truſt in his ſervants, and his Angels he charged with folly. As if he had ſaid, If Angels are not able to ſtand before God, and juſtifie themſelves upon his enquirie; then certainly man, the beſt of men, who dwell but in houſes of clay cannot: But Angels cannot juſtifie themſelves before God, therefore much leſſe can the beſt of men. That Angels are not able to juſtifie themſelves before God, he proves in theſe words: Behold he put no truſt in his ſervants, and his Angels he charged with folly: They that cannot be truſted by God, cannot be juſtified by God: And they that are chargeable with folly, are not able to ſtand in judgement before the moſt wiſe, the only wiſe and holy God. Angels are excellent creatures, yet becauſe creatures, they are in, and of themſelves, fraile and weake: they have no ſtrength to ſtand longer then upheld, no ſtedfaſtneſſe to obey, longer than confirmed, no faithfullneſſe to be loyall, longer than overruled, no wiſedome to diſcerne, further than they are enlightned; what then will become of man, if he ſtand alone, or ſtand in competition with God his Maker? This is the ſumme and generall ſenſe of the words as they are an argument. We will now conſider them as they lye here in order.

Behold he put no truſt in his ſervants.

The particle [Behold] in the Originall, as it often notes wonder in other texts, ſo it may, much more in this, Behold a wonder, Angels are fooliſh, Angels are not to be truſted; yet in this place, Behold, is put by way of affirmation, rather then of admiration. Behold he put no truſt in his ſervants, is as much as verily and indeed, certainly and without controverſie, he put no truſt in his ſervants; So (Deut. 13 14.) Thou ſhalt inquire and ſearch, and aske diligently, and behold if it be true; in the Hebrew thus, and behold true, or behold truth; that is, if upon enquirie it appeare, that ſucb and ſuch things are certainly ſo, then, they muſt proceed according to the Law provided in that caſe. Againe (Deut. 19. 18.) The Judges ſhall make diligent inquiſition, and behold, if the witneſſe be a falſe witneſſe, ſo we tranſlate; but the letter is, Behold the witneſſe, a falſe witneſſe, that is, if it be affirmed, and doe appeare that it is a falſe witneſſe or teſtimonie which is brought, then the Judges ſhall proceed ſo and ſo, &c. Thus here, Behold he put no truſt in his ſervants, is a vehement affirmation, that God ſearching into thoſe his ſervants, finds them ſuch as are not to be truſted

p. 126But who are theſe untruſty ſervants? Firſt, The Chaldee paraphraſt underſtands by ſervants, the holy Prophets; Prophets (I grant) ſometimes have, and oftner would have proved unfaithfull; ſome of them, diſcovered much, and others would have diſcovered more unfaithfulneſſe, if God had not mightily ſupported them. Secondly, One of the Rabbins, underſtands it in generall of any, or of all the faithfull, Behold he put no truſt in his ſervants; that is, not in any of the holieſt and faithfulleſt of the children of men.

But the connexion of the text carries it clearely, that by ſervants, we are to underſtand the Angels, who are called miniſtring ſpirits, Heb. 1. 14. Are they not all miniſtring ſpirits (or ſervants) ſent out for the good of thoſe that are the heires of ſalvation? And ſo the words in the cloſe of this verſe, are exigeticall, expounding who are intended by thoſe ſervants; Behold he put no truſt in his ſervants, and his Angels he charged with folly; that is, he truſted not thoſe ſervants the Angels, but charged them with folly. But there is a further reaſon, more fully evidencing that it muſt be underſtood of Angels, in the 19 verſe, where the perſons ſtanding in equall oppoſition to theſe ſervants and Angels, are men H…w much leſſe (ſaith he) on them that dwell in houſes of clay: Now a dwelling in a houſe of clay, is the periphraſis, or deſcription of mankinde in generall, good or bad, one or other, high or low, all mankinde dwels in a houſe of clay. Seeing then the terme of oppoſition is mankinde in generall, we muſt take ſomewhat which being foreign Nutrivit in Hiphil credid…t fiſus eſt A fide quae in nutr…endo requiritur, foreigna raionall creature is not man, for the other terme, which cannot be any except Angels; we cannot ſet any ſort of men in oppoſition to others upon this ground, becauſe they dwell in houſes of clay, for the Saints on earth dwell in houſes of clay, as well as men of the earth; therefore to make the oppoſition clear, it neceſſarily follows, that by Servants in the firſt clauſe of the verſe, Angels are implyed, as well as in the latter, where Angels are expreſt.nutriius d…ctus eſt cujus fidei pue… eſt commiſsus, quaſi fidum aut fidetem dicas, ſaepe etiam accommodatur ad aeconomum & diſpenſatorem, proper fidelitatem eorum,

But if theſe ſervants be Angels, how is it, that he put no truſt in, or that (as we may render it word for word out of the Hebrew) he did not believe in theſe his ſervants? I ſhall anſwer that, when I have a little opened the wopd here tranſlated To put truſt. We finde it uſed two wayes in Scripture, ſometime paſſively, and ſometime actively. It is taken paſſively to be faithfull, truſty, and true in word or promiſe. From this root the Hebrew takes the name of a Guardian or Foſter-father or Steward, becauſe ſuch to whoſe care children or families are committed, ought to be moſt faithful in the diſcharge of ſo great a truſt.

p. 127The Apoſtle (1 Cor. 4. 1, 2.) ſpeaking of that heavenly Stewardſhip, the miniſtery of the Goſpel, expreſſeth it thus, Let a man ſo account of us as of the Miniſters of Chriſt, and Stewards of the myſteries of God, moreover (ſaith he) it is required in a Steward that a man be found faithfull. And (Numb. 12. 7.) where Moſes is ſpoken of, as a ſervant, he is thus deſcribed, My ſervant Moſes is not ſo, who is faithfull in all my houſe; he is a man whom I may truſt or give credit to, for he is truſty and faithfull. (Heb. 3. 2, 5.) the Apoſtle comparing Chriſt and Moſes, ſaith of Chriſt, That he was faithfull to him that appointed him, as Moſes was faithfull in all his houſe. So that here is an elegant Antitheſis, His ſervants, who according to their duty and office, ought to be conſtant, faithfull, truſty; he found unconſtant unfaithfull, not to be truſted.

Yet the word being in Hyphil, is of an active ſignification, and foreign A verbi preprietate non recedamus, qua ſign…ficat cum foreign credere & fidere alicui Merc Verbum de verbo in ſervos ſuos credidit.when it is in conſtruction with Beth (as Grammarians obſerve) it imports to give credit unto, or confide in a perſon; and ſo here, he put no truſt; that is, he did not credit or condfie in thoſe ſervants, or he did not believe on them. He ſaw ſomewhat in them, which might betray them to diſloyaltie, if himſelfe withdrawing his aſſiſtance ſhould make an experiment, or try what was in their hearts. And this ſenſe is moſt ſuitable to the ſtate and office of a ſervant: truſting or not truſting, faithfulneſſe, or unfaithfulneſſe, are acts proper to that relation, Lord and Servant. So then the Lord put no truſt, or he could not confide in his ſervants, they being ſuch as he found not perfectly ſure and loyall unto him. We ſay commonly of a man whom we cannot rruſt, We will not give our word for him, and we will not take his. Our Lord Chriſt is therefore called a faithfull High Prieſt, becauſe his Father truſted him with the whole buſineſſe of our ſalvation, without the leaſt miſgiving thought of his faithfulneſſe, or the miſcarriage of the work. Thus Solomon deſcribes a faithfull Wife and a confiding Husband, Prov. 31, 10, 11. A rare couple indeed, and as rarely found. Therefore he makes proclamation for ſuch a woman; who can finde a vertuous Woman? for her price is farre above Rubies, the heart of her Husband doth ſafely truſt in her, ſo that he ſhall have no need of ſpoile: there's confidence to the height, the heart of her Husband doth ſafely truſt in her. A Husband that hath ſuch a Jewell to his Wife, knowes, ſhe will order the family with diſcretion at home, when he's abroad: he knowes ſhe is faithfull to him body and goods. Her chaſtity or her frugality never came in queſtion before p. 128his thoughts; therefore (ſaith he) I ſhall have no need of ſpoile, which ſome interpret thus: her care and wiſdome in providing for the family, will make it like an Army, which hath overcome the Tam circum. fluit bonis omnibus familia ejus quam milites ſpolijs ex pugnata urbe, out hoſte ſupera…o.Enemy in the field, or wonne a wealthy City, where the Souldiers have ſpoile or pillage enough, they need no ſpoile. Or as others, He ſhall have no need of ſpoile, that is, he ſhall have no need to ſpoile or oppreſſe others, to helpe his family. All things ſhall be ſo ordered by his wives prudence, that he ſhall not need to take any unjuſt way, to provide for, or ſupply his houſehold. Thus the heart of her husband doth ſafely truſt in her. Such truſt the heart of God could not put in thoſe ſervants, his Angels, he knew they might come ſhort in their accounts. Such truſt Chriſt could not give ſome, who ſeemed to truſt or believe on him, (John 2. 23.) Many ſeeing Chriſts miracles believed on him, yet Chriſt would not believe on them; we tranſlate, he would not commit himſelfe to them; the Greek is, he did not believe or truſt himſelfe foreign.unto them, Chriſt believes in, or may truſt them all the world over, who truly believe in him: But theſe believed ſo falſely upon him that he could not believe fully upon them; and the text gives the reaſon, For he himſelfe knew all men, he knew, they were not metall of a due temper, and therefore not to be truſted. So God knew all Angels, the uttermoſt perfection, power, and vertue that was in Angels, therefore he would not commit all to them, he would not believe upon them. We finde the word belief thus uſed, (Exod. 14. 31.) when the children of Iſrael ſaw the great work, that the Lord had wrought in deſtroying the Egyptians, it is ſaid, The people feared the Lord, and believed the Lord, and his ſervant Moſes; he puts God and Moſes as the joynt object of their faith: as they had formerly been of their unbelief▪ Except the ſervants of the Lord be believed, the Lord himſelfe is not. And when they are believed, the Lord is. Believe in the Lord your God, believe his Prophets, ſaith good Jehoſaphat to his people, 2 Chron. 20 20. Moſes had told them enough of the power of God before, he had undertaken they ſhould be delivered, but they would not truſt Moſes upon his word, nor would they truſt the Word of God: yet now when they ſaw this great deliverance, preſent ſight wrought faith for the time to come: they perceived by this miracle, that the Lord and Moſes were to be credited, & they doubted not, to credit them another time. Though that faith which comes in at the eyes only, ſeldome goes downe ſo low, as the heart, or ſees further and p. 129longer then the eye. Thus we may underſtand the firſt part of the Verſe, He put no truſt, no belief in his ſervants, he gave no credit to them, as knowing perfectly what their nature and power was, what both could do: that if left by God, they would quickly leave God, and prove unfaithfull.

I ſhall obſerve one point, before I come to the latter part of the Verſe (for there the ſuſpition of diſloyaltie upon the Angels comes more fully to be conſidered) from the title here given to the Angels, His ſervants, he put no truſt in his ſervants, Angels are the ſervants of God. They are his ſervants, as being altogether at his command, and they are his ſervants, as being fully conformable to his commands. Theſe great and glorious Spirits, come under the ſame title and denomination with men, who dwell in houſes of clay, ſervants of God. To ſerve God, is not only the duty, but it is the honour of the higheſt creatures. It is more honour to ſerve God, then to rule the world. The ſtile of the good Angels, is, Miniſtring Spirits, Heb. 1. but the ſtile and title of the evill Angel, is, Prince of the power of the aire, God of this word: you would think theſe were weighty titles, Prince of the aire, God of the world, but the additions diminiſh their weight, yea, make them lighter then vanity, or rather, heavie only with miſery: There is more glory in being a ſervant of God, than in being a god of the world, or a Prince of the power of the aire.

I might here enlarge my enquiry into the ſervices of Angels, in what they are ſervants, and what their offices and duties are, but I ſhall only touch. Their ſervice may be conſidered either in reſpect of the Church, or the enemies of the Church. Reſpecting the Church and people of God, they have ſuch ſervices as theſe.

Firſt, they are as meſſengers to carry and reveale the minde of God. They are as Tutors and inſtructors of the Churches, Dan. 8. 9. God ſent his Angel to teach Daniel the myſterie of thoſe viſions. And Rev. 1. 11. an Angel was ſent to inſtruct John, Chap. 22. 16. I Jeſus have ſent mine Angell to teſtifie theſe things in the Churches.

Secondly, they are ſent as guardians and protectors of the people of God, to take their part, and to be on their ſide, Pſal. 34. 7. The Angel of the Lord encampeth round about them that feare him. Pſal. 91. 11. He giveth his Angels a charge over them, leſt at any time they ſhould daſh their feet againſt a ſtone. Gen. 32. 2. When Jacob journied, it is ſaid, the Angels of God met him; p. 130an army of Angels was his Convoy, Gods Hoaſt coming out for his protection and ſafeguard, and therefore he called the name of that place Nahanaim, that is, two Hoſts or Camps; either becauſe the Angels appeared in two bands, and ſo made as it were a guard for Jacob to paſſe between them. Or, becauſe the great Angelicall Royall Army, quartered and marched with Jacobs little Army; and ſo two confederate Armies appeared in the field together. Angels are called Chariots, Pſal. 68. 17. The Chariots of God are twenty thouſand, even thouſands of Angels. That is, God uſeth Angels for defence of his people, as Chariots in Warr. The ancient Prophets were called the Chariots of Iſrael, (2 King. 3. 13.) and the Angels are the Chariots of God. Our ſtrongeſt Militia is of Spirits, or of men ſpiritualiz'd.

Thirdly, Angels ſuggeſt good things, holy thoughts to us. If the Devill, who is an evill Angel, a wicked ſpirit, can ſuggeſt evill, ſinfull filthy thoughts, and help on the heart in wickedneſſe; then doubtleſſe a good Angel can help on the heart in holineſſe, in heavenly thoughts and meditations. Chriſt ſpeaks of Judas, that Satan had put it into his heart to betray him, John 13. and Peter to Ananias (Acts 5.) Why hath Satan filled thine heart to lye to the Holy Ghoſt? The nature of a good Angel is as fit, his power given as great, to deale with our ſpirits, as either the nature or the power of an evill Angel. That of the Apoſtle (2 Cor. 11. 14.) gives a hint, if not a proofe of it, where he tels the Corinthians, That deceitfull workers transforme themſelves into the Apoſtles of Chriſt, and no marvell, for Sathan himſelfe is transformed into an Angell of light, and when is Satan in this change from an Angel of darkneſſe to an Angel of light? even when He ſuggeſts good for evill ends, or evill for good ends. And if he is called an Angel of light for this reaſon, then Angels of light, good Angels ſuggeſt good, for good ends; otherwiſe, Satan could not be ſaid to imitate them, in ſuggeſting good for ill ends, and under ſpecious pretences of bringing glory to God, tempting to tranſgreſſe the will of God.

Fourthly, good Angels comfort, ſtrengthen and ſupport, in times of diſtreſſe, anguiſh and trouble: an Angel comforted Hagar Gen. 21 and (Matth. 4. 10.) after Chriſt had finiſhed his terrible combat with that wicked Angel, the good Angels came and miniſtred unto him. Againe, when he was in that moſt bitter Agony in the garden (Luke 22. 43.) an Angel appeared to him from Heaven, p. 131ſtrengthning him. That which they do to Chriſt the Head, they do to his members in their proportion.

Their fifth ſervice, is to conveigh and carry the ſoules of departed Saints to Heaven: they are Heavenly Porters (Luke. 16. 22.) Lazarus dyed, and was carried by the Angels into Abrahams boſome.

Laſtly, they ſhall convocate and gather all the Elect together at the laſt day, Matth. 24. 31. Their ſervices againſt the wicked and all enemies of the Church have been many and great. Angels aſſiſt Saints, and oppoſe the oppoſers of Sion. Two Angels were ſent upon a meſſage of deſtruction to Sodome; an Angel defeated the Hoaſt of Senacherib; an Angel ſmote bloody perſecuting Herod; Angels (by name, if not by nature) powre out the ſeven vials of Gods wrath in the Revelation. And at the laſt day Angels ſhall hurry the wicked to Chriſts Tribunall; they are heavenly Purſivants; and they ſhall bundle the Tares up together, as fuell to be throwne into everlaſting burnings, Matth. 13. 41, 42.

And it may be a great comfort to us, that God hath ſuch ſervants. When viſible dangers are round about us, we ſhould remember, God hath inviſible ſervants round about us. There are more with us, then againſt us, as Eliſha told his fearfull ſervant, 2 Kings 6. And in that low eſtate of the Church, Zech. 1. 8. the Prophet is ſhewed Chriſt in a viſion ſtanding among the Mirtle trees in the bottome, (the Mirtle trees in the bortome, noted the Church in a low eſtate) and behinde him there were red Horſes, ſpeckled and white; that is, horſemen ſpeckled and white. Theſe diverſe coloured Horſes were Angels appointed for ſeverall offices, as the learned Junius (with others) interprets it; The red horſes being appointed for judgement, the white for mercy, and the ſpeckled, (as he conjectures) for mixt actions, being ſent out, at once to protect and help the people of God, and to execute wrath and judgement upon the adverſary. Thus we ſee the ſervices of the Angels; they are ſervants, yet ſuch as the moſt wiſe God put no truſt in; therefore we have an Angel better then Angels, even the Angel of the Covenant the Lord Jeſus, into whoſe hands our ſafety is committed, to whoſe care the Church is left, in whom God puts the whole truſt, knowing that this great Angel, is, and for ever will be faithfull, in and over his houſe, to his higheſt delight, and the Churches compleateſt welfare.

p. 132And his Angels he charged with folly.Nec in Angelis ſuis ponet lumen Tagn. Nec in Angelis ſuis poſuit lucem exactiſſimam- Vatab. Angelis ſuis poſuit veſaniam, Tygur. In Angelis ſuis ponet glorationem. Bibl. Reg. In Angelis ſuis reperit vanitatem Sym. foreign Sept. foreign àradice foreign Splenduit, luxit, claruit Metaphoricè in piel, ſpiendidum, illuſtrem, cla…ū reddidit laudavit, praedicavit. Per Antiph raſin. inglorius, inſanus furore actus fuit, inſanivit.

There are very different readings of this part of the Verſe. Some (as M. Beza) read it thus, He truſted not in his ſervants, though he had put light into thoſe his meſſengers. Others reade it with a negation in both parts, He put no trust in his ſervants, neither hath he put light in his Angels. Another thus, neither hath he put perfect light in his Angels. Mr. Broughton differs from all theſe, Behold he holdeth not perfection to be in his own ſervants, and in his Angels he judged no clear light to be. Another ſort read it to theſe ſenſes, He charged, or put madneſſe in or upon his Angels, he put or charged vaine boaſting in, or upon his Angels, he found vanity in or amongſt his Angels, he obſerved ſome evill amongſt his Angels.

Now that which hath given occaſion to this variety of tranſlatings, is the different ſenſes which the Originall yields us. The Hebrew word is very fruitfull of ſignifications, and hath (as the Oracle told Rebecca concerning two contrary Nations) two contrary meanings in the wombe of it, and that makes the ſtrugling amongſt Interpreters. The word in its proper ſenſe ſignifies to ſhine forth with a reſplendent brightneſſe, ſo Chap. 29. 3. Job wiſheth, O that I were as in moneths paſt, when the candle of God ſhined upon my head; it is a Verbe of which the word folly in this text of Job is a derivative. And (Iſay 14. 12.) Hielel ſignifies the Morning ſtar, whoſe ſhining brightneſſe hath obtained the name Lucifer, Light-bringer, or Light-bearer. How art thou fallen from Heaven O Lucifer, ſonne of the Morning? How art thou fallen from Heaven, Hielel, thou ſhining day-ſtar? Thus, the word properly ſignifies ſhining or brightneſſe, or to ſhine and be bright: and hence by a Metaphor to be Famous, or renowned, or to make one renowned or famous, or to paint out a man with praiſes; becauſe a man is (as it were) decked with light, and hath rayes of brightneſſe caſt upon him, when he is honoured and adorned with praiſes. Due commendations are to a man as a robe or veſture of light, which makes him ſhine to all about him. And hence the word Halelujah is derived, praiſe ye Jah, or the Lord; uſed frequently both in the beginning and end of the Pſalmes: in the beginning of the Pſalmes by way of exhortation, and in the end by way of acclamation, crying up the honour and glory of God. And (to note that in paſſage) it is well obſerved, that this word Hallelujah is firſt uſed p. 133in the old Teſtament, Pſal. 104. 35. where the utter conſumption of ſinners is mentioned; and in the New Teſtament it is firſt uſed, Rev. 19. 3 6. where the utter conſumption of Antichriſt is propheſied. Judgement on the wicked, is matter of high praiſe to God. Thirdly, the word ſignifies (by the figure Antiphraſis or contrary ſpeaking) to boaſt and brag vainly, fooliſhly; or vaine fooliſh boaſting. To commend or extoll our ſelves is pride running mad, and arrogance diſtracted. It is the higheſt dotage to be in love with our owne wiſdome and folly, to publiſh our own works. There may be wiſdom (though oftentimes there is a great deale of folly) in commending others, but in commending our ſelves, there can be nothing but folly: therefore the very ſame word which ſignifies to boaſt and commend our ſelves; ſignifies both the concrete, to be mad, vaine, or fooliſh; and the abſtract, madneſſe and folly: thus in Eccleſ. 2. 2, 12. the word is uſed, I ſaid of laughter thou art mad. I turned my ſelfe to behold wiſdome, and folly, and madneſſe: and Pſal. 75. 4. I ſaid unto the fooles, deale not fooliſhly, or to the mad-men, do not play the mad-men, that is, do not exalt your ſelves, for ſo he clears his meaning in the fifth Verſe, Lift not up your hornes on high, ſpeak not with a ſtiffe neck, that is, a neck ſtifned with pride, and a horne lifted up with vaine-glory or ſelf-confidence.

From this variety of ſignifications, the variety of tranſlations before toucht, ariſeth. Firſt they who read it, He put light into thoſe his meſſengers, take the word in a proper ſtrict ſenſe, making out the meaning thus; that God having put the light of excellent knowledge into the Angels, could not yet truſt them: all their ſpeculative knowledge, and high raiſed illuminations, were not enough to make them ſteadily and ſteadfaſtly holy: that is the intent of Mr. Beza's interpretation, He truſted not to his ſervants, though he had put light into thoſe his meſſengers. For thoſe who retaining the word light tranſlate negatively, neither hath he put light in his Angels, or neither hath he put perfect light into his Angels; or as Mr. Broughton, In his Angels he judgeth no cleare light to be, putting a negative particle in both branches of the Verſe, whereas in the Hebrew there is no expreſſe negation in the latter. Theſe, I ſay, are led by this reaſon or rule. It is frequent in Scripture, when there is a negative in the former clauſe of a Verſe, then to underſtand a negative alſo in the latter clauſe, though none be expreſt. For inſtance (Pſal. 9. 18.) The needy ſhall p. 134not alway be forgotten, the expectation of the poore ſhall not periſh for ever; ſo we read, but in the Hebrew the latter clauſe is, the expectation of the poore ſhall periſh for ever: there is no Negative in the Originall; but our Tranſtators, and not only they, but all that I have ſeen upon the place, render it ſo, ſupplying the Negative particle of the former, in the latter clauſe of that ſentence. And without that negative, the ſentence is not only imperfect, but untrue. Thus, The needy ſhall not alwayes be forgotten the expectation of the poore ſhall periſh for ever, this were a contradiction: but reading it, the expectation of the poor ſhall not periſh for ever, makes the whole a truth, and congruous in it ſelf. Againe (Pro. 17. 26.) To puniſh the juſt is not good, to ſtrike Princes for equity, ſo the letter of the Hebrew; but we reade it thus, To puniſh the juſt is not good, nor to ſtricke Princes for equity. I might give ynu other examples, but a taſt may ſuffice Thus in the Text before us, when it is ſaid in the firſt clauſe, he put no truſt in his ſervants, we take up the negative, and ſay in the ſecond, neither hath he put light into his Angels, or he did not put light in his Angels, or he put no perfect light in his Angels, or he judged not cleare light to be in his Angels.

Secondly, they, who (according to our Tranſlation) render it madneſſe or ſolly, vain boaſting or vanity, theſe take the Originall in that figurative ſence before given. When a man from a reflection upon his own worth, boaſts out his own praiſes, which, becauſe it is a point of extreame vanity and folly, therefore the word is elegantly applyed to ſignifie folly, &c. He charged his Angels with folly. He put or laid folly upon, or to his Angels; He put, for ſo the Hebrew word bears. Not, that the vanity which is in Angels is of Gods putting, but the folly that is in them, he puts to them, or char…eth it upon them, or layeth it to their charge. As we ſay, foreignSuch a one put it home upon him; that is, he charged him ſoundly, or fully, with ſuch a crime or offence. To charge, is a judiciall or Law-term, implying, that the Lord ſitting in judgement, to examine the ſtate of Angels, charged them by way of accuſation, and upon triall found them (in a ſenſe) guilty of that, which, though they had not formed into any one ſin, yet might be formed and ſhap'd into any ſin, Folly or vaine-glory.

Having given ſome account of thoſe tearms, Charging and Folly, He charged his Angels with folly, it growes to a great doubt what Angels we are here to underſtand: what Angels did God thus p. 135charge with folly? The quere or doubt lies, whether we ſhall lay this charge at the doore of the good Angels, or of the bad, or of both.

Many of the Ancients reſtrain it to the evill Angels to the Apoſtate Angels; God put no truſt in them, he ſaw folly in them; taking it for confeſſed, that the Angels which ſtood, the good Angels are truſty ſervants, diſcreet and wiſe, farre from, either unfaithfulneſſe or folly; ſuch, as God hath put truſt in, and they never deceiv'd his truſt; ſuch whoſe obedience is made the pattern of ours, by Chriſt himſelf in his patterne of prayer, Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven. And would the Lord regulare us by them who are themſelves irregular? or make them our copy in doing his will, whoſe folly renders them unfit to be truſted with the doing of his will? Therefore (ſay theſe) ſuch a charge ſuits not the ſtate and condition of the good Angels.

Others caſt it upon the good Angels, that God put no truſt, no, not in them. I conceive, from either there may be a good ſenſe, though I incline to the latter. For in the Apoſtate Angels (take it in the broadeſt ſenſe) God ſaw no light, no goodneſſe, no faithfulneſſe at all; they have plainly diſcovered themſelves, and ſhewed, not only weakneſſe and unfaithfulneſſe, but wickedneſſe and utmoſt folly. But to confine it to the evill Angels, or to underſtand it chiefly of them, is too narrow for the Text; eſpecially, ſeeing Angeli boni exſe nihil habent niſi inſantam negativè, i. e. nullam exſe ſap…entiam, nullam veritatem, bonitatem nullam.this is but a light, a too eaſie charge for thoſe Apoſtate Spirits to ſay onle thus that God found unfaithfulneſſe in them, and charged them with folly: for in them rebellion was found, and they ſtand charged to this day with High Treaſon, againſt the Crowne and dignity of the King of Heaven: and are therefore committed to priſon, and reſerved in chaines of darkneſſe to the judgement of the great day. As for the good Angels, God may be ſaid to charge them with folly without any wrong, either to the holineſſe of their nature, or the ſtedfaſtnes of their obedience. For upon examination (or intuition rather) he finds, they have no wiſdome, or ſtability, but by Divine bounty and eſtabliſhment. As the apoſtate Angels were poſitively full of folly and unfaithfulnes ſo the good Angels might be charged with folly, negatively, namely, that they had no faithfullneſſe, but as aſſiſted and propt up.

But, we may take the Angels in a third or middle conſideration neither for the fallen or apoſtate Angels, nor for the good and confirmed Angels as diſtinct, or ſince this diſtinction: But by Angels we may underſtand the Angelicall nature; the whole complex p. 136nature of Angels in their creation and conſtitution was ſuch, as God could not truſt fully unto, ſuch as he ſaw folly in. We may demonſtrate this plainly, becauſe a great part of the Angels (and it is queſtioned whether or no the geater part) but it is clear, that a great part of the Angels, a whole Regiment at leaſt, proved diſloyall, and fell together: therefore the Angelicall nature (in that abſtracted notion) is ſubject to folly and unfaithfulnes, as well as man, although they are of a more excellent make and conſtitution then man. God looking upon Angels in generall, ſaw they were not to be truſted; the event alſo ſhewing many of them (who were as good by nature as they who ſtand) falling from him diſcovering their folly and nakedneſſe to all the world.

But it may be queſtioned yet, how there could be folly in the Angelicall nature, for as much as God viewing and reviewing all the works, which he had made, ſaw every thing which he had made, and behold it was very good.

I anſwer, firſt God charged them with folly comparatively, reſpecting himſelf. As (1 Tim. 6. 16.) the Apoſtle ſaith of God, that he only hath immortality; that ſpeech is excluſive, ſhutting out all other creatures from a participation of Gods immortality. Yet we know Angels are immortall, Angels dye not, therefore alſo they are oppoſed to men (in the next Verſe to the Text) who live in houſes of clay, whoſe foundations are in the duſt, and are cruſhed before the moth; Angels are not cruſhed, they dye not, yet God only is immortall; becauſe the immortality of Angels compared with the immortality of God, is but mortality. And the reaſon is this, becauſe Angels are not immortall in themſelves, or of themſelves, they have not originall or abſolute immortality, their immortality is dependent and derivative; God only is independently In comparatione juſtitiae Dei ſinec ſancti in coelis Angeli juſti eſſedicantur, non mihi videtur importuna ſententia, non quia ut hoc eſſentà juſtitia lapſi ſunt, ſed quia facti ſunt & Deus non ſunt. Auguſt. cont. Priſc.and originally immortall, and hence he only is ſaid to have immortality. As it is in the point of life, ſo alſo of righteouſneſſe, wiſdome, and faithfulneſſe. God only is faithfull, he only is wiſe, that's the Apoſtles phraſe, To God only wiſe: Men, yea Angels, are unfaithfull, unwiſe, fooliſh, compared with God. He is wiſe of himſelf, and in himſelf, in his own compaſſe creatures have only what they borrow or receive from him. To this ſenſe on of the Ancients ſpeaks fully, In compariſon of the juſtice of God, if the holy Angels in heaven be called unjuſt, I ſee no hurt in the aſſertion not becauſe they have fallen from juſtice, but becauſe they are creatures, and not God. All is reſolved into this, they are creatures, that's p. 137enough to prove their folly, and unfaithfulneſſe And, if a man that hath not only ſome ſmattering of learning and knowledge but is a profeſſed Scholer, be looked upon as ignorant, compared with the Ben-clerks and great Scholers of the world; is it any wonder that Angels ſhould be called fools, in reference to the infinite wiſdome of God? The fooliſhneſſe of God is wiſer then men, and the weakneſſe of God is ſtronger then men. And it is as true of Angels, the fooliſhneſſe of God is wiſer then Angels, and the weakneſſe of God is ſtronger then Angels. Angels are called Principalities and powers, but yet, it is only becauſe they act in the power of God; and go forth in his ſtrength, that's the firſt anſwer. The whole nature of Angels is unfaithfull and fooliſh, weighed with God.

Secondly, I anſwer, although in the Angels there is no actuall unfaithfulneſſe or folly, yet there is poſſible folly & unfaithfulneſſe in Angels; and, this potentiality is the thing here meant or aimed at. Cuicun que c…eaturae hoc convenit, ut peccare non poſſit hoc habet ex dono gratiae, non ex conditione naturae. Aqin. p 1 queſ…. 63. Art. 1.The Holy Angels that now ſtand are wiſe and faithfull altogether, yet conſidered in themſelves (not as confirmed by Chriſt) they may fall; their condition is altered, but their conſtitution is the ſame. It is otherwiſe with man (which makes a wide difference between Angels and men.) Man not only hath a potentiality to be fooliſh & unfaithfull, but man is actuall fooliſh and unfaithfull; yea man in himſelf is nothing elſe, but a bundle of folly and unfaithfulneſſe. Whereas Angels in themſelves, or conſidered in their naturall conſtitution, have no folly actually in them at all. The nature of man is nothing but ſinne, and Angels have no ſinne at all in their nature; they only have a potentiality, a poſſibility in their nature to ſinne. So then, we muſt underſtand this charge of folly with two cautions concerning Angels. Firſt, there was not any folly concreated with them, their nature is purely pure. Secondly, they have not contracted any folly into their nature. The folly of the good Angels is but like the folly of man in the ſtate of innocency, when he had only a power to ſin: which poſſibility of Angels to ſin is by the mediation of Chriſt (wherein theſe Angels have a ſhare though not to redeem or raiſe them from their Fall (as man) yet to confirme and keep them from falling) I ſay, by the mediation of Chriſt that poſſibility is removed. Chriſt hath changed their poſſibility to ſin, into an impoſſibility of ſinning. This is a glorious priviledge indeed, and that which all the Saints ſhall have in glory. Redemption hath not only bettered the condition of man, but the condition of Angels. Now they all excell in ſtrength, doing the p. 138commandements of God, and harkning to the voice of his word for ever. Pſal. 103. 20.

We may hence learne, firſt, What the ſin of Angels was, God charged his Angels with folly; The poſſible ſin, which God ſaw and ſtill ſees, in the nature of Angels, was the actuall ſin of Angels. Pride & ſelfe confidence were the ſins of Angels, and theſe are the moſt proper ſins of Angels; Angels cannot fall into every ſin. The Schooleman queſtions, Whether the firſt ſin of Angels was pride? He argues and concludes that howſoever in regard of guilt, the Devils, Aquin pa…. 1. q. 63. art. 1.or fallen Angels, have all ſins upon them, becauſe they tempt man to every ſin (For he that tempts another to a ſin which himſelfe commits not, or is incapeable to commit is as guilty, as if he had committed it) yet in regard of the act it ſelfe, evill angels can only commit thoſe ſins, which are ſutable to a ſpirituall nature.

Now a ſpirituall nature, is not affected with thoſe ſins, which belong to a corporall or ſenſitive nature; Devils are not adulterers, they are not drunkards; theirs are ſpirituall ſins, and their chiefe ſpirituall ſin, was pride; Their firſt ſin conſiſted in not ſubmitting themſelves to that condition, wherein God placed them, and whereunto they were appointed. All agree it was pride, though there be different opinions about what this pride ſhewed if ſelfe; whether in affecting a higher degree, then God created them in refuſing the work and office God ſet them about, (which ſome conceive, was the miniſtration to, or the guardianſhip of man, which truſt they deſerted or ſcorned) or whether it were in affecting a further condition upon their own ſtrength, not looking to the ſtrength and grace of God, whatſoever the particular was, the generall is plaine, they abode not in the truth, they kept not their ſtation: Pride and ambition ſwel'd them, till they brake and fell.

Secondly obſerve, Angels (as creatures) are mutable creatures, A…geli f…erum à Deo creati beati …eatitudine n… tura…, non au…em beatitu…i… …, quae in …though they are the beſt of creatures, yet they are changeable creatures; though they are the moſt perfect creatures, yet there is ſomewhat in them of imperfection. Looke upon Angels in their creation, they were created bleſſed; Bleſſed (as the Schooles determine) with a naturall bleſſedneſſe, not with a ſupernaturall which conſiſts in the viſion of God; for, if they had been created in a ſupernaturall bleſſedneſſe, then they had never fallen; they were created only in a naturall bleſſedneſſe, and from that they might fall and did. Now, indeed the good Angels have obtained by p. 139Chriſt a ſupernaturall bleſſedneſſe, from▪ which they cannot fall; and ſo by grace are become immutable, which by creation they were not. Though Chriſt be not a Redeemer (as was toucht before) yet he is a confirmer, a ſupporter of the holy Angels. In reference whereunto, Chriſt is called the head of all things (Eph. 1. 22.) And of him the whole family in Heaven, and in earth is named, Epheſ. 3. 15. And by him (Col. 1. 20.) God hath reconciled all things unto himſelfe, by him I ſay, whether they be things in earth, or things in Heaven. Some underſtand that place in the Coloſſians of men only, becauſe of the word reconciling, yet we may well take in Angels alſo, becauſe, that place takes in all things, both in Heaven and earth. And howſoever Angels needed not ſuch a reconciliation, as ſuppoſes a breach of peace, or a falling out, before: yet they needed ſuch a reconciliation, as conſiſts in the continuance and ſtrengthning of that peace which was before.

Further, We learne by way of Corollary from the former point, That there is no ſtability in any eſtate out of Chriſt; The Angels themſelves could not be truſted out of Chriſt; folly is in them not conſidered in Chriſt, how much more in man? When Adam fell, if God ſhould have repaired him againe, and ſet him up (in ſtatu quo) in the ſame condition wherein he was, yea in a better (if a better could be had) without a Mediator; and ſo have tried his obedience once more; or ſhould every particular man have ſtood for himſelfe, and not one for all; certainly, as we fell at firſt in a lump all together, ſo we ſhould have all fallen ſingle (as it were) by retaile, one after another: There is no aſſurance in any eſtate on this ſide Chriſt: Nor man, nor Angel can hold out without a Surety: Chriſt is called the Surety of the Covenant, Heb. 7. 22. becauſe he undertakes for us that we ſhall doe our parts, that we ſhall be faithfull and beleeving, that we ſhall be holy and humble, that we ſhall doe what God expects from thoſe, whom free grace ſhall ſave: Chriſt undertakes for all the grace, and holineſſe, and faithfullneſſe which is required in beleevers; He gives no command, but what himſelfe helps us to fulfill, nor calls he for any duty, but what himſelfe works in us and for us.

Fourthly obſerve, That God ſees imperfection in creatures whoſe natures are moſt perfect. Man looking upon the Angelicall nature, or upon mans nature in innocency, could ſee no fault or folly in either, but God ſaw both poſſibly faulty, though not actually faulty. And, as it is with the nature of men and Angels, ſo with p. 140their works: when we can ſee nothing amiſſe in a work, God can: as the Apoſtle acknowledges (1 Cor. 4. 4.) I know nothing by my ſelfe: I profeſſe, when I looke into the courſe of my miniſtery (for he ſpeakes to that particular) when I looke, how I have diſcharged my Apoſtleſhip, my conſcience beares me witneſſe, I know of no unfaithfulneſſe or neglect, but yet, though I know nothing by my ſelfe, I am not hereby juſtified, but he that judgeth me is the Lord: as if he ſhould ſay, wheu God comes to looke over my worke, he may find faults, many faults in it; there is no ſtanding for creatures before God in any creature-purity: Angelicall perfection is imperfect in his ſight. Angels have not the leaſt ſpot or tincture of ſin in their nature, yet the nature of Angels is potentially ſinfull. The beſt creature (in regard of pure naturalls) may be wrought to evill, one God cannot. And the reaſon is, becauſe every one may erre, who hath not the rule of righteouſneſſe within him: and therefore it is impoſſible God ſhould erre, becauſe his own will is the rule of his own actions: He is every way a law unto himſelfe. The Apoſtle ſpeaking of the Gentiles (Rom. 2. 14.) ſaith, Theſe having not the law, are a law unto themſelves. Not that their nature is a law, (which is the tranſcendent priviledge of God) but, that they have the law of nature, or the law printed in their nature, though not publiſhed to their eare; They have the law written in their hearts, but the heart of God is his law, both written and unwritten. Creatures how perfect ſoever in their nature, have the will of God for their rule and law: which though it be within them, yet it is not Them, and ſo they may act beſide it. The hand of the Artificer often failes in cutting or faſhioning the work he is about, becauſe his hand is not the rule by which he workes: his hand workes by a rule or line, his hand is not that rule or line, therefore he ſometimes ſtrikes right; and ſometimes he ſtrikes wrong; but if the hand of a man were the rule by which he works, then it were impoſſible that ever he ſhould worke amiſſe. Thus it is with God, the very will of God which acts, is the rule by which he acts, hence Solum illum actum à rectitudine declina re non contingit, cujus regula eſt ipſa virtus agentis. Aquin. par. 1. q. …3. art. 1.it is impoſſible for God to faile; Angels and men act by a rule preſcribed, their will is one thing, and the rule is another; the power by which they worke is one thing, and the direction by which they worke is another; and therefore (to ſhut up this point) the moſt perfect creature may poſſibly ſwerve and erre in acting; Only he cannot erre in any thing he doth, whoſe will is the perfect rule of all be doth.

p. 141Fifthly, Foraſmuch as God beholding Angels, ſees folly in them, learne, That God hath no need of any creature, no not of Aagels. The reaſon is clearely this, becauſe Angels themſelves in themſelves are unfaithfull, Angels themſelves in themſelves are fooliſh, therefore what need hath God of ſuch as theſe? As King. Achiſh ſaid (1 King. 21. 15.) when David changed his behaviour before him (ſtudiouſly acting the foole & mad man) ſcrabling on the doores of the gate, and letting his ſpittle fall downe upon his beard: What, ſaith Achiſh unto his ſervants, have I need of madmen, that you have brought this fellow to play the madman in my preſence? So, God may ſay, when he lookes upon the beſt of creatures, Angels or men, have I any need of mad-men, any need of fooles or of their folly? Foraſmuch then, as there is nothing in any creature, barely as a crearure, but what may be reduced to folly and unfaithfullneſſe, and would certainely end there, therefore God hath no need at all of any creature. Men will ſay, we need not the helpe of diſloyall or untruſty men, we need not the helpe of fooles, to counſell us, or of unfaithfull ones, to act for us.

Beſides, Creatures are no helpe to God: For the truth is, God and the creature, are no more than God alone; I ſay, God and the utmoſt perfection of all creatures put together, are no more than God alone: The reaſon of it is, becauſe, if there be any perfection in creatures, it is but what God himſelfe hath put into them. What a man gives to another, is no addition to himſelfe, much leſſe is that which God gives man or Angel, any addition to God. God is infinite, and no addition can be made to infinite: When the creature doth moſt for us, the creature (of it ſelfe) doth nothing for us, God doth all in all & by all. The creature doth you no more good at one time than at another, all the good which is done at any time, God doth it: So then, every way God hath no need of creatures. And it is our comfort, I am ſure it ought to be, that he hath not. He ſaith to wiſemen I have no need of your counſels; to rich men I have no need of your purſes; and to great men, I have no deed of your power; hee ſees all is vanity.

Laſtly, If God truſt not Angels, let not us truſt in man; if he charges his Angels with folly, let not us adore the wiſedome of man. This diſcovery of imperfection in Angels, ſhould lay all creatures low before us, and take us off from confidence or boaſting in any arme of fleſh. To this ſenſe, Eliphaz proſecutes the argument in the following words to the end of the Chapter. p. 142If Angels, the chiefeſt and choiceſt of creatures be thus weake, what then is man, who dwels in a houſe of clay, whoſe foundation is in the duſt, and who are cruſhed before the moth?