Exposition of Job 38-42, Commentary on Job · Chapter 42 · Verse 14-15

Exposition of Job 38-42 · Commentary on Job · Chapter 42 · Verse 14-15

p. 996JOB, Chap. 42. Verſ. 14, 15.

14. And he called the name of the firſt Jemima, and the name of the ſecond Kezia, and the name of the third Keren-happuch.

15. And in all the land were no women found ſo fair as the daughters of Job; and their father gave them inheritance among their brethren.

THe former verſe gave us the account of Jobs children; He had alſo ſeven ſons and three daughters: Nor is any thing more ſaid of his ſons, but that they were ſeven; but much more is ſaid of his daughters in theſe two verſes, than that they were three; and more is ſpoken of his daughters in three particulars.

Firſt, They are ſet forth by their names.

Secondly, By the comlineſs of their perſons.

Thirdly, By the greatneſs of their dowry.

Their names are expreſt in the 14th verſe.

He called the name of the first Jemima, and the name of the ſecond Kezia, and the name of the third Keren-happuch.

The comlineſs of their perſons is ſhewed at the beginning of the 15th verſe, And in all the land were no women found ſo fair as the daughters of Job.

The greatneſs of their dowry is ſet down at the cloſe of the 15th verſe,

And their father gave them inheritance among their brethren.

Some have queried, why no more is ſaid of the ſons of Job, than how many they were? To ſuch, this anſwer may ſuffice, it was the Lords pleaſure to have no more ſpoken of them; and where no more is ſaid, why ſhould we expect more?

p. 997If any ſhall further enquire; but were not his ſons worthy perſons, that they are put off thus ſlightly, and mention made only of their number, not of their weight? Were they not worthy to have ſo much as their names recorded? which honour, and much more, is done their ſiſters, the daughters of Job.

I anſwer, We may upon good ground believe, that Jobs ſeven ſons were worthy perſons, becauſe they were a great part, yea, the chief part of his reſtored happineſs; for as children are better than riches, ſo among children, ſons are better than daughters, as being the more worthy ſex. Sons, if not well qualified, are not only leſs worthy than daughters, but a great croſs to their father: And therefore it would have been a diminiſhing of Jobs felicity, to have had ſons equal in number with the former, yet inferior in vertue and man-like qualities; we may, for this reaſon, ſafely conclude, that (though nothing be ſaid of their worth) that Jobs ſons were worthy perſons, or perſons of praiſe worthy qualities. But ſeing we have nothing from divine authority, but only from well-grounded reaſon, to aſſert concerning Jobs ſons, I ſhall not ſtay the reader in any further diſcourſe about them; but proceed as the text doth with the daugtiters, concerning whom we have many things to ſay from divine authority. And, Firſt, Their names muſt not be paſt with ſilence.

And he called the name of the firſt Jemima,

He,

That is, Job, I ſay, it was he. Though ſome make a queſtion whether it was he or no? or whether Job gave the name, or the people? I ſhall determine it upon Job; he Called the name of the firſt.

The Hebrew is he called the name of one. Every firſt is one, but every one is not firſt; and therefore to diſtinguiſh who this one was, we render the word Firſt. 'Tis uſual in Scripture to call that one which is Firſt. Thus ſpake Moſes, deſcribing the works of creation (Gen. 1.5.) So the evening and the morning were the first day: The Hebrew ſtrictly is, The evening was, and the morning was, day one. Any day is one day, the fift day was one day, and the ſixt day was one day, as well as the firſt; but the fift p. 998or ſixth were not the firſt day; therefore we tranſlate for one day, the firſt day. Thee here he called the name of one, that is, of the firſt Jemima.

There is a two fold firſtneſs. Firſt, In order of time. Secondly, In order of honour. Firſt here is firſt in time. The other two might equal, yea, exceed the firſt in worth and dignity; but this was Jobs firſt-born daughter, his firſt in time. He called the name of the firſt Jemima.

Hence note, Firſt; It is a duty to give names to our children.

'Tis not meerly matter of prudence, 'tis not humane invention to give names. God himſelf gave the name to the firſt man; God called him by the name, which, doubtleſs himſelf had given him, when he called him Adam. The proper name of the firſt man, is a name common to all men; Adam ſignifying red earth, ſheweth us of what matter all men are made. And as God called the firſt man by that name Adam, ſo Adam gave a name to the firſt woman, his wife (Gen. 3.20.) He called his wifes name Eve, becauſe ſhe was the mother of all living. And as God gave the firſt man a name, and he named the firſt woman, ſo God appointed the firſt man to give names to all living creatures (Gen. 2.19.) The Lord brought all the beaſts of the field to Adam to ſee what he would call them; & whatſoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. The Lord would have nothing nameleſs, or without a name; ſurely then, he would have men and women known by their names. Abraham was once called Abram, a high father; but God changed his name, and would have him called Abraham, the father of a multitude. Were it not for names we ſhould be in a great confuſion, both about perſons and things; we could not diſtinguiſh men had we not names to call them by;Nomon quaſi notamon. Shem, quaſi Sham, poſitum. and therefore the Latines ſay the word (nomen) ſignifying a name, comes from (notamen) a word which ſignifieth a mark of diſtinction. Whatſoever God is made known by, is called his name in Scripture, becauſe men, and all things elſe, are known by their names. Though ſome in a ſpecial manner are called men of name in Scripture (Gen. 6.4.) which we therefore tranſlate men of renown; and men of no account or reputation among men, are called men of no name: yet the pooreſt, the p. 999obſcureſt man hath a name, by which he is known and diſtinguiſht from other men. And as by names we diſtinguiſh perſons at preſent, ſo we preſerve the memory of perſons, and of their actions, and of their ſayings, whether good or bad for hereafter. How can it be cold who did, or who ſaid, this of that, unleſs we had their names who ſaid or did it.

Secondly, He called, that is, Job called the name of, &c.

Hence note; It is the fathers priviledge to give the name to his children.

To give a name is an act of power; and therefore the Lord, as I ſhewed before, brought all the creatures to Adam as their Lord: Having ſaid (Gen. 1.28.) Have thou dominion over the beaſts of the earth, and the fowls of the air, and the fiſh of the ſea, He brought them to Adam, as their Lord, to receive their names (Gen. 2.19.) It is an act of great power either to give or to change names. When Saul (Acts 9.) was converted or changed, the Lord changed his name, he was no more called Saul, but Paul; In ſignum herilis poteſtatis.being now become the Lords ſervant, and (as it were) one of his menial or houſhold ſervents, he gave him a new name. The Prince of the Eunuchs changed the names of Daniel and his three companions; He gave unto Daniel the name of Belteſhazzar, and to Hananiah of Shadrach, &c. (Dan. 1.7.) Yet we read in Scripture that women very often gave names to their children. 'Tis conceived that Eve gave the name to Cain, I have gotten a man from the Lord (Gen. 4.1.) yea, as ſome expound her meaning in thoſe, words, ſhe thought ſhe had gotten, That man the Lord, even the Lord Jeſus Chriſt, the promiſed ſeed (Gen. 3.15.) and then ſhe had gotten ſomewhat indeed, a poſſeſſion to purpoſe, as the name Cain ſignifieth. In the hiſtory of Jacob, we find the mothers, Leah and Rachel, ſtill giving the name (Gen. 29.32, 33, 34, 35. chap. 30.6, 8. &c. 1 Sam. 1.20.) But as it is well diſtinguiſhed, though the nomination was often from the mother, yet the impoſition or confirmation of the name,Nominatio à matre, impoſitio nominis à patro. was always from the father: the mother deſired the name, the father ratified it; as is plain in the caſe of John the Baptiſt (Luke 1.59.60, 61, 62, 63.) Friends preſent at his circumciſion called him Zacharias, after the name of his father; his mother anſwered, not p. 1000duplicate page p. 1001duplicate page p. 1000ſo, but his name ſhall be called John. How was this matter determined? They made ſignes to his father, how he would have him called, he muſt end the matter; and he called for a writing table, and wrote, ſaying, his name is John. There have been many nominations from the Mother, but the impoſition ever was from the Father; and uſually, the Father only is mentioned in giving the name (Gen. 5.3, 29.) as alſo here in the Text, 'tis ſaid of Job alone, He called the name of the firſt Jemima, and the name of the ſecond, Kezia, and the name of the third Keren-hapuch. I ſhall,

Firſt, Conſider the ſignification of theſe names in the original Language.

Secondly, Give ſome account why Job gave them theſe names; for we muſt not think they were given (as we ſay) at a venture, nor in a fancy.

He called the name of the firſt Jemima.

foreign. Sept. Diem. Vulg. A Radicè foreignThe root of this name in the Hebrew, ſignifieth Day, or, the light of the day; and ſo both the Septuagint and the vulgar Latine tranſlate: as if we ſhould render it in Engliſh, He called the name of the firſt, Day.

He called the name of the ſecond Kezia.

That, in the Hebrew, ſignifieth a Spice or Perfume, a very fragrant and pleaſant ſpice, of which Naturaliſts ſpeak much, and is commonly known by the name Caſſia, and ſo rendred (Pſal. 45.8.) All thy garments ſmell of Myrrh, Aloes and Caſſia: as if in Engliſh Job had called his ſecond daughters name, Sweet ſpice or perfume.

And the name of the third Keren-happuch.

That's a compound word, from Keren, which ſignifieth a Horn; and Happuch, which among the Learned hath a double ſignification.

Firſt, It ſignifieth a pouder, of which they made a kind of ointment, wherewith proud ones painted themſelves, called in Latine Stibium. Some ſay it was a mineral; others ſay it was a plant growing in the Sea, which being ground to pouder, was of an p. 1001excellent redneſs in colour. Here the word Keren ſignifying a Horn, is prefixed to it, becauſe they uſed to preſerve ſuch painting-pouder in a horn. We find this word Happuch made uſe of in the Verb (2 Kings 9.30.) where it is ſaid, that Jezebel hearing Jehu was come to Jezreel, Painted her face, and tired her head, &c. The Prophet alſo maketh uſe of it (Jer. 4.30.) when he would ſhew how unable anything ſhould be to do them good, the Lord being provoked by their evil deeds. True bodily beauty cannot, much leſs can a painted face procure them favour with men, with whom the Lord is angry for their wickedneſs and ſoul-pollutions; and therefore, ſaith the Prophet there, Though thou cloatheſt thy ſelf with crimſon, and deckeſt thy ſelf with ornaments of gold, though thou renteſt thy face with painting, in vain ſhalt thou make thy ſelf fair, thy lovers will deſpiſe thee, they will ſeek thy life. When he ſaith, Though thou renteſt thy ſelf with painting, it is only to ſhew, that though they did their beſt, and uſed their utmoſt skill to make themſelves look fair, though they ſhould rub their faces with this vermillion, till they crack'd their very skin, yet it would do them no good, the enemy would not be enamoured with them, nor pity, nor ſpare them for their fine cloaths and fair faces.

Secondly, Others derive this word Happuch from a root, which ſignifieth to turn, and then the ſence of the Text is, He called the name of the third Keren-happuch, that is, The horn of converſion, or of turning. I ſhall give the reaſon of that tranſlation by-and-by. The Septuagint render it by a word which ſignifieth Plenty, The horn of plenty. But I conceive our rendring moſt proper: He called her name Keren-happuch, that is, The horn of beauty, alluding to the cuſtom of proud women, who to make themſelves look fair, and ſo to enſnare others with their beauty, anointed or painted themſelves with that tincturing ſtuff. Thus we have the ſignification of theſe names.

But why did Job give his daughters ſuch names as theſe?

Firſt, I ſuppoſe this may be given as a reaſon of it, That he might in theſe names remember, or be minded of, his wonderful reſtoration. God having brought him out of a low and miſerable eſtate, to a very high and comfortable one, he therefore called the name of the firſt Jemima, that is, Day, to ſignifie that he who before was in a night, a dark night of ſadneſs and ſorrow, of trouble and adverſity, was now come to a comfortable day of p. 1002proſperity. The Scripture ſaith, Light is ſown for the righteous. They may be in the dark, in a dark day, in a day as dark as night, and where the very light (as Job ſpake, Chap. 10.) is as darkneſs; but there is a Day coming, Light is ſown for the righteous. Job might ſay, I have been in the dark night of affliction, but now 'tis break of day with me; and therefore that I may remember this goodneſs of God, my firſt daughter ſhall be named Day, that her name may help me to remember the goodneſs of God all my dayes.

Again, When he called his ſecond daughter Kezia, that alſo might refer to his new ſtate. As if he had ſaid, My former condition of ſtink and filth is paſſed away; I once ſate (as it were) upon a dunghil, being little better than dung my ſelf, full of ulcerous ſoars; my breath ſavour'd ſo ill, that my Wife could not endure me, and I was an offence to all neer me: but now the Lord hath renewed my fleſh, as the fleſh of a child, now I am ſweet and clean, my ſavour is like a perfume; and therefore my ſecond daughters name ſhall be Kezia, Spice or perfume.

Job might alſo ſay, My late affliction was a ſtate of deformity, I was black and uncomely, my face was all as a ſcab, and my body as a ſore, my countenance was ſlurr'd with tears and weeping (as he complained, Chap. 16.16.) there was no beauty in me; Job might ſay of himſelf in that ſtate, as it is ſaid of Chriſt in the Propheſie, When we beheld him there was no beauty, no comelineſs in him: but now my ſores are healed, now I have recovered my former ſtrength, freſhneſs and comelineſs; and therefore, the name of this daughter ſhall be, The horn of beauty, to mind me how the Lord hath given me beauty for aſhes, and garments of joy for a ſpirit of heavineſs. Thus he might very well, and very piouſly, give his children theſe names, to mind him of the bleſſed change which the Lord had made in his outward condition. And this is the reaſon of that tranſlation before mentioned, of the name of the third daughter, called Keren-happuch, The horn of Converſion, intimating how great a change the Lord had made in his horn; his horn was in the duſt before, it was empty and had nothing in it but filth, whereas now is become or turned to be a Horn of plenty. Jobs eſtate was changed from poverty to plenty, and his horn raiſed from the duſt to honour and dignity; and therefore he called the name of his third daughter p. 1003Keren-happuch, The horn of Converſion, or, The change of the Horn. Thus Job might have great reaſon to call his daughters by theſe names, with reſpect to the change of his condition.

Hence obſerve; Godly Parents do well, when they give ſuch names to their children, as may be memorials of the providences of God towards them.

Joſeph had a mighty turn in his eſtate, as the Pſalmist epitomizeth the Hiſtory of Moſes in Geneſis concerning him (Pſal. 105.17, 18, 19, 20, &c.) He was ſold for a ſervent, his feet were hurt with fetters, he was laid in irons, until the time that his word came; the word of the Lord tryed him: The King ſent and looſed him, he made him Lord of his houſe, and Ruler of all his ſubſtance, &c. This Joſeph had two ſons in the Land of Egypt, after this turn of his eſtate; but what were their names? The Text anſwers (Gen. 41.51, 52.) And he called the name of his firſt-born Manaſſeth, which ſignifieth forgetfulneſs; and he giveth this reaſon of it; for (ſaid he) God hath made me forget all my toyl, and all my fathers houſe. And the name of the ſecond called he Ephraim, which ſignifieth fruitful; for (ſaid he) God hath cauſed me to be fruitful in the land of my affliction. He was once very much afflicted, and now he was very fruitful; therefore, he called the name of his younger ſon, Ephraim, that he might remember the kindneſs of God to him, as often as he beheld or ſpake to, or of, that ſon. So Moſes called his ſon Gerſhom (ſtranger) for he ſaid, I have been a ſtranger in a ſtrange Land (Exod. 2.22.) We find alſo names given to things, as well as to perſons, by way of remembrance. Thus (1 Sam. 7.12.) after a great victory obtained againſt the Philiſtines, Samuel ſet up a ſtone, and gave it a name, He called it Eben-ezar, or the Stone of help: The reaſon was, for (ſaid he) hitherto the Lord hath helped us. The name of the ſtone, was, to mind them of the Lords conſtant readineſs to help them, even unto that day. So Moſes (Exod. 17.) after that great deliverance from the Amalekites, built an Altar, and called it Jehovah niſſi, which ſignifieth, the Lord is my Banner, to put them in remembrance how the Lord went forth as a man of War, and mightily confounded their enemies. There is a prudence to be uſed in the names, both of things and perſons. We read (Gen. 10.25.) p. 1004Ʋnto Eber were born two ſons, and the name of the one he called Peleg; and why Peleg? for in his days (ſaith that Text) was the earth divided. Peleg ſignifieth diviſion. The whole world, which lay before as one common field in his days, was divided and cantoniz'd into ſeveral Countries, therefore his name was called Peleg. And, as many names have been given from paſt or preſent providences, ſo ſome names have been given, as it were, by Propheſie, with reſpect to after providences (Gen. 5.29.) Lamech lived a hundred eighty and two years, and begat a ſon, and called his name Noah, w^ch ſignifieth reſt. Why ſo? not from a providence that was paſt or preſent, but from what he believed ſhould be; For this ſame (ſaid he) ſhall comfort us concerning our work and toyl of our hands, becauſe of the ground which the Lord hath curſed. Thus much of the names of Jobs daughters, as they ſignified the providences of God towards him, and the turn of his ſtate.

Secondly, We may conſider theſe nemes, with reference to the perſonal qualifications or endowments of his daughters, and thoſe twofold; Firſt, their corporal & external qualifications. Secondly, their ſpiritual & internal qualifications, which we may well conceive Job had a chief reſpect unto, in giving them theſe names.

Firſt, He called the names of the firſt Jemima, or, Day, thereby ſignifying, Firſt, the clear natural beauty of that daughter, or the brightneſs of her complexion like the brightneſs of the day, or as if ſhe ſhined in beauty like the day, when beautified by the beams of the Sun. Thus Chriſt ſpake of the Church (Cant. 6.10.) Who is ſhe that looketh forth as the morning, fair as the Moon, clear as the Sun? Jobs eldeſt daughter looked forth as the day, ſhe was of a reſplendent comelineſs: and we may well ſuppoſe, Job, who gave her this name, had prayed ſhe might have, and hoped ſhe would have, and doubtleſs in her time ſhe had not only a beautiful face, and a comly feature of body, but (which is far better) a beautiful ſoul, a well-featured diſpoſition of mind, much grace and goodneſs; in which ſenſe, the Church (in the place laſt mentioned) is ſaid to look forth as the morning, to be fair as the Moon, and clear as the Sun. The name Day, doth very well ſhadow, both the virgin beauty of the body, and the divine unſpotted beauty of the ſoul. Secondly, he might call her ſo, thereby ſignifying, that as the day is ſweet and pleaſant, ſo was ſhe, both as to her bodily aſpect in comelineſs, and the aſpect of p. 1005her ſoul in holineſs. Thirdly, (ſay ſome) he called her name Day, Ʋna dies aperit, ſuſturit uno dies.becauſe beauty (bodily beauty they mean) is of no long continuance, it is but, as it were, for a day; like a flower, which a day opens and withers.

He called the ſecond Kezia, or as one of the Ancients renders, Caſſia, ſignifying ſpice and perfume, to note that ſhe was of a fragrant temper, of a winning diſpoſition and converſation. Grace and vertue yield the ſweeteſt ſmell in the noſtrils of God, and of all good men. The Church (Cant. 1.3.) ſaith of Chriſt, Becauſe of the ſavour of thy good ointments, thy name is an ointment poured forth; therefore do the virgins love thee. Theſe ointments were the precious graces of Chriſt. 'Tis ſo in ſome proportion, with all the godly; their ointments (the unction of the Spirit poured upon them) caſt a delightful ſavour. Solomon ſaith (Eccl. 7.1.) A good name is better than precious ointment. A good name, ariſing from good qualities, from grace received and acted, is the moſt precious ointment, more precious than all the ointments which affect the ſenſe. To be Jemima, beautiful in body as the day, and not to be Kezia, not to have a ſpirit ſweet as Caſſia, what is it, but a piece of pageantry, or gilding upon a common poſt?

Job called the name of the 3d Keren-happuch, or, Horn of beauty; Firſt, with reſpect to her out-ſide, intimating, that ſhe was a great beauty. Some ſay, ſhe was called Keren-happuch by an Antiphraſis, becauſe ſhe needed not, much leſs uſed, the horn of beauty to make her ſelf beautiful; ſhe was even beauty it ſelf: Her natural beauty exceeded all that artificial beauty which proud women make ſhew of, by painting their faces. She was alſo a horn of beauty, as to her graces and ſpiritual endowments. Thus Job might give his daughters theſe names, not only with reſpect to the change of his condition, but conſidering the conditions of his daughters, both with reſpect to their bodily beauty, and the divine excellency of grace beſtowed upon their ſouls.

Hence note; It is good to give names, exciting to vertue and to duty.

The names of Job's three daughters, Day, Perfume, Nomina bona calcar ad virtutem habent.Horn of beauty, might ſtir them up to approve themſelves ſuch as their p. 1006names imported! Vertuous names, or names of vertue, ſhould mind us to do vertuouſly. 'Tis alſo a piece of ſpiritual prudence and policy, to put, as the names of excellent things, of graces and vertues, ſo of excellent perſons, ſuch as have excelled in grace and vertue, upon our children, that they may be provoked to imitate and follow their examples, whoſe names they bear. The good wiſhes and deſires of parents concerning children, may be ſilently (if I may ſo ſpeak) expreſſed in their names. They who would have their children excel in ſuch a grace or good way, may do well to ſix it in their names,Apud nos votiva & quaſi ob virtutis auſpi cium ponuntur vocabula, ſc. Victoris, Caſti, Pii. Probi; ſic apud Hebraeos, Micheas, & Habdias & Zacharias caetera que his ſimilia ex virtutem vocabulo liberis à parentibus imponuntur. Hieron. in Proaem. Comment in lib. Mich. as prophecying or hoping, at leaſt, they will really be what they are in name, or what their names promiſe. One of the Ancients reports this practice of the Ancients; We give names (ſaith he) wherein we hold forth our wiſhes and deſires, and pray to God that our children may anſwer the ſignification of their names. Many Scripture-names have myſterious meanings in them. Hoſea, ſignifieth a Saviour, his parents therein prophecying (as it were) and ſhewing their faith, that he would be a Prophet, and prove inſtrumental for the ſalvation of others. Obadiah, ſignifieth the ſervant of God; his parents gave him that name (we may ſuppoſe) hoping he would, and wiſhing he might be a faithful ſervant of God. Zachariah, ſignifieth the memery or remembrance of God; his parents earneſtly deſiring, that God would both remember him (which is all mercy to man) or that he might alwayes remember God (which is all duty to God) Remember now thy Creator in the dayes of thy youth; that is; perform all duty to God.

Nomina erant quaſi omina vel monita vel v… ta rei futurae.We ſee then, it hath been uſual among godly parents, to give ſignificant names to their children, either that they might be minded of the mercies of God to them, or of the duties which they were to perform to God.

I ſhall only adde for the cloſe of the point, this ſhort admonition to all, to women eſpecially (becauſe the Text ſpeaks of them) that, As it is uſeful and uſual for parents to give good names to their children, ſo children ſhould have a gracious ambition to make good the ſignification of their names. What will it advantage a man to be called John, which ſignifieth grace, if himſelf be graceleſs? or to be called Obadiah, which ſignifieth a ſervant of God, if he neglect to ſerve God? or to be called Zechariah, which ſignifieth the Remembrance of God, if he forget p. 1007God? Again, what will it benefit a woman to be called Suſanna, which ſignifieth a Lilly (a beautiful flower) if ſhe be not like that lilly among thorns, the Church (Cant. 2.2.) but only a lilly in the wilderneſs of this world? What will it benefit a woman to be called Tamar, which ſignifieth a Palm-tree, tall and ſtrait, if her ſelf be of a low, baſe, and crooked di…poſition. 'Tis better to be a crooked ſhrub in bodily ſtature, than a tall ſtrait Palm-tree with a crooked mind, and a low ſpirit. To be named Jemima, as fair as Day; to be named Kezia, as ſweet as ſpice or perfume; to be called Keren-happuch, as beautiful as the very horn of beauty; what will it advantage any women, unleſs they have real vertues, and gracious qualities anſwering theſe names? Yea, theſe names will be real witneſſes againſt them at laſt, and fill their faces with ſhame. To profeſs our ſelves to be, or to have a name to be, what we are not, is to be deeply hypocritical; and to bear that in our names which we are not, nor take any care to be, is highly diſgraceful. But when names are fulfilled in perſons; when men and women, who wear good names, are or do the good ſignified by their names, how precious are their names! and their memories, how honorable! And when the good or vertues of the three feminine names in the Text meet and center in the perſon of any one woman; when Jemima, the day-light of true knowledge and underſtanding is joyned with Kezia, the perfume of reputation, aſcending from Keren-happuch, ſtore of beautiful graces, put forth in the gracious actions of a ſpotleſs and unblameable converſation; what Pencil is able to draw to the life the raviſhing features of ſuch a perſon? Such, I believe, were thoſe noble Ladies, Jobs daughters, named in the Text, which was the joy of their fathers heart, and the ſtaff of his old age.

Thus much of the names of Jobs daughters, and of the ſignification of them; both in reference to the then preſent change of Jobs eſtate, and the hope he had of their future good eſtate; with reſpect to the beauty and gracefulneſs of their bodies, but eſpecially to the beauty and graciouſneſs of their ſouls or minds.

Now as the beauty and vertues too of Jobs three daughters were implyed, and wrapt up in their names, ſo their beauty is plainly expreſſed in the next words.

p. 1008Verſ. 15. And in all the land were no women found ſo fair as the daugh…ers of Job, and their father gave them inheritance among their brethren.

In this verſe we have two things concerning Jobs daughters. Firſt, The ſupereminency of their beauty. Secondly, The greatneſs of their dowry or portions, beſtowed on them by the bounty of their father. The former we have at the beginning of the verſe.

And in all the land were no women found ſo fair as the daughters of Job.

When 'tis ſaid, in all the land, we are to underſtand it of all the land of Ʋz: foreign. In ea quae ſub coelo. Sept. Tota terra eſt ſub coelo; hic autem reſtringitur ad certam Regio…em. Druſ.Yet the Septuagint extend it to all lands all the world over, rendring all under heaven; but the word in the Original will not reach ſo far, though the truth might. But in all that land were no women (or women kind, as Maſter Broughton reads) found ſo fair, that is, none were ſo fair as they. The word found is to be taken as in that of Moſes (Exod. 35.23.) Every man with whom was found (that is, with whom there was, or who had) blue and purple, &c. brought them: And as in that which is ſpoken of Chriſt (Phil. 2.8.) He was found (that is, he was or appeared) in the form of a man. So (Mal. 2.6. 2 Chron. 19.3.) For we are not to conceive that there was an inquiry or ſearch made amongſt all the women of the land of Ʋz who was faireſt, and that upon the return, none were found ſo fair and beautiful as Jobs daughters: The meaning is only this, none were known ſo fair as they, or they had no known Peers in fairneſs; and this is a ſufficient proof, that thoſe notable names were not given Jobs daughters without a cauſe, either ſeen or foreſeen, at leaſt deſired, the iſſue anſwering the deſire; In all the land there were none ſo fair as they.

There is a bodily fairneſs, and a ſoul fairneſs. The word into which we render the Hebrew ſignifieth properly the fairneſs of the face or body:Non ſunt inventae juxta filias Job meliores eis. Sept. but the Septuagint tranſlate it by a word ſignifying the ſouls fairneſs; They ſay, No women were found better than the daughters of Job. Their goodneſs without queſtion, as it was far more excellent in it ſelf, ſo more contentful and delightful to him than their fairneſs. But we may very well take in both, as was p. 1009hinted before, namely, that his daughters were excellent, both for the one beauty and for the other. Yet, I conceive,Pulcritudo terrenae faelicitatis eximia portio eſt, ad diſpenſationem veteris teſtamenti pertinens. the fairneſs here ſpoken of, was that of the body; and we muſt reckon it as a part of Jobs renewed felicity, not only that he had three daughters as he had before, but that his daughters were fairer than any in the land.

Hence note; The bodily beauty of our children is a gift of God, and no ſmall one.

Beauty is not only one of the excellencies of nature, but ſome part of Gods image in man, and much reſpected in women.Species corporis ſimulacrum eſt mentis & figura probitatis. Amb. l. 2. de virgin. The beauty of the body, bears the image of a beautiful mind, and is a figure of holineſs; hence that Scripture phraſe, The beauty of holineſs. It is ſaid of Moſes, He was a goodly child; and of Sarah, that ſhe was a very beautiful woman; ſo beautiful, that Abraham was afraid her beauty might endanger him among ſtrangers. Rebeccah alſo was beautiful, and very fair;Gratior eſt pulchro veniens è corpore virtus. and though beauty is no grace, yet it is a grace to grace. Beauty is, and duly may be, a great attractive of love and affection: Though we know it is often an incentive to luſt, yet it is an attractive of true love. What is ſaid of the Church (Pſal. 45.11.) So ſhall the King greatly deſire thy beauty, thy ſpiritual or inward beauty, is true alſo of outward or corporal beauty. Beauty to ſome is a portion among men; to others, a favour from God. Beauty is a ſilent eloquence, a tacit perſwaſion, it works much. But conſider, I ſpeak of that beauty firſt, which is natural, not artificial; I ſpeak not of beauty out of a box, but of that which is laid on by the hand of God, that's a bleſſing and a mercy, then eſpecially, when it is joyned with better beauty. Only remember, though bodily beauty be a bleſſing, it is but an inferior bleſſing; it is a gift of God, yet an inferior gift: And there are many conſiderations which may keep them humble in their own thoughts, who are moſt beautiful in the eyes of others.

For, Firſt, As beauty is a bleſſing, ſo it is a ſnare oftentimes; and that in two reſpects.

Firſt, It proveth a ſnare to them that have it.Faſtus ineſt pulchris, ſequiturque ſuperbia formam. If they have not grace, it maketh them proud and vain; ſuch are often given up to new-fangled inventions; their natural beauty will nor ſerve p. 1010them, they muſt have artifical ſet-offs. Again, much beauty maketh many diſdainful of others; and they who are ſo, are under the diſdain of God; and it had been much better for ſuch, if they had been the verieſt Doudes (as ſome call unhandſome ones) or the moſt deformed creatures in the world. Therefore (I ſay) remember there is a ſnare in beauty to thoſe that have it; yet by how much beauty hath the more temptation in it, by ſo much are they the more to be commended, who being beautiful, overcome thoſe temptations, and continue humble, modeſt, chaſt, diſcreet, and diligent, avoiding evil, with all the occaſions of it, turning from every vanity, and doing good.

Secondly, Beauty is often a ſnare to others. When the Perſian Captive Ladies were preſented to Alexander the Great, he called them, The ſores or pain of the eyes; He was afraid they might wholly conquer him, who had conquered ſo great a part of the world. What reaſon have any to be proud of that, which may inſnare, and ſo undo, both themſelves and others?

Secondly, Conſider there is nothing more frail, nor ſooner loſt than bodily beauty. A little ſorrow, a few tears, ſpoil and fully a a fair face; a fit of ſickneſs withereth beauty, and, inevitably, old age will do it;Eſt exigui donum breve temporù. Sen. in Hippol. at beſt, 'tis quickly gone, and every day, when once at beſt, abates it; the longer you have it, the leſs you have of it. Some conceive (as I toucht before) that Job called his eldeſt daughter Jemima, Day, becauſe beauty laſteth but as it were a day; one day bloweth it, and another day blaſteth it.

Formae omnes inſidiantur.Thirdly, Beauty endangers the weaker ſex to become a prey to the luſts of adulterous men, who often lye in wait for ſuch a booty. So then, though beauty be a bleſſing, yet we have little reaſon to be proud of it, if theſe three things be true (as who can deny the truth of any one of them) which have been ſaid of it; and three times three things more might be ſaid of it, with as much truth, to take all off from over-much valuing it, or to abate our valuation of it.

Therefore, above all, look to the beauty of the mind, that's a beauty worth the ſtriving after; and that is trueſt bodily beauty, which is adorned with ſoul-beauty, or when the beauty of comelineſs is aſſociated with the beauty of holineſs. It had been no great matter of commendation to Jobs daughters, that they were p. 1011the faireſt women in all the …nd, if they had not been the holieſt. The beauty of the mind is ten thouſand times more commendable than that of the body; the King of heaven deſires ſuch beauty. It is not a naturally fair face that will make the Lord Jeſus deſi…e you; and as for an artificially fair, that will cauſe the Lord Jeſus to abhor you. The Kings daughter is all glorious within (Pſal. 45.13.) her glory is a ſpiritual glory. Solomon hath told us what natural beauty is without ſpiritual (Prov. 11.22.) As a jewel in a ſwines ſnout, ſo is a fair woman which is without diſcretion; eſpecially, that fair woman is ſo, who (as the Margin hath it) departeth from diſcretion. They are truly beautiful and lovely, who have beautiful diſpoſitions, and follow beautiful and lovely actions. The Lord ſaid of the Jewiſh Church (Ezek. 16.14.) Thy renown went forth among the heathen for beauty; for it was perfect through my comelineſs which I had put upon thee. But what was the comelineſs which God had put upon her? It was the comelineſs of divine gifts and graces planted in her, and exerciſed or held out by her. That's the ornament with which the Apoſtle Peter ſaith, the good women in the old time adorned themſelves, even the hidden man of the heart, a meek and quiet ſpirit (1 Epiſt. 3.4, 5.) And let men as well as women ſtrive for theſe ornaments. They that are deformed in perſon, may more than make it up, by being conformed to Chriſt in their ways and works. Better be deformed in body, and conformed to Chriſt, than to have a well-proportion'd comely body, and no conformity unto Chriſt. It hath been ſaid of ſome wiſe and worthy men, that their ſouls were ill-houſed, that is, they had ill ſhap'd or unhandſome bodies. But though the houſe of the body be mean and deſpicable, yet if the inhabitant, or the ſoul, be wiſe and good, that makes a mends for all outward deficiencies, yea, for deformities and monſtroſities; whereas if the houſe of the body be never ſo well framed and built, yet if it be inhabited by a proud, unclean, ignorant, impious ſoul, how doth that ſpoil, defile, and diſhonour that body, and make it no better than a darkſome dungeon.

So far concerning the names of Jobs daughters, who being qualified in body and mind according to the import of their names, were themſelves portion enough to any husband; yet Job did not put them off ſo, but gave an honourable ſhare of his plentiful eſtate to them, as it followeth, p. 1012And their father gave them inheritance among their brethren.

And well they deſerved it. Their father gave them. He made the diſtribution to prevent contention, which often falls out among children (and poſſibly might among Jobs) about their fathers eſtate. This was a high favour, and ſomewhat unuſual, to give daughters inheritance among their brethren; they uſe only to inherit, when they have no brethren. For among the Jews, and probably among the Idumeans, it was a cuſtome, and it paſt into a law among the Jews, that ſons ſhould have the whole inheritance; the reaſon was, becauſe their families and inheritances were preſerved diſtinct by the male, not ſo by the females. The Hebrew word for a male ſignifies Remembrance, foreignbut that for a female Forgetfulneſs; becauſe daughters loſe the name of their family in marriage, and therefore daughters did not inherit, but when there was no male iſſue. Thus it was in the caſe of the daughters of Zelophehad, their father left no ſon, & ſo they inherited (Num. 27.7.) An immoveable inheritance came not to daughters; they had only a moveable inheritance.Illud Inter, vel ut in Hebraeo eſt in medio fratrum aequalitatem quandam & communem rationem denotat. Pined. But Job giving his daughters inheritance among their brethren, implyeth (as ſome Interpreters conceive) that they had an equal inheritance in lands with their brethren, which is alſo the opinion of our Annotators; as if out of love to them, and in reward of their vertues, he gave to every one of them, as to his ſons, a portion of land to inherit, ſo that they ſhared proportionally with their brethren, by their fathers Will and Teſtament, and were coheirs with them in his eſtate equally.

Inter fratres ſc. ad deſignandum convenientiam virtutis in utriſque. Aquin.Yet thoſe words, among or in the midſt of their brethren, note, faith another Expoſitor, only an equality in their good qualities & vertues. I ſuppoſe, if you take equally in a ſtrict ſenſe, that is, juſt as much, foot for foot, penny for penny, they did not inherit equally; but if we take it in a common or large ſenſe, ſo they had as great an inheritance as their b…ethren, they had as much for daughters, as their brethren for ſons. Their fathers gave them inheritance among their brethren.

Hence note, Firſt; It is the fathers duty to provide for his Children.

(1 Tim. 5.8.) If any provide not for his own, and ſpecially p. 1013for thoſe of his own houſe, he hath denied the faith, and is worſe than an infidel. The Apoſtles meaning is, in that point, he hath denied the faith, and doth not carry it like a believer, no, nor ſo well as unbelievers or infidels commonly do.

Secondly, Their father gave them inheritance.

Hence note; It is the fathers priviledge to diſpoſe of his eſtate to his children.

Children muſt not take their portions; their father muſt give it them. Children muſt not carve to themſelves: It is the priviledge of the father to diſpoſe of what he hath, according to right and reaſon, and the law of the place.

Thirdly, Who were they that had this gift, they were his daughters, Their father gave them inheritance.

Hence note; Daughters are to be provided for, as well as ſons.

Some fathers are all for their ſons, and neglect their daughters altogether. Sons ſhould not be denied their priviledge, and daughters ſhould not be unprovided for. Sons bear up the name of the family, and daughters may bring both ſtrength and honour to the family; by matching into worthy families.

Note, Fourthly; The better daughters are, the better ſhould parents, father or mother, do and provide for them.

The reaſon why Job went ſo high, to give his daughters inheritance among their brethren, was, becauſe his daughters were not only beautiful, but dutiful, and though women by ſex, yet of a maſculine ſpirit. The very grammer of the Text (as ſome take notice) leads us to this ground of their fathers bounty and nobleneſs to them; he dealt with them as with ſons, becauſe they had the vertues of ſons;; for in three places the Holy Ghoſt uſeth the maſculine affixe (מ mem) where (according to ordinary rule) he ſhould uſe the feminine (נ nun) to ſhew (ſay they) that Job was not moved by fond affection to his daughters, but ſound judgement; he ſeing them exceed their ſex in vertue, equall'd them in his fatherly proviſion, with thoſe who were of a more excellent p. 1014ſex, and dealt with them as with ſons in their degree.

Laſtly, Obſerve; Children ought to be ſatisfied with their fathers pleaſure in diſpoſing his eſtate among them.

We do not hear that there was any diſcontent in the ſons, becauſe the daughters had ſo much; nor in the daughters, becauſe they had no more: both reſted in what their father was pleaſed to do for them. How much more ſhould we reſt content with that portion and inheritance which our father in heaven provides for us? and indeed he will give all his daughters at laſt inheritance among his ſons: For as the Apoſtle ſpeaketh with reſpect to grace, ſo 'tis true in reſpect to glory, There is neither male nor female; but Chriſt is all and in all. The grace of God is not more to the male than to the female; and, as it is in the giving of grace here, ſo it will be in the diſtribution of glory hereafter: Brethren and ſiſters, husbands and wives, who are heirs of the ſame grace of life, ſhall be all heirs together in the life of glory, o… in the glorious life; and therefore let us be content with what portion or inheritance our heavenly father is pleaſed to give us, to allor, or allow us in this life.