Expository Notes on the Pentateuch, Exposition · Genesis · Chapter 3
Notes on the third Chapter.
Quest. 1. verſe 1.
Whether it were a true Serpent that talked with Eve, or not?
Affir. It was a true Serpent, but poſſeſſed, Reſp. and acted by the devil. That it was a true Serpent, appears,
1. Becauſe here is a compariſon made, between the Serpent, and the beaſts of the field; if we ſay the Lyon is more ſtrong then any beaſt of the field, it is implied that the Lyon is a beaſt: ſo when it is ſaid, that the Serpent was more ſubtile then any beaſt of the field, it is implied that the Serpent here ſpoken of, was a beaſt.
2. The puniſhment that was afterwards pronounced upon the Serpent, is agreeable to that which we finde by experience verified on the true natural Serpent, viz. Upon thy belly ſhalt thou go, and duſt ſhalt thou eat all the dayes of thy life.
3. It will be hard to ſay, that Satan had power before the fall, in interiora hominis acccdere, to do him miſchief by an inward temptation, and therefore he makes uſe of a Serpent, ſomething ad extra.
Queſt. 2. verſe 1.
Why did the Devil make uſe of a Serpent in tempting our firſt parents to ſinne?
Becauſe, though the Serpent was a beaſt, Reſp. yet the moſt ſagacious, and ſubtile beaſt of the field, as in the text, & in the opinion of ſome, the moſt excellent creature next unto man: wit unſanctified is a fit toole for the Devil to work withal.
Queſt. 3. verſe 1.
Why did not Satan rather appear in the ſhape of a man, or woman, for ſo he might have gained an opinion with Eve of more excellency and knowledge, then appearing in the forme of a Serpent?
'Tis anſwered by Learned men, that the Reſp. Devil could not appear in humane ſhape, whileſt man was in his integrity, becauſe he was a ſpirit fallen, and therefore God would not ſuffer him to appear in any ſhape, but that which might argue his imperfection, and abaſement, which was the ſhape of a beaſt: it is obſerved, that the good Angels can take upon them no other ſhape, then the ſhape of a man, the ſhape of an inferiour creature would be unſuitable to their excellent and glorious ſtate: ſo the Devill could not appear in the ſhape of a man, becauſe he was fallen from that ſtate wherin he was created. 'Tis true, ſince the fall of man the caſe is altered, yet it is ſaid, the Devill cannot take upon him the ſhape of a compleat man, but appears with ſome deformity or other.
Quest. 4. verſe 1.
Seeing it is cleare by the Scripture, that our firſt parents were ſeduced by the Devil, the Queſtion is, why we finde no mention of the Devil in this Chapter, but onelyonly of the Serpent?
Some conceive, becauſe Moſes herein, Reſp. 1 would conforme himſelf to the weakneſſe of the infant ſtate of the Jewiſh Church, as formerly he made no mention of Angels, ſo neither here of Satan being a ſpirit.
Others ſay, Moſes did not write as an Interpreter, but as an Hiſtorian, and therefore layes downe the matter of fact, as it was preſented to Eve: ſhe ſaw the Serpent, heard the Serpent, treated with the Serpent, therefore Moſes in this place makes mention onelyonly of the Serpent. So he relates unto us the ſtory of Abraham entertaining three men, which were onelyonly in the ſhape of men, but indeed Angels: yet he ſo gives us Gen. 8.the hiſtory, that by the circumſtances we may eaſily gather, that it was not the Serpent alone that ſeduced our firſt parents, but the Devil in the Serpent, for the Serpent being an irrationall creature could not ſpeak, at leaſt not ſo as to diſcourſe by way of queſtion and reply, and therefore muſt be acted by ſome being of an intellectuall nature: now if what had been ſaid, had been good, and holy, we ſhould in reaſon have aſcribed it to God, or a good Angel, but being a Lie, and ſinfull, we aſcribe it to Satan.
Queſt. 5. verſe 1.
How could the Serpent be ſaid to ſpeake?
The Devil ſpake by the Serpent, as he Reſp. did afterwards by thoſe that were poſſeſſed.
Perſons poſſeſſed had naturall Organs Object. fit for the forming of ſpeech, ſo had not the Serpent.
'Tis true they had, but the Devil hath Reſp. ſpoke in them, whether they would, or not, yea, when their mouth hath been ſhut, and their teeth ſet: now as to the matter in hand, it is all one to have no proper Organs for ſpeech, and not to make uſe of them.
Thus by the eare death is brought into the world; but bleſſed be God, through Chriſt life is brought in by the ſame doore.
Queſt. 6. verſe 1.
How came it to paſſe that Eve was not aſtoniſhed to hear the Serpent ſpeak, and ſo dreaded to treat with him?
Some conceive, that in the beginning Reſp. 1 it was natural for Serpents to ſpeak: Julian laughs at this conceit, and ſaith he, Quo idiomate uſus est ſerpens? This I am ſure, it was not naturall for the Serpent to ſpeake after this manner, by way of rationall diſcourſe.
Some ſay, that Eve knew that a ſpirit ſpake in the Serpent, and upon that account treated with him: but this ties the knot faſter then it was, for ſhe might, and indeed ſhe ought, before ſhe entered into a treaty, to conſider, why a ſpirit good or bad, ſhould make uſe of ſuch an inſtrument.
What if it ſhould be aſſerted, that Eve did not know but that other creatures might have a faculty to ſpeake as well as man?
Was knowledge imperfect in innocency? Object.
Say ſome, It is probable Eve had leſſe Reſp. knowledge then Adam, and yet had as much as was required to the perfection of a woman, and that ſtate and condition that God had placed her in: It was not neceſſary for her to know things by their cauſes, and to underſtand the naturall properties of all the creatures, but ſhe was skilled in thoſe things that concerned her family, and related to her husband and children.
The ſtate of innocency was free from Object. all kind of evill both of body and minde: error is an evill of the minde; now if Eve did not know but that other creatures might ſpeak as well as the Serpent, ſhe was in an error.
There is a twofold ignorance: Reſp.
1▪ Ignorantia pravae diſpoſi…ionis, when we are ignorant of that we are bound to know, and this indeed was repugnant to the ſtate of innocency.
2. Ignorantia purae negationis, which is when a perſon barely not knowes a thing; this the Learned call Neſcience: this was not repugnant to the ſtate of innocency. Chriſt as man might be ſaid Neſcire, not to know ſome things, viz. the day of judgement, and yet Chriſt as man was without ſinne, ſo children in the ſtate of innocency ſhould not have known ſo much as men, yea, for ought I know, Adam himſelf might have attained to a greater meaſure of knowledge by experience.
3. Though I have high thoughts of thoſe learned Authors that are of this perſwaſion, yet dogmatically to affirme that Eve was created with leſſe knowledge then the women of after-ages have attained to, is an aſſertion hard of digeſtion to my underſtanding &c.
4. It is likely therefore Eve was ſomething aſtoniſhed at firſt at the ſpeech of the Serpent, but being deſirous to heare what the Serpent would ſay, the underſtanding of a rationall creature being as much delighted with knowledge, as the ſtomack with meat, engaged in a treaty with the Serpent, which was the occaſion both of her ſinne and puniſhment.
Queſt. 7. verſe 1.
Why Satan ſetteth upon the woman, and not upon the man?
1. Becauſe the precept was given to Adam by God himſelfe, ſay ſome, Adam Reſp. 1 had the precept from God immediately, and ſo had deeper impreſſions of it in his ſoul then Eve that had it by tradition from her husband.
The woman was the weaker veſſell, and the Devil delighteth to ſet upon us where we are weakeſt, as he ſet upon Chriſt when he was an hungry: the Devill will be ſure to force us there moſt, where we are leaſt able to reſiſt.
Adam would ſooner be ſeduced by his wife then by the Serpent. Saul knew what he did when he married his daughter unto David, I will give him her, ſaid Saul, that ſhe may be a ſnare to him: ſnares are tied faſt 1 Sam. 18. 2….with a falſe lovers knot: motions of a wife either to good or evil, are very taking on an husbands heart.
To enhance the ſinfulneſſe of Eves ſin; if the Serpent had tempted Adam, and Adam Eve, more might have been ſaid by her, by way of excuſe: As Adam ſaid, The woman thou gaveſt me, ſhe gave me of the tree, and I did eat; ſo might Eve have ſaid, The man thou gaveſt me to be my head, my governour, gave me, &c.
Queſt. 8. verſe 3.
Whether the woman ſinned, in ſaying, neither ſhall ye touch it?
Some conceive ſhe did: ſay they Reſp. 1
1. She endeavours to caſt a reproach upon the wayes of God, as if they were too ſevere, and ſtrict: as if a woman were forbidden by her husband to go out of the houſe and ſhe being angry therewith, when queſtioned about it, ſhould ſay, that her husband would not ſuffer her to ſtirre out of her chamber.
2. She adds to the command of God, God ſaies, Ye ſhall not eat, and ſhe ſaies, Ye ſhall not touch.
Others conceive ſhe did not ſin; and that ſhe did only explaine the precept that God had given them: then the meaning is this, thou ſhalt not eat of the fruit, yea, thou ſhalt not take the fruit into thy hand with a purpoſe to eat thereof; the leaſt motion, and tendency to ſin is ſinfull, Nemo repentè fit turpiſſimus.
As for that which is ſpoken on the other ſide, it doth not, as I conceive, preſſe much upon the reaſon and underſtanding of a man: For the firſt, it is but ſaid, not proved; and for the ſecond, to explaine a precept, is not to adde thereunto.
Queſt. 9. verſ. 3.
Whether Eve ſpake doubtingly concerning the threatening, and the fulfilling thereof, when ſhe ſaid, Ye ſhall not eat of it, neither ſhall ye touch it, leſt ye die? Reſp▪
It is the Opinion of thoſe vry Learned, that from this pharaſe it cannot clearly be demonſtrated, that Eve doubted concerning the threatening: for,
1. The Septuagint turne the words abſolutely, foreign.
2. The Particle foreign pen, doth not alwaies note dubitation, as, I the Lord do keep it, I will water it every moment, leſt any hurt it, I will keep it night and day; where there is Iſa. 27. 3.not implied the leaſt doubt, whether the Lord would keep it or not.
And truly I conceive, hitherto Eve cannot be blamed.
Quest. 10. verſe 5.
The Serpent ſayes to the woman, Ye ſhall be as gods: which words imply that Ambition was a main ingredient in the ſin of our firſt parents: now the queſtion is, how the deſire of being like unto God could be a ſin, when God created man in his own likeneſſe?
For the anſwer of this queſtion, we muſt Reſp. conſider, that God hath two kind of Attributes, his Communicable, and his Incommunicable.
Wicked men ſtrive to be like him in his incommunicable attributes, as worſhip, honour, and glory, and to be loved, and feared above all, in ſelf-dependance, &c. Good men ſtrive to be like him in his communicable attributes, holineſs, mercy, love, patience. The image of God after which man was created, did certainly conſiſt in the participation of thoſe attributes which are communicable Good & bad ſtrive to be like God; the one will be like God in power and glory ſicut altiſſimus; the other in holineſſe and righteouſneſſe, ſicut ſanctiſſimus.
Queſt. 11. verſe 6.
Whether the woman ſinned before the eating of the forbidden fruit?
Aff▪ And that appears by ver. 6. And Reſp. when the woman ſaw the Tree was good for food, and a tree to be deſired to make one wiſe, ſhe ſaw the tree before, but now ſhe ſaw it to be good for food, which clearly ſhewes her judgement to be tainted. How many thouſand ſoules have died of the wound of the eye?
Queſt. 12. verſe 6.
What was the firſt ſin?
Some conceive, as the Popiſh Writers, Reſp 1 that pride was the firſt ſin: certainly it was a poyſonous ingredient in the tranſgreſſion of our firſt parents.
Others, as Proteſtant Writers, that unbeliefe was the firſt ſin; by unbeliefe they underſtand a defection, or a putting off from the command of God.
Reaſons given by us for our judgement herein, are ſuch as theſe.
1. The ſacred Hiſtory favours us in it; firſt the Devil ſolicites the woman to doubt of the truth of Gods Word, Ye ſhall not ſurely dye, and then to pride, for God doth kn…w, that in the day you eat thereof, your eyes ſhall be opened, and ye ſhall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
2. It is impoſſible for the ſoul to riſe up againſt that command, which at preſent it peremptorily and reſolvedly purpoſes to obſerve: pride and obedience … diametro pugnant, therefore pride could not in order of Time be before diſobedience to the command.
3. Faith is the grace, by which firſt of all we are united unto God, and ſo probably unbeliefe the firſt ſin, by which we departed from God.
Rom. 5. 19. The firſt ſin of man is called diſobedience, For as by one mans diſobedience Object. many were made ſinners, ſo by the obedience of one ſhall many be made righteous, now if the firſt ſin were unbeliefe, neither truly nor properly did the Apoſtle call it diſobedience.
Verè et propriè, Truly and properly Reſp. 1 ought not to be confounded, many things are not ſaid properly, which notwithſtanding may be ſaid truly.
Unbeliefe is comprehended under diſobedience: certainly a ſlacking of the bent of the ſpirits of our firſt parents to that which is good, a departure from the Word of Gods Command, as to the inward man may be called, without impropriety of ſpeech, diſobedience.
We ſay the end is firſt in intention, and Object. laſt in execution; we think of the end before we reſolve upon the means, therefore it firſt came into Adams thoughts to be like unto God, and afterwards he reſolved upon a departure from the command, as the means tending thereunto.
We are to diſtinguiſh between election Reſp. and ſeduction; between a choice that is made by a man from the dictate of his own ſpirit, and a choice made from the perſwaſion of another: indeed in election, we firſt think of the end before we reſolve upon the means; but in ſeduction, or choice upon perſwaſion, we firſt ſet upon the means, without conſideration of the end, as a man may firſt be perſwaded to take a convenient delightful walk, and afterwards may be told whither it will bring him, as Iſaac was perſwaded by his father to go along with him, & did readily aſſent, though he did not know what his fathers ends might be, in perſwading him thereunto, as Iſaac had high thoughts of his father, and what he ſaid, ſo Eve of the Serpent.
But you will ſay, According to this account, Object. in cogitancy or inconfiderateneſs was the firſt ſin.
Incogitancy is a part of unbeliefe, viz. a Reſp. careleſſe letting go their hold from that word which God gave our firſt parents to obſerve and keep.
Queſt. 13. verſe 6.
It is ſaid, that the woman did eat and gave alſo unto her husband, the queſtion is whether ſhe ſpake ſomething, when ſhe tendered the forbidden fruit to her huſband?
'Tis likely ſhe did, and that ſhe told him Reſp. he ſhould be like unto God, if he would eat of that fruit: As appears by the holy jeere, if I may ſpeak it with reverence, that God puts upon the man, Behold, the man is Gen. 3.22.become as one of us: God would not have ſaid this concerning man, if being as God had never come into his thoughts. Quod Deus loquitur cum riſu, tu legas cum fletu.
Queſt. 14. verſe 6.
Whether Adams or Eves ſinne was greater?
There are ſome that ſet themſelves to Reſp. extenuate Adams ſin, as if he did eat the forbidden fruit, not that he would be like unto God, but purely upon the Account of gratifying his wife.
But I conceive it dangerous to go about ſuch a work as this is: if you handle nettles gently they will ſting ſo much the ſorer.
But for the ſolution of this queſtion, conſider, there was ſomething that aggravated Adams ſin, and ſomething that aggravated Eves.
Adams ſin was greater then Eves in this reſpect, becauſe he was her head, and governour: and truly this conſideration accents ſinne, and makes it exceeding ſinfull.
Eves ſinne was greater then Adams, becauſe ſhe was firſt in the tranſgreſſion, Propter quod aliquid eſt tale, id eſt magis tale. &c.
And truly I conceive, it would not have been an eaſy matter to have determined whoſe ſin had been greater, had not God done it, as it were to our hands, by inflicting a greater puniſhment on Eve, then on Adam.
Queſt. 15. verſe 6.
How man created after Gods Image, in righteouſneſſe and true Holineſſe, could fall into ſin? or how Adams underſtanding being in vigore viridi could be entangled in ſuch a ſnare and deluded with ſuch a miſerable fallacy?
For the anſwering of this perplexing Reſp. queſtion, conſider,
1. There is no created good per eſſentiam, but per participationem, and therefore may poſſibly fall from its goodneſſe. God is eſſentiall holineſſe, eſſentiall goodneſſe. A man may be a man, and yet unholy, becauſe holineſſe is a quality in man, and not his eſſence. But goodneſſe and holineſſe in God is his very nature: and therefore if you deny the holineſſe, or goodneſſe of God, as much as in you lyes, you put God out of the world; Aug. Cujus participatione juſti ſunt, ejus comparatione nec juſti ſunt. Man who is juſtby participation from God, is not juſt in compariſon with God.
2. Sinne is an irregular act, and it is poſſible for any agent to act beſide the rule, unleſſe the will of the agent be the rule according to which it acts. And therefore all intelligent beings, conſider them as to their natures, may ſinne, except God himſelfe, becauſe his will alone is the rule of his own actions. The reaſon why the Artificer ſometimes works irregularly is, becauſe his hand is one thing, and his rule is another but if it were poſſible for his hand to be his rule, he could not work amiſſe.
3. Though our firſt parents were created holy, yet they were created mutable; and although they had not an inclination to ſin, for that pronita… ad malum non fluit ex principilis, naturae integrae; it would be too injurious to the God of nature to imagine he ſhould frame evil: yet they had a power to ſin if they would.
4. The Learned conclude, that the underſtanding of Adam was defective in its office by a negligent non attendency, and ſo ſinned againſt God: yet ſo as that this negligence did not go before the firſt ſin, but was part of it.
Queſt. 16. verſ. 6.
In this verſe you read that Adam and Eve both ſinned, and yet the Apoſtle tells us, that by one mans diſobedience many were made ſinners?Rom 5.19
The Apoſtle ſpeaks of one man, becauſe they two are one fleſh. Reſp. 1
Adam being the ſuperiour, and one that ſhould have ruled and guided his wife, and not his wife him, the breach of the Law is attributed unto the man.
Queſt. 17. verſe 6.
Whether the Church militant be alwayes viſible?
Neg. From this very text, when Adam Reſp. and Eve were excommunicated from the preſence of God, and cut off from the Ordinances, where was then the Church viſible?
You may as well ſay the inviſible Object. Church was cut off.
Neg. The Angels belonged to the inviſible Reſp. Church.
But Adam and Eve were not a Church, Object. two cannot make a Church.
Neg. Paul calls a family a Church, as, Reſp. Greet the Church that is in their houſe. Salute Rom. 16.5the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Col. 3.15.Nymphas, and the Church which is in his houſe. Now we know, two, viz. a man and his wife, may conſtitute a family.
Queſt. 18. verſe 7.
It is ſaid that the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew they were naked. Did not they know they were naked before?
Yes, queſtionleſſe they both ſaw, and Reſp. knew they were naked before they had ſinned, elſe why is it ſaid, The man and his wife were both naked, and were not aſhamed? Gen. 2.25.but now they ſaw it with ſhame, which they did not before; ſin and ſhame are twins, and came into the world together. As there was no paleneſſe to be ſeene in the ſtate of innocency, no tremblings, no ſhiverings, no tears, no ſighs, no bluſhes: ſo not the leaſt tincture of ſhame. Paradiſe had ſo much of the Lilly, that it had nothing of the Roſe; the nakedneſſe of creation needed no Covering, nakedneſſe was then an Ornament; man was richly attired when he had no garments.
Queſt. 19. verſe 7.
Why our firſt parents made themſelves aprons of figge-leaves rather then of the leaves of any other Tree?
Some conceive, that the tree of knowledge Reſp. 1 was a figge-tree, and that he took the leaves of this Tree to cover his nakedneſſe; but it ſeems to be unlikely, that when by wofull experience they had▪ contracted and brought upon themſelves ſo much miſcheife by eating of the fruit of the Tree of knowledge, that they ſhould repaire to the ſame tree for leaves, to make themſelves aprons.
They ſewed figge-leaves together, becauſe they were fit for that purpoſe for which they intended them, the leaves of that Tree being broad in our own Countrey, and queſtionleſſe in the Eaſt, eſpecially in Paradiſe, broader then ours
Queſt. 20. verſe 8.
How are we to underſtand that paſſage, And they heard the voice of the Lord God, walking in the Garden?
We have often mention in the Scripture Reſp. of the voice of God. The thunder is called the voice of God.
The voice of the Lord is upon the waters, Pſal. 29.3.the God of Glory thundereth. Sometimes the Word of God, though it be delivered by a man, is called the voice of God; Samuel alſo ſaid unto Saul, The Lord ſent me to anoint 1 Sa. 15.1.thee to be King over his people, now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of the Lord.
The Learned conceive, that the voice of God in this place is not to be taken for a ſound, or a noyſe, but for an articulate voice: but now whether this voice was formed in the aire, As at the time of the Baptiſme and transfiguration of our Saviour; or whether it was formed in ſome body, God at that time aſſuming the viſible ſhape of a man, is not very cleare; yet the latter ſeems to be probable.
1. He deals with man by way of judiciall proceſſe as a man, firſt he calls him to an account for the crime he had committed, and then pronounces ſentence againſt him.
2. Ye read of the Lord God walking in the garden, which ſeems as it were to point toward this opinion.
Quest. 21. verſe 8.
'Tis ſaid, They heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden, and yet it is ſaid, in Jeremiah, that the Lord filleth heaven and earth.Jer. 23.24.
The Divine eſſence fills heaven and Reſp. earth, and yet that viſible forme whereby God manifeſts his preſence, may be circumſcribed to a place, and ſo it was in this Caſe.
Queſt. 22. verſe 8.
It is ſaid, they hid themſelves from the preſence of the Lord, and yet the Pſalmiſt Pſ. 139.7, 8.ſayes, Whither ſhall I go from thy ſpirit, or whither ſhall I flee from thy preſence, &c.
'Tis true, we cannot hide our ſelves from Gods preſence, yet we may from that viſible Reſp. forme that God appears in for the preſent, and poſſibly this may be the meaning in this place, &c.
In vaine doth the ſinner endeavour to run away from God and the terrours of Conſcience. This is juſt as if the wounded Deere ſhould go about to run from the deadly Arrow that ſticks in his ſide; this is like the fiſh, which ſwimmeth to the length of the Line with the Hooke in its mouth. The beſt way to run from God is to run to God, viz. from his wrath to his mercy. To cloſe and get in avoids the blow: when a ſtorme ariſes the Mariner puts forth to ſea.
Queſt. 23. verſe 9.
God calls man, Adam, where art thou? and yet in Jeremiah, Mine eyes are upon all their wayes, neither is there iniquity hid Jer. 16.17.from mine eyes.
Non interogat ut ipſe ſciat, ſed ut hominem Reſp. 1 ſcire et agnoſcere faciat: God doth not propound this queſtion to Adam that he might know, but that man might know that he did know.
Non eſt vox ignorantis, ſed ad judicium citantis: It is not the voice of one that deſired to be informed, but of a Judge calling man to an account for the tranſgreſſion of the Command.
Queſt. 24. verſe 9.
Why doth not God call Eve by her name, as well as Adam, they having both ſinned?
Some ſay, to note, it concernes the huſband Reſp. to take heed not onelyonly of what is done by himſelfe, but alſo by his wife, or family; he may be called to an account for it.
Queſt. 25. verſ. 10.
It is ſaid, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, did not Adam feare God before?
Yes, but he feared him before with a Reſp. ſonne-like filial feare; now with a baſe unworthy ſervile feare: He feared him before, becauſe of his goodneſſe, now he fears him becauſe of his vengeance: ſo when the image of God is repaired,
The people of God have not a ſlaviſh, wiredrawen, and compelled affection towards God, but their affections freely melt and drop towards God, as the honey drops out of the Comb; feare, and love muſt be mixed, and tempered together; indeed they do not well aſunder, as if a man would make the moſt perfect beautifull colour, he would temper the pureſt white, and the faireſt red together; ſuch is that for which the ſpouſe giveth her beloved the Commendation, that he was candidus et rubicundus, white and ruddy, feare without love would ſet us in the forlorne hope, and precipitate us into deſpaire; and love without fear, would make us wanton and ſecure; therefore there is not onelyonly magnitude, but pulchritude in God; he is not onelyonly great to cauſe us to feare him, but he is good to cauſe us to love him.
Queſt. 26. verſe 12.
The man ſaid, The woman whom thou gaveſt to be with me, ſhe gave me of the Tree, and I did eat. And yet the Apoſtle ſaith, 1 Tim. 2. 14.That Adam was not deceived, but the woman.
The Apoſtle may ſpeake of the manner Reſp. 1 of the ſeduction of our firſt parents, Adam was not deceived, viz. by the Serpent, but the woman.
The Serpent deceived Eve, but Eve could not in propriety of ſpeech be ſaid to deceive Adam: for that perſon may be ſaid properly to deceive, who perſwades to ſomething falſe, and injurious animo fallendi, with an intention to wrong another, and in this ſenſe the Serpent may be ſaid to deceive Eve. But Eve had no thoughts of over-reaching her husband, therefore Adam was not deceived, but the woman.
Queſt. 27. v…rſe 14.
Why the Serpent was not examined by God as well as the man, or woman?
The examination of the man and woman Reſp. was in order to their repentance, and ſo by Conſequence in order to their ſalvation, but God would ſhew no mercy to the Serpent.
Queſt. 28. verſe 14.
Upon whom this curſe was pronounced, upon the Serpent or Satan, or Satan, and the Serpent?
Some would have it onelyonly ſpoken of the Reſp. 1 brute Serpent, and the Jews are very zealous in the maintaining of this aſſertion.
But if this were a truth, then it would follow that the brute creature that Satan made uſe of, ſhould be puniſhed; but Satan himſelfe, who was the principall actor in tempting our firſt parents to ſinne, ſhould eſcape unpuniſhed
Some would have it onelyonly ſpoken of the ſpirituall Serpent the Devill, becauſe the brute was onelyonly paſſive, and abuſed by the Devil, for the calling on of his ſinfull deſignes.
But neither can this be; for if this curſe had not beene pronounced upon a true Serpent, why ſhould this Serpent be reckoned amongſt the beaſts of the field? And why doth not Moſes make mention of Satan, in this whole Chapter.
Some would divide the controverſie, applying the firſt part of the curſe in the 14. verſe, to the brute Serpent, and the latter in the 15. verſe to the Devil, the ſpiritual Serpent.
But neither can this be; for,
1. The ſubject the Spirit of God ſpeakes of, is not changed, but the ſame in the 14. and 15. verſes. ver 14. The Lord ſaid to the Serpent, Thou art curſed above all cattel. And, verſe. 15. I will put enmity between thee and the woman. &c?
2. It is cleare, that the words in the 15. ver. without any ſtraining are applicable to the brute Serpent: viz. It ſhall bruiſe thy head, and thou ſhalt bruiſe his heele; you know the Serpent being a creature going upon his belly is obnoxious to be tread upon, and to have his head bruiſed; but being not able to reach mans head, it is ſaid of the Serpent, that it ſhould bruife mans heels.
Some conceive that the curſe was pronounced both upon the brute Serpent and the ſpirituall Serpent, and this I hold to be the Truth: the Devil when he beguiled man, came not as a naked ſpirit, but in the ſhape and figure of a Serpent: and therefore that his puniſhment might be ſuitable and anſwerable to his offence, he was to receive his doome likewiſe under the figure of a ſerpent.
Quest 28. verſe 14.
Whether Satan was not under the curſe of God before this was pronounced?
Affir. but, Reſp.
1. After he had tempted man to ſin, his curſe was augmented.
2. In this verſe God declares the curſe pronounced upon the Serpent to be irrepealable: Upon thy belly ſhalt thou go, and dust ſhalt thou eat all the dayes of thy life.
We may obſerve, that there is a great difference between the ſentence prenounced upon the man and woman, and the ſentence pronounced upon the Serpent.
1. You have a curſe pronounced upon the Serpent, but none upon the perſon of man or woman.
2. The puniſhment inflicted upon them is temporall, but the puniſhment inflicted upon the Serpent is eternall: which is noted unto us by that expreſſion, All the dayes of thy life, viz. as long as Satan hath a being.
Queſt. 29. verſe 14
How it could be juſt with God to puniſh the brute Serpent being an unreaſonable creature, knowing neither good nor evil, and had no will to ſin, but ſpake meerly as it was acted, and poſſeſſed by Satan?
Why ſhould we queſtion the juſtice of Reſp. 1 God here more then in Adams Cenſure, verſ. 17. where the whole earth was curſed for Adams ſake? what had the earth done? or how was it guilty of Adams tranſgreſſion? And afterwards we read And behold, I, even I do bring a flood of waters on the Earth to deſtroy all fleſh: Gen 6.17.How were the beaſts, the creeping things, the fowles of the Aire partakers of mans wickedneſſe?
God curſed the Serpent, as well as Satan, becauſe Satan made uſe of the Serpent, as his inſtrument to tempt our firſt parents to ſin againſt God; God was ſo diſpleaſed with ſinne, that he would curſe not only the principall cauſe of it, but the inſtrumentall alſo; ſo in other caſes God doth not onelyonly puniſh the offender, but the inſtrument made uſe of in the committing of the offence; As if a man defil'd himſelf with a beaſt, if a man lye with a Lev. 20.15beaſt, he ſhall ſurely be put to death, and ye ſhall ſlay the beast. We may ſee this in a Caſe where there is no diſpute; when a man hath committed murder, his body ſuffers; now what is the body, but an inſtrument the ſoule makes uſe of? The hand cannot move otherwiſe, then as it is acted by the ſoul, yet this would not be a plea in humane Courts: Oh ſee the vileneſſe of our hearts! we can reaſon againſt God, when in the very ſame caſe we dare not reaſon againſt man.
Quest. 30. verſe 14.
Whether the Serpent went upon his belly before the curſe?
Some conceive that it did, but that Reſp. 1 this was made ignominious, and curſed to him after the fal of man; and they illuſtrate this two manner of wayes.
1. Nakedneſſe was naturall to man at firſt, and yet afterwards he was aſhamed of it, and it became his puniſhment.
2. Briars and thornes were created before mans fall, but afterwards became a curſe.
But to both theſe inſtances we may give this anſwer:
1. That nakedneſſe ſimply conſidered was not the cauſe of mans ſhame, but nuditas turpis. Adamus videns faedos, et inordinatos membrorum motus, pudefactus eſt.
2. For briars and thornes, conſider them in puris naturalibus, in their pure naturalls, and ſo they did not become a curſe; but as after the fall, they grew out of their proper places, and were blended and mixed with the fruits of the earth, for the puniſhment of man, &c.
Therefore others conceive, that the Serpent did not go on his breaſt till the curſe, but had a body erected as man hath: and they render theſe reaſons amongſt others.
1. We know the more excellent, and ſublime the nature of a creature is, the more it raiſeth it ſelf upwards; the more ignoble and baſe, the more it falls down-ward; this we ſee in the Elements; the fire the moſt excellent, & operative of the four, raiſeth it ſelf above the reſt; the earth the moſt unactive and baſeſt of all, the loweſt.
2. As there is this difference amongſt elements, ſo among living creatures; the baſeſt is the moſt creeping, as wormes, &c. whileſt the noble Lyon advanceth his head and breaſt, ſo farre as the frame of his body is capable; ſo man being of all creatures moſt excellent, is therefore of all others moſt advanced in body.
Os homini ſublime dedit coelúmque tueri Juſſit.—
The Serpent therefore being of a ſublime nature, inſomuch that the Scripture ſayes, it was more ſubtile then any beaſt of the field, the frame and ſhape of his body was ſuitable thereunto.
Queſt. 31. verſe 14.
In what ſenſe we muſt underſtand this phraſe, Duſt ſhalt thou eat all the days of thy life; when we find, that Serpents feed upon herbes, and devour other creatures alſo?
Theſe two phraſes, Upon thy belly ſhalt Reſp. thou go, and duſt ſhalt thou eat, ought to be joyned together in the opening of this Scripture, the one ought to be conſidered as the cauſe, and the other as the effect.
So that eating duſt in this place is not ſo to be underſtood, as if the Serpent ſhould live, and feed onelyonly upon duſt; but that the Serpent going upon his belly, ſhould be forced to eat duſt, viz. take in duſt into his mouth whether he will or not: the Learned phraſe it thus, Haec verba non referuntur ad alimentum, ſed ad incommodum, et velut coactam terrae in os receptionem.
Againſt this Expoſition ſome object, Object. and ſay, that we have a promiſe concerning the happy and peaceable condition of the Church in the latter dayes; and amongſt other things it is ſaid, The dust ſhall be the Serpents meat: The Wolfe, and Iſ 65.25.the Lambe ſhall feed together, and the Lyon ſhall eat ſtraw like the bullock, and duſt ſhall be the Serpents meat.
Theſe words are not to be underſtood literally, Reſp. but allegorically, as the very expreſſions in the text clearly intimate: and when it is ſaid, The duſt ſhall be the Serpents meat, the meaning is no more but this, that in thoſe dayes man ſhall not need to feare hurt from any creature: the Serpent it ſelfe ſhall be confined to his duſt; and ſhall not be able to prejudice man in the leaſt.
Queſt. 32. verſe 14.
Seeing this ſentence was pronounced both upon the brute Serpent, and the ſpirituall Serpent, the queſtion may be, how this phraſe, Upon thy belly ſhalt thou go, & duſt ſhalt thou eat, can be accommodated unto Satan?
Per analogiam, in a ſpirituall ſenſe we Reſp. ſhall finde that the Scripture makes uſe of ſuch expreſſions as theſe are, to note unto us, the loweſt, and moſt ignominious debaſement; when God threatens heavy judgements againſt Jeruſalem, mark how he phraſes it, Thou ſhalt be brought down, and ſhalt ſpeak out of the ground, thy Iſa 24.4.ſpeech ſhall be low, out of the duſt, and thy ſpeech ſhall whiſper out of the duſt. The Spirit of God ſeemes to allude to the carriage of a poore captive taken in warre, and lying proſtrate at the feet of the Conquerour, hardly daring ſo much as to whiſper out of the duſt: You may finde alſo expreſſions ſomething like to theſe, Eſay 49.23. Lam. 3.29. Mic. 7.17.
So then theſe expreſſions ſignifie the debaſement of Satan from his primitive excellency. A wonderful ſtoop indeed this was, when that which was advanced as high as heaven, was made to fall down as low as hell.
It is the obſervation of a learned Author, that as food is made uſe of for the repairing, and preſervation of nature, ſo the goodneſſe or badneſſe thereof doth make the temper of the body better, or worſe: hence according to the degrees of excellency in the creatures, their food is finer, or courſer. Plants ſuck moiſture from the earth, beaſts live upon plants, man of beaſts, fowle, and fiſh: ſo that this expreſſion, Duſt ſhalt thou eat, notes unto us, the lowneſſe, and baſeneſſe of the Serpent.
Queſt. 33. Verſe 15.
What is meant by the woman in this verſe?
It ſeemes to be that woman, with whom Reſp. the Serpent had treated, viz. Eve: as if God had ſaid Seeing thou haſt by a treaty with the woman, tempted her to ſinne, I will put enmity between thee, and the woman.
Now the woman is mentioned, and not the man, not becauſe God had not put enmity between the man and the Serpent, as well as the woman and the Serpent, but becauſe Eve was immediately ſeduced by the Serpent, the man by the perſwaſion of his wife.
Quest. 34. Verſe 15.
Whether we may not with the Church of Rome, expound the woman of the Virgin Mary?
Neg. And amongſt others this reaſon Reſp. may be rendred, The enmity the Spirit of God ſpeaks of in this verſe, was immediately to follow the curſe: now the Virgin Mary was not borne many hundreds of years afterward.
But God ſpeaks in the future tence, Object. I will put enmity between thee and the woman, &c.
God ſpeaks in the future tence, when Reſp. 1 he pronounces that other part of the curſe upon the Serpent, Verſ. 14. Upon thy belly ſhalt thou go, and duſt ſhalt thou eat: now this curſe immediately followed upon the ſentence, and why not the other?
God ſpeakes in the future tence, to note the duration, and continuance of this curſe.
Queſt. 35. Verſe 15.
What is meant by the Serpents ſeed?
This cannot be expounded, but in a Reſp. ſpiritual ſenſe, for daemones propriè ſemen non habent, nec gignunt ſibi ſimiles: therefore we are to underſtand by the Serpents ſeed, the reprobate wicked world: They which imitate God, and obey him, are called his ſeed, or his children in the Scripture, as, Be ye followers of God, as dear children: ſo they that imitate the Eph. 5.1.devil, and obey him, are called his ſeed, or his children, as, Ye are of your father Joh. 8. 44the devil, and the luſts of your father ye will do. He that committeth ſinne is of the devil.1 Joh▪ 3. 8.
Queſt. 36. Verſe 15.
What is meant by the ſeed of the woman?
Firſt, and principally Jeſus Chriſt. Reſp. 1
It implieth all the Elect, viz. all Eves ſeed, that ſhould not become the ſeed of the Serpent.
By the ſeed of the woman can be Object. meant onelyonly Chriſt, who was ſo the ſeed of the woman, that he was not of the man.
'Tis true Chriſt was born of a Virgin, Reſp. and was ſo the ſeed of the woman, that he was not of the man: but yet that by the ſeed of the woman, Chriſt ſingularly, and individually ſhould be meant by the Spirit of God in this place, is not ſufficiently demonſtrated by this phraſe: and the reaſon is this, becauſe ſuch perſons as have been conceived, and born in an ordinary way, have been called the ſeed of the woman, or that which amounts thereunto: ſo, Adam knew his wife again, Gen. 4.25.and ſhe bare a ſonne, and called his name Seth, for God, faith ſhe, hath appointed me another ſeed inſtead of Abel, whom Cain ſlew: there you have Eve calling Seth her ſeed: ſo the wicked Jews. are Iſa. 57.3.called the ſonnes of the forcereſſe.
Queſt. 37. Verſe 15.
How is this particle it, to be expounded, It ſhall bruiſe thy head?
Some, and thoſe very learned, though Reſp. 1 they expound the ſeed of the woman collectively, and take it for Chriſt and his Church, this particle notwithſtanding, ſay they, referres unto Chriſt ſingularly, and individually conſidered.
Their reaſons are three,
Say they, the Septuagint renders it Arg. 1 foreign; and though the Greek word which is uſed for ſeed, be foreign, not foreign, yet the pronoune relative is of the maſculine gender foreign; now if it had been to be taken collectively as the ſeed of the woman before, it would have been foreign.
But we muſt conſider, that both in Latine, Reſp. and Greek Authours pronouns many times agree rather cum re, then cum voce: and ſo it is in this caſe: by the ſeed of the woman, though we do not ſay, is meant Chriſt onelyonly, yet we ſay Chriſt principally, and foreign clearly relates to Chriſt: now that in Latine, and Greek Authors, pronouns do not only convenire cum verbo, but ſometimes cum re, appears: Terence hath ſuch a phraſe as this, Ubi eſt ſcelus qui me perdidit? And as for the Greek, frequent inſtances we may finde in the New Teſtament: Mat. 28.19as, foreign Luk. 8. 5.foreign. And ſo in Luke, where the noune foreign is of the maſculine gender, and foreign the neuter.
It is oppoſed to one individual Serpent, Arg. 2 it ſhall bruiſe thy head.
The ſeed of the Serpent is implied Reſp. 1 there, though not expreſſed for as the Serpent not alone, but with his ſeed ſhall bruiſe the heele of the ſeed of the woman; ſo Chriſt the ſeed of the woman, not individually conſidered, but with his ſeed ſhall break the Serpents head.
For the further clearing of this, the ſeed of the woman, may be ſaid to bruiſe the Serpents head two manner of wayes.
1. As the Lord Jeſus ſpoiled principalities and powers, and blotted out the handwriting of Ordinances againſt us, and nailing it to his croſſe.
2. As he overcomes the plots, the aſſaults, the rebellions of this conquered, and broken enemy.
In both ſenſes we may ſay of the ſeed of the woman collectively conſidered, it ſhall break the Serpents head, It, viz. Chriſt and his Church, head and members.
In the firſt ſenſe the Saints break the Serpents head in Chriſt, in the ſecond ſenſe Chriſt breaks the Serpents head in and with his Saints.
In the firſt ſenſe Chriſt breaks the Serpents head, without the actual concurrence of his Saints: it is true, the Saints do it in him, but they do not concurre with him in it: (as all of us ſinned in Adam, though we did not actually concurre with him in his ſinne) and in this ſenſe he is ſaid to tread the Winepreſſe alone▪
In the ſecond ſenſe, Chriſt breaks the Serpents head, with the actuall concurrence of his Saints: not that Chriſt receives any help from them for to do it, but becauſe he is pleaſed to make uſe of them in the doing of it, and in this ſenſe is that Scripture to be underſtood; The God of peace ſhall bruiſe Satan under your feet ſhortly. Rom. 16. 20.Chriſt hath throwen Satan down, and wounded him, and he will enable his people to keep him down, and tread upon him; As Ioſhua cauſed the Princes of Iſrael to ſet their feet on the very necks of the five Kings.
They urge, to break the Serpents head notes a Divine power, and therefore it is Arg. 3 to be underſtood onelyonly of Chriſt.
This Argument would be ſomething Reſp. 1 againſt thoſe that ſhut out Chriſt from this great work, but not in the leaſt againſt thoſe who ſay, the Church breakes the Serpents head, but that power whereby it doth it, is derived from Chriſt.
Since therefore beſides what hath been already ſaid according to the judgement of thoſe who hold this firſt aſſertion, the ſeed of the woman is to be taken collectively therefore.
I rather cloſe with others as Learned, who ſay, that this particle it, is to be expoū ded collectively alſo; for, it being a pronoune relative, and pointing to the ſeed of the woman, which the Adverſary ſaith is to be expounded collectively, I conceive we cannot without ſtraining of the Grammar of the Text, interpret it otherwiſe.
Nor doth this detract from the honour of Chriſt, the victory is Chriſts principally, ours onelyonly relatively, and as his members.
Nor doth this advantage the Jew: for according to this conſtruction, in this Scripture you have a Prophecy concerning the Meſſiah: It is ſaid here, The ſeed of the woman ſhall breake the Serpents head; now this being a work above the ſpheare of the activity of any creature, it will follow that the Meſſiah is principally intended in this promiſe, or Prophecy.
Queſt. 37. verſe 15.
Why we may not tranſlate this verſe according to the vulgar Latin, ſhe, viz. the Virgin Mary ſhall breake the Serpents head?
Becauſe according to the Hebrew text Reſp. 1 it is not ſhe, but according to our tranſlation it.
Becauſe this, detracts much from the honour of Chriſt. It was a rare ſaying of Seneca, Similiter eſſe exprehenſibilem, nimiam laudationem et immoderatam vituperationem.
I but ſay the Romaniſts, Chriſt did it by Object. his own power, the Virgin Mary by Chriſts.
If you ſay that of the bleſſed Virgin, Reſp. as we have formerly concerning other Saints of God, we have no cauſe to be offended: but they intend more by it then this comes to.
Doth not the worth and eminency of a Object. childe caſt a ſhine of honour upon the Parents? If it be ſaid of Abraham, In thee ſhall all Nations be bleſſed, though it was not Abraham that made them bleſſed, but his ſeed, why not of the Virgin Mary, In thee ſhall the Serpents head be broken, though ſhe did not do it, but Chriſt?
It is one thing to ſay, a parent is bleſſed in a child, or to ſay that in a parent a Nation Reſp. is bleſſed becauſe of a child, and to attribute the worthy atchievements of the child to the parent: as if a woman ſhould beare a ſonne, who when he came to years ceſerved worthily of the Common-wealth, a ſhine of honour would be caſt upon this woman becauſe of her ſon: but we could not with any ſenſe, nor indeed with honeſty aſcribe the worthy acts of the ſonne to the mother.
Thus they endeavour to paint over their black and horrid blaſphemies, with the faireſt colours they will take: The chimney-piece is commonly the faireſt part of the Roome, and yet it covereth the fouleſt and blackeſt place.
Queſt. 38. verſe 15.
Why is it ſaid, I will put enmity between thee, and the woman in the Abſtract?
To note unto us the bitter, inveterate, Reſp. irreconcileable hatred of the wicked againſt the godly; enemies may be reconciled, but enmity cannot, &c.
It is obſervable, that profane perſons, Hereticks, blaſphemous, Popiſh, & ſuperſtitious perſons are more loving, & favourable each to other (though vaſtly differing in their judgment) then either of them to the people of God. Edom, and Iſhmael, Moab, & the Hagarens, Gebal, Ammon, Amaleck, & the Philiſtines the men of Tyre, & Aſhur, had each ſeveral gods, yet all conſpired againſt the true God. Pſ. 83. 5, 6, 7, 8. They have conſulted together with one conſent, they are confederate againſt thee. The Tabernacles of Edom, & the Iſhmaelites, of Moab & the Hagarens, Gebal, and Ammon, and Amaleck, the Philiſtines with the inhabitants of Tyre. Aſhur alſo is joyned with them, they have holpen the children of Lot. Darkneſſe and darkneſſe agree better together, then light and darkneſſe.
Queſt. 39. verſ. 15.
Whether man had any ſhare in this curſe pronounced in theſe two verſes?
Man hath a ſhare in that which was pronounced Reſp. againſt the Serpent; but all his ſhare is mercy: for though it be a curſe to the Serpent, yet a bleſſing to man; The truth is, there ſeems to be ſpirituall checker-work in this 15. verſe, halfe white, and half black, much of judgement and terrour, and much of mercy and conſolation, reſembling Moſes, who ſaved the Iſraelites, and ſlew the Egyptians.
In this verſe, you have the Sun in a cloud, the Goſpel with its maſque on: the day-break of that glorious myſtery which was hid in God from before the foundation of the world, the light whereof, though it were faint, and ſhadowy in regard of our Noon-day-brightneſſe, yet at that time, through the help of the proſpective of faith they might ſee thereby,
1. Mans Redemption, from the Tyranny of Satan, and by conſequence from ſin, death, and hell, noted in that expreſſion of breaking the Serpents head.
2. That man ſhould be redeemed by a Mediatour, viz. by the intervention of the ſeed of the woman.
3. That this Mediator ſhould be true man, intimated by the ſeed of the woman, and that he ſhould have a divine power, being able to break the Serpents head, which is tantum mount to foreign, Godman.
4. That this Redemption ſhould be wrought in a way of ſuffering, intimated by that expreſſion, Thou ſhalt bruiſe his heel.
5. That none ſhould have benfit by this Redemption, but the elect, intimated by the ſeed of the woman.
6. That this Redemption is an act of free grace; as ſoon as man had ſinned, God makes a gracious promiſe of the Meſſiah, (no poſſibility of merits intervening)
7. That the Devil and his Angels have no intereſt in the free grace, and mercy of God in Chriſt; He took not on him the nature of Angels, but became the ſeed of the woman: We have a ſaying in nature, Corruptio optimi est peſſima; when Satan ſinned againſt God, the moſt excellent nature was defiled, and ſo fell under the heavieſt doome.
Queſt. 40. verſe 15.
Why the promiſe made concerning the Meſſiah was ſo dark and hard to be underſtood?
1. Propter Diabolum, in regard of the Devil, that he might be exerciſed with perpetuall feare, and ſuſpect every child that was borne into the world to be the Meſſiah: the Doctrine of the Meſſiah was a Eph. 3.9.myſtery hid in God.
2. Propter parentes, in regard of our firſt parents, that God might exerciſe their faith, and the faith of their holy ſeed, and that their deſires might be enflamed after a clearer diſcovery of this myſtery: the Apoſtle Peter tells us, that the Prophets enquired, and ſearched diligently after the grace 1 Pet. 1.10.of Christ.
3. Propter Chriſtum, in regard of Chriſt himſelf: for look as it is with School-Maſters, they will reſerve the reading of the moſt Learned Lectures for themſelves: So Chriſt is our great Rabbi; All were his Uſhers that were before, they taught the punies an inferiour Lecture of the Law and Prophets; but the Goſpel, as to the ſublimeſt and moſt myſterious part of it, Chriſt hath reſerved for to unfold himſelf: It is ſaid, The Law having a ſhadow Heb. 10.1.of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, &c. In this ver. you have mention made of the ſhadow, and the image: The thing it ſelf was not yet come; the Jewes had the ſhadow, and we the image, now look how much an image or the picture of a man goes beyond his ſhadow, ſo much doth the diſcovery of Chriſt now, go beyond the diſcoveries of him then; ſo in another place, God who at ſundry times, and in divers manners, ſpake Heb. 1.1.in times paſt unto the fathers by the Prophets, hath in theſe last dayes ſpoken unto us by his Son; God who by piece meale, drop by drop, now a drop, and then a drop, ſpake unto our fore-fathers by the Prophets, hath in theſe laſt times ſpoken more fully by his Sonne. When this King came, all the cocks ran with wine: as Iacob before he was borne, put forth his hand, ſo Chriſt before he was borne, did as it were put forth his hand to the Jews, they could ſee ſomething of Chriſt, but unto us a Sonne is borne, unto us a child is given. Our fathers went to heaven by Candle-light, how ſad will it be if we ſhould go to Hell by day-light?
Queſt. 41. verſe 16.
Whether the woman ſhould have conceived, and brought forth in ſorrow if ſhe had not ſinned?
Neg. For although now her pain, and ſorrow Reſp. ariſes from naturall cauſes, yet it may well be queſtioned whether this was natural at firſt: for ſeeing we find by experience that other creatures bring forth without pain, it doth not imply a contradiction, that the conſtitution of the body of woman, might be ſuch at firſt, as ſhe might conceive and bring forth without ſorrow: and therefore we need not ſay, as ſome, that woman ſhould have brought forth by a miracle, if ſhe had not ſinned, &c.
Queſt. 42. verſe 16.
It is ſaid here, Thy deſire ſhall be to thy Husband, and he ſhall rule over thee: Now the queſtion is, how that could be inflicted as a puniſhment upon the woman, which was ſuitable to her condition in the ſtate of innocency?
The ſubjection of the woman to her Reſp. husband, was not repugnant to the ſtate of innocency; but then, as the authority of the man would have been uſed with juſtice, and kindneſſe, ſo the obedience of the woman would have been exerciſed with pleaſure and cheerfullneſſe.
The truth is, though this be the puniſhment of the woman, yet thoſe who have good husbands have not the like ſhare in it, with thoſe who have bad. A good man dares not but carry himſelf as a man of knowledge towards his wife, and make her yoke as eaſy as may be: It is remarkable when the Apoſtle had bid wives, Submit Col. 3. 18, 19your ſelves unto your husbands, as it is fit in the Lord, he doth not ſay, Husbands, rule over your wives, for that they will do faſt enough without bidding; but, Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter to them.
Queſt. 43. verſe 17.
Why doth the Lord in pronouncing the ſentence upon the man, inſert the cauſe, Becauſe thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife?
That God might convince man of the Reſp. vanity and weakneſſe of that excuſe which he made, why he ſinned againſt God, as verſe 12. The woman whom thou gaveſt to be with me, ſhe gave me of the Tree, and I did eat.
Let us have a care of carnall ſhifts, and excuſes; when God calls us to an account, theſe will not ſtand us in ſtead: there was never any came to Hell, but they had ſome ſeeming pretence for coming thither.
Pilate could not waſh off the guilt, when he waſhed his hands: Saint Paul exhorts, Be not deceived, God is not mocked: as in Gal. 6. 7.divers other things, the deceitfulneſſe of our hearts ſhews it ſelfe ſo in this, viz. the forging of idle reaſons, to ſatisfie, and beare out our ſelves in the neglect of duties commanded by the Word of God; and if you conſult the context, you will finde, it is about paying the Miniſter his dues: Let him that is taught in the word, communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things; Now people are very apt to verſe 6.finde excuſes, that they may ſave their purſe, and if it be poſſible ſatisfie Conſcience; but the Apoſtle exhorts them not to put a cheat upon their ſoules, Be not deceived, ſaith he, God is not mocked.
Queſt. 44. verſe 18.
God ſayes, Thou ſhalt eat the herbe of the field: why? ſhould not man have eat of the herb if he had not ſinned? Did not God ſay, Behold, I have given you every herbe bearing ſeed, which is upon the face of all Gen. 1. 29.the earth, and every tree in the which is the fruit of a Tree yielding ſeed; to you it ſhall be for meat?
Very true, but here when God ſayes, Reſp. Thou ſhalt eat the herbe of the field, the meaning is, thou ſhalt not eat of the herbs or fruits of Paradiſe.
Queſt. 45. verſ. 19.
How this curſe can be verified concerning man, That in the ſweat of his browes he ſhould eat his bread, when many neither labour, nor ſweat, and yet have bread enough?
As for idle perſons, whileſt they think Reſp. 1 to ſhake off that yoke that God hath put upon their necks, they bind it faſter, and make it heavier: To a perſon of any ingenuity idleneſſe is a toyle, nor is a man more weary then when he doth nothing.
We muſt diſtinguiſh of a three-fold labour.
1. Labor Oeconomicus or mechanicus, the labour of mechanicks, as we call them, or handicrafts-men; of this the Apoſtle ſpeaks, Let him that stole ſteale no more; Eph. 4.28.but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good.
2. Labor Politicus, the labour of Magiſtrates and Governours: ſo the Apoſtle ſpeaking of the Magiſtrate, He is the Miniſter of God to thee for good; but if thou do Rom. 13.4that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the ſword in vaine; for he is the Miniſter of God, &c.
3. Labor Eccleſiaſticus, the labour of Miniſters; we may obſerve that whileſt the world takes this to be an eaſie calling, the Spirit of God in the Scripture frequently ſpeaks of the labour, and the work that doth attend it: He that deſires the office of a Biſhop, deſires a good work. And, The workman is worthy of his hire. And, They that rule well are worthy of double honour, eſpecially they that labour in the Word, and doctrine.
Miniſters are called Starres, now the Starres are in continuall motion for the good of the Univerſe; they are to cry aloud, and to lift up their voice like a Iſa. 58.1.trumpet, Durante pugnâ non ceſſat Tuba: The trumpet muſt be ſounding all the while the battell is fighting. The Church of God is Gods husbandry, and the Miniſters are his husbandmen.
—Redit agricolis labor actus in Orbem.
The husbandman hath never done his work, but the end of one task is ſtill the beginning of another: ſo it fares with the Miniſters of the Goſpel, ſometimes they are inſtructing poor ignorant ſouls, & then they are like Starres that ſhine in a cold winters night; another while convincing gain-ſayers; then they are like thoſe Starres that fought in their courſe againſt Siſera; every man muſt be accountable for his idle words, and a Miniſter for his idle ſilence: Qui claves habent Eccleſiae oſtia ſuorum labiorum aperiant: A Miniſter had better be worne out with whetting, then with ruſting.
A way then with the fanatick Spirits of our dayes, who call upon Miniſters to work with their hands, as if there were no other labour, but hand-labour. Conſider,
1. They confound thoſe things that God would have diſtinguſhed: there is the labour of the head and brain, as well as of the hand.
2. They overthrow (as much as in them lyes) the well-being, if not the being of Kingdomes, States, Common-wealths in which they live: for we ſtand in as much need of the Magiſtrate, and Miniſter as we do of the Husbandman, and handycraftſman.
3. Aaron with his poſterity were Prieſts, Ioſhua, David, Ioſias were Magiſtrates, yet it might be ſaid of them, that they are their bread in the ſweat of their browes.
Queſt. 46 verſ 19.
It is ſaid here, In the ſweat of thy brows thou ſhalt eat thy bread; and yet our Saviour hath taught us to pray, Give us this day our daily bread. If we earne our bread with our labour, how is it a gift?
We earne it of man, but not of God, from man it is a debt, but from God it is a Reſp. 1 gift.
It is an act of free grace, that we have bread for our labour; God might have ſaid that we ſhould labour, and ſweat, and after all we ſhould eat husks with hogs; as the Prodigall, or graſſe with the Oxe, as Nebuchadnezzar: that in the ſweat of our brows we eat bread, is a mercy.
As the Scripture ſpeaks of bread, ſo of the ſtaffe and ſtay of bread: For behold, the Lord, the Lord of hoſts doth take away from Jeruſalem, and from Judah, the Iſay. 3.1.ſtay, and ſtaffe, the whole stay of bread. And the truth is, a man is ſtrengthened more by the ſtaffe that is in his body, then by the ſtaffe that is in his hand; it is not the corne, and floure, but the ſtaffe of bread, which ſupports the life, and that is not any thing that comes out of the earth, but the bleſſing of God, which comes down from heaven. The creature cannot hold up it ſelfe, much leſſe contribute to the ſubſiſtence of other things, unleſſe God continue the influence of his bleſſing upon it. It is the obſervation of a Learned Author, As ſoone as ever Chriſt curſed the figge-tree it withered, and dried Ma. 11.20.up from the roots, to ſhew, that it was not the root alone, but the bleſſing of Chriſt which did ſupport the figge-tree, it is pronounced Hoſ. 4. 10.as a curſe, They ſhall eat, and not have enough; and again, Ye ſhall eat, and not Lev. 26. 26.be ſatiſfied: when I have broken the staffe of your bread, ye ſhall eat, and not be ſatiſfied. As good take a mouthfull of gravel, as a mouthfull of bread, and as able it is to nouriſh without Gods bleſſing.
The means by which we live, are without life; If they be living creatures, as ſheep, and oxen, and beaſts, and birds, and fiſhes, they muſt loſe their lives, before they can come to be helpes to ours; ſo true is that ſaying mortibus vivimus, we live by deaths; now reaſon tells us, Nihil dat quod non habet nothing can give that, which it hath not; How ſhould food of it ſelfe preſerve and further life, which in it ſelf is void of life? the death of the creatures ſheweth that our life is not from them, but from ſomething elſe.
By all which we may perceive, how theſe Scriptures may be reconciled, of Eating our bread in the ſweat of our browes, and yet to pray, according to the forme our Saviour hath preſcribed us, Give us this day our daily bread.
Quest. 47. verſ. 19.
Whether from this Scripture we have a command from God, to labour, To eat our bread in the ſweat of our browes?
I conceive we have, though ſome think, that this was laid upon man after his Reſp. tranſgreſſion, rather as a curſe which he muſt indure, then a duty which he ſhould performe: for the clearing of this conſider,
1. It is granted that this was a curſe laid upon man for his tranſgreſſion.
1. As ſome of Gods curſes are promiſes as well as curſes, to ſet out his goodneſſe: ſo ſome of Gods curſes are precepts as well as curſes, to ſet forth h…s juſtice.
Some of Gods curſes are promiſes, as well as curſes; ſo, I will put enmity between thee and the woman: It is a curſe on he Serpent, and yet a promiſe of the Meſſiah.
Some of Gods curſes areprecepts as well as curſes; ſo, Thy deſire ſhall be to thy husband, and he ſhall rule over thee; this is Gen. 3.16.a curſe, and yet it is a precept: Let our 1 Cor. 14. 34.women keep ſilence in the Churches; for it is not permitted unto them to ſpeak, but they are commanded to be under obedience, as ſaith the Law.
Now the truth is, this of eating our bread in the ſweat of our brows is all theſe, it is a curſe, it is a promiſe, it is a precept; it is a curſe, in that God will not ſuffer the earth to afford us bread, without our ſweat; it is a promiſe, in that God aſſureth us, that we ſhall have bread for our ſweat; and it is a precept too, in that God enjoyneth us, if we will have bread to ſweat for it.
Have a care then of relieving common beggers, vagrant and idle perſons: I ſpeak not againſt Almes, God requireth us to feed the hungry: but remember as God doth not approove of any other work without charity, ſo neither of charity it ſelfe without diſcretion, as Paul, Honour widows; but thoſe that are widdowes indeed: 1. Tim 5.3A woman that hath poyſoned her huſband is a widow, but ſhe is not a widow indeed, not to be honoured; ſo you muſt relieve the poor, but thoſe who are poor indeed: who are they?
Thoſe that want not onelyonly the things they aſke, but want alſo means to get without asking, viz. blind, aged, paſt their work, that have a greater charge then they can maintain by their work.
Ierome: Pars ſacrilegii eſt rem pauperum dare non pauperibus. Whileſt you think you relieve the poor, you robbe the poor.
Queſt 48. verſ. 16, 17, 18, 19.
What may we learne, from theſe verſes conſidered together?
That God in the midſt of judgement Reſp. remembers mercy: and that he rolls up the ſentence pronounced againſt the man, and woman in love, and ſweetneſſe: thou ſhalt conceive, and travell in ſorrow, there is judgement, but thou ſhalt bring forth children, there is mercy; thy deſire ſhall be ſubject, there is judgement; but it ſhall be to thy husband, there is mercy. God ſaith to Adam, Curſed is the ground for thy ſake, there is judgement; but not curſed art thou, there is mercy. Thou ſhalt labour and ſweat, there is judgement; but it ſhall not be overmuch, (you know the face ſweats before any part) and it ſhall be the ſweat of thy face, there is mercy; thy face ſhall ſweat, there is judgement; but in the ſweat of thy face thou ſhalt eat bread, there is mercy.
Quest. 49. verſ. 21.
Why did the Lord God make coats of skinnes, and cloath our firſt parents with them?
To teach them he had not caſt them out Reſp. 1 of his fatherly care, though they had ſinned againſt him.
That it might be a continuall Item of their ſin againſt God. The originall of raiment ſhould never be forgotten by the ſonnes of Adam, but be remembred as a check to the vanity, and pride of apparell; we have no more cauſe to be proud of our cloaths, then of a plaiſter of maſtick worne to ſtay the Rheume from annoying the eyes or Teeth, or a paire of ſpectacles to help the dimneſſe of the ſight.
Queſt. 50. verſ. 24.
In the former verſe it is ſaid, The Lord God ſent man forth from the garden of Eden, and in this verſe, it is ſaid he drove out the man.
It is like God at firſt bid him go, and Reſp. then he ſhewing himſelfe unwilling, and begging that he might abide there ſtill, God with ſome evidence of wrath drove him out.
Queſt. 51. verſe 24.
What may we Learne from Gods placing at the Eaſt of the Garden Cherubims, and a flaming ſword, which turned every way, to keep the way of the Tree of life?
That when man fell out with God, he fell out with the good Angels; The Reſp. Angels were loyall ſubjects, and took part with their Prince againſt the Rebels; but through Chriſt God and we are friends, and the Angels and we are friends; now in ſtead of ſhutting us out of Paradiſe, they carry us into Paradiſe: The Angels conveyed Lazarus into Abrahams boſome.
Good examples are rare in the world, Oh that we could imitate the good Angels! The mariners at ſea when they have no land-markes to direct them home to their own Countrey, are guided by the Starres. Truly we have but a few good examples in this world, and therefore let us take our patterne from the Angels, that continually behold the face of God, ready to do his will: Deſpiſe ye not one of theſe little Matth. 18. 19.ones, for I ſay unto you, that in heaven their Angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.