An exposition on the fourteene first chapters of Genesis, by way of question and answere Collected out of ancient and recent writers: both briefely and subtilly propounded and expounded. By Abraham [sic] Rosse of Aberden, preacher at St. Maries neere South-Hampton, and one of his Maiesties chaplaines.

Questions on the second Chapter.

Q. DId God create the world at the sa•…•… instant, or in the space of sixe dayes?

A. In the space of sixe dayes: first, because Moses narration is historicall, and therefore he speaketh of sixe distinct dayes: secondly, Mo∣ses, Exodus 20. and 31. vrgeth the Iewes to worke sixe dayes, and rest the seuenth, because God created the world in sixe dayes, and rested the seuenth; this reason had beene ridiculous, if GOD had made the world in an instant▪ thirdly, if we vnderstand Moses in this place allegorically, then wee must make this whole historie an allegorie: fourthly, if the seuenth day had beene the first (and in it God had cre∣ated the world) then how is it vnderstood that God rested the seuenth day? fiftly, how could so many diuers kindes of creatures bee created in the same instant of time? yea, then we must say, that man was created and brought into

Paradise, and was cast asleepe, and E•…•…ah was formed of his rib the same instant.

Q. How then is that vnderstood. Ecclesiast. 18. He that liueth for euer, created all things to∣gether?

A. It is to be vnderstood of that confused masse that God created in the beginning: out of the which afterward hee created the rest of the creatures in their distinct dayes.

Q. Why did God spend so much time in ma∣king the world?

A. Not because he was weake, and could not make it in lesse time, but that we might the more seriously consider the order of the crea∣tion, distinction, and replenishing of the world; and in these, the omnipotencie, wisedome and goodnesse of God.

Q. Did God make the world of necessitie, or of his owne accord?

A. Of his owne free will, because he made it at that time and manner he thought fittest: secondly, because he, in creating, wrought o∣therwise than the course of Nature doth; for he made the heauens without light, then made light: first, imperfect; afterward, perfect: and he made the hearbs before the Sunne.

Q. Can it be gathered from hence, that as God created the world in sixe dayes, and rested the se∣uenth:

so likewise the world shall continue si•…•… ages, or sixe thousand yeares, and after shall be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 perpetuall Sabbath?

A. No: for this computation is but a con∣iecture, or fixion of Elias▪ not the Prophet, but the Rabbin, hauing no ground. Secondly, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this were true, we should know how long the world should continue, and fully know the time of Christs comming: which cannot bee: for his comming shalbe as a theefe in the night, as Lightning; his comming shall bee a•…•… the comming of the flood: of this houre knoweth no man, not the Angels; the Father hath put in his owne power the times and seasons.

Q. Were the Angels created, or are they eter∣nall?

A. Created, Psal. 149. Reuel. 4 & 10. Col•…•…s. 1. The Church confesseth; the Fathers con∣firme; and generall Councells establish this point. Secondly, onely God is eternall. Third∣ly, They are parts of the world, therefore crea∣ted.

Q. Are the Angels reall substances, or onely good and bad motions in the minde, as thought the Sadduces?

A. They are indiuiduall substances. First, Their names doe shew this, for they are called Messengers, Watchmen, &c. Secondly, their

actions and operations, which onely belong to personall substances: for, they serue God; come to vs; comfort vs; gather together the Elect; an Angell wrestled with Iaacob; con∣ferred with Abraham; they were receiued by Lot, &c. Angels declared Christs Natiuity to the shepheards, his Resurrection to the wo∣men. Thirdly, some of them stood, some fell, therefore substances. Fourthly, wee shall bee like them: Ergo, they are not bare motions.

Q. What is meant here by the Host of Heauen and earth?

A By those of Heauen, is meant the An∣gels, for they are called the heauenly host, Luke 2. also the Stars, Esay 34. Therefore the Stars in their courses fought against Sisera, Iudges 5. By the host of Earth, is meant all the earth∣ly creatures: therefore God is called the Lord of hostes.

Q. Were the Angels created before this visible world?

A. No: because God created all things in the beginning: ergo, Angels, and not before, or else this had beene no beginning. Second∣ly, They were created for the vse of man, but man was not before the beginning: ergo, nor Angels.

Q. Were they created after the sixe dayes?

A. No: for God rested from all his worke the seuenth day.

Q Then what day were they created?

A. The first, that they might bee the be∣holders and admirers of Gods power and wis∣dome in creating the World. Secondly, They are called Angels of Heauen in Scripture; not onely because they inhabit, but also because they were created with the heauen the first day. Thirdly, this is manifest in Iob 38. where it is sayd, that the Sonnes of God (that is, the An∣gels) did sing and showte when God laid the foundations of the earth.

Q. Where were they created?

A. In Heauen: for some of them fell from thence; And Christ saw Satan like Light∣ning fall from Heauen: therefore they are cal∣led the Host and Angels of Heauen.

Q. Why doth not Moses speake distinctly of the creation of An•…•…els?

A. Because hee did accomodate himselfe to the rude capacitie of the Iewes; therefore hee doth onely speake here of the creation of visi∣ble creatures.

Q. What is meant by Gods rest on the Sab∣bath day? was he wearie?

A. No: but by his rest, is vnderstood his de∣sisting and ceasing to make other creatures.

Q. Did God rest from all his workes?

A. Yes, of creation, but not of preseruati∣on: for yet the Father worketh with the Son, Iohn 5.

Q. Did God create no other creatures since the Creation?

A. No: for whatsoeuer seomes to bee crea∣ted since, it was created before, either in the matter thereof (as Wormes, Flies, Bees, and such like) or else, in that God gaue faculty to some creatures of diuers kindes, to produce a third kinde, as Mules of the Horse and Asse; & power he gaue to the Starres, to produce some creatures of putrified matter: yet some crea∣tures he doth still produce, either by generati∣on, as all particular men, and other creatures that are generated, or by creation, either ordi∣nary, as the soules of men, or extraordinary, as the Starre that appeared to the Wise men, and the Doue that descended on Christ: so then God rested from creating new kindes of crea∣tures, but not from producing the indiuiduall creatures of those kindes that were made in the Beginning.

Q. Why is it said here that God ended his worke the seuenth day, seeing they were ended the sixth day?

A. The creatures were perfected the sixth

day, in respect of their substance, qualities, and properties; but in respect of their operation, they were not perfected till the seuenth day, for they did not begin to produce effects till after the sixth day: and seeing operation is the end of the forme, they were not fully per∣fected till they began to worke.

Q. How doe you vnderstand that God sanctifi∣ed the Sa•…•…bath?

A. In that hee separated it from the other dayes, and consecrated it for holy vses, hee would haue this to bee a Day of rest, and wherein we might wholly addict our selues for his seruice.

Q. Did God inioyne Adam to keepe this day holy?

A. No: but this was afterwards comman∣ded by Moses: for in that happy •…•…state it had not beene needfull to appoint one day for Gods seruice, seeing euery day should haue beene a day of rest, and Sabbath for Adam to meditate on Gods workes. Secondly, it was not need∣full for man then to rest from seruill worket, because in that happinesse, mans labour should not haue beene wearisome. Thirdly, we reade of no commandement that was giuen to A∣dam: but only one, concerning not eating the •…•…orbidden fruite. Fourthly, if this law had

beene giuen to Adam▪ it should haue tied, all his posterity to the obseruation thereof: but wee doe not reade, that any one of the Fathers be∣fore Moses, did obserue the Sabbath. Fiftly, if the Sabbath had beene kept by the Fathers, Moses would haue mentioned the same, as a strong argument to perswade the Iewes to kee•…•…e it▪ Sixtly, the soundest of the Fathers are of this opinion.

Q. What is meant here by she day wherein God made the heauen and the earth?

A. By the day is meant, the whole 6. daies: so, often in the Scriptures, day signifieth time, as the day of saluation, the day of Iudgement.

Q. What is meant by a mist that watered the earth?

A. Not a fountaine: but a vapour, which is the matter of raine.

Q. What is me•…•…nt by this, that God made man of the dust of the earth?

A. By man is vnderstood his body: by dust, the matter of his body, to put vs in minde of humility, and of this bodies frailtie: by earth, is vnderstood the 4▪ elements: for man is per∣fectly composed of all: but ea•…•…th is only ex∣pressed, because in mans body there is more earth then any other element. Secondly, when man dies, his body is desolued into earth.

Thirdly, he liues vpon the earth. Fourthly, he taketh his clothes and food from the earth.

Q. Why was not the body of man rather made of heauenly then earthly substance, seeing the soule is so excellent?

A. Because the soule of man did require such a body as was capable of senses, by the which as by instruments shee might worke in the body: but the celestiall bodies are not capable of senses: for they are not capable of the first qualities.

Q. Wherein doth the body of man exceed the bodies of other creatures?

A. First, in that the body of man is made straight: that he may behold heauen his coun∣try, that his senses might vse their function the better, his hands might bee imployed in wor∣king, not in walking. Secondly, in that his senses are more perfect then of other crea∣tures, not in the quicker apprehension of the sensible obiect: for other creatures haue per∣fecter senses in this regard: but that man can discerne more perfecter by his senses, the diffe∣rences of obiects than other creatures. Third∣ly, in that mans body is more perfectly com∣pounded of the 4. elements, then other bodies: for the bodies of the creatures are more earth∣ly, or more waterish.

Q. Of what age created God Adam and Eua?

A. In the prime and flowre of their age. First, because God created all things in their perfect estate. Secondly, because God com∣manded them to increase and multiply, which they could not haue done, if they had not bin created of a ripe age.

Q. Whether was the body or the soule of man created first?

A. The body: for God did keepe the same course in mans creation, which nature doth now in mans generation: for first, the body is formed in the mothers wombe, and then the soule is infused.

Q. Why is the creation of mans soule called a breathing?

A. First, to shew vs that the soule was not taken out of the power of the matter: but was created of nothing, and infused in the body. Secondly, to teach vs Gods power, who did as easily create the soule, as man doth breathe. Thirdly, to shew the excellencie of mans soule, which seemeth as it were the breath of Gods owne mouth.

Q. Is the soule of man, of the essence of God?

A. No: if it were, it should be either a part thereof, or the whole: it is not a part; for Gods

essence cannot be deuided in parts, neither is it the whole: for then all men should bee but one soule. Secondly, if mans soule were a part of Gods essence, then a part of Gods essence should be sinfull, and subiect to the wrath of God, and paines of hell

Q. Why did God breathe the soule, rather in the face, then in any other part of man?

A. Because, in the face are all the senses, which are the organs of the soule.

Q. Why in the nosthrils rather then in any o∣ther part of the face?

A. To teach vs, that hee is the only author of our breathing: secondly; to shew the weak∣nesse of our life, which dependeth from the nosthrils: thirdly, because the nose is the most commodious instrument of breathing, by which the soule is kept in the body.

Q. Did God create one soule in man, or three?

A. Only one: first, because one body can haue but one essentiall forme: secondly, the power of growing▪ feeling, and reasoning, are not three soules, but three faculties of one soule: thirdly, the Scripture neuer speakes but of one soule.

Q. Were the soules of men created long before the body, as thought Plato and Origines?

A. No: for God created all things perfect, but the soule of man, being a part of man;

without, the body could not bee perfect: se∣condly, now in generation the body is no soo∣ner formed, but God infuseth the soule; the same order did God keepe in mans creation: thirdly, the soules in all that time should haue either done good or euill: but Iacob and Esau did neither good nor euill before they were borne, Rom. 9. 11. Ergo.

Q. Seeing the soule doth exist, after the cor∣ruption, why did she not exist before the creation of the body?

A. Shee doth exist after the dissolution of the body, of necessitie, being immortall: but it was not fit she should exist, before the creation of the body, seeing she is the naturall forme, and essentiall part of man.

Q. Whether are the soules of men infused in the bodies, or are they deriued and propagated one of another?

A. By creating they are infused, and by infusing created: for mans soule being incor∣porall and indiuisible, cannot be propagated of any other soule, nor multiplied, that is plaine by Zach. 12. 1. and Coloss 12. 7.

Q. Is the soule of man immortall?

A. It is, because a simple essence voyde of contrarieties, and bodily accidents: secondly, It is created to Gods Image: and mans soule

is not like God, only in that it is capable of all sciences, and in that it hath an appetite infinite, which cannot be filled, but with God; and that it hath a will free and indifferent to all parti∣cular good: but also in that desire which it hath of immortalitie: thirdly, man hath do∣minion ouer the creatures, which consisteth also in this, that his soule is immortall, theirs are not: fourthly, Mans soule is not produced of any matter by generation, but is induced in the body by creation, the soules of all other creatures were procreated of the Elements, for the earth brings out beasts; and the waters fi∣shes: this is also manifest by many places of Scripture.

Q. Is the soule of man immortall by nature, or by grace?

A. Internally: that is, as it is a simple im∣materiall substance, it is immortall by nature: but externally, as it depends on God, hath it being and subsistance in him, it is immortall by grace.

Q. In what place of the world was Paradise?

A. Not in any other earth separated from ours, by the Ocean; nor higher than the su∣preme region of the ayre, as some Fathers thought: but in Mesopotamia and the borde∣ring countries to it: for Paradise was planted

on the East side of Eden, which is in Mesopota∣mia: secondly, that is manifest by the Riuers Tignis and Euphrates, which spring out of the mountaines of Armenia, and flow thorow the countries of Mesopotamia, Assyria, and Chal∣dea, and runne into the Persian gulfe, and these are the Riuers of Paradise.

Q. Should man haue remained in Paradise onely, if he had not sinned?

A. No: for Paradise was not so large as to containe all mankinde, being comprehended within the limits of these countries aforesayd: secondly, man had power ouer the whole earth; and all the hearbs of the ground were giuen to him for food; and therefore hee was to reple∣nish the whole earth: thirdly, how should the earth be trimmed, manured and made fruitfull, if man had dwelt in paradise?

Q. Then to what end did God make Paradise, seeing he knew that man should presently fall, and be cast out of it?

A. He made it, that Adam, so long as hee obeyed God, might enioy it: secondly, that it might be a figure and type of the heauenly Paradise, and ioyes of the life to come: third∣ly, to put him in minde, after his fall, what great blessings he had lost, by losing Paradise.

Q. Is Paradise yet extant, •…•…r not?

A. It is not extant: for Paradise was in these Countries of Mesapotamia, Assyria, &c. through the which Tigris and Euphrates the Riuers of Paradise) did flowe: but those coun∣tries are still populous, and no signe now of Paradise: secondly, the Floud, Genesis 7. was fifteene cubites higher than the mountaines, therefore it was also defaced with the floud.

Q. Why was the tree of life called so?

A. Because it was the Sacrament or signe of life, both naturall in Paradise, and spirituall in heauen: or as some thinke, because it had power, being eaten, to preserue the life of man, a long time▪ but not for euer: for man was not to liue still a naturall life. Againe, the body of man was corruptible, because it was made of matter the subiect of corruption, of contrary e∣lements and parts; as also because the naturall heate of the body, by degrees is extenuated, and the radicall humor exhausted: and in these respects, although this tree had that vertue to preserue the life of the body a long time, yet not for euer.

Q. Why did God forbid man to eate of the tree of knowledge of good and euill?

A. Not because it was euill in it selfe, or hurtfull to man: but because by this command, God would trie mans obedience.

Q. Why was the tree, called the tree of know∣ledge of good and euill?

A. Not because it had power either to be∣get knowledge in Adam, or to augment his knowledge, as the Hebrewes and Iosephus doe thinke: for Adam was created with perfect knowledge: neither can corporall fruites pro∣duce spirituall effects in the soule: but it was so named from the euent: for man knew now what was good and euill by experience, hauing transgressed in eating of this tree. Secondly, it was so named, because of Satans false pro∣mise, who inticed them to eate of it, promising they should bee as Gods, knowing good and euill.

Q. What riuers were those, that Moses calls here Phison and Gehon?

A. They were parts of Tigris, and Euphra∣tes, which riuer is sometimes named one, be∣cause they flow together, and are ioyned in one below Babylon: sometimes two, in respect of the place, from whence they spring and where they end. Sometimes foure, in re∣spect of their foure heads, whereof two spring out of the mountaines, and other two emptie themselues in the Persian sea.

Q. Then Phison is not Ganges of India, nor Gehon, Nilus of Egypt?

A. No: for Ganges springeth out of Cau∣casus of India, Nilus out of the mountaine of inferior Mauritania▪ but Phison and Gehon, out of Armenia: Nilus exonerateth her selfe in the Mediterranean sea: but Phison and Ge∣hon into the Persian Gulfe.

Q. What countrie is this Hauilah?

A. Not a countrie in India, but bordering vpon Palestine, and Assyria, as may be gathered out of Gene. Chap. 25. 18.

Q. What is Bdellium?

A. It is a blacke Tree, the bignesse of an Oliue tree, from the which there runneth a kinde of sweet Gum. Plinius. lib. 12. Chapt. 9.

Q. How is that vnderstood, that God did put Adam into the Garden?

A. Either by the inward perswasion of God hee was led thither, as Christ was led to the wildernesse, Math. 4. or he was caught by the Spirit, as Henoch, Habh•…•…cuc, and Philip, or else by an Angell, in the shape of man, hee was led to Paradise.

Q. Why did not God create Adam in Para∣dise?

A. To let him know that Paradise did not belong to him by nature, but by grace. Se∣condly, to teach him to bee the more circum∣spect in obeying God, considering hee might

be as well put out of it, as he was brought in, if he brake Gods Law. Thirdly, that hee should haue no cause to accuse God of cruelty, in put∣ting him out of that place, which by nature was due to him; therefore he returnes to the place from whence he came.

Q. Then why was Euah created in Paradise?

A. Because Adam, out of whose side shee was taken was now in Paradise. Secondly, she is not now properly created, but formed and framed out of Adams rib: for when Adam was formed, she was created potentia in him, in re∣spect the body of Adam was the matter of her body.

Q. Should man haue wrought in Paradise?

A. Yes: but not for need, and with trouble as now: but with pleasure, to keepe himselfe from idlenesse. Secondly, thereby to stirre him vp the more to contemplate heauenly things. And thirdly, to trie the diuers natures of grounds, and of those things that grow on the ground.

Q. Doth these words, You shall eate of euery tree of the Garden, containe a precept or a per∣mission?

A. Not a precept, but a permission: for if God did command Adam to eate of •…•…uery tree, he should haue beene tied to it▪ Secondly,

man hath no need to bee commanded to eate, when he is hungry: for he can doe that by na∣ture. Thirdly, he knew that all the trees were created to that vse, therefore he needs no com∣mandement to eate.

Q. Was this commandement of not eating the tree of Knowledge of good and euill, inioyned to Eua also?

A. Yes: for so she confessed to the Ser∣pent. Secondly, if she had not beene comman∣ded to abstaine from it, shee should not haue sinned in eating of it.

Q. How could this precept belong to Eua, see∣ing she was not yet created?

A. It was first giuen to Adam, and then by Adam it was deliuered to Eua.

Q. Why did God forbid Adam to eate of this tree?

A. First, to let him know, that he was but a creature and seruant, and therfore had a Lord whom hee must serue and obey. Secondly, to let him see, that hee had free-will and power both to chuse and refuse any thing hee pleased▪ Thirdly, to exercise him in obedience.

Q. But seeing God knew that Adam would violate this precept, and bring himselfe and his po∣sterity to perpetuall miserie, why would God in∣ioyne it to him.

A. To make him inexcusable: for he made him vpright, and gaue him grace to obey, if he would: dedit Adamo posse, si vellet; non, & velli, & posse. Secondly, Although God knew that man would sinne, yet he did permit him, because he was to conuert that sinne of Adam to his greater good, in sending his Sonne into the world. Thirdly, he suffered him to fall, that his Mercie and Iustice might appeare the more.

Q. How is it vnderstood, that whatsoeuer day Adam should eate of the Forbidden tree, he should die?

A. Hee did not die actually, as soone as hee had eaten the forbidden fruite but now he was subiect to death, and the necessity of dying is laid vpon him▪ Secondly, he may be said to dye actually that day, because then the infirmities of body and soule, which are the fore-runners & causes of death actual, did seaze vpon him: & so mortuus est morte inchoata, sed non completa.

Q. Why did not God expressely threaten Adam with death eternall?

A. Because God in the old Testament spea∣keth but sparingly of death eternall, and vnder shaddowes. Secondly, death corporall is better knowne to man (not onely by faith and reason, but also by experience) then death eternall,

which onely is knowne by faith. Thirdly, hee would speake of such a death, as did not onely belong vnto him, but to all his posterity, al∣though they did repent: and this is the death of the body, whereof all are partakers.

Q. Why did God threaten Adam with death?

A. Because death is the greatest and most fearefull miserie that can happen to man. Se∣condly. The name of death comprehends all the miseries and afflictions that doe befall man in this life, because they are preparations to death: Nam vt via ad generationem est ge∣neratio, sic via ad interitum est mors.

Q. Then what death is mean•…•… here?

A. Both of body and soule, temporall and eternall.

Q. How can death corporall bee a punishment for sinne, seeing it proceeds of naturall causes, as of contrary qualities?

A. It is not the punishment of sinne, as it proceedes of naturall causes, but in respect that God ordained Adam to liue immortally, if he had not sinned: now hauing sinned, death fol∣lowes as the stipend of sinne.

Q. Why was it not good that man should bee alone?

A. Because man without the woman could not procreate children, and so man-kinde

could not bee multiplyed. Secondly, Christ could not haue come in the flesh. Thirdly, the Elect and Church of God could not haue in∣creased, if Adam had beene alone.

Q. How were the creatures brought to A∣dam?

A. Either by the helpe of Angels, or by that naturall instinct which the Greekes call 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by the which euery creature perceiueth what is good and bad for them.

Q. Why did God bring the creatures to A∣dam?

A. First, To let him see how much he did excell them, and how much the more he should be thankfull. Secondly, Because hee was the Lord of the beasts, God would haue him to see his seruants. Thirdly, that he might name them. Fourthly, that posterity might know, what ex∣cellent knowledge Adam had, in giuing names to the creatures according to their kindes.

Q. Why were not the fishes brought to Adam?

A. Because they doe not so much resemble man as the beasts: secondly, because they could not be such a helpe to man as the beasts: third∣ly, because they could not liue out of the wa∣ter.

Q. Had Adam the knowledge of all things, as soone as he was created?

A. Yes, because he was created perfect, as well in regard of the gifts of his minde, as of his body: secondly, hee was to be the Father, Teacher, and Gouernour of mankinde, which hee could not haue beene without excellent knowledge: thirdly, knowledge was a part of Adams happinesse, and hee could not haue beene perfectly happy, if hee had beene at any time ignorant: fourthly, if God prepared food and all things needfull for his body; then much more, science and vnderstanding, which is the food of the soule.

Q. Should Adams Pesterity▪ in the state of in∣nocencie, haue knowledge ingrafted in them with∣out labour?

A. No: for it is naturall to man to attaine to knowledge by his senses and experience, therefore the soule hath receiued a body with senses, which the soule may vse as organs, to beget knowledge; yet man in that happy e∣state should haue attained to knowledge soo∣ner, and with greater ease than now, because the wit was most excellent, the senses more perfect, the life longer, the body healthier and stronger, and there should haue beene no impe∣diment to learning as now▪

Q. Had Adam the knowledge of supernatu∣rall things?

A. Yes, or else his knowledge had not been perfect: secondly, without this knowledge he could not haue knowne God, nor the Angels, nor the end of his owne creation.

Q. Had Adam more wisedome than any man euer since?

A. Yes: except Christ. And Adams wise∣dome did excellours: first, in that he knew all naturall things, wee but some: secondly, his knowledge did proceed of the causes of natu∣rall things, but ours from the effects: thirdly, his knowledge could not bee lost, but ours is often; partly through the infirmity and corruption of our naturall senses, partly by idlenesse and ceasing to study; and partly by the contrary habit of ignorance and false opi∣nions.

Q. Had Adam the knowledge of the hea∣uens, and their operations, as hee had of earthly creatures?

A. Yes, because his minde was perfect: and knowledge is the perfection of the minde: secondly, the power, wisedome and prouidence of God is seene in the heauenly bodies as in the earthly: thirdly, Adam could not haue had the perfect knowledge of earthly things, if hee had not had the knowledge of heauenly: for the knowledge of the earthly things, de∣pends

from the knowledge of the heauenly.

Q. What were the effects of that originall righteousnesse, in the which Adam was created?

A. The effects thereof are many, especially these foure: first, the holinesse of his will and reason, which was wholly subiect to God: se∣condly, the vprightnesse of the inferiour part, that is, of the flesh and senses, which were per∣fectly obedient to the superiour part of the soule; thirdly, perfect inclination to doe good, and eschew euill: fourthly, a perpetuall ioy of the minde, and peace of conscience, raising from this holinesse.

Q. Hath Christ brought vs more happinesse by his Iucarnation, than Adam lost by his trans∣gression?

A. Yes: for although sinne did abound, yet grace did more abound, as the Apostle disputeth, Rom. 5. Therefore▪ Foelix fuit Ada culpa cuius delendae causa, tantum habemus Re∣demptorem: saith Gregorius.

Q. Was Adam mortall or immortall before his Fall?

A. He was immortall, not simply, but con∣ditionally, if he did obey God, if not, then he should die.

Q. How was he immortall?

A. Not as God, who is altogether immor∣tall,

both internally and externally, because in him there is no mutability: nor as the Angels, who are immortall, because they are not com∣pounded of a matter, which is the subiect of corruption: nor as the heauens, which though they haue a materiall substance, yet this is not the subiect of contradiction and contrary qua∣lities, as the sublunary and elementall bodies are: but Adam was immortall by grace, and the power of God, who would haue preserued him supernaturally from corruption, although naturally he was subiect to corruption.

Q. Then this gift of immortality which Adam should haue inioyed, was not naturally due to him?

A. No: for if it had bin naturall, it should not haue bin taken from Adam: but sinne did neither abolish nor diminish mans naturall gifts. Secondly, that which is against nature, cannot be due to nature: but for the body to be immortall, is against the nature of mans bo∣dy, seeing it is compounded of contrary quali∣ties.

Q. Why would God forme Eua of Adam slee∣ping?

A. That Adam should not feele any paine in losing his rib. Secondly, to signifie a great mysterie: for as Eua was formed out of the side of Adam sleeping: so the Church was reformed

by water and blood, out of the body of Christ dying.

Q. Why was Eua made rather of the side, then of any other part of the body?

A. Because the side is the middle of the bo∣dy; to signifie that the woman must be of equall dignitie with the man, therefore shee was not made of the head, nor of the foot, for she must neither be superior, nor inferior to him.

Q. Of what side was she taken out?

A. It is probable, that she was taken out of the left side, for the heart inclineth to that side•…•… so man and woman should imbrace each other with hearty loue. And as the left side is weakest, so is the woman the weaker vessell: also the males are conceiued in the right side, the females in the left; and as the sides are de∣fended by the armes, so must the woman by the husband.

Q. Why was Eua made of the man, and not of the earth, as Adam was?

A. Because Adam should loue his wife the more, not only because she is of that same na∣ture with him, that shee is ioyned with him by carnall copulation, that shee doth bring him sorth child•…•…en: but also because shee is a part of his owne substance. Secondly, Eùa was made of Adam, to shew that Adam is the be∣ginning

of the woman, and of all mankinde. Thirdly, that we might learne from hence, that mysticall coniunction betwixt Christ and his Church.

Q. What is meant by the rib?

A. Not the bare bone: but bone with the flesh thereof, as Adam testifieth: Thou art bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh.

Q. How did God of one rib make a whole wo∣man?

A. Either by rarefaction, or multiplication of the same rib, or by some addition of some new matter: as Christ did feed 5. thousand men with 5. loaues: for God can of nothing, or of euery thing make any thing.

Q. Was this rib, whereof Eua was created, one of Adams naturall ribs, or was it a superfiuous rib?

A. It was one of Adams naturall ribs: for •…•…ow elsé could hee haue said of Eua, Thou art bone of my bone? or how could Eua bee sayd, to be formed of Adam? Neither was Adam im∣perfect, although he wanted his rib: for God did fill vp that place with flesh.

Q. If Adam lost one of his ribs, how comes it▪ that the posteritie of Adam haue all their 24. ribs?

A. Although Abraham was circumcised: yet he begot his children vncircumcised; and

a maimed man doth beget a whole man: for nature, if she be not hindred, retaines her owne force and vigor, and brings forth the perfectest effects she can.

Q. How come it, that Adam▪ in losing his rib, did not feele paine?

A. Eyther in regard of his deepe sleepe, for those that are in a lethargie. doe feele neither stripes nor wounds; or else, because God did sus∣pend, and hinder the act of feeling, which is in the nerues.

Q. Why doth not Moses speake as well of the creation of Eua's soule, as of her body?

A. Because her body was otherwise crea∣ted, then the body of Adam: but the manner of the creation of her soule, is all one with that of Adams, therefore there was no need of re∣petition.

Q. Why was Eua brought to Adam?

A. To signifie, that shee was Adams com∣panion. Secondly, a helpe to him to beger chil∣dren. Thirdly, that the man is not for the wo∣man, but the woman for the man. Fourthly, this bringing signifieth, that they are now con∣tracted and married.

Q. Had Eua •…•… reasonable soule as Adam had?

A. Yes: because she was made for a helpe to

man, which shee could not haue bin without a reasonable soule: secondly, both receiue a Law, vpon both was inflicted punishment for the breach thereof; both their bodies are alike: re∣demption is promised to both; and both doe expect glory.

Q. Why did not God create Eua as soon as Adam?

A. That Adam liuing a priuate life a while, might the better perceiue the comforts of the married life. Secondly, that he might loue God the more, who prouided such a comfort to him, when he was alone.

Q. Is man and woman of the same kinde?

A. Yes: for male and female make no essenti∣all difference. Secondly, if they were not of the same kinde, how could they procreate children? Thirdly, they both haue the same definition and essentiall properties. Fourthly, wee reade that maides haue become boyes, which could not be if they were of diuers kindes, Plinius lib. 7. Cap. 4. Gellius. lib. 9. Cap. 4. &c.

Q. How could Adam and Eua bee married, seeing they were so neere a kin?

A. The neerenesse of kin, which forbiddeth matrimony, is that which ariseth of carnall copulation, and Eua was not begotten, but cre∣ated of Adam: therefore she was not his daugh∣ter, but his wife.

Q. Why was there but one woman created?

A. Because that one woman is sufficient to bee a helpe to one man. Secondly, to teach posterity, that God doth hate Polygamy. Thirdly, that the loue of man might bee the greater to his wife.

Q. How is man and woman one flesh?

A. Because they are ioyned together to liue one commonlife. Secondly, in respect of their carnall copulation. Thirdly, in respect of pro∣creation of one flesh: for the childe is the flesh and substance of the father and mother, and both their flesh is vnited in their children, Fourthly, because of the right and power the Husband hath ouer the body of his Wife, and the Wife ouer her Husband, 1. Cor. 7.

Q. Why was not Adam and Eua ashamed of their nakednesse?

A. Because that externally, neither heat nor cold, nor any thing else could hurt their body, internally there was no inordinate affection in the soule: but perfectly the inferior part of the soule did obey the superior. And thirdly, because there was nothing to bee seene in their bodies, but that which was comely and decent; and therefore, Nihil putabant velandum, q•…•…ia nihil 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉, Aug. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 11. de Gen. Cap. 1.