To prove that these are in the right; I offer for it these Arguments.
1. Because, Fool is the name given in common unto all sinners in Scripture, Prov. 10.21. ch. 18.2. Luke 12.19. Eph. 5.15. Et passim. But natural men are such; as will appear afterwards.
2. Who is Nabal properly, and correspondent unto the allusion (which is, ad arborem marcescen∣tem, to a dry tree) but, one that is expers vitae spiritualis, void of spiritual Life?
3. What is here in the singular, is presently turn∣ed into the plural number, The fool hath said, &c. They are corrupt; intimating all and every of them so to be. And the Prophet runs it to a man, There is none that doth good, and vers. 3. no not one.
4. The enquiry, v. 2, is concerning the children of men, the Children of Adam as it is in the Original; and that, To see if there were any that did under∣stand, &c.
5. Put in any other wicked person, Atheist, or whom you will, and then see how it agrees. What, Did the Lord look down from Heaven, to see whe∣ther the Atheist did understand or seek God? &c. or do any good? Doth this need such examen, such enquiry? or is it a wonder that they are abominable in their works, and do no good?
6. Doth not the Apostle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, alledge this very Text, to prove the universal corruption of mankind, both of Jew and Gentile? Rom. 3.9, 10, 11, We have before proved Jew and Gentile, that they are all under sin, as it is written, there is none righteous, no not one; there is none that understandeth, &c.
Lastly, Who are Fools, but they which under∣stand not? and who such Fools, as they which seek not God? which no meer Son of Adam doth, v. 2.