{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_27978/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_27978","id":"gutenberg_27978","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/27978","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Genesis -- Commentaries","Category: Religion/Spirituality"],"text":"Produced by Ron Swanson\n\n\n\n\n\nLUTHER ON SIN AND THE FLOOD\nCOMMENTARY ON GENESIS\n\nBY\n\nJOHN NICHOLAS LENKER, D.D.\n\nTRANSLATOR OF LUTHER'S WORKS INTO ENGLISH;\nAUTHOR OF \"LUTHERANS IN ALL LANDS\"\n\n\n\n\nVOL. II\nSECOND THOUSAND\n\n\n\n\nThe Luther Press\nMINNEAPOLIS, MINN., U.S.A.\n1910\n\n\n\n\n_DEDICATION_.\n\nTo all interested in studying the Christian Missionary problems of\n\"the last times\" of the modern world, this volume is dedicated.\n\n\n\n\nCopyright, 1910, by J. N. LENKER.\n\n\n\n\n_FOREWORD_.\n\n\nThe first volumes of the \"American Luther\" we selected for publication\nwere his best commentaries, then eight volumes of his Gospel and\nEpistle sermons and one volume of his best catechetical writings.\nThese rich evangelical works introduced us to the real Luther, not the\npolemical, but the Gospel Luther. They contain the leaven of the\nfaith, life and spirit of Protestantism. We now return to his\nspiritual commentaries on the Bible which are the foundation of all\nhis writings. The more one reads Luther the greater he becomes as a\nstudent of the One Book.\n\nContents of This Volume.\n\nThis, the second volume of Luther's great commentary on Genesis,\nappears now in English for the first time.\n\nIt covers chapters four to nine inclusive of Genesis. The subjects\ndiscussed are: Cain's murder, his punishment, Cain's sons, Seth and\nhis sons, the wickedness of the old world, the ark, Noah's obedience,\nthe universal destruction, the salvation of Noah's family, his\nsacrifice, his blessing, the rainbow covenant, Noah's fall, Ham cursed\nand Shem and Japheth blessed. These great themes are discussed by\nMoses and Luther. They have vital relations to problems pertaining to\nthe end of the modern world. Our hope and prayer are that God may use\nthis volume to make the book of Genesis and the whole Old Testament a\ngreater spiritual blessing to the Church and that it may serve the\nservants of God in these latter days in calling people to repentance,\nfaith and prayer like Noah and Luther did.\n\nIn his \"Dear Genesis\" Luther proved that the free Evangelical religion\nhe taught was not new, but as old as the first book of the Bible, and\nthat it does not consist in outward forms, organizations and pomp, but\nin true faith in Christ in our hearts and lives. Genesis contains the\nonly historic records accessible of the first 2364 years of the 4004\nyears before Christ. It is worthy of study in our day as it was in the\ndays of the Reformation.\n\nAcknowledgments.\n\nLuther advised no one should translate alone and he practiced what he\ntaught. We have followed his rule and example. Pastor C. B. Gohdes of\nBaltimore translated chapter six and President Schaller of Milwaukee\nTheological Seminary, chapters five, seven, eight and nine.\n\nInaccuracies may be due to the revision and editing, and not to the\ntranslators, for every good translation must be fluent and idiomatic,\nto secure which is the most difficult task. Pastor Gohdes also\nrendered valuable help in the final revision of parts. The translation\nof the analyses is by the undersigned.\n\nThe few last pages of the first edition of volume one we revised and\nreprint in this volume in order to make the pages of each volume of\nour edition to correspond with the German and Latin volumes of the\nErlangen edition. The paragraphs are numbered and the analyses given\naccording to the old Walch edition.\n\n\n_Luther and World-Evangelization_.\n\nIn translating Luther into practical English in practical America, and\nin this age that is growing more and more practical, we need to be\nreminded that this work is for practical use and purposes. Luther was\nradical along Bible lines in applying the truth personally and to the\nworld.\n\nIt is a year since the last volume of the \"American Luther\" appeared.\nThe delay was caused by an effort to raise the work to a higher\nstandard and by the publication of a book on \"The True Place of\nGermans and Scandinavians in the Evangelization of the World\", not a\nrevision of, but a new companion volume to \"Lutherans In All Lands\"\nthat appeared seventeen years ago. By comparing these two books one\nhas the best evidence of the marvelous progress of God's Kingdom in\nrecent years, and the growing world-significance of Luther's\nevangelistic writings. Evangelization at home and abroad is the\npopular religious theme today in the German fatherland and in the\nwhole Protestant world. The word \"world\" is becoming so common its\nfull meaning is not appreciated. When world-evangelization is\ndiscussed, it is too often from the standpoint of the nation\ndiscussing it. Each nation is so active in its own work that it fails\nto appreciate what others are doing. For example how little the world\nmissionary conferences in English lands have to say of the German and\nScandinavian missions and the Reformed Churches of the Lutheran work.\nHence the fruits of Luther's evangelical writings are underestimated\nby the English people. It is opportune to translate not only Luther\nbut also the best fruits of those writings in various languages during\nthe past 400 years, especially since the memorable date of 1917 is\nsoon to be celebrated by universal Protestantism. Luther in all\nlanguages and Lutherans in all lands go together. We ought to consider\nmost carefully the great Reformer in his relation to the modern world\nand modern world-evangelization. The known world in his day was not so\nlarge. He had, however, a clear view of it all in his writings, which\nis due to his faithful study of the Scriptures. The Bible gave him a\nknowledge of the world, including all lands and all times. His\ncommentary of eleven volumes on Genesis illustrates this. The first\nvolume on Genesis treats of the first part of the ancient world; the\nsecond volume, the one before us, treats of the second part and end of\nthe old world. This Luther would have us apply to the last times of\nthe modern world.\n\nLuther Educational and Devotional.\n\nHere, as everywhere in his catechisms, sermons and commentaries,\nLuther is unique among religious authors in that he is both\neducational and devotional, appealing equally to head and heart. He is\n\"religiously helpful and intellectually profitable,\" covering every\nphase of religious, moral and social conditions, and touching every\ninterest of humanity. \"His words went to the mark like bullets and\nleft marks like bullets.\" Being beyond criticism they have a unique\nplace to fill in the literature and libraries of the world.\n\nAlthough the cry, \"Read Luther!\" has been raised here in the new world\nthe multitudes of the English people are not rushing for his writings,\nas the Germans did when they first appeared in the old world, under\nconditions similar to what they are in America at present. If asked\nwhat made the German people what they are, the answer is, these\nwritings, so universally circulated and read. If the Anglo-Saxons\nappreciated their educational and devotional value the 35,000 copies\ncirculated the last seven years would easily, as a professor\nsuggested, be increased to a hundred thousand copies.\n\nNations Helping Nations.\n\nThe world-consciousness is growing, so is the national consciousness.\nBoth are characteristic of our times. Perhaps never did the national\nspirit develop as in recent years. The great powers, instead of\ndividing China, witness the national spirit growing everywhere--in\nJapan, China, India, Africa, South America, Norway, Sweden, as well as\nin Germany, England, Russia and the United States. This is a good\nsign, for the world-family is composed of nations, and each nation has\nat least one talent not to be crushed, but with which to serve all the\nothers. One serves the world when he serves his nation. Luther's\nwords, \"I live for my countrymen\", illustrates this. It is not the\nnations that have the largest armies and navies that are the greatest\nblessing to the world, but the nations that work out the best\nChristian civilization for the world to imitate and send over the\nearth the best farmers to show other nations and tribes how to\ncultivate the earth, the best teachers, preachers and authors to train\nthe people, the best medical skill to relieve human suffering, the\nbest mechanics and servants, the greatest philanthropists, the best\nChristians. In educational, industrial, medical and charitable mission\nwork the nations dominated by Luther's writings stand high. Nations,\nlike individuals, are the greatest which serve others best; not the\nnations which have the most territory, but nations which do the\ngreatest service for the whole human family. The students missionary\nmovement develops men, and the laymen's missionary movement raises\nmoney. Both are needed, but men must be trained to do their work in\nthe best way and the money be used to bring the best results. Hence\nnations should help and study one another most carefully with this in\nview. Luther and his writings in the evangelization of Europe ought\nnot to be overlooked in the evangelization of other continents. By\nhelping abroad the home does not suffer. Among American Lutherans the\nNorwegians prove this, for they have done the most for the heathen and\nhave the best home mission work.\n\nTransition and Translation or Transition and Revolution.\n\nWhile we are translating Luther for all Anglo-Saxons, we do not\noverlook the fact that Luther's disciples, Germans and Scandinavians,\nare themselves being translated, or are in a state of transition. The\ntranslation of a people and of their literature or spirit clearly\npresents a double problem, both sides of which demand at once the most\ncareful work. The translation of both the people and their literature\nshould run parallel and in the same, and not in an opposite,\ndirection. Germans and Scandinavians have always, and do still, make\nthe fatal blunder of translating from English into their own\nlanguages, instead of from their languages into English. They thus\ncross one another's path never to meet again. Their children and\ngrandchildren, however, find it easier to translate into English,\ntheir mother tongue; but, alas, they have little interest in doing it.\nThey make the mistake in thinking their old thoughts and classics are\nnot needed in the new language. Their motto seems to be, \"new\nliterature for the new language\", when to the English public, if not\nto themselves, the old writings would be the newest. It is marvelous\nhow wide-awake preachers are mislead.\n\nBest Literature is Translations.\n\nPeople who are prejudiced against translations, forget that the Bible\nand our best literature are translations of the classics of the\nworld's leading languages. Translations should be welcomed by a people\nwho themselves are in a state of translation, especially if the\ntranslations are from their mother tongue into the language they are\nlearning. What endless friction and confusion would be avoided, if\npeople and their life and literature were translated at the same time.\nAs we have said, a transition of a people without a translation of\ntheir literature is no transition, but a revolution. To this various\nchurch bodies witness. During the transition of language the best\nliterature for the children to read is the translations of the\nclassics of the language of the parents. There may be better\nliterature, but not for these particular children, if the unity of the\nfamily life is to be perpetuated. Hence it becomes a vital concern\nthat both children and parents understand that the best literature for\nthem is such translations. But where are the German or Scandinavian\nteachers and preachers who are enthusing over putting this thought\ndeep into the family life of their congregations.\n\nA Lesson from Luther and Wesley in America.\n\nWhat unwisdom even to attempt to build up the Lutheran Christian life\nin free, aggressive Protestant Anglo-Saxon civilization without\nLuther's writings in good Anglo-Saxon! Muhlenberg (b. 1711; d. 1787)\nand Wesley (b. 1703; d. 1791) came to America about the same time.\nWesley returned home in 1738 after a stay of two years in the south.\nMuhlenberg spent his ministerial life of 45 years (1742-1787) in\nAmerica, in the Keystone state, in and near Philadelphia, the\nmetropolis of the new world. When the two Palatinate Germans from\nLimerick County, Ireland, Philip Embury and Barbara Heck, a\nlay-preacher and a godly woman, held the first Methodist service in\nAmerica, in 1766, in New York City, the Lutheran faith had been\nplanted here by the Dutch since 1657 in the same city, by the Swedes\non the Delaware since 1639, (Torkillus), by the Germans since 1708\n(Kocherthal); Muhlenberg had arrived in Philadelphia in 1742, built\nchurches the following year in Philadelphia and \"The Trappe\", and\norganized the Synod of Pennsylvania among its 60,000 Lutherans in\n1748. All these Lutherans to some extent learned, preached and\nconfirmed in English. Muhlenberg was naturalized in 1754 as a subject\nof Great Britain. This and his stay in England gave an Anglican turn\nto his German pietism. When we became a free people in 1776, the\nMethodists had only 20 preachers and 3418 members in America and less\nthan 76,000 followers in Europe from which to receive immigrant\nmembers, while the Lutherans were strong here and in Europe. Today\nAmerican Methodists report 60,737 churches, and the Lutherans 13,533.\nWhy did Wesley's followers become the dominating religious force in\nAmerica? Not because Wesley and his writings were greater than Luther\nand his writings. Methodists did not bear Wesley's name, but they did\nhave his spirit and writings. Even to the present day every Methodist\npreacher must pass an examination in Wesley's writings before\nordination. Where were Luther's spirit and writings among his early\nAmerican followers?\n\nLanguage is no more a barrier to Luther's spirit than to Wesley's.\nMethodism forged its way from English into German, Norwegian, Danish\nand Swedish and among Indians, Mexicans and Negros. People, regardless\nof language, color or condition, could not help but learn what real\nspiritual Methodism is. It was preached and sung in such simple, plain\nAnglo-Saxon, and in good translations, that it could not be\nmisunderstood nor misrepresented. Wesley's simple evangelical message\nwas abroad in the land in the hearts of the people. But the\nevangelical voice of Luther, the prince of translators, was hardly\nheard and even today the English world has no clear popular view of\nwhat spiritual Evangelical Lutheranism is. Often when they speak of\nit, they seem to think it is the opposite of what it is. Germans,\nScandinavians and all know the spiritual side of Methodism, but the\nEnglish world does not know the spiritual side of Lutheranism, and it\nnever will until Luther's spiritual writings are translated into\nreadable English and circulated broadcast over the land, and the\nhearts of the people come into direct and close touch with the heart\nof the great Reformer himself.\n\nThe English world knows the statistics, the numerical strength of\nLutherans. That needs no apology. But what does need a defense among\nAmericans is the spirituality of the Lutherans. That is developed by\nthe translations into the plainest vernacular of God's Word and\nLuther's evangelical sermons and commentaries. These are the best\nliterature for young Germans and Scandinavians. Although translations,\nand not perfect, they are the best for them. The Bible first; Luther's\nspiritual writings second, not first nor third. Have not Lutherans in\nAmerica been following the disciples of Luther instead of Luther;\nwhile Methodists have followed Wesley and not Wesley's disciples. The\nDutch, Swedish and German Lutherans in the east, all learned English.\nWe say it was a transition, but was it not a revolution? Their history\nstands forth as beacon lights of warning to the polyglot Lutherans\nmigrating to the ends of earth and learning all languages. They will\nno more keep up their faith with one language than the English nation\nwill keep up their trade by refusing to learn other languages. Strange\nit is that nations can learn and use other languages in one line and\nnot in another--the English in church work and not in trade; the\nGermans in trade, but not in church work.\n\nIt is said there are 30 million people in the United States with some\nGerman blood in their veins. Two thirds of these, or 20 millions, may\nbe said to have some Lutheran mixture in their makeup, but only one\nand a half million of these 20 millions are communicant members of\nEnglish and German Lutheran churches. What people in America can show\na worse religious record? Yet the tenders of the sheep and lambs are\nafraid to feed them in the only way they can be fed. Verily whatever\nyou sow, that shall you also reap. Lift up your eyes, behold the\nharvest! Can you not discern the signs of the times?\n\nIt is no wonder that the United States Census of 1890, the latest\nreliable statistics on the subject, gave the number of Lutheran\ncommunicants using only English in this English land at 198,907;\nGeneral Synod 143,764; United Synod South 37,457; General Council\n14,297; Ohio Synod 287; Missouri Synod 1,192--after 150 years of work.\nOur good German and Scandinavian parents, in the light of these\nfigures, need not fear losing many members to purely English churches.\n\"Reading Luther\" in German, Swedish, Norwegian and English will bring\nbetter results to old and young than if read only in one language. The\nChurch of the Reformation is not one-tongued, but many-tongued.\n\nEnglish Luther in German and Scandinavian Churches.\n\nApril 12th, 1910, became a memorable date in the North-west by the\nintroduction of the Scandinavian languages into all the high schools\nof Minneapolis. German and Scandinavian taxpayers are gradually\nbecoming more interested in having their children learn the language\nof their mothers in the public schools. This will prove to be a great\nblessing to children and home, society and state. The Church however\nwill blunder, if she thinks there will now be no need of circulating\nEnglish literature in German and Scandinavian congregations.\nTranslating Luther and teaching German and Scandinavian are two ways\nof doing the same thing, for language is not an end, but a means to an\nend. Many young people are being confirmed in English and they often\nattend services in foreign languages. Many know more of the language\nthan of the matter preached. When weak in the language they understand\nbetter what is preached if they are familiar with the thought. The\nreason many do not appreciate a sermon with the Luther ring is because\nthey are familiar with neither the language nor the thought. Hence the\nneed of our young people becoming familiar with Luther's sermons and\ncommentaries in English. One understands better in a strange language\nwhat he is familiar with. This familiar knowledge would help to bridge\nthe chasm between Lutheran parents and children. Ask parents and they\nwill tell about the \"Old Luther Readers,\" in their native land and\ntongue. All admit that if the young people are not interested to read\nLuther in English, they will never read him. All who do will the\nbetter understand sermons in German and Scandinavian. The universal\nreading of the English Luther, on the part of the young people, will\ntherefore help, and not harm, the German and Scandinavian\ncongregations. Luther's teachings thoroughly understood in a living\nway will bind the young to their Christian convictions, as much as the\nknowledge of a language binds them to that language. The passive\ninterest therefore, on the part of German and Scandinavian pastors and\ncongregations in circulating the English Luther, as far as their young\npeople are concerned, should give way to active interest, for the sake\nof their own work in the future. It is important to learn your\nmother's language. You may do that and forget her faith--Better retain\nthe faith than the language.\n\nJ. N. Lenker.\nThe Fiftieth Day (Pentecost), 1910.\nMinneapolis, Minn.\n\n\n\n\nCOMMENTARY ON GENESIS.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\n\nIV. CAIN MURDERS HIS BROTHER; CALLED TO ACCOUNT.\n\n   A. HOW CAIN MURDERED HIS BROTHER.\n\n      1. What moved Cain to commit murder 107.\n\n      2. Cain's hypocritical actions in concealing his anger that he\n         might the more easily commit the murder 108-109.\n\n       * Cain the picture of all hypocrites 110-129.\n\n       * The attitude of hypocrites to their neighbors. Also, how we\n         are to view the efforts of the pope and bishops in behalf of\n         peace and unity 111-112.\n\n       * Against what people we should most guard 112.\n\n      3. How Cain listened to no warning in his thoughts of murder\n         113.\n\n       * Complaint of the world's attitude to good admonition 114.\n\n       * The ways of the hypocrite. Also, why falsehood wears a\n         friendly aspect 115.\n\n      4. Whether Cain's passion to murder Abel was noticeable 115.\n\n      5. Cain took no notice of Abel's sighing and praying 116.\n\n       * The origin of man's cruel and tyrannical nature 117.\n\n   B. HOW CAIN WAS CALLED TO ACCOUNT, AND HIS BEHAVIOR.\n\n      1. Who questioned Cain, and his defiant actions 118.\n\n      2. Cain accused himself most when he tried to clear himself 119.\n\n       * Liars speak against themselves, as is proved by examples\n         119-120.\n\n      3. Cain's vindication more foolish than that of the first\n         parents in paradise 121.\n\n       * St. Martin will absolve the devil if he repents 122.\n\n       * Whoever excuses his sin follows the example of Satan and\n         makes his case worse 123.\n\n      4. How Cain heaps sin upon sin 124.\n\n      5. Cain despairs and is in a worse state than our first parents\n         after their fall 125.\n\n      6. How Cain placed himself in a position where nothing could\n         help him 126.\n\n      7. Gently accused, and yet defiant 127.\n\n      8. Cain has not the least reverence for God or his father 128.\n\n       * This is a picture of all hypocrites 129.\n\n      9. How his defense ends 130.\n\n       * How man ought to act when his conscience accuses him of sin\n         131.\n\n       * The hypocrite's actions when his conscience is awakened, and\n         what he is to do 132-133.\n\n     10. In Cain's defense wickedness and folly are mingled 134.\n\n       * How God reveals hypocrites 135.\n\n       * Moses says much in few words 136.\n\n       * Whether Abel and our first parents anticipated Cain's murder\n         137.\n\n       * Without a thought of what might restrain him, Cain commits\n         the deed 138.\n\n       * The picture of the sacrifice of Iphigenia applied to Moses'\n         description of Cain's murder 139-140.\n\n       * Cain's is no ordinary murder, and how he differs from other\n         murderers 141.\n\n       * The hypocrite's hatred is different from other hatred, and is\n         found among the Jews and the Papists 142-143.\n\n       * Cain the father of all murderers 144.\n\n       * How the first parents felt over this whole affair 145.\n\n         a. Their grief was so great that they could not have endured\n            without special divine comfort 146.\n\n         b. Their severe trial in view of the first sin 147.\n\n         c. Very likely because of this murder they refrained so long\n            from bearing children 148.\n\n          * Whether the first parents had at the time more children\n            than Cain and Abel 148.\n\n       * Why Cain slew Abel, and how he did it 149.\n\n     11. The time and occasion when Cain was called to account 150.\n\n     12. Adam with the authority of God calls Cain to account 152.\n\n\nIV. HOW CAIN MURDERED HIS BROTHER AND WAS REQUIRED TO GIVE AN ACCOUNT,\nAND HOW HE CONDUCTED HIMSELF.\n\nA. How Cain Murdered His Brother.\n\nV. 8a. _And Cain told (talked with) Abel his brother._\n\n107. Our translation adds that Cain said: \"Let us go out doors.\" But\nthis is one of the comments of the rabbins, whose relative claim to\ncredit I have fully shown on a previous occasion. Lyra, following the\ninvention of Eben Ezra, relates that Cain told his brother how\nseverely he had been rebuked of the Lord. But who would believe\nstatements for which there is no authority in the Scriptures? We hold\ntherefore to an explanation which has the warrant of the Scriptures,\nnamely that Cain, finding himself rejected of God, indulged his anger,\nand added to his former sins contempt of his parents and of the Word,\nthinking within himself: \"The promised seed of the woman belongs to me\nas the first-born. But my brother, Abel, that contemptible,\ngood-for-nothing fellow, is evidently preferred to me by divine\nauthority, manifest in the fire consuming his sacrifice. What shall I\ndo, therefore? I will dissemble my wrath until an opportunity of\ntaking vengeance shall occur.\"\n\n108. Therefore the words, \"Cain told Abel his brother,\" I understand\nto mean that Cain, dissembling his anger, conducted himself toward\nAbel as a brother, and spoke to him and conversed with him, as if he\nbore with good nature the sentence pronounced upon him by God. In this\nmanner also Saul simulated an attitude of kindness toward David. \"I\nknow well,\" said Saul, \"that thou shalt surely be king,\" 1 Sam 24, 20;\nand yet he was all the while planning to prevent this by killing\nDavid. Just so Cain now conversed with Abel his brother, and said: I\nsee that thou art chosen of the Lord; I envy thee not this divine\nblessing, etc. This is just the manner of hypocrites. They pretend\nfriendship until an opportunity of doing the harm they intend presents\nitself.\n\n109. That such is the true sense of the passage, all the circumstances\nclearly show. For if Adam and Eve could have gathered the least\nsuspicion of the intended murder, think you not that they would either\nhave restrained Cain or removed Abel, and placed the latter out of\ndanger? But as Cain had altered his countenance and his deportment\ntoward his brother, and had talked with him in a brotherly manner,\nthey thought all was safe, and the son bowed to and acquiesced in the\nadmonition of his father. The appearance deceived Abel also, who, if\nhe had feared anything like murder from his brother, would doubtless\nhave fled from him, as Jacob fled from Esau when he feared his\nbrother's wrath. What, therefore, could possibly have come into the\nmind of Jerome when he believed the rabbins, who say Cain was\nexpostulating with his brother?\n\n110. Accordingly, Cain is the image and picture of all hypocrites and\nmurderers, who kill under the show of godliness. Cain, possessed by\nSatan, hides his wrath, waiting the opportunity to slay his brother\nAbel; meanwhile he converses with him, as a brother beloved, that he\nmight the sooner lay his hands upon him unawares.\n\n111. This passage, therefore, is intended for our instruction in the\nways of murderers and hypocrites. Still Cain talks in a brotherly\nmanner with his brother, and, on the other hand, Abel still trusts\nCain as a brother should trust a brother; and thus he is murdered, and\nthe pious parents meanwhile are deceived.\n\nJust so the pope and the bishops of our day talk and confer much\nconcerning the peace and concord of the Church. But he is most\nassuredly deceived who does not understand that the exact opposite is\nplanned. For true is that word of the Psalm, \"The workers of iniquity\nspeak peace with their neighbors, but mischief is in their hearts,\" Ps\n28, 3. For it is the nature of hypocrites that they are good in\nappearance, speak kindly to you, pretend to be humble, patient and\ncharitable, give alms, etc.; and yet, all the while they plan\nslaughter in their hearts.\n\n112. Let us learn, then, to know a Cain and especially to beware when\nhe speaks kindly, and as brother to brother. For it is in this way\nthat our adversaries, the bishops and the pope, talk with us in our\nday, while they pretend a desire for concord, and seek to bring about\ndoctrinal harmony. In reality, if an opportunity of seizing us and\nexecuting their rage upon us should present itself, you would soon\nhear them speak in a very different tone. Truly, \"there is death in\nthe pot,\" 2 Kings 4, 40; and under the best and sweetest words there\nlies concealed a deadly poison.\n\nV. 8b. _And it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain\nrose up against Abel his brother, and slew him._\n\n113. Here you see the deceptive character of those alluring words.\nCain had been admonished by his father with divine authority to guard\nagainst sin in the future, and to expect pardon for that of the past.\nBut Cain despises the twofold admonition, and indulges his sin, as all\nthe wicked do. For true is the saying of Solomon, \"When the wicked\ncometh, there cometh also contempt, and with ignominy cometh\nreproach,\" Prov 18, 3.\n\n114. Our ministry at the present day deserves no blame. We teach, we\nexhort, we entreat, we rebuke, we turn ourselves every way, that we\nmay recall the multitude from security to the fear of God. But the\nworld, like an untamed beast, still goes on and follows not the Word,\nbut its own lusts, which it tries to smooth over by a show of\nuprightness. The prophets and the apostles stand before us as\nexamples, and our own experience is instructive, also. Our\nadversaries, so often warned and convicted, know they are doing wrong,\nand yet they do not lay aside their murderous hate.\n\n115. Learn, then, what a hypocrite is; namely, one who lays claim to\nthe worship of God and to charity, and yet, at the same time, destroys\nthe worship of God and slaughters his brother. And all this semblance\nof good-will is only intended to bring about better opportunities of\ndoing harm. For, if Abel had foreseen the implacable wrath and the\ntruly diabolical anger, he would have saved himself by flight. But as\nCain betrayed no such anger, uttered a friendly greeting and\nmanifested his usual courtesy, Abel perished before he felt any fear.\n\n116. There is no doubt that Abel, when he saw his brother rising up\nagainst him, entreated and implored him not to pollute himself with\nthis awful sin. However, a mind beset by Satan pays no regard to\nentreaties, nor heeds uplifted hands, but as a father's admonition had\nbeen disregarded, so now the brother is spurned as he pleads upon his\nknees.\n\n117. Light is cast here upon the bondage to Satan by which our nature,\nentangled in sins, is oppressed. Hence Paul's expression, \"children of\nwrath,\" Eph 2, 3, and the declaration that such are taken captive by\nSatan unto his will, 2 Tim 2, 26. For when we are mere men; that is,\nwhen we apprehend not the blessed seed by faith, we are all like Cain,\nand nothing is wanting but an opportunity. For nature, destitute of\nthe Holy Spirit, is impelled by that same evil spirit which impelled\nwicked Cain. If, however, there were in any one those ample powers, or\nthat free will, by which a man might defend himself against the\nassaults of Satan, these gifts would most assuredly have existed in\nCain, to whom belonged the birthright and the promise of the blessed\nseed. But in that very same condition are all men! Unless nature be\nhelped by the Spirit of God, it cannot maintain itself. Why, then, do\nwe absurdly boast of free-will? Now follows another remarkable\npassage.\n\nB. How Cain Had to Give an Account, and His Conduct.\n\nV. 9. _And Jehovah said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he\nsaid, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?_\n\n118. Good God! into what depth of sin does our miserable nature fall\nwhen driven onward by the devil. Murder had been committed on a\nbrother, and perhaps murdered Abel lay for days unburied. Thereupon,\nas Cain returned to his parents at the accustomed time, and Abel\nreturned not with him, the anxious parents asked him: Cain, thou art\nhere, but where is Abel? Thou hast returned home, but Abel has not\nreturned. The flock is without their shepherd. Tell us therefore,\nwhere thy brother is. Upon this, Cain, becoming abusive, makes answer\nto his parents, by no means with due reverence, \"I know not: Am I my\nbrother's keeper?\"\n\n119. But it happened to Cain as to all the wicked, that by excusing\nhimself he accused himself, according to the words of Christ, \"Out of\nthine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant,\" Luke 19, 22.\nAlso the heathen had a striking proverb among them, \"A liar ought to\nhave a good memory.\" Such was the judgment of heathen men, though they\nknew nothing of the judgment of God and of conscience, and had nothing\nto guide their judgment but their experience in civil affairs. And\ntrue it is that liars run much risk of being discovered and unmasked.\nHence the Germans have the proverb, \"A lie is a very fruitful thing.\"\nFor one lie begets seven other lies, which become necessary to uphold\nthe first lie. And yet it is impossible, after all, to prevent\nconscience from arousing and betraying itself at times, if not in\nwords, then in gestures. This is proved by numberless examples. I will\ncite only one example here:\n\n120. In Thuringia there is a small town in the district of Orla,\ncalled Neustadt. In this town a harlot had murdered her infant, to\nwhich she had secretly given birth, and had thrown it, after the\nmurder, into a neighboring fishpond. Accidentally the little piece of\nlinen in which she had wrapped the infant, brought the horrid deed to\nlight. The case was brought before the magistrate; and as the simple\nmen of the place knew no better means of investigating the crime, they\ncalled all the young women of the town into the town hall and closely\nexamined them, one by one. The face and the testimony of each one of\nthese proclaimed her innocent. But when they came to her who was the\nreal perpetrator of the deed, she did not wait for questions to be put\nto her, but immediately declared aloud that she was not the guilty\nperson. The contrast she presented to the others in making such haste\nto defend herself, confirmed the suspicion of the magistrates. At once\nshe was seized by the constables and put to death.\n\nIndeed, instances are innumerable and of daily occurrence which show\nthat people, in their eagerness to defend themselves, accuse\nthemselves. Sin may, indeed, lie asleep, but that word which we have\njust heard, is true. It lies at the door.\n\n121. Just so in the present case. Cain thinks he has made an effectual\nexcuse for himself by saying that he is not his brother's keeper. But\ndoes he not confess by the very word \"brother\" which he takes upon his\nlips that he ought to be his keeper? Is not that equal to accusing\nhimself, and will not the fact that Abel is nowhere in evidence arouse\nthe suspicion in the minds of his parents that he has been murdered?\nJust so also Adam excuses himself in paradise, and lays all the blame\non Eve. But this excuse of Cain is far more stupid; for while he\nexcuses his sin he doubles it, whereas the frank confession of sin\nfinds mercy and appeases wrath.\n\n122. It is recorded in the history of St. Martin, that when he\nabsolved certain notorious sinners, he was rebuked by Satan for doing\nso. St. Martin is said to have replied, \"Why, I would absolve even\nthee, if thou wouldst say from thy heart, I repent of having sinned\nagainst the Son of God, and I pray for pardon.\" But the devil never\ndoes this. For he persists in committing sin and defending the same.\n\n123. All liars and hypocrites imitate Cain their father, by either\ndenying their sin or excusing it. Hence they cannot find pardon for\ntheir sins. And we see the same in domestic life. By the defense of\nwrong-doing, anger is increased. For whenever the wife, or the\nchildren, or the servants, have done wrong, and deny or excuse their\nwrong-doing, the father of the family is the more moved to wrath;\nwhereas, on the other hand, confession secures pardon or a lighter\npunishment. But it is the nature of hypocrites to excuse and palliate\ntheir sin or to deny it altogether and under the show of religion, to\nslay the innocent.\n\n124. But here let us survey the order in which sins follow each other\nand increase. First of all Cain sins by presumption and unbelief when,\npriding himself on the privilege of his birthright, he takes it for\ngranted that he shall be accepted of God on the ground of his own\nmerit. Upon this pride and self-glorification immediately follow envy\nand hatred of his brother, whom he sees preferred to himself by an\nunmistakable sign from heaven. Upon this envy and hatred follow\nhypocrisy and lying. Though he designs to murder his brother, he\naccosts him in a friendly manner and thereby throws him off his guard.\nHypocrisy is followed by murder. Murder is followed by the excusing of\nhis sin. And the last stage is despair, which is the fall from heaven\nto hell.\n\n125. Although Adam and Eve in paradise did not deny their sin, yet\ntheir confession was lukewarm, and the sin was shifted from the one to\nthe other. Adam laid it on Eve, and Eve on the serpent. But Cain went\neven farther, for he not only did not confess the murder he had\ncommitted, but disclaimed responsibility for his brother. And did not\nthis at once prove his mind to be hostile against his brother?\nTherefore, though Adam and Eve made only a half-hearted confession,\nthey had some claim to pardon, and in consequence were punished with\nless severity. But Cain, because he resolutely denied his sin, was\nrejected, and fell into despair.\n\nAnd the same judgment awaits all the sons of Cain, popes, cardinals,\nand bishops, who, although they plan murder against us day and night,\nsay likewise, \"I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?\"\n\n126. There was a common proverb of old, \"What is it to the Romans that\nthe Greeks die?\" So we think that our dangers and calamities only\nbelong to ourselves. But how does this principle agree with the\ncommandment of God? For his will is that we should all live together,\nand be to each other as brethren. Cain, therefore, by this very saying\nof his, heavily accuses himself when he makes the excuse that the\ncustody of his brother was no affair of his. Whereas, if he had said\nto his father, \"Alas, I have slain Abel, my brother. I repent of the\ndeed I have done. Return upon me what punishment thou wilt,\" there\nmight have been room for a remedy; but as he denied his sin, and,\ncontrary to the will of God, disclaimed responsibility for his brother\naltogether, there was no place left for mercy or favor.\n\n127. Moreover, Moses took special pains in the preparation of this\naccount, that it might serve as a witness against all hypocrites, and\nas a chronicle containing a graphic description of their character and\nof the ire to which they are aroused by Satan against God, his Word\nand his Church. It was not enough for this murderer that he had killed\nhis brother, contrary to the command of God, but he added the further\nsin that he became filled with indignation and rage when God inquired\nof him concerning his brother. I say, \"when God inquired of him,\"\nbecause, although it was Adam who spoke these words to his son Cain,\nyet he spoke them by the authority of God and by the Holy Spirit. In\nview of so great a sin, was it not quite gentle to inquire, \"Where is\nAbel thy brother?\" And yet, to this word, which contained nothing\nsevere, the hypocrite and murderer is ferocious and proud enough to\nreply, \"I know not.\" And he is indignant that he should be called to\nan account concerning the matter at all. For the reply of Cain is the\nlanguage of one who resists and hates God.\n\n128. But to this sin Cain adds one still worse. Justly under\nindictment for murder, he presently becomes the accuser of God, and\nexpostulates with him: \"Am I my brother's keeper?\" He prefaces his\nreply with no such expression of reverence or honor as is due both to\nGod and to his father. He did not say, \"Lord, I know not.\" He did not\nsay, \"My Father, didst thou make me the keeper of my brother?\" Such\nexpressions as these would have indicated a feeling of reverence\ntoward God or toward his parent. But he answers with pride as if he\nhimself were the Lord, and plainly manifests that he felt indignation\nat being called to account by him who had the perfect right to do so.\n\n129. This is a true picture of all hypocrites. Living in manifest\nsins, they grow insolent and proud, aiming all the while to appear\nrighteous. They will not yield even to God himself and his Word when\nupbraided by them. Nay, they set themselves against God, contend with\nhim, and excuse their sin. Thus David says, that God is judged of men,\nbut that at length he clears and justifies himself, and prevails, Ps\n51, 4. Such is the insolence of the hypocrites Moses has here\nendeavored to paint.\n\n130. But what success has Cain with his attempt? This, that his\npowerful effort to excuse himself becomes a forcible self-accusation.\nChrist says, \"Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked\nservant,\" Lk 19, 22. Now, this servant wished to appear without guilt,\nsaying: \"I knew thee that thou art a hard man, reaping where thou\ndidst not sow; and I was afraid, and hid thy talent,\" Mt 25, 24-25.\nCould he have brought a stronger accusation against himself, in view\nof the fact that Christ immediately turns his words against him?\nThereby Christ evidences the wisdom of the Holy Spirit.\n\n131. Such illustrations help us to learn not to contend with God. On\nthe contrary when you feel in your conscience that you are guilty,\ntake heed with all your soul that you strive neither with God nor with\nmen by defending or excusing your sin. Rather do this: When you see\nGod point his spear at you, flee not from him; but, on the contrary,\nflee to him with a humble confession of your sin, and with prayer for\nhis pardon. Then God will draw back his spear and spare you. But when,\nby the denial and excuse of your sin, you flee farther and farther\nfrom him, God will pursue you at close range with still greater\ndetermination, and bring you to bay. Nothing, therefore, is better or\nsafer than to come with the confession of guilt. Thus it comes to pass\nthat God's victory becomes our victory through him.\n\n132. But Cain and hypocrites in general do not this. God points his\nspear at them, but they never humble themselves before him nor pray to\nhim for pardon. Nay, they rather point their spear at God, just as\nCain did on this occasion. Cain does not say, \"Lord, I confess I have\nkilled my brother; forgive me.\" On the contrary, though being the\naccused, he himself accuses God by replying, \"Am I my brother's\nkeeper?\" And what did he effect with his pride? His reply was\ncertainly equal to the confession that he cared naught for the divine\nlaw, which says, \"Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,\" Lev 19,\n18. And again, \"Do not unto another that which you would not have\nanother do unto you,\" Mt 7, 12. This law was not first written in the\nDecalog; it was inscribed in the minds of all men. Cain acts directly\nagainst this law, and shows that he not only cares nothing for it, but\nabsolutely despises it.\n\n133. In this manner, Cain represents a man who is not merely wicked,\nbut who occupies such a height of wickedness as to combine hypocrisy\nwith bloodshed, and yet is so eager to maintain the appearance of\nsanctity that he rather accuses God than concedes the justice of the\naccusation against himself. And this is what all hypocrites do. They\nblaspheme God and crucify his Son, and yet wish to appear righteous.\nFor after their sins of murder, blasphemy and the like their whole aim\nis to seek means whereby to excuse and palliate the same. But the\nresult always is that they betray themselves and are condemned out of\ntheir own mouths.\n\n134. While Cain makes an effort to clear himself, he exhibits the\nfoulest stains. He thinks he made a most plausible excuse when he\nsaid, \"Am I my brother's keeper?\" But this very excuse becomes his\nmost shameful accusation. The maxim of Hilary, that wickedness and\nstupidity always go hand in hand, finds unvarying application. If Cain\nhad been as wise as he was wicked, he would have excused himself in\nquite a different manner. Now, under the operation of the divine rule\nthat wickedness and stupidity are running mates, he becomes his own\naccuser. The same principle operates in favor of the truth, and makes\nher defense against all adversaries easy. Just as Cain betrayed by\nword and mien his indifference and hate toward his brother, so all\nadversaries of the truth betray their wickedness, the one in this way,\nthe other in that.\n\n135. Facts of importance and apt for instruction are, therefore, here\nset before us. And their general import is that God does not permit\nhypocrites to remain hidden for any length of time, but compels them\nto betray themselves just when they make shrewd efforts to hide their\nhypocrisy and crime.\n\n136. Moses does not exhibit in his narrative the verbose diction\ncharacteristic of pagan literature, where we often find one and the\nsame argument embellished and polished by a variety of colors. We find\nby experience that no human power of description can do justice to\ninward emotions. In consequence, verbosity, as a rule, comes short of\nexpressing emotion. Moses employs the opposite method, and clothes a\ngreat variety of arguments in scant phraseology.\n\n137. Above the historian used the expression, \"when they were in the\nfield.\" Thereby Moses indicates that the murderer Cain had watched his\nopportunity to attack his brother when both were alone. All the\ncircumstances plainly show that Abel was not idle at the time; for he\nwas in the field, where he had to do the things his father committed\nto him. From Moses' statement we may infer that Abel's parents felt\nabsolutely no fear of danger. For, although at the outset they had\nfeared that the wrath of Cain would eventually break out into still\ngreater sin, Cain, by his gentleness and pretended affection,\nprevented all suspicion of evil on the part of his parents. For had\nthere been the least trace of apprehension, they certainly would not\nhave permitted Abel to go from their presence alone. They would have\nsent his sisters with him as companions; for he no doubt had some. Or\nhis parents themselves would have prevented by their presence and\nauthority the perpetration of so great a crime. As already stated,\nalso the mind of Abel was perfectly free from suspicion. For, had he\nsuspected the least evil at the hand of his brother, he would\ndoubtless have sought safety by flight. But after he had heard that\nCain bore the judgment of God with composure, and did not envy the\nbrother his honor, he pursued his work in the field with a feeling of\nsecurity.\n\n138. What orator could do justice to the scene which Moses depicts in\none word: \"Cain rose up against his brother?\" Many descriptions of\ncruelty are to be found on every hand, but could any be painted as\nmore atrocious and execrable than is the case here? \"He rose up\nagainst his brother,\" Moses writes. It is as if he had said, Cain rose\nup against Abel, the only brother he had, with whom he had been\nbrought up and with whom he had lived to that day. But not only the\nrelationship Cain utterly forgot; he forgot their common parents also.\nThe greatness of the grief he would cause his parents by such a grave\ncrime, never entered his mind. He did not think that Abel was a\nbrother, from whom he had never received any offense whatever. For\nCain knew that the honor of having offered the more acceptable\nsacrifice, proceeded not from any desire or ambition in Abel, but from\nGod himself. Nor did Cain consider that he, who had hitherto stood in\nthe highest favor with his parents, would lose that favor altogether\nand would fall under their deepest displeasure as a result of his\ncrime.\n\n139. It is recorded in history of an artist who painted the scene of\nIphigenia's sacrifice, that when he had given to the countenance of\neach of the spectators present its appropriate expression of grief and\npain, he found himself unable to portray the vastness of the father's\ngrief, who was present also, and hence painted his head draped.\n\n140. Such is the method, I think, Moses employs in this passage, when\nhe uses the verb _yakam_, \"Rose up against.\" What tragical pictures\nwould the eloquence of a Cicero or a Livy have drawn in an attempt to\nportray, through the medium of their oratory, the wrath of the one\nbrother, and the dread, the cries, the prayers, the tears, the\nuplifted hands, and all the horrors of the other! But not even in that\nway can justice be done to the subject. Moses, therefore, pursues the\nright course, when he portrays, by a mere outline, things too great\nfor utterance. Such brevity tends to enlist the reader's undivided\nattention to a subject which the vain adornment of many words\ndisfigures and mars, like paint applied to natural beauty.\n\n141. This is true also of the additional statement, \"He slew him.\"\nOccasionally we see men start a quarrel and commit murder for a\ntrivial cause, but no such ordinary murder is described here.\nMurderers of this kind immediately afterward are filled with distress;\nthey grieve for the deeds they have done and acknowledge them to be\ndelusions of the devil by which he blinded their minds. Cain felt no\ndistress; he expressed no grief, but denied the deed he had done.\n\n142. This satanic and insatiable hatred in hypocrites is described by\nChrist in the words, \"When they kill you, they will think that they do\nGod service,\" Jn 16, 2. So the priests and the kings filled Jerusalem\nwith the blood of the prophets and gloried in what they did as a great\nachievement; for they considered this as proof of their zeal for the\nLaw and the house of God.\n\n143. And the fury of popes and bishops in our day is just the same.\nThey are not satisfied with having excommunicated us again and again,\nand with having shed our blood, but they wish to blot out our memory\nfrom the land of the living, according to the description in the\nPsalm, \"Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof,\" Ps 137, 7.\nSuch hatred is not human but satanic. For all human hatred becomes\nmellow in time; at all events, it will cease after it has avenged our\ninjury and gratified its passion. But the hatred of these Pharisees\nassumes constantly larger dimensions, especially since it is smoothed\nover by a show of piety.\n\n144. Cain, therefore, is the father of all those murderers who\nslaughter the saints, and whose wrath knows no end so long as there\nremains one of them, as is proved in the case of Christ himself. As\nfor Cain, there is no doubt of his having hoped that by putting Abel\nto death he should keep the honor of his birthright. Thus, the ungodly\nalways think that their cruelty will profit them in some way. But when\nthey find that their hope is vain they fall into despair.\n\n145. Now, when the fact of this shameful murder was made known to the\nparents, what do we think must have been the sad scenes resulting?\nWhat lamentations? What sighs and groans? But I dwell not on these\nthings; they are for the man with the gifts of eloquence and\nimagination to describe. It was certainly a marvel that both parents\nwere not struck lifeless with grief. The calamity was rendered the\ngreater by the fact that their first-born, who had aroused so large\nhopes concerning himself, was the perpetrator of this horrible murder.\n\n146. If, therefore, Adam and Eve had not been helped from above, they\ncould never have been equal to this disaster in their home; for there\nis nothing like it in all the world. Adam and Eve were without that\nconsolation which we may have in sudden and unexpected calamities,\nnamely, that like evils have befallen others and have not come upon us\nalone. Our first parents had only two sons, though I believe that they\nhad daughters also; and therefore they lacked such instances of grief\nin the human family as we have before our eyes.\n\n147. Who can doubt, moreover, that Satan by this new species of\ntemptation increased greatly the grief of our first parents? They no\ndoubt thought, Behold, this is all our sin. We, in paradise, wished to\nbecome like God; but by our sin we have become like the devil. This is\nthe case also with our son. We loved only this son, and made\neverything of him! Our other son, Abel, was righteous before us, above\nthis son; but of his righteousness we made nothing! This elder son we\nhoped would be he who should crush the serpent's head; but behold, he\nhimself is crushed by the serpent! Nay, he himself has become like the\nserpent, for he is now a murderer. And whence is this? Is it not\nbecause he was born of us, and because we, through our sin, are what\nwe are? Therefore it is to our flesh; therefore it is to our sin, that\nthis calamity must be traced.\n\n148. It is very probable, accordingly, and the events of the series of\nyears which followed strengthen this probability, that the sorrowing\nparents, shaken to the core by their calamity, abstained for a long\ntime from connubial intercourse. For it appears that when Cain\ncommitted this murder he was about thirty years of age. During this\nperiod some daughters were born unto Adam. In view of the subsequent\nstatements, verse 17, that \"Cain knew his wife,\" he no doubt married a\nsister. Moreover, since Cain himself says in verse 14, \"It shall come\nto pass that everyone that findeth me shall slay me\", and as it is\nfurther said in verse 15, \"The Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any\nfinding him should kill him\"--it appears most probable from all these\ncircumstances that Adam had many children besides Cain and Abel, but\nthese two only are mentioned, on account of their important and\nmemorable history, and because these two were their first and most\nremarkable children. It is my full belief that the marriage of our\nfirst parents was most fruitful during the first thirty years of their\nunion. Somewhere Calmana and Dibora are mentioned as daughters of\nAdam, but I know not whether the authors are worthy of credence.\nInasmuch, therefore, as the birth of Seth is recorded as having taken\nplace a long time after this murder, it seems to me very probable that\nthe parents, distressed beyond measure at this monstrous crime in the\nbosom of their family, refrained for a long time from procreation.\nWhile Moses does not touch upon all these things, he intimates enough\nto arouse in the reader a desire to dwell upon the noteworthy events\nwhich the absence of detailed information permits us to survey only\nfrom a distance.\n\n149. But I return to the text before us. Cain is an evil and wicked\nman, and yet, in the eyes of his parents, he is a divine possession\nand gift. Abel, on the contrary, is in the eyes of his parents\nnothing; but in the eyes of God he is truly a righteous man; an\nappellation with which also Christ honors him when he calls him\n\"righteous Abel\"! Mt 23, 35. This divine judgment concerning Abel,\nCain could not endure, and, therefore, he thought that by murder not\nonly the hatred against his brother could be satisfied, but also his\nbirthright be retained. But he was far from thinking that was sin; as\nthe first-born he thought he had exercised his right. He killed Abel,\nnot with a sword, as I think, but with a club or a stone, for I hold\nthat there were as yet no iron weapons.\n\n150. After the murder, Cain remained unconcerned, for he thought the\ndeed could be concealed by hiding the body, which he buried, or\nperhaps cast into a river, thinking that thus it would surely remain\nundiscovered by his parents.\n\nWhen Abel, however, had been from home a longer time than had been his\nhabit, the Holy Spirit prompted Adam to inquire of Cain concerning\nAbel, saying, \"Where is Abel thy brother?\" The above-mentioned\nutterance of Adam, \"If not, sin lieth at the door,\" was a prophecy\nwhich now began to come true. Cain thought he had laid his sin to\nrest, and all would thus remain hidden. And true it was that his sin\ndid lie at rest, but it lay at rest \"at the door.\" And who opens the\ndoor? None other than the Lord himself! He arouses the sleeping sin!\nHe brings the hidden sin to light!\n\n151. The same thing must come to pass with all sinners. For, unless by\nrepentance you first come to God, and yourself confess your sin to\nGod, God will surely come to you, to disclose your sin. For God cannot\nendure that any one should deny his sin. To this fact the psalmist\ntestifies: \"When I kept silence, my bones wasted away through my\nroaring all the day long. For day and night thy hand was heavy upon\nme; my moisture was changed as with the drouth of summer.\" Ps 32, 3-4.\nFor, although sin has its sleep and its security, yet that sleep is\n\"at the door\"; it cannot long last, and the sin cannot remain hidden.\n\n152. When Moses introduces Jehovah as speaking, I understand him to\nmean, as above, that it was Adam who spoke by the Holy Spirit in the\nplace of God, whom he represented in his relation as father. The\nexpression of the Holy Spirit, therefore, is intended to set forth the\nhigh authority of parents; when children dutifully hear and obey\nthese, they hear and obey God. And I believe Adam knew by the\nrevelation of the Holy Spirit that Abel had been slain by his brother;\nfor his words intimate the commission of murder at a time when Cain\nstill dissembled as to what he had done.\n\n\nV. CAIN PUNISHED FOR HIS MURDER.\n\n   A. CAIN'S PUNISHMENT IN GENERAL.\n\n      1. By whom and how he is punished 153.\n\n      2. Why he was not put to death 153.\n\n       * The double grief of the first parents 154.\n\n       * What was Adam's church and altar 155.\n\n      3. How Cain was excommunicated 156.\n\n       * God's inquiry about Abel's blood.\n\n         a. How unbelievers refer to it 157.\n\n         b. How a theologian should use it 158.\n\n         c. It is a great and important matter 159.\n\n          * How Abel's death is to be viewed 159.\n\n         d. Why God does not inquire after the blood of beasts\n            160-161.\n\n         e. Whether this inquiry was from God direct or made through\n            Adam 162-163.\n\n         f. How Cain felt upon this inquiry 164.\n\n          * The result of sin to murderers and other sinners 165-166.\n\n          * An evil conscience the result of evil-doing 166.\n\n         g. How to understand the statement that Abel's blood crieth\n            to heaven 167.\n\n          * How God's children are to comfort themselves when the\n            world oppresses them and seemingly God refuses to help\n            168-171.\n\n         h. This inquiry is a sign of God's care for Abel 169.\n\n          * The blood of many Evangelical martyrs cry to the Papists\n            170.\n\n          * How God opportunely judges the afflictions of believers\n            171.\n\n          * Why God's vengeance does not immediately follow 172.\n\n         i. The time this inquiry occurred 173.\n\n          * God indeed has regard for the sufferings and tears of his\n            children 174.\n\n          * How sinners can meet the judgments of God 174.\n\n      4. The miserable life Cain must have led after his punishment\n         175.\n\n   B. CAIN'S PUNISHMENT IN DETAIL.\n\n      1. The Church suffered.\n\n         a. How Cain's punishment and curse differed from Adam's\n            176-178.\n\n         b. Why Cain's person was cursed 178-179.\n\n          * The more Cain desired honor, the less he received 180.\n\n          * The beginning of both churches, the true and the false\n            181.\n\n          * Cain's whole posterity perished in sin 181.\n\n         c. How his curse and punishment were lightened 182.\n\n          * Whether any of Cain's posterity were saved, and holy 182.\n\n          * The way the heathen had part in the promise 182-185.\n\n          * The way Cain withheld his children from the true Church\n            185.\n\n      2. The Home suffered.\n\n         a. How this curse affected the earth 186-187.\n\n         b. Why Adam used such severe words in this curse 186.\n\n         c. How it caused the earth to be less fruitful 187.\n\n          * The difference between \"Arez\" and \"Adama\" 188.\n\n      3. The State suffered.\n\n       * What \"No\" and \"Nod\" mean, and how they differ 189-190.\n\n       * Cain's sin punished in three ways and in each the sin was\n         mitigated 191-193.\n\n       * Cain a fugitive and a wanderer.\n\n         a. This refers chiefly to the true Church, as is illustrated\n            by many examples of the saints 194-195.\n\n         b. It refers less to the false 194-195.\n\n         c. Many take offense at this 196.\n\n\nV. HOW CAIN WAS PUNISHED FOR HIS MURDER.\n\nA. Cain's Punishment in General.\n\n153. If Eve overheard these words, what think you must have been the\nstate of her mind! Her grief must have been beyond all description.\nBut the calamity was brought home to Adam with even greater force. As\nhe was the father, it fell to him to rebuke his son and to\nexcommunicate him for his sin. Since, according to the ninth chapter,\nthe law concerning the death-penalty for murderers was not promulgated\nuntil afterward when the patriarchs beheld murder becoming alarmingly\nfrequent, Adam did not put Cain to death, but safeguarded his life in\nobedience to the prompting and direction of the Holy Spirit; still, it\nis a fact not to be gainsaid that the punishment ordained for him and\nall his posterity was anything but light. For in addition to that\ncurse upon his body he suffered excommunication from his family,\nseparation from the sight of his parents and from the society of his\nbrothers and sisters, who remained with their parents, or in the\nfellowship of the Church.\n\n154. Now, Adam could not have done all this, nor could Eve have heard\nit without indescribable anguish. For a father is a father, and a son\nis a son. Gladly would Adam have spared his son and retained him at\nhome, as we now sometimes see murderers become reconciled to the\nbrothers of their victims. But in this case no place was left for\nreconciliation. Cain is bidden at once to be a fugitive upon the face\nof the earth. The pain of the parents was doubled in consequence. They\nsee one of their sons slain, and the other excommunicated by the\njudgment of God and cut off forever from the fellowship of his\nbrethren.\n\n155. Moreover, when we here speak of excommunication from the Church,\nit stands to reason that not our houses of worship, built in\nmagnificent style and ample proportions out of hewn stone, are meant.\nThe sanctuary, or church, of Adam was a certain tree, or a certain\nlittle hill under the open heaven, where they assembled to hear the\nWord of God and to offer their sacrifices, for which purpose they had\nerected altars. And when they offered their sacrifices and heard the\nWord, God was present, as we see from the experience of Abel.\n\nAlso elsewhere in the sacred story, mention is made of such altars\nunder the open heaven, and of sacrifices made upon them. And, if we\nshould come together at this day under the open sky to bend our knees,\nto preach, to give thanks, and to bless each other, a custom would be\ninaugurated altogether beneficial.\n\n156. It was from a temple of this kind and from such a church, not a\nconspicuous and magnificent church at a particular place, that Cain\nwas cast out. He was thus doubly punished; first, by a corporal\npenalty, because the earth was accursed to him, and secondly, by a\nspiritual penalty, because by excommunication, he was cast out from\nthe temple and the church of God as from another paradise.\n\n157. Lawyers also have drawn upon this passage, and quite properly\nbrought out the fact that Jehovah first investigated the matter and\nthen passed sentence. Their application is, that no one should be\npronounced guilty until his case has been tried; until he has been\ncalled to the bar, proved guilty and convicted. This, according to a\nprevious statement, was also done with Adam: \"The Lord God called unto\nAdam, and said unto him. Where art thou?\" Gen 3, 9. And further on: \"I\nwill go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according\nto the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know,\" Gen\n11, 5; 18, 21.\n\n158. However, dismissing the matter in its bearings upon public life,\nlet us view its more attractive theological features. The element of\ndoctrine and of hope is found in the fact that Jehovah inquires\nconcerning the dead Abel. Clearly there is pointed out to us here the\ntruth of the resurrection of the dead. God declared himself to be the\nGod of Abel, although now dead, and he inquired for the dead, for\nAbel. Upon this passage we may establish the incontrovertible\nprinciple that, if there were no one to care for us after this life,\nAbel would not have been inquired for after he was slain. But God\ninquires after Abel, even when he had been taken from this life; he\nhas no desire to forget him; he retains the remembrance of him; he\nasks: \"Where is he?\" God, therefore, we see, is the God of the dead.\nMy meaning is that even the dead, as we here see, still live in the\nmemory of God, and have a God who cares for them, and saves them in\nanother life beyond and different from this corporal life in which\nsaints suffer affliction.\n\n159. This passage, therefore, is most worthy of our attention. We see\nthat God cared for Abel, even when dead; and that on account of the\ndead Abel, he excommunicated Cain, and visited him, the living, with\ndestruction in spite of his being the first-born. A towering fact\nthis, that Abel, though dead, was living and canonized in another life\nmore effectually and truly than those whom the pope ever canonized!\nThe death of Abel was indeed horrible; he did not suffer death without\nexcruciating torment nor without many tears. Yet it was a blessed\ndeath, for now he lives a more blessed life than he did before. This\nbodily life of ours is lived in sin, and is ever in danger of death.\nBut that other life is eternal and perfectly free from trials and\ntroubles, both of the body and of the soul.\n\n160. No! God inquires not after the sheep and the oxen that are slain,\nbut he does inquire after the men who are slain. Accordingly men\npossess the hope of a resurrection. They have a God who brings them\nback from the death of the body unto eternal life, a God who inquires\nafter their blood as a most precious thing. The Psalmist says:\n\"Precious in the sight of Jehovah is the death of his saints,\" Ps 116,\n15.\n\n161. This is the glory of the human race, obtained for it by the seed\nof the woman which bruised the serpent's head. The case of Abel is the\nfirst instance of such promise made to Adam and Eve, and God showed by\nthe same that the serpent did not harm Abel, although it caused his\nmurder. This was indeed an instance of the serpent's \"bruising the\nheel\" of the woman's seed. But in the very attempt to bite, its own\nhead was crushed. For God, in answer to Abel's faith in the promised\nseed, required the blood of the dead, and proved himself thereby to be\nhis God still. This is all proved by what follows.\n\nV. 10. _And he said, What hast thou done? The voice of thy brother's\nblood crieth unto me from the ground._\n\n162. Cain's sin hath hitherto lain at the door. And the preceding\ncircumstances plainly show how hard he struggled to keep his sin\nasleep. For being interrogated by his father concerning his brother\nAbel and his whereabouts, he disclaimed knowledge of the matter, thus\nadding to murder lying. This answer of Cain is sufficient evidence\nthat the above words were spoken by Adam in his own person, and not by\nGod in his divine Majesty. For Cain believed that the deed was hidden\nfrom his father, as he was a mere man, while he could not have thought\nthis of the divine Majesty. Therefore, had God spoken to him in his\nown person, he would have returned a different answer. But, as he\nthought himself dealing with a human being only, Cain denied his deed\naltogether, saying: \"I know not. How numerous are the perils by which\na man may perish. He may have been destroyed by wild beasts; he may\nhave been drowned in some river; or he may have lost his life by some\nother death.\"\n\n163. Thus Cain thought that his father would think of any other cause\nof death than the perpetration of murder. But Cain could not deceive\nthe Holy Spirit in Adam. Adam therefore, as God's representative,\narraigns him with the words, \"What hast thou done?\" As if he had said\n\"Why dost thou persist in denying the deed; be assured thou canst not\ndeceive God, who hath revealed to me all. Thou thinkest the blood of\nthy brother is hidden by the earth. But it is not so absorbed and\nconcealed thereby as to prevent the blood crying aloud unto God.\" That\nmeant to awaken the sin lying at the door, and to drag it forth.\n\n164. The text before us, then, provides much consolation against the\nenemies and murderers of the Church; for it teaches us that our\nafflictions and sufferings and the shedding of our blood fill heaven\nand earth with their cries. I believe, therefore, that Cain was so\noverwhelmed and confounded by these words of his father that, as if\nthunderstruck, he knew not what to say or what to do. No doubt his\nthoughts were, \"If my father Adam knows about the murder which I have\ncommitted, how can I any longer doubt that it is known unto God, unto\nthe angels, and unto heaven and earth? Whither can I flee? Which way\ncan I turn, wretched man that I am?\"\n\n165. Such is the state of murderers to this day. They are so harassed\nwith the stings of conscience, after the crime of murder has been\ncommitted, that they are always in a state of alarm. It seems to them\nthat heaven and earth have put on a changed aspect toward them, and\nthey know not whither to flee. A case in point is Orestes pursued by\nthe furies, as described by the poets. A horrible thing is the cry of\nspilled blood and an evil conscience.\n\n166. The same is true of all other atrocious sins. Those who commit\nthem, experience the same distresses of mind when remorse lays hold of\nthem. The whole creation seems changed toward them, and even when they\nspeak to persons with whom they have been familiar, and when they hear\nthe answers they make, the very sound of their voice appears to them\naltogether changed and their countenances seem to wear an altered\naspect. Whichever way they turn their eyes, all things are clothed, as\nit were, in gloom and horror. So grim and fierce a monster is a guilty\nconscience! And, unless such sinners are succored from above, they\nmust put an end to their existence because of their anguish and\nintolerable pain.\n\n167. Again Moses' customary conciseness is in evidence, which,\nhowever, is more effective than an excess of words. In the first\nplace, he personifies a lifeless object when he attributes to blood a\nvoice filling with its cries heaven and the earth. How can that voice\nbe small or weak which, rising from earth, is heard by God in heaven?\nAbel, therefore, who when alive was patient under injuries and gentle\nand placid of spirit, now, when dead and buried in the earth, can not\nbrook the wrong inflicted. He who before dared not murmur against his\nbrother, now fairly shrieks, and so completely enlists God in his\ncause that he descends from heaven, to charge the murderer with his\ncrime. Moses, accordingly, here uses the more pregnant term. He does\nnot say, \"The voice of thy brother's blood speaketh unto me from the\nground,\" but, \"The voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me.\" It is\na cry like the shout of heralds when they raise their voices to\nassemble men together.\n\n168. These things are written, as I have observed, to convince us that\nour God is merciful, that he loves his saints, takes them into his\nspecial care, and demands an account for them; while, on the other\nhand, he is angry with the murderers of his saints, hates them and\ndesigns their punishment. Of this consolation we stand in decided\nneed. When oppressed by our enemies and murderers, we are apt to\nconclude that our God has forgotten and lost interest in us. We think\nthat if God cared for us, he would not permit such things to come upon\nus. Likewise, Abel might have reasoned: God surely cares nothing for\nme; for if he did, he would not suffer me thus to be murdered by my\nbrother.\n\n169. But only look at what follows! Does not God safeguard the\ninterests of Abel better than he could possibly have done himself? How\ncould Abel have inflicted on his brother such vengeance as God does,\nnow that Abel is dead? How could he, if alive, execute such judgment\non his brother as God here executes? Now the blood of Abel cries\naloud, who, while alive, was of a most retiring disposition. Now Abel\naccuses his brother before God of being a murderer; when alive he\nwould bear all the injuries of his brother in silence. For who was it\nthat disclosed the murder committed by Cain? Was it not, as the text\nhere tells us, the blood of Abel, fairly deafening with its constant\ncries the ears of God and men?\n\n170. These things, I say, are all full of consolation; especially for\nus who now suffer persecution from the popes and wicked princes on\naccount of our doctrine. They have practiced against us the utmost\ncruelty and have vented their rage against godly men, not in Germany\nonly, but also in other parts of Europe. And all this sin is\ndisregarded by the papacy, as if it were nothing but a joke. Nay, the\nPapists really consider it to be a service toward God, Jn 16, 2. All\nthis sin, therefore, as yet \"lieth at the door.\" But it shall become\nmanifest in due time. The blood of Leonard Kaiser, which was shed in\nBavaria, is not silent. Nor is the blood of Henry of Zutphen, which\nwas shed in Dietmar; nor that of our brother Anthony, of England, who\nwas cruelly and without a hearing slain by his English countrymen. I\ncould mention a thousand others who, although their names are not so\nprominent, were yet fellow-sufferers with confessors and martyrs. The\nblood of all these, I say, will not be silent; in due time it will\ncause God to descend from heaven and execute such judgment in the\nearth as the enemies of the Gospel will not be able to bear.\n\n171. Let us not think, therefore, that God does not heed the shedding\nof our blood! Let us not imagine for a moment that God does not regard\nour afflictions! No! he collects all our tears, and puts them into his\nbottle, Ps 56, 8. The cry of the blood of all the godly penetrates the\nclouds and the heavens to the very throne of God, and entreats him to\navenge the blood of the righteous, Ps 79, 10.\n\n172. As these things are written for our consolation, so are they\nwritten for the terror of our adversaries. For what think you can be\nmore horrible for our tyrants to hear than that the blood of the slain\ncontinually cries aloud and accuses them before God? God is indeed\nlong-suffering, especially now toward the end of the world; and\ntherefore sin lies the longer \"at the door,\" and vengeance does not\nimmediately follow. But it is surely true that God is most grievously\noffended with all this sin, and that he will never suffer it to pass\nunpunished.\n\n173. Such judgment of God on Cain, however, I do not believe to have\nbeen executed on the first day, but some time afterward. For it is\nGod's nature to be long-suffering, inasmuch as he waits for the sinner\nto turn. But he does not, on that account, fail to punish him. For he\nis the righteous judge both of the living and of the dead, as we\nconfess in our Christian Faith. Such judgment God exercised in the\nvery beginning of the world with reference to these two brothers. He\njudged and condemned the living murderer, and justified murdered Abel.\nHe excommunicated Cain and drove him into such agonies of soul that\nthe space of the whole creation seemed too narrow to contain him. From\nthe moment Cain saw that God would be the avenger of his brother's\nblood, he felt nowhere safe. To Abel, on the other hand, God gave for\nenjoyment the full width of earth and heaven.\n\n174. Why, then, should we ever doubt that God ponders and numbers in\nhis heart the afflictions of his people, and that he measures our\ntears and inscribes them on adamantine tablets? And this inscription\nthe enemies of the Church shall never be able to erase by any device\nwhatever except by repentance. Manasseh was a terrible tyrant and a\nmost inhuman persecutor of the godly. And his banishment and captivity\nwould never have sufficed to blot out these sins. But when he\nacknowledged his sin and repented in truth, then the Lord showed him\nmercy.\n\nSo Paul had, and so the pope and the bishops have now, only one way\nleft them: to acknowledge their sin and to supplicate the forgiveness\nof God. If they will not do this, God in his wrath will surely require\nat their hands the blood of the godly. Let no one doubt this!\n\n175. Abel is dead, but Cain is still alive. But, good God, what a\nwretched life is that which he lives! He might wish never to have been\nborn, as he hears that he is excommunicated and must look for death\nand retribution at any moment. And in due time this will be the lot of\nour adversaries and of the oppressors of the Church.\n\nB. Cain's Punishment In Detail.\n\nV. 11. _And now cursed art thou from the ground, which hath opened its\nmouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand;_\n\n176. We have heard, so far, of the disclosure of Cain's sin through\nthe voice of Abel's blood, of his conviction by Adam his father, and\nof the decision rendered with reference to the two brothers, namely,\nthat the one should be canonized, or declared a saint--the first\nfruits, as it were, of the blessed seed; but that the other, the\nfirst-born, should be condemned and excommunicated, as shall presently\nbe shown. Now Moses mentions the penalties to be visited upon such\nfratricide.\n\n177. First of all, we should mark as particularly worthy of note the\ndiscrimination exercised by the Holy Spirit. Previously, when the\npenalty for his sin was inflicted upon Adam, a curse was placed not\nupon the person of Adam, but only upon the earth; and even this curse\nwas not absolute but qualified. The expression is this: \"Cursed is the\nground for thy sake\"; and in the eighth chapter of the Romans, verse\ntwenty, we read: \"The creature was made subject to vanity, not\nwillingly.\" The fact is, that the earth, inasmuch as it bore guilty\nman, became involved in the curse as his instrument, just as also the\nsword, gold, and other objects, are cursed for the reason that men\nmake them the instruments of their sin. With fine reasoning the Holy\nSpirit discriminates between the earth and Adam. He diverts the curse\nto the earth, but saves the person.\n\n178. But in this instance the Holy Spirit speaks of Cain. He curses\nthe person of Cain. And why is this? Is it because the sin of Cain, as\na murderer, was greater than the sin of Adam and Eve? Not so. But\nbecause Adam was the root from whose flesh and loins Christ, that\nblessed seed, should be born. It is this seed, therefore, that was\nspared. For the sake of this seed, the fruit of the loins of Adam, the\ncurse is transferred from the person of Adam to the earth. Thus, Adam\nbears the curse of the earth, but his person is not cursed; from his\nposterity Christ was to be born.\n\n179. Cain, however, since he fell by his sin, must suffer the curse\nbeing inflicted upon his person. He hears it said to him, \"Cursed art\nthou,\" that we might understand he was cut off from the glory of the\npromised seed, and condemned never to have in his posterity that seed\nthrough which the blessing should come. Thus Cain was cast out from\nthe stupendous glory of the promised seed. Abel was slain; therefore\nthere could be no posterity from him. But Adam was ordained to serve\nGod by further procreation. In Adam alone, therefore, after Cain's\nrejection, the hope of the blessed seed rested until Seth was born\nunto him.\n\n180. The words spoken to Cain, \"Cursed art thou,\" are few, but\nnevertheless entitled to a great deal of attention, in that they are\nequal to the declaration: Thou art not the one from whom the blessed\nseed is hoped for. With this word Cain stands cast out and cut off\nlike a branch from the root, unable longer to hope for the distinction\naround which he had circled. It is a fact, that Cain craved the\ndistinction of passing on the blessing; but the more closely he\nencircled it the more elusive it became. Such is the lot of all\nevildoers: their failure is commensurate with their efforts to\nsucceed.\n\n181. From this occurrence originate the two churches which are at war\nwith each other: the one of Adam and the righteous, which has the hope\nand promise of the blessed seed; the other of Cain, which has\nforfeited this hope and promise through sin, without ever being able\nto regain it. For in the flood Cain's whole posterity became extinct,\nso that there has been no prophet, no saint, no prince of the true\nChurch who could trace his lineage back to Cain. All that was denied\nCain and withdrawn from him, when he was told: \"Cursed art thou.\"\n\n182. We find added, however, the words, \"from the ground.\" These words\nqualify the fearful wrath. For, if God had said, \"from the heavens,\"\nhe would have deprived his posterity forever of the hope of salvation.\nAs it is, the words, \"from the ground,\" convey, indeed, the menacing\ndecision that the promise of the seed has been forfeited, but the\npossibility is left that descendants of Cain as individuals, prompted\nby the Holy Spirit, may join themselves to Adam and find salvation.\n\nThis, in after ages, really came to pass. While it is true the promise\nof the blessed seed was a distinction confined to the Jews, according\nto the statement in Psalm 147, 20: \"He hath not dealt so with any\nnation,\" the Gentiles, nevertheless, retained the privilege of\nbeggars, so to speak. It was in this manner that the Gentiles, through\ndivine mercy, obtained the same blessing the Jews possessed on the\nground of the divine faithfulness and promise.\n\n183. In like manner, all rule in the Church was absolutely denied also\nto the Moabites and Amorites; and yet many private individuals among\nthem embraced the religion of the Jews. Thus, every right in the\nChurch was taken away from Cain and his posterity absolutely, yet\npermission was left them to beg, as it were, for grace. That was not\ntaken from them. Cain, because of his sin, was cast out from the right\nof sitting at the family table of Adam. But the right was left him to\ngather up, doglike, the crumbs that fell from his father's table, Mt\n15, 26-27. This is signified by the Hebrew expression _min haadama_,\n\"From the ground.\"\n\n184. I make these observations because there is a great probability\nthat many of the posterity of Cain joined themselves to the holy\npatriarchs. But their privileges were not those of an obligatory\nservice toward them on the part of the Church, but mere toleration of\nthem as individuals who had lost the promise that the blessed seed was\nto spring from their flesh and blood. To forfeit the promise was no\ntrifle; still, even that curse was so mitigated as to secure for them\nthe privilege of beggars, so that heaven was not absolutely denied\nthem, provided they allied themselves with the true Church.\n\n185. But this is what Cain, no doubt, strove to hinder in various\nways. He set up new forms of worship and invented numerous ceremonies,\nthat thereby he might also appear to be the Church. Those, however,\nwho departed from him and joined the true Church, were saved, although\nthey were compelled to surrender the distinction that Christ was to be\nborn from their flesh and blood. But let us now return to the text.\n\n186. Moses here uses a very striking personification. He represents\nthe earth as a dreaded beast when he speaks of her as having opened\nher mouth and swallowed the innocent blood of Abel. But why does he\ntreat the earth so ruthlessly since all this was done without her\nwill? Yes, being a creature of God which is good, did not all\ntranspire in opposition to her will and in spite of her struggle\nagainst it, according to Paul's teaching: \"The earth was made subject\nto vanity, not willingly,\" Rom 8, 20. My reply is: The object was to\nimpress Adam and all his posterity, so that they might live in the\nfear of God and beware of murder. The words of Adam have this import\n\"Behold the earth hath opened her mouth and swallowed the blood of thy\nbrother; but she ought to have swallowed thee, the murderer. The earth\nis indeed a good creature, and is good to the good and godly; but to\nthe wicked she is full of pitfalls.\" It is for the purpose of\ninspiring murderers with fear and dread that these terrifying words\nwere spoken. Nor is there any doubt that Cain, after hearing the words\nfrom an angry father, was overwhelmed with terror and confusion, not\nknowing whither to turn. The expression, \"which hath opened its mouth\nto receive thy brother's blood from thy hand,\" is, indeed, terrifying,\nbut it portrays the turpitude of the fratricidal deed better than any\npicture.\n\nV. 12a. _When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield\nunto thee its strength._\n\n187. The Lord said above to Adam, \"Thorns also and thistles shall it\nbring forth to thee.\" But the words spoken to Cain are different. As\nif he had said, \"Thou hast watered and fertilized the earth, not with\nhealthful and quickening rain, but with thy brother's blood. Therefore\nthe earth shall be to thee less productive than to others. For the\nblood thou hast shed shall hinder the strength and the fruitfulness of\nthe earth.\" This material curse is the second part of the punishment.\nThe earth, although alike cultivated by Adam and Cain, should be more\nfruitful to Adam than to Cain and yield its return to the former for\nhis labors. But to the labors of Cain it should not yield such\nreturns, though by nature desirous to give in proportion to its\nfruitfulness and strength, because it was hindered by the blood\nspilled by Cain.\n\n188. Here we must offer a remark of a grammatical nature. In the\npresent passage Moses terms the earth _haadama_. In the passage\nfollowing, \"A fugitive and a wanderer shalt thou be in the earth\" he\nuses the term _arez_. Now _adama_ signifies, according to grammatical\ninterpreters, that part of the earth which is cultivated, where trees\ngrow and other fruits of the earth adapted for food. But _arez_\nsignifies the whole earth, whether cultivated or uncultivated. This\ncurse, therefore, properly has reference to the part of the earth\ncultivated for food. And the curse implies that where one ear of wheat\nbrings forth three hundred grains for Adam, it should bring forth\nscarcely ten grains for Cain the murderer; and this for the purpose\nthat Cain might behold on every side God's hatred and punishment of\nthe shedding of blood.\n\nV. 12b. _A fugitive and a wanderer (vagabond) shalt thou be in the\nearth._\n\n189. This is a third punishment resting on murderers to our day. For,\nunless they find reconciliation, they have nowhere a fixed abode or a\nsecure dwelling-place.\n\nWe find here, in the original, two words, _No Vanod_, signifying\nvagabond and fugitive. The distinction I make between them is, that\n_No_ designates the uncertainty of one's dwelling-place. An\nillustration is furnished by the Jews, who have no established\nhabitation, but fear every hour lest they be compelled to wander\nforth. _Nod_, on the other hand, signifies the uncertainty of finding\nthe dwelling-place sought; with the uncertainty of a present permanent\ndwelling-place there is linked the uncertainty of a goal to strive for\nwhen the present uncertain dwelling-place must be abandoned. Thus, the\npunishment contains two features, the insecurity of the present\ndwelling-place and a lack of knowledge whither to turn when thrust\nforth from the insecure abode of the present. In this sense the term\nis used in Psalm 109, 10: \"Let his children be continually\n_vagabonds_.\" That means, Nowhere shall they find a certain abode; if\nthey are in Greece this year, they shall migrate to Italy the next,\nand so from place to place.\n\n190. Just such is evidently the miserable state of the Jews at the\npresent day. They can fix their dwelling-place nowhere permanently.\nAnd to such evil God adds this other in the case of Cain, that when he\nshould be driven from one place of abode he should not know where to\nturn, and thus should live suspended, as it were, between heaven and\nearth, not knowing where to abide nor where to look for a permanent\nplace of refuge.\n\n191. In this manner the sin of Cain was visited with a threefold\npunishment. In the first place he was deprived of all spiritual or\nchurchly glory; for the promise that the blessed seed was to be born\nfrom his posterity, was taken from him. In the second place, the earth\nwas cursed, which is a punishment affecting his home life. The third\npunishment affects his relations to the community, in that he must be\na vagabond without a fixed abode anywhere.\n\n192. Notwithstanding, an open door of return into the Church is left,\nbut without a covenant. For, as has been explained, in the event that\nany one of Cain's posterity should ally himself with the true Church\nand the holy fathers, he was saved. Thus the Home is left, but without\na blessing; and the State is left so that he may found a city and\ndwell there, but for how long, is uncertain. Without exaggeration,\ntherefore, he may be likened to a beggar in Church, Home and State.\n\n193. This punishment is mitigated by the prohibition to slay him\nforthwith after the commission of the murderous deed, a law providing\nfor the punishment of murderers which was reserved for a later day.\nCain was saved that he might be an example for others, to teach them\nto fear God and to beware of murder. So much about the sin,\narraignment, and punishment of Cain.\n\n194. But there are some who reply that, the godly, likewise sometimes\nendure these same curses, while the wicked, on the contrary, are free\nfrom them. Thus, Paul says that he also \"wandered about and had no\ncertain dwelling-place,\" 1 Cor 4, 11. Such is even our condition\nto-day, who are teachers in the churches. We have no certain\ndwelling-place; either we are driven into banishment or we expect\nbanishment any hour. Such was the lot also of Christ, the apostles,\nthe prophets, and the patriarchs.\n\n195. Concerning Jacob the Scriptures say \"The elder shall serve the\nyounger,\" Gen 25, 23. But does not Jacob become a servant when we see\nhim, from fear of his brother, haste away into exile? Does he not, on\nhis return home, supplicate his brother and fall on his knees before\nhim? Is not Isaac also seen to be a most miserable beggar? Gen 6,\n1-35. Abraham, his father, goes into exile among the Gentiles and\npossesses not in all the world a place to set his foot, as Stephen\nsays, Acts 7, 1-5. On the other hand, Ishmael was a king, and had the\nprinces of the land of Midian as his offspring before Israel entered\ninto the land of promise, Gen 25, 16. Thus, as we shall see a little\nlater, Cain first built the city of Enoch, and, furthermore, became\nthe ancestor of shepherds, workers in metals, and musicians. All this\nappears to prove that it is a mistake to attribute to Cain and his\nposterity a curse. The curse seems to rest with weight upon the true\nChurch, while the wicked appear to thrive and flourish.\n\n196. These things are often a stumbling-block, not to the world only,\nbut even to the saints, as the Psalms in many places testify. And the\nprophets, also, are frequently found to grow indignant, as does\nJeremiah, when they see the wicked possess freedom as it were from the\nevils of life, while they are oppressed and afflicted in various ways.\nMen may therefore inquire, Where is the curse of the wicked? Where is\nthe blessing of the godly? Is not the converse the truth? Cain is a\nvagabond and settled nowhere; and yet Cain is the first man that\nbuilds a city and has a certain place to dwell in. But we will answer\nthis argument more fully hereafter. We will now proceed with the text\nof Moses.\n\n\nVI. CAIN'S CONDUCT WHEN PUNISHED.\n\n   1. How he despaired. \"My punishment is greater\" etc.\n\n      a. These words have greatly perplexed interpreters 197.\n\n      b. The way Augustine explains them 197.\n\n      c. The explanation of the rabbins 198.\n\n       * How the rabbins pervert the Scriptures and whence their false\n         comments 198-199.\n\n      d. Why the rabbins' interpretation cannot be accepted 200.\n\n      e. The true understanding of these words 201.\n\n       * The punishment troubles Cain more than his sin 201.\n\n      f. What makes these words difficult 202.\n\n       * The right understanding of the words \"Minso\" and \"Avon\"\n         202-203.\n\n       * Grammarians cannot get at the right meaning of the Scriptures\n         204.\n\n       * How we should proceed in interpreting Scripture 204.\n\n   2. How Cain viewed his political punishment 205.\n\n   3. How he viewed his ecclesiastical punishment 206.\n\n    * Why Cain was excommunicated by Adam 206-207.\n\n    * In what sense Cain was a fugitive and a wanderer 208-209.\n\n    * Adam received his punishment in a better way 210.\n\n    * The meaning of being a fugitive and a wanderer. How the same is\n      found among the papists 211-212.\n\n    * The grace of God was guaranteed to Seth and his posterity 212.\n\n    * Why no temptation can harm believers 212.\n\n   4. Cain's fear that in turn he would be slain 213.\n\n    * God shows Cain a double favor in his punishment. Why he does\n      this 213.\n\n    * Whether any of Cain's posterity, under the Old Testament, were\n      saved 214-215.\n\n   5. Whether Cain prayed that he might die, as Augustine, Lyra and\n      others relate 216-217.\n\n    * The fables of the rabbins cause Luther double work and why he\n      occasionally cites them 218.\n\n    * Whether God changed his judgment upon Cain 219.\n\n    * Why God still showed Cain incidental grace 219.\n\n    * The fables of the Jews concerning Cain's death and Lamech's\n      punishment 220-221.\n\n    * It is foolish to dispute concerning the sevenfold vengeance to\n      be visited upon the one who slew Cain 222.\n\n    * The divine promises.\n\n      a. They are twofold, of the law and of grace 223.\n\n      b. The promise Adam received 224.\n\n      c. Whether God gave Cain one of these promises 224-225.\n\n      d. The kind of promises well organized police stations have 226.\n\n      e. The promises the Church has 227.\n\n      f. Cain's promise is temporal, incidental and incomplete 227.\n\n       * Was Cain murdered 228.\n\n   6. How Cain had cause to fear, even though there were no people on\n      the earth except Adam and Eve and his sisters 229-230.\n\n    * The sign that is put upon Cain.\n\n      a. Can anything definite be said of it. What the fathers thought\n         of it 231.\n\n      b. Why this sign was placed upon him 232.\n\n      c. How he had to carry it his whole life 232.\n\n      d. How the sign was a confirmation and a promise of the law 233.\n\n   7. Of Cain's departure, and his excommunication from the presence\n      of Jehovah.\n\n      a. The first parents in obedience to God made Cain an outcast\n         234-235.\n\n      b. How the first parents overcame their parental affections in\n         expelling Cain 236.\n\n       * What should urge men to flee from their false security 237.\n\n      c. His expulsion must have pierced Cain to the heart 238.\n\n       * What is the presence of Jehovah 238.\n\n      d. How he went from the presence of Jehovah, to be without that\n         presence 239.\n\n      e. It was a sad departure, both for Cain and his parents 240.\n\n      f. Whither he resorted 241.\n\n       * What meaning of \"in the land of Nod\" 241.\n\n       * Of Paradise.\n\n         (1) The deluge very likely destroyed paradise 241.\n\n         (2) Where was paradise 242.\n\n       * Of the Deluge.\n\n         (1) The deluge destroyed paradise 243.\n\n           * Cain lived where Babylon was built later 244.\n\n         (2) The deluge gave the earth an entirely different form 244.\n\n\nVI. CAIN'S CONDUCT UPON BEING PUNISHED.\n\nV. 13. _And Cain said unto Jehovah, My punishment (iniquity) is\ngreater than I can bear (than can be remitted)._\n\n197. Here Moses seems to have fixed a cross for the grammarians and\nthe rabbins; for they crucify this passage in various ways. Lyra\nrecites the opinions of some who see in this passage an affirmation,\nconsidering it to mean that in his despair Cain claimed his sin to be\ngreater than could be pardoned. This is our rendering. Augustine\nlikewise retained this view of the passage, for he says, \"Thou liest,\nCain; for the mercy of God is greater than the misery of all the\nsinners.\"\n\n198. The rabbins, however, expound the passage as a denial in the form\nof a question, as if he had said, \"Is my iniquity greater than can be\nremitted?\" But if this rendering be the true one, Cain not only does\nnot acknowledge his sin, but excuses it and, in addition, insults God\nfor laying upon him a punishment greater than he deserves. In this way\nthe rabbins almost everywhere corrupt the sense of the Scriptures.\nConsequently I begin to hate them, and I admonish all who read them,\nto do so with careful discrimination. Although they did possess the\nknowledge of some things by tradition from the fathers, they corrupted\nthem in various ways; and therefore they often deceived by those\ncorruptions even Jerome himself. Nor did the poets of old so fill the\nworld with their fables as the wicked Jews did the Scriptures with\ntheir absurd opinions. A great task, therefore, is incumbent upon us\nin endeavoring to keep the text free from their comments.\n\n199. The occasion for all this error is the fact that some men are\ncompetent to deal only with grammatical questions, but not with the\nsubject matter itself; that is, they are not theologians at the same\ntime. The inevitable result is mistakes and the crucifixion of\nthemselves as well as of the Scriptures. For how can any one explain\nwhat he does not understand? Now the subject matter in the present\npassage is that Cain is accused in his own conscience. And no one, not\nonly no wicked man, but not even the devil himself, can endure this\njudgment; as James witnesses, \"The devils also believe and tremble\nbefore God,\" Jas 2, 19. Peter also says, \"Whereas angels which are\ngreater in power and might cannot endure that judgment which the Lord\nwill exercise upon blasphemers,\" 2 Pet 2, 11. So also Manasseh in his\nprayer, verses 4 and 5, confesses that all men tremble before the face\nof the Lord's anger.\n\n200. All this is sufficient evidence that Cain, when arraigned by God,\ndid not have courage to withstand and to argue with him. For God is an\nalmighty adversary; the first assault he makes is upon the heart\nitself when he takes the conscience into his grasp. Of this the\nrabbins know nothing, nor can they understand it; in consequence they\nspeak of this arraignment as if it took place before men, where the\ntruth is either denied or facts are smoothed over. This is impossible\nwhen God arraigns men; as Christ says in Matthew 12, 37, \"By thy words\nthou shalt be justified and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.\"\n\n201. Cain thus acknowledges his sin, although it is not so much the\nsin he grieves over as the penalty inflicted. The statement, then, is\nto be understood in the affirmative, and it reveals the horrors of\ndespair.\n\nA further proof of Cain's despair is, that he does not utter one word\nof reverence. He never mentions the name of God or of his father. His\nconscience is so confused and so overwhelmed with terror and despair\nthat he is not able to think of any hope of pardon. The Epistle to the\nHebrews gives the same description of Esau when it states that he \"for\none mess of meat, sold his own birthright. For ye know that even when\nhe afterward desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected; for he\nfound no place for change of mind, though he sought it diligently with\ntears,\" Heb 12, 16-17. Thus in the present instance, Cain feels his\npunishment, but he grieves more for his punishment than for his sin.\nAnd all persons, when in despair, do the same.\n\n202. The two original words of this passage, _minneso_ and _avon_, are\na pair of crosses for grammarians. Jerome translates this clause, \"My\niniquity is greater than can be pardoned.\" Sanctes, the grammarian of\nPagnum, a man of no mean erudition and evidently a diligent scholar,\nrenders the passage, \"My punishment is greater than I can bear.\" But\nby such a rendering we shall make a martyr of Cain and a sinner of\nAbel. Concerning the word _nasa_, I have before observed that when it\nis applied to sin it signifies, to lift sin up, or off, or on high;\nthat is, to take it out of the way. Similarly the figure has found\ncurrency among us: the remission of sins, or to remit sin. In the\nThirty-second Psalm, verse one, we find the expression, _Aschre Nesu\nPascha_. This, literally translated, would make: Being blessed through\nthe removal of crime, or sin. We make it: Blessed is he whose\ntransgression is forgiven, or taken away. The same is found in Isaiah\n33, 24, The people that dwell therein shall be _Nesu Avon_, that\nmeans, relieved from sin--shall be the people whose sin is forgiven.\n\n203. The other original term, _avoni_, grammarians derive from the\nverb _anah_, which signifies \"to be afflicted,\" as in Zechariah 9, 9:\n\"Behold thy king cometh unto thee lowly (or afflicted).\" Our\ntranslation renders it \"meek.\" Likewise in Psalms 132, 1: \"Jehovah,\nremember for David all his affliction.\" From the same root is derived\nthe expression, \"low estate,\" or \"lowliness,\" used by the Virgin Mary\nin her song, Lk 1, 48. This fact induces Sanctes to render it\n\"punishment.\"\n\nBut here _avoni_ signifies \"iniquity\" or \"sin,\" as it does also in\nmany other passages of the Holy Scriptures, which appears more plainly\nfrom the verb \"remit,\" which stands connected with it.\n\n204. Hence it is that grammarians, who are nothing but such and know\nnothing of the divine things, find their crosses in all such passages,\nand crucify, not only the Scriptures, but themselves and their hearers\nas well. In the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures, the sense is\nfirst to be determined; and when that appears in all respects\nconsistent with itself, then the grammatical features are to receive\nattention. The rabbins, however, take the opposite course, and hence\nit grieves me that divines and the holy fathers so frequently follow\nthem.\n\nV. 14. _Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the\nground; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive\nand a wanderer in the earth; and it will come to pass, that whosoever\nfindeth me will slay me._\n\n205. From these words it appears that the sentence on Cain was\npronounced through the mouth of Adam. Cain acknowledges that he is\ndriven first from Home and State, and then also from the Church. Of\nthe difference between the words _adamah_ and _erez_ we spoke above.\nWe showed that _erez_ signifies the earth generally, while the word\n_adamah_ means the cultivated part of the earth. The meaning therefore\nis: I am now compelled to flee from thy presence and from that part of\nthe earth which I have cultivated. The whole world indeed lies before\nme, but I must be a fugitive and a vagabond upon the earth; that is, I\nshall have no certain dwelling place. In the same way fugitive\nmurderers among us are punished with exile. These words, accordingly,\ncast additional light upon the utterance of Adam, \"Cursed art thou\nfrom the ground.\" They refer to Cain's banishment. This part of Cain's\npunishment therefore is a civil punishment, and by it he is shut out\nfrom civic association.\n\n206. But that which Cain next adds, \"From thy face shall I be hid,\" is\nan ecclesiastical punishment and true excommunication. For, as the\npriesthood and the kingdom rested with Adam, and Cain on account of\nhis sin was excommunicated from Adam, he was thereby also deprived of\nthe glory both of priesthood and kingdom. But why Adam adopted this\npunishment is explained by the words, \"When thou tillest the ground,\nit shall not henceforth yield unto thee its strength;\" as if he had\nsaid, Thou art cursed and thy labors are cursed also. Therefore if\nthou shalt remain with us upon earth it cannot be but that both\nthyself and we likewise must perish with hunger. For thou hast stained\nthe earth with thy brother's blood, and wherever thou art, thou must\nbear about the blood of thy brother, and even the earth itself shall\nexact her penalties.\n\n207. A similar sentence we find pronounced in 1 Kings 2, 29-33, where\nSolomon gives commandment to Benaiah, son of Jehoiada, saying, \"Fall\nupon Joab, that thou mayest take away the blood, which Joab shed\nwithout cause, from me and from my father's house. And Jehovah will\nreturn his blood upon his own head. But unto David, and unto his seed,\nand unto his house, and unto his throne, shall there be peace for ever\nfrom Jehovah.\" As much as to say, If Joab suffer not this punishment\nof his unjust murder, the whole kingdom must suffer that punishment\nand be shaken by wars. The meaning of Adam then, in this passage is,\nIf thou shalt remain on the earth with us, God will bring punishment\nupon us for thy sake, in that the earth shall not yield us her fruit.\n\n208. But now let us reply to the question raised above. It was said to\nCain, \"A fugitive and wanderer shalt thou be in the earth.\" And yet,\nCain was the first man who builds a city, and his posterity so\nincreased from that time that they debauched and oppressed the Church\nof God, and so utterly overthrew it as not to leave more than eight\npersons of the posterity of Seth. All of the remainder of mankind,\nwhich perished in the flood, had followed Cain, as the text plainly\ndeclares when it affirms that the sons of God, when they came unto the\ndaughters of men, begat giants and mighty men, which were of old, men\nof renown, Gen 6, 4. Therefore, since Cain had so great a posterity,\nand he built the first city, how can it be true, men ask, that he was\na fugitive and wanderer upon earth?\n\n209. We will reply in accordance with what is written. The\nillustrations from the New Testament above mentioned, Paul, the\napostles, Christ, and the prophets, assuredly belong to quite a\ndifferent category. When Adam here says to Cain, \"A fugitive and a\nwanderer shalt thou be in the earth,\" he speaks these words to him to\nsend him away, without further precept. He does not say to him, \"Go to\nthe east;\" he does not say, \"Go to the south;\" he does not mention any\nplace to which he should go. He gives him no command what to do; but\nsimply casts him out. Whither he goes and what he does, is no concern\nof his. He adds no promise of protection, he does not say: God shall\ntake care of thee; God shall protect thee. On the contrary; as the\nwhole sky is free to the bird, which is at liberty to fly whither it\npleases, but is without a place where it may be secure from the\nattacks of other birds, so Adam turns Cain away. The latter feels\nthis. Hence his rejoinder: \"It shall come to pass that every one that\nfindeth me, shall slay me.\"\n\n210. The condition of Adam was different and better. Adam had sinned,\nand by his sin he had sunk into death. But when he was driven out of\nparadise, God assigned him a particular task--that he should till the\nearth in a particular place. God also clothed him with a covering of\nskins. This, as we said, was a sign that God would take care of him\nand protect him. And, last but not least, a glorious promise was made\nto the woman concerning the seed which should bruise the serpent's\nhead. Nothing like this was left to Cain. He was sent away absolutely\nwithout assignment of any particular place or task. No command was\ngiven him nor was any promise made him. He was like a bird aimlessly\nroving beneath the wide heavens. This is what it means to be a\nvagabond and wanderer.\n\n211. Unsettled and aimless, likewise, are all who lack God's Word and\ncommand, wherein person and place receive adequate direction. Such\nwere we under the papacy. Worship, works, exercises--all these were\npresent; but all these existed and found acceptance without a divine\ncommand. A trying condition was that and Cainlike--to be deprived of\nthe Word; not to know what to believe, what to hope, what to suffer,\nbut to undertake and to perform everything at haphazard. What monk is\nthere who could affirm that he did anything right? Everything was\nman's tradition and man's teaching, without the Word. Amid these we\nwandered, being driven to and fro, and like Cain, uncertain what\nverdict God would pass, whether we should merit love or hate. Such\nwas, in those days, our instruction.\n\nUnsettled and aimless like this was Cain's whole posterity. They had\nneither promise nor command from God, and lacked all definite guidance\nfor life and for death. Hence, if any of them came to the knowledge of\nChrist, and allied themselves with the true Church, it was not by\nreason of a promise but through sheer compassion.\n\n212. Seth, however, who was born subsequently, had, together with his\nposterity, a definite promise, a definite abode and a definite mode of\nworship; on the other hand, Cain was aimless. He founded a city, it is\ntrue, but he did not know how long he should dwell in it, not having a\ndivine promise. Whatever we possess without a promise is of uncertain\nduration; at any amount Satan may disturb it or take it. However, when\nwe go into the fray equipped with God's command and promise, the devil\nfights in vain; God's command insures strength and safety. Therefore,\nalthough Cain was lord of the whole world and possessed all the\ntreasures of the world, still, lacking the promise of God's help and\nthe protection of his angels, and having nothing to lean upon but\nman's counsels, he was in every respect aimless and unsettled. This he\nhimself admits when he further says:\n\nV. 14b. _And it shall come to pass that every one that findeth me\nshall slay me._\n\n213. This result was quite to be expected. Having neither God nor his\nfather to look to for succor, having forfeited his rights both as\npriest and as ruler, he saw the possibility before him that any one\nfound him, might slay him, for he was outlawed, body and soul.\nNotwithstanding, God conferred upon the nefarious murderer a twofold\nblessing. He had forfeited Church and dominion, but life and progeny\nwere left. God promised him to protect his existence, and also gave\nhim a wife. Two blessings these by no means to be despised; and when\nhe heard the first part of his sentence pronounced by his father, they\nwere more than he had a right even to hope for. They were valuable for\nthe additional reason that opportunity and time for repentance were\ngranted, though, in the absence of a clear promise, there was neither\ncovenant nor commission. In the same manner, we found our way under\nthe papacy to uncovenanted mercy (_fortuita gratia_), if I may use\nthis expression, for no promise was previously given that the truth\nwas to be revealed in our lifetime, and the Antichrist to become\nmanifest. The reason to which these blessings are attributable, is\nconsideration for the elect. It is quite credible that many of Cain's\noffspring were saved, namely, those who joined the true Church.\nLikewise, at a later day, provision was made among the Jews for\nproselytes and Gentiles.\n\n214. While a stern law existed according to which the Moabites and\nAmmonites were not admitted to the religious services, Ammonites and\nMoabites were saved, such as came to the kings of Judah to serve under\nthem. Also Ruth, the mother and ancestress of our Saviour, was a\nMoabite. This is what I call uncovenanted mercy, no previous promise\nhaving rendered it certain.\n\n215. Also Naaman, and the king of Nineveh, and Nebuchadnezzar, and\nEvilmerodach, and others from among the Gentiles, were saved by such\nuncovenanted mercy; for, unlike the Jews, they had no promise of\nChrist. In the same way, bodily safety is vouchsafed to Cain, and a\nwife with offspring, for the sake of the elect to be saved by\nuncovenanted mercy. For, although what we said of the Moabites is true\nof all his posterity, that it was to live under a curse, it is true,\nnotwithstanding, that some of the patriarchs took their wives from the\nsame.\n\nV. 15a. _And Jehovah said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain,\nvengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold._\n\n216. Jerome, in his Epistle to Damascus, contends that Cain had begged\nof the Lord that he might be slain, an opinion into which he rushes\nfull sail, as it were, entertaining no doubt whatever concerning its\ntruth. Lyra follows Jerome, and resolutely affirms that the context\nrequires this interpretation. But this error of theirs should be laid\nat the door of the rabbins from whom they received it. The true sense\nof the passage is rather that everyone was prohibited from killing\nCain. Judgment is pronounced here by God, and when he spares Cain's\nlife and in addition permits him afterward to marry, it is done to\nstay its execution.\n\n217. Moreover, how is it likely that an ungodly person asks death at\nthe very time when God exercises judgment? Death is the very\npunishment of sin; therefore he flees and dreads death as the greatest\npart of his penalty. Away, therefore, with such vagaries of the\nrabbins! With these also Lyra's suggestion may safely be classed that\nthe text ought to be divided and made to mean, Whoever shall kill\nCain, shall surely meet with severe punishment. And when it is further\nstated, He shall be punished sevenfold, they would explain it as\nmeaning that in the seventh degree--in the seventh generation--the\npunishment is to be inflicted.\n\n218. Such vagaries are worthy of the rabbins after having cast away\nthe light of the New Testament. However, they impose a double labor\nupon us, inasmuch as we are compelled to defend the text and to clear\nit of such corruptions, and to correct their absurd comments. If I\nquote them occasionally, it is to avoid the suspicion of proudly\ndespising them, or of failing to read, and to give sufficient\nconsideration to, their writings. While we read them intelligently, we\ndo so with critical discrimination, and we do not permit them to\nobscure Christ, and to corrupt the Word of God.\n\n219. The Lord, accordingly, does not in this passage at all alter the\nsentence upon Cain whereby he had been doomed to a curse on earth, but\nmerely vouchsafes to him this uncovenanted mercy for the sake of the\nelect that are to be saved from that curse as from a mass of dregs.\nThat is the reason he said Cain should not be killed, as he feared.\n\nThere is, then, no necessity for doing violence to this text as Rabbi\nSolomon does, who, after the words \"whosoever slayeth Cain,\" puts a\nstop; making it to be a hiatus or (ellipsis), as we find in that noted\nline in Virgil (Aeneas, 135)--\n\n  _Quos ego--sed motos praestat componere fluctus._\n  Whom I--but now, be calm, ye boist'rous waves.\n\nAnd then the expression, \"shall be punished sevenfold,\" the rabbi\nrefers to Cain himself, who was punished in his seventh generation.\nFor Cain begat Enoch, and Enoch begat Irad, and Irad begat Mehujael,\nand Mehujael begat Methusael, and Methusael begat Lamech.\n\n220. And the Jews' absurd comment upon that passage (verse 23, below),\nis that Lamech, when he was old, and his eyes dim, was taken by his\nson Tubal-Cain into a wood to hunt wild beasts, and that, when there\nshooting at a wild beast, Lamech accidently shot Cain, who in his\nwanderings had concealed himself in the wood. Such interpretations are\nonly fables, unworthy a place or notice in our schools. Moreover, they\nmilitate against the very truth of the text. For if Cain was really\ndesigned of God to be killed in the seventh generation, and if that\ntime was thus fixed for his death, he was not \"a fugitive and a\nvagabond upon earth.\"\n\n221. We condemn, therefore, this interpretation of Rabbi Solomon, on\nthe ground of critical discrimination, because it militates directly\nagainst that sentence which God had before pronounced; and God is not\nman, that he should change his mind, 1 Kings 15, 29-30. This rule\nshould be strictly observed in all interpretation of the Holy\nScripture, that the rendering of one passage must not subsequently\nconflict with that of another. And when the rabbins, moreover, say\nthat the deluge was the particular punishment of Lamech's sin in thus\nkilling Cain, Lyra refutes them. He very truly affirms that the deluge\nwas the common punishment of the whole world of wicked men. We leave,\ntherefore, all these Jewish absurdities and hold fast the true meaning\nof the text before us, that, when Cain feared lest he should be slain\nby any one who should find him, the Lord prevented him from being thus\nslain, and denounced on such murderer a punishment sevenfold greater\nthan that of Cain.\n\n222. And, though Lyra argues and inquires how it could be that he who\nshould slay Cain could deserve a sevenfold greater vengeance than Cain\ndeserved, who slew his own brother, of what profit is it to us to\ninquire into the counsel of God in such matters as these, especially\nwhen it is certain that God permitted his mercy to stray to Cain in\nthe form of promises and blessings under the Law, if I may so express\nmyself, thus securing his safety.\n\n223. There are two kinds of promises, or a twofold promise, as we have\noften explained. There are the legal promises, if I may so call them,\nwhich depend, as it were, upon our own works, such as the following:\n\"If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land,\" Is\n1, 19. Again, I am God, showing mercy unto thousands of them that love\nme and keep my commandments, Ex 20, 6. And also above, in this case of\nCain, \"If thou doest well, shall not thy countenance be lifted up?\"\nGen 4, 7. And these legal promises have for the most part their\ncorresponding threats attached to them.\n\nBut the other kind of promises are promises of grace, and with them no\nthreats are joined. Such are the following: \"Jehovah thy God will\nraise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren,\nlike unto me; unto him ye shall hearken,\" Deut 18, 15. Again, \"I will\nput my law in their inward parts, in their heart will I write it; and\nI will be their God, and they shall be my people,\" Jer 31, 33. And\nagain, \"I will put enmity between thee and the woman,\" Gen 3, 15. Now,\nthese promises depend not in any way upon our works, but absolutely\nand only upon the goodness and grace of God, because he was pleased to\nmake those promises and to do what he thus promised. Just in the same\nway we have the promise of Baptism, of the Lord's Supper, and of the\nKeys, etc., in which God sets before us his good will and his mercy\nand his works.\n\n224. Now, God gave no promise of the latter kind to Cain. He only said\nto him, Whosoever shall slay thee shall be punished sevenfold. But\nAdam had such a promise of grace made to him. And Cain, because he was\nthe first-born, ought to have received that promise as an inheritance\nfrom his parents. That promise was the large and blessed promise of\neternal glory, because by it the seed was promised which should bruise\nthe serpent's head, and this without any work or merit of man. For\nthat promise had no condition attached to it, such as, If thou shalt\noffer thy sacrifices, if thou shalt do good, etc.\n\n225. If, therefore, you compare this promise of grace with the words\nGod spake to Cain, the latter are as a mere crust held out to a\nbeggar. For even Cain's life is not promised him absolutely. Nothing\nmore is said than a threat pronounced against those who should slay\nhim. God does not say positively, No man shall slay thee. He does not\nsay, I will so overrule all others that no one shall slay thee. Had\nthe words been thus spoken, Cain might have returned into the presence\nof God and of his parents. But a command only is given to men that\nthey slay not Cain. If, therefore, the words spoken to Cain be at all\nconsidered as a promise, it is that kind of promise which, as we have\nbefore said, depends on the works and will of man. And yet, even such\npromise is by no means to be despised, for these legal promises often\nembrace most important things.\n\n226. Thus, Augustine observes that God gave to the Romans their empire\non account of their noble virtues. And in the same manner we find,\neven to this day, that the blessings of those nations which keep from\nmurder, adultery, theft, etc., are greater than those of other nations\nin which these evils prevail. And yet, even governments which, as far\nas mere reason can succeed, are especially well established, possess\nnothing beyond these temporal promises.\n\n227. The Church, however, possesses the promises of grace, even the\neternal promises. And although Cain was left utterly destitute of\nthese promises, yet it was a great favor that the temporal mercies\nwere left him: that he was not immediately killed, that a wife was\ngiven him, that children were born unto him, that he built a city,\nthat he cultivated the earth, that he fed his cattle and had\npossessions, and that he was not utterly ejected from the society and\nfellowship of men. For God could not only have deprived Cain of all\nthese blessings, but he could have added pestilence, epilepsy,\napoplexy, the stone, the gout, and any other disease. And yet there\nare men disposed curiously to argue in what manner God could possibly\nhave multiplied the curse of Cain sevenfold on himself or on any\nother.\n\nAs God above deprives Cain of all the divine blessings, both\nspiritual--or those pertaining to the Church--and civil, so here he\nmitigates that sentence by commanding that no one shall slay Cain. But\nGod does not promise at the same time that all men shall surely obey\nhis command. Therefore Cain, even possessing this promise in reference\nto his body, is still a fugitive and a wanderer. And it might be that\nif he continued in his wickedness, he was liable to be slain at any\nmoment; whereas, if he did well, he might live a long time. But\nnothing is promised him with certainty, for although these corporal or\nlegal promises are great and important, yet they are positively\nuncertain and uncovenanted.\n\n228. Whether, therefore, Cain was killed or not, I cannot with any\ncertainty say, for the Scriptures afford no plain information upon\nthat point. This one thing, however, evidently can be proved from the\npresent text, that Cain had no certain promise of the preservation of\nhis life; but God left him to a life of uncertainty, doubt and\nrestless wandering, and did no more than protect the life of Cain by a\ncommand and a threat which might restrain the wicked from killing him,\non account of the certain awful punishment which would follow such\ndestruction of the murderer. But a promise that he should not be\nmurdered was withheld. We know, moreover, what is the nature of the\nlaw, or a legal command, and that there are always very few who obey\nit. Therefore, although it is not recorded at what time, in what\nplace, or by whom, Cain was slain, yet it is most probable that he was\nkilled. The Scriptures however make no mention of it, even as they are\nquite silent also concerning the number of the years of Cain, and say\nnothing about the day of his birth or the day of his death. He\nperished, together with his whole generation; to use a popular\nproverb, \"without cross, candle, or God.\" A few only of his generation\nare excepted, who were saved by the uncovenanted mercy of God.\n\n229. The question is here usually asked, To what persons could the\nwords of Cain possibly apply, when he says, \"Everyone that findeth me\nshall slay me,\" when it is evident that besides Adam and Eve and their\nfew daughters, no human beings were in existence. I would at once\nreply that they bear witness to the fact that we see the wicked \"flee\nwhen no man pursueth,\" as the Scriptures say; for they imagine to\nthemselves various perils where none really exist. Just so we see it\nto be the case with murderers at the present day, who are filled with\nfears where all is safe, who can remain quiet nowhere, and who imagine\ndeath to be present everywhere.\n\n230. However, when it follows in the command of God, \"Yea, verily,\nwhosoever slayeth Cain shall be punished sevenfold,\" these words\ncannot be referred exclusively to the fears of Cain, for Cain had\nsisters, and perhaps he greatly dreaded that sister whom he had\nmarried, lest she should take vengeance on him for the murder of her\nbrother. Moreover, Cain had perhaps a vague apprehension of a long\nlife, and he saw that many more sons might be born of Adam. He feared,\ntherefore, the whole posterity to Adam. And it greatly increased these\nfears that God had left him nothing more than his stray mercy. I do\nnot think that Cain feared the beasts at all, or dreaded being slain\nby them; for what had the sevenfold vengeance threatened upon\nmurderers to do with beasts?\n\nV. 15b. _And Jehovah appointed a sign for (set a mark upon) Cain, lest\nany finding him should smite him (slay him)._\n\n231. What this mark was is not to be found in the Holy Scriptures.\nTherefore commentators have entertained various opinions. Nearly all,\nhowever, have come to this one conclusion--they have inferred that\nthere was apparent in Cain a great tremor of his head and of all his\nlimbs. They suppose that, as a physical cause of his trembling, God\nhad changed, or disarranged, or mutilated some particular organ in his\nbody, but left the body whole as it was first created, merely adding a\nvisible outward mark, such as the trembling. This conjecture of the\nfathers contains much probability, but it cannot be proved by any\ntestimony of the Scriptures. The mark might have been of another kind.\nFor instance, we observe in nearly all murderers an immediate change\nin the eyes. The eyes wear an appearance of sullen ferocity, and lose\nthat softness and innocence peculiar to them by nature.\n\n232. But whatever this mark was, it was certainly a most horrible\npunishment; for Cain was compelled to bear it during his whole life as\nGod's penalty for the awful murder which he had committed. Rendered\nconspicuous by this degrading mark, hateful and abominable in the eyes\nof all, Cain was sent away--banished from his home by his parents. And\nalthough the life he asked of God was granted him, yet it was a life\nof ignominy, branded with an infamous mark of homicide; not only that\nhe himself might be perpetually reminded of the sin he had committed,\nto his own confusion, but also that others might be deterred from the\ncrime of committing murder. Nor could this mark be effaced by\nrepentance. Cain was compelled to bear about this sign of the wrath of\nGod upon him as a punishment in addition to his banishment, the curse,\nand all the other penalties.\n\n233. It is worthy of observation that the original verb used above is\n_harag_, which signifies \"to kill.\" But the verb here found is\n_nakah_, which means \"to strike.\" God, therefore, here gives to Cain\nsecurity, not only from death, but also from the danger of death. This\nsecurity, however, as we have observed, is a legal security only; for\nit merely commands that no one shall slay Cain, threatening a\nsevenfold punishment upon the person who should do so. But God does\nnot promise that all men will obey his command. It was far better for\nCain, however, to have this legal promise made him, than to be without\nany promise at all.\n\nV. 16. _And Cain went out from the presence of Jehovah, and dwelt in\nthe land of Nod, on the east of Eden._\n\n234. This also is a very remarkable text, and it is a wonder that the\nfancy of the rabbins did not run riot here as usual. Moses leaves it\nto the thoughtful reader to reflect how miserable and how full of\ntears this departure of Cain from his father's house must have been.\nHis godly parents had already lost their son Abel; and now, at the\ncommand of God, the other son departs from them into banishment,\nloaded with the divine curses, on account of his sin--the very son\nwhom his parents had hoped to be the only heir of the promise, and\nwhom they therefore had devotedly loved from his cradle. Adam and Eve,\nnevertheless, obey the command of God, and in conformity therewith\nthey cast out their son.\n\n235. Accordingly, this passage rightly praises obedience to God, or\nthe fear of God. Adam and Eve had, indeed, learned by their own\nexperience in paradise that it was no light sin to depart from the\ncommand of God; therefore they thought: Behold, our sin in paradise\nhas been punished with death, and with an infinite number of other\ncalamities into which we have been thrown since we were driven out of\nparadise. And now that our son has committed so atrocious a sin, it\nbehooves us not to resist the will of God and his righteous judgment,\nhowever bitter we feel them to be.\n\n236. The story of the woman of Tekoah is well known, whom Joab\ninstructed to intercede for the banished Absalom. She pleads as an\nargument before the king, that as she had lost one son, it would be\nwicked in the extreme to deprive her of the other also. Also Rebecca\nsaid to Jacob, her younger son, after she had perceived the wrath of\nEsau against his brother: \"Why should I be bereaved of you both in one\nday?\" Gen 27, 45. Adam and Eve overcame this same pain in their\nbosoms, and thus mortified their paternal and maternal affections. For\nnot only did they feel it to be their duty to obey the will of God,\nbut they had also learned wisdom from former obedience. They had been\ndriven out of paradise for their sin of disobedience. They feared,\ntherefore, that if they now retained their son with them, contrary to\nthe will of God, they should be cast out of the earth altogether.\n\n237. This part of the history of Adam and Eve, therefore, is a\nbeautiful lesson in obedience to God, and a striking exhortation to\nfear God. This is also Paul's principal object in his first Epistle to\nthe Corinthians, nearly all of which is written against the\nself-confidence of the human heart. For, although God is merciful, yet\nmen are not therefore to sin; he is merciful to those only who fear\nand obey him.\n\n238. As it was bitter in the extreme for the parents to lose their\nson, this departure from his home was, I have no doubt, most bitter\nalso to Cain himself. For he was compelled to leave, not only the\ncommon home, his dear parents and their protection, but his hereditary\nright of primogeniture, the prerogative of the kingdom and of the\npriesthood, and the communion of the Church.\n\nHence it is that we have the expression in the text, that Cain \"went\nout from the presence of Jehovah.\" We have above shown what the\nScriptures term \"the face of Jehovah,\" namely, all those things and\nmeans by which Jehovah makes himself known to us. Thus the face of\nJehovah, under the Old Testament, was the pillar of fire, the cloud,\nthe mercy-seat, etc. Under the New Testament, the face of Jehovah is\nbaptism, the Lord's Supper, the ministry of the Word, etc. For by\nthese things, as by visible signs, the Lord makes himself known to us,\nand shows that he is with us, that he cares for us and favors us.\n\n239. It was from this place, therefore, in which God declared that he\nwas always present, and in which Adam resided as high priest, and as\nlord of the earth, that Cain \"went out;\" and he came into another\nplace, where there was no \"face of God,\" where there was no visible\nsign of his presence by which he could derive the consolation that God\nwas present with his favor. He had no sign whatever, save those signs\nwhich are common to all creatures, even to the beasts, namely, the\nuses of sun and moon, of day and night, of water, air, etc. But these\nare not signs of that immutable grace of God contained in the promise\nof the blessed seed. They are only the signs of God's temporal\nblessings and of his good will to all his creatures.\n\n240. Miserable, therefore, was that going out of Cain indeed. It was a\ndeparture full of tears. He was compelled to leave forever his home\nand his parents, who now gave to him, a solitary man and a \"vagabond,\"\ntheir daughter as his wife, to live with him as his companion; but\nthey knew not what would become either of their son or of their\ndaughter. In consequence of losing three children at one time their\ngrief is so much greater. No other explanation suggests itself for the\nsubsequent statement \"Cain knew his wife.\"\n\n241. Where, then, did Cain live with his wife? Moses answers, \"in the\nland of Nod,\" a name derived from its vagabond and unsettled\ninhabitant. And where was this land situated? Beyond paradise, toward\nthe east, a place indeed most remarkable. Cain came into a certain\nplace toward the east, but when he came there, he was insecure and\nunprotected, for it was the land of Nod, where he could not set foot\nwith certainty, because \"the face of God\" was not there. For this\n\"face\" he had left with his parents, who lived where they had paradise\non their side, or toward the west. When Cain fled from his home he\nwent toward the east. So the posterity of Cain was separated from the\nposterity of Adam, having paradise as a place of division between\nthem. The passage, moreover, proves that paradise remained undestroyed\nafter Adam was driven out of it. In all probability it was finally\ndestroyed by the deluge.\n\n242. This text greatly favors the opinion of those who believe that\nAdam was created in the region of Damascus, and that, after he was\ndriven out of paradise for his sin, he lived in Palestine; and hence\nit was in the midst of the original paradise that Jerusalem, Bethlehem\nand Jericho stood, in which places Jesus Christ and his servant John\nchiefly dwelt. Although the present aspect of those places does not\naltogether bear out that conclusion, the devastations of the mighty\ndeluge were such as to change fountains, rivers and mountains; and it\nis quite possible that on the site which was afterward Calvary, the\nplace of Christ's sacrifice for the world's sin, there stood the tree\nof the knowledge of good and evil, the same spot being marked by the\ndeath and ruin wrought by Satan and by the life and salvation wrought\nby Christ.\n\n243. It is not without a particular purpose, therefore, that Daniel\nuses the striking expression: \"The end thereof (of the sanctuary, the\nsacrifice and the oblation) shall be with a flood,\" Dan 9, 26. As if\nhe had said, The first paradise was laid waste and utterly destroyed\nby the mighty deluge, and the other, future paradise, in which\nredemption is to be wrought, shall be destroyed by the Romanists as by\na flood.\n\n244. We may carry the analogy further by stating that as Babel was the\ncause of the destruction of the Jewish people, so this disaster had\nits beginning with Cain and his offspring, who settled in that part of\nthe earth where, at a later day, Babylon was founded. These are my\nthoughts and views, derived partly from the fathers. Though they may\nnot be true, they are yet probable, and have nothing ungodly in them.\nAnd there can be no doubt that Noah, after the flood, saw the face of\nthe whole earth altogether changed from what it was before that awful\nvisitation of the wrath of God. Mountains were torn asunder, fountains\nwere made to break forth and the courses of the rivers themselves were\nwholly altered and diverted into other channels, by the mighty force\nof the overwhelming waters.\n\n\nVII. GENERATIONS OF CAIN AND OF THE RIGHTEOUS.\n\n   A. IN GENERAL.\n\n      1. Why Cain's generations were described before those of the\n         righteous 245.\n\n      2. How the Holy Spirit is interested more in the generations of\n         the righteous than in those of Cain 246-247.\n\n      3. Why the Holy Spirit gives this description of both 248.\n\n      4. The relation of the two to each other 248.\n\n      5. How the generations of the righteous are attacked and\n         conquered by those of the godless 249.\n\n       * Of Cain's marriage.\n\n         a. Who was his wife, and the question of his being married\n            before he committed the murder 250-251.\n\n          * How to read the writings of the Jews 251.\n\n         b. The question of his being married after the murder\n            252-254.\n\n          * That some of his posterity were saved 254.\n\n\nVII. THE GENERATIONS OF CAIN AND THE GENERATIONS OF THE GODLY.\n\nA. The Posterity of Cain in General.\n\nV. 17. _And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and\nhe builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of\nhis son, Enoch._\n\n245. It is worthy of admiration that Moses describes the generation of\nthe sons of Cain before the generation of the sons of God. But all\nthis is done according to the fixed counsel of God. For the children\nof this world have in this life and in this their generation the\nadvantage of the children of God (Lk 16, 8) with reference to the\nfirst promise. The spiritual seed of the woman indeed possess the\nspiritual blessing, but the seed of the serpent arrogate to themselves\nthe corporal, or temporal, blessing, and they bruise the heel of the\nblessed seed. In this respect the temporal has precedence over the\nspiritual.\n\n246. But a great difference comes to the surface at a later day.\nAlthough Moses records the history of the posterity of Cain before the\nposterity of the righteous, yet we afterwards see that the latter are\nmore especially the care of the Holy Spirit. He does not confine\nhimself to a bare registration of their names, but he carefully\nnumbers their years, makes mention of their death, and not only\nchronicles their own doings, as he chronicles in this passage those of\nthe sons of Cain, but also the transactions and the conversations\nwhich Jehovah had with them, the promises he made, the help rendered\nin danger, and the blessings vouchsafed.\n\n247. None of these things are recorded of the wicked posterity of\nCain. When Moses has said that Cain begat a son named Enoch, and that\nhe built a city to which he gave the name of his son, calling it\nEnoch, the sacred historian immediately cuts off the memory of Cain\naltogether and, as it were, buries him forever with these few short\nwords of record. He seems to entertain no further care or concern for\neither his life or his death. He merely records temporal\nblessings--that he begat a son and that he built a city. For as the\ngift of reproduction was not taken away from the murderer Cain,\nneither was the gift of dominion taken from him. But he lost all the\nrich blessings of the earth because it had drunk the blood of his\nbrother, as we have shown above.\n\n248. The Holy Spirit records these things in order that we may see\nthat there was, from the very beginning, two churches: one the church\nof the sons of Satan and of the flesh, which often makes sudden and\ngreat increase; and the other the church of the sons of God, which is\nusually weak and makes slow progress. Although the Scriptures do not\nrelate how these two churches lived together in the beginning, yet, as\nit was declared by God to Satan, \"I will put enmity between thy seed\nand her seed,\" it is certain that the church of Cain was ever hostile\nto the Church of Adam. And the present text fully shows that the sons\nof men so increased and prevailed that they almost completely\nperverted and destroyed the Church of the sons of God. For in the\ngreat flood, only eight souls of them were saved; all the rest of the\nhuman race perished in the waters on account of their sin.\n\n249. And this is a calamity of the true Church, common to all ages: as\nsoon as she begins to increase, she is compelled to oppose with all\nher might Satan and the ungodly. She is at length tired out by the\nwickedness of her enemy, and is then either obliged to yield to her\nenraged foe, overcome by the cross and its afflictions, or she sinks\nunder the seductions of pleasures and riches. So it was with the\nposterity of Adam. Broken down, at length, under so long a war with\nthe sons of men, they yielded, being reduced at last to eight souls\nonly, who were saved. Ungodliness having so far prevailed, and the\ngodly losing ground, the Lord at length interposes and saves the few\nrighteous remaining; but all the rest, both the seduced and the\nseducers, he punishes, including them in the same judgment. And we\nhope and believe the Lord will do the same in the judgment at the last\nday.\n\n250. Many questions arise here. Some inquire respecting the\ncircumstances connected with the wife of Cain: at what time the murder\nwas committed; whether Cain murdered his brother before he was a\nhusband, or after he was married. And the Jews, moreover, say that Eve\nbrought forth twins at every birth, a male and a female; and they\nassert that Cain married his sister Calmana, and Abel his sister\nDebora. Whether these things be true or not I cannot affirm. I know\nnot. But they are not vital to the interests of the Church, and there\nis nothing certain known concerning them. This one thing is certain,\nthat Cain had a sister for his wife. But whether or no he had her as\nhis wife when he committed the murder, cannot with certainty be\nproven. However, the text before us greatly tends to the conclusion\nthat Cain was married when he committed the murder of his brother; for\nit intimates that the inheritance was divided between the two brothers\nwhen it affirms that the care of the cattle was committed by the\nfather to Abel and the tilling of the ground to Cain. I, therefore, am\ninclined to believe that both of the brothers were married.\n\n251. This conclusion is favored also by the statement made above, that\nCain and Abel \"in the process of time\" brought their offerings. This\nhas been explained in the following manner: At the end of the year,\nthe two newly married husbands brought as offerings the new fruits\nwhich God had given them in this first year of their marriage; Cain\nbrought the first fruits of the earth, and Abel the first fruits of\nhis flock. And the time was probably the autumn of the year, the time\nwhen the fruits of the earth are gathered, the same season in which\nthe Jews afterwards held the feast of expiation. Moses, in his\nLevitical law, seems carefully to have noted and collected the\nancestral patterns, and to have reduced them to a code. When,\ntherefore, the new husbands came to render their thanks to God for his\nblessings and to offer their gifts, and Abel's offering was accepted\nof God and not the offering of Cain, Cain's heart was immediately\nfilled by Satan with hatred of his brother; and upon this hatred\nafterwards followed the horrible murder. This is the opinion of the\nJews, which I thus relate because it does not appear to be at all far\nfrom the truth. But, as I have often said, the interpretations of the\nJews are to be read with critical discrimination, so that in their\nteachings, we may retain the things consistent with the truth, but\ncondemn and refute all fictions of their own making.\n\n252. If Cain was not married when he slew his brother, it is still\nmore wonderful that after such a wicked deed he obtained a wife at\nall; and certainly that damsel was worthy the highest praise who\nmarried such a man. For how could the maiden rejoice in a marriage\nwith her brother who was a murderer, accursed and excommunicated? She,\non her part, no doubt supplicated her father, and expostulated with\nhim and asked how he could give her, an innocent one, in marriage to a\nman thus accursed, and force her into banishment with him. Nay, the\nvery example of her brother's murder must have naturally filled her\nwith terror, lest the crime which her husband committed on his brother\nhe might also dare to commit on her, his sister and his wife.\n\n253. In bringing about this marriage, Adam obviously had to exercise\nmarvelous eloquence. It was for him to convince his daughter that the\nfather's command was not to be disobeyed, and that while Cain,\ncurse-ridden, would have to bear the penalty of his sin, God would\nstill preserve and bless her, the innocent one.\n\nNor do I entertain the least doubt that God conferred many personal\nblessings upon Cain, down the whole line of his posterity, for the\nsake of his wife, who, from motives of faith toward God and of\nobedience toward her parents, had married her murderous brother.\n\nAs Christ was the minister of the circumcision for the truth of God,\nto establish the certainty of the promise made unto the Jewish\nfathers; and as, in the absence of a promise, he was the minister of\nthe Gentiles, because of the mercy of God, (Rom 15, 8-9), so the like\nuncovenanted mercy was shown also to the posterity of Cain. These two\nopinions have been expressed concerning the marriage of Cain, but\nwhich is the truth I know not. If Cain was married after he committed\nthe murder, his wife is most certainly worthy of all praise and of all\nfame, who could thus yield to the authority of her parents, and suffer\nherself to be joined in marriage with an accursed murderer.\n\n254. To myself, the first opinion appears to be much nearer the truth,\nthat he murdered his brother after his marriage with his sister;\nbecause we have so clear a testimony in the text concerning the\ndivision of the inheritance. And in that case, the necessity lay on\nthe wife to follow her husband. As wife and husband are one body and\none flesh, Adam had no desire to separate them; moreover, the wife is\nbound to bear her part of the calamities of her husband. Just in the\nsame manner as the posterity of Cain enjoyed a part of those blessings\nwhich were bestowed of God upon the innocent wife, Pharaoh, king of\nEgypt, was saved in the time of Joseph, and the King of Nineveh was\nsaved in the time of his calamity, although neither of them belonged\nto the people of God. And so I also believe that some were saved out\nof the posterity of Cain, although Cain himself had utterly lost the\npromise concerning the blessed seed.\n\n\nB. THE POSTERITY OF CAIN IN DETAIL; THE GENERATIONS OF CAIN.\n\n * The names were given to the descendants of Cain, not by accident,\n   but by special thought and with a definite meaning 255.\n\n   1. Of Enoch.\n\n      a. The meaning of his name 255-256.\n\n      b. Is the first in Cain's posterity and the beginning of the\n         temporal blessing 256.\n\n       * Why Cain built a city 257-258.\n\n   2. Irad and the meaning of his name. It was not given without a\n      purpose 259.\n\n   3. Mehujael and the meaning of his name 260.\n\n    * The means the false church uses to suppress the true Church 260.\n\n   4. Methushael and the meaning of his name 261.\n\n   5. Lamech.\n\n      a. What his name signifies 262.\n\n       * Cain's descendants persecute the true Church. Yet some of\n         Cain's posterity were saved 263.\n\n      b. The reason he took two wives 264.\n\n      c. Who were his wives 265.\n\n      d. His sons, Jabal, Jubal, Tubal-cain, and his daughter Naamah\n         266-268.\n\n       * Why Moses mentions the various arts of Cain's descendants\n         269.\n\n       * Whether poverty drove Cain's descendants to the arts 269-270.\n\n       * As the false church was before the flood so is she still, and\n         will remain so to the end of the world 271.\n\n       * How the Cainites increased and oppressed the true Church 272.\n\n       * Why the Scriptures do not mention that some of the Cainites\n         were saved 272.\n\n      e. Of his haughty speech, \"I have slain a man etc.\"\n\n         (1) This is difficult to understand, and has been poorly\n             treated by interpreters 273.\n\n         (2) The fable explanation of these words by the Jews refuted\n             274-275.\n\n         (3) How others explained them 275.\n\n         (4) Luther's understanding of them 276-277.\n\n      f. Whether Lamech slew Cain, and thereby made himself famous\n         278.\n\n      g. How he attempted to be ruler upon Adam's death 279.\n\n       * How the Church is oppressed from both sides 279.\n\n       * Why Moses mentions the blood descendants of Cain with such\n         care 280.\n\n      h. Cain is not sorry for his deed, but even boasts of it 281.\n\n       * The nature of the Cain church 281.\n\n      i. How he seeks to avoid being slain by others 282.\n\n       * The pope has the conscience of Cain and Lamech 282.\n\n      j. He is a type of all the children of this world 283.\n\n       * How the devil drives the Cainites to rage against the Church\n         under the guise of being holy 284.\n\n       * The true Church from the very beginning had to shed her blood\n         285.\n\n       * The tyranny of Popes Julius II and Clement VII 285.\n\n       * God at all times severely punished the persecutors of his\n         Church 286.\n\n      k. How Lamech still wished to defend his deed 287.\n\n      l. He had no Word of God, but was filled with pride 288.\n\n\nB. THE POSTERITY OF CAIN IN DETAIL.\n\n255. As regards the names of Cain's offspring, I believe that, in\ncommon with those of the holy patriarchs, they indicate not an absence\nof purpose or a random selection, but a definite purpose and a\nprophecy. Thus \"Adam\" signifies a man of, or taken out of, the red\nearth. \"Eve\" signifies the mother of life, or of the living. \"Cain\"\nsignifies possession. \"Abel\" signifies vanity. And we find that also\namong the Gentiles many names have such a significance; not seldom\nnames are found which are truly prophetic. \"Enoch\" is a prophetic\nname, expressive of hope in the future as a relief to Cain's mind, or\nrather to his wife's, for it was the latter who called the son she\nbore Enoch, from the Hebrew _Hanach_, which signifies, \"she\ndedicated,\" or \"she devoted.\"\n\n256. This is a word frequently used by Moses. As when he says, \"What\nman is there that hath built a new house, and hath not dedicated it?\nlet him go and return to his house, lest he die in the battle, and\nanother man dedicate it,\" Deut 20, 5. The verb in this passage, which\nsignifies originally to dedicate, here signifies to possess, or to\nenjoy; and when this possession or enjoyment begins, it is attended\nwith happy signs and auspicious invocations. So when the wife of Cain\nbrought forth her first son, she said to her husband, Enoch; that is,\n\"Dedicate him, devote him:\" for the verb is in the imperative mood. As\nif Cain had said himself, May this our beginning be happy and\nprosperous. My father Adam cursed me on account of my sin. I am cast\nout of his sight. I live alone in the world. The earth does not yield\nme her strength; she would be more fruitful to me, had I not thus\nsinned. And yet God now shows me uncovenanted mercy in giving me this\nson. It is a good and happy beginning.\n\nAs in the generation of Cain the corporal blessings begin with Enoch,\nso it is another Enoch in the generation of the righteous under whom\nreligion and spiritual blessings begin to flourish.\n\n257. That which is added by Moses concerning the city Cain thus built\nbelongs to history. But I have before observed that Cain, when\nseparated from the true church and driven into banishment, hated the\ntrue church. When, therefore, Cain thus first built a city, that very\nact tended to show that he not only disregarded and hated the true\nChurch, but wished also to oppose and oppress it. For he reflects\nthus: Behold I am cast out by my father and I am cursed by him, but my\nmarriage is not a barren one; therefore I have in this the hope of a\ngreat posterity. What, therefore, is it to me that I am driven by my\nfather from beneath his roof? I will build a city, in which I will\ngather a church for myself. Farewell, therefore, to my father and his\nchurch. I regard them not.\n\n258. Accordingly, it is not through fear, or for defense, that Cain\n\"built a city,\" but from the sure hope of prosperity and success, and\nfrom pride and the lust of dominion. For he had no need whatever to\nfear his father and mother, who at the divine command had thrust him\nout to go into some foreign land. Nor had he any more ground of fear\nfrom their children than from themselves. But Cain was inflated with\npride through this uncovenanted mercy of God, as I have termed it;\nand, as the world ever does, he sought by means of his \"city\" an\nopportunity of emerging from his present state into future greatness.\nThe sons of God, on the contrary, are only anxious about another city,\n\"which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God,\" as we have\nit described in the Epistles to the Hebrews 11, 10.\n\nV. 18a. _And unto Enoch was born Irad._\n\n259. What opinion to form concerning this name, I really know not, for\nits origin is very obscure; and yet I believe the name is not\naccidental but prophetic. In the book of Joshua we have a city called\nAi; and this same term is used elsewhere as an appellative. Now, the\nproper name Ai signifies, \"a heap,\" as a heap of fallen buildings. And\nif with this name you compound the verb _Irad_, the word thus\ncompounded will signify increase. Although the posterity of Cain, on\naccount of their excommunication, were at that time like a great heap\nof ruins, it was his prayer that they might not altogether perish, but\nbe preserved and greatly increased by means of this son Irad. If\nanyone can offer a better interpretation, I will by no means despise\nit; for on obscure points like the present, conjecture is quite\nallowable.\n\nV. 18b. _And Irad begat Mehujael._\n\n260. This name is formed from the verb _mahah_, which signifies \"to\ndestroy,\" and from _jaal_, \"he began,\" or \"he attempted or dared.\"\nAccordingly this name signifies that the posterity of Cain should now\nenter upon so mighty an increase as to dare to set itself in array\nagainst the true Church and to despise it and persecute it; so\nmightily should it prevail by its wealth, wisdom, glory and numbers.\nThese, indeed, are for the most part the influences through which the\ntrue Church is always overcome by the world and the false church.\n\nV. 18c. _And Mehujael begat Methushael._\n\n261. _Meth_ signifies \"death,\" and _schaal_ means \"to ask,\" or \"to\ndemand.\" Hence we have the name Saul; that is, demanded. This name\nindicates a spirit haughtier than any of the others. I understand it\nto signify that Methushael threatens that he will avenge his parents,\nwho are dead, whom the other church--that is the true Church--has\npunished with excommunication and exile.\n\nV. 18d. _And Methushael begat Lamech._\n\n262. Hitherto the Cainites seem to have insulted the true Church with\nimpunity and to have triumphed over them. But the name \"Lamech\"\nsignifies that God, at the time in which Lamech was born, inflicted on\nthe posterity of Cain their due punishment. The name Lamech is derived\nfrom the verb _makak_, which signifies to humble, to diminish, to\nsuppress. Or, it may be understood actively, to mean that in the time\nof Lamech the posterity of Cain so greatly increased that the true\nChurch was quite overwhelmed by them.\n\n263. Such was the posterity of Cain; men, no doubt, renowned for their\nwisdom and greatness. And I also believe that some of them were saved\nby the uncovenanted mercy of God, as I have above explained. But far\nthe greater part of them most bitterly hated and persecuted the true\nChurch. They could not brook inferiority to the sons of Adam, the true\nChurch; therefore they set up their own forms of worship, and\nintroduced many other new things for the sake of suppressing the\nchurch of Adam. And because the false church was thus kept separate\nfrom the true Church, I believe that Cain married to each other his\nsons and daughters. Accordingly, about the time of Lamech, Cain's\nposterity began to multiply exceedingly. And it is for this reason, I\nbelieve, that Moses here terminates the list.\n\nV. 19. _And Lamech took unto him two wives; the name of the one was\nAdah, and the name of the other Zillah._\n\n264. Here again a twofold question arises. In the first place divines\ndispute whether Lamech married these two wives on account of lustful\npassion or for some other cause. My belief is that polygamy was not\nentered into for the sake of lust, but with the object of increasing\nhis family, and from the lust of dominion, and especially so if, as\nhis name imports, the Lord at that time had been punishing the\nCainites, or the posterity of Cain, by pestilence, or by some other\ncalamity. In this case, Lamech probably thought by such expedient to\nretrieve his greatness. Thus barbarous nations retain polygamy to\nstrengthen and establish both home and State.\n\n265. As regards the names of these two wives, the name of one is Adah;\nthat is, adorned, or, having chains on the neck. _Adi_ signifies a\nneat, or elegant woman, and _adah_, the verb, signifies to adorn, or,\nto put on. And perhaps this name was given to her, not only because\nshe was the mistress of the house, elegantly adorned or clothed, but\nbecause she was also beautiful. The name of the other wife, Zillah,\nsignifies, his shade.\n\nV. 20. _And Adah bare Jabal; he was the father of such as dwell in\ntents and have cattle._\n\n266. The name Jabal is derived from the verb _jabal_, which signifies\nto bring forward, or to produce.\n\nV. 21. _And his brother's name was Jubal; he was the father of all\nsuch as handle the harp and pipe._\n\n267. And the name Jubal has the same origin and signification; for it\nmeans produced, or introduced. Both these names, therefore, contain a\nwish or prayer of Lamech concerning the increase of his family. The\nposterity of Cain always entertained the object and expectation of\nsurpassing in numbers. And, no doubt, the Cainites held up this\ntemporal blessing in the face of the true Church as an evident proof\nthat they were not cast off by God, but were the very people of God.\n\nV. 22. _And Zillah, she also bare Tubal-cain, the forger of every\ncutting instrument of (an artificer in every workmanship of) brass and\niron; and the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah._\n\n268. Tubal-cain signifies, produce property. So the Romans gave such\nnames as \"Valerius\" (from valeo), and \"Augustus\" (from augeo). And\nNaamah received her name from her sweetness, or beauty. This posterity\nof Cain increased infinitely; hence Moses breaks off at this point.\n\n269. Now, when he not only chronicles names but makes mention also of\nthe deeds and labors of each one, the Jewish explanation is to be\nrejected that the offspring of Cain was compelled to follow other\noccupations because the earth was cursed, and hence gained their\nlivelihood, one as a shepherd, another as a worker in brass, and\nanother as a musician, obtaining grain and the other fruits of the\nearth from the offspring of Adam. But if the Cainites had been so\nseverely pressed by hunger, they would have forgotten the harp, organ\nand other instruments of music in their extremity; for the enjoyment\nof music is not characteristic of the hungry and thirsty.\n\n270. Their invention of music and their efforts in the discovery of\nother arts is proof that they had the necessaries of life in\nabundance. The reason, therefore, that the descendants of Cain turned\nto these pursuits and were not contented with the simple food the\nearth produced, like the descendants of Adam, was that they wished to\nrule, and aimed at the high praise and glory of being men of talent. I\nbelieve, however, that some of them passed over to the true Church and\nfollowed the religion of Adam.\n\n271. And such as Moses here describes the generation of the wicked, or\nthe false church, to be, from the beginning down to the mighty flood\nof waters, so we find it ever, and such it will remain until the final\nflood of fire. \"The sons of this world are for their own generation\nwiser than the sons of the light,\" Lk 16, 8. Therefore it is that they\never advance and increase, and commend themselves and their own, and\nthus acquire riches, dignities and power; while the true Church, on\nthe other hand, always lies prostrate, despised, oppressed,\nexcommunicated.\n\nVs. 23-24. _And Lamech said unto his wives: Adah and Zillah, hear my\nvoice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a\nman for wounding me, and a young man for bruising me. If Cain shall be\navenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold._\n\n272. Thus far Moses has given us a history of the generation of the\nchildren of this world, and having brought down the list to the time\nof Lamech and his wives and children, he buries them, as it were,\naltogether in silence, leaving them without any promise, either of the\nlife which is to come or of the life that now is. For except that\nuncovenanted blessing of offspring and of food, the Cainites possessed\nnothing whatever. Yet they so increased in power and in multitude that\nthey filled the whole world, and at length overturned and ravaged to\nsuch an extent the righteous nation of the children of God which\npossessed the promise of the future and eternal life, and sunk them\ninto so deep a hell of wickedness, that eight men only remained to be\nsaved when the flood came upon the whole world of the ungodly. And\nthough there is no doubt that some of the generation of Cain were\nsaved both before the flood and in the flood, yet the Scriptures do\nnot mention them, to the end that we might the more fear God and walk\naccording to his Word. But hard as the diamond are those human hearts\nwhich fail to be moved by such an example as the flood, than which\nnothing more dreadful is to be found in the whole chain of time.\n\n273. Moses, therefore, having buried in silence the entire generation\nof Cain, records only one unimportant fact respecting Lamech, but what\nthe real import of that fact is, Moses does not explain. I know not\nthat any other passage in the Holy Scriptures has been so diversely\ninterpreted, and so rent and wrested, as this text. For ignorance at\nleast, if eloquence is not, is fruitful of surmises, errors and\nfables. I will mention some of the vulgar views upon the passage now\nbefore us.\n\n274. The Jews compose the fable that Lamech, when he had grown old and\nwas blind, was led by a youth into the woods to hunt wild beasts, not\nfor the sake of their flesh but for their skins; circumstances which\nare altogether absurd, and at once prove the whole fable to be a lie.\nAnd they hold that Cain was there, concealed among the bushes, and in\nthat solitude he not only exercised repentance but sought security for\nhis life. The young man who directed the spear for Lamech, thinking he\nsaw a wild beast in a certain thicket, told Lamech to hurl his spear,\nand Lamech hurled his spear and, contrary to all thought, pierced\nCain. And they add that after Lamech had been made conscious of the\nmurder he had committed, he immediately speared the youth himself, who\nalso died under the wound he received. It was thus, say the Jews, that\nthe \"man\" and the \"young man\" were slain by Lamech. But such\nabsurdities as these are utterly unworthy of refutation. Indeed, Moses\nhimself completely refutes them; he records the fact that Cain, far\nfrom fleeing into solitude and concealment, \"built a city,\" which\nimplies that he governed a State and thereby established for himself a\nkind of kingdom. Moreover, the ages of Cain and Lamech would not\naccord with this explanation, for it is not at all probable Cain lived\nto the time Lamech became old and blind.\n\n275. There is still another Jewish invention. After Lamech had killed\nCain, his wives would no longer live with him, through fear of the\npunishment they foreboded would come upon him, and therefore Lamech,\nto comfort himself and to induce his wives to live with him,\nprophesied that whosoever should kill him would assuredly be punished\n\"seventy and sevenfold.\" The Jews invent like absurdities also\nconcerning the sons of Lamech, whom they say he taught to fabricate\narms for the destruction of men. Other commentators, again, will have\nit that the sense of this text is to be taken negatively, thus: If I\nhad killed a man, as Cain killed his brother, I should have been\nworthy of your reprobation.\n\n276. My interpretation, accordingly, is that the words, \"If Cain shall\nbe avenged sevenfold,\" etc., are not to be taken for the Word of God.\nFor that generation did not have the Word; how, then, could Lamech be\nbelieved to have been a prophet? Thus, even such a man as Jerome\nproduces the vagary that, inasmuch as, according to Luke,\nseventy-seven generations can be counted between Adam and Christ, it\nwas after this space of time that Lamech's sin was taken away by\nChrist. If such vaporings are legitimate, anything can be proved from\nthe Scriptures. Jerome even forgets that Lamech represented the\nseventh generation from Adam! The word under consideration then, is\nnot to be placed upon the same level with the former, spoken to Cain;\nfor that was the Word of God. It is, on the contrary, the word of a\nwicked murderer; not true, but an audacious fiction, based upon that\nspoken by Adam to Cain. But why does he deliver his discourse not\nbefore his church but at home, and only before his wives?\n\n277. It is probable that the good and pious women were greatly alarmed\non account of the murder committed by their husband. The wicked\nmurderer, therefore, to appear equally safe with Cain, endeavored in\nthis way to reassure his wives concerning his safety from death. This\nis what the wicked church is accustomed to do; it prophesies out of\nits own head. But all such prophecies are vain. This one thing,\nhowever, we can gather from the present text, that Lamech did not\nutter the contents of his prophecy from the Word of God, but out of\nhis own brain.\n\n278. In respect to Cain, I do not think that he was killed by Lamech,\nbut that he died long before the time of Lamech. And as there were\ncontinual animosities between the Cainite church and the Church of\nAdam--for the Cainites could not brook their being treated as outside\nof the true communion--my opinion is, that Lamech killed some eminent\nman and some distinguished youth of the generation of the righteous,\njust as Cain, his father, had killed Abel. And I believe that, having\ncommitted such murders, he wished to protect himself from being killed\nby uttering the words of the text, after the manner of the protection\nvouchsafed by God to his father Cain. For Lamech was no doubt a man of\nvery great abilities and the chief man in his day and State. He had\nalso strengthened his cause by a novel venture, for he was the first\nman who married two wives. And he harassed the Church of the godly in\nvarious ways, as men are wont to do who combine talent with malice.\nTherefore he furnished his men with arms, riches, and pleasures, that\nhe might overcome the true Church on every side, which alone held the\nholy faith, the pure Word, and the pure worship of God. To all else he\npaid little attention.\n\n279. It is very probable that the patriarch Adam died about this time,\nthis being the first patriarchal death; and there is no doubt that\nLamech seized this opportunity of transferring the whole government of\nthe world at that time to himself, that he might have all things under\nhis own rule. This is the manner in which the world acts to this day.\nThe Church of God, therefore, placed as it were in the midst, is\noppressed on either side; by tyrants and blood-thirsty men on the one\nhand, and by those who are devoted to the concerns and pleasures of\nthis world on the other. As tyrants use violence and the sword to\ndestroy the Church, so the latter entice her by their allurements.\n\n280. Hence it is that Moses makes a special point of recording that\nthe blood-thirsty seed of the Cainites gave themselves up to pleasures\nand to other worldly pursuits. And hence it is, also, that Christ\nexpressly shows that much blood was shed even before the flood, by\ntestifying \"that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on the\nearth, from the blood of Abel the righteous unto the blood of\nZachariah son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the sanctuary and the\naltar,\" Mt 23, 35. Moses testifies subsequently (Gen 6, 1-13), that\nthe earth before the flood was filled with iniquities; and he is not\nspeaking of the iniquities and violent deeds of thieves and\nadulterers, but describes particularly the tyranny of the Cainite\nchurch, which pursued with all the violence of the sword the holy\nposterity of Adam. And it is for this same reason that the sacred\nhistorian describes the descendants of Cain by the name \"giants.\"\nThese are the reasons which lead me to conclude that Lamech followed\nin the footsteps of his father Cain and slew some distinguished man of\nthe holy patriarchs and his son.\n\n281. It was certainly an evidence of the greatest tyranny in Lamech,\nthat, when he had been discovered by his wives, he did not grieve for\nwhat he had done, but held in contempt the punishment which he had\njust cause to dread. As if he had said: I have killed a man 'tis true,\nbut what is that to you? The wound of that belongs to me; I shall be\nwounded for it, not you. I have indeed killed a young man, but it is\nto my own hurt. I shall be punished for it, not you. What utterances\ncould evince more contempt than these in the face of open sins?\n\nThese are my thoughts on the passage now before us. The text shows\nthat the Cainites were tyrannical men, proud of their success, and\ngiven to pleasure; and the very words of Lamech prove him to be a\nproud man, not grieving at all for the murder he had committed, but\nglorying in it as in a righteous cause. The Cainite church always\nexcuses that tyranny which it exercises over the godly, as Christ\nsays: \"Whosoever killeth you shall think that he offereth service unto\nGod,\" Jn 16, 2. This is expressed in the additional words of Lamech:\n\nV. 24. _If Cain shall he avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and\nsevenfold._\n\n282. Here Lamech sets himself above his father Cain, making it appear\nthat he had a more righteous cause for the murder he had committed,\nand fortifying himself against those inclined to avenge the murders\nperpetrated by him. For the words of the text are not the words of the\nLord, as we have said, but the words of Lamech himself. Just so the\npope fortifies himself by violence, tyranny, threats and anathemas, to\nmake himself secure against avengers, for he has the conscience of a\nCain and a Lamech. Let him, says the pope, who shall do anything\ncontrary to these my decrees know that he shall incur the indignation\nof St. Peter and St. Paul.\n\n283. Lamech, therefore, is an example of this world, and Moses points\nto him to show what kind of a heart, will and wisdom the world has.\nJust as if he had said in reference to Lamech: Such are the actions of\nthe seed of the serpent and such are the children of this world. They\ngather riches, follow their pleasures, increase their power, and then\nabuse all these things by their tyranny, making use of them against\nthe true Church, the members of which they persecute and slay. And yet\nin the midst of all these mighty sins, they fear not, but are proud\nand secure, boasting and saying, \"What can the righteous do?\" (Ps 11,\n3): \"Our lips are our own: who is lord over us?\" (Ps 12, 4): \"He (the\nwicked) saith in his heart: God hath forgotten, he hideth his face, he\nwill never see it,\" (Ps 10, 11): and other like sentiments.\n\n284. That such is the meaning of the passage in question the facts\nrecorded prove, though the words of the text do not so clearly express\nthat meaning. The true Church has ever Satan as its great enemy, and\nhe drives the Cainites into fury, disguised as devotion, against their\nbrethren, the Abels; as Christ also says, affirming that the devil was\na murderer from the beginning, Jn 8, 44. It is declared throughout the\nScriptures concerning the true Church, that the wicked are ever\nshedding its blood. The various passages in the Psalms speak the same\nthings, \"Precious shall their blood be in his sight,\" Ps 72, 14.\nAgain, \"Precious in the sight of Jehovah is the death of his saints\"\nPs 116, 15. And again, \"For thy sake are we killed all the day long\"\nPs 44, 22.\n\n285. As, therefore, the Church of God has at all times, and in all\nages, given her blood to be shed by the wicked and by false brethren,\nso also, in that first age of the world she had to suffer from her\nenemies, whom the Scriptures call \"giants,\" and affirm that those\n\"giants\" filled the earth with \"violence.\" Among these giants was also\nthis Lamech now before us, who was one perhaps like Pope Julius II or\nClement VII who although they exercised cruelty in the highest degree,\nyet wished to be called and appear as most holy saints. Just so Lamech\nhere wishes to make it appear that he had a most righteous cause for\nthe murder he had committed, and therefore he threatened greater\nvengeance on the man who should kill him than God himself had\nthreatened on the person who should slay his father, the murderer\nCain.\n\n286. In this manner, the Church was vexed with the cross and with\npersecutions from the very beginning of the world until God, compelled\nby the wickedness of man, destroyed the whole world by the flood. Just\nso, also, when the measure of Pharaoh's malice was full he was drowned\nwith all his host in the Red Sea. Just so, again, when the measure of\nthe malice of the Gentile nations was full they were all uprooted and\ndestroyed by Moses and Joshua. In the same manner afterwards when the\nJews raged against the Gospel they were so utterly destroyed that not\none stone was left upon another in Jerusalem. Other instances are the\nBabylonians, the Medes, the Persians, the Grecians, and the Romans.\n\n287. The Scriptures therefore do not record whom Lamech killed. They\nonly record that two murders were committed by him, and that Lamech,\nin his impenitence, wished to protect himself in the same manner as\nhis father Cain had been divinely protected, by issuing his\nproclamation, thereby making it appear that he had righteous cause for\nthe murder he committed. And if this interpretation be not the true\none, it is at least certain that the generation of the Cainites was a\nblood-thirsty generation, and hated and persecuted the true Church.\n\n288. And it is, moreover, true that Lamech had not the Word, and that,\naccordingly, his utterance is not to be considered in the same light\nas that word which was spoken to his father Cain; for the latter was\nthe voice of truth, but the word of Lamech was the voice of his own\npride, expressive of the rule of Satan and of a church of hypocrites,\nwhich sins securely and yet glories in its sins as if they were deeds\nof righteousness.\n\n\nC. THE POSTERITY OF THE RIGHTEOUS IN DETAIL; THE GENERATIONS OF THE\n   RIGHTEOUS.\n\n   1. Of Seth.\n\n      a. Why Seth is described in detail 289.\n\n      b. Why Eve at Seth's birth recalled Cain's murder 290.\n\n       * How and why the first parents after Abel's death refrained\n         from bearing children 291.\n\n      c. Seth's birth was announced before in a special way by God\n         291-292.\n\n       * The uncovenanted grace of the Cainites. Also, why God did not\n         mention that some of them would be saved 293.\n\n      d. How Eve manifested special faith and obedience in Seth's\n         birth 294-295.\n\n       * Why the Romish church never canonized Eve 296.\n\n       * The idle fables of the Jews about Lamech and his wives, and\n         about Adam's abstinence and Cain's increase, are to be\n         rejected 297.\n\n      e. A new generation springs from Seth, in which the promise\n         shall be fulfilled 298.\n\n   2. Of Enoch.\n\n      a. What his name means, and why it was given to him 299.\n\n       * The names of the holy patriarchs originated not by chance\n         299.\n\n      b. How true worship began under Enoch 300-302.\n\n       * Of true worship.\n\n         (1) In what it consists 301.\n\n         (2) Why it was not in use before 302.\n\n           * The meaning of \"the name of Jehovah\" or the proclaiming\n             of the name of Jehovah 303.\n\n         (3) The right course to take in the doctrine concerning\n             divine worship 304.\n\n           * God always ministered comfort to his Church under the\n             cross 305.\n\n         (4) What is the true worship according to the first table of\n             the law 306-307.\n\n         (5) How true worship according to the second table follows\n             from the first 308.\n\n         (6) People are to be instructed first and chiefly in the\n             worship of the first table 309.\n\n         (7) Whether visible signs were present in these days in their\n             worship, and to what end they were necessary 310-311.\n\n         (8) The worship of which Moses speaks is to be understood not\n             of the Cainites but of Seth's posterity 312.\n\n* A summary review of the contents of the fourth chapter of Genesis\n  313.\n\n* Why the fifth chapter was written 314.\n\n* Why the Jews cannot see the unity in the first five chapters of the\n  Bible 315.\n\n\nC. THE POSTERITY OF THE RIGHTEOUS IN DETAIL.\n\nV. 25. _And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called\nhis name Seth: For, said she, God hath appointed me another seed\ninstead of Abel; for Cain slew him._\n\n289. Hitherto Moses has spoken of the generation of the wicked only,\nthe whole of which he buries as it were with the above brief catalog.\nThe historian now turns to the description of the godly and of the\ntrue Church. And first of all, we are to observe the manner of\nexpression Moses uses in reference to the name given by Eve to her\nson: \"And she called his name Seth.\" Moses does not speak thus\nconcerning Cain when he was born, nor concerning righteous Abel, nor\nwith reference to Enoch, nor with reference to any of the others. By\nthis particular expression regarding Seth and his name Moses would\nsignify that this was the first son in whom flowed the stream of the\npromise which had been made to the parents in paradise. So Eve is to\nbe understood when she assigns the reason for giving her son this\nname. Eve manifests her surpassing godliness and faith in giving her\nson such a name.\n\n290. The fact that Eve recalls the murder by wicked Cain of his\nbrother Abel proves that there had existed a fierce enmity between\nthese two churches, and that she had witnessed and suffered many evils\nand indignities from the Cainites. Because of this she now called to\nmind the awful murder which had been committed, whereby Cain wished to\ndestroy the righteous seed that he might reign alone. But thanks be to\nGod, says she, who hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel.\n\n291. Moses here, as is his usual manner, embraces in the fewest\npossible words the mightiest things, that he may incite the reader to\nthe most diligent consideration of the works of God. Of the pain and\nrighteous grief of the parents at the murder of Abel by his brother we\nhave spoken before. I see no reason why we should not believe that\nafter the perpetration of that horrible murder no son was born to Adam\nuntil the birth of Seth; for it is most probable that the awful peril\nof a recurrence of a calamity like that which they had just\nexperienced, induced the godly parents to abstain from connubial\nintercourse. I believe, therefore, that by a particular promise made\nto them by an angel, their minds were again comforted and confirmed,\nand that they were influenced to believe that a son of the description\nof Seth would now be born unto them, who should hold fast the promise;\nand that, although the generation of Cain should utterly perish by\ntheir sin, the generation of him about to be born should be preserved\nuntil the promised blessed seed should come into the world.\n\n292. It is a proof of some like particular promise having been\nrevealed to the parents by an angel that Eve adds to the name she gave\nto her son a kind of short sermon, and that Moses when recording this\ncircumstance makes use of an expression not otherwise adopted by him\nin connection with the names Adam or Eve gave to their children: \"And\nshe called his name Seth.\" Seth is derived from the Hebrew verb\n_sath_, which signifies he placed, or he established, and was intended\nto show that this son would be, as it were, the foundation on which\nthe promise concerning Christ would rest, even though many other sons\nshould be born unto the parents. Eve does not give him an exalted\nname, such as \"Cain,\" yet she gives him a name signifying that the\nposterity of Seth should never be suppressed or destroyed.\n\n293. The Cainites, cast out from the sight of their parents, are left\nunder a curse, without any promise whatever, and have only so much\nmercy as they receive from the generation of the righteous as beggars,\nnot as heirs. This is the mercy we above called uncovenanted mercy.\nBut who, of the posterity of the Cainites, obtained that mercy, Moses\ndoes not mention, and his design in this omission is to keep separate\nthe two churches: the one the Church of the righteous, which had the\npromise of a life to come, but in this life was poor and afflicted;\nthe other the church of the wicked, which in this life is rich and\nflourishing.\n\n294. Eve, the mother of us all, is highly to be praised, as a most\nholy woman, full of faith and charity, because in the person of her\nson Seth she so nobly lauds the true Church, paying no regard whatever\nto the generation of the Cainites. For she does not say, I have gotten\nanother son in the place of Cain. She prefers the slain Abel to Cain,\nthough Cain was the first-born. Herein praise is due, not only to her\nfaith but to her eminent obedience; for she is not only not offended\nat the judgment of God concerning righteous Abel, but she also changes\nher own judgment concerning God. When Abel was born she despised him,\nand magnified Cain as the first-born, and as the possessor, as she\nthought, of the promise. But now she acts in all things quite the\ncontrary. As if she had said: After God's acceptance of him and of his\noffering, I had placed all my hopes on my son Abel, because he was\nrighteous; but his wicked brother slew him. But now God hath appointed\nme another seed instead of Abel.\n\n295. She does not indulge her maternal affection for Cain. She does\nnot excuse or lessen the sin of her son. But she herself\nexcommunicates him, already excommunicated of God; and she banishes\nhim, together with all his posterity, among the polluted mass of the\nGentiles who live without any sure mercy of God, laying hold only as\nthey can of that uncovenanted mercy which, as we have said, they\nreceive as beggars, not as heirs.\n\n296. It is a great marvel, surely, that the church of the pope, having\nmade up so great a list of saints, has not yet inserted in that\ncatalog Saint Eve, a woman full of faith and love, and with an\ninfinite number of crosses! But perhaps we are to gather from this\nomission that it would rather follow the church of the Cainites than\nthe holy Church.\n\n297. I am inclined to say nothing here about that absurd and idle\nfable of the Jews, that Lamech brought his disobedient wives to Adam\nas judge, and that when Adam commanded them to render to their husband\ndue benevolence the wives in reply asked Adam why he did not do the\nsame to Eve. These fablers say that Adam, who had refrained from the\nbed of his wife from the murder of Abel to that time, again lived with\nher as man and wife, in order that he might not by his example induce\nothers to maintain perpetual continence, and thus prevent mankind from\nbeing multiplied. All these fables show how impure the thoughts of the\nJews were. Of the same description is the like argument of these Jews,\nwho hold that when Seth was born, which was within a hundred years\nafter the death of Abel, the children of Cain had increased unto the\nseventh generation. Such absurdities do wicked men invent to bring\nreproach upon the Holy Scriptures. And of precisely the same\ndescription is the opinion that Cain was born in paradise, while, as\nyet, the original righteousness of his parents remained. What is the\nobject of this lying invention but to cause us to do away with Christ\naltogether? For take away original sin, and what need is there of\nChrist at all? These things are indeed, as we have intimated, unworthy\nof being mentioned here. But they are worthy the enemies of Christ and\nthe enemies of grace.\n\n298. In Seth, therefore, we have a new generation, which arises from\nand comes to pass in accordance with the great original promise, that\nthe seed of the woman should bruise the serpent's head. Appropriately\nthe name Seth is bestowed, so that Eve may felicitate herself upon the\nfact that this seed is established, safe from overthrow. David uses\nthe same verb: \"If the foundations be destroyed, what can the\nrighteous do?\" Ps 11, 3. And the Hebrew word forms a perfect rhyme\nwith its German equivalent: \"Seth--steht.\"\n\nV. 26a. _And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called\nhis name Enosh._\n\n299. The verb _yikra_, he called, is in the masculine gender, by which\nyou are to understand that it was the father who gave this name to his\nson. In the former case the verb was feminine, because Eve gave to her\nson Seth his name. The expression in each case is different, which\ndifference of gender in a verb the Latin language does not indicate.\n\nEnosh signifies a man afflicted or full of calamity. \"What is man that\nthou art mindful of him,\" Ps 8, 4. Seth, accordingly, intimates that\nat that time there was some persecution or affliction of the Church.\nThat \"old serpent,\" who had cast man out of paradise and had killed\nAbel, the man beloved of God, was neither asleep nor idle. Therefore,\nupon the consolation enjoyed in the birth of Seth there soon follows\nanother trial or tribulation, which the godly parents Adam and Eve\nsignalize by giving the name Enosh to their son. The names thus given\nare by no means to be considered accidental. They were either\nprophetical or commemorative of some particular event.\n\nV. 26b. _Then began men to call upon the name of Jehovah._\n\n300. The rabbins understand this as having reference to idolatry. They\nthink that about this time the name of Jehovah began to be given to\ncreatures: to the sun, the moon, etc. But Moses is not here speaking\nof what the generation of Cainites did, but what the godly generation\nof Adam did. The sacred historian is testifying that after the birth\nof Enosh there began the true worship of God, the calling upon the\nname of Jehovah.\n\n301. Here Moses most beautifully defines what it is to worship God, to\ncall upon the name of Jehovah; which is, as it were, the work of the\nfirst table and concerns the true worship of God. Now, calling upon\nthe name of Jehovah embraces the preaching of the Word, faith, or\nconfidence in God, confession, etc. Paul beautifully joins these\nthings together in the fourteenth verse of the tenth chapter of his\nEpistle to the Romans. True, the works of the second table also belong\nto the worship of God, but these works do not refer directly and only\nto God as do the works of the first table.\n\n302. After the confusion made in the house of Adam by Cain, the\ngeneration of the godly began to multiply by degrees and a little\nChurch was formed, in which Adam as the high priest governed all\nthings by the Word and by sound doctrine. Moses here affirms that this\ntook place about the time of the birth of Enosh. Although this name\nimplies that the Church had been overwhelmed by some terrible\ndisaster, yet God raised her up again by his grace and mercy, and\nadded the great spiritual blessing of godly assemblage in a particular\nplace, with preaching, prayer and the offering of sacrifices,\nblessings which had hitherto perhaps been either hindered or forbidden\nby the Cainites. We have here, then, another evidence of the promised\nseed warring with the serpent and bruising its head.\n\n303. Furthermore, as Moses does not say: Jehovah began to be called\nupon, but the name of Jehovah, the reference to Christ recommends\nitself to our approval, since also in other passages the Schem Jehovah\n(the name of Jehovah) is so to be understood. This expression, \"then\nmen began to call upon the name of Jehovah,\" contains a meaning most\nimportant. It signifies that Adam, Seth, and Enosh taught and exhorted\ntheir posterity to expect redemption and to believe the promise\nconcerning the seed of the woman, and to overcome by that hope the\nsnares, the crosses, the persecutions, the hatred and the violence of\nthe Cainites, and not to despair of salvation, but rather to give\nthanks unto God, assured that he would at some time deliver them by\nthe seed of the woman.\n\n304. What could Adam and Seth teach greater or better than that the\ngreat deliverer, Christ, was promised to their posterity? And this is\nquite in keeping with the proper principle to be observed in religious\ninstruction. The first care should ever be directed to the first\ntable. When this table is well understood, the right understanding of\nthe second table will soon follow; yea, it is then easy to fulfil the\nlatter. For how is it possible that, where pure doctrine is taught,\nwhere men rightly believe, rightly call upon the name of Jehovah, and\nrightly give thanks unto God, the second and inferior fruits can be\nwanting?\n\n305. In this manner did it please God at that time to comfort the\nafflicted church of the godly and to prevent their despair concerning\nthe future. We see throughout the pages of sacred history a perpetual\nsuccession and change of consolations and afflictions. Joseph in Egypt\nkeeps alive his parents and his brethren when divinely visited by\nfamine. After this, when these people were oppressed by wicked kings,\nthey were again delivered from their cruel bondage. And Cyrus delivers\nthem when captives in Babylon. When God permits his own people to be\noppressed by the violence and guile of the devil and the world, he\nalways lifts them up again and gives them prophets and godly teachers\nto restore his sinking church, and to break for a while the fury of\nSatan.\n\n306. Furthermore, it is the intention to lay down a logical definition\nwhen it is claimed that the worship of God does not consist in\nceremonies devised and transmitted by men, in the erection of statues,\nor the performance of other sport suggested by reason, but in calling\nupon the name of Jehovah. Worship in its truest meaning, well-pleasing\nto God, and subsequently made mandatory in the first commandment,\nembraces the fear of God, trust in God, confession, prayer and\npreaching.\n\n307. The first commandment of the Law demands faith, that we believe\nGod is the only helper in time of need, Ps 9, 9. The second\ncommandment demands confession and prayer, that we call upon the name\nof Jehovah in times of peril and give thanks unto God. The third\ncommandment requires that we teach the truth, and that we guard and\ndefend sound doctrine.\n\nThese are the true and appropriate acts of the worship of God, and\nthey are those which God requires. He requires not sacrifices nor\nmoney nor anything of the kind. As regards the first table, he\nrequires that we hear, consider and teach the Word; that we pray to\nGod and fear him.\n\n308. Where these things exist, the observances and works required by\nthe second table follow, as it were, of their own accord. It is\nimpossible that he who does the works and performs the worship of the\nfirst table should not do and perform those of the second table also.\nDavid saith: \"His delight is in the law of Jehovah; and on his law\ndoth he meditate day and night. And he shall be like a tree planted by\nthe stream of water; that bringeth forth its fruit in its season,\nwhose leaf also doth not wither.\" Ps 1, 2-3. These things are evident\nconsequences of the right worship of God, according to the\ncommandments of the first table. He who believes God, who fears God,\nwho calls upon God in tribulation, who praises God and gives thanks\nunto him for his mercies, who gladly hears the Word of God, who\ncontinually contemplates the works of God, and who teaches others to\ndo the same things--do you think that such a one will harm his\nneighbor, or disobey his parents, or kill, or commit adultery?\n\n309. The first table, therefore, is to be set forth first of all, and\ninstruction as regards the true worship is to receive precedence to\nall else. This means, first to make the tree good on which good fruit\nis to grow. Now, our adversaries take the diametrically opposite\ncourse; they want to have the good fruit before they have even the\ntree.\n\n310. Moreover, I believe that about this time there was added some\nvisible ceremony of divine worship, for God is ever wont thus to do.\nHe always joins with the Word some visible sign. When Abel and Cain\npresented their offerings God showed by a visible sign from heaven\nthat he had respect unto Abel and his offering, but not unto Cain and\nhis offering. And so, in all probability, it was in this case and at\nthis time. When the Church began to flourish and the Word of God was\npublicly taught with considerable success, God added also some visible\nsign, that the Church might assuredly know that she pleased God.\n\n311. But whatever that sign was, whether fire from heaven or something\nelse, God withheld it until the third generation, that men might learn\nto be content with the Word alone. Afterwards, when men had comforted\nthemselves by the Word alone against the Cainites, in all\ntribulations, God of his great mercy added to the Word some visible\nsign. He established a place and appointed persons and ceremonies to\nwhich the Church might gather for the exercise of faith, for preaching\nand prayer. By means of these things, the Word or the first table and\nthen a visible sign ordained of God, a Church is constituted, in which\nmen undergo discipline through teaching, hearing, and the partaking of\nthe sacraments. Then upon these things will assuredly follow the works\nof the second table, which are acceptable, and acts of worship, only\non the part of those who possess and practice the first table.\n\n312. This gift of God, Moses sets forth in the few short words of the\ntext before us, when he says, \"Then began men to call upon the name of\nJehovah.\" For this beginning to call upon the name of Jehovah was not\non the part of the Cainites, as the Jews explained the passage, but on\nthe part of the godly posterity of Adam, which alone was then the true\nChurch. If any of the posterity of Cain were saved, it must of\nnecessity have been by joining this Church.\n\n313. The sum of the first four chapters of Genesis is that we are to\nbelieve in a resurrection of the dead after this life, and a life\neternal through the Seed of the woman. This is the blessed portion of\nthe godly, of them that believe, who in this life are filled with\nafflictions and subject to injuries at the hands of all men. To the\nwicked, on the contrary, are given, as their portion, the riches and\npower of this world, which they use against the true Church of God.\n\nIn the first chapter it is shown that man was created unto\nimmortality, because he was created \"in the image of God.\"\n\nThe teaching also of the second chapter sets forth the same thing, \"In\nthe day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die.\" It follows\nthat the first created man and woman could not have died if they had\nnot eaten of that fruit. By their sin of eating they fell from\nimmortality to mortality, and they begat an offspring like unto\nthemselves.\n\nIn the third chapter immortality is set forth anew, as restored by the\npromise of the Seed of the woman.\n\nIn the fourth chapter we have an especial example of immortality set\nbefore us in Abel, who, after he had been slain by his brother, was\nreceived into the bosom of God, who testified that the voice of the\nblood of Abel cried unto him from the ground.\n\n314. And the fifth chapter, which now follows, is expressly written to\nset forth the immortality of Enoch, who was taken up into heaven by\nthe Lord. Although the following chapter is necessary as a chronicle\nof the number of the years of the generation of the righteous, yet its\nmost remarkable feature is its record that Enoch did not die like\nAdam, nor was slain like Abel, nor carried away, nor torn to pieces by\nlions and bears, but was taken up into heaven and translated into\nimmortality by the Lord himself; all which was written that we might\nbelieve in the Seed of the woman, Christ our Redeemer and Satan's\nconqueror, and that through him we also might expect a life immortal\nafter this mortal and afflicted life.\n\n315. This harmony of these five chapters the Jews see not, for they\nare destitute of that sun which sheds light upon these things and\nmakes them manifest; which sun is Christ, by whom we have the\nremission of sins and life immortal.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\n\nI. THE BOOK OF THE FIRST GENERATIONS OF MAN, AND THE GLORY OF THE\n   CAINITES.\n\n   A. THE BOOK OF THE FIRST GENERATIONS OF MAN.\n\n      1. The reasons why Moses records the generations of Adam 1.\n\n      2. Why he so particularly gives the years, and in the case of\n         each patriarch adds \"and he died\" 1-2.\n\n      3. Why Enoch is placed in the records of the dead 3-4.\n\n       * Was Enoch a sinner, and do sinners have hope of eternal life\n         4.\n\n       * Of death.\n\n         a. How we are to comfort ourselves against death 5.\n\n         b. How reason views death, and how the best heathen\n            philosophers viewed it 6.\n\n         c. The knowledge the Scriptures give us of death 6.\n\n      4. How we may be greatly profited by the book of the generations\n         of the ancient world 7.\n\n      5. Why the book of the generations of Cain is larger than that\n         of Seth's 7.\n\n       * How terrible that both lines were totally destroyed, except\n         eight persons 8.\n\n      6. The aim of Moses in writing this book of the generations of\n         Adam 9.\n\n       * The glory of the first world 10.\n\n         a. What was this glory 9-10.\n\n         b. Why this glory was revealed 10.\n\n         c. Profitable and interesting to meditate upon it 11.\n\n         d. The patriarchs of the first world the most holy of all\n            martyrs 12.\n\n   B. THE GLORY OF THE CAINITES.\n\n      1. The Cainites greatly tormented God's Church, especially after\n         Adam's death 12.\n\n      2. To what end their hatred and persecution served the holy\n         patriarchs 13.\n\n       * Why Moses did not record the zeal of the holy fathers against\n         the Cainites 14.\n\n       * Why Moses gives such a short description of the deluge 15.\n\n       * The character of the first world 16.\n\n       * Luther's lamentation over the character of the last world;\n         its approaching destruction, and an earnest prayer to God\n         16-18.\n\n\nI. THE RECORDS OF THE GENERATIONS OF MAN AND THE GLORY OF THE\nCAINITES.\n\nA. The Records of the Generations of Man.\n\nV. 1. _This is the book of the generations of Adam._\n\n1. This chronicle has been arranged by Moses for two reasons. First,\non account of the promise of the seed made to Adam; and second, on\naccount of Enoch. Moses writes still another genealogy in the tenth\nchapter, after the flood, from a far different motive than the\npresent. In the present chapter, he gives the number of the years of\nthe righteous and adds with a special purpose in the case of each one,\nthe words, \"and he died.\"\n\n2. This little phrase may at first thought appear superfluous. After\nthe historian has said, \"All the days that Adam lived were nine\nhundred and thirty years,\" what seems to be the use of his adding the\nfew words, \"and he died\"? The statement as to the number of his years\nconnotes also the time of his death; for had he lived longer, the\nadditional years would have been contained in the enumeration.\n\nMoses, however, does this with the definite purpose of pointing out\nthe unspeakable wrath of God against sin, and the inevitable\npunishment of it, inflicted by him on the whole human race, on the\nrighteous as well as on the wicked. So does the Apostle Paul pursue\nhis argument, drawn from this very portion of the Holy Scripture: \"As\nthrough one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and\nso death passed upon all men, for that all sinned,\" Rom 5, 12. This is\na consequence perpetuated through all generations. Adam died,\ntherefore Adam was a sinner. Seth died, therefore Seth was a sinner.\nInfants die, therefore infants partake of sin and so are sinners. This\nis what Moses intends to set forth when he says, concerning the whole\nline of patriarchs, that, though they were all sanctified and renewed\nby faith, yet, \"they died!\"\n\n3. Nevertheless, from this line of the dying there flames starlike a\nmost lovely light of immortality when Moses here records concerning\nEnoch that \"he was not;\" that is, he no longer appeared among men, and\nyet he did not die but was taken up into heaven by the Lord himself.\nBy this glorious fact is signified that the human race is indeed\ncondemned to death on account of sin, and yet the hope of life and\nimmortality is left us, that we need not abide in death forever.\n\n4. For this cause God thought it needful, not only that the promise of\nlife should be given to the original world, but that immortality\nshould be demonstrated by an object lesson. Accordingly Moses said of\neach patriarch that he fulfilled so many years of life and \"died\":\nthat is, suffered the punishment of sin, or, was a sinner. But the\ndivine historian does not use these expressions concerning Enoch. Not\nbecause that patriarch was not a sinner, but because, even unto such\nsinners as he, there was left a hope of eternal life through the\nblessed seed. Therefore all the patriarchs, who died in the faith of\nthis seed, held fast the hope of eternal life.\n\nEnoch, therefore, is the second object lesson by which God makes it\nmanifest that it is his will to give unto us life eternal after this\nlife. The Lord says that Abel, who was killed by his brother, still\nlived, and that his voice cried from the ground. In the present\ninstance, Enoch is taken up by the Lord himself into heaven.\n\n5. We will not despair, therefore, though we see death, derived from\nAdam, extend to every one of the whole human race. We must, indeed,\nsuffer death because we are sinners. But we shall not abide in death.\nWe rather have a hope in a divine purpose and providence whereby God\ndesigns our deliverance from death. This deliverance has begun with\nthe promise of the blessed seed, and has been demonstrated by Abel and\nEnoch as object lessons. Wherefore we possess the first fruits of\nimmortality. The Apostle Paul says, \"For in hope were we saved,\" Rom\n8, 24. Hope saves us until the fullness of immortality shall be\nbrought unto us at the last day, when we shall see and feel that\neternal life which we possessed here in faith and hope.\n\n6. Now, the flesh does not understand this. The flesh judges that man\ndies like a beast. Men, occupying the front rank of philosophers have\nfelt accordingly that by death the soul is separated and delivered\nfrom the prison of the body, to mingle, free from all bodily\ninfirmities, in the assembly of the gods. Such was the immortality\ndreamed of by the philosophers, though steadfastness of grasp and of\nvision was out of the question. The Holy Scriptures, however, teach\ndifferently concerning the resurrection and eternal life; they place\nthis hope so plainly before our eyes as to leave no room for doubt.\n\n7. Next in order, we find in this chapter a reflection of the\ncondition of the primitive world. The ten antediluvian patriarchs\nbelonging to the lineage of Christ, with their descendants, are\nenumerated. Nor is it a useless study to put these data before one's\neyes on paper, according to the directions given by Moses, to see who\nthe patriarchs were, who were their contemporaries, and how old they\nbecame, as I have taken the time to do. Cain also has his line, as\nMoses has shown in the preceding chapter, and I have no doubt that the\nposterity of Cain was far more numerous than that of righteous Seth.\n\n8. From these two families, as from roots, was the world peopled, down\nto the deluge, in which both branches, with their two classes of\ndescendants (that is, the posterity of the wicked and that of the\nrighteous) were rooted out of the earth, eight souls only being left,\nand even among them one was wicked. Accordingly, as in this chapter a\nmagnificent picture of the primeval world is presented to our view, so\nwe behold also the incalculable wrath of God, and the horrible event\nof the reduction of the total offspring of these patriarchs to eight\nsouls.\n\n9. We will reserve this awful record for its proper time and place.\nLet us now do that which Moses does in the present chapter, who wants\nus to consider the exceeding splendor of this primeval age of the\nworld. Adam lived beyond the age of his grandson Enoch, and died but a\nshort time before Noah was born. A hundred and twenty years only\nintervened between the death of Adam and the birth of Noah. Seth died\nonly fourteen years before Noah's birth. Enosh and the rest of the\npatriarchs, except Enoch, lived at the same time with Noah. Thus by a\ncomparison of the figures, we shall ascertain that quite a number of\ngray-headed patriarchs, of whom one lived seven hundred, and another\nnine hundred years, were contemporaries, and teaching and governing\nthe Church of the godly.\n\n10. The exceeding glory of the primitive world consists in this, that\nit contained so many good and wise and holy men. We are by no means to\nthink that all these are merely common names of plain and simple men.\nThey were the greatest heroes and men of renown that the world ever\nwitnessed, next to Christ and John the Baptist. In the last day we\nshall behold and admire the real majesty of all these worthies, and\nthen we shall truly behold the mighty deeds which these mighty men\nwrought. Yes, it will then be made manifest what Adam did, what Seth\ndid, what Methuselah did, and the others; what they suffered from the\nold serpent; how they comforted and fortified themselves, by their\nhope in the promised seed, against all the harm and violence of the\nworld, that is, of the Cainites; what craft they experienced; what\ninjuries and hatred and contempt they bore for the glory of the\nblessed seed to be born from their lineage. We are assuredly not to\nimagine that these great and holy men lived without severe afflictions\nand innumerable crosses. All these things, I say, shall be revealed at\nthe last day.\n\n11. And it is an undertaking, as I said, full of profit and pleasure\nnow to contemplate with our minds, as with open eyes, that happy age,\nin which so many patriarchs lived contemporaneously, nearly all of\nwhom, except Noah, had seen and known their first father, Adam.\n\nB. The Glory of the Cainites.\n\n12. Also the Cainites had their glory. Among them were men most\neminent in the liberal arts, and the most consummate hypocrites, who\ngave the true Church a world of trouble, and harassed the holy\npatriarchs in every possible way. We may justly call all those who\nwere thus oppressed by them most holy martyrs and confessors. The\nCainites, as Moses before intimated, very soon surpassed the other\ndescendants of Adam in numbers and activity. Although they were\ncompelled to revere their father Adam, yet they adopted all possible\nmeans of oppressing the Church of the godly, and especially so after\nthe death of the first patriarch, Adam. By such wickedness, these\nCainites helped to bring on the flood as retribution.\n\n13. This power and malice of the Cainites caused the holy patriarchs\nto teach and instruct their Church with increased zeal and industry.\nWhat numerous and powerful sermons may we suppose were preached by\nthem in the course of these most eventful years! There is no doubt\nthat both Adam and Eve testified of their original state of innocence,\ndescribed the glory of paradise and warned their posterity to beware\nof the serpent, who, by tempting them to sin, had caused all these\ngreat evils. How constant may we suppose them to have been in\nexplaining the promise of the blessed seed! How earnestly must they\nhave exhorted the hearts of their followers to be moved neither by the\nsplendor of the Cainites nor by their own afflictions.\n\n14. All these particulars Moses omits to record, both because they\ncould not be described on account of their infinite variety of detail\nand because the revelation of them is reserved for that great day of\ndeliverance and glory!\n\n15. Likewise the flood, in spite of its horror, is described with the\ngreatest brevity because he wished to leave such things to the\nmeditation of men.\n\n16. For the same reasons Moses has purposely given us, in these first\nfive chapters, as briefly as possible, a picture of the original and\nprimeval world. It was an admirable condition of life, and yet that\nprimeval age contained a multitude of the worst of men, in consequence\nnot more than \"eight souls\" were saved from the destroying flood! What\nthen, may we conclude, will be the state of things before the last day\nshall come, seeing that even now, under the revealed light of the\nGospel, there is found so great a host of despisers of it that there\nis cause to fear that they will fill the world ere long with errors\nand prevail to the extinction of the Word altogether.\n\n17. Awful is the voice of Christ when it utters the words,\n\"Nevertheless, when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the\nearth?\" Lk 18, 8. And in Matthew 24, 37-38, our Lord compares the last\ndays with the days of Noah. These utterances of our Lord are indeed\nmost awful. But the world, in its security and ingratitude, is a\ndespiser of all the threats as well as all the promises of God. It\nabounds in iniquities of every kind and becomes daily more corrupt.\nFrom the time that the popes ceased to rule among us, who had ruled\nthe whole world by means of the mere dread of their vengeance, sound\ndoctrine has been despised, and men have degenerated into all but\nbrutes and beasts. The number of holy and godly preachers of the Word\nis becoming less and all men are indulging their desires. The last\nday, however, shall assuredly come upon the world as a thief, and will\novertake these men in all their security, and in the indulgence of\ntheir ambition, tyranny, lust, avarice, and vices of every kind.\n\n18. And let it be remembered that it is Christ himself who has\nforetold these things, and we can not possibly imagine that he would\nlie. If the primitive world, which contained so mighty a multitude of\nthe greatest patriarchs, was so wholly corrupted, what may we not have\ncause to dread in the weakness of our nature? May the Lord our God\ngrant that we may be gathered, as soon as possible, in the faith and\nconfession of his Son Jesus Christ, unto these our fathers; yea, if it\nplease him, that we may die within the next twenty years, and not live\nto see the miseries and calamities, both temporal and spiritual, of\nthe last time! Amen!\n\n\nII. ADAM AND HIS SON SETH.\n\n   1. The name Adam, and why given to the first man 19.\n\n   2. The Jews' fables of Adam's cohabitation with Eve 20.\n\n    * Purity of doctrine cannot be expected from the Jews 20.\n\n   3. Why Moses so carefully describes the times of Adam 21.\n\n   4. Why it is said of Adam that he was created in the likeness of\n      God 21-23.\n\n    * The likeness of God.\n\n      a. The difference between \"Zelem\" and \"Demuth\" 22-23.\n\n      b. How the likeness of God was lost and how it is restored 24.\n\n      c. Whether it can be fully restored in this life 25.\n\n   5. The prating of the rabbins about the name Adam 26.\n\n    * Why Moses here mentions the blessing 27.\n\n    * Why he did not refer to the blessing in the descriptions of Cain\n      and Abel 28.\n\n   6. How long it was before Adam begat Seth 29.\n\n    * Abel's age when murdered 29.\n\n   7. How and why Adam mourned so long for his son Abel, and therefore\n      refrained from bearing children 29-30.\n\n   8. The Jews' fable of Adam's vow of chastity refuted 30.\n\n   9. How we are to understand that Adam begat a son in his own\n      likeness 31.\n\n  10. Whether Adam's son Seth had God's likeness 31.\n\n  11. How Adam acquired again the lost image 32.\n\n  12. How Seth secured the likeness of God 32.\n\n  13. Why Adam gave his son the name Seth; its meaning 33.\n\n    * The long lives of the first men.\n\n      a. Longevity a part of the happy state of the first world 34.\n\n      b. The causes of such long lives 34-35.\n\n       * Men's bodies were much stronger and healthier than ours 35.\n\n      c. Whether the climate, food and holy living contributed to this\n         end 36-37.\n\n       * The creatures given to man for food after the flood were\n         inferior to those before, and they injured the body more than\n         nourished it 37.\n\n      d. Luther's thoughts on this theme 38.\n\n  14. Which is the first or chief branch born from Adam and Eve 39.\n\n  15. How long Adam lived after Seth's birth 39.\n\n    * The glory of the first world 40.\n\n    * The histories of the first world were most excellent, but they\n      were destroyed in the flood 41.\n\n    * Eve's age and experiences 42.\n\n    * The age of the first world is called the golden age 43.\n\n\nII. ADAM AND HIS SON SETH.\n\nV. 1a. _This is the book of the generations of Adam._\n\n19. \"Adam,\" as will be stated further on, is the common name of the\nwhole human race, but it is applied to the first man more expressly as\nan appellation of dignity, because he was the source, as it were, of\nthe whole human family. The Hebrew word _sepher_, \"a book,\" is derived\nfrom _saphar_, which signifies \"to narrate\" or \"to enumerate.\"\nWherefore this narration or enumeration of the posterity of Adam is\ncalled \"the book of the generations of Adam.\"\n\nV. 1b. _In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made\nhe him._\n\n20. This clause of the sacred text has induced the blind Jews to fable\nthat Adam slept with Eve as his wife in paradise on the same day in\nwhich he was created, and that she conceived in that same day. Fables\nof this kind are numerous among them, nor may anything sound or pure\nin the matter of scriptural interpretation be expected of them.\n\n21. The intent of Moses, in this clause, is to record the complete age\nof Adam, and to number the days of his life from the day of his\ncreation, and, at the same time, to show that before Adam there was no\ngeneration. Generation is to be clearly distinguished from creation.\nThere was no generation before Adam, but creation only. Adam and Eve\nwere not born but created, and that directly by God himself. Moses\nadds, \"In the likeness of God made he him.\" We are to understand,\nthen, that when he afterwards mentions that Adam begat Seth, he\nnumbers his years from the very day of his creation.\n\n22. In respect to Adam's having been made in the likeness of God, we\nhave shown above in its place what that \"likeness\" of God was.\nAlthough almost all commentators understand the expressions, \"the\nlikeness of God,\" and \"the image of God,\" to mean one and the same\nthing, yet so far as I have been able from careful investigation to\nreach a conclusion, there is a difference between the two terms.\n_Zelem_ properly signifies \"an image,\" or \"figure,\" as when the\nScripture says, Ye shall break down their images, Ex. 23, 24, in which\npassage the original term signifies nothing more than the figures, or\nstatues, or images erected by men. But _demuth_ signifies \"a\nlikeness,\" or \"the perfectness of an image.\" For instance, when we\nspeak of a lifeless image, such as that which is impressed on coins,\nwe say, This is the image of Brutus or of Caesar. That image, however,\ndoes not reproduce the likeness, nor exhibit every single feature.\n\n23. Accordingly, when Moses says that man was created also in the\nlikeness of God, he points out that man resembles God not only in the\npossession of reason, or of intellect and will, but that he has also\nthe likeness of God, that is, a will and an intellect, with which he\nknows God and wills what he wills.\n\n24. If man, having been created both \"in the image\" and \"in the\nlikeness\" of God, had not fallen, he would have lived forever, full of\njoy and gladness, and would have possessed a will joyfully eager to\nobey the will of God. But by sin both this \"likeness\" and this \"image\"\nwere lost. They are, however, in a measure, restored by faith, as we\nare told by the apostle, Col 3, 10; Eph 4, 24. For we begin to know\nGod, and the spirit of Christ helps us, so that we desire to obey the\ncommandments of God.\n\n25. Of these blessed gifts we possess only the first-fruits. This new\ncreation within us is only as yet begun; it is not perfected here in\nthe flesh. The will is in some measure stirred to praise God, to give\nhim thanks, to confess sin, and to exercise patience, but all this is\nonly the first-fruits. The flesh, obeying the law of its nature, still\nfollows the things of the flesh, while it opposes the things of God.\nThe result is that the restoration of such gifts in us is only in the\ninitial stage; but the full tithe of this likeness in all its\nperfection shall be rendered in the future life, when the sinful flesh\nshall have been destroyed by death.\n\nV. 2. _Male and female created he them, and blessed them, and called\ntheir name Adam, in the day when they were created._\n\n26. I have above observed that the general name \"Adam\" was applied to\nAdam alone, by reason of his superiority. I omit to mention those\nvagaries of the rabbins, who say that no man can be called \"Adam\"\nunless he has a wife. Likewise, no woman can be called \"Adam\" unless\nmarried. The thought may have been drawn from the teachings of the\nfathers, but the Jews have corrupted it by their foolish fancies and\nopinions.\n\n27. Moses aims to show this blessing was not taken from man because of\nhis sin, since the blessing of bearing children and ruling them\ncontinued with Cain though he had murdered his brother.\n\n28. Moses mentions not Abel, for he had died without an heir and is\npresented to us as an example of the resurrection of the dead. Neither\nis Cain mentioned, who because of his sin was cut off from the true\nChurch.\n\n29. Scripture says nothing of what Adam and Eve did during the one\nhundred years. Some of our writers add a hundred years longer Adam\nshould have lived with Eve before Cain slew his brother Abel, which\nmakes Adam two hundred and thirty years of age when Seth was born. It\nseems to me plausible that the godly parents passed one hundred years\nin sorrow and mourned the great dishonor that befell their family.\nAfter Adam was expelled from paradise did he first beget children,\nsons and daughters, who were like him, and Abel was perhaps thirty\nyears of age when he was slain. It appears the children were not much\nyounger than their parents, who were not born, but created.\n\n30. I believe, accordingly, that the godly parents indulged their\ngrief, and abstained from connubial intercourse. This abstinence,\nhowever, was not maintained with the intent which the Jews fable, who\nabsurdly affirm that Adam vowed perpetual chastity, like our monks,\nand that he would still have kept his vow had he not been commanded by\nan angel from heaven to live together with his wife. Such a story as\nthis is only fit to be told to a Roman pontiff of the age of forty,\nwho alone is worthy of listening to such fables. No, Adam was not so\nwicked as thus to refuse the gift and command of God! Such abstinence\nwould have been taking vengeance on himself for the grief he had\nendured, and it would have meant to reject the gift of that blessing\nwhich God had been pleased to leave to nature even in its fallen\nstate.\n\nMoreover, this was a matter not left in the power of Adam. As Moses\nhas clearly shown, God had created him a male. He had, therefore, need\nof a female, or wife, because the instinct of procreation was\nimplanted in his nature by God the Creator, himself. If therefore Adam\nabstained, he did so for a reason only, intending to return to his Eve\nafter giving vent to his grief for a time.\n\n31. Moses here expressly adds, concerning Adam, that he \"begat a son\nin his own likeness, after his image.\" Theologians entertain various\nopinions as to the real meaning of those expressions. The simple\nmeaning is, that Adam was created \"in the image\" and \"after the\nlikeness\" of God, or that he was the image of God, created, not\nbegotten; for Adam had no parents. But in this \"image of God\" Adam\ncontinued not; he fell from it by sin. Seth, therefore, who was\nafterwards born, was begotten, not after the image of God, but after\nthe image of his father Adam. That is, he was altogether like Adam; he\nresembled his father Adam, not only in his features, but he was like\nhim in every way. He not only had fingers, nose, eyes, carriage,\nvoice, and speech, like his father, but he was like him in everything\nelse pertaining to body and soul, in manners, disposition, will and\nother points. In these respects Seth did not bear the image of God\nwhich Adam possessed originally, and which he lost; but he bore the\nlikeness of Adam, his father. But this likeness and image were not of\nGod by creation, but of Adam by generation.\n\n32. Now, this image included original sin, and the punishment of\neternal death on account of sin, which God inflicted on Adam. But as\nAdam, by faith in the seed that was to come, recovered the image of\nGod, which he had lost, so Seth also recovered the same after he grew\nup to man's estate; for God impressed again his own \"likeness\" upon\nhim through the Word. Paul refers to this when he says to the\nGalatians, \"My little children, of whom I am again in travail until\nChrist be formed in you,\" Gal 4, 19.\n\n33. Of the name Seth I have spoken above. It denotes command, and\nvoices the sentiments of one praying and prophesying good news, as if\nAdam had said: \"Cain has not only himself fallen, but also caused his\nbrother to fall. May God, therefore, grant that this my son Seth shall\nstand as a firm foundation which Satan shall not overthrow.\" Such\nblessing or prayer is implied in the name.\n\nVs. 4-5. _And the days of Adam after he begat Seth were eight hundred\nyears and he begat sons and daughters. And all the days that Adam\nlived were nine hundred and thirty years and he died._\n\n34. This is another part of the happiness of that age, that men\nattained to so long life. Such longevity, when compared with the\nlength of our lives, seems quite incredible. A question naturally\narises as to the cause and theory of such old age. I am not at all\ndispleased with the reasons assigned by some, that the constitutions\nof men were then far better than ours are now, and also that all\nthings then used for food were more healthful than those now used. To\nthese particulars we must add that important requisite for a long\nlife, the greatest moderation in the use and enjoyment of food. To\nwhat extent the latter conduces to health, is needless to explain.\n\n35. Though the body was sounder than at present, yet the general vigor\nand strength of limb which men had in paradise before the advent of\nsin, had passed away. It is true, however, that their bodily\nwell-being was enhanced when, after the fall, they were renewed and\nregenerated through faith in the promised seed. For the same reason,\nalso, sin was weakened through faith in the seed. As for us, we have\nlost their strength and vigor just in proportion as we have departed\nfrom their righteousness.\n\n36. With reference to food, who cannot easily believe that one apple,\nin that primeval age, was more excellent and afforded a greater degree\nof nourishment than a thousand in our time? The roots, also, on which\nthey fed, contained infinitely more fragrance, virtue and savor, than\nthey possess now. All these conditions, but notably holiness and\nrighteousness, the exercise of moderation, then the excellence of the\nfruit and the salubrity of the atmosphere--all these tended to produce\nlongevity till the time came for the establishment of a new order by\nGod which resulted in a decided reduction of the length of man's life.\n\n37. Now, if we turn to consider thoughtfully our present mode of life,\nwe find that we are much more corrupted than nourished by the meat and\ndrink we consume. In addition to the immoderation characterizing our\nlife, how much have the fruits themselves lost in excellence? Our\nfirst parents lived moderately, and chose only those things for their\nmeat and drink calculated to nourish and refresh their bodies. There\ncan be no doubt that after the deluge all the fruits of the earth\ndeteriorated greatly. Even so, in our own age, we find all things\ndeteriorate. The Italian wines and fruits differ no more from our own\nat the present day than the fruits before the deluge differed from\nthose produced amid that brackishness and foulness made by the sea.\n\n38. These causes, with others which many assign for the great\nlongevity of the primeval patriarchs, I by no means disapprove. But\nthis one reason is quite sufficient, in my opinion, that it pleased\nGod to give them such length of life in the best part of the world.\nYet we see, as Peter strikingly says, that God willed not to spare the\nold world, no, not even the angels in heaven that sinned; so horrible\na thing is sin. Sodom and Gomorrah were the choicest portion of the\nearth, and yet, on account of sin, they were utterly destroyed. In the\nsame manner the Holy Scriptures everywhere set forth the greatness of\nsin, and exhort to the fear of God.\n\n39. We have now the root, or rather the source, of the human race,\nnamely Adam and his Eve. From these Seth is born, the first branch of\nthis tree. But as Adam lived eight hundred years after the birth of\nSeth, Adam saw himself in possession of numerous progeny. This was the\nperiod of the restoration of righteousness through the promise of the\nseed to come. Afterwards, however, when men increased, and the sons of\nGod mingled with the daughters of men, the world gradually became\ncorrupt, and the majesty of the holy patriarchs became an object of\ncontempt.\n\n40. It is an attractive sight, to view the number of gray-headed\npatriarchs living at the same time. Only a little ciphering is\nrequired to do it. If you compute carefully the years of our first\nparent, Adam, you will see that he lived over fifty years with Lamech,\nNoah's father. Accordingly, Adam saw all his descendants down to the\nninth generation, having an almost infinite number of sons and\ndaughters. These, however, Moses does not enumerate, being satisfied\nto number the trunk and the immediate branches down to Noah.\n\n41. There were, without doubt, in this mighty multitude, many very\ndistinguished saints, whose history, if we possessed it, would exceed\nin marvelousness all the histories of the world. Compared with it, the\nexodus of the children of Israel from Egypt, their passage through the\nRed Sea and through Jordan, their captivities and returns, would be as\nnothing. But as the primeval world itself perished, so did its\nhistory. In consequence, the first place in the annals of history\nbelongs to the account of the flood, in comparison with which the\nothers are only as sparks to the fire. Of the former world we have\nnothing but names, but these are, so to speak, great histories in\nminiature.\n\n42. It is probable that also Eve lived to the age of 800 years and saw\nthis great posterity. What must have been her concern, how great her\nlabors, how devoted her toils, in visiting, in teaching, and in\ntraining her children and grandchildren. And what must have been her\ncrosses and sighs, when the generation of the Cainites opposed with so\nmuch determination the true Church, although some of them were even\nconverted by the uncovenanted mercy of God.\n\n43. Truly that primeval time was a \"golden age,\" in comparison with\nwhich our present age is scarcely worthy of being called the age of\nmud. During those primeval centuries, there lived at the same time\nnine patriarchs, together with their posterities, and all of them in\nharmony concerning the faith in the blessed seed! All these glorious\nthings Moses just mentions, but does not explain; otherwise this would\nbe the history of histories.\n\n\nIII. ENOCH.\n\n   1. Why Moses writes the history of Enoch and not that of the other\n      patriarchs before the flood 43-45.\n\n   2. How it is to be understood that Enoch led a godly life and how\n      the monks interpret this falsely 46.\n\n   3. Enoch's prophecy cited by Jude and where Jude received it 47.\n\n   4. Enoch's exceptional courage and how he opposed Satan and the\n      world 48.\n\n   5. The length of time he led a godly life; and Moses justly praises\n      him 49.\n\n   6. Why Enoch is so greatly praised 50.\n\n   7. The tenor of his preaching 51.\n\n   8. He by no means led the life of a monk 51.\n\n   9. How he was missed. \"He was not\" 52.\n\n    * Enoch's ascension a proof of the resurrection of the dead 52.\n\n  10. The effect of his ascension upon his father and grandfather\n      53-55.\n\n  11. Whether the other patriarchs living then at once knew that he\n      ascended; and how such news affected them 54-56.\n\n    * The cross must always precede consolation 54.\n\n  12. Why God took Enoch 55.\n\n    * The news of Enoch's ascension must have quickened the holy\n      patriarchs 56.\n\n  13. Enoch's ascension a sign that a better life is offered to man\n      57.\n\n  14. How Enoch walked and lived before God 58.\n\n  15. Enoch a man as we are and yet God took him 58.\n\n    * The great sorrow of the patriarchs at Enoch's disappearance and\n      their great joy over such an experience 59.\n\n    * Seth at the time was high priest, old and tired of life, and\n      died soon after Enoch was taken 60-63.\n\n    * What Luther would do if he knew in advance the day of his death\n      61.\n\n    * This temporal life full of want and misery 62.\n\n    * The results of Seth's preaching after Enoch's ascension 63.\n\n    * The longing of the holy fathers for eternal life, and how it\n         should serve us 64.\n\n    * Lamentation over the great corruption inherent in our flesh 65.\n\n  16. Enoch's ascension was great comfort to the holy patriarchs in\n      meeting death 66.\n\n    * Of death.\n\n      a. It is not death to believers, but a sleep 66.\n\n      b. In what way death is a punishment of sin, and how it is\n         sweetened 67.\n\n    * Luther's thoughts of Enoch's ascension 67.\n\n  17. Enoch's ascension extraordinary, and well worthy of\n      consideration by all 68.\n\n  18. The rabbins' foolish thoughts of Enoch's ascension refuted 69.\n\n  19. Enoch doubtless had many temptations 69.\n\n  20. Enoch ascended even bodily, and not with that life which he now\n      lives 70.\n\n    * How and why God willed that the world should have in all times a\n      sign of the resurrection, and hence in the first world Enoch\n      ascended, in the second Elijah, and in the third Christ 71.\n\n    * Lamentation over the unbelief of the world 72.\n\n    * Christ's ascension more significant than Enoch's or Elijah's 73.\n\n    * The chief doctrine of the first five chapters of Genesis 74.\n\n    * How and why death and the resurrection of the dead are set forth\n      74.\n\n\nIII. ENOCH.\n\n44. There is one history, however, that of Enoch, the seventh from\nAdam, which Moses was not willing to pass over for the reason of its\nbeing extraordinarily remarkable. Still, even in this case he is\nextremely brief.\n\nIn the case of all the other patriarchs he mentions only the names and\nthe number of their years. Enoch, however, he delineates in such a\nmanner that he seems, in comparison, to slight the other patriarchs\nand, as it were, to disparage them as if they were evil men, or at\nleast slighted of God. Did not Adam also, and Seth, and Cainan,\ntogether with their descendants--did not all these, also, walk with\nGod? Why, then, does Moses ascribe this great honor to Enoch only? And\nis the fact that God took Enoch to be understood as if the other\npatriarchs are neither with God nor living? Yes, they all, like Enoch,\nnow live with God, and we shall behold them all, at the last day,\nshining equally with Enoch, in the brightest glory!\n\n45. Why, then, does Moses discriminate in favor of Enoch? Why does he\nnot bestow the same praise upon the other patriarchs? Although they\ndied a natural death, and were not taken by God, yet, also they\n\"walked with God.\" We have heard above concerning Enosh that in his\ntimes, likewise, mighty things were done. It was in his days that \"men\nbegan to call upon the name of Jehovah,\" that is, that the Word and\nworship of God began to flourish; and as a result holy men once more\n\"walked with God.\" Why is it then, we repeat, that Moses does not laud\nEnosh equally with Enoch? Why does he bestow such high praise on the\nlatter only? For his words are these:\n\nVs. 21-24. _And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat\nMethuselah. And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three\nhundred years, and begat sons and daughters. And all the days of Enoch\nwere three hundred sixty and five years. And Enoch walked with God:\nand he was not; for God took him._\n\n46. When Moses says that Enoch \"walked with God,\" we must beware of\ntaking the monastic view in the premises, as if he had kept himself\nsecluded in some private corner, and there lived a monastic life. No,\nso eminent a patriarch must be placed on a candlestick, or, as our\nSaviour Christ expresses it, set as a city on a hill, that he may\nshine forth in the public ministry.\n\n47. It is as a bearer of such public office the Apostle Jude extols\nhim in his epistle, when he says: \"To these also Enoch, the seventh\nfrom Adam, prophesied, saying, Behold, the Lord came with ten\nthousands of holy ones, to execute judgment upon all, and to convict\nall the ungodly of all their works of ungodliness, which they have\nungodly wrought, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have\nspoken against him,\" Jude vs. 14, 15. From what source Jude obtained\nthese facts I know not. Probably they remained in the memory of man\nfrom the primitive age of the world; or it may be that holy men\ncommitted to writing many of the sacred words and works of the\npatriarchs as they were handed down from age to age by tradition.\n\n48. It is this public ministry that Moses lauds, exalting the pious\nEnoch as a sun above all the other patriarchs and teachers of the\nprimeval world. Wherefore, we may gather from all these circumstances\nthat Enoch possessed a particular fullness of the Holy Spirit, and a\npreeminent greatness of mind, seeing that he opposed with a strength\nof faith excelling that of all the other patriarchs, Satan and the\nchurch of the Cainites. To walk with God, is not, as we have before\nobserved, for a man to flee into a desert, or to conceal himself in\nsome corner, but to go forth in his vocation, and to set himself\nagainst the iniquity and malice of Satan and the world, and to confess\nthe seed of the woman; to condemn the religion and the pursuits of the\nworld, and to preach, through Christ, another life after this.\n\n49. This is the manner of life led for three hundred years by the\ngreatest prophet and high priest of his generation, Enoch, the man who\nhad six patriarchs for his teachers. Most deservedly, therefore, does\nMoses extol him as a disciple of greatest eminence, taught and trained\nby many patriarchal masters, and those the greatest and most\nillustrious; and, moreover, so equipped with the Holy Spirit that he\nwas the prophet of prophets and the saint of saints in that primeval\nworld. The greatness of Enoch, then, consisted in the first place in\nhis office and ministry.\n\n50. In the second place, he receives preeminent praise because it was\nthe will of God that he should be an example to the whole world in\nverifying, and showing the comfort of, the faith in the future life.\nThis text, therefore, is worthy of being written in letters of gold\nand of being deeply engraven in the inmost heart.\n\n51. Here we have another view of what it means to walk with God. It is\nto preach the life beyond this present life; to teach concerning the\nseed to come, concerning the serpent's head that is to be bruised and\nthe kingdom of Satan that is to be destroyed. Such was the preaching\nof Enoch, who nevertheless was a husband, and the father of a family;\nwho had a wife and children, who governed his household, and procured\nhis subsistence by the labor of his own hands. Wherefore say or think\nno more about living in a monastery, which has merely the outward show\nof walking with God. When this godly man had lived, after the birth of\nMethuselah, 300 years in the truest religion, in faith, in patience\nand in the midst of a thousand crosses, all of which he endured and\novercame by faith in the blessed seed to come, he appeared no more.\n\n52. Mark how pregnant these words are with power! He does not say, as\nhe expresses himself concerning the other patriarchs, \"and he died,\"\nbut \"he was not,\" an expression that all scholars have come to regard\nas a pure proof of the resurrection of the dead. In the Hebrew this\nmeaning is most strikingly brought out. And Enoch walked with God, and\n_veenenu_, \"he was not.\" The original signifies that Enoch was lost or\ndisappeared, contrary to the thought or expectation of all the other\npatriarchs, and at once ceased to be among men.\n\n53. Without doubt, at the severe loss of so great a man, both his\nfather and his grandfather were filled with grief and consternation;\nfor they well knew with what devotion he had taught the true religion,\nand how many things he had suffered. When they had thus suddenly lost\nsuch a man as Enoch, who had strong testimony of his godliness both\nfrom men and from God himself, what do you think must have been their\nfeelings?\n\n54. Find me, if you can, a poet or a fluent orator to do justice to\nthis text and to treat it with power! Enosh, Seth, and all the other\npatriarchs knew not by whom or whither Enoch was taken away; they\nsought him, but found him not. His son Methuselah sought him, and his\nother children and his grandchildren sought him, but they found him\nnot. They suspected, no doubt, the malice of the Cainites, and they\nprobably thought that he was killed, as Abel was, and secretly buried.\n\nAt length, however, they learned, through a revelation made to them of\nGod by an angel, that Enoch was taken away by God himself, into\nparadise. This fact they probably did not know the first or the second\nday after the translation, and perhaps not till many months, or it may\nbe many years, afterwards. In the meantime the holy men bewailed his\nwretched lot, as if he had been slain by the Cainite hypocrites. It is\nalways the divine rule that the cross and affliction should precede\nconsolation. God never comforts any but the afflicted, just as he\nnever quickens unto life any but the dead, nor ever justifies any but\nsinners! He always creates all things out of nothing.\n\n55. It was a severe cross and affliction to the patriarchs when they\nsaw taken away from them, to appear nowhere among them, him who had\ngoverned the whole world by his doctrine, and who had done so many\nillustrious deeds in the course of his life. While these patriarchs\nwere mourning and bewailing the misfortune of the holy man, behold!\nconsolation was at hand, and it was revealed to them that the Lord had\n\"translated\" Enoch! Such an expression we have not concerning any\nother man than Enoch, except Elijah. God willed, therefore, to testify\nby an object lesson, that he has prepared for his saints another life\nafter this life, in which they shall live forever with God.\n\n56. The Hebrew verb _lakak_ does not signify \"translated\" according to\nthe impression conveyed by our use of the word, but \"received to\nhimself.\" These words are, accordingly, words of life, revealed by God\nthrough some angel to the patriarch Enoch, and to the whole of that\ngeneration of saints, that they might have the consolation and promise\nof eternal life, not only through a word, but also through an act, as\nbefore in the case of Abel. How delightful must have been to them this\nproclamation, when they heard that Enoch was not dead, nor slain by\nwicked men, nor taken away from them by the fraud or snares of Satan,\nbut translated; that is, \"received to himself\" by the living and\nomnipotent God.\n\n57. This is that bright gem which Moses sought to display in the\npresent chapter--that the omnipotent God did not take unto himself\ngeese, or cows, or blocks of wood, or stones, but a man, even Enoch,\nto teach there was reserved for men another and better life than this\npresent one, so filled with evils and calamities of every kind.\nAlthough Enoch was a sinner, yet the manner of his departure from this\nlife proved that God had prepared for him and brought him to another\nand eternal life; for he entered upon the life with God, and God took\nhim to himself.\n\n58. Accordingly, Enoch's walking with God signifies that he was in\nthis life a faithful witness of eternal life to be gained after this\nlife through the promised seed. This is what living with God means,\nnot the mere animal life subject to corruption. Inasmuch as Enoch\nconstantly preached this doctrine, God verified and fulfilled this\npreaching in the patriarch himself, that we might fully and surely\nbelieve it; in that Enoch, a man like unto ourselves, born of flesh\nand blood, as we also are, of the seed of Adam, was taken up into\nheaven by God, and now lives the life of God, that is, an eternal\nlife.\n\n59. Before the generation of patriarchs knew the facts in the case, it\nwas appalling to them to hear that so holy a man as Enoch had\ndisappeared so completely that his whereabouts or manner of death was\nbeyond everybody's ken. Great, therefore, was the grief of the pious\nparents and elders. But afterwards incredible joy and consolation were\ntheirs when they heard that their son lived with God himself and had\nbeen translated by God to an angelic and eternal life.\n\n60. This consolation God made known to Seth, who was the greatest\nprophet and high priest after his father Adam had fallen asleep in the\nfaith of the blessed seed fifty-seven years before, Seth having then\narrived at about his eight hundred and sixtieth year. Seth, being now\nan old man and full of days and without doubt fully confirmed in the\nfaith of the blessed seed to come, and anxiously awaiting deliverance\nfrom the body and earnestly desiring to be gathered to his people,\ndied with greater joy about fifty-two years afterward, because of the\ntranslation of his son Enoch. Fifty-two years were indeed but a short\ntime for an old man wherein to make his will and visit all his\ngrandchildren, and preach to them and exhort them to persevere in the\nfaith of the promised seed and to hope in that eternal life unto which\nhis son and their father Enoch had been translated to live with God.\nIn this manner, doubtless, the aged saint employed his time among his\ndescendants, bidding farewell to and blessing each one. Full of years\nand full of joy, he no doubt thus taught and comforted both himself\nand them.\n\n61. If I knew that I were appointed to die in six months' time, I\nshould scarcely find time enough wherein to make my will. I would\nremind men of what had been the testimony of my preaching, exhort and\nentreat them to continue and persevere therein, and warn and guard\nthem as far as my powers of mind could do so, against the offense of\nfalse doctrine. All these things could not be done in one day, nor in\none month. Those fifty years during which Seth lived after the\ntranslation of Enoch, formed but a very short period for him (for\nspiritual men have an altogether different method of calculating time\nthan the children of this world) in which to instruct all his family\nin the nature of this glorious consolation--that another and eternal\nlife is to be hoped for after this life, a hope which God revealed to\nhis saints by the marvelous fact of his having taken to himself Enoch,\nwho was of the same flesh and blood with ourselves.\n\n62. \"Follow not,\" said he, \"the evil inclinations of your nature, but\ndespise this present life and look forward to a better. For what evil\nexists that is not found in this present life? To how many diseases,\nto what great dangers, to what dreadful calamities, is it not subject?\nto say nothing now of those evils which are the greatest of all\nafflictions, those spiritual distresses which burden with anguish the\nmind and conscience, such as the Law, sin, and death itself.\n\n63. \"Why is it then, that ye so anxiously expect such great\nconsolations from this present life as to seem incapable of ever being\ncompletely satisfied? Were it not for the fact that God wants us to\nlive to proclaim him, to thank him, and to serve the brethren, life is\nsuch as to suggest its voluntary termination. This service, therefore,\nlet us render unto God, with all diligence. Let us look forward with\ncontinual sighs to that true life to which, my children, your brother\nEnoch has been translated by the glorious God.\"\n\nThese and like things the aged saint taught his people after his great\nconsolation had been revealed. There is no doubt that after it was\nunderstood that Enoch was translated alive into immortality, they\nlonged for the time when they also might be delivered out of this\nafflicted life, in the same manner, or at least by death.\n\n64. If, then, those godly patriarchs of old so anxiously looked\nforward to the eternal life and desired it to come, on account of Abel\nand Enoch, whom they knew to be living with God, how much greater\nought to be our expectation and desire, who have Christ for our leader\nunto eternal life, who is gone before, as Peter says in Acts 3, 20-26.\nThey believed in him as one to come; we know that he has become\nmanifest, and has gone to the Father to prepare for us a home, and to\nsit at the right hand of the Father to intercede for us. Ought we not,\ntherefore, to sigh for those future things, and to hate those of the\npresent? It is not an Enoch or an Abel who sets before us, as those\npatriarchs did before their people, the hope of a better life to come;\nbut Christ, the leader and author of life himself. It becomes us,\ntherefore, firmly to despise this life and world, and with swelling\nbreast to pant after the coming glory of eternal life.\n\n65. Herein we feel how great is the infirmity of our flesh which lusts\nafter these present things with eager desire but fails to rejoice in\nthe certainties of the life to come. How is it possible that a fact\nshould not be most certain which has for witnesses not only Abel and\nEnoch and Elijah, but also Christ himself, the head and the first\nfruits of those that rise? Most worthy, therefore, the hatred of both\nGod and men are the wicked Epicureans; and most worthy our hatred also\nis our own flesh, when we wholly plunge into temporal cares and\nsecurely disregard the eternal blessings.\n\n66. Worthy of note and carefully to be remembered is the statement\nthat Enoch was taken up and received, not by some patriarch or angel,\nbut by God himself. This was the very consolation which rendered the\ndeaths of the patriarchs endurable; yea, which enabled them to depart\nfrom this life with joy. They saw that the seed which had been\npromised them warred, even before he was revealed, with Satan, and\nbruised, through Enoch, his head. Such was the hope entertained by\nthem concerning themselves and all their believing descendants, and,\nin perfect security, they despised death as having ceased to be death,\nas having become a sleep from which they were to awaken into life\neternal. \"To them that believe,\" death is not really death, but a\nsleep. When the terror, the power, and the sting of death are taken\naway, it can no longer be considered death. The greater the faith of\nthe dying man, the weaker is death. On the other hand, the weaker the\nfaith of the dying man, the more bitter is death.\n\n67. In this text we are also reminded of the nature of sin. If Adam\nhad not sinned, we should not have been dying men, but, like Enoch of\nold, we should have been translated, without fear or pain, from this\nanimal life to that better and spiritual life. But although we have\nforfeited that life, the present history of the patriarch Enoch\nassures us that the restitution of paradise and of eternal life is not\nto be despaired of. Our flesh cannot be free from pain, but where\nconscience has obtained peace, death is no more than a swoon, by means\nof which we pass out of this life into eternal rest. Had our nature\nremained innocent, it would not have known such pain of the flesh. We\nshould have been taken up as if asleep, presently to awaken in heaven,\nand to lead the life of the angels. Now, however, that the flesh is\ndefiled by sin, it must first be destroyed by death. As to Enoch,\nperhaps he lay down in some grassy spot and fell asleep praying; and\nsleeping he was taken up by God, without pain; without death.\n\n68. Let us give proper attention to this text to which Moses attaches\nspecial importance as embodying an account of the most noteworthy\nevent of the primitive world. What fact could possibly inspire more\nwonder and admiration than that a man, a corrupt sinner, born of flesh\nand blood, as we are, and defiled as we are by that sin and\ncorruption, so obtained the victory over death as not to die at all!\nChrist himself is man, and righteous, yet our sins caused him to\nsuffer the bitterest of all deaths; but he is delivered on the third\nday, and lifts himself up unto life eternal. In Enoch there was the\nsingular fact that he died not at all, but was caught up, without\ndeath intervening, to the life spiritual and eternal.\n\n69. Emphatically deserving of aversion are the rabbins. The sublimest\npassages of the Scriptures they shamefully corrupt. As a case in\npoint, they prate concerning Enoch that, while he was good and\nrighteous, he very much inclined toward carnal desires. God,\ntherefore, out of pity, prevented his sinning and perishing through\ndeath. Is not this, I pray you, a shocking corruption of the text\nbefore us? Why should they say concerning Enoch in particular, that he\nwas subject to the evil desires of the flesh? As if all the other\npatriarchs did not experience the same. Why do they not notice the\nrepeated testimony of Moses, that Enoch \"walked with God\"? That is\ncertainly evidence that Enoch did not indulge those evil inclinations\nof his flesh, but bravely overcame them by faith. The Jews when\nspeaking of the corrupt desires of the flesh have reference to lust,\navarice, pride, and similar promptings. Enoch, however, without doubt,\nlived amid mightier temptations than these; like Paul, he felt that\n\"thorn in the flesh\"; day by day he wrestled with Satan; and when, at\nlength, he was completely bruised and worn out with every kind of\ntemptation, God commanded him to depart from this life to the blessed\nlife to come.\n\n70. What that life is which Enoch now lives, we who still continue to\nbe flesh and blood cannot possibly know. It is enough for us to know\nthat Enoch was translated in his body. This the patriarchs must have\nclearly understood by revelation, and about to die, they needed this\ncomfort. This much we know also. But what that holy patriarch is now\ndoing, where he is, and how he lives, we know not. We know that he\nlives; and we also know that the life he lives is not like unto this\nanimal life, but that he is with God. This the text before us\ndistinctly declares.\n\n71. This fact, then, makes the narrative under consideration so\nmemorable that God intended to use it for the purpose of setting\nbefore the old, primeval world the hope of a better life. Likewise, to\nthe second world, which had the Law, God gave the example of Elijah,\nwho also was taken up into heaven and translated by the Lord before\nthe very eyes of his own servant Elisha. We are now in the New\nCovenant, in a third world, as it were. We have Christ himself, our\ngreat deliverer, as our glorious example, who ascended into the\nheavens, taking with him many of his saints.\n\nIt was God's will to establish for every age a testimonial of the\nresurrection of the dead, that he might thereby allure our minds by\nall possible attractions from this corrupt and in many ways wretched\nlife, in which, however, we will gladly serve God as long as it shall\nplease him, by the faithful performance of all public and private\nduties, and especially by instructing others in holiness and in the\nknowledge of God. But, as the apostle says, we have here \"no certain\ndwelling-place,\" 1 Cor 4, 11. Christ, our forerunner, is gone before\nus, that he might prepare for us, the eternal mansions, Jn 14, 2-3.\n\n72. Just as we find many among us by whom such things are considered\nabsurd, and not sufficiently worthy of faith, so there is no doubt\nthat this account was deemed ridiculous by most people. The world is\never the same. For that reason these things have by divine authority\nbeen committed to writing and recorded for the saints and the\nfaithful, that these might read, understand, believe and heed them.\nThey present to our sight a manifest triumph over death and sin, and\nafford us a sure comfort in Enoch's victory over the Law, and the\nwrath and judgment of God. To the godly nothing can yield more grace\nand joy than these antediluvian records.\n\n73. But the New Testament truly overflows with the mercy of God. While\nwe do not discard records like these, we have others far superior. We\nhave the Son of God himself ascending to the skies, and sitting at the\nright hand of God. In him we see the serpent's head completely\nbruised, and the life lost in paradise restored. This is more than the\ntranslation of Enoch and of Elijah; still, it was God's will in this\nmanner to administer comfort to the original world and also to the\nsucceeding one, which had the Law.\n\n74. The paramount doctrine contained in these five chapters is,\naccordingly, this: that men died and lived again. In Adam all men\ndied. But believers lived again through the promised seed, as the\nhistory of Abel and Enoch testifies. In Adam, death was appointed for\nSeth and all others; hence it is written of every one: \"And he died.\"\nBut Abel and Enoch illustrate the resurrection from the dead and the\nlife immortal. The purpose intended is that we should not despair in\ndeath but entertain the unwavering assurance that the believers in the\npromised seed shall live, and be taken by God, whether from the water\nor the fire or the gibbet, or the tomb. We desire to live, and we\nshall live, namely the eternal life through the promised seed, which\nremains when this is past.\n\n\nIV. LAMECH AND HIS SON NOAH.\n\n   A. LAMECH.\n\n      1. He lived at the time Enoch was taken to heaven 75.\n\n       * To what end Enoch's ascension served the holy patriarchs 75.\n\n      2. Why Lamech called his son Noah 76-77.\n\n       * The erroneous comments of the rabbins taken by Lyra without\n         any good reason 78-79.\n\n      3. On what Lamech's heart was centered at Noah's birth 79-81.\n\n      4. How and why Lamech erred in the case of his son as Eve did at\n         Cain's birth 80.\n\n       * The longing of the patriarchs for the Messiah was of the Holy\n         Spirit 81.\n\n       * Complaint of the world's ingratitude 82.\n\n       * The patriarchs' greatest treasure and desire 82.\n\n       * Comparison of the three worlds 83-85.\n\n       * Why the present world so lightly esteems Christ, whom the\n         patriarchs so highly revered 84.\n\n       * The first world was the best, the last the worst 85.\n\n\nIV. LAMECH AND HIS SON NOAH.\n\nA. Lamech.\n\nVs. 28-29. _And Lamech lived a hundred eighty and two years, and begat\na son: and he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us\nin our work and in the toil of our hands, which cometh because of the\nground which Jehovah hath cursed._\n\n75. Only incidentally Moses adverts in this account to the name of\nNoah, which certainly deserves a somewhat careful examination. Lamech\nwas living when Enoch was taken away by God out of this life into the\nother immortal life. When the great glory of God had become manifest\nin the extraordinary miracle of the rapture from a lowly estate into\nlife eternal of Enoch who was a man like us, a husband, a man with\nfamily, having sons, daughters, household, fields and cattle, the holy\nfathers were filled and fired with such joy as to conclude that the\nglad day was near which should witness the fulfilment of the promise.\nThat Enoch was taken up living, to be with the Lord, appeared as a\nsalient display of divine mercy.\n\n76. As Adam and Eve, after the reception of the promise, were so\nabsorbed in their hope that, in their joy to see a man like\nthemselves, they identified Cain with the promised seed, so in my\njudgment Lamech committed a similar pious error when he gave his son\nthe name Noah, and said: This same shall comfort us, and shall deliver\nus from the labors and sorrows of this life. Original sin, and the\npunishment thereof, shall now cease. We shall now be restored to our\nformer innocent state. The curse shall now cease which rests on the\nearth on account of the sin of Adam; and all the other miseries\ninflicted on the human race on account of sin, shall also cease.\n\n77. Such considerations as these prompted Lamech to base upon the fact\nof his grandfather's rapture into paradise unaccompanied by pain,\nsickness and death, the hope that presently the whole of paradise was\nto be ushered in. He concludes that Noah was the promised seed by whom\nthe earth was to be restored. This notion that the curse is about to\nbe lifted is expressed in unmistakable terms. Not so; neither the\ncurse of sin nor its penalty can be removed unless original sin itself\nshall have been removed first.\n\n78. The rabbins, those pestilent corrupters of the Scriptures, surely\ndeserve aversion. This is their interpretation of the passage in\nquestion: He shall bring us rest from the toil and labor of our hands\nby showing us an easier way of cultivating the earth. With a\nplowshare, by a yoke of oxen, the earth shall be broken up; the\npresent mode of digging it with man's hand shall cease.\n\nI wonder that Lyra is satisfied with this interpretation, and follows\nit. He ought to have been familiar with the unchanging practice of the\nJews to pervert Scripture by substituting a material meaning for a\nspiritual one, in order to gain glory among men. Could anything more\nderogatory to the holy patriarch be said than that he gave such\nexpression to his joy over the birth of his son Noah on account of an\nadvantage pertaining to the belly?\n\n79. No; it was a much greater concern than this which filled his mind\nwith anxiety. It was the wrath of God, and death, with all the other\ncalamities of this life. His hope was that Noah, as the promised seed,\nwould put an end to these evils. And therefore it was that he thus\nexulted with joy at the birth of this his son, predicted good things,\nand called upon others to join him in the same hope. His thoughts did\nnot dwell upon the plow, nor upon oxen, nor upon other trivial things\nof the kind pertaining to this present life, as the blind Jews rave.\nHe was really filled with the hope that this his son Noah was that\nseed to come which should restore the former blessed state of\nparadise, in which there was no curse. As if he had said: Now we feel\nthe curse in the very labors of our hands. We toil and sweat in\ncultivating the earth, yet it yields us in return nothing but briers\nand thorns. But there shall arise a new and happy age. The curse on\nthe earth which was inflicted on account of sin shall cease, because\nsin shall cease. This is the true meaning of the text before us.\n\n80. But the holy father was deceived. The glory of bringing about that\nrenewal belonged, not to the son of a man but to the Son of God. The\nrabbins are silly. Although the earth is not dug by the hands of men,\nbut by the use of oxen, yet the labor of man's hand has not ceased.\nEnoch, by his translation, does not disclose the solace of bodily\neasement, agreeable to the belly, but deliverance from sin and death.\nLamech hoped, in addition, for the restoration of the former state. He\nbelieved to see the inauguration of this change in his grandfather\nEnoch, and felt assured that the deliverance, or the renewal of all\nthings, was close at hand. Just so Eve, as we have already observed,\nwhen she brought forth her first-born son Cain, said, I have gotten a\nman with the help of Jehovah, one who shall take away all these\npunishments inflicted on sin, and bring about our restoration. But,\nlike Eve, the good and holy Lamech was deceived in his ardent longing\nfor the restoration of the world.\n\n81. All these anxieties plainly show how those holy patriarchs longed\nfor, hoped for, and sighed for, that great \"restitution of all\nthings,\" Acts 3, 21. Although they herein erred, even as Eve erred and\nwas deceived with respect to Cain, this desire for deliverance in\nitself, was of the Holy Spirit, and proved the truth and constancy of\ntheir faith in the promised seed. When Eve named her son Cain, and\nwhen Lamech called his son Noah, these names were but birth cries, as\nthe apostle represents them, of the whole creation, groaning and\ntravailing in pain together, and earnestly expecting the resurrection\nof the dead, deliverance from sin, the restoration of all things, and\nthe manifestation of the sons of God, Rom 8, 19-23. The simplest and\ntrue meaning, accordingly, is that Lamech, after seeing the reality of\nthe future life demonstrated by the translation of Enoch from the\nafflictions and toils caused by sin, has a son born to him, whom he\ncalls Noah, which means rest, an expression of the hope that\ndeliverance from the curse of sin and sin itself shall take place\nthrough him. This interpretation accords with the analogy of faith,\nand confirms the hope for a resurrection and a life eternal.\n\n82. Such longing for the future life on the part of the holy men whose\nshoes we are unworthy to clean, contrasts strangely with the horrible\ningratitude of our time. How great the difference between having and\nwishing! Those patriarchs were men of transcendent holiness, equipped\nwith the highest endowments, the heroes of the world! In them we\nbehold the strongest desire for the seed which is to come; that is\ntheir greatest treasure; they thirst, they hunger, they yearn, they\npant for Christ! And we, who have Christ among us, who know him as one\nrevealed, offered, glorified, sitting at the right hand of God and\nmaking intercession for us--we despise him and hold him in greater\ncontempt than any other creature! O, the wretchedness of it! O, the\nsin of it!\n\n83. Note the difference between the several ages of the world! The\nprimeval age was the most excellent and holy. It contained the noblest\njewels of the whole human race. After the flood there still existed\nmany great and eminent men--patriarchs, and kings, and prophets; and\nalthough they were not the equals of the patriarchs before the flood,\nyet in them also there appeared a bright longing for Christ, as Christ\nsays: \"For I say unto you, that many prophets and kings desired to see\nthe things which ye see, and saw them not; and to hear the things\nwhich ye hear, and heard them not,\" Lk 10, 24. And then there is our\nown age, the age of the New Testament; to this Christ has been\nrevealed. This age is, as it were, the waste and dregs of the whole\nworld. It holds nothing in greater contempt than Christ, than whom a\nprevious age knew nothing more precious.\n\n84. What is the cause of this grave state of affairs? To be sure, our\nflesh, the world, and the devil. We altogether loathe what we have,\naccording to the proverb:\n\n   _Omne rarum carum; vilescit quotidianum._\n   \"All that's rare, is dear; vile is what is here.\"\n\nAnd apt is the poetic truism:\n\n   _Minuit praesentia famam._\n   \"Sight levels what fancy has exalted.\"\n\nAs far as the revelation is concerned, we are far richer than the\npatriarchs. But their devotion to a comparatively inferior revelation\nwas greater; they were lovers of the bridegroom. We, on the other\nhand, are that fat, bloated, wanton servant, Deut 32, 15; for we have\nthe Word and are overwhelmed by the abundance of it.\n\n85. In the same degree as the first world was excellent and holy, the\nlatter-day world is evil and wicked. In view of the fact, then, that\nGod did not spare the first, primitive world, and destroyed the second\nworld by overturning kingdom after kingdom, and government after\ngovernment, what shall we expect to be the end of this latter-day\nworld which in security despises the Christ, the desire of nations, as\nhe is called by Haggai, in spite of the fact that he urges himself\nupon us to the point of weariness!\n\n\nB. NOAH.\n\n   1. Remarkableness of the fact that Noah refrained so long from\n      wedlock 86.\n\n   2. He was fit to marry, but had reasons for abstaining 87.\n\n   3. What his reasons were 88.\n\n   4. His chastity is highly praised by Moses in few words 89.\n\n   5. The Jews' lies about the reasons for his chastity refuted 90-91.\n\n    * The Jews' lies as to why Shem was called the first-born 91.\n\n    * Papists without reason take offense at Moses relating so much\n      about the birth of the children of the patriarchs 92-93.\n\n   6. Noah shines like a bright star as an example of chastity among\n      all the patriarchs 93.\n\n   7. Noah remained single, not because he despised marriage; and why\n      he finally married 94.\n\n   8. How his sons were born one after the other 95-97.\n\n    * Why Shem was preferred to Japheth 96.\n\n    * How to meet the objections to the birth of Noah's sons 97.\n\n   9. Noah an excellent example of chastity 98.\n\n    * The threefold world.\n\n      a. The first world a truly golden age and the most holy. How and\n         why it was punished by God 99-100.\n\n      b. The second world is full of idolatry, and will be severely\n         punished by God 100.\n\n      c. The third world is the worst, and hence can expect the\n         hardest punishment 101.\n\n      d. The punishment of these three worlds portrayed in the colors\n         of the rainbow 101.\n\n      e. How believing hearts act upon considering sin and the world's\n         punishment 102.\n\n\nB. NOAH.\n\nV. 32. _And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham,\nand Japheth._\n\n86. Here again we meet with surprising brevity. As is his custom,\nMoses expresses in the fewest possible words the greatest and most\nimportant things, which the ignorant reader passes by unobserved. But\nyou will say, perhaps, Of what import is it that Noah first begat sons\nwhen he was five hundred years old? Why, if Noah had no children all\nthose 500 years, he either endured that length of time the severe\ntrial of unfruitfulness or, as appears to me more likely, he abstained\nfrom marriage all those years, setting an example of most marvelous\nchastity. I do not speak here of the abominable chastity of the\nPapists; nor of our own. Look at the prophets and the apostles, and\neven at some of the other patriarchs, who doubtless were chaste and\nholy. But what are they in comparison with this man Noah, who,\npossessed of masculine vigor, managed to live a chaste life without\nmarriage for five hundred years?\n\n87. Now you will scarcely find one in a thousand among the men of our\nage who, at the age of thirty, has not known woman. Moreover, Noah,\nafter he had lived a single life for so many centuries, at length took\nto himself a wife, and begat children; which latter fact carries its\nown proof that he was in a state appropriate for marriage prior to\nthis, and had a definite reason for practicing continence.\n\n88. In the first place, it is evident that such unequaled chastity\nmust necessarily have been a peculiar gift of God. It evinced a nature\nalmost angelic. It does not seem a thing possible in the nature of man\nto live 500 years without knowing a wife. In the next place these five\ncenturies of chastity in Noah manifest some signal displeasure with\nthe world. For what other reason are we to conclude that he abstained\nfrom marriage than because he had seen the descendants of his uncle\nand aunt degenerate into giants and tyrants, filling the world with\nviolence? He thought in consequence, that he would rather have no\nchildren at all than such as those. And my belief is that he would\nnever have taken to himself a wife at all if he had not been\nadmonished and commanded so to do either by the patriarchs or by some\nangel. He who had refrained from marriage for 500 years might have\nrefrained during all the rest of his life.\n\n89. In this manner Moses explains in brief words exceedingly weighty\nfacts, and, what the ignorant reader would never observe owing to the\nfailure of chastity being mentioned in express words, he commends the\nchastity of Noah above that of all the other inhabitants of the\nprimeval world, setting him up as an example of all but angelic\nchastity.\n\n90. The Jews, according to their custom, play the fool, and fable that\nNoah for centuries denied himself a wife because he knew that God\nwould destroy the world by the flood. If, therefore, Noah had married,\nlike all the other patriarchs, in the earlier part of his life--that\nis, when he was about a hundred years old or less--he himself would\nhave peopled the world in the space of 400 years; and then God would\nhave been compelled to destroy both the father himself and the whole\nof his progeny. To this fable they add the other, that Shem was called\nthe first-born for the reason that he was the first to receive\ncircumcision.\n\n91. In a word, these Jews corrupt everything and twist it to suit\ntheir own carnal bent and ambition. If Noah abstained from marriage\nfor the reason which they assign, why did not all the other\npatriarchs, for the same reason, abstain from marriage and fatherhood?\nThese comments of the rabbins are accordingly frivolous and\nnonsensical. Why do they not rather urge the real cause, that it was a\nspecial gift that Noah, a vigorous man, abstained from marriage for\nfive hundred years? Throughout the course of time no instance of such\ncontinence is found.\n\n92. The book of Genesis highly offends the Papists because it mentions\nso often that the fathers begat sons and daughters. They say of this\nbook that it is a book in which little more is contained than the\nrecord that the patriarchs were men of extravagant love for their\nwives; and they consider it obscene that Moses should make mention of\nsuch things with such attention to detail. But, in the impurity of\ntheir hearts, they can not refrain from befouling the most exalted\nchastity.\n\n93. If you would really behold the brightest examples of chastity the\nwhole world contains, read Moses as he relates that the patriarchs did\nnot marry until they were of advanced age. Among them Noah shines\nforth a star of first magnitude, inasmuch as he did not marry until he\nhad reached the five hundredth year of his life. Where will you find\nsuch eminent examples of chastity in the papacy? Although there are\nsome among the Papists who do not actually sin with their bodies, yet\nhow foul and filthy are their minds! And all this is judgment upon\ntheir contempt for marriage, which God himself has designed to be a\nremedy for the corruption of nature.\n\n94. Another reason why Noah refrained from marriage has been\nmentioned. He did not condemn marriage, nor did he consider it to be a\nprofane or impure manner of life; but he saw that the descendants of\nthe elder patriarchs had degenerated to the level of the ungodly\ngeneration of the Cainites. Such children as these he felt he could\nnot endure; he rather waited, in the fear of God, the end of the\nworld. When afterwards he did enter into marriage, and begat children,\nhe no doubt did it by reason of some particular admonition and command\nof God.\n\n95. Here a question naturally arises concerning the order in which\nNoah's sons were born. It will be worth our while to inquire into this\nmatter, so that our computation of the years of the world may have a\nreliable basis. The common opinion is that Shem was the first-born of\nNoah, because his name is mentioned first in order. The testimony of\nScripture, however, compels us to conclude that Japheth was the\nfirst-born, Shem the second, and Ham the last. The truth of this is\nproved in the following manner: Shem begat his son Arpachshad two\nyears after the flood, when he was 100 years old, Gen 11, 10. Hence\nShem was 98 years old when the flood came, and Noah, when Shem was\nborn, was 498 years old. But Japheth was evidently born before Shem,\nfor he was the elder brother, Gen 10, 21. It plainly follows,\ntherefore, that only Ham, the youngest brother, was born when Noah was\n500 years old.\n\n96. The reason why Shem is mentioned before Japheth is not because he\nwas first circumcised, as the Jews, who always are hunting carnal\nglory, falsely claim, but because it was through him that Christ, the\npromised seed, was to come. For the same reason, Abraham, the\nyoungest, is given precedence to his brothers, Haran and Nahor.\n\n97. But you will perhaps say, How does this agree with the text which\npositively says, \"Noah was five hundred years old; and Noah begat\nShem, Ham and Japheth\"? Harmony is restored if you make out of the\npreterit a pluperfect, and read the passage thus:--When Noah was five\nhundred years old he had begotten Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Moses does\nnot record the particular year in which each son was born, but merely\nmentions the year in which the number of sons born to Noah reached\nthree. Thus the biblical record is reduced to harmony.\n\n98. As conclusion to the fifth chapter Moses presents the finest and\nmost noteworthy example of chastity. Saintly and continent throughout\nhis career, Noah had just rounded out his fifth century when he began\nmarried life. Thus far, he had renounced matrimony, repelled by the\nlicentiousness of the young, who were drifting into the depravity of\nthe Cainites. Notwithstanding, at the call of God, he obediently\nentered upon marriage, although it was quite possible for him to\nremain chaste, as a celibate.\n\n99. Such is the description given by Moses of the first, the original\nworld, in five brief chapters. But it is readily seen that in the\nbeginning was the real golden age of which poets have made mention,\ntheir information being doubtless the traditions and the utterances of\nthe fathers.\n\n100. But as the sins of men increased, God spared not the old world,\nbut destroyed it by a flood utterly, even as he did not spare it when\nunder the dispensation of the Law. Because of its idolatry and the\nimpiousness of its worship, he not only overturned one kingdom after\nanother, but even his own people, the Jews, having been severely\npunished at his hands by various afflictions and captivities, were at\nlength utterly destroyed by the Roman armies.\n\n101. Our age, which is the third age of the world, although it is the\nage of grace, is so filled with blasphemies and abominations that it\nis not possible either to express them in language or to form a mental\nimage of them. This age therefore shall not be punished by temporal\npunishment, but by eternal death and eternal fire, or, if I may so\nexpress it, by a flood of fire. The very rainbow even, with its\ncolors, contains a prophetic intimation of these things. The first\ncolor is sea-green, representing the destruction of the first world by\nthe waters of the flood, because of violence and lust; the middle\ncolor of the bow is yellow, prefiguring the various calamities by\nwhich God avenged the idolatry and wickedness of the second age; the\nthird and last color of the bow is fiery red, for fire shall at length\nconsume the world, with all its iniquities and sins.\n\n102. Wherefore, let us constantly pray that God may so rule our hearts\nby his fear and may so fill us with confidence in his mercy, that we\nare able with joy to await our deliverance and the righteous\npunishment of this ungodly world. Amen. Amen.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\n\nI. THE SINS OF THE FIRST WORLD, THE CAUSE OF ITS DESTRUCTION.\n\n * How this chapter and the preceding one are connected 1.\n\n * It is terrible that God destroyed by a flood the first world, which\n   was the best 2.\n\n * Of pride and the proud.\n\n      1. How God humbles what is high and grand in the eyes of the\n         world and has the best gifts 3-4.\n\n       * How man can meet the judgments of God 4.\n\n      2. The more gifts man has the greater his pride 5.\n\n      3. The most terrible examples of punishment God gives in the\n         case of the proud and such examples should be diligently\n         pondered 6-7.\n\n       * The complaint that the world is hardened by reason of God's\n         judgments 7-8.\n\n      4. How the ancient world was misled into pride through its gifts\n         9-10.\n\n      5. Pride is the common weakness of human nature 11.\n\n      6. In what ways man is moved to pride 12-13.\n\n         a. The chief sin of the old world 14-15.\n\n          * Pride is the spring of all vices 15.\n\n         b. How the old world sinned against the first table of the\n            law, and brought on the sins against the second table 16.\n\n         c. How and why God punished the old world 17.\n\n          * From the punishment of the first world we conclude that\n            the last world will be also punished 18.\n\n         d. Whether the first world was wicked before Noah's birth; on\n            what occasion its wickedness increased 19.\n\n          * Noah the martyr of martyrs 20.\n\n          * Why Lamech called his son Noah 21.\n\n         e. How sin greatly increased in the days of Noah 22.\n\n          * Why Noah remained unmarried so long, which was his\n            greatest cross 23.\n\n         f. When the wickedness of the old world began 24.\n\n          * Concerning unchastity.\n\n            (1) It is the foundation of all want and misery 24.\n\n            (2) It is the spring of many other sins 25.\n\n            (3) How to remedy it 25.\n\n            (4) Whether bearing children is in itself to be reckoned\n                as unchastity, and how far Moses denounces it 26.\n\n            (5) Unchastity makes the bearing of children difficult 27.\n\n         g. The reason the sons of God looked upon the daughters of\n            men 28.\n\n         h. Why the sin of the first world was not so terrible as the\n            sin of the second 29-30.\n\n         i. How the first world changed through the marriages of Adam\n            and the other patriarchs 30-32.\n\n          * The sons of God.\n\n            (1) What is understood by them 32.\n\n            (2) The rabbins' fables about the sons of God, how to\n                refute them 33-34.\n\n              * What is to be held concerning the \"Incubis\" and\n                \"Succubis\" 34-35.\n\n            (3) How the deluge came because of the sons of God 36.\n\n            (4) To what end should the fall and punishment of the sons\n                of God serve us 37-38.\n\n              * Should the Romish church be called holy 37.\n\n              * How the children of God became the children of the\n                devil 38.\n\n              * How Noah had to spend his life among a host of\n                villains 39.\n\n              * The conduct of the world when God sends it righteous\n                servants 40.\n\n\nI. THE SINS OF THE PRIMEVAL WORLD IN GENERAL THE CAUSE OF ITS\nDESTRUCTION.\n\n1. In the first five chapters Moses describes the state of the human\nrace in the primeval world and the wonderful glory of the holy\npatriarchs who governed it. In these five chapters the chronicles as\nin the first book, so to speak, the happiest period of the whole human\nrace and of the world before the flood. Now we shall begin what may be\ntermed the second book of Genesis, containing the history of the\nflood. It shows the destruction of all the offspring of Cain and the\neternal preservation of the generation of the righteous; for while\neverything perishes in the flood, the generation of the righteous is\nsaved as an eternal world.\n\n2. It is appalling that the whole human race except eight persons is\ndestroyed, in view of the fact that this was truly the golden age; for\nsucceeding ages do not equal the old world in glory, greatness and\nmajesty. And if God visited with destruction his own perfect creation\nand the very glory of the human race, we have just cause for fear.\n\n3. In inflicting this punishment, God followed his own peculiar way.\nWhatever is most exalted he particularly overthrows and humiliates.\nPeter says in 2 Peter 2, 5: God \"spared not the ancient world;\" and he\nwould imply that it was, in comparison with succeeding ages, a\nveritable paradise. Neither did he spare the sublimest creatures--the\nangels--nor the kings ruling his people, nor the first-born of all\ntimes. But the more highly they were blessed with gifts, the more\nsternly he punished them when they began to misuse his gifts.\n\n4. The Holy Spirit says in the ninth verse of the second psalm,\nconcerning kings: \"Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou\nshalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.\" But is it not the\nLord himself who has ordained kings and wills that all men should\nhonor and obey them? Here he condemns and spurns the wisdom of the\nprudent and the righteousness of the righteous. It is God's proper and\nincessant work to condemn what is most magnificent, to cast down the\nmost exalted and to defeat the strongest, though they be his own\ncreatures. He does this, however, that abundant evidence of his wrath\nmay terrify the ungodly and may arouse us to despair of ourselves and\nto trust in his power alone. We must either live under the shadow of\nGod's wing, in faith in his grace, or we must perish.\n\n5. After the fall it came to pass that the more one was blessed with\ngifts, the greater was his pride. This was the sin of the angels who\nfell. This was the sin of the primitive world, in which the grandest\npeople of the race lived; but because they prided themselves in their\nwisdom and other gifts, they perished. This was the sin of the\ngreatest kings. This was the sin of nearly all the first-born. But\nwhat is the need of so many words? This is original sin--that we fail\nto recognize and rightly use the great and precious gifts of God.\n\n6. That the greatest men must furnish the most abhorrent examples is\nnot the fault of the gifts and blessings, but of those to whom they\nare intrusted. God is a dialectician and judges the person by the\nthing,[1] meting out destruction to the thing or gift as well as to\nits possessor.\n\n[Footnote 1: _ut arguat a conjugatis._]\n\n7. It is expedient to give heed to such examples. They are given that\nthe proud may fear and be humbled, and that we may learn our utter\ndependence upon the guidance and will of God, who resisteth the proud\nbut giveth grace to the humble. Lacking the understanding and practice\nof these truths, man falls continually--kings, nobles, saints, one\nafter the other, filling the world with examples of the wrath and\njudgment of God. The Blessed Virgin sings: \"He hath scattered the\nproud in the imagination of their heart. He hath put down the princes\nfrom their thrones, and hath exalted them of low degree.\" Lk 1, 51-53.\n\n8. Full of such examples are all ages, all princely courts, all lands.\nYet, by the grace of Saint Diabolus, the prince of this world, our\nhearts are so hard that we are not moved by all this to fear; rather\nto disdain, though we feel and see that we also shall incur\ndestruction. Blessed are they, therefore, who heed, and are moved by\nsuch examples of wrath to be humble and to live in the fear of God.\n\n9. Consider, then, the preeminence of the old world, that perished in\nthe flood. It possessed apparently the best, holiest and noblest men,\ncompared with whom we are as the dregs of the world. For the\nScriptures do not say that they were wicked and unjust among\nthemselves, but toward God. \"He saw,\" says Moses, \"that they were\nevil.\" The eyes of God perceive and judge quite differently from the\neyes of men. He says in Isaiah 55, 8-9: \"Neither are your ways my\nways.... For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways\nhigher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.\"\n\n10. These tyrants and giants were esteemed and honored among\nthemselves as the wisest and most just of men. So in our day kings and\nprinces, popes and bishops, theologians, physicians, jurists and\nnoblemen occupy exalted places and receive honor as the very gems and\nluminaries of the human race. More deservedly did the children of God\nin the old world receive such honor, because they excelled in power\nand possessed many gifts. Nevertheless, falling into pride and\ncontempt of God while enjoying his blessings, they were rejected by\nGod and destroyed, together with their gifts, as if they had been the\nlowest and vilest of the human race.\n\n11. And this is a common failing of our human nature. It necessarily\npuffs itself up and prides itself on its gifts unless restrained by\nthe Holy Spirit. I have often said that a man has no more dangerous\nenemy than himself. It is my own experience that I have not without me\nso great cause for fear as within me; for it is our inner gifts that\nincite our nature to pride.\n\n12. As God, who is by nature most kind, cannot refrain from gracing\nand showering us with various gifts: health, property, wisdom, skill,\nknowledge of Scripture, etc., so we cannot refrain from priding\nourselves upon these gifts and flaunting them. Wretched is our life\nwhen we lack the gifts of God, but twice wretched is it when we have\nthem; for they tend to make us doubly wicked. Such is the corruption\nof original sin, though all but believers are either unaware of its\nexistence or regard it a trivial thing.\n\n13. Such corruption is perceptible not only in ourselves but in\nothers. How property inflates pride though it occupies relatively the\nlowest place among blessings! The rich, be they noblemen,\ncity-dwellers or peasants, deem other people as flies. To even a\ngreater extent are the higher gifts abused--wisdom and righteousness.\nPossession of these gifts, then, makes inevitable this condition--God\ncannot suffer such pride and we cannot refrain from it.\n\n14. This was the sin of that primeval world. Among Cain's descendants\nwere good and wise men, who, nevertheless, before God were most\nwicked, for they prided themselves upon their gifts and despised God,\nthe author. Such offense the world does not perceive and condemn; God\nalone is its judge.\n\n15. Where these spiritual vices exist and flourish, the lapse into\ncarnal ones is imminent. According to Sirach 10, 14, sin begins with\nfalling from God. The devil's first fall is from heaven into hell;\nthat is, from the first table of the Law into the second. When people\nbegin to be godless--when they do not fear and trust God, but despise\nhim, his Word and his servants--the result is that from the true\ndoctrine they pass into heretical delusions and teach, defend and\ncultivate them. These sins in the eyes of the world are accounted the\ngreatest holiness, and their authors alone are reputed religious,\nGod-fearing and just, and held to constitute the Church, the family of\nGod. People are unable to judge concerning the sins of the first\ntable. Those who despise God sooner or later fall into abominable\nadultery, theft, murder and other gross sins against the second table.\n\n16. The purpose of my statements is to make plain that the old world\nwas guilty, not only of sin against the second table, but most of all\nof sin against the first table by making a fine, but deceptive and\nfalse show of wisdom, godliness, devotion and religion. As a result of\nthe ungodliness which flourished in opposition to the first table,\nthere followed that moral corruption of which Moses speaks in this\nchapter, that the people polluted themselves with all sorts of lust\nand afterward filled the world with oppression, bloodshed and wrong.\n\n17. Because the ungodly world had trampled both tables under foot, God\ncame to judge it, who is a consuming fire and a jealous God. He so\npunishes ungodliness that he turns everything into sheer desolation,\nand neither government nor the governed remain. We may, therefore,\ninfer that the world was the better the nearer it was to Adam, but\nthat it degenerated from day to day until our time, when the\noffscouring and lowest filth of humanity, as it were, are living.\n\n18. Now, if God did not spare a world endowed with so many and great\ngifts, what have we to hope for, who, offal that we are, are subject\nto far greater misfortune and wretchedness? But if it please God,\nspare the Roman pontiff and his holy bishops, who do not believe such\nthings! I now come to my text.\n\nVs. 1-2. _And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face\nof the ground, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God\nsaw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives\nof all that they chose._\n\n19. This is a very brief but comprehensive account. The text must not\nbe understood to mean that the world did not increase until the five\nhundredth year of Noah. The more ancient patriarchs are embraced in\nthis statement. This is demonstrated by the fact that Noah had no\ndaughters. The reference in the text to \"daughters\" certainly must be\nunderstood as referring to the by-gone age of Lamech, Methuselah,\nEnoch and others. The world, accordingly, was corrupt and evil before\nNoah was born, particularly when licentiousness began to prevail after\nthe death of Adam, whose authority, as the first father, they feared.\n\n20. I have said that Noah was a virgin above all others; I may add he\nwas the greatest of all martyrs. Our so-called martyrs, compared with\nhim, have infinite advantage in strength received from the Holy\nSpirit, by which death is overcome and all trials and perils are\nescaped. Noah lived among the unrighteous for six hundred years, and\nlike Lot at Sodom, not without numerous and dire perils and trials.\n\n21. This was, perhaps, one reason why Father Lamech gave his son the\nname Noah at his birth. When the holy patriarch saw evil abounding in\nthe world, he entertained the hope concerning his son that he should\ncomfort the righteous by opposing sin and its author, Satan, and\nrestoring lost righteousness.\n\n22. However, the wickedness that began then, not only failed to cease\nunder Noah, but rather grew greater. Hence Noah is the martyr of\nmartyrs. For is it not much easier to be delivered from all danger and\nsuffering in a single hour than to live for centuries amid colossal\nwickedness?\n\n23. The opinion before expressed I maintain, that Noah abstained from\nmatrimony so long that he might not be compelled to witness and suffer\nin his own offspring what he saw in the descendants of the other\nsaints. This sight of man's wickedness was his greatest cross, as\nPeter says of Lot in Sodom (2 Pet 2, 8): \"That righteous man dwelling\namong them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day\nto day with their lawless deeds.\"\n\n24. Accordingly, the increase of humanity of which Moses speaks has\nnot reference alone to the time of Noah, but also to the age of the\nother patriarchs. It was there that the violation of the first table\ncommenced--in the contempt manifested for Jehovah and his Word. This\nwas followed later by such gross offenses as oppression, tyranny and\nlewdness, which Moses explicitly mentions and names first as the cause\nof evil. Consult all history, study the Greek tragedies and the\naffairs of barbarians and Romans of all times, and you find lust the\nmother of every kind of trouble. It can not be otherwise. Where God's\nWord remains unknown or unheeded, men will plunge into lust.\n\n25. Lust draws in its train endless other evils, as pride, oppression,\nperjury and the like. These sins can be attacked only as men, through\nthe first table, learn to fear and to trust in God. Then it is that\nthey follow the Word as a lamp going before in the dark, and they will\nnot indulge in such scandalous deeds, but will rather beware of them.\nWith violation of the first table, however, the spread of passions and\nsins of every description is inevitable.\n\n26. But it seems strange that Moses should enumerate in the catalog of\nsins the begetting of daughters. He had found it commendable in the\ncase of the patriarchs. It is even enjoyed by the ungodly as a\nblessing of God. Why, therefore, does Moses call it a sin?\n\nI reply, he does not condemn the fact of procreation as such, but the\nabuse of it, resulting from original sin. To be endowed with royal\nmajesty, wisdom, wealth and bodily strength is a goodly blessing. It\nis God who bestows these gifts. But when men, in possession of these\nblessings, fail to reverence the first table, and by means of these\nvery gifts do violence to it, such wickedness merits punishment.\nTherein is the reason for Moses' peculiar words: \"The sons of God saw\nthe daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of\nall that they chose,\" without consideration of God or of law, natural\nor statutory.\n\n27. The first table having been despised, the second shares the same\nfate. Desire occupies the principal place and in contempt for\nprocreation it becomes purely bestial; whereas God has instituted\nmatrimony as an aid to feeble nature and chiefly for the purpose of\nprocreation. But when lust in this manner has gained the upper hand,\nall commandments, those that go before and that follow, are ruthlessly\nbroken and dishonored. Parental honor becomes insecure; men do not\nshrink from doing murder; from alienating property, speaking false\ntestimony, etc.\n\n28. The word _jiru_, \"saw,\" does not merely signify \"to view,\" but \"to\nview with pleasure and enjoyment.\" This meaning often occurs in the\npsalms, for instance: \"Mine eye also hath seen my desire on mine\nenemies,\" Ps 92, 11; that is, shall with pleasure see vengeance\nexecuted upon my enemies. The meaning here is that, after turning\ntheir eyes from God and his Word, they turned them, filled with lust,\nupon the daughters of men. The sequence is unerring that, from the\nviolation of the first table, men rush to the violation of the second.\nAfter despising God they despised also the laws of nature and, as they\npleased, they married whom they chose.\n\n29. These are rather harsh words, and yet it is my opinion that lust\ncontinued hitherto within certain limits, inasmuch as they neither\ncommitted incest with their mothers, as later the inhabitants of\nCanaan, nor polluted themselves with the vice of the Sodomites. Moses\nconfines his charge to their casting aside the legal trammels set by\nthe patriarchs and recognizing in their matrimonial alliances no law\nbut that of lust, selecting only as passion directed and against the\nwill of the parents.\n\n30. It seems the patriarchs had strictly forbidden to contract\nalliances with the offspring of Cain, just as, later, the Jews could\nnot lawfully mingle with the Canaanites. Though there are not wanting\nthose who write that incestuous marriages existed before the flood,\nblood-relationship being held to be no barrier, I yet infer from the\nfact that Peter has extolled the old world, that such incestuous\natrocities did not exist at that time, but that the sin of the ancient\nworld consisted rather in men marrying whom they pleased, and as many\nwives from the Cainites as they chose, ignoring parental authority and\ncontrolled alone by passion. It is, therefore, a harsh word--\"All\nwhich they chose.\"\n\n31. I have shown, on various occasions, that the two generations, or\nchurches, of Adam and Cain were separate. For, as Moses clearly\nstates, Adam expelled the murderer from his association. Without\ndoubt, therefore, Adam also exhorted his offspring to avoid the church\nof the evil-doers and not to mingle with the accursed generation of\nCain. And for a while his counsel or command was obeyed.\n\n32. But when Adam died and the authority of the other patriarchs\nbecame an object of scorn, the sons of God who had the promise of the\nblessed seed and themselves belonged to the blessed seed, craved from\nthe tribe of the ungodly, intercourse and espousal. He tersely calls\nthe sons of the patriarchs the \"sons of God,\" since to them was given\nthe promise of the blessed seed and they constituted the true Church.\nYielding to the corruptions of the Cainite church they indulged the\nflesh themselves and took from the tribe of Cain, as wives and\nmistresses, whom and as many as they chose. This Lamech and Noah saw\nwith pain, and for that reason, perhaps, deferred entering upon\nmarriage.\n\n33. In reference to this point the Jews fancy foolish things. They\ninterpret the sons of God to signify demon-lechers by whom that\nimpious generation was begotten, and that they were called the sons of\nGod by reason of their spiritual nature. The more moderate ones,\nhowever, refute such folly and represent the sons of the mighty. This\nhas been aptly disproved by Lyra; for the punishment of the deluge\nbefell, not alone the mighty, but all flesh, as shall the doom at the\nlast day.\n\n34. But as regards the demon-lechers and strumpets (incubi and\nsuccubi), I do not deny--nay, I believe--that a demon may be either a\nlecher or a strumpet, for I have heard men cite their own experience.\nAugustine says that he heard this from trustworthy people whom he was\nconstrained to believe. Satan is pleased when he can deceive us in\nthis manner, by assuming the form either of a young man or a young\nwoman. But that anything may be begotten by a devil and a human being\nis simply false. We hear of monstrous births of demon-like features,\nand I have even seen some. I am of opinion, however, that they have\nbeen deformed by the devil, but not begotten: or that they are real\ndevils with a human body either simulated or purloined. For if the\ndevil, by divine permission, may take possession of the whole man and\nchange his mind, is it strange that he may disfigure also his body,\ncausing men to be born sightless or cripples?\n\n35. Hence, the devil may so deceive frivolous people and such as live\nwithout the fear of God that when the devil is in bed, a young man may\nthink that he has a girl with him, and a girl that she has a youth\nwith her; but that anything may be born from such concubinage I do not\nbelieve. Many sorceresses have at one time or another been subjected\nto death at the stake on account of their intercourse with demons. If\nthe devil can deceive eyes and ears so that they fancy they see and\nhear things which do not exist, how much easier is it for him to\ndeceive the sense of touch, which is in this nature exceedingly gross!\nBut enough! These explanations have no bearing upon the present text,\nand we have been led to them merely by Jewish babbling.\n\n36. The true meaning is that Moses calls those men the sons of God,\nwho had the promise of the blessed seed. This is a New Testament\nphrase and signifies the believers who call God, Father, and whom, God\nin turn, calls sons. The flood came not because the generation of Cain\nwas corrupt, but because the generation of the righteous who had\nbelieved God, had obeyed his Word, and had possessed the true worship,\nnow had lapsed into idolatry, disobedience to parents, sensuality,\noppression. Even so the last day shall be hastened, not by the\nprofligacy of Gentile, Turk and Jew, but by the filling of the Church\nwith errors through the pope and fanatical spirits, so that those very\nones who occupy the highest place in the Church exercise themselves in\nsensuality, lust and oppression.\n\n37. It is a cause of fear for us all, that even those who were\ndescended from the best patriarchs, began to grow haughty and depart\nfrom the Word. They gloried in their wisdom and righteousness, as\nlater the Jews did in circumcision and Father Abraham. So did the\npopes glory in the title of the Church only to replace gradually their\nspiritual glory by carnal indulgence after forfeiting the knowledge of\nGod, his Word and his worship. The Roman Church was truly holy and\nadorned by the grandest martyrs. We, at this day, however, are\nwitnesses how she has fallen.\n\n38. Let no one, therefore, glory in his gifts, however splendid! The\ngreatest gift is to be a member of the true Church. But take care not\nto become proud on that account, for you may fall, just as Lucifer\nfell from heaven and, as we are here informed, as the sons of God fell\ninto carnal pleasures. They are, therefore, no longer sons of God, but\nsons of Satan, having fallen alike from the first and the second table\nof the Law. So in the past, popes and bishops have been good and holy,\nbut today they are of all men the worst and, so to speak, the dregs of\nall classes.\n\n39. Among this rabble of decadent men who had departed from the piety\nand virtues of their ancestors, godly Noah lived in the greatest\ncontempt and hatred of everybody. How could he approve the corruption\nof such degenerate progeny? And they themselves were most impatient of\nreproof. While, therefore, his example shone and gleamed, and his\nholiness filled the whole earth, the world became worse from day to\nday, and the greater the sanctity and chastity of Noah, the more the\nworld reveled in lust. This is the beginning; it invariably introduces\nruin.\n\n40. When God arouses holy men, full of the Holy Spirit, to instruct\nand reprove the world, the world, impatient of sound doctrine, falls\nwith much greater zeal into sin and plies it with much greater\npersistency. This was the situation at the beginning of the world, and\nnow, at the end of the world, we realize it is still the case.\n\n\nII. GOD'S JUDGMENT AND GRIEF OVER THE FIRST WORLD; NOAH AND HIS\n    PREACHING.\n\n   A. GOD'S JUDGMENT AND LAMENTATION OVER THE OLD WORLD.\n\n      1. The words of the lamentation.\n\n         a. Interpreters have shamefully perverted these words 41.\n\n         b. The Jewish interpretation, which Jerome follows 42.\n\n         c. The Jews' interpretation refuted 42-43.\n\n         d. The interpretation of Rabbi Solomon 44.\n\n         e. The interpretation of others, especially of Origen 45.\n\n          * Why Augustine was especially pleased with the doctrine of\n            the Manicheans 45.\n\n         f. Rabbi David's explanation 46.\n\n          * The false idea of the Jews and some Christian interpreters\n            that the true sense of Scripture is learned from grammar.\n\n            (1) Thus ideas most foreign to the sense of Scripture are\n                defended 46-47.\n\n            (2) This method is false and led the Jews into many\n                fantasies 47.\n\n         g. The source of Rabbi David's awkward interpretation of\n            these words 48.\n\n          * Why Luther has so much to say about the false\n            interpretation of Scripture 49.\n\n          * What is necessary to interpret Scripture 50.\n\n         h. The true sense of these words 51.\n\n          * Scripture definition of \"to judge\" 51.\n\n      2. The author of this judgment and lamentation 51-53.\n\n       * Man's conduct upon hearing God's Word preached 54.\n\n      3. From what kind of a heart does such judgment and lamentation\n         spring 55.\n\n       * What kind of grief is the grief of the Holy Spirit 56.\n\n       * God's severest punishment 57-59.\n\n       * What follows when man does not possess God's Word 57-58.\n\n       * Why the heathen are so carnal 58.\n\n      4. The nature of this judgment and lamentation 59.\n\n       * The lamentation and judgment of Luther over Germany because\n         it lightly esteemed God's Word 60.\n\n       * The spirit of grace and of prayer 61.\n\n       * The office of the ministry.\n\n         a. It requires two things 62.\n\n         b. It is the greatest blessing of God 63.\n\n         c. To despise it is a great sin, and what follows when it is\n            taken from a people 63.\n\n         d. A complaint of its neglect 64.\n\n         e. This office is explained by the expression \"to judge\" 65.\n\n          * Every godly preacher is one who disputes and judges 65.\n\n          * Luther's grief because of the stubbornness of the world\n            66.\n\n          * Why Ahab called Elijah a troubler of Israel 67.\n\n          * Why the world resents being reproved by sound doctrine. It\n            is a good sign if a minister is reviled by the world 68.\n\n       * The glory of people who boast of being the Church.\n\n         a. Such glory avails nothing before God 68-70.\n\n         b. Papists wish by all means to have this glory 68-70.\n\n         c. Papists need this glory to suppress the Protestants 71.\n\n         d. Christ will decide at the judgment day to whom this glory\n            belongs 71.\n\n         e. Although the first world adorned itself with this glory,\n            it did not save them 72.\n\n      5. How and why this judgment and complaint are ascribed to God\n         73-74.\n\n      6. How they were published to the world by the holy patriarchs\n         75.\n\n      7. Why they were made 76.\n\n      8. In what way they have been published to the world 77.\n\n      9. How the world resented this judgment and complaint 78.\n\n       * Time given to the first world for repentance.\n\n         a. We are not to understand the 120 years as the period of a\n            man's life 79.\n\n         b. The 120 years the time given these people in which to\n            repent 80-81.\n\n     10. Whether and to what end this time was necessary 82.\n\n     11. How the old world felt upon hearing this 83.\n\n       * The complaint and judgment of the last world 84-86.\n\n       * The nearer the world approaches its destruction the less it\n         thinks of it 86.\n\n       * How the time of the flood is to be compared with the time God\n         gives man to repent 87.\n\n\nII. THE JUDGMENT AND LAMENTATION OF GOD OVER THE FIRST WORLD; NOAH AND\nHIS PREACHING.\n\nA. GOD'S JUDGMENT AND LAMENTATION OVER THE OLD WORLD.\n\nV. 3. _Jehovah said, \"My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for\nthat he also is flesh: yet shall his days be a hundred and twenty\nyears.\"_\n\n41. Moses here begins by describing Noah as the highest pontiff and\npriest, or, as Peter calls him, a preacher of righteousness. This text\nhas been mangled in various ways, for the natural man cannot\nunderstand spiritual things. When, therefore, the interpreters, with\nunwashed feet and hands, rushed into the Holy Scriptures, taking with\nthem a human bias and method, as they themselves acknowledge, they\ncould not but fall into diverse and erroneous views. It has almost\ncome to pass, that the more sublime and spiritual the utterances of\nScripture, the more shamefully they have been distorted. This passage\nin particular they have managed so shamelessly that you would not know\nwhat to believe, if you followed the interpreters.\n\n42. The Jews are the first to crucify Moses here, for this is their\nexposition: My Spirit, that is my indignation and wrath, shall not\nalways abide upon man. I will not be angry with men, but spare them,\nfor they are flesh. That means, being spurred by sin, they incline to\nsin. This meaning Jerome also adopts, who is of the opinion that here\nonly the sin of lust is spoken of, to which we are all prone by\nnature. But his first error is that he interprets Spirit as wrath. It\nis the Holy Spirit Moses here speaks of, as the contrast shows. \"For\nman,\" he says, \"is flesh.\" The meaning is, therefore, that the flesh\nis not only prone to sin, but also hostile toward God.\n\n43. Then the matter itself serves as refutation, for could anything\nmore absurd have been devised? They see with their eyes the wrath of\nGod swallowing the whole human race through the flood, and yet they\nexpound that God does not wish to be influenced toward the human race\nby anger but by mercy, and this after a hundred and twenty years, the\nvery time of the flood.\n\n44. Rabbi Solomon expounds it thus: The Spirit which is in God shall\nno more strive and wrangle. As if God in his majesty would have\ndisputed and wrangled about what should be done with man, whether to\ndestroy or to spare him, finally, wearied by man's wickedness,\ndetermining upon his destruction, nevertheless.\n\n45. Others understand this of the created spirit: My spirit that I\nbreathed upon the face of man, that is the spirit of man, shall no\nlonger strive and contend with the flesh, which is in subjection to\nits lusts, for I shall take away this spirit and free it from the\nflesh, so that when the latter has become extinct, it may create no\nmore difficulties for the spirit. This is the understanding of Origen,\nand it does not differ much from the Manichean error which attributes\nsin not to the whole man, but only to a part. And Augustine says that\nthis had pleased him most in the tenets of the Manicheans, to hear\nthat his depravity was not altogether his, but only of that part of\nthe body which is evil from the beginning. The Manicheans posited two\nprinciples, the good and the bad, just as certain philosophers have\nposited enmity and friendship. Thus do men not only miss the mark, but\nthey also fall into ungodly delusions.\n\n46. Rabbi David cites Sanctes, and derives the word _jadon_ from\n_nadan_, which means sheath, or shell. But as the interpretation is\nvery clumsy, so he clothes it also in a very clumsy word: My Spirit\nshall not be inclosed in man as in a sheath. Has anything more\nunnatural ever been heard? But the Jews make a laughing-stock of\nmodern Hebraists when they convince them that the Holy Scriptures can\nnot be understood except through grammatical rules and an exact\nscience of vowel-points. No exposition is so absurd but that they\ndefend and polish it with their stale grammatical rules.\n\n47. But tell me, what language has there ever been that men easily\nhave learned to speak from grammatical rules? Is it not true that the\nvery languages most thoroughly reduced to rules, like Greek and Latin,\nare learned rather by practice? What stupendous absurdity, therefore,\nit is to gather the sense of a sacred tongue, which is the repository\nof things theological and spiritual, from grammatical rules, and to\npay no attention to the proper signification of things? And this is\nwhat the rabbis and their disciples do almost universally. Many words\nand verbs may be declined for which no use is seen in the language.\nWhile they make such things paramount and everywhere chase anxiously\nafter etymology, they fall into strange fancies.\n\n48. So here. Because the word in this passage can be derived from\n_nadan_, they construct from that a prodigious meaning. My spirit,\nthey say, shall not be held back as in a sheath. They mean the spirit\nof man contained in the body as in a sheath. I shall not leave it in a\nsheath, they say, but I shall remove him and destroy the sheath. Such\nabsurdities originate in the stale grammatical rules, whereas usage\nrather should be considered; it is that which trains the grammarian.\n\n49. But I recite all this at length, in order to admonish you, when\nyou come upon such silly commentators, not to follow them and admire\nsuch singular wisdom. For great men even have found delight in the\nfolly of the rabbis. They are not unlike the Sacramentarians, who do\nnot deny the words of Christ, This is my body, this is my blood; but\nexplain it thus: Bread is bread, and yet the body of Christ, namely,\nhis creature; this is my blood, namely my wine. This passion of\ndistorting texts no sane man tolerates in the exposition of the fables\nof Terence, or of the eclogues of Virgil, and, forsooth, we should\ntolerate it in the Church!\n\n50. We need the Holy Spirit to understand the Holy Scriptures. For we\nknow that the same Spirit shall exist to the end of the world who\nexisted before all things. We glory in possessing this Spirit through\nthe grace of God, and, through him, we have faith, a moderate\nknowledge of Scripture and an understanding of the other things\nnecessary to godliness. Hence we do not invent a new interpretation;\nwe are guided not only by an analogy of Holy Scripture but also by\nfaith.\n\n51. Through the Holy Scriptures in its entirety, the verb judge,\n_dun_, signifies almost invariably a public office in the Church, or\nthe office of the ministry, through which we are corrected, reproved,\ninstructed and enabled to distinguish the evil from the good, etc.\nThus, Psalm 110, 6: _Jadin bagojim_, \"He will judge among the\nnations;\" which means: He will preach among the nations. The word\nfound in this passage is evidently the same. And in the New Testament\nthis phrase, originally Hebrew, is very much in vogue, especially in\nPaul's writings, who uses the Hebrew idiom more than the others.\n\n52. I understand this passage therefore as words spoken by Lamech or\nNoah as a new message to the whole world. For it was a public message\nproclaimed at some public assembly. When Methuselah, Lamech and Noah\nsaw that the world was hastening straight to destruction by its sins,\nthey resorted to this proclamation: My Spirit shall no longer preach\namong men. That means: we teach in vain, we admonish in vain; the\nworld has no desire to be better.\n\n53. It is as if one in the present perverse times should say: We teach\nand make ample effort to summon the world back to sobriety and\ngodliness, but we are derided, persecuted, killed, and all men, in the\nend, rush to destruction with blind eyes and deaf ears; therefore we\nare constrained to desist. These are the words of a soul planning\nappropriate action and full of anxiety, because it is clear that the\nhuman race, at the height of its peril, cannot be healed.\n\n54. This exposition conforms to faith and Holy Scriptures. When the\nWord is revealed from heaven, we see that some are converted, who are\nfreed from damnation. The remaining multitude despises it and securely\nindulges in avarice, lust and other vices, as Jeremiah says (ch 51,\n9): \"We should have healed Babylon, but she is not healed: forsake\nher, and let us go everyone into his own country.\"\n\nThe more diligently Moses and Aaron importuned and instructed, the\nmore obstinate Pharaoh became. The Jews were not made better by even\nthe preaching of Christ and the apostles. The same befalls us who\nteach in our day. What, in consequence, are we to do? Deplore the\nblindness and obstinacy of men we may, correct it we cannot. Who would\nrejoice in the eternal damnation of the popes and their followers? Who\nwould not prefer that they should embrace the Word and recover their\nsenses?\n\n55. A similar exhibition of obstinacy Methuselah, Lamech and Noah saw\nin their day. Therefore there bursts from them this voice of despair:\nMy Spirit, namely the Word of healing truth, shall no longer bear\nwitness among men. For inasmuch as you refuse to embrace the\nWord--will not yield to healing truth--you shall perish.\n\nThese are the words of a heart filled with anxiety after the manner\nthat the Scriptures say God is anxious; that is, the hearts of Noah,\nLamech, Methuselah and other holy men who are filled with love toward\nall. Beholding this wickedness of men, they are troubled and pained.\n\n56. Such grief is really the grief of the Holy Spirit, as Paul says,\n\"Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, in whom ye were sealed unto the\nday of redemption,\" Eph 4, 30. This means that the Holy Spirit is\ngrieved when we miserable men are distracted and tormented by the\nwickedness of the world, that despises the Word we preach by the Holy\nSpirit. Thus Lot was troubled in Sodom, and the pious Jews in Babylon\nunder the godless king Belshazzar; also Jeremiah, when he preached to\nthe ungodly Jews and exclaimed (Jer 15, 10): \"Woe is me, my mother,\nthat thou hast borne me.\" So in Micah 7, 1: \"Woe is me! for I am as\nthe grape gleanings of the vintage: there is no cluster to eat.\"\n\n57. The wrath of God is most fearful as he recalls the Word. What man\nwould not prefer pestilence, famine, war--these being mere bodily\ncalamities--to a famine of the Word which is always joined to eternal\ndamnation? An example of the horrible darkness into which Satan can\nlead men when God is silent and does not speak, is furnished by the\nGentiles who have been bereft of the Word. Who is not horrified by the\nRomans, men of exemplary wisdom and famous before other nations by\nreason of their dignified discipline, who observed the custom of\nletting the worthy matrons worship and crown Priapus, the foul idol,\nand of leading bridal virgins before it? What is more ludicrous than\nthat the Egyptians adored the calf Apis as the supreme godhead?\n\n58. The Tripartite History gives an account of Constantine the Great\nbeing the first to abolish in Phoenicia and other places the shameless\ncustom of using virgins, before their nuptials, for purposes of\nprostitution. Such monstrous infamies were accounted religion and\nrighteousness among the Gentiles. There is nothing, in fact, so\nridiculous, so stupid, so obscene, nothing so remote from all\npropriety, that it cannot be foisted as the very essence of religion\nupon men who have been forsaken by the Word.\n\n59. This is, therefore, the greatest penalty, that God, through the\nmouths of the holy patriarchs, threatens no longer to reprove men by\nhis Spirit; which means that henceforth he will not give his Word to\nmen, since all teaching is vain.\n\n60. Like punishment our times will bring also upon Germany. For we see\nthe haste, the unrest, of Satan, and his efforts to defraud whom he\nmay of the Word. How many sects has he roused during our lifetime, and\nthis while we bent all our energies toward the maintenance of pure\ndoctrine! What is in store after our death? Surely, he will lead forth\nwhole swarms of Sacramentarians, Anabaptists, Antinomians, Servetians,\nCampanistans and other heretics who at present, conquered by the pure\nWord and the constancy of faithful teachers, keep out of sight, but\nare ready for every opportunity to establish their doctrines.\n\n61. Those, therefore, who have the Word in its purity, should learn to\nembrace the same, to thank God for it and to call upon him while he\nmay be found. For when the spirit of knowledge is taken away, the\nspirit of prayer is also gone. Zechariah says (Zech 12, 10): For the\nspirit of prayer is joined to the spirit of grace. It is the spirit of\ngrace which reproves our sins and gives instruction concerning their\nremission, which condemns idolatry and instructs concerning the true\nworship of God, which condemns avarice, lust and oppression, and\nteaches chastity, patience and charity. This spirit, God here\nthreatens, shall no longer continue his work of instruction, since men\nrefuse to hear and are incorrigible. The spirit of grace having been\ntaken away, the spirit of prayer has also been taken away. For it is\nimpossible for him to pray who is without the Word.\n\n62. Accordingly, the office of a priest is twofold; first, that he\nturns to God and prays for himself and for his people; second, that he\nturns from God to men through instruction and the Word. Says Samuel:\n\"Far be it from me that I should sin against Jehovah in ceasing to\npray for you: but I will instruct you in the good and the right way,\"\n1 Sam 12, 23. He is aware that this is his proper office.\n\n63. Therefore, the ministry is rightly praised and esteemed as the\nhighest favor. When this has been lost or has been vitiated, not only\nprayer becomes impossible, but men are simply in the power of the\ndevil, and do nothing but grieve the Holy Spirit with all their deeds,\nand thus fall into mortal sin, for which it is not lawful to pray.\nSuch other lapses as occur among men are trivial, for return is open\nand the hope of pardon is left. But when the Holy Spirit is grieved\nand men refuse to receive the witness and reproof of the Holy Spirit,\nthe disease is desperate and incurable.\n\n64. But how common is this sin today among all classes! Princes,\nnoblemen, inhabitants of city and country, refuse to be reproved; they\nrather reprove and sit in judgment upon the Holy Spirit in his\nservants. They judge of the office of the ministry by the lowliness of\nthe person. They reason thus: This minister is poor and despised; why\nthen should he reprove me, a prince, a nobleman, a magistrate? Rather\nthan endure this, they trample under foot the ministers, together with\ntheir office and their message. Should we not, then, fear the judgment\nof God, such as he here announces to the old world?\n\n65. These, therefore, are the words of a father who disinherits his\nson, or of a severe schoolmaster in wrath ejecting a pupil, when God\nsimply fixes a hundred and twenty years as the time in which\nopportunity is granted for repentance. He threatens, should it not be\nimproved, his Spirit shall no longer reprove and strive.\n\nThis word pertains properly to the office of the ministry and, in a\ncertain sense, describes it. For every preacher or servant of the Word\nis a man of strife and judgment, and is constrained, by reason of his\noffice, to chide whatever is vicious, without considering the person\nor office of his hearer. When Jeremiah does this zealously, he incurs\nnot only hate but also the gravest dangers. He is moved even to\nimpatience, so that he wishes he had never been born, Jer 20, 14.\n\n66. And if I had not been particularly strengthened by God, I should\nhave been wearied and broken down ere this by the contumacy of an\nimpenitent world; for the ungodly so grieve the Holy Spirit in us,\nthat, with Jeremiah, we wish often we had never made a beginning of\nanything. Hence I often pray to God to let the present generation die\nwith us, because, after our death, the most perilous times are to\ncome.\n\n67. For this reason Elijah is called by Ahab the godless king of\nIsrael, the disturber of Israel; because he openly reproved the\nidolatry, violence and passions of his day. Likewise we today are\ndeemed the disturbers of Germany.\n\n68. But it is a good sign when men condemn us and call us authors of\nstrife, for the Spirit of God strives with men, reproves and condemns\nthem. But men are so that they wish to be taught only what gives them\npleasure, as they frankly admit in Micah 2, 6-7: \"Prophesy not to us;\nfor confusion has not seized us, says the house of Jacob.\" The latter\nthey use as an argument; because they look upon themselves as the\nhouse of Jacob and the people of God, they decline chastening, and\nwill not take to themselves penalties and threats. So today the pope\nand his accomplices plume themselves solely upon being the Church, and\ndeclare that the Church is incapable of error. But notice this text\nand it will appear how frivolous such an argument is.\n\n69. Are not those whom God threatens to no longer judge by his Spirit\nlikewise the sons of God? What can be more splendid than this name?\nBeyond doubt they gloried in this name and rebelled against the\npatriarchs when they opposed, or at least despised, their preaching.\nFor it does not seem likely that God should be thrown into a rage\nagainst the whole human race on account of a few sins. But the\nmagnificent name did not save them, nor did it avail that they were\nstrong and great in number. Six hundred thousand marched out of Egypt,\nand two only entered the land of Canaan; all the others were prevented\nby death on account of their sins.\n\n70. Evidently God will in no way inquire about the magnificent titles\nof the Church, pope and bishop. Other testimony will be needed when\nthey desire to escape the wrath of God than to boast of being the\nChurch. For it is written (Mt 7, 20): \"By their fruits ye shall know\nthem.\" And verse 21: \"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord,\nshall enter into the kingdom of heaven.\"\n\n71. If ever in the future a council shall be held--which I hardly\nbelieve--no one will be able to take from them the title of Church,\nbut propped up by this alone they will condemn and oppress us.\nDifferent shall be the judgment, when the Son of man shall come in his\nglory. Then it shall appear that among the members of the holy Church\nhave been John Huss and Jerome of Prague. The pope, however, and the\ncardinals, the bishops, doctors, monks and priestly mountebanks, shall\nappear as the church of evil-doers, enthroned in pestilence, and as\nveritable henchmen of Satan, rendering aid to their father in his\nlying and murdering.\n\n72. Such judgment of God we see also here. He does not deny that the\noffspring of the saints are sons of God. This magnificent title in\nwhich they took pride and securely sinned, God leaves to them. And yet\nthese very sons of God who took in marriage the daughters of men, he\nwarns that he not only will take the Word from their hearts and minds,\nbut that he will take from their eyes and ears also the ministering\nSpirit who preaches, prays, reproves, teaches and sighs in holy\nservants, and because they refuse to be chastened and reproved;\nknowing themselves to be the sons of God they despise the Word and its\nteachers. But they do not escape punishment because of their name. The\nsame shall likewise befall the papists and other enemies of the Word.\n\n73. In accordance with this I hold that the sentiments of pious men\nare here attributed to God himself, according to the usage of the Holy\nScriptures; for instance in Malachi 3, 8, where the Lord says that he\nis pierced through, or, as the Hebrew has it, that violence is done to\nhim because the people were unfaithful in rendering to the priests the\nfirst-fruits and the tenth.\n\n74. But why, you may say, should God need to complain thus? Can he not\nwhen it pleases him suddenly destroy the whole world? He surely can,\nbut does not do so gladly. He says: \"I have no pleasure in the death\nof the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live,\" Ezk\n33, 11. Such a disposition proves that God is inclined to pardon, to\nendure and to remit the sins of men, if only they will come to their\nsenses; but inasmuch as they continue in obduracy, and reject all\nhelp, he is, as it were, tormented by this wickedness of men.\n\n75. The words \"And Jehovah said,\" I attribute to the holy fathers, who\ntestified through a public decree that God should be compelled to\nexercise vengeance, for they taught by divine authority. When Noah and\nhis ancestors had preached nearly a thousand years, and yet the world\ncontinued to degenerate more and more, they announced God's decision\nto an ungrateful world and disclosed this as his thought: Why should I\npreach forever and permit my heralds to cry in vain? The more\nmessengers I send, the longer I defer my wrath,--the worse they\nbecome. It is therefore necessary for preaching to cease, and for\nretribution to begin. I shall not permit my Spirit, that is my Word,\nto sit in judgment and to bear witness forever, and to tolerate man's\nwickedness. I am constrained to punish their sins. Because man is\nflesh, he is opposed to me. He is earthly, I am spirit. Man continues\nin his carnal state, mocks at the Word, persecutes and hates my Spirit\nin the patriarchs, and the story is told to deaf ears. Hence it is\nnecessary that I should cease and permit man to go his own way. This\ncontrast he desires to indicate when he says: \"For he is flesh.\"\n\n76. Noah, Lamech and Methuselah were very holy men, full of the Holy\nSpirit. Accordingly they performed their office by teaching,\nadmonishing, urging and entreating, in season and out of season; as\nPaul says, 2 Tim 4, 2. But they reproved flesh and did unprofitable\nlabor, for the flesh would not yield to sound teaching. Should I, says\nhe, endure forever such contempt for my Word?\n\n77. This proclamation, therefore, contains a public complaint, made by\nthe Holy Spirit through the holy patriarchs, Noah, Lamech, Methuselah\nand others, whom God took away before the flood that they might not be\nspectators of so widely diffused wrath. All these, with one voice and\nmouth, admonished the giants and tyrants to repent, and added the\nthreat that God would not endure forever such contempt of his Word.\n\n78. But the flesh remained true to its nature; they despised faithful\nexhortations in their presumption and carnal security, and the holy\npatriarchs they treated as men in dotage and as simpletons because of\ntheir threat that God would move in wrath even upon his Church,\nnamely, the heirs of the promise of the coming seed.\n\n79. The added clause, \"yet shall his days be a hundred and twenty\nyears,\" Jerome affirms must not be understood as referring to the\nyears of human life, nor to the age of individual men; for it is\ncertain that after the flood many exceeded the two hundredth year. If\nyou refer it to the years allotted to individuals, the promise would\nbe that individuals should complete so many years, which, however, is\nfalse. Therefore he speaks of the time conceded to the world for\nrepentance until the flood should arrive.\n\n80. This interpretation agrees with what precedes. God shows that he\nis displeased with the perversity of men. He is full of solicitude and\nquite ready to forbear. Against his will, so to speak, he permits the\nflood to rage. Therefore, he decided upon a fixed and adequate time\nfor them to come to their senses, and to escape punishment. All this\ntime Noah admonished men to repent, making it clear that God could not\nlonger endure such wickedness, while he was yet so kind as to grant\nadequate time for repentance.\n\n81. There is a beautiful cohesion between the words and their\nsignificance. A former proclamation threatens: I cannot endure longer\ncontempt for my Word; my preachers and priests attain nothing with\ntheir infinite labor except derision. Nevertheless, as a father or\ngood judge would gladly spare a son but is compelled by his wickedness\nto be severe, so, the Lord says, I do not destroy gladly the human\nrace. I shall grant them one hundred and twenty years in which they\nmay come to themselves, and during which I shall exercise mercy.\n\n82. Horrible was the disaster, because neither the brothers nor the\nsisters of Noah were saved. It was necessary that the most earnest\nwarning should precede, that, perhaps, they might be called back to\nrepentance. To the Ninevites Jonah announces destruction within forty\ndays, and they repent and are saved.\n\n83. It is clear, therefore, that the heedlessness of the old world was\nvery great, inasmuch as in the one hundred and twenty years of grace\nit obstinately persisted in its lusts, even deriding its pontiff Noah,\nthe teacher of righteousness.\n\n84. In our times, at the approach of the day of the Lord, almost the\nsame condition obtains; we exhort to penitence the papists and our\nnoblemen; the inhabitants of city and country we admonish not to\ncontinue despising the Word, since God will not leave this unavenged.\nBut in vain we exert ourselves, as the Scripture says. A few faithful\nfolk are edified and these are, one by one, gathered away from the\nface of sin, and \"no man layeth it to heart,\" as is spoken in Isaiah\n57, 1. But when God, in this way, has shaken out the wheat and\ngathered the grain in its place, what, think you, shall be the future\nof the chaff? Nothing else but to be burned with inextinguishable\nfire, Mt 13, 42. This shall be the lot of the world.\n\n85. But the world does not understand how it can be that through the\npreaching of the Gospel the wheat should be separated from the chaff,\nto be gathered into the barn, while the chaff, that is, the throng of\nunbelievers sunk in idolatry and darkness, shall be consigned to the\nfire. It is written: \"In a day of salvation have I helped thee; and I\nwill preserve thee,\" Is 49, 8. Those who will neglect this day of\nsalvation, will find God as an avenger, for he will not do useless\nlabor in threshing empty chaff.\n\n86. But the world is flesh; it does not obey. Yea, the nearer and more\nimmediate the calamity, the more secure it is and the more readily it\ndespises all faithful admonitions. Though this offense provokes the\nrighteous, we should, notwithstanding, conclude that God does not\nreprove in vain the world through his Holy Spirit, nor that the Holy\nSpirit in the righteous is grieved in vain. Christ uses this as an\nexample when he speaks of the wickedness and heedlessness of our age:\n\"And as were the days of Noah, so shall be the coming of the Son of\nman,\" Mt 24, 37.\n\n87. It is to be observed here what has been an object of difficulty\nfor Jerome, that the flood came a hundred years after the birth of\nShem, Ham and Japheth, while here a hundred and twenty years are said\nto have been the time of the flood.\n\n\nB. NOAH AND HIS PREACHING.\n\n   1. The time Noah began to preach 87.\n\n   2. Why the world took occasion to despise Noah's preaching 88.\n\n    * Jerome's reckoning of the 120 years 89.\n\n   3. Why Noah married after living so long single, when the world was\n      to be destroyed 90.\n\n   4. How and why Noah was the prophet of prophets and his the\n      greatest of prophecies 91.\n\n   5. His preaching disregarded not only by the Cainites but by the\n      sons of God 92.\n\n    * To what end God's complaint of the first world should serve us\n      93.\n\n    * When was the judgment of God announced 94.\n\n    * The generation of the Cainites.\n\n      a. Whether it still existed in the days of Noah 95.\n\n      b. Why Moses does not record the generations of the Cainites and\n         of their patriarchs 95.\n\n      c. How the holy patriarchs warned their children against the\n         Cainites 96.\n\n      d. How the Cainites tormented the holy patriarchs 96.\n\n   6. Why God raised up Noah 97.\n\n   7. Noah's faith exceptionally strong 97-98.\n\n   8. What impelled Noah to continue his work, and not to turn to the\n      world 99.\n\n   9. How Noah's age was the wickedest and he had to oppose its\n      wickedness all alone 100.\n\n    * Who of the patriarchs were still living in Noah's time 100.\n\n  10. What trials Noah had to experience 101.\n\n\nB. NOAH AND HIS PREACHING.\n\n87. But this passage shows that Noah began preaching about the\nimpending punishment of the deluge before his marriage, having\nhitherto led the life of a celibate.\n\n88. Consider, therefore, what pastime he offered to a wicked world in\nits fancied security. He predicts destruction to the whole world\nthrough the flood, nevertheless, he himself marries. Why? Was it not\nsufficient for him to perish alone, that he must join to himself a\ncompanion for the disaster? Oh, foolish old man! Surely if he believed\nthe world was to perish by a deluge, he would rather perish alone than\nmarry and take the trouble to beget children. But if he himself will\nbe saved, why, so shall also we.\n\nIn this manner they commenced to despise the preaching concerning the\nflood with the greater assurance because of the marriage of Noah,\nignorant of the counsel of God, who moves in a manner altogether\nunintelligible to the world. How absurd to promise Abraham posterity\nthrough Isaac, and yet to command Isaac to be sacrificed!\n\n89. The divine Jerome argues against the view that God had fixed the\ntime for the flood at a hundred and twenty years, but saw himself\ncompelled, later, when wickedness had waxed strong, to shorten the\ntime.\n\n90. But we shall not make God a liar; we rather give it as our\nconviction that Noah had hitherto preached, while in a state of\ncelibacy, that the world was to be destroyed through the flood, and\nlater, by a divine command, had taken a maid as a little branch, so to\nspeak, from the race of women, and begotten three sons. Below it is\nwritten that he had found grace with the Lord; otherwise he who had\nrefrained from marriage so long, might have continued to do so still\nlonger. But God, in order to restrain his wrath, wants to leave a\nnursery for the human race; therefore, he commands marriage. This the\nwicked believe to be a sign that the world shall not perish; they live\naccordingly in security and despise the preacher, Noah. But the\ncounsel of God is different--to destroy the whole world and to leave\nthrough this righteous Noah a nursery for the future world.\n\n91. Noah was, therefore, the greatest prophet; his equal the world has\nnot had. First he teaches the longest time; then he gives instruction\nconcerning a universal punishment coming upon the world, and even\nfixes the year of its advent. Likewise Christ prophesies concerning\nthe last judgment, when all flesh shall perish. \"But of that day,\" he\nsays in Mark 13, 32, \"or that hour knoweth no one, ... but the\nfather.\"\n\nJonah foretells punishment for the Ninevites within forty days;\nJeremiah foretells seventy years of captivity; Daniel, seventy weeks\nuntil the coming of Christ. These are remarkable prophecies, in which\ntime, place and person are accurately described.\n\nBut this prophecy of Noah surpasses all others, inasmuch as he\nforetells through the Holy Spirit that within a certain number of\nyears the whole human race shall perish. He is worthy to be called the\nsecond Adam and the head of the human race, through whose mouth God\nspeaks and calls the whole world to repentance.\n\n92. It is terrible, however, that his message was despised with such\nassurance that not only none of the Cainites, but not even any one of\nAdam's progeny underwent a change. Therefore Noah was compelled to\nwitness the destruction of brothers, sisters, relatives and kindred\nwithout number, and all these made a mock of the pious old man and of\nhis message as an old woman's tale.\n\n93. This awful example is held up to us lest we persist in sin. For if\nGod did not spare the primitive world, which was so magnificent--the\nvery flower and youth of the world--and in which had lived so many\npious men, but, as he says in Psalm 81, 12, \"gave them up unto their\nown hearts' lust,\" and cast them aside, as if they had no claim upon\nthe promise made to the Church--if he did this, how much less will he\nspare us who do not possess such prerogatives?\n\n94. Therefore, the decree cited in this passage that God would grant\nmen a hundred and twenty years for repentance, was rendered and\npromulgated before Noah had begotten children.\n\n95. With reference to the generation of the Cainites, no mention is\nmade of their patriarchs at the time of the flood, nor does Moses even\ndeem them worthy of being named. Previously he has brought down the\ngeneration of Cain as far as Lamech, but whether his sons or nephews\nlived at the time of Noah is uncertain. This much is certain, that the\noffspring of Cain existed to that time, and were so powerful as to\nmislead the very sons of God, since even the posterity of the holy\npatriarchs perished in the flood.\n\n96. Before this time the holy patriarchs--the rulers of the true\nChurch, as it were--admonished their families to beware of the\naccursed generation. But the Cainites, incensed at being condemned,\nmade the attempt to overturn the righteous with every kind of\nmischief; for the church of Satan wars perpetually against the Church\nof God.\n\n97. Therefore, as the righteous begin to waver and wickedness gains\nground, God raises Noah to exhort to repentance and to be for his\ndescendants a perpetual example, whose faith and diligent, patient\ndevotion to teaching, his offspring might admire and imitate. A great\nmiracle is it and a case of illustrious faith, that Noah, having heard\nthrough Methuselah and Lamech the decree that the world is to perish\nafter a hundred and twenty years, through the flood, does not doubt\nits truth, and yet, when the hundred and twenty years have almost\nexpired, marries and begets children. He might rather have thought: If\nthe human race is to perish, why should I marry? Why should I beget\nsons? If I have refrained these many years, I shall do so henceforth.\nBut Noah does not do this; rather, after making known God's purpose\nrespecting the world's destruction, he obeys God, who calls him to\nmatrimony, and believes God that, though the whole world may perish,\nyet he with his children shall be saved. An illustrious faith is this\nand worthy of our consideration.\n\n98. There was in him first that general faith, in common with the\npatriarchs, concerning the seed which was to bruise the head of the\nserpent. He possessed also the singular virtue of holding fast to this\nfaith in the midst of such a multitude of offenses, and not departing\nfrom Jehovah. Then, to this general faith he added the other, special\nfaith, that he believed God as regards both the threatened destruction\nof the rest of the world and the salvation promised to Noah himself\nand his sons. Beyond a doubt, to this faith his grandfather Methuselah\nand his father Lamech earnestly incited him; for it was as difficult\nto so believe as it was for the Virgin Mary to believe that none but\nherself was to be the mother of the Son of God.\n\n99. This faith taught him to despise the presumption of the world\nwhich derided him as a man in his dotage. This faith prompted him\ndiligently to continue the building of the ark, a work those giants\nprobably ridiculed as extreme folly. This faith made Noah strong to\nstand alone against the many evil examples of the world, and to\ndespise most vehemently the united judgment of all others.\n\n100. But almost unutterable and miraculous is this faith, burdened as\nit is with strange and most weighty obstacles, which the Holy Spirit\nshows in passing, without going into great detail, that we may be\ninduced to meditate the more diligently upon its circumstances.\nConsider first the great corruption of the age. While the Church had\nbefore this time many and most holy patriarchs, it was now deprived of\nsuch rulers; Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalalel, Jared, Enoch are all\ndead, and the number of patriarchs is reduced to three--Methuselah,\nLamech and Noah. These alone are left at the time the decree\nconcerning the destruction of the world is published. These three are\ncompelled to witness and suffer the incredible malice of men, their\nidolatry, blasphemy, violent acts, foul passions, until finally\nMethuselah and Lamech are also called out of this life. There Noah was\nthe only one to oppose the world rushing to destruction, and to make\nan effort to preserve righteousness and to repress unrighteousness.\nBut far from meeting with success, he had to see even the sons of God\nlapse into wickedness.\n\n101. This ruin and havoc of the Church troubled the righteous man and\nall but broke his heart, as Peter says of Lot in Sodom, 2 Pet 2, 8.\nNow, if Lot was so distracted and vexed by the wickedness of one\ncommunity, how must it have been with Noah, against whom not only the\ngeneration of Cain raged, but who was opposed also by the decadent\ngeneration of the patriarchs, and then even by his own father's house,\nhis brothers, sisters, and the descendants of his uncles and aunts?\nFor all these were corrupted and estranged from the faith by the\ndaughters of men. As the text says, they \"saw the daughters of men.\"\n\n\nIII. THE SINS OF THE ANCIENT WORLD IN PARTICULAR.\n\n   A. THE FORBIDDEN MARRIAGES ENTERED INTO.\n\n      1. Why this is said of the sons and not of the daughters of the\n         holy patriarchs 102.\n\n      2. Why were the holy fathers so emphatically forbidden to let\n         their sons marry the ungodly 103-104.\n\n      3. How this was the beginning of all evils 105.\n\n       * What evils have in all times come through woman 106.\n\n      4. The sins here sprang from despising the first table of the\n         law 107-108.\n\n       * The sins of the second table follow when the first table is\n         not kept 108.\n\n      5. Everything that is called sin is embraced in this sin\n         109-110.\n\n      6. How marriage with the children of the true Church was\n         despised 111.\n\n      7. Their desire to marry thus resembled Eve's desire to take the\n         forbidden apple 112.\n\n      8. Why the patriarchs' children took this step 113.\n\n      9. How these marriage alliances were formed 114-116.\n\n     10. Berosus' testimony concerning these forbidden marriages 116.\n\n   B. DISORDER IN ALL BRANCHES OF SOCIETY 116-117.\n\n   C. THE TYRANNY EXERCISED.\n\n      1. By the \"giants\" or tyrants.\n\n         a. What is to be understood by tyrants 117.\n\n          * The pope resembles the tyrants before the flood 118.\n\n         b. The nature of these tyrants 119.\n\n         c. Why called Nephilim 120-122.\n\n         d. Whether they received their name from their size or from\n            their cruelty 123.\n\n          * How the Scriptures designate true rulers 123.\n\n         e. These tyrants types of Antichrist 123.\n\n         f. They were raging, powerful and criminal characters 124.\n\n          * Of authorities.\n\n            (1) How God wants us to honor the authorities though he\n                terribly threatens them 125-126.\n\n            (2) Why God wants them to be honored, when he himself does\n                not honor them 127.\n\n            (3) Godless rulers are God's swine and are rare birds in\n                heaven 128.\n\n         g. Whether these tyrants were rulers and why God called them\n            by such a shameful name 129.\n\n         h. Moses chose the word Nephilim, which in his day designated\n            a wicked people, to express the tyrants of the first World\n            130.\n\n      2. By \"the mighty men.\"\n\n         a. How Jerome perverts this text 131.\n\n         b. What is to be understood by \"the mighty men that were of\n            old\" 131.\n\n          * The meaning of \"Olam\" 132.\n\n         c. Whence did they receive their power 133.\n\n         d. Why called \"mighty men\" 134.\n\n          * The character of the true church 134.\n\n      3. By \"the men of renown.\"\n\n         a. Why they were thus named 135.\n\n         b. Who they were 136.\n\n          * They resembled the pope and bishops 136.\n\n         c. Lyra's false explanation of it refuted 137.\n\n          * How Antichrist is restrained from the world, and true\n            doctrine maintained 137.\n\n   D. THE SIN AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT 138.\n\n    * That one sin follows another until man reaches the highest\n      degree of sin 139.\n\n\nIII. THE SINS OF THE OLD WORLD IN PARTICULAR.\n\nA. THE FORBIDDEN MARRIAGES ENTERED INTO.\n\n102. But, I ask, why is not complaint made also of the men, or why are\nnot the daughters of God included in this complaint? He says merely\nthat they \"saw the daughters of men.\" It was surely for this reason,\nthat the holy generation of Seth had received the peculiar injunction\nto beware of fellowship with the Cainites, inasmuch as they had been\nexcluded from the true Church, and to mingle with them neither\nsocially through marriage, nor ecclesiastically through worship, for\nthe righteous should avoid every occasion of offense.\n\n103. In prohibiting marriage with the Cainites it was the chief\npurpose of the pious fathers to maintain their generation pure; for\ndaughters bring into the houses of their husbands the views and\nmanners of the fathers. Thus, we read of Solomon in the Book of the\nKings that he was led astray through a woman who was a stranger; and\nthus Jezebel introduced the wickedness of the Syrians into the kingdom\nof Israel.\n\n104. The holy fathers saw the same would come to pass in their\ngeneration; therefore, after they were separated from the Cainites\nthrough the divine command, they resolved that the sons of the holy\ngeneration should not marry the daughters of men. The daughters of the\nrace of the righteous could more readily be restrained from marriage\nwith the Cainites, while the sons were independent and headstrong.\n\n105. In this way Moses wishes to show the trouble began from the time\nthe sons of God joined themselves to the daughters of men, seeing that\nthey were fair. The sons of men who were proud and strong and\npassionately given to pleasure, without doubt despised the plain\nmaidens of the pious race who had been reared by the holy patriarchs\nnot delicately, but simply and modestly, being arrayed in homely garb.\nThere was hence no necessity of making a law also for the maidens,\ninasmuch as they were in any case neglected by the noble Cainites.\n\n106. If you study the history of nations you will find that women have\nbeen the occasion for the overthrow of the strongest kingdoms. Well\nknown is the disgrace of Helen. The sacred writings demonstrate also\nthat woman occasioned the fall of the whole human race. This, however,\nshould be mentioned without reflection upon the sex, for we have a\ncommand, \"Honor thy father and thy mother,\" Ex 20, 12. Likewise,\n\"Husbands, love your wives,\" Col 3, 19. It is true that Eve was the\nfirst to pluck the apple; however, she first sinned by idolatry and\nfell from the faith, which faith, as long as it is in the heart,\ncontrols also the body; but when it has departed from the heart, the\nbody serves sin. Guilt is not peculiar to sex but to sin, which man\nhas in common with woman.\n\n107. Thus Moses gives an account of the prevailing unrighteousness and\nlust. But he gives the reader to understand that, before sin was\ncommitted against the second table of the Law, the first had been\nviolated, and the Word of God treated with contempt. Otherwise the\nsons of God would have obeyed the will of their pious parents\nforbidding marriage with those outside the Church.\n\n108. Moses, therefore, concludes that, because the sons of God had\nforsaken the worship and Word of God and departed from the precepts of\ntheir parents, thereupon to fall into sensuality and lust, and to take\nto wife whom they pleased, they also became violent and appropriated\nthe goods of others. The world cannot do otherwise. When it has\nforsaken God, it worships the devil; when it has despised the Word and\nfallen into idolatry, it rushes forth into all sins of passion, in\nwhich fierceness of anger and fierceness of desire by turns are\naroused, and thus all the appetites are thrown into a state of the\ngreatest disorder. When the righteous reprove this, the result is\nresentment and violence against them.\n\n109. The sin of the flood, then, embraces everything that may be\ncalled sin, by the first as well as the second table. Wicked men first\ndepart from God through unbelief; then they disregard obedience to\nparents, and finally become murderers, adulterers, etc.\n\n110. I mention this to the end that no one may believe that sex or the\nmarriage estate in themselves are to blame. It is chiefly\ntransgression of God's commandments and disobedience to parents which\nare condemned. Owing to absence of fellowship between the Cainites and\nthe true Church, pious parents desired also social separation from the\nCainites, for fear they might be perverted by the manners of ungodly\nwives. But God's command being neglected, and the authority of parents\ndespised, the younger generation lapsed into the passions of\nconcupiscence and vehemence. In this way the honor of sex and the\ndignity of matrimony are conserved: accusation is brought solely\nagainst the unrighteousness which first departs from God and then\nmanifests itself in injuring the saints.\n\n111. This is the teaching of the words: \"The sons of God saw the\ndaughters of men that they were fair.\" Why did they not see the\ndaughters of God and desire those in the Church and possess the\npromise of the seed? Are they not convicted of contempt for the\nsisters of their own generation, that is the true Church, and of\nmingling with the carnal and impious generation of Cain? They despise\nthe simplicity and reserve of their sisters and prefer the smiles, the\ndress, the wiles of the daughters of Cain; the latter they crave and\ncultivate, the former they treat either with neglect or dishonor.\n\n112. With such eyes as Eve viewed the apples when she fell into sin,\nthe sons of God viewed the daughters of men. Eve had seen the\nforbidden tree before that, but with eyes of faith looking back to\nGod's commandment; for that reason she did not crave, but rather she\nfled from the same. When, however, the eyes of faith were dimmed and\nshe beheld the tree solely with carnal eyes, she stretched out her\nhand with desire and invited also Adam, her husband.\n\n113. Likewise the sons of the patriarchs had seen long before that the\ndaughters of the Cainites excelled in form, dress and elegance of\nmanners. Nevertheless, they did not mingle with them, for the eye of\nfaith looked back to the commandment of God and to the promise of the\nseed to be born from the generation of the righteous. But the eyes of\nfaith having been lost, they saw no longer either the command or the\npromise of God, but followed merely the desire of the flesh. The\nsimple, good and virtuous girls of their own generation they despised;\nthe Cainites they married, seeing they were polished, charming and\npleasant.\n\n114. It is not a sin, therefore, that they marry, nor is the sex in\nitself condemned. Condemnation lies in this, that with contempt of the\ndivine commandment they marry unlawfully; that they permit themselves\nto be led astray by their wives from the true worship to the wicked\nworship of a false church; that, after the fashion of the Cainites,\nthey pay no heed to parental authority and become guilty of violence,\noppression and other sins.\n\nMoses clearly reveals their sin when he says: \"They took them wives of\nall that they chose,\" as if he said: To marry a wife is not an evil\nbut a blessing, if it be done lawfully. But they sinned in that they\nmarried without judgment, against the will and purpose of the parents,\nmarrying whom and as many as they pleased, regardless of their own\nestate, whether married or single.\n\n115. This is a stern word, by which Moses characterizes it as a great\nsin that they arbitrarily married two wives or more, exchanged them,\nor snatched them from others, after the manner of Herod, who possessed\nhimself of his brother's wife. It is this unbridled reign of evil lust\nthat Moses discloses and condemns.\n\n116. Berosus writes that incestuous marriages also took place among\nthem, so that they married even their mothers and sisters. But I doubt\nwhether they were so wicked as that. It is a sin sufficiently grave\nthat in marrying they dispensed with judgment, the authority of their\nparents and even with the Word of God, following altogether the\nguidance of lust and desire. They took whom they pleased and whom they\ncould, and by such license they brought chaos into domestic, public\nand churchly relations.\n\nB. DISORDER IN ALL BRANCHES OF SOCIETY\n\nThe sin of the primeval world was, therefore, an upheaval of all\nestablished order, inasmuch as the Church was demoralized by idolatry\nand false modes of worship. This condition was aggravated by those\noppressors who cruelly persecuted the righteous teachers and holy men.\nPublic discipline was destroyed by oppression and violent deeds, and\ndomestic discipline by uncurbed lust. Upon such overturning of piety\nand integrity followed universal depravity; men were not merely evil\nbut plainly incorrigible.\n\nC. THE TYRANNY EXERCISED.\n\nV. 4a. _The Nephilim_ (giants) _were in the earth in those days,_\n\n117. Moses continues the description of the sin and offense which\nprovoked the deluge. The first point was that the sons of God had\nfallen from the fear of God, and the Word had become altogether\ncarnal, perverting not only the Church but also the State and home.\nNow he adds that wickedness had grown to the extent of giants arising\nupon earth. He clearly states that there were born from the\nconcubinage of the sons of God with the daughters of men, not sons of\nGod, but giants; that is, bold men who arrogated to themselves at the\nsame time both government and priesthood.\n\n118. Just so the pope arrogates to himself at the same time the\nspiritual and the temporal sword. This would not be the height of\nevil, if he would only make use of his power for the preservation of\nState and Church; but the greatest sin is that he abuses his power for\nthe establishment of idolatry, for a warfare against sound doctrine,\nand for purposes of oppression even in the State. When the Papists are\nreproved with the Word of God, they spurn such reproof, claiming that\nthey are the Church and incapable of error. This class of people Moses\ncalls \"giants,\" men who arrogate to themselves power both political\nand ecclesiastical, and who sin most licentiously.\n\n119. Such men are described in the Book of Wisdom who say: \"Let\nunrighteousness be our law,\" 2, 11. Also in Psalms, 12, 4: \"Who have\nsaid, With our tongue will we prevail; our lips are our own: who is\nlord over us?\" Again in Psalm 73. \"They scoff, and in wickedness utter\noppression: they speak loftily,\" etc. Such were the giants who\nwithstood the Holy Spirit to his face, who, through the mouth of\nLamech, Noah and the sons of Noah, exhorted, implored, taught and\nreproved.\n\n120. There are those who dispute the meaning of the noun Nephilim and\nderive it from _Naphal_, which signifies \"to fall.\" They commonly take\nit in a passive sense, meaning that other men, seeing the uncouth\nforms and extraordinary size, fell down from fear. Let the rabbis\nvouch for the correctness of this; it is ridiculous to call them\n\"_Nephilim_\" because others fell. Some, however, suggest the etymology\nthat they were thus called because they had fallen from the common\nstature of men, and allege as proof-passage Numbers 13, 33, from which\nit appears that giants possessed huge bodies like the Anakim and\nRephaim. Which of these are right, I do not decide, especially since\nit is certain that a theory of all words can not be given, nor their\norigin demonstrated.\n\n121. But here another question obtrudes itself: Why should those born\nfrom the sons of God and the daughters of men alone have differed from\nthe ordinary stature of man? I have no other answer than that the text\nsays nothing of stature in this place. In Numbers 13, 33 it is said:\n\"There we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, who come of the giants:\nand we were in our sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their\nsight.\" There hugeness of body is shown, but not here; therefore they\nmay be called giants for some other reason than massive stature.\n\n122. To give my opinion of the word, I hold it is to be taken neither\nin the sense of the neuter nor of the passive, but of the active,\ninasmuch as the word \"_naphal_\" is often used in the sense of the\nactive, though it does not belong to the third conjugation, in which\nalmost all transitive verbs are found. Thus in Joshua 11, 7: \"So\nJoshua came, and all the people of war with him, against them by the\nwaters of Merom suddenly, and fell upon them.\" If the verb is\nconstrued as neuter, as if Joshua and his men had fallen before the\nenemies, history will object; for the meaning is that they fell upon\nthe enemies and suddenly overpowered them.\n\n123. Therefore, this passage and other, similar ones prompt me to\nunderstand \"_nephilim_\" to designate not bulk of body, but tyranny and\noppression, inasmuch as they domineered by force, making no account of\nlaw and honor, but merely indulging their pleasure and desire.\nRightful rulers the Scripture calls shepherds and princes, but those\nwho rule by wrong and violence are rightly called \"_Nephilim_,\"\nbecause they fall and prey upon those beneath them.\n\nThus in Psalm 10: \"He croucheth and humbleth himself and _Venaphal Baa\nZumaf Helkaim_ (falls with his strong ones upon the poor)\". The Holy\nSpirit speaks there of the reign of the Antichrist, whom he describes\nas raging so furiously as to crush what he can, and, at all events, to\nbend what he cannot crush, so that afterward he may suppress with all\nhis strength what has been bent. For _baazuma_ can be indifferently\nrendered by \"with his strength,\" or \"with his strong ones.\" This\npower, he says, he uses only against those who are _Hilkaim_, that is\nthe poor, such as have previously been in some state of affliction.\nOthers who excel in power, he worships so as to draw them over to his\nside.\n\n124. Accordingly I interpret \"giants\" in this passage not as men of\nhuge stature, as in Numbers 13, 33, but as violent and oppressive; as\nthe poets depict the Cyclopeans, who fear neither God nor men, but\nfollow only their desires, relying upon their strength and power. For\nthe oppressors sit enthroned in majesty, sway empires and kingdoms,\nand arrogate to themselves even spiritual power, but use such power\nagainst the Church and the Word of God for the gratification of their\nlust.\n\n125. Observe here the strange counsel of God, commanding us to fear\nthe authorities, to obey, serve and honor them, while at the same time\nthe threats and dreadful reproofs which he administers are almost\ninvariably directed against those in authority, against kings and\nprinces, as if God proceeded against them with a peculiar hatred.\nScripture enjoins upon us to honor authority, but itself does not\nhonor it; rather it destroys it with a threat of the gravest\npenalties. Scripture enjoins us to fear authority, but itself appears\nto despise authorities, inasmuch as it does not commend but threatens.\n\n126. Does not Mary earnestly declaim in her song against princes, Luke\n1, 51-53: \"He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their\nheart. He hath put down princes from their thrones, and hath exalted\nthem of low degree. The hungry he hath filled with good things; and\nthe rich he hath sent empty away\"? If we believe this to be true, who\nwould wish to be found among authorities, for whom so certain\nperdition is prepared and imminent? Who would not prefer to live on a\nlowly plane and suffer hunger? The second psalm accuses the\nauthorities of the gravest crime when it says that they place\nthemselves with united strength and efforts in opposition to God and\nhis anointed and render violence to his kingdom. \"Thou hast made of a\ncity a heap, of a fortified city a ruin,\" Is 25, 2. The whole Bible\nabounds with like sentiments.\n\n127. Thus, the Bible does not honor the authorities, but threatens\nthem with danger, and drags them into manifest contempt; and still\nwith consummate care it commands us to reverence and fear them, and to\nrender them all manner of service. Why is this? Surely because God\nhimself desires to punish them, and has reserved vengeance for himself\ninstead of surrendering it to their subjects. Jeremiah argues in\nchapter 12, 1, concerning the prosperity of the way of the ungodly,\nand yet the Lord is righteous. But he concludes: \"Thou, O Lord,\nfattenest them and preparest them for the sacrifice.\"\n\n128. So might it be said that the authorities are God's swine, as it\nwere; he fattens them, gives them wealth, power, fame and the\nobedience of their subjects. They are not pursued, while they\nthemselves pursue and oppress others; they suffer no injury, but they\ninflict it upon others; they do not give to others, but rob them until\nthe hour comes when, like fattened swine, they are slaughtered. Hence\nthe German proverb: A prince is a rare bird in the kingdom of heaven\nor, princes are wild game in heaven.\n\n129. Accordingly, those whom Moses calls here \"_Nephilim_,\" which is\nan odious and disgraceful name, were without doubt the lawful\nadministrators of Church and State. But because they did not use their\noffice as they should, God marks and brands them with this opprobious\nname. As we, in this corrupt state of nature, are unable to use the\nleast gift without pride, so God, most intolerant of pride, thrusts\nthe mighty from their throne, and leaves the rich empty.\n\n130. I accept, then, the word \"_Nephilim_\" as having an active\nsignification, being equivalent to tyrants, oppressors, revelers. I\nbelieve, furthermore, as has been the case with other languages also,\nthat Moses has transferred the usage of this word from his own times\nto those before the deluge, after changing somewhat its meaning,\ninasmuch as these degenerate descendants of the sons of God abused\ntheir power and position for the oppression of the good, just as those\nAnakim were tyrants relying upon bodily strength, and so Moses will\npresently show.\n\nV. 4b. _And also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the\ndaughters of men, and they bare children to them; the same were the\nmen that were of old, the men of renown._\n\n131. Jerome[1] renders: _Isti sunt potentes a seculo_ (these are\nmighty men from the beginning). But the word _seculum_ (olam) does not\nhere signify duration of time, nor does it predicate extent. These\ngiants did not exist from the beginning, they were not born until the\nsons of God had degenerated. But _seculum_ (olam) connotes a second\npredicate, that of substance, so that Moses explains the nature of the\npower in which they trusted to have been secular or worldly. They\ndespised the ministry of the Word as a vile office; therefore they\nseized upon another office, a secular one. The very same thing our\nPapists have done. It has pleased them better to hold ample revenues\nand worldly kingdoms than to be hated of all men for the sake of the\nGospel.\n\n[Footnote 1: So also the A. V. and the R. V., while Luther has by no\nmeans the philological science against him. Mundus, seculum, aion, and\nolam are used to express the same conception. Translator.]\n\n132. As far as Moses is concerned, the noun _olam_ designates the\nworld itself, and also age or time. Hence it is to be carefully noted\nwhen _olam_ (_seculum_) signifies duration of time, and when it\nsignifies \"world\" in the Scriptures. Here it signifies of necessity\n\"world,\" for they did not exist from the beginning.\n\n133. This clause, then, aptly describes the power they had received,\nnot from the Church, nor from the Holy Spirit, but from the devil and\nthe world. It is, as it were, the counterpart of what Christ says\nbefore Pontius Pilate, John 18, 36: \"My kingdom is not of this world.\"\nThe servants of the Word struggle with hunger, and they labor under\nthe hate of all classes. In consequence, they cannot exercise tyranny;\nbut those who possess kingdoms, who govern states, who possess castles\nand domains, are equipped for exercising tyranny.\n\n134. This clause contains also a suggestive reference to the small\nChurch with her few souls. These are cross-bearers without wealth; but\nthey possess the Word. Their only wealth is what the world despises\nand persecutes. The Nephilim, on the other hand, or giants, usurp as\nthe descendants of the patriarchs the splendid name of the Church, and\npossess also kingdoms. They exercise dominion, and pursue the\nmiserable Church in their power. In accordance therewith Moses calls\nthem mighty before, or in, the world; or worldlings and temporal\npotentates.\n\n135. What Jerome renders _viri famosi_ (famous men) is, in Hebrew,\n\"men of name,\" that is, renowned or famous in the world. Moses touches\nhere also upon the sin of the Cyclopeans, who, possessing everything\nin the world, possessed also a famous name and were renowned\nthroughout the world; while, on the contrary, the true sons of God,\nnamely Noah and his sons, were held in the greatest scorn and regarded\nas heretics, as sons of the devil, as a blot upon the grandeur of\nChurch and State. So is it now with us. Christ testifies in Matthew\n24, 37, that the last times resemble the times of Noah.\n\n136. Moses had before testified that the Holy Spirit would be taken\nfrom the wicked and they would be sent in the ways of their own\ndesire. They were, accordingly, such rascals as the pope today with\nhis cardinals and bishops, who are not only styled princes and possess\nkingdoms, but also take to themselves the name of Church, so as to\nsubject us as heretics to the ban, and securely to condemn us. They do\nnot permit themselves to be called tyrants, nor wicked, nor\ntemple-robbers. They wish to be styled most kind, holy and reverend\ngentlemen.\n\n137. The meaning, therefore, is not that which Lyra follows when he\nunderstands \"famous\" as \"notorious.\" As the world does not call the\npope Antichrist, but ascribes to him the name of the greatest saint\nand admires him as if he and his carnal creatures were filled with the\nHoly Spirit and incapable of error, and therefore humbly worships\nwhatever he commands or advises--exactly so those giants had a noble\nname and were held in admiration by the whole world. On the contrary,\nNoah with his followers was condemned as a rebel, as a heretic, as a\ntraducer of the dignity of State and Church. So today do bishops\nregard us who profess the Gospel.\n\nD. THE SIN AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT.\n\n138. This passage furnishes a description of the sins with which that\nage was burdened: Men were averse to the Word; they were given over to\ntheir own lusts and reprobate minds; they sinned against the Holy\nSpirit by persistent impenitence, by defending their ungodly behavior\nand by warring upon the recognized truth. Yet with all these\nblasphemies they retained the name and authority, not only of the\nState, but also of the Church, as if God had exalted them to the place\nof the angels. When this was the state of things, and Noah and Lamech\nwith their pious ancestor Methuselah taught in vain, God turned them\nover to the desires of their hearts (Ps 81, 12) and maintained silence\nuntil they should experience the flood, the prophecy of which they\nrefused to believe.\n\n139. This is falling away from God and Church and entering upon\nillicit marriage. One sin, unless corrected at once, will lead to\nanother, and so on indefinitely until the state is reached which\nSolomon describes in Proverbs 18, 3, \"When the wicked cometh, there\ncometh also contempt, and with ignominy Cometh reproach.\" They who\nthus sin, even if afterward rebuked, do not heed. They imagine they\nstand in need of no instructor, and think they represent a just cause.\nThey do not believe in a life after this, or even hope for salvation,\nwhile living in open sin. Notwithstanding, scorn and shame shall\noverwhelm them. It was this persistent impenitence and consummate\ncontempt for the Word that impelled God to visit all flesh with a\nuniversal flood.\n\n\nIV. GOD'S REPENTANCE AND GRIEF THAT HE MADE MAN.\n\n   A. THE REPENTANCE OF GOD.\n\n      1. The Words, \"The wickedness of man was great.\"\n\n         a. How Luther used these words against the doctrine of free\n            will; how the advocates of free will falsely interpreted\n            them, and how they are refuted 140-141.\n\n          * Concerning free will.\n\n            (1) Augustine's doctrine of free will misinterpreted by\n                the schools 140.\n\n            (2) The schools unreasonably defend it 141.\n\n            (3) Man has no free will and without the grace of the Holy\n                Spirit can do nothing 142-143.\n\n            (4) The reproving office of the Holy Spirit makes it clear\n                that man has no free will 144.\n\n            (5) Whether there is hope, if a council be held, that the\n                Papists will abandon their false doctrine of free will\n                145.\n\n            (6) How the true doctrine of free will leads us to a\n                knowledge of sin and what we are to hold in reference\n                to it 146.\n\n            (7) Why we should guard against the false doctrine\n                concerning free will 147.\n\n              * The comfort for one who commits sins of infirmities\n                147.\n\n              * All endeavors without the Holy Spirit are evil 148.\n\n            (8) We are to distinguish in the doctrine of free will\n                what is good politically from what is good\n                theologically 149-150.\n\n         b. These words are wrongly understood by the Jews and\n            sophists 151.\n\n          * How we should view the discussions of philosophers in\n            regard to God and divine things 152.\n\n         c. These words should be understood as spoken not only of the\n            people before the flood, but of all men 153.\n\n      2. The Words, \"It Repented Jehovah.\"\n\n         a. How the repentance of God is to be reconciled with the\n            wisdom and omniscience of God.\n\n            (1) The way sophists answer this question 154.\n\n            (2) Luther's answer 155-157.\n\n              * How man should treat questions which lead us into the\n                throne of the divine majesty 158.\n\n              * How the passages of Scripture are to be understood\n                which attribute to God the members of a human body\n                159.\n\n              * Whether the Anthropomorphites were justly condemned\n                159.\n\n              * Why God is represented to us as if he sprang from the\n                temporal and the visible 161-163.\n\n              * We cannot explore God's nature 163.\n\n              * In what pictures God reveals himself in the Old\n                Testament, and in the New 164.\n\n              * The will of God in signs and the will of God's good\n                pleasure, \"signs\" and \"Beneplaciti.\"\n\n                (a) How we can know God's will in signs 165-166.\n\n                (b) Why we cannot know the will of God's pleasure, nor\n                    fathom it 165-166.\n\n                (c) What is really to be understood by the will in\n                    signs 167.\n\n         b. The way the schools explain these words 168.\n\n         c. How they are to be rightly understood 169.\n\n          * Disputing about God's majesty and omnipotence places man\n            in a dangerous position 169-171.\n\n          * How man should hold to the signs by which God revealed\n            himself 171.\n\n          * What the will of God's pleasure is, to what it serves and\n            how it is revealed in Christ 172-176.\n\n          * The will of good pleasure of which the fathers speak\n            cannot comfort the heart 175.\n\n          * The only view of the Godhead possible in this life 176.\n\n         d. In what sense it can be said that \"it repented Jehovah\n            that he had made man\" 177.\n\n\nIV. THE REPENTANCE AND GRIEF OF GOD BECAUSE HE HAD MADE MAN.\n\nA. The Repentance of God.\n\nVs. 5-6. _And Jehovah saw that the wickedness of man was great in the\nearth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was\nonly evil continually. And it repented Jehovah that he had made man on\nthe earth, and it grieved him at his heart._\n\n140. This is the passage which we have used against \"free will,\" of\nwhich Augustine writes that without the grace of the Holy Spirit it\ncan do nothing but sin. The scholastics, however, the champions of\nfree will, are not only hard beset by this clear passage, but also by\nthe authority of Augustine, and they sweat. Of Augustine they say that\nhis language is hyperbolical, as Basil writes of one who in refuting\nthe other side had gone too far, that he did like the farmers; they\nwhen trying to straighten out crooked branches bend them a little too\nfar on the other side; and so Augustine, in beating back the\nPelagians, is asserted to have spoken more severely against free will\nin the defense of grace than the merits of the case warranted.\n\n141. As far as this passage is concerned, it is slandered when it is\nheld that it speaks only of the evil generation before the flood, and\nthat now men are better, at least some who make good use of their\nfreedom of will. Such wretched interpreters do not see that the\npassage speaks of the human heart in general, and that a particle is\nplainly added, _Rak_, which signifies \"only.\" In the third place, they\nfail to see that after the flood the same declaration is repeated in\nthe eighth chapter in almost precisely the same terms. For God says,\n\"The imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth,\" Gen 8, 21.\nHere evidently he does not speak only of the antediluvians. He rather\nspeaks of those to whom he makes the promise that henceforth another\ngeneral flood of water shall never come, that is, of all the offspring\nof Noah. These are words of universal application: \"The imagination of\nman's heart is evil.\"\n\n142. We draw, therefore, the general conclusion that man without the\nHoly Spirit and without grace can do nothing but sin, and thus he\nunhaltingly goes forward from sin to sin. When in addition, he will\nnot endure sound doctrine but rejects the word of salvation and\nresists the Holy Spirit, he becomes an enemy of God, blasphemes the\nHoly Spirit and simply follows the evil desires of his heart.\nWitnesses of this are the examples of the prophets, Christ and the\nApostles, the primeval world under Noah as teacher, and also the\nexample of our adversaries today, who cannot be convinced by anything\nthat they are in error, that they sin, that their worship is ungodly.\n\n143. Other declarations of Holy Scripture prove the same thing. Is not\nthe statement of the fourteenth Psalm, verse 3, sweeping enough when\nit says: \"Jehovah looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to\nsee if there was any that did understand, and did seek after God. They\nare all gone aside?\" Thus, Ps 116, 11, \"All men are liars;\" and Paul,\n\"God hath shut up all unto disobedience,\" Rom 11, 32. These passages\nare most sweeping, and emphatically force the conclusion that we all,\nwithout the Holy Spirit, whose dispenser is Christ, can do nothing but\nerr and sin. Therefore, Christ says in the Gospel, \"I am the vine, ye\nare the branches: ... apart from me ye can do nothing,\" Jn 15, 5.\nWithout me you are a branch cut off, dry, dead and ready for the\nburning.\n\n144. And the very reason the Holy Spirit performs the office of\nreproving the world is that he may call the world back to penitence\nand the recognition of its derangement. But the world remains\nconsistent with itself; it hears not and believes it can please God\nwith forms of worship of its own choosing and without the sanction of\nthe divine Word, and does not permit itself to be undeceived.\n\n145. If ever a council should be held, the final declaration and\nconclusion with reference to this very point, the freedom of will,\nwill be that we should abide by the decisions of the pope and the\nfathers. We may clamor until we are hoarse that man in himself without\nthe Holy Spirit is evil, that everything he does without the Holy\nSpirit or without faith is condemned before God, that his heart is\ndepraved and all his thought; we shall effect nothing.\n\n146. Therefore, the mind is to be grounded in this, and we are to hold\nfast the doctrine which lays before us our sin and condemnation. This\nknowledge of our sin is the beginning of salvation; we must absolutely\ndespair of ourselves and give glory for righteousness to God alone.\nWhy does Paul elsewhere complain, and in Romans 7, 18 freely confess\nthat there is nothing good in him? He says plainly, \"in my flesh;\" so\nthat we understand that the Holy Spirit alone can heal our infirmity.\nWhen this has been fixed in our hearts, the foundation of our\nsalvation is largely laid, inasmuch as subsequently clear testimonies\nare given that God will not cast away the sinner, that is, one who\nrecognizes his sin and desires to come to his senses and thirsts after\nrighteousness and the remission of sin through Christ.\n\n147. Let us, therefore, take care not to be found among those\nCyclopeans who oppose the Word of God and proclaim their freedom of\nwill and their own powers. Though we often err, though we fall and\nsin, still, upon yielding to reproof on the part of the Holy Spirit\nwith an humble confession of our depravity, the Holy Spirit himself\nwill be present, and not only not impute to us the sin we acknowledge,\nbut the grace of Christ shall cover it and he will shower upon us\nother gifts necessary to this life as well as the future one.\n\n148. But the words of Moses are to be more closely considered, for\nwith a definite purpose he has used here a peculiar expression; he has\nnot merely said, \"The thoughts of man's heart are evil,\" but \"the\nimagination of the thoughts of his heart.\" Thus he expresses the\nhighest that man can achieve with his thoughts or with his reason and\nfree will. \"Imagination\" he calls that which man with his strongest\neffort devises, selects, creates like a potter, and believes to be\nmost beautiful.\n\nBut such imagination is evil, he says, and that not once, but always.\nFor our reason without the Holy Spirit is altogether without knowledge\nof God. Now, to be without knowledge of God means to be entirely base,\nto dwell in darkness and to deem that very good which, in reality, is\nvery bad.\n\n149. But when I speak of good, I do so from the standpoint of\ntheology, for we must distinguish between the theological and the\ncivil standpoints. God approves also the rule of the ungodly; he\nhonors and rewards virtue also among the ungodly: but only in regard\nto the things of this life and in things grasped by a reason which is\nupright from the civil standpoint; whereas the future life is not\nembraced in such reward. His approval is not with regard to the future\nlife.\n\n150. When we dispute about the freedom of the will, the question with\nus is what it may do from the theological standpoint, not in civil\naffairs and in those subjects to reason. We believe that man, without\nthe Holy Spirit, is altogether corrupt before God, though he may stand\nadorned with all heathen virtues, inasmuch as there are certainly\ndistinguished examples of moderation, of liberality, of love of\ncountry, parents and children, of courage and humanity, even in the\nhistory of the Gentiles. We maintain that man's best thoughts\nconcerning God, the worship of God, the will of God, are worse than\nCimmerian darkness; for the light of reason, which has been given to\nman alone, understands only bodily blessings. Such is the wicked\ninfatuation of our evil desires.\n\n151. This declaration, therefore, should not be construed frivolously,\nas the Jews and sophists do, who believe that the lower part of man\nonly is here meant, which is bestial, and that the reason longs for\nbetter things. \"The imagination of the thoughts\" they apply\naccordingly to the second table, like the Pharisee who condemns the\npublican and says that he is not like the other persons. The words the\nPharisee uses are very fine, for to give thanks to God for his gifts\nis not a sin; and yet we declare this same thing to be ungodly and\nwicked, because it proceeded from gross ignorance of God, and it is\ntruly prayer turned into sin, tending neither to the glory of God nor\nto the welfare of men.\n\n152. You may observe that philosophers have at various times quite\ncleverly discussed God and the providence with which he rules all\nthings. To some, such words have seemed so pious that they almost have\nplaced Socrates, Xenophon and Plato in the same rank with the\nprophets; yet, because in these discussions the philosophers are\nignorant of the fact that God has sent his only Son into the world to\nsave sinners, these beautiful utterances are, according to the\ndeclaration of this passage, consummate ignorance of God and mere\nblasphemies, for the passage states unequivocally that all imagination\nand effort of the human heart is only evil.\n\n153. The text speaks, accordingly, not only of the sins before the\nflood, but it speaks of the whole nature of man, his heart, his reason\nand his intellect, even when man pretends to righteousness and desires\nto be very holy, as do today the Anabaptists when they purpose in\ntheir heart so to excel as to fail in nothing, when for a show they\nattempt to attain the fairest virtues. The truth is that hearts\nwithout the Holy Spirit are not only ignorant of God, but naturally\neven hate him. How, then, can anything be aught but evil that proceeds\nfrom ignorance and hatred of God?\n\n154. Another question is here raised. Moses speaks thus: \"When Jehovah\nsaw that every imagination of the thoughts of man's heart was only\nevil continually, it repented him that he had made man on the earth.\"\nIf God foresees everything, why does the text say that he now first\nsees? If God is wise, how can regret for having created anything\nbefall him? Why did he not see this sin or depraved nature of man from\nthe beginning of the world? Why does Scripture thus attribute to God\nsuch things as a temporary will, vision and purpose? Are not the\npurposes of God eternal and unalterable, incapable of being regretted?\nSimilar instances are found also in the prophets, where God threatens\npenalties, as for instance to the Ninevites, and yet pardons the\npenitent.\n\nTo this question the sophists have no other reply than this, that the\nScripture speaks after the manner of men, that such things are\nascribed to God accordingly through the use of a figure of speech.\nHence they contend concerning a double will of God, the will expressed\nby signs (_voluntas signi_) and the will of his good pleasure\n(_voluntas beneplaciti_). The will of his good pleasure, they say, is\nconstant and unchangeable, while the expressed will is subject to\nchange. For the signs through which he expresses himself, he changes\nwhen he pleases. Thus he has abolished circumcision and instituted\nbaptism, whereas the will of his good pleasure, fixed from eternity,\nabides.\n\n155. While I do not condemn this interpretation, a simpler meaning of\nthe Scripture seems to be that the Holy Scriptures express the thought\nof men in the ministry. For when Moses says that God sees and regrets,\nthis is really done in the hearts of those who have the ministry of\nthe Word. Thus he said above: \"My Spirit shall not strive with man,\"\nbut he does not say this simply of the Holy Spirit as existing in his\nown nature, or of the divine majesty, but of the Holy Spirit in the\nhearts of Noah and Methuselah, that is, the Holy Spirit as officiating\nand administering the Word through the saints.\n\n156. In this manner God saw the wickedness of man and repented; that\nis, Noah, who had the Holy Spirit and was a minister of the Word, saw\nthe wickedness of men and, seeing such things, he was moved by the\nHoly Spirit to grief. So Paul says in Ephesians 4, 30, that the Holy\nSpirit in the righteous is grieved by the ungodliness and malice of\nthe wicked. Inasmuch as Noah is a faithful minister of the Word and an\norgan of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is said to grieve when Noah\ngrieves and wishes that man rather did not exist than to be thus\niniquitous.\n\n157. The meaning, therefore, is not that God did not see these things\nfrom eternity; he saw everything from eternity; but inasmuch as this\nwickedness now manifests itself in all its fierceness, God now first\nreveals the same in the hearts of his ministers and prophets.\n\nFrom eternity, therefore, God is firm and constant in his purpose. He\nsees and knows everything. But only in his own time does God reveal\nthis to the righteous so that they, also, may see it. This seems to me\nthe simplest meaning of this passage, nor does Augustine differ from\nit much.\n\n158. However, I constantly follow the rule to avoid, whenever\npossible, such questions as draw us before the throne of the highest\nmajesty. It is better and safer to stand at the manger of Christ, the\nman. To lose one's self in the labyrinths of divinity is fraught with\ngreatest danger.\n\n159. To this passage belong also other similar ones in which God is\npictured as having eyes, ears, mouth, nose, hands and feet, as Isaiah,\nDaniel and other prophets saw him in their visions. In such passages\nthe Bible speaks of God in the same manner as of a man. In\nconsequence, the Anthropomorphites stood condemned of heresy because\nthey attributed to the divine essence a human form.\n\n160. Because the Anthropomorphites fancied such gross things, they\nhave rightly been condemned. Their fancy is manifestly erroneous, for\na spirit, as Christ says (Lk 24, 39), has not flesh and bone. I am\nrather of the opinion that the Anthropomorphites intended to adapt the\nform of their doctrine to the plainest people. For in his substance,\nGod is unknowable, indefinable, inexpressible, though we may tear\nourselves to pieces in our efforts to discern or portray him.\n\n161. Hence, God himself condescends to the low plane of our\nunderstanding and presents himself to us with childlike simplicity in\nrepresentations, as in a guise, so that he may be made known to us in\nsome way. Thus the Holy Spirit appeared in the form of a dove; not\nbecause he is a dove, but in this crude form he desired to be\nrecognized, received and worshiped, for it was really the Holy Spirit.\nNo one, to be sure, will say that the same passage defines God as a\nvoice speaking from heaven, yet under this crude image, a human voice\nfrom heaven, he was received and worshiped.\n\n162. When Scripture thus ascribes to God human form, voice, actions\nand state of mind, it is intended as an aid only for the uncultivated\nand feeble; we who are great and learned and of discernment in\nreference to Scripture, should likewise lay hold of these\nrepresentations, because God has put them forth and revealed himself\nto us through them. The angels likewise, appear in human form, though\nit is certain that they are only spirits; spirits we cannot recognize\nwhen they present themselves as such, but likenesses we do recognize.\n\n163. This is the simplest way of treating such passages, for the\nnature of God we cannot define; what he is not we can well define--he\nis not a voice, a dove, water, bread, wine. And yet in these visible\nforms he presents himself to us and deals with us. These forms he\nshows to us that we should not become wandering and unsettled spirits\nwhich dispute concerning God, but are completely ignorant concerning\nhim, since in his unveiled majesty he can not be apprehended. He sees\nit to be impossible for us to know him in his own nature. For he\nlives, as the Scripture says in 1 Timothy 6, 16, in an inaccessible\nlight, and what we can apprehend and understand he has declared. They\nwho abide in these things will truly lay hold of him, while those who\nvaunt and follow visions, revelations and illuminations will either be\noverwhelmed by his majesty or remain in densest ignorance of God.\n\n164. Thus the Jews also had their representations in which God\nmanifested himself to them, as the mercy-seat, the ark of the\ncovenant, the tabernacle, the pillars of smoke and fire. God says in\nExodus 33, 20, \"Man shall not see me and live,\" therefore he gives a\nrepresentation of himself in which he so manifests himself to us that\nwe may lay hold of him. In the new covenant we have Baptism, the\nLord's Supper, absolution and the ministry of the Word.\n\n165. These are what the scholastics call _voluntas signi_, the will\nexpressed through signs, which we must view when we desire to know the\nwill of God. Another is the _voluntas beneplaciti_, the will of his\ngood pleasure, the essential will of God, or his unveiled majesty,\nwhich is God himself. From this our eyes are to be turned away. It\ncannot be laid hold of; for in God is nothing but divinity, and the\nessence of God is his infinite wisdom and almighty power. These are\nabsolutely inaccessible to reason: what he has willed according to the\nwill of his good pleasure, that he has seen from eternity.\n\n166. Into this essential and divine will we should not pry, but should\nabsolutely refrain from it as from the divine majesty, for it is\ninscrutable, and God has had no desire to declare it in this life. He\ndesires to show it under certain tokens or coverings, as Baptism, the\nWord and the Lord's Supper. These are the images of the deity and are\nhis will as expressed through signs, by which he deals with us on the\nplane of our intelligence. Hence, we should look to these alone. The\nwill of his good pleasure is to be left entirely out of contemplation,\nunless you happen to be Moses, or David, or some similarly perfect\nman, although even they so looked to the will of the divine good\npleasure as never to turn their eyes from the will expressed by signs.\n\n167. This will of God is called his activity (_effectus Dei_), wherein\nhe comes out to us and deals with us garbed in the drapery of things\nextraneous to himself; these we can lay hold of--the Word of God and\nthe ceremonies instituted by himself. This will of God is not that of\nhis omnipotence, for though God in the ten commandments enjoins what\nought to be done it is yet not done. Thus, Christ has instituted the\nLord's Supper to strengthen in us faith in his mercy, and yet many\nreceive it to their condemnation, that is, without faith.\n\n168. But I return to Moses. He says that God sees man's wickedness and\nrepents. The scholastics explain this: He sees and repents, namely,\naccording to the expressed will, not that of his good pleasure, or the\nessential will.\n\n169. We say that Noah's heart is moved by the Holy Spirit to\nunderstand that God is wroth with man and desires his destruction.\nThis interpretation commends itself to our intelligence and does not\ndraw us into discussions concerning the absolute will or majesty of\nGod, which are very dangerous, as I have seen in many. Such spirits\nare first puffed up by the devil so that they believe themselves to be\nin possession of the Holy Spirit, neglect the Word to the point of\nblaspheming it and vaunt nothing but the Spirit and visions.\n\n170. This is the first degree of error--that men, paying no heed to\nthe Deity as imaged and incarnate, seek after the unveiled God.\nAfterward, when the hour of judgment comes, and they feel the wrath of\nGod, God himself judging and searching their hearts, the devil ceases\nto puff them up and they despair and die. They go about in the\nuntempered sunlight and forsake the shade that delivers from the heat,\nIs 4, 6.\n\n171. Let no one therefore meditate upon divinity unveiled, but flee\nfrom such thoughts as from the infernal regions and the very\ntemptations of Satan. But let us take care to abide in these symbols\nthrough which God has revealed himself to us--the Son, born of the\nVirgin Mary, lying among beasts in the manger, and the Word, Baptism,\nthe Lord's Supper and absolution. In these images we see and find God\nin a way wherein we can endure him; he comforts us, lifts us up into\nhope and saves. Other thoughts about the will of the good pleasure, or\nthe essential and eternal will, kill and damn.\n\n172. However, to name this the will of \"good pleasure\" is a misnomer.\nFor that deserves to be called the will of good pleasure which the\nGospel discloses, concerning which Paul says, \"that ye may prove what\nis the good will of God,\" Rom 12, 2. And Christ says, \"This is the\nwill of my Father, that every one that beholdeth the Son should have\neternal life,\" Jn 6, 40. Also, \"Whosoever shall do the will of my\nFather who is in heaven, he is my brother,\" Mt 12, 50. Again, \"This is\nmy beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased,\" Mt 3, 17. This will of\ngrace is correctly and properly called the will \"of the divine good\npleasure\" and it is our only remedy and safeguard against that other\nwill, be it called the \"expressed will\" or the \"will of good\npleasure,\" about the display of which at the flood and the destruction\nof Sodom the scholastics dispute.\n\n173. On both occasions a terrible wrath is in evidence, against which\nno soul could find protection, except in that gracious will, keeping\nin mind that the Son of God was sent into the flesh to deliver us from\nsin, death and the power of the devil.\n\n174. This will of the divine good pleasure has been determined from\neternity, and revealed and published in Christ. It is a quickening,\ngracious and lovable will, and consequently it alone merits to be\ncalled \"the will of good pleasure.\" But the good fathers almost pass\nthe promises by; they do not press them, though they could properly be\ncalled \"the will of the good pleasure.\"\n\n175. Therefore, as they enjoin looking to the will expressed by signs,\nthey do well, but this is in no wise sufficient; when we consider the\nten commandments, are we not frightened by the sight of our sins? When\nthose terrible examples of wrath are added which are also divine will\nas expressed by signs, it is impossible for the soul to be lifted up\nexcept by looking back to the will of the good pleasure, as we call\nit, that is, the Son of God, who portrays for us the spirit and the\nwill of his Father, who does not hate sinners but desires to have\ncompassion upon them through his Son. Christ says to Philip, \"He that\nhath seen me hath seen the Father,\" Jn 14, 9.\n\n176. The Son of God, therefore, who became incarnate, is that sign or\nveil of God in which the divine majesty with all its gifts so offers\nitself to us that no sinner is so wretched but he dare approach him in\ncertain confidence of obtaining forgiveness. This is the only vision\nof Deity which in this life is expedient and possible. However, those\nwho have died in this faith shall on the last day be so illumined by\npower from on high as to behold the majesty itself. In the meantime,\nit behooves us to approach the Father through the way, which is Christ\nhimself. He will lead us safely and we shall not be deceived.\n\n177. The additional statement of the text, \"It repented Jehovah that\nhe had made man on the earth,\" I believe to be meant to bring out the\nantithesis, that God has in mind not the earthly man, who is subject\nto sin and death, but the heavenly man, who is lord over them. He\nexpresses his love for the latter, while he hates the former and plans\nhis destruction.\n\n\nB. THE GRIEF OF GOD.\n\n   1. This is not to be understood of the divine nature, but of the\n      hearts of the patriarchs 178-179.\n\n   2. Abraham, Samuel and Christ grieved in like manner 180.\n\n   3. By whom such grief is awakened in the heart 181.\n\n   4. The cause of this grief 182.\n\n    * The character of the children of God and of the world in the\n      face of the approaching calamity 183-184.\n\n    * How the patriarchs and the Church were walls of defense 185.\n\n   5. What made the grief of the holy patriarchs greater 185.\n\n   6. Moses describes this grief very carefully 186.\n\n    * How we see the grief of God in his saints 187.\n\n    * How all is ruined on account of sin 187.\n\n    * Why Noah did not dare to reveal the great wrath of God to the\n      world 188.\n\n    * What prevents the world from believing God's threatenings\n      188-189.\n\n    * To whom God's promises do and do not apply 190.\n\n    * Why the old world did not believe the threat of the deluge 191.\n\n    * The fate of true doctrine in our day is the same as it was in\n      Noah's 192.\n\n\nB. THE GRIEF OF GOD.\n\nV. 6b. _And it grieved him at his heart._\n\n178. Such was the regret of God that he was pained in his heart. The\nword here is _azab_, which was used before when he said (Gen 3, 16),\n\"In pain shalt thou bring forth children\"; also in Psalm 127, 2, \"the\nbread of toil.\" This expression must be understood according to the\nusage of Scripture. We must not think that God has a heart or that he\ncan suffer pain, but when the spirit of Noah, Lamech or Methuselah is\ngrieved, God himself is said to be grieved. We may understand such\ngrief not of his divine nature, but of his conduct. Noah, with his\nfather and grandfather, feels in his heart, through a revelation of\nthe Holy Spirit, that God hates the world because of sin and desires\nits destruction; therefore they are grieved by this impenitence.\n\n179. This is the simple and true meaning. If you refer these words to\nthe will of the divine essence and hold that God has resolved this\nfrom eternity, a perilous argument is employed to which are equal only\nmen who are spiritual and tested by trial, like Paul, for instance,\nwho has ventured to argue concerning predestination. Let us take our\nstand on an humbler plane, one less open to danger, and hold that Noah\nand the other fathers were most grievously pained when the Spirit\ndisclosed to them such wrath. These inexpressible groanings of the\nbest of men are accordingly attributed to God himself, because they\nemanate from his Spirit.\n\n180. An example of such groanings we see later in the case of Abraham,\nwho interposed himself like a wall in behalf of the safety of the\nSodomites and did not abandon the cause until they came down to five\nrighteous ones. Without a doubt the Holy Spirit filled the breast of\nAbraham with infinite and frequent groanings in his attempts to effect\nthe salvation of the wretched. Likewise Samuel--what does he not do\nfor Saul? He cries and implores with such vehemence that God is\ncompelled to restrain him: \"How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing\nI have rejected him from being king over Israel?\" 1 Sam 16, 1. So\nChrist, foreseeing the destruction of Jerusalem within a few years by\nreason of its sins, is most violently moved and pained in his soul.\n\n181. Such promptings the Spirit of prayer arouses in pious souls.\nPresent everywhere, he is moved by the adversities of others, teaches,\ninforms, spares no pains, prays, complains, groans. Thus Moses and\nPaul are willing to be accursed for the sake of their people.\n\n182. In this manner Noah, the most holy man, and his father and\ngrandfather are consumed with pain at the sight of such terrible wrath\nof God. He is not delighted at this overthrow of the whole human race,\nbut is filled with anxiety and the most grievous pain, while at the\nsame time the sons of men live in the greatest security, mocking,\nboasting and taunting. Thus Psalms 109, 4, \"For my love they are my\nadversaries: but I give myself unto prayer.\" Thus Paul, \"I tell you\neven weeping.\" Phil 3, 18. And what else could holy men do but weep\nwhen the world would in no wise permit itself to be corrected?\n\n183. It is always the appearance of the true Church that she not only\nsuffers, not only is humiliated and trampled under foot, but also\nprays for her tormentors, is seriously disturbed by their dangers; on\nthe contrary, others play and frolic in proportion as they approach\ntheir doom. But when the hour of judgment comes, God in turn closes\nhis ears so completely that he does not even hear his own beloved\nchildren as they pray and intercede for the wicked. So Ezekiel laments\nthat no one is found who will stand for Israel as a protecting wall,\nsaying that this is the office of the prophets, Ezek 13, 5.\n\n184. It is impossible for the ungodly to pray; let no one, therefore,\nentertain the hope concerning the papists, our adversaries, that they\npray. We pray for them and plant ourselves like a wall against the\nwrath of God and, without doubt, it is by our tears and groanings that\nthey are saved, if, perchance, they will repent.\n\n185. It is a terrible example, that God has spared not the first\nworld, for which Noah, Lamech and Methuselah set themselves like a\nwall. What, then, shall we expect where such walls do not exist, where\nthere is no Church at all? The Church is always a wall against the\nwrath of God. She feels pain, is tormented in her soul, prays,\nintercedes, instructs, teaches, exhorts, as long as the judgment hour\nis not here but coming. When she sees these ministrations to be\nunavailing, what else can she do but feel grievous pain at the\ndestruction of the impenitent? The pain of the godly fathers was\naugmented by the sight of so many relatives and kindred at one time\ngoing to destruction.\n\n186. This pain Moses could not express in a better and more graphic\ndescription than to say that God repented of having made man. Before,\nwhen he describes man's nature as having been formed in God's image,\nhe says that God beheld all that he had made and it was very good.\nGod, then, is delighted with his creatures and has joy in them. Here\nhe absolutely alters that statement by one altogether at variance with\nit--that God is grieved at heart and even repents of having created\nman.\n\n187. It was Noah and the other fathers who felt this through the\nrevelation of the Holy Spirit; otherwise, they would have shared those\nthoughts of joy and would have judged according to the earlier\nprophecy that God had delight in all his works. Never would they have\nthought that the wrath of God was such as to destroy not only the\nwhole human race, but also all living flesh of sky and earth, which\nsurely had not offended, yea, the very earth also; for the earth,\nbecause of man's sin, had not retained after the flood its pristine\nexcellence. Some have written, as Lyra reminds us, that by the flood\nthe surface of the earth was washed away three hands deep. Certain it\nis that paradise has been utterly destroyed through the flood.\nTherefore, we possess today an earth more deeply cursed than before\nthe flood and after the fall of Adam; though the state of the earth\nafter the fall could not compare with the grandeur of its primeval\nstate before sin.\n\n188. These disasters, therefore, the holy fathers saw through the\nrevelation of the Holy Spirit a hundred and twenty years before. But\nsuch was the wickedness of the world that it put the Holy Spirit to\nsilence. Noah could not venture to reveal such threats without risk of\nthe gravest dangers. With his father and grandfather, with his\nchildren and wife, he would discuss this great wrath of God. The sons\nof men, however, had no more inclination to hear these things than the\npapists today have to hear themselves called the church of Satan and\nnot of Christ. Accordingly, they would vaunt their ancestors and over\nagainst Noah's proclamations they would plead the promise of the seed,\nbelieving it to be impossible for God, in this manner, to destroy all\nmankind.\n\n189. For the same reason, the Jews did not believe the prophets nor\neven Christ himself when called to repentance, but maintained that\nthey were the people of God, inasmuch as they had the temple and\nworship. The Turks today are inflated with victories which they\nbelieve to be the reward for their faith and religion because they\nbelieve in one God. We, however, are viewed as heathen and reputed to\nbelieve in three Gods. God would not give us such victories and\ndominions, they say, if he did not favor us and approve our religion.\nThis same reasoning blinds also the papist. Occupying an exalted\nposition, they maintain they are the Church and hence they have no\nfear of divine punishment. Devilish, therefore, is that argument\nwhereby men take the name of God to palliate their sins.\n\n190. But if God did not spare the first world, the generation of the\nholy patriarchs, which had the promise of the seed as its very own--if\nhe saved only a very small remnant--the Turks, Jews and Papists shall\nboast in vain of the name of God. According to Micah 2, 7, the Word of\nGod promises blessings to those who walk in uprightness. But those who\ndo not walk in uprightness are cursed. Those he threatens, those he\ndestroys. Neither does he take account of the name \"Church\", nor of\ntheir number, whereas he saves the remnant which walks in uprightness.\nBut never will you convince the world of this.\n\n191. In all probability the descendants of the patriarchs who perished\nin the flood abused quite shamefully the argument of the dignity of\nthe Church, and condemned Noah for blasphemy and falsehood. To say,\nthey argued, that God was about to destroy the whole world by a flood\nis equal to saying that God is not merciful, nor a Father, but a cruel\ntyrant. You proclaim the wrath of God, O Noah! Then God is not such a\nbeing as to promise deliverance from sin and death through the seed of\nwoman? The wrath of God, therefore, will not swallow the whole earth.\nWe are the people of God. We have from God magnificent gifts; never\nwould God have given these to us if he had resolved to act against us\nwith such hostility. In this fashion the wicked are in the habit of\napplying to themselves the promises and trusting to the same. All\nwarnings, however, they neglect and deride.\n\n192. It is profitable to contemplate this diligently so that we may be\nsafeguarded against such vicious heedlessness of the wicked. For what\nhappened to Moses, now happens also to us. Our adversaries ascribe to\nthemselves the name of God's people, true worship, grace and\neverything holy; to us, everything devilish. Now, when we reprove them\nfor blasphemy and say that they are the church of Satan, they rage\nagainst us with every kind of cruelty. Hence we mourn with Noah, and\ncommend the cause to God, as Christ did on the cross--what else could\nwe do?--and wait till God shall judge the earth and show that he loves\nthe remnant of those that fear him and that he hates the multitude of\nimpenitent sinners in spite of their boast of being the Church, of\nhaving the promises, of having the worship of God. When God destroyed\nthe whole original world, he manifested the promise of the seed to\nthat wretched and tiny remnant, Noah and his sons.\n\n\nV. NOAH ALONE WAS RIGHTEOUS; THE WORLD DESTROYED.\n\n   A. NOAH ALONE WAS FOUND RIGHTEOUS.\n\n      1. What comfort was offered Noah by his righteousness in the\n         midst of his suffering 193.\n\n       * To find grace before God leads to faith and excludes works\n         194.\n\n      2. For what was righteous Noah especially praised by God 195.\n\n       * Many great men lived in the days of Noah 196.\n\n      3. How righteous Noah had to contend against so much all alone\n         197.\n\n       * By what means the Papists contend against the Evangelicals\n         198.\n\n      4. With what the world especially upbraided righteous Noah 199.\n\n       * People then were wiser and more ingenious than now 200.\n\n      5. Noah may be called both just and pious 201.\n\n      6. Righteous Noah led a godly life, possessed great courage and\n         was a marvelous character 202.\n\n      7. By his piety Noah was a confessor of the truth 203-204.\n\n       * It is very difficult for one man to withstand the united\n         opposition of many 204.\n\n      8. Being a preacher of righteousness Noah was in greater danger\n         205.\n\n      9. Noah an example of patience and of all virtues 206.\n\n     10. How he traveled and preached everywhere in the world, and\n         preserved the human race temporally and spiritually 207-208.\n\n     11. The world takes offense at righteous Noah's marrying, and\n         adds sin to sin 209.\n\n     12. The order of the birth of Noah's sons 210.\n\n   B. THE WHOLE WORLD DESTROYED.\n\n      1. Whether, as Lyra teaches, birds and animals were destroyed\n         211.\n\n       * Why the punishment of sin was visited also upon the animals\n         212-213.\n\n      2. The meaning of \"the earth was corrupt before God\" 214-216.\n\n       * The sins against the first table of the law can easier be\n         concealed than those against the second table 214.\n\n       * Where false doctrine is taught, godless living follows 215.\n\n      3. How the earth was corrupt in the light of the first table of\n         the law 215-216.\n\n      4. How the earth was corrupt in the light of the second table\n         217-218.\n\n       * The meaning of \"violence\" in Scripture 218.\n\n       * The greatest violence can obtain under the appearance of\n         holiness, as among the Papists and Turks 219-221.\n\n       * Moses beautifully traces the course God takes in his\n         judgments 222.\n\n       * Who can pass the right judgment upon the pope that he is\n         Antichrist 223.\n\n       * How Antichrist strengthens the courage of the godly, and\n         whether they can check him 223.\n\n      5. Noah laments this corruption 224.\n\n       * Godlessness cannot be remedied when it adorns itself with the\n         appearance of holiness 225.\n\n      6. How God views this corruption 226.\n\n       * Luther laments the wickedness of the enemies of the Gospel\n         227.\n\n       * How we should view God's delay in punishing the wickedness of\n         his enemies 228.\n\n       * God's delay is very hard for believers 229.\n\n      7. The first world, although corrupt, was much better than the\n         present world 230.\n\n\nV. HOW NOAH ALONE WAS FOUND RIGHTEOUS, AND HOW THE WHOLE WORLD WAS\nDESTROYED.\n\nA. Noah Alone Was found Righteous.\n\nV. 8. _But Noah found grace in the eyes of Jehovah._\n\n193. These are the words through which Noah was lifted up and\nquickened again. For such wrath of the divine majesty would have\nkilled him, had not God added the promise of saving him. It is likely,\nhowever, that his faith had a struggle and was weak. We cannot imagine\nhow such contemplation of God's wrath weakens courage.\n\n194. This novel expression of the Holy Spirit the heavenly messenger\nGabriel also uses when speaking to the Blessed Virgin Lk 1, 30, \"Thou\nhast found favor (grace) with God.\" The expression most palpably\nexcludes merit and commends faith, through which alone we are\njustified before God, made acceptable and well pleasing in his sight.\n\nV. 9. _These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man,\nand perfect in his generations; Noah walked with God._\n\n195. With this passage the Jews commence not only a new chapter, but\nalso a new lesson. This is a very brief history, but it greatly extols\nour patriarch Noah; he alone remained just and upright while the other\nsons of God degenerated.\n\n196. Let us remember many most excellent men were among the sons of\nGod, of whom some lived with Noah well nigh five hundred years. Man in\nthat age before the flood was very long-lived; not only the sons of\nGod, but also the sons of men. A very wide and rich experience had\nbeen gathered by these people during so many years. Much they learned\nfrom their progenitors and much they saw and experienced.\n\n197. Amid the corruption of all these stands Noah, a truly marvelous\nman. He swerves neither to the left nor to the right. He retains the\ntrue worship of God. He retains the pure doctrine, and lives in the\nfear of God. There is no doubt that a depraved generation hated him\ninordinately, tantalized him in various ways and thus insulted him:\n\"Art thou alone wise? Dost thou alone please God? Are the rest of us\nall in error? Shall we all be damned? Thou alone dost not err. Thou\nalone shalt not be condemned.\" And thus the just and holy man must\nhave concluded in his mind that all others were in error and about to\nbe condemned, while he and his offspring alone were to be saved.\nAlthough his conviction was right in the matter, his lot was a hard\none. The holy man was in various ways troubled by such reflections.\n\n198. The wretched Papists press us today with this one argument: Do\nyou believe that all the fathers have been in error? It seems hard so\nto believe, especially of the worthier ones, such as Augustine,\nAmbrose, Bernard and that whole throng of the best men who have\ngoverned Churches with the Word and have been adorned with the august\nname of the Church. The labors of such we both laud and admire.\n\n199. But surely no less a difficulty confronted Noah himself, who\nalone is called just and upright, at a time when the very sons of men\nparaded the name of the Church. When the sons of the fathers allied\nthemselves with these they, forsooth, believed that Noah with his\npeople raved, because he followed another doctrine and another\nworship.\n\n200. Today our life is very brief, still to what lengths human nature\nwill go is sufficiently in evidence. What may we imagine the condition\nto have been in such a long existence, in which the bitterness and\nvehemence of human nature were even stronger? Today we are naturally\nmuch more dull and stupid, and yet men singularly gifted rush into\nwickedness. It is afterward said that all flesh had corrupted its way\nupon the earth, only Noah was just and upright.\n\n201. From these two words we may gather the thought that Noah is held\nto be \"just\" as he honored the first table and \"upright\" as he honored\nthe second. \"Just\" he is called, because of his faith in God, because\nhe first believed the general promise with respect to the seed of\nwoman and then also the particular one respecting the destruction of\nthe world through the flood and the salvation of his own offspring. On\nthe other hand he is called \"upright\" because he walked in the fear of\nGod and conscientiously avoided murder and other sins with which the\nwicked polluted themselves in defiance of conscience. Nor did he\npermit himself to be moved by the frequent offenses of men most\nillustrious, wise and apparently holy.\n\n202. Great was his courage. Today it appears to us impossible that one\nman should oppose himself to all mankind, condemning them as evil,\nwhile they vaunt the Church and God's Word and worship, and to\nmaintain that he alone is a son of God and acceptable before him.\nNoah, accordingly, is a marvelous man, and Moses commends this same\ngreatness of mind when he plainly adds \"in his generation,\" or \"in his\nage,\" as if he desired to say that his age was indeed the most wicked\nand corrupt.\n\n203. Above, in the history of Enoch, we explained what it means to\nwalk with God, namely, to advocate the cause of God in public. To be\njust and upright bespeaks private virtue, but to walk with God is\nsomething public--to advocate the cause of God before the world, to\nwield his Word, to teach his worship. Noah was not simply just and\nholy for himself but he was also a confessor; he taught others the\npromises and threats of God, and performed and suffered all that\nbehooves a public personage in an age so exceedingly wicked and\ncorrupt.\n\n204. If it were I who had seen that so great men in the generation of\nthe ungodly were opposed to me, I surely in desperation should have\ncast aside my ministry. For one cannot conceive how difficult it is\nfor one man to oppose himself alone to the unanimity of all churches;\nto impugn the judgment of the best and most amicable of men; to\ncondemn them; to teach, to live, and to do everything, in opposition\nto them. This is what Noah did. He was inspired with admirable\nconstancy of purpose, inasmuch as he, innocent before men, not only\nregarded the cause of God, but most earnestly pressed it among the\nmost nefarious men, until he was told: \"My spirit shall not further\nstrive with man.\" And the word \"strive\" finely portrays the spirit\nwith which the ungodly heard Noah instruct them.\n\n205. Peter also beautifully sets forth what it means to walk with God\nwhen he calls Noah a preacher, not of the righteousness of man, but of\nGod; that is, that of faith in the promised seed. But what reward Noah\nreceived from the ungodly for his message Moses does not indicate. The\nstatement is sufficient, that he preached righteousness, that he\ntaught the true worship of God while the whole earth opposed him. That\nmeans the best, most religious and wisest of men were against him.\nMore than one miracle, in consequence, was necessary to prevent his\nbeing waylaid and killed by the ungodly. We see today how much wrath,\nhate, and envy one sermon to the people may create. What shall we\nbelieve Noah may have suffered who taught not a hundred, not two\nhundred, but even more years, down to the last century, when God did\nnot desire the wicked to receive instruction any longer lest they\nbecome still fiercer and more depraved.\n\n206. Therefore we may conjecture from the condition and nature of the\nworld itself, and of the devil, from the experience of the apostles\nand the prophets, and likewise from our own, what a noble example of\npatience and other virtues Noah has been, who was just and\nirreproachable in that ungodly generation and walked with God--that\nis, governed the churches with the Word--and who, when the one hundred\nand twenty years were determined upon, after the lapse of which the\nworld was to be destroyed by a flood, in face of such a terrible\nthreat, entered into matrimony and begot children.\n\n207. It is very probable that he traveled up and down the earth; that\nhe taught everywhere; that everywhere he exhorted to worship God in\ntruth; that he, hindered by many labors, refrained from matrimony on\naccount of abundance of tribulations and in the expectation of the\nadvent of a better and more religious age. But when he recognized this\nhope as unfounded and by a voice divine was warned that a time had\nbeen set for the world's destruction, then and not before, prompted by\nthe Spirit, did he make up his mind to marry, in order to transmit to\nthe new age seed out of himself. And thus the holy man preserved the\nhuman race, not only spiritually, in the true Word and worship, but\nalso bodily, by begetting children.\n\n208. As in paradise a new Church had its beginning, before the flood,\nthrough Adam and Eve's faith in the promise, so also here a new world\nand a new Church arise from the marriage of Noah--a nursery of that\nworld which shall endure to the end.\n\n209. I stated above (para 88) that this marriage was an occasion of\ngreat offense to the ungodly and that they made the most extraordinary\nsport of it. How inconsistent that the world is to perish so soon,\nwhen Noah, five hundred years old, becomes a father! They deemed his\nact the surest evidence that the world was not to perish by a flood.\nHence, they began to live even more licentiously, and in the greatest\nsecurity to despise all threats. Christ says in Matthew 24, 38, that\nin the days of Noah they ate, they drank, etc. The world does not\nunderstand the plans of God.\n\n210. Concerning the order of the sons of Noah, I said above that\nJapheth was first, that Shem was born two years afterward when Noah\ncommenced to build the ark, and Ham two years later. This has not been\nclearly explained by Moses, but still it has been carefully noted.\n\nB. Destruction of the Whole World.\n\nV. 11. _And the earth was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled\nwith violence._\n\n211. Lyra, perhaps under the influence of rabbinic interpretation,\ncontends here that even the birds and other animals forsook their\nnature and mixed with those of another species. But I do not believe\nit, for the creation or nature of animals remains as it was fashioned.\nThey have not fallen through sin, like man, but are, on the contrary,\nfashioned for this bodily life alone. In consequence they neither hear\nthe Word, nor does the Word concern them. They are absolutely without\nthe Law of the first and the second tables. Accordingly, this passage\nrefers only to man.\n\n212. But that the beasts bore the penalty of sin and perished at the\nsame time with man through the flood was the result of God's purpose\nto destroy man altogether; not alone in body and soul, but with the\npossessions and dominion which were his at creation. Instances of\nsimilar retribution occur in the Old Testament. In the sixth chapter\nof Daniel we see the enemies of Daniel cast into the lions' den,\ntogether with their wives, children and whole families. In the\nsixteenth chapter of Numbers a like incident is narrated in connection\nwith the destruction of Korah, Dathan and Abiram. Similar is also an\ninstance spoken of by Christ when the king commands to sell the\nservant together with wife, children and all his substance.\n\n213. In this manner, evidently, not only men but all their goods were\ndestroyed, so that punishment might be full and complete. Beasts,\nfields and the birds of heaven were created for man. They are man's\nproperty and chattels. Therefore, the animals perished, not because\nthey had sinned, but because God wanted man to perish amid all his\nearthly possessions.\n\n214. In this passage Moses' specific statement that \"the earth was\ncorrupt before God,\" is made to show that Noah was treated and\nesteemed in the eyes of his age as a stupid and good for nothing\ncharacter. The world, on the contrary, appeared in its own eyes\nperfectly holy and righteous, believing it had just cause for the\npersecution of Noah, especially in regard to the first table of the\nLaw and the worship of God. The second table is not without its\ndisguise of hypocrisy, but in this respect it bears no comparison to\nthe former. The adulterer, the thief, the murderer can remain hidden\nfor a while, though not forever. But the sins of the first table\ngenerally remain hidden under the cloak of sanctity until God brings\nthem to light. Godlessness never wishes to be godlessness, but chases\nafter a reputation for piety and religion; and trims its cult so\nfinely that in comparison with it the true cult and the true religion\nappear coarse.\n\n215. The verb _shiheth_ is very frequent and conspicuous in Holy\nScripture. Moses uses it in the thirty-first chapter of Deuteronomy,\nverse 29: \"For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt\nyourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you.\"\nAnd David says, \"They are all gone aside; they are together become\nfilthy,\" Ps 14, 3. Both passages speak particularly of the sins\nagainst the first table; that is, they accuse the apparently devoutest\nsaints of false worship and false doctrine, for it is impossible for a\nrighteous life to follow teaching that is false.\n\n216. When Moses says the earth was corrupt before God, he clearly\npoints out the contrast--the hypocrites and oppressors judged Noah's\nteaching and practise as wholly wrong, and their own as altogether\nholy. The reverse, Moses says, was true. Mankind was assuredly corrupt\nmeasured by the first table. They lacked the true Word and the true\nworship. This distinction between the first and the second tables\ncommends itself strongly to my judgment and was doubtless suggested by\nthe Holy Spirit.\n\n217. The additional statement--\"and the earth was filled with\nviolence\"--points to this unfailing sequence. With the Word lost, with\nfaith extinct, with traditions and will-worship--to use St. Paul's\nphraseology (Col 2, 8)--having replaced the true cult, there results\nviolence and shameful living.\n\n218. The correct significance of the word _hamas_ is violence force,\nwrong, with the suspension of all law and equity, a condition where\npleasure is law and everything is done not by right, but by might. But\nif such was their life, you may say, how could they maintain the\nappearance and reputation of holiness and righteousness? As if we did\nnot really have similar instances before our eyes today. Has the world\never seen anything more cruel than the Turks? And they adorn all their\nfierceness with the name of God and religion.\n\n219. The popes have not only seized for themselves the riches of the\nearth, but have filled the Church itself with stupendous errors and\nblasphemous doctrines. They live in shocking licentiousness. They\nalienate at pleasure the hearts of kings. Much is done by them to\nbring on bloodshed and war. And yet, with all such blasphemies and\noutrages, they arrogate to themselves the name and title of the\ngreatest saints and boast of being vicars of Christ and successors of\nPeter.\n\n220. Thus the greatest wrong is allied to the names of Church and true\nreligion. Should any one offer objection, immediately is he put under\nthe ban and condemned as a heretic and an enemy of God and man.\nBarring the Romans and their accomplices, there is no people which\nplumes itself more upon religion and righteousness than the Turks. The\nChristians they despise as idolaters; themselves they esteem as most\nholy and wise. Notwithstanding, what is their life and religion but\nincessant murder, robbery, rapine and other horrible outrages?\n\n221. The present times, therefore, illustrate how those two\nincompatible things may be found in union--the greatest religiousness\nwith abominations, the greatest wrong with a show of right. And this\nis the very cause for men becoming hardened and secure without\napprehending the punishment they merit by their sins.\n\nV. 12. _And God saw the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all\nflesh had corrupted their way upon the earth._\n\n222. Inasmuch as the wrath of God is appalling and destruction is\nimminent for all flesh except eight souls, Moses is somewhat redundant\nin this passage, and uses repetitions, which are not superfluous but\nexpress an emphasis of their own. Above he said the earth was corrupt;\nnow he says that God, as if following the customary judicial method,\nsaw this and meditated punishment. In this manner he pictures, as it\nwere, the order in which God proceeds.\n\n223. The judgment of spiritual people concerning the pope at the\npresent day is that he is the Antichrist, raging against the Word and\nthe kingdom of Christ. But they who censure it are unable to correct\nthis wickedness. Wickedness is growing daily and contempt for\ngodliness is becoming greater every day. Now comes the thought: What\nis God doing? Why does he not punish his enemy? Does he sleep and care\nno longer for human affairs? The delay of judgment causes the\nrighteous anguish. They themselves cannot come to the succor of a\nstricken religion and they see God who could help, connive at the fury\nof the popes, who securely sin against the first and the second tables\nof the Law.\n\n224. Just so Noah sees the earth filled with wrongs. Therefore, he\ngroans and sighs to heaven in order to arouse God from the highest\nheaven to judgment. Such voices occur here and there in the Psalms\n(10, 1): \"Why standest thou afar off?\"; (13, 1): \"How long, O\nJehovah?\"; (9, 13): \"Have mercy upon me, O Jehovah; consider my\ntrouble\"; (7, 6-9): \"Arise, judge my cause, etc.\"\n\n225. What Moses here describes comes at length to pass, that God also\nsees these things and hears the cry of the righteous who are able to\njudge the world; for they who are spiritual judge all things (1 Cor 2,\n15), though they cannot alter anything. Wickedness is incorrigible\nwhen adorned with a show of piety, and so is oppression when it\nassumes the disguise of justice and foresight. It is nothing new that\nthey who seize the wives, daughters, houses, lands and goods of others\ndesire to be just and holy, as we showed above in respect of the\npapacy.\n\n226. This is the second stage then: When the saints have seen and\njudged the wickedness of the world, God also sees it. He says of the\nSodomites: \"The cry of them is waxed great before Jehovah\" (Gen 19,\n13); and above (ch 4, 10): \"The voice of thy brother's blood crieth\nunto me.\" But always before the Lord takes note, the sobs and groans\nof the righteous precede, arousing, as it were, the Lord from slumber.\n\nWhat Moses desires to show in this passage through the word, \"saw\" is\nthat God finally perceived the afflictions and heard the cries of the\nrighteous, filling at last all heaven. He who hitherto had winked at\neverything and seemed to favor the success of the wicked, was awakened\nas from slumber. The fact is he saw everything much sooner than Noah;\nfor he is the searcher of hearts and cannot be deceived by simulated\npiety as we can. But not until now, when he meditates punishment, does\nNoah perceive that he sees.\n\n227. Thus we are afflicted today by extreme and unheard of wickedness,\nfor our adversaries condemn from sheer caprice the truth they know and\nprofess. They try to get at our throats and shed the blood of the\nrighteous with a satanic fury. Such blasphemous, sacrilegious and\nparricidal doings against the kingdom and name of God, manifest as\nsuch beyond possibility of denial, they defend as the acme of justice.\nWhile contending for the maintenance of their tyrannical position they\ngo so far as to arrogate to themselves the name of the Church. What\nelse can we do here but cry to Jehovah to make his name sacred and not\nto permit the overthrow of his kingdom nor resistance to his paternal\nwill?\n\n228. But so far the Lord sleeps. He apparently does not observe such\nwickedness, because he gives no sign as yet of observing it. Rather he\npermits us to be tormented by such woeful sights. We are, therefore,\nthus far in the first stage and this verse, stating that the whole\nearth is corrupt, applies to our age. But at the proper time the\nsecond stage will be reached, when we can declare in certainty of\nfaith that not only we but God also sees and hates such wickedness.\nThough God, in his long-suffering, has continued to wink at many\nthings, he shall retain the name of One who in righteousness shall\njudge the earth.\n\n229. How bitter and hard such delay is for the righteous, the\nlamentations of Jeremiah in Jeremiah 12, 1ff., and 20, 7ff, show.\nThere the holy man almost verges on blasphemy until he is told that\nthe Babylonian king should come and inflict punishment upon the\nunbelieving scoffers. Thereupon Jeremiah recognizes that God looks\ndown on the earth and is Judge upon the earth.\n\n230. The universal judgment which follows is terrible in the extreme,\nnamely that all flesh upon the earth had corrupted its way and that\nGod, when he had begun to examine the sons of men, did not, from the\noldest to the youngest of the fathers, find any he could save from\ndestruction.\n\nThis strikes our ears as still more awful when we take into\nconsideration the condition of the primitive world, not judging by the\nmiserable fragments we have today. As the physical condition of the\nworld at that time was infinitely ahead of this age, so we may\nconclude that the majesty and pomp of our rulers and the show of\nsanctity and wisdom on the part of the popes are not to be compared to\nthe show of religion, righteousness and wisdom found among those\nrenowned men of the primitive world.\n\nAnd yet the text says that all flesh had corrupted its way, save Noah\nand his offspring. That means all men were wicked, lived in idolatry\nand false religion and hated the true worship of God. They despised\nthe promise of the seed, and persecuted Noah, who proclaimed\nforgiveness through the seed and threatened to those, who should fail\nto believe his forgiveness, eternal doom.\n\n\nVI. GOD DECIDES TO PUNISH THE FIRST WORLD; COMMANDS NOAH TO BUILD AN\n    ARK; THE COVENANT.\n\n   A. HOW GOD DECREED TO PUNISH THE OLD WORLD IN HIS WRATH.\n\n      1. How punishment finally comes when God has suffered sin long\n      enough 231.\n\n       * Luther's hope that God's judgment may soon break upon the\n         last world 231.\n\n      2. Whether reason can grasp the wrath and punishment of God 232.\n\n      3. How God's promises stand in the midst of his wrath and\n         punishment 232.\n\n      4. The first world thought itself secure against God's wrath\n         233.\n\n       * The Papal security and boldness against the Evangelicals 234.\n\n      5. By what means God punished the first world 235.\n\n       * The Holy Spirit must reveal that God's wrath and punishment\n         do not violate his promises 236.\n\n      6. The causes of this wrath and punishment 237.\n\n       * By what may it be known that God will visit Germany with\n         punishment 238.\n\n       * God complains more of the violence shown to the neighbor than\n         to himself 239.\n\n       * The damages of the deluge 240.\n\n       * The ground of the earth was in a better state before the\n         flood than now 240.\n\n       * The colors in the rainbow signs of the punishment of the\n         first and the last world 241.\n\n\nVI. GOD DECIDES TO PUNISH THE FIRST WORLD; COMMANDS NOAH TO BUILD AN\nARK; THE COVENANT.\n\nA. God Decides to Punish the Old World.\n\nV. 13. _And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before\nme; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I\nwill destroy them with the earth._\n\n231. After Noah and his people had for a long time raised their\naccusing cry against the depravity of the world, the Lord gave\nevidence that he saw the depravity and intended to avenge it. This,\nthe second stage, we also look for today, nor is there any doubt that\nmen shall exist, to whom this coming destruction of the world is to be\nrevealed, unless the destruction be the last day and the final\njudgment, which I truly wish. We have seen enough wickedness in these\nbrief and evil days of ours. Godless men, as in Noah's time, adorn\ntheir vices with the name of holiness and righteousness. Hence, no\npenitence or reformation is to be hoped for. This stage having been\nreached in the times of Noah, sentence is finally passed, having been\npreviously announced by the Lord when he gave command that striving\nshould cease and issued the declaration that he regretted having made\nman.\n\n232. Reason is incapable of believing and perfectly understanding such\nwrath. Just consider how different this is from what had been. Above\nwe have read (ch 1, 31) that God saw everything he had made and\nbehold, it was very good; that he gave man and beast the additional\nblessing of propagation; that he subjected to man's rule the earth and\nall the treasures of the earth; that as the highest blessing, he added\nthe promise of the woman's seed and life eternal and instituted not\nonly the home and the State, but also the Church. How, then, is it\nthat the first world, called into being in this way through the Word,\nshould, to use Peter's expression, perish by water?\n\n233. There is no doubt that the sons of the world threw all this up to\nNoah as he preached the coming universal destruction, and publicly\ncharged him with lying, on the ground that home, State and Church had\nbeen instituted by God; that God surely would not overturn his own\nestablishment by a final destruction; that man had been created for\npropagation and dominion upon the earth, not for the rule of water\nover him to his destruction.\n\n234. Just so the Papists press us with the one argument that Christ\nwill be with the Church to the end of the world (Mt 28, 20); that the\ngates of hell will not prevail against it (Mt 16, 18). This they vaunt\nin a loud-voiced manner, believing their destruction to be an\nimpossibility. Swept by the waves Peter's ship may be, they say, but\nthe waters cannot overwhelm it.\n\n235. Quite similar was the security and assurance before the flood;\nnotwithstanding, we see that the whole earth perished. The scoffers\nboasted that God's regulations are perpetual, and that God had never\ncompletely abolished or altered his creation. But consider the outcome\nand you will see that they were wrong, while Noah alone was right.\n\n236. Unless the additional light of the Holy Spirit is vouchsafed, man\nwill surely be convinced by such argument; for is it not equivalent to\nmaking God inconstant and changeable, to maintain that he will\ncompletely destroy his creature? Yet God gives Noah the revelation\nthat he will make an end of flesh and earth, not in part, but of all\nflesh and all the earth. Would it not be awful enough to partition the\nearth into three parts and to threaten destruction to one? But to rage\nagainst the whole earth and against all mankind seems to be in\nconflict with God's government and the declaration that everything is\nvery good. These things are too sublime to be understood or\ncomprehended by human reason.\n\n237. What is the cause of wrath so great? Surely, the fact that the\nearth is filled with violence, as he here says. Astonishing reason! He\nsays nothing here concerning the first table; he mentions only the\nsecond. It is, as if he said: I shall say nothing of myself that they\nhate, blaspheme and persecute my Word. Among themselves how shamefully\ndo they live! Neither home nor State are properly administered;\neverything is conducted by force, nothing by reason and law.\nTherefore, I shall destroy at the same time both mankind and the\nearth.\n\n238. We see also in our age that God winks at the profanation of the\nmass, a horrible abomination that fills the whole earth, and at\nungodly teachings and other offenses which have hitherto been in vogue\nin religion. But when men live so together that they disregard both\nState and home, when huge covetousness, graft of every description and\nmanifold iniquity have waxed strong, does it not become clear to every\nman that God is compelled, as it were, to punish, yea to overturn\nGermany?\n\n239. It is the fullness of his mercy and love that prompts God rather\nto make complaint concerning the wrongs inflicted upon his members\nthan those inflicted upon himself. We observe he maintains silence\nrespecting the latter, while he threatens punishment, not to man\nalone, but even to the very earth itself.\n\n240. A twofold effect is traceable to the flood; a weakening of man's\npowers and an impairment of his wealth and that of the earth. The\nlatter-day fruit of trees is in nowise to be compared with that in the\ndays before the flood. The antediluvian turnips were better than\nafterward the melons, oranges or pomegranates. The pear was finer than\nthe spices of today. So it is likely that a man's finger possessed\nmore strength than today his whole arm. Likewise man's reason and\nunderstanding were far superior. But God, because of sin, has brought\npunishment to bear, not alone upon man, but also upon his property and\ndomain, as witness to posterity also of his wrath.\n\nBut how is the destruction to be effected? Assuredly, by his seizing\nthe watery element and blotting out everything. The force with which\nthis element is wont to rage is common knowledge. Though the\natmosphere be pestilential, it does not always infect trees and roots.\nBut water not only overturns everything, not only does it tear out\ntrees and roots, but it also lifts the very surface of the earth. It\nalters the soil, so that the most fertile fields are marred by the\noverflow of salty earth and sand (Ps 107, 34). This was therefore\nequal to the downfall of the primitive world.\n\n241. The penalty of the present world, however, will be different, as\nthe color of the rainbow shows. The lowest color the extent of which\nis well defined, is that of water. For the fury of the water in the\ndeluge was so great that limits were set to its havoc, and the earth\nwas restored to the remnant of the godly after the destruction of the\nevil-doers. But the other arch of the rainbow, the outer, which has no\nclearly defined bounds, is of the color of fire, the element which\nshall consume the whole world. This destruction shall be succeeded by\na better world, which shall last forever and serve the righteous. This\nthe Lord seems to have written in the color of the rainbow.\n\n\nB. GOD COMMANDS NOAH TO BUILD AN ARK.\n\n * That Noah had only three children is a sign of God's mercy 242.\n\n   1. The kind of wood used in building the ark 243.\n\n   2. Its various rooms 244.\n\n   3. The pitch by which it was protected 245.\n\n   4. Why God instructed Noah so particularly how each part was to be\n      constructed 246.\n\n   5. The form of the ark, and how teachers differ on this point 247.\n\n   6. The place Noah occupied in the ark, and that of the animals 248.\n\n   7. Whether the ark had the proportions of a human body 249.\n\n   8. How the ark was a type of the body of Christ--of the Church 250.\n\n   9. The windows of the ark:\n\n      a. Whether it had more than one window 251.\n\n       * The Latin version is not clear here 252.\n\n      b. What kind of a window it was, and how it could stand the rain\n         253.\n\n      c. Luther's opinion of the Jews' ideas about the window 253.\n\n  10. The door of the ark 254.\n\n  11. How to meet the various questions about the ark 255-256.\n\n    * The deluge was a new method of punishment, hence the non\n      incredible 257-258.\n\n    * God was in earnest in the threatening of this flood 259.\n\n\nB. GOD COMMANDS NOAH TO BUILD AN ARK.\n\nV. 14. _Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the\nark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch (bitumen)._\n\n242. God's first thought was to save a remnant through that tiny seed,\nthe three sons of Noah, for Noah ceased henceforth to beget children.\nThis strongly attests the mercy of God toward those who walk in his\nways.\n\n243. _Gopher_ some make out to be pine, others hemlock, still others\ncedar; hence, a guess is rather difficult. The choice appears to have\nbeen made owing to its lightness or its resinous quality, so that it\nmight float more easily upon the water and be impervious to it.\n\n244. _Kinnim_ signifies \"nests\" or \"chambers\"; that is separate spaces\nfor the various animals. Bears, sheep, deer and horses did not dwell\nin one and the same place, but the several species had their\nrespective quarters.\n\n245. But what is meant by _bitumen_, I do not know. With us vessels\nare made water tight with pitch and tow. Pitch, it is true, withstands\nwater, but it also invites the flame. There is no bitumen with us\nwhich resists water, hence we raise no objection to \"bitumen\" being\nrendered \"pitch.\"\n\n246. You may ask: Why does God prescribe everything so accurately? The\ninjunction to build the ark should have been sufficient. Reason could\ndetermine for itself the rules concerning dimensions and mode of\nconstruction. Why, then, does God give such careful instruction with\nreference to dimensions and materials? Certainly that Noah, after\nundertaking all things according to the Lord's direction (as Moses\nbuilt the tabernacle according to the model received on the mount),\nshould with the greater faith trust that he and his people were to be\nsaved, nor entertain any doubt concerning a work ordered by the Lord\nhimself, even how it should be made. This is the reason the Lord gives\nhis directions with such attention to detail.\n\nV. 15. _And this is how thou shalt make it: the length of the ark\nthree hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height\nof it thirty cubits._\n\n247. A nice geometrical and mathematical exercise concerning the form\nand dimensions of the ark is here presented. The views of writers\nvary. Some claim it was four-cornered, others that it was gabled like\nnearly all our structures in Europe. As for myself, I hold it was\nfour-cornered. Eastern people's were not acquainted with gabled\nbuildings. Theirs were evidently of four-cornered form, as the Bible\nmentions people walking on roofs. Similar was the shape of the temple.\n\n248. There is a difference of opinion also concerning the arrangement\nof the animals in their quarters, which occupied the upper, which the\ncentral and which the lower places, this being the distinction\nwarranted by the text. No certainty, however, can be arrived at. It is\nlikely that Noah himself and the birds occupied the upper part, the\nclean animals the central and the unclean animals the lower one. The\nrabbis assert the lower part served the purpose of storing dung. But I\nthink the dung was thrown out of the window, for its removal was\nnecessitated by such a multitude of beasts abiding in the ark for over\na year.\n\n249. Augustine quotes Philo against Faustus in stating that on\ngeometrical principles, the ark had the proportions of the human body,\nfor when a man lies on the ground his body is ten times as long as it\nis high and six times as long as broad. So three hundred cubits are\nsix times fifty and ten times thirty.\n\n250. An application is made of this to the body of Christ, the Church,\nwhich has baptism as the door, through which clean and unclean enter\nwithout distinction. Although the Church is small, she rules the earth\nnotwithstanding, and it is due to her that the world is preserved,\njust as the unclean animals were preserved in the ark. Others stretch\nthe application so far as to point to the wound in the side of Jesus'\nbody as prefigured by the windows in the ark. These are allegories\nwhich are not exactly profound, but still harmless because they harbor\nno error and serve a purpose other than that of wrangling, namely,\nthat of rhetorical ornamentation.\n\nV. 16. _A light shalt thou make to the ark, and to a cubit shalt thou\nfinish it upward; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side\nthereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it._\n\n251. Behold, how diligent an architect God is! With what care he\ninterests himself in all the parts of the structure and their\narrangement. Furthermore, the word _Zohar_ does not properly signify\nwindow, but southern light. The question may be raised here whether\nthe ark had only one window or several. For the Hebrew language\npermits the use of the singular for the plural, or of the collective\nfor the distributive term, as for instance: \"I will destroy man from\nthe face of the ground.\" Here evidently not one man but many are\nspoken of. But to me it seems there was only one window that shed\nlight upon man's domicile.\n\n252. The Latin interpreter is so strangely obscure as to fail to make\nhimself understood. My unqualified opinion is that he was unable to\ndivest himself of the image of a modern ship, in which men are\ncommonly carried in the lower part. Nor is it quite intelligible what\nhe says about the door, inasmuch as it is certain that the ell-long\nwindow was in the upper part, and the door in the center of the side\nor in the navel of the ark. Thus, also, Eve was framed from the middle\nportion of man's body. The whole structure was divided into three\npartitions, a higher, a central and a lower one, and it was the upper\none which, according to my view, was illuminated by the light of day\nthrough the window.\n\n253. You may say, however: What kind of a window was it, or how could\nit exist in those frequent and violent rains? For rain did not fall\nthen as it does ordinarily, since the water in forty days rose to such\nproportions as to submerge the highest mountains by fifteen\narm-lengths. The Jews claim that the window was closed by a crystal\nwhich transmitted the light. But too curious a research into these\nmatters appears to me useless, since neither godliness nor Christ's\nkingdom are put in jeopardy from the fact of our remaining in\nignorance concerning some features of this structure of which God was\nthe architect. It seems to me sufficiently satisfactory to assume that\nthe window was on the side of the upper partition.\n\n254. As to the door, it is certain that it was about thirteen or\nfourteen cubits from the earth. The ark, when it floated, sank about\nten feet into the water with its great weight of animals of every kind\nand provender for more than a year. This may suffice as a crude\nconception of the ark; for, besides height and length, Moses merely\nindicates that it had three partitions, a door and a window.\n\n255. We will dismiss innumerable other questions such as: What kind of\nair was used in the ark? for such a stupendous mass of water,\nparticularly falling water, must have produced a violent and\npestilential stench; whence did they draw their drinking-water? for\nwater cannot be preserved a whole year, hence mariners often call at\nports in their vicinity for the purpose of drawing water; again, how\ncould the bilge-water with its obnoxious odor be drawn up?\n\n256. Such questions and other subordinate points related to the\nexperience of the mariner we may pass by. Otherwise there will be no\nend of questions. We will be content with the simple supposition that\nthe lower part probably served the purpose of securing the bears,\nlions, tigers and other savage animals; the middle part, that of\nhousing the gentle and tractable animals, together with the provender,\nwhich cannot be kept in a place devoid of all air-currents; the upper\nthat of accommodating human beings themselves, together with the\ndomestic animals and the birds. This should be enough for us.\n\nV. 17. _And I, behold, I do bring the flood of waters upon the earth,\nto destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under\nheaven; everything that is in the earth shall die._\n\n257. Above God has threatened in general the human race with\ndestruction. Here he points out the method; namely, that he intends to\ndestroy everything by a new disaster, a flood. Such a punishment the\nworld hitherto had not known. The customary punishments, as we see\nfrom the prophets, are pestilence, famine, the sword and fierce\nbeasts. Men and beasts perish of pestilence. The earth is laid waste\nby war, for it is deprived of those who till it. The sufferings of\nfamine, though they seem to be less cruel, are by far the most\nterrible. With the fourth class of penalties, our regions have almost\nno experience at all. Although these are severally sufficient for the\nchastisement of the human race, the Lord desired to employ a novel\nkind of punishment against the primeval world, through which all flesh\nhaving the breath of life was to perish.\n\n258. Because this punishment was unheard of in former ages, the wicked\nwere slower to believe it. They reasoned thus: If God is at all angry,\ncan he not correct the disobedient by the sword, by pestilence? A\nflood would destroy also the other creatures which are without sin;\nsurely God will not plan anything like this for the world.\n\n259. But in order to remove such unbelief from the mind of Noah and\nthe righteous, he repeats with stress the pronoun, \"And I, behold, I\ndo bring.\" Afterward he clearly adds that he will destroy all flesh\nthat is under heaven and in the earth; for he excludes here the fishes\nwhose realm is widened by the waters. This passage tends to show the\nmagnitude of the wrath of God, through which men lose, not only body\nand life, but also universal dominion over the earth.\n\n\nC. GOD'S COVENANT WITH NOAH.\n\n * The way God comforted Noah in announcing the flood, and why such\n   comfort was needed 260.\n\n   1. The nature of this covenant.\n\n      a. The views of Lyra, Burgensis and others 261.\n\n      b. Luther's views 262-263.\n\n   2. Whether the giants or tyrants were embraced in this covenant and\n      how received by them 262-263.\n\n   3. Why it was made only with Noah 264.\n\n   4. How this covenant was made clearer from time to time, and why it\n      was needed at this time 265.\n\n   5. How a special call was added to this covenant 266.\n\n    * God's judgment upon the first world terrible 267.\n\n    * Why Ham was taken into the ark, who was later rejected 267.\n\n    * Foreknowledge and election.\n\n      a. Why we should avoid thinking and disputing on this subject\n         268.\n\n      b. To what end should the examples of Scripture on this theme\n         serve 269.\n\n      c. How consideration of the same may help and harm us 270.\n\n\nC. GOD'S COVENANT WITH NOAH.\n\nV. 18. _But I will establish my covenant with thee; and thou shalt\ncome into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons'\nwives with thee._\n\n260. To this comfort Moses before pointed when he declared that Noah\nhad found grace. Noah stood in need of it, not only to escape despair\namid such wrath, but also for the strengthening of his faith in view\nof the raging retribution. For it was no easy matter to believe the\nwhole human race was to perish. The world consequently judged Noah to\nbe a dolt for believing such things, ridiculed him and, undoubtedly,\nmade his ship an object of satire. In order to strengthen his mind\namid such offenses, God speaks with him often, and now even reminds\nhim of his covenant.\n\n261. Interpreters discuss the question, what that covenant was. Lyra\nexplains it as the promise to defend him against the evil men who had\nthreatened to murder him. Burgensis claims this covenant refers to the\nperils amid the waters, which were to be warded off. Still others\nbelieve it was the covenant of the rainbow, which the Lord afterward\nmade with Noah.\n\n262. In my opinion, he speaks of a spiritual covenant, or of the\npromise of the seed, which was to bruise the serpent's head. The\ngiants had this covenant, but when its abuse resulted in pride and\nwickedness, they fell from it. So it was afterward with the Jews,\nwhose carnal presumption in reference to God, the Law, worship and\ntemple led to their loss of these gifts and they perished. To Noah,\nhowever, God confirms this covenant by certainly declaring that Christ\nwas to be born from his posterity and that God would leave, amid such\ngreat wrath, a nursery for the Church. This covenant includes not only\nprotection of Noah's body, the view advocated by Lyra and Burgensis,\nbut also eternal life.\n\n263. The sentiment, therefore, of the promise is this: Those insolent\ndespisers of my promises and threats will compel me to punish them. I\nshall first withdraw from them the protection and assurance which are\ntheirs by reason of their covenant with me, that they may perish\nwithout covenant and without mercy. But that covenant I shall transfer\nto you so that you shall be saved, not alone from such power of the\nwaters, but also from eternal death and condemnation.\n\n264. The plain statement is, \"With thee.\" Not the sons, not the wives,\ndoes he mention, whom he was also to save; but Noah alone he mentions,\nfrom whom the promise was transmitted to his son Shem. This is the\nsecond promise of Christ, which is taken from all other descendants of\nAdam and committed alone to Noah.\n\n265. Afterward this promise is made clearer from time to time. It\nproceeded from the race to the family, and from the family to the\nindividual. From the whole race of Abraham it was carried forward to\nDavid alone; from David to Nathan; from Nathan down to one virgin,\nMary, who was the dead branch or root of Jesse, and in whom this\ncovenant finds its termination and fulfilment. The establishment of\nsuch a covenant was most necessary in view of the imminence of the\nincredible and incalculable wrath of God.\n\n266. You will observe here, however, a special call when he says:\n\"Thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, etc.\" If Noah had\nnot received this special call, he would not have ventured to enter\nthe ark.\n\n267. How terrible is it that from the whole human race only eight\npersons should be selected for salvation and yet from among them, Ham,\nthe third son of Noah, be rejected! By the mouth of God he is numbered\nhere among the elect and saints. Yea, with them he is protected and\nsaved. Nor is he distinguished from Noah. If he had not believed and\nprayed for the same things, if he had not feared God, he would in\nnowise have been saved in the ark; and yet, afterward he is rejected!\n\n268. The sophists wrangle here concerning an election that takes place\naccording to the purpose of God. But often have I exhorted to beware\nof speculations about the unveiled majesty, for besides being anything\nbut true, they are far from being profitable. Let us rather think of\nGod as he offers himself to us in his Word and sacraments. Let us not\ntrace these instances back to a hidden election, in which God arranged\neverything with himself from eternity. Such doctrine we cannot\napprehend with our minds, and we see it conflicts with the revealed\nwill of God.\n\n269. What, then, you will ask, shall we declare with reference to\nthese examples? Nothing but that they are pointed out to inspire us\nwith the fear of God, so that we believe it is possible to fall from\ngrace after once receiving grace. Paul warns, \"Let him that thinketh\nhe standeth take heed lest he fall.\" 1 Cor 10, 12. We should heed such\nexamples to teach us humility, that we may not exalt ourselves with\nour gifts nor become slothful in our use of blessings received, but\nmay reach forth to the things which are before, as Paul says in\nPhilippians 3, 13. They teach us not to believe that we have\napprehended everything.\n\n270. Malignant and most bitter is our enemy, but we are feeble,\nbearing this great treasure in earthen vessels. 2 Cor 4, 7. Therefore,\nwe must not glory as if we were secure, but seeing that men so holy\nfell from grace, which they had accepted and for a long time enjoyed,\nwe should look anxiously to God as if in peril at this very moment. In\nthis manner these examples are discussed to our profit; but those who\ngive no attention to them and chase after complex high thoughts on an\nelection according to the purpose of God, drive and thrust their souls\ninto despair, to which they naturally incline.\n\n\nVII. ANIMALS AND FOOD IN THE ARK; NOAH'S OBEDIENCE.\n\n   A. THE ANIMALS NOAH TOOK INTO THE ARK.\n\n      1. The number and kinds of animals 271-272.\n\n      2. The differences in the animals 273.\n\n         a. What is understood by the \"Behemoth\" 274.\n\n         b. By the \"Remes\" 275.\n\n         c. Whether this difference is observed in all places 276.\n\n      3. Whether wild and ferocious animals were in paradise, and if\n         created from the beginning 276-277.\n\n      4. How Noah could bring the animals, especially the wild ones,\n         into the ark 278-279.\n\n       * The animals at the time felt danger was near 278-279.\n\n      5. The animals came of themselves to Noah in the ark 280.\n\n   B. THE FOOD NOAH TOOK INTO THE ARK.\n\n      1. Why necessary to take with them food 281.\n\n       * The kind of food man then had, and if he ate flesh 282.\n\n      2. God's foreknowledge shines forth here 283.\n\n      3. Why God did not maintain man and the animals in the ark by a\n         miracle 284.\n\n       * The extraordinary ways and miracles of God.\n\n         a. Why man should not seek miracles, where ordinary ways and\n            means are at hand 285.\n\n         b. The monks seek extraordinary ways and thus tempt God 286.\n\n          * Whether we should use medicine, and if we should learn the\n            arts and languages 286.\n\n         c. Why God did not save Noah in the water without the ark,\n            when he could have done so 287.\n\n         d. When does God use extraordinary means with man 288.\n\n   C. NOAH'S OBEDIENCE.\n\n      1. In what respect it was especially praised 289.\n\n       * Obedience to God.\n\n         a. How one is to keep the golden mean, and not turn to the\n            right or left 290.\n\n         b. How man can by obedience or disobedience mark out his own\n            course 290-291.\n\n         c. Why most people shun obedience 291.\n\n         d. How we are here not to look to the thing commanded, but to\n            the person commanding 292-296.\n\n         e. How sadly they fail who look at the thing commanded 293.\n\n          * How the Papists neither understand nor keep God's\n            commandments 294.\n\n          * What we are to think of the holiness of the Papists 295.\n\n         f. All God commands is good, even if it seems different to\n            reason 296.\n\n          * How the Papists do harm by the works of their wisdom, and\n            only provoke God to anger, as king Saul did 297.\n\n         g. How in his obedience Noah held simply to God's Word and\n            overcame all difficulties 298.\n\n\nVII. THE ANIMALS AND THEIR FOOD, AND NOAH'S OBEDIENCE.\n\nA. THE ANIMALS NOAH TOOK INTO THE ARK.\n\nVs. 19-20. _And every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort\nshalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they\nshall be male and female. Of the birds after their kind, and of the\ncattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the ground after\nits kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive._\n\n271. Here again a dispute arises, as is the case when in historical\nnarratives one proceeds to the application and incidental features.\nOur text appears to vindicate the view that here two and two are\nspoken of; but in the beginning of the seventh chapter seven and\nseven. Hence, Lyra quarrels with one Andrea, who believed fourteen\nspecimens were included in the ark, because it is written: \"Of every\nclean beast thou shalt take to thee seven and seven.\" But I approve\nLyra's interpretation, who says seven specimens of every class were\ninclosed in the ark, three male and three female, and the seventh also\nmale, to be used by Noah for purposes of sacrifice.\n\n272. When Moses says here that two and two of the several species were\nbrought into the ark, we must necessarily understand the seventh\nchapter as speaking only of the unclean animals, for the number of\nclean animals was the greater. Of the unclean seven of every species\nwere inclosed in the ark.\n\n273. It is also necessary that we here discuss the signification of\nterms as \"all life,\" \"beasts,\" \"cattle.\" Though these are often used\nwithout discrimination, still at various places the Scripture employs\nthem discriminatingly; for instance, when it says, \"Let the earth\nbring forth living creatures.\" Gen 1, 24. \"Let the waters swarm with\nswarms of living creatures.\" Gen 1, 20. In those places the words of\nthe genus stand for all living beings on the earth and in the waters.\nHere the constituent species are named--_chayah_, _remes_, and\n_behemah_--though frequently used without discrimination.\n\n274. The cattle he calls here _behemoth_, though in Ezekiel, first\nchapter, those four animals are called by the common name,\n_hachayoth_, a word by which we commonly designate not so much animals\nas beasts, subsisting not on hay or anything else growing out of the\nearth, but flesh; as lion, bear, wolf and fox. _Behemoth_ are cattle\nor brutes which live on hay and herbs growing from the earth; as\nsheep, cows, deer and roe.\n\n275. _Remes_ means reptile. The word is derived from _ramas_, which\nmeans to tread. When we compare ourselves with the birds, we are\n_remasian_, for we creep and tread upon the earth with our feet like\nthe dogs and other beasts. But the proper meaning is, animals which do\nnot walk with face erect. The animals which creep and which we term\nreptiles have a specific name, being called _sherazim_, as we see in\nLeviticus from the word _sharaz_, which means to move, hereafter used\nin the seventh chapter. The word _oph_ is known, meaning bird.\n\n276. Such are the differences among these terms, although, as I said\nbefore, they are not observed in some places. The interpretation must\nbe confined, however, to the time after the flood; otherwise the\ninference would be drawn that such savage beasts existed also in\nparadise. Who will doubt that before sin, dominion having been given\nto man over all animals of earth, there was concord not only among men\nbut also between animals and man?\n\n277. Though the first chapter clearly proves that these wild beasts\nwere created with the others, on account of sin their nature was\naltered. Those created gentle and harmless, after the fall became wild\nand harmful. This is my view, though since our loss of that state of\ninnocent existence it is easier to venture a guess than to reach a\ndefinition of that life.\n\n278. But, you ask, if because of sin the nature of animals became\ncompletely altered, how could Noah control them, especially the savage\nand fierce ones? The lion surely could not be controlled, nor tigers,\npanthers and the like. The answer is: Such wild animals went into the\nark miraculously. To me this appears reasonable. If they had not been\nforced by a divine injunction to go into the ark, Noah would not have\nhad it within his power to control such fierce animals. Undoubtedly he\nhad to exercise his own human power, but this alone was insufficient.\nAnd the text implies both conditions, for at first it says: \"Thou\nshalt bring into the ark,\" and then adds: \"Two of every sort shall\ncome unto thee.\" If they had not been miraculously guided, they would\nnot have come by twos and sevens.\n\n279. That two by two and seven by seven came of their own accord is a\nmiracle and a sign that they had a premonition of the wrath of God and\nthe coming terrible disaster. Even brute natures have premonitions and\nforebodings of impending calamities, and often as if prompted by a\ncertain sense of compassion, they will manifest distress for a man in\nevident peril. We see dogs and horses understand the perils of their\nmasters and show themselves affected by such intelligence, the dogs by\nhowling, the horses by trembling and the emission of copious sweat. As\na matter of fact it is not rare that wild beasts in danger seek refuge\nwith man.\n\n280. When, therefore, there is elsewhere in brute natures such an\nintelligence, is it a wonder that, after having been divinely aroused\nto a sense of coming danger, they joined themselves voluntarily to\nNoah? For the text shows they came voluntarily. In the same manner\nhistory bears witness, and our experience confirms it, that, when a\nterrible pestilence rages or a great slaughter is imminent, wolves,\nthe most ferocious of animals, flee not only into villages, but, on\noccasion, even into cities, taking refuge among men and humbly asking,\nas it were, their help.\n\nB. THE FOOD NOAH TOOK INTO THE ARK.\n\nV. 21. _And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and gather\nit to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them._\n\n281. Inasmuch as the flood was to last a whole year, it was necessary\nto remind Noah of the food to be collected from the herbs and the\nfruits of trees in order to preserve the life of man and of animals.\nThough the wrath of God was terrible, to the destruction of everything\nborn on earth, the goodness of the Lord shines forth, notwithstanding,\nin this an awful calamity. He looks to the preservation of man and the\nanimals, and through their preservation to that of the species. The\nanimals chosen for preservation in the ark were sound and of\nunblemished body, and through divine foresight, they received food\nsuitable to their nature.\n\n282. As for man, it is established that, as yet, he did not use flesh\nfor food. He ate only of the vegetation of the earth, which was far\nmore desirable before the flood than at present, after the remarkable\ncorruption of the earth through the brackish waters.\n\n283. We observe here the providence of God, by whose counsel the evil\nare punished and the good saved. By a miracle God preserves a portion\nof his creatures when he punishes the wicked and graciously makes\nprovision for their posterity.\n\n284. It would have been an easy matter for God to preserve Noah and\nthe animals for the space of a full year without food, as he preserved\nMoses, Elijah and Christ, the latter for forty days, without food. He\nmade everything out of nothing, which is even more marvelous. Yet God,\nin his government of the things created, as Augustine learnedly\nobserves, allows them to perform their appropriate functions. In other\nwords, to apply Augustine's view to the matter in hand, God performs\nhis miracles along the lines of natural law.\n\n285. God also requires that we do not discard the provisions of\nnature, which would mean to tempt God; but that we use with\nthanksgiving the things God has prepared for us. A hungry man who\nlooks for bread from heaven rather than tries to obtain it by human\nmeans, commits sin. Christ gives the apostles command to eat what is\nset before them, Lk 10, 7. So Noah is here enjoined to employ the\nordinary methods of gathering food. God did not command him to expect\nin the ark a miraculous supply of food from heaven.\n\n286. The life of the monks is all a temptation of God. They cannot be\ncontinent and still they refrain from matrimony; likewise they abstain\nfrom certain meats, though God has created them to be received with\nthanksgiving by them that believe, and by those who know the truth,\nthat every creature of God is good, and nothing to be rejected, if it\nbe received with thanksgiving, 1 Tim 4, 3-4. The use of medicine is\nlegitimate; yea, it has been created as a necessary means to conserve\nhealth. The study of the arts and of language is to be cultivated and,\nas Paul says, \"Every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be\nrejected, if it be received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified\nthrough prayer.\" 1 Tim 4, 4-5.\n\n287. God was able to preserve Noah in the midst of the waters. They\nfable of Clement that he had a cell in the middle of the sea. Yea, the\npeople of Israel were preserved in the midst of the Red Sea and Jonah\nin the belly of the whale. But this was not God's desire. He rather\nwilled that Noah should use the aid of wood and trees, so that human\nskill might thereby have a sphere for its exercise.\n\n288. When, however, human means fail, then it is for you either to\nsuffer or to expect help from the Lord. No human effort could support\nthe Jews when they stood by the sea and were surrounded in the rear by\nthe enemy. Hence, a miraculous deliverance was to be hoped for, or a\nsure death to be suffered.\n\nC. NOAH'S OBEDIENCE.\n\nV. 22. _Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did\nhe._\n\n289. This phrase is very frequent in Scripture. This is the first\npassage in which praise for obedience to God is clothed in such a form\nof words. Later we find it stated repeatedly that Moses, the people,\ndid according to all that God commanded them. But Noah received\ncommendation as an example for us. His was not a dead faith, which is\nno faith at all, but a living and active faith. He renders obedience\nto God's commands, and because he believes both God's promises and\nthreats, he carefully carries out what God commanded with reference to\nthe ark and the gathering of animals and food. This is unique praise\nfor Noah's faith, that he remains on the royal way--adds nothing,\nchanges nothing and takes nothing from the divine command, but abides\nabsolutely in the precept he has heard.\n\n290. It is the most common and at the same time most noxious sin in\nthe Church, that people either altogether change God's commands or\nrender something else paramount to them. There is only one royal road\nto which we must keep. They sin who swerve too much to the left by\nfailing to perform the divine commands. Those who swerve to the right\nand do more than God has commanded, like Saul when he spared the\nAmalekites, also sin even more grievously than those who turn to the\nleft. They add a sham piety; for, while those who err on the left\ncannot excuse their error, these do not hesitate to ascribe to\nthemselves remarkable merit.\n\n291. And such error is exceedingly common. God is wont sometimes to\ncommand common, paltry, ridiculous and even offensive things, but\nreason takes delight in splendid things. From the common ones it\neither shrinks or undertakes them under protest. Thus the monks shrank\nfrom home duties and chose for themselves others apparently of greater\nglamour. Today the great throng, hearing that common tasks are\npreached in the Gospel, despises the Gospel as a vulgar teaching,\nlacking in elegance. What noteworthy thing is it to teach that\nservants should obey their master and children their parents? Such a\ncommon and oft-taught doctrine the learned papists not only neglect\nbut even ridicule. They desire rather something unique, something\nremarkable either for its reputed wisdom or for its apparent difficult\ncharacter. Such is the madness of man's wisdom.\n\n292. In general it is wisdom to observe not so much the person that\nspeaks as that which he says, because the teacher's faults are always\nin evidence. But when we consider precepts of God and true obedience,\nthis axiom should be reversed. Then we should observe not so much that\nwhich is said, but the person of him who speaks. In respect to divine\nprecepts, if you observe that which is said and not him who speaks,\nyou will easily stumble. This is illustrated by the example of Eve,\nwhose mind did not dwell upon the person who issued the command. She\nregarded only the command and concluded it to be a matter of small\nmoment to taste the apple. But what injury was thereby wrought to the\nwhole human race!\n\n293. He who observes him that gives the command will conclude that\nwhat is very paltry in appearance is very great. The Papists estimate\nit a slight thing to govern the State, to be a spouse, to train\nchildren. But experience teaches that these are very important\nmatters, for which the wisdom of men is incompetent. We see that at\ntimes the most spiritual men have here shamefully fallen. When we,\ntherefore, remember him who gives the command, that which is paltry\nand common becomes a responsibility too great to discharge without\ndivine aid.\n\n294. The Papists, therefore, who look only at the outward mask, like\nthe cow at the gate, can make light of duties toward home and State,\nand imagine they perform others of greater excellence. In the very\nfact that they are shameless adulterers, blasphemers of God, defilers\nof the sanctuary and brazen squanderers of the Church's property, they\npowerfully testify against themselves that they can in no wise\nappreciate the paltry, common and vulgar domestic and public duties.\n\n295. In what, therefore, consists the holiness they vaunt? Forsooth,\nin that on certain days they abstain from meat, that they bind\nthemselves to certain vows, that they have a liking for certain kinds\nof work. But, I ask you, who has given command to do those things? No\none. That which God has enjoined or commanded, they do not respect.\nThey render paramount something else concerning which God has given no\ncommand.\n\n296. Hence, the vital importance of this rule, that we observe not the\ncontents of the command but its author. He who fails to do this will\noften be offended, as I said, by the insignificance or absurdity of a\ntask. God should receive credit for wisdom and goodness. Assuredly\nthat which he himself enjoins is well and wisely enjoined, though\nhuman reason judge differently.\n\n297. From the wisdom of God the Papists detract when they consider\ndivinely enjoined tasks as paltry and attempt to undertake something\nbetter or more difficult. God is not propitiated by such works, but\nrather provoked, as Saul's example shows. As if God were stupid,\ndastardly, and cruel in that he commanded to destroy the Amalekites\nand all their belongings, Saul conceived a kinder plan and reserved\nthe cattle for the purpose of sacrifice. What else was such action but\nto deem himself wise and God foolish.\n\n298. Hence Moses rightly commends in this passage Noah's obedience\nwhen he says that he did everything the Lord had enjoined. That means\nto give God credit for wisdom and goodness. He did not discuss the\ntask, as Adam, Eve and Saul did to their great hurt. He kept his eye\non the majesty of him who gave the command. That was enough for him,\neven though the command be absurd, impossible, inexpedient. All such\nobjections he passes by with closed eyes, as it were, and takes his\nstand upon the one thing commanded by God. This text therefore is\nfamiliar as far as hearing it is concerned, but even as to the\nperformance and practice of it, it is known to very few and is\nextremely difficult.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\n\nI. NOAH OBEYS COMMAND TO ENTER THE ARK.\n\n   1. Noah saw God's favor in his command 1.\n\n    * Noah experienced severe temptations and needed comfort 1-2.\n\n   2. What God wished to teach Noah by calling him to enter the ark 3.\n\n   3. Whether God spoke this commandment directly to Noah 4-5.\n\n    * When God speaks to us through men it is to be viewed as God's\n      Word 4-5.\n\n    * The thoughts of the Jews on the seven days 6.\n\n    * The office of the ministry.\n\n      a. Through it God deals with mankind 7.\n\n      b. Why we should not despise the office and expect revelations\n         direct from God 8-9.\n\n       * God speaks with man in various ways 9.\n\n    * Corruption and destruction of the first world.\n\n      a. The ruin of the first compared with that of the last world\n         10-13.\n\n       * The need of posterity to pray that they retain pure doctrine\n         12.\n\n      b. Why so few righteous persons were found in Noah's day 12.\n\n       * The efforts of the pope and bishops to crush the Gospel 13.\n\n      c. First world severely punished, neither old nor young were\n         spared 14-15.\n\n      d. Punishment of first world greatly moved Peter when he wrote\n         about it 16-17.\n\n    * Peter's record of sermon Christ delivered to the spirits of the\n      first world in prison 16-17.\n\n      a. Who are to be understood here by the unbelieving world 18.\n\n      b. Peter here shows the wrath and long suffering of God 19.\n\n      c. Nature and manner of this sermon 20.\n\n       * Apostles had special revelations we cannot grasp 20-21.\n\n   4. How Noah was righteous before God 22.\n\n   5. How the world laughed at him while executing God's command, God\n      then comforted him 23-24.\n\n   6. Greatness of Noah's faith and steadfastness in executing this\n      command 25-26.\n\n    * Luther's confession he would have been too weak for such a work\n      25-26.\n\n    * The great firmness of John Huss and Jerome of Prague 27.\n\n    * We are to comfort ourselves when all the world forsakes and\n      condemns us 28.\n\n   7. God commands Noah to take the animals he names along into the\n      ark 29.\n\n    * Why God so often repeats the same thing 29.\n\n      a. What is to be understood by Behemoth 30.\n\n      b. How many of each kind entered the ark 31.\n\n       * The rain at the flood was exceptional 32.\n\n       * The flood is a token of God's righteousness and from it we\n         conclude God will punish the sins of the last world 33.\n\n   8. By what may we learn Noah's faith and obedience to God 34.\n\n    * Why God did not save Noah in some other way 34.\n\n\nI. NOAH OBEYS COMMAND TO ENTER THE ARK.\n\nV. 2a. _And Jehovah said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into\nthe ark._\n\n1. As soon as that extraordinary structure, the ark, was built, the\nLord commanded Noah to enter it, because the time of the deluge, which\nthe Lord announced one hundred and twenty years before, was now at\nhand. All this convinced Noah that God was taking care of him; and not\nonly this, but also, as Peter says (2 Pet 1, 19), gave him an ample\nand abundant word to support and confirm his faith in such great\nstraits. Having foretold the deluge for more than a century, he\ndoubtless was bitterly mocked by the world in many ways.\n\n2. As I have said repeatedly, God's wrath was incredible. It could not\nbe grasped by the human mind, in that original age of superior men,\nthat God was about to destroy the whole human race, except eight\nsouls. Noah, being holy and just, a kindly and merciful man, often\nstruggled with his own heart, hearing with the greatest agitation of\nmind the voice of the Lord, threatening certain destruction to all\nflesh. It was needful, then, that repeated declaration should confirm\nhis agitated faith, lest he might doubt.\n\n3. God's command to enter the ark amounted to this: \"Doubt not, the\ntime of punishment for the unbelieving world is close at hand. But\ntremble not, do not fear, for faith is at times very weak in the\nsaints. I shall take care of you and your house.\" To us such promise\nwould have been incredible, but we must admit that all things are\npossible with God.\n\n4. Notice Moses' peculiar expression again: \"Jehovah said.\" It gives\nme particular pleasure that these words of God did not sound from\nheaven, but were spoken to Noah through the ministry of man. Although\nI would not deny that these revelations may have been made by an\nangel, or by the Holy Spirit himself, yet where it can plausibly be\nsaid that God spoke through men, there the ministry must be honored.\nWe have shown above that many of God's words according to Moses, were\nspoken through Adam; for the Word of God, even when spoken by man, is\ntruly the Word of God.\n\n5. Now, as Methuselah, Noah's grandfather, died in the very year of\nthe deluge, it would not be inapt to infer that (since Lamech, Noah's\nfather, had died five years before the flood,) this was, so to speak,\nMethuselah's last word and testament to his grandson, a dying\nfarewell. Perhaps he added some remarks as these: My son, as thou hast\nobeyed the Lord heretofore, and hast awaited this wrath in faith, and\nhast experienced God's faithful protection from the wicked, henceforth\nfirmly believe that God will take care of thee. The end is now at\nhand, not mine alone, which is one of grace, but the end of all\nmankind, which is one of wrath. For after seven days the flood will\nbegin, concerning which thou hast long and vainly warned the world.\nAfter this manner, I think, spoke Methuselah, but the words are\nattributed to God, because the Spirit of God spoke through the man.\n\nThus I like to interpret these instances to the honor of the ministry\nwherever, as in this case, it can appropriately be done. Since it is\ncertain that Methuselah died in the very year of the flood, the\nsupposition is harmless that these were his last words to Noah, his\ngrandson, who heard his words and accepted them as the Word of God.\n\n6. The Jews' peculiar idea concerning these seven days is that they\nwere added to the one hundred and twenty years in honor of Methuselah,\nthat therein his posterity might bewail his death. This is a harmless\ninterpretation, for the patriarch's descendants did not fail to do\ntheir duty, particularly his pious children.\n\n7. But the first view concerning the ministry of the Word, is not only\nplausible, but also practical. God does not habitually speak\nmiraculously and by revelation, particularly where, he has instituted\nthe ministry for this very purpose of speaking to men, teaching,\ninstructing, consoling and entreating them.\n\n8. In the first place, God entrusts the Word to parents. Moses often\nsays: \"Thou shalt tell it to thy children.\" Then to the teachers of\nthe Church is it entrusted. Abraham says (Lk 16, 29): \"They have Moses\nand the prophets; let them hear them.\" We must expect no revelation,\nbe it inward or outward, where the ministry is established; otherwise\nall ranks of human society would be disturbed. Let the pastor preach\nin Church; let the magistrate rule the State; let parents control the\nhouse or family. Such are the ministries of men instituted by God. We\nshould make use of them and not look for new revelations.\n\n9. Still I do not deny that Noah heard God speak after Methuselah's\ndeath. God speaks ordinarily through the public ministry--through\nparents and the teachers of the Church--and in rare cases by inward\nrevelation, through the Holy Spirit. It is well that we remember not\nto overlook the Word in vain expectation of new revelations, as the\nfanatics do. Such a course gives rise to spirits of error, a source of\ndisturbance to the whole world, as the example of the Anabaptists\nproves.\n\nV. 1b. _For thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation._\n\n10. This is truly a picture of the primitive, ancient world, as Peter\ncalls it. 2 Pet 2, 5. His appellation carries the thought of a\npeculiarity of that particular age, which is foreign to the people of\nour own. Could words be more appalling than these, that Noah alone was\nrighteous before the Lord? The world is similarly pictured in Ps 14,\n2-3, where we read that the Lord looked down from heaven to see if\nthere were any that did understand, that did seek God. But he says:\n\"They are all gone aside; they are together become filthy; there is\nnone that doeth good, no, not one.\"\n\n11. Similar to this judgment upon the world was Christ's declaration\nas to the last days. He says: \"When the Son of man cometh, shall he\nfind faith on the earth?\" Lk 18, 8. It is a fearful thing to live in\nsuch an evil and godless world. By the goodness of God, since we have\nthe light of his Word, we are still in the golden age. The sacraments\nare rightfully administered in our Churches, pious teachers proclaim\nthe Word purely, and, though magistrates be weak, wickedness is not\ndesperately rampant. But Christ's prophecy shows that there will be\nevil times when the Lord's day approaches. Wholesome teaching nowhere\nwill be found, the Church being dominated by the wicked, as today the\nplans of our adversaries are a menace. The pope and the wicked princes\nzealously strive totally to destroy the ministry of the Word,\noppressing or corrupting the true ministries, that everyone may\nbelieve whatever pleases him.\n\n12. So much the more diligently should we pray for our posterity, and\ntake earnest heed that a more wholesome doctrine be transmitted to\nthem. If there had been more godly teachers in the days of Noah, there\nmight have been more righteous people. The fact that Noah alone was\nproclaimed a righteous man makes it evident that the godly teachers\nhad been either destroyed or corrupted, leaving Noah the sole preacher\nof righteousness, as Peter calls him, 2 Pet 2, 5. Since government had\nbeen turned into tyranny and the home vitiated by adultery and\nwhoredom, how could punishment be delayed any longer?\n\n13. Such danger awaits us also if the last days are to be like the\ndays of Noah. Truly, the popes and bishops strenuously endeavor to\nsuppress the Gospel and to ruin the Churches which have been\nrightfully established. Thus does the world assiduously press onward\nto a period similar to the age of Noah, when, with the light of the\nWord extinguished, all shall go astray in the darkness of wickedness.\nFor without the preaching of the Word, faith cannot endure nor prayer,\nnor the purity of the sacraments.\n\n14. Such, according to Moses, was the condition of the ancient world\nin Noah's day, when the world was young and at its best. The greatest\ngeniuses flourished everywhere and people were well educated by\nexperience because they lived so long. What will be our fate in the\nfrenzy, so to speak, that shall befall the world in its dotage? We\nshould remember to care for our posterity and continually pray for it.\n\n15. As the first world was most corrupt, it was thus subject to\nterrible punishment. Adults perished who provoked God to anger by\ntheir wicked deeds, also those of an innocent age, who had knowledge\nand were unable to distinguish between their right hand and their\nleft. Many, doubtless, were deceived by their own guilelessness; but\nGod's wrath does not discriminate, it falls upon and destroys alike\nadults and infants, the crafty and the guileless.\n\n16. This awful punishment appears to have moved even the Apostle\nPeter. Like one besides himself, he uses words which we today are not\nable to understand. He says: Christ, having been made alive in the\nSpirit, also \"went and preached unto the spirits in prison, that\naforetime were disobedient, when the long suffering of God waited in\nthe days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is,\neight souls, were saved through water,\" etc. (1 Pet 3, 19-20).\n\n17. A strange declaration, and an almost fanatical saying, by which\nthe Apostle describes this event! By these words, Peter assures us\nthat there was a certain unbelieving world to whom the dead Christ\npreached after their death. If this is true, who would doubt that\nChrist took Moses and the prophets with him to those who were fettered\nin prison, in order to change the unbelieving world into a new and\nbelieving one? This seems to be intimated by Peter's words, though I\nshould not like to make this assertion authoritatively.\n\n18. But doubtless those whom he calls an unbelieving world were not\nthe wicked despisers of his Word nor the tyrants. If they were\noverwhelmed in their sins, these were certainly condemned. The\nunbelieving world of which he speaks seems rather to be the children\nand those whose lack of judgment precluded belief. These were at that\ntime, seized and carried away headlong to their destruction, by the\noffenses of the world, as if in the power of a rapid stream, only\neight souls being saved.\n\n19. In this way does Peter magnify the awful intensity of God's wrath.\nAt the same time he praises his long-suffering in that he did not\ndeprive those of the Word of salvation who at the time did not or\ncould not believe because they hoped in the patience of God and would\nnot be convinced that he would visit such fearful and universal\npunishment upon the world.\n\n20. How this came to pass is beyond our understanding. We know and\nbelieve that God is wonderful in all his works and has all power.\nTherefore he who in life preached to the living, could also in death\npreach to the dead. All things hear, feel and touch him, though our\nhuman minds can not understand the process. Nor is it to our discredit\nwhen we are ignorant of some of the mysteries of Holy Writ. The\napostles had each his own revelation, and contention concerning them\nwould be presumptuous and foolish.\n\n21. Such was the revelation of Christ given to the spirits that\nevidently perished in the flood, and we may perhaps, not\ninappropriately connect it with that article of our creed which speaks\nof the descent of Christ into hell. Such was also Paul's revelation\nconcerning paradise, the third heaven (2 Cor 12, 2-4), and certain\nother matters of which we may be ignorant without shame. It is false\npride to profess to understand these things. St. Augustine and other\nteachers give their fancy loose rein when they discuss these passages.\nMay it not be that the apostles had revelations which St. Augustine\nand others did not have? But let us return to Moses.\n\n22. A truly fearful description of the world is vouchsafed in this\ndeclaration of God that he saw Noah alone to be righteous before him,\nin spite of the small children and those others who had innocently\nbeen misled. Let us particularly note the term, \"Before me.\" It\nsignifies that Noah was blameless not only as regards the second table\nof the Law, but also as regards the first. He believed in God, and\nhallowed, preached and called upon his name; he gave thanks to God; he\ncondemned godless teachings. For, to be righteous before God means to\nbelieve God and to fear him, and not, as they taught in popedom, to\nread masses, to free souls from purgatory, to become a monk, and like\nthings.\n\n23. This term \"Before me\" has reference also to the condemnation of\nthe ancient world. Having neglected the worship demanded by the first\ntable, they criminally transgressed also the second. Not only did they\nmock Noah as a fool, but they went so far as to condemn his teaching\nas heresy. Meanwhile they ate, drank, and celebrated festivals in\nsecurity. Before the world, accordingly, Noah was not righteous;\nmeasured by her code he was a sinner.\n\n24. Hence God, or the grandfather, Methuselah, consoles Noah with the\nWord of counsel to disregard the blind and wicked verdict of the\nworld, neither to care for her views and utterances, but to close eyes\nand ears while heeding alone the Word and verdict of God, believing\nhimself to be righteous before God, or approved and acceptable to him.\n\n25. And Noah's faith was truly great; he could rely upon God's\nutterance. I, forsooth, should not have believed. I realize what\nweight the whole world's hostile and condemnatory judgment must carry.\nWe are condemned in the judgment of the Pope, the Sacramentarians, and\nthe Anabaptists, but this is mere play and pleasure, compared to what\nthe righteous Noah had to bear, who found not a single person in the\nwhole world to approve of his religion or life, except his own sons\nand his pious grandfather. We have, the endorsement of many Churches,\nby God's grace, and our princes fear no danger in defense of their\ndoctrine and religion. Noah had no such protectors, and he saw his\nenemies living in peaceful leisure and enjoyment. If I had been he, I\nsurely should have said: Lord, if I am righteous, if I am well\npleasing to thee and if those people are wicked and displeasing to\nthee, why, then, dost thou enrich them? Why dost thou heap upon them\nall manner of favors, while I, with my family, am greatly harassed and\nalmost without assistance? In short, I should have despaired in such\ngreat afflictions unless the Lord had given me that spirit which Noah\nhad.\n\n26. Therefore, Noah is a brilliant and admirable example of faith, who\nopposed the judgments of the world with an heroic steadfastness of\nmind in the assurance that he was righteous while all the rest of the\nworld was wicked.\n\n27. Often when I think of those most holy men, John Huss and Jerome of\nPrague, I view with astonishment the courage of their souls, as they,\nonly two in number, set themselves against the judgment of the whole\nworld, of pope, emperor, bishops, princes, universities and all the\nschools throughout the empire.\n\n28. It is helpful often to reflect upon such examples. Since the\nprince of the world battles against us, endeavoring to kindle despair\nin us with his fiery darts, it behooves us to be well armed, lest we\nsuccumb to the enemy. Let us say with Noah: I know that I am righteous\nbefore God, even though the whole world condemn me as heretical and\nwicked, yea, even desert me. Thus did the apostles desert Christ,\nleaving him alone; but he said (Jn 16, 32): \"I am not alone.\" Thus did\nthe false brethren desert Paul. Hence, this is no uncommon danger, and\nit is not for us to despair; but with courage to uphold the true\ndoctrine, in spite of the world's condemnation and curse.\n\nVs. 2-3. _Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee seven and\nseven, the male and his female; and of the beasts that are not clean\ntwo, the male and his female. Of the birds also of the heavens, seven\nand seven, male and female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all\nthe earth._\n\n29. It is evident that God takes pleasure in speaking to Noah. Hence,\nhe does not confine himself to a single command, but repeats the same\nthings in the same words. To human reason such repetition appears to\nbe absurd talkativeness, but to a soul struggling against despair the\nwill of God cannot be repeated too often, nor can too exhaustive\ninstruction be given relative to the will of God. God recognizes the\nstate of a soul that is tempted, and hence makes the same statements\nagain and again, so that Noah may learn from frequent conversations\nand conferences that he is not only not forsaken though the whole\nworld forsake him, but that he has a friend and protector in God who\nso loves him that he never seems to weary of conversing with him. This\nis the cause of the statements being repeated. However, as has been\nexplained, God spoke with Noah not from heaven but through men.\n\n30. In respect to the language, this passage shows that _ha-behemah_\nsignifies not only cattle, the larger animals, but also the smaller\nones which were commonly used for sacrifice, as sheep, goats and the\nlike. The custom of offering sacrifices was not first instituted by\nMoses, but was in the world from the beginning, being handed down, as\nit were, by the patriarchs to their posterity; as shown by the example\nof Abel, who brought of his first fruits an offering to God.\n\n31. As to the remainder of the passage, we explained at the end of the\nsixth chapter how to harmonize the discrepancies apparent in the fact\nthat here seven beasts of each kind are ordered to be taken into the\nark while only two of each kind are mentioned there. To repeat is not\nnecessary. Since Noah was saved by a miracle, he thought that a\nseventh animal should be added to the three pairs of clean beasts as a\nthank-offering to God, after the flood, for his deliverance.\n\nV. 4. _For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth\nforty days and forty nights; and every living thing that I have made\nwill I destroy from off the face of the ground._\n\n32. Here you see God's care to give Noah complete assurance. He sets a\nlimit of seven days, after which will follow a rain of forty days and\nforty nights. God speaks with peculiar significance when he says that\nit shall rain. It was not a common rain, but fountains of the deep as\nwell as the windows of heaven were opened; that is, not only did a\ngreat mass of rain fall from heaven, but also an immense amount of\nwater streamed forth from the earth itself. And an immense amount of\nwater was necessary to cover the highest mountain tops to a depth of\nfifteen cubits. It was no ordinary rain, but the rain of God's wrath,\nby which he set out to destroy all life upon the face of the earth.\nBecause the earth was depraved, God despoiled it, and because the\ngodless people raged against the first and second tables of the\ncommandments, therefore God also raged against them, using heaven and\nearth as his weapons.\n\n33. This story is certain proof that God, though long-suffering and\npatient, will not allow the wicked to go unpunished. As Peter says (2\nPet 2, 5), if he \"spared not the ancient world,\" how much less will he\nspare the popes or the emperors who rage against his Word? How much\nless will he spare us who blaspheme his name when our life is unworthy\nof our calling and profession, when we freely and daily sin against\nour consciences? Let us, then, learn to fear the Lord, humbly to\naccept his Word and obey it; otherwise punishment will overtake also\nus, as Peter threatens.\n\nVs. 5-10. _And Noah did according unto all that Jehovah commanded him.\nAnd Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon\nthe earth. And Noah went in, and his sons and his wife, and his sons'\nwives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the flood. Of\nclean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of birds, and of\neverything that creepeth upon the ground, there went in two and two\nunto Noah into the ark, male and female, as God commanded Noah. And it\ncame to pass after the seven days, that the waters of the flood were\nupon the earth._\n\n34. This is clear from what precedes. Noah's faith is praiseworthy in\nthat he obeyed the Lord's command and unwaveringly entered the ark\nwith his sons and their wives. God truly could have saved him in\ninnumerable other ways; he did not employ this seemingly absurd method\nbecause he knew no other. To him who kept Jonah for three days in the\nmidst of the sea and in the belly of the whale, what do you think is\nimpossible? But Noah's faith and obedience are to be commended because\nhe took no offense at this plan of salvation divinely shown to him,\nbut embraced it in simple faith.\n\n\nII. COMPLETE DESTRUCTION BY FLOOD.\n\n * Why Moses so often repeats and expresses in few words what other\n   writers describe at length 35-39.\n\n * Noah's grief because of the approaching calamity 38.\n\n * The way of coarse and satiated spirits 39.\n\n   1. When did the flood commence.\n\n      a. Some think it began in the spring 40.\n\n      b. Others think it began in the autumn 41.\n\n      c. Which is the more probable 42.\n\n       * What to think of the Jews reckoning the year has two\n         beginnings 44.\n\n   2. How the flood continued.\n\n      a. Must distinguish the fountains of the earth, the windows of\n         heaven and the rain 45.\n\n       * Of the earth and the water.\n\n         (1) Why the water does not overflow the earth since the earth\n             floats in the water 46.\n\n         (2) Why the water above the earth does not fall and overflow\n             the earth 47-48.\n\n         (3) How the prophets wondered at this as a miracle, but we in\n             our day give it little thought 49.\n\n      b. How were the fountains broken up, how can such a work be\n         ascribed to God 50-51.\n\n       * Overflowing of the German fountains at Halle 51.\n\n      c. How were the windows of heaven opened 52.\n\n         (1) What is meant by the windows of heaven 53.\n\n         (2) Why such words used here 53.\n\n   3. Flood covered and destroyed the whole earth 54.\n\n   4. Why God sent the deluge 54.\n\n    * Why God so often repeats the same thing 55-60.\n\n    * What is meant by Zippor 55.\n\n    * How God's wrath as seen in the deluge was very great 56-57.\n\n   5. The deluge was a terrible spectacle; Noah and his sons took\n      courage from it 58-60.\n\n    * Noah's glorious faith at the sight of the deluge 60.\n\n    * Noah's long ship voyage; how he was comforted 61.\n\n   6. How the world's destruction harmonizes with God's promises: how\n      the promises to the Church agree with his threatenings 62ff.\n\n    * God's threatenings and man's unbelief.\n\n      a. Why the first world believed not the threatenings about the\n         deluge 62ff.\n\n      b. Why the Jews believe not the threatenings of the prophets 63.\n\n      c. Why the Papists believed not the threats against them 64.\n\n    * God's Church and her maintenance.\n\n      a. The world understands not how the church is maintained 66.\n\n      b. What is the true form of the true Church 66.\n\n      c. God's promises not rescinded when rejected; who bear the name\n         of the Church 67-68.\n\n   7. Whether God fully rescinded through the flood the rule over the\n      earth he once gave man 69.\n\n    * How God preserved his Church through the deluge 69.\n\n   8. The deluge was apparently against God's promise 70.\n\n    * God allows nothing to hinder the punishment of the impenitent\n      71-73.\n\n    * By what means Papists adorn themselves and how it is all in vain\n      72.\n\n    * Why we should not rely on present, temporal things, but upon\n      God's Word 73.\n\n    * The marks of a true Church.\n\n      a. What they are not and what they are 74-76.\n\n      b. Papists have characteristics Holy Scriptures give as marks of\n         Antichrist 75.\n\n      c. Church born of God's Word and is to be known by that Word 76.\n\n      d. Rule to be observed in the marks of the true Church 77.\n\n      e. How far one may consider the Papists the true church, and how\n         far not 78-79.\n\n      f. The true church is where the Word is, although few belong to\n         it and it has no temporal power 79.\n\n      g. Whether the Evangelicals can justly be accused of falling\n         from the old church 80.\n\n      h. How and why the Evangelical or Gospel Church is really the\n         true Church 81.\n\n       * How Noah retained all and remained lord of the world although\n         the deluge destroyed everything 81.\n\n\nII. COMPLETE DESTRUCTION.\n\nVs. 11-12. _In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second\nmonth, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day were all\nthe fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven\nwere opened. And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty\nnights._\n\n35. We see that Moses uses a great many words, which results in\ntiresome repetition. How often he mentions the animals! how often the\nentrance into the ark! how often the sons of Noah who entered at the\nsame time! The reason for this must be left to the spiritually minded;\nthey alone know and see that the Holy Spirit does not repeat in vain.\n\n36. Others, however, who are more materially minded may think that\nMoses, being moved, when he wrote the passage, by the greatness of\nGod's wrath, desired to enforce its truths by repetition; for\nreiteration of statements is soothing to troubled minds. Thus did\nDavid repeat his lament over his son Absalom, 2 Sam 18, 33. So viewed,\nthis narrative shows depth of feeling and extreme agitation of mind.\nThis example of wrath so impresses the narrator that for emphasis he\nmentions the same thing again and again, and in the same words.\n\n37. This is not the custom of poets and historians. Their emotions are\nfactitious; they are diffuse in their descriptions; they pile up words\nfor mere effect. Moses husbands his words, but is emphatic by\nrepetition that he may arouse the reader's attention to the importance\nof the message and compel him to feel his own emotions instead of\nreading those of another.\n\n38. Evidently Moses did not only wish to convey by persistent\nrepetition the extreme agitation of his own mind, but also of that of\nNoah himself, who, being filled with the Holy Spirit, and burning with\nlove, necessarily deplored the calamity when he saw that he could not\navert it. He foresaw the doom of the wisest and most distinguished and\neminent men. Thus did David mourn when he could not call back Absalom\nto life. So Samuel mourned when he despaired of saving Saul.\n\n39. The text is not a mere tautology or repetition. The Holy Spirit\ndoes not idly repeat words, as those superficial minds believe, which,\nhaving read through the Bible once, throw it aside as if they had\ngathered all its contents. Yet these very repetitions of Moses contain\na statement more startling than any to be found in heathen\nrecords--that Noah entered the ark in the six hundredth year, the\nsecond month and the second day of his life.\n\n40. Opinions differ as to the beginning of the year. One is, that the\nyear begins at the conjunction of the sun and the moon which occurs\nnearest to the vernal equinox. Thus this month is called the first by\nMoses in Exodus. If the flood set in on the seventeenth day of the\nsecond month, it must have continued almost to the end of April, the\nmost beautiful season of the year, when the earth seemingly gathers\nnew strength, when the birds sing and the beasts rejoice, when the\nworld puts on a new face, as it were, after the dreary season of\nwinter. Death and destruction must have come with added terror at that\nseason which was looked forward to as a harbinger of joy and the\napparent beginning of a new life. This view is substantiated by the\nwords of Christ in Matthew 24, 38, where he compares the last days of\nthe world to the days of Noah and speaks of feasting, marriage and\nother signs of gladness.\n\n41. A second opinion makes the year begin with that new moon which is\nnearest to the autumnal equinox, when all the harvest has been\ngathered from the fields. Its advocates declare this to be the\nbeginning of the year, because Moses calls that month in which such\nnew moon occurs, the end of the year. They call this autumnal equinox\nthe beginning of the civil year, and the vernal equinox the beginning\nof the holy year. The Mosaic ceremonies and festivals extend from the\nlatter season up to the autumnal equinox.\n\n42. If Moses in this passage is speaking of the civil year, then the\nflood occurred in September or October, an opinion I find Lyra held.\nIt is true that fall and winter are more liable to rains, the signs of\nthe zodiac pointing to humidity. Again, as Moses writes further on, a\ndove was sent forth in the tenth month and brought back a green olive\nbranch. This fact seems to harmonize with the view that the deluge\nbegan in October.\n\n43. But I cannot endorse this argument of the Jews, assuming two\nbeginnings of the year. Why not make four beginnings, since there are\nfour distinct seasons according to the equinoxes and solstices? It is\nsafer to follow the divine order, making April the first month,\nstarting with the new moon which is nearest to vernal equinox. The\nJews betray their ignorance in speaking of an autumnal beginning of\nthe year: the autumnal equinox is necessarily the end of the year.\nMoses so calls it for the reason that all field labors had then ceased\nand all products had been gathered and brought home.\n\n44. Hence, it is my belief that the flood began in the spring, when\nall minds were filled with hope of the new year. Such is the death of\nthe wicked that when they shall say, \"Peace and safety,\" they perish.\n1 Thes 5, 3. Nor is any inconsistence shown in the fact that the green\nolive branch is afterward mentioned, for certain trees are evergreen,\nas the boxwood, fir, pine, cedar, laurel, olive, palm and others.\n\n45. But what does Moses mean by saying that the fountains of the great\ndeep burst, and that the windows of heaven were opened? No such record\nis found in all pagan literature, although the heathen searched with\nzeal the mysteries of nature. One discrimination should be made as\nregards the abysses of the earth, the floodgates or windows of heaven,\nand the rain. Rain, as we know it, is a common phenomenon, while that\nof bursting floodgates and abysses is both unfamiliar and amazing.\n\n46. Almost all interpreters are silent on this point. We know from\nHoly Writ that God, by his Word, established a dwelling-place for man\nand other living beings on dry land, above the water, contrary to\nnature; for it is opposed to natural law that the earth, being placed\nin water, should rise up out of it. If you cast a clod into the water,\nit sinks at once. But the dry land stands up out of the water by\nvirtue of the Word, which has set bounds for the sea, as Solomon (Prov\n8, 27) and Job (ch 38, 11) declare. Unless the water were restrained\nby the power of the Word, with a bound, as it were, they would\noverflow and lay waste everything. Thus is our life guarded every\nsingle moment, and wonderfully preserved by the Word. We have an\nillustration in partial deluges, when at times entire states or\nregions are flooded, proving that we should daily suffer such\nunpleasant things if God did not take care of us.\n\n47. But just as there are waters below us, and beneath the earth, so,\ntoo, are there waters above us, and beyond the sky. If they should\ndescend, obeying natural law, destruction would result. The clouds\nfloat as if suspended in space. When at times they descend, how great\nthe terror they cause! But imagine the result of a universal collapse!\nHow they would burst, in obedience to the law of their nature, did\nthey not remain in place above us, suspended, as it were, by the Word!\n\n48. Thus we are girt about on all sides by water, shielded only by a\nfrail ceiling of unsubstantial material--the air that we\nbreathe--which bears up the clouds and carries that weight of water,\nnot in obedience to the laws of nature, but by the command of God, or\nby the power of the Word.\n\n49. When the prophets think of these things they are lost in\nadmiration. It is contrary to nature that such a weight should remain\nin suspension above the earth. But we, blinded by daily witnessing of\nsuch wonders, neither observe nor admire them. That we are not at any\nmoment overwhelmed by waters from above or from below, we owe to the\ndivine majesty which orders all things and preserves all creatures so\nwonderfully, and he ought to be the object of our praise.\n\n50. Startling and significant are the words Moses uses--the fountains\nof the great deep were broken up. The conception he would convey is\nthat they had been closed by God's power and sealed, as it were, with\nGod's seal, as today; and that God did not open them with a key, but\nrent them with violence, so that the ocean, in a sudden upheaval,\ncovered everything with water. It is not to be supposed that God moved\nhis hand, because the fountains of the deep are said to have been\nbroken up. It is the custom of Scripture to adapt itself to our\nunderstanding in the phraseology employed, and that under\nconsideration here denotes that God gives leave to the waters in that\nhe no longer restrains or coerces them but suffers them to rage and\nbreak forth unchecked according to their nature. That is the reason\nthe ocean seemed to swell and boil. In the salt works in our\nneighborhood there is a spring named after the Germans, which, if it\nis not pumped out at certain times, swells and overflows with terrific\nforce.\n\n51. They say that in olden times the town of Halle was once destroyed\nby a violent overflow of a spring of the kind described. If a single\nspring could work such destruction what would be the result of the\nuncurbed power of ocean and seas? Thus mankind was destroyed before\nthey even knew their danger. Whither should they flee when the waters\npoured in upon them with such force?\n\n52. But this is not all: the windows of heaven also were opened.\nMoses' word implies that to that time the windows were closed as they\nare closed today. Indeed, the world thought such opening impossible;\ntheir sins, however, made it possible.\n\n53. Moses' use here of the word \"windows\" signifies the literal\nopening of heaven. With rain as we know it, the water appears to fall\nby drops from the pores of the rain-clouds, but at the time of the\nflood it came down with great force, not through pores, but through\nwindows, like water poured from a vessel with one movement, or as when\nwater-skins burst in the middle. Moses uses this figure of speech for\nthe sake of effect, so that those occurrences are brought to our\nvision.\n\n54. A volume of water, therefore, swept over the earth, from the sky\nas well as from the innermost parts of the earth, until at last the\nwhole earth was covered with water, and the fertile soil, or the\nentire face of the earth was destroyed by the briny flood. A like\ninstance occurs nowhere in any book. The Holy Scriptures alone teach\nus that these things were visited upon the world sinning in imagined\nsecurity, and that to this day the waters suspended in the clouds are\nrestrained only by the kindness of God. Otherwise they would descend\nin vast volume, as in the flood, according to the law of their nature.\n\nVs. 13-16. _In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and\nJapheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and three wives of his\nsons with them, into the ark; they, and every beast after its kind,\nand all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that\ncreepeth upon the earth after its kind, and every bird after its kind,\nevery bird of every sort. And, they went in unto Noah and the ark, two\nand two of all flesh wherein is the breath of life. And they that went\nin, went in male and female of all flesh, as God commanded him._\n\n55. Here Moses begins to be remarkably verbose. His wordiness hurts\ntender ears when he so often and apparently without any use repeats\nthe same things. It is not sufficient to say \"all birds,\" but he names\nthree kinds of birds. Of these, the term _zippor_ is usually said to\nmean \"a sparrow,\" but this passage shows clearly that it is a generic\nterm, doubtless so called from the sound, _zi, zi_. He also names\nthree kinds of beasts. Also, when speaking of the flood itself, he is\nvery wordy, saying that the waters prevailed, that they increased,\nthat they flooded and covered the face of the earth. Finally, when he\ntells of the effect of this flood, he makes similar repetition: \"All\nflesh expired, died, was destroyed,\" etc.\n\n56. But I said above (para 37) that Moses repeats these things\ncontrary to his style, in order to force the reader to pause and more\ndiligently learn and meditate upon this great event. We cannot fully\ncomprehend the wrath which destroys, not man alone, but all his\npossessions. Moses wishes to arouse hardened and heedless sinners by\nsuch a consideration of God's wrath.\n\n57. Hence, these words are not idle, as a shallow and unspiritual\nreader might judge. They rather challenge us to fear God, and call\nattention to the present so that, sobered by the thought of such\nwrath, we may make an earnest beginning in the fear of God, and cease\nfrom sin. For not without many tears does Moses appear to have written\nthis account! So utterly is he with eyes and mind absorbed in this\nhorrible spectacle of wrath that he cannot but repeat the same\nstatements again and again. Doubtless he does this with the purpose to\nthrust such darts of divine fear, so to speak, into the souls of pious\nreaders.\n\n58. It may be well to transport ourselves in thought into the time of\nthe event. What do you think would be our state of mind if we had been\nput into the ark, if we had seen the waters spreading everywhere with\noverwhelming force and the wretched human beings perishing without\npossibility of help? Let us remember that Noah and his sons were also\nflesh and blood; that is, they were men who, as that person in the\ncomedy (Terence, Heaut. 1: 1, 25) says, thought nothing human was\nforeign to themselves. They were in the ark for forty days before it\nwas lifted off the earth. In those days were destroyed all the human\nbeings and animals living upon the earth. This calamity they saw with\ntheir own eyes; who would doubt that they were violently stirred by\nthe sight?\n\n59. Furthermore, the ark floated upon the waters for one hundred and\nfifty days, buffeted on all sides by the waves and winds. There was no\nhope for any harbor, or for any meeting with men. As exiles,\ntherefore, as vanished from the earth, as it were, they were driven\nhere and there by currents and winds. Is it not a miracle that those\neight human beings did not die from grief and fear? Truly, we are made\nof stone if we can read this story with dry eyes.\n\n60. What outcry, sorrow and wailing if from the shore we see a small\nboat overturned, and human beings miserably perishing! Here, however,\nnot one boat-load, but the entire world of men perish in the waters; a\nworld composed not only of grown persons, but also babes; not only of\ncriminal and wicked ones, but also simple-hearted matrons and virgins.\nThey all perished. Let us believe that Moses told the tale of this\ncalamity with such redundancy of words in order that we might be\nimpelled to give earnest attention to this important event. Noah's\nfaith was truly of a rare kind, since he consoled himself and his\nfamily with the hope of promised seed and dwelt more upon this promise\nthan the destruction of all the rest of the world.\n\nVs. 16-24. _And Jehovah shut him in. And the flood was forty days upon\nthe earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was\nlifted up above the earth. And the waters prevailed, and increased\ngreatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters.\nAnd the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high\nmountains that were under the whole heaven were covered. Fifteen\ncubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.\nAnd all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both birds, and cattle,\nand beasts, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and\nevery man: all, in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of\nlife, of all that was on the dry land, died. And every living thing\nwas destroyed that was upon the face of the ground, both man, and\ncattle, and creeping things, and birds of the heavens; and they were\ndestroyed from the earth: and Noah only was left, and they that were\nwith him in the ark. And the waters prevailed upon the earth a hundred\nand fifty days._\n\n61. For forty days the ark stood in some plain. By that time the\nwaters had risen to such an extent that they lifted the ark, which\nthen floated for one hundred and fifty days. A long sea voyage indeed,\nand one of great mourning and tears. Yet the occupants upheld\nthemselves by faith, not doubting the kindness of God toward them.\nThey had experienced his goodness when building the ark, when\npreparing the food, when getting ready other things needful for this\noccasion, and finally when the Lord closed the ark after the flood\ncame in its power.\n\n62. The question arises, how can God be truthful here? He had set man\nas master over the earth to cultivate and rule it. God did not create\nthe earth to lie waste, but to be inhabited and give its fruits to\nmen. How can we reconcile such purpose of the creator with the fact\nthat he destroyed all mankind except eight souls? I have no doubt that\nthis argument influenced the descendants of Cain as well as the wicked\nposterity of the righteous generation not to believe Noah when he\nproclaimed the flood. How can we harmonize God's promise to Adam and\nEve, \"You shall rule the earth,\" and his words here to Noah, \"The\nwater shall overpower all men, and destroy them all.\" So the\nunbelievers decided that Noah's preaching was wicked and heretical.\n\n63. In like manner the books of the prophets bear witness that the\nthreats of the Assyrian and Babylonish captivity were not believed by\nthe priests and kings, who knew this grand promise: \"This is my\nresting-place forever: here will I dwell; for I have desired it,\" Ps\n132, 14; and that other, by Isaiah: \"Here is my fire, and my\nhearth-stone,\" Is 31, 9. To them it was incredible that either the\nState or the temple should be overthrown by the gentiles. And the\nJews, miserable outcast though they be, even to this day hold fast the\npromise that they are God's people and heirs of the promises given\nAbraham and the fathers.\n\n64. Thus is the pope puffed up with the promises given to the Church:\n\"I am with you unto the end of the world,\" Mt 28, 20; \"I will not\nleave you desolate,\" Jn 14, 18; \"I made supplication for thee, that\nthy faith fail not,\" Lk 22, 32; and others. Though he sees and feels\nthe wrath of God, yet, caught in these promises, he dreams, and\nlikewise his followers, that his throne and power are secure. Hence\nthe Papists blatantly use the name of the Church to overwhelm us,\npromising themselves the utmost success, as if they could force God to\nestablish the Church according to their dreams and desires.\n\n65. Fitly, then, do we here raise the question how the flood, by which\nall mankind perished, agrees with the will of God, who created human\nnature and gave it the promise and endowment of dominion. The answer\nto this question will likewise settle the one concerning the Church.\nIt is this: God remains truthful, preserving, ruling and governing his\nChurch though in a manner transcending the observation and\nunderstanding of the world. He permits the Roman pontiff and his\nadherents to think that the pope is the Church. He suffers him to feel\nsecure and to enjoy his dignity and title. But in fact God has\nexcommunicated the pontiff, because he rejects the Word and\nestablishes idolatrous worship.\n\n66. On the other hand, God has chosen for himself another Church,\nwhich embraces the Word and flees idolatry, a Church so oppressed and\nshamefully afflicted that it is not considered a Church but a band of\nheretics and the devil's school. Thus Paul writes to the Romans (ch 2,\n17) that the Jews do not fear God yet they glory in the Law and in\nGod, at the same time denying, blaspheming and offending God. And\nwhile the Jews, who take pride in being God's people, are doing this,\nGod prepares for himself a Church from the gentiles, who truly glory\nin God and embrace his Word.\n\n67. But who should dare to accuse God of untruthfulness because he\npreserves the Church in a manner unknown and undesired by man? Of\nsimilar nature were the promises concerning the preservation of\nJerusalem and the temple. These promises were not violated when that\ncity and temple were laid waste by the Babylonians. For God\nestablished another Jerusalem and another temple in the Spirit and by\nthe Word; Jeremiah promised (Jer 29, 10-11) that the people should\nreturn after seventy years and that then both the temple and the\nnation should be re-established.\n\n68. As regards the Jews, these were destroyed at that time, but not as\nregards God who had promised in his Word that they should be rebuilt.\nThe Jews argue correctly that God will not desert the nation and\ntemple; but God keeps his promise in a way foreign to the thought of\nthe Jews, who believed that the nation would not be destroyed because\nthe promise said: \"This is my resting-place forever.\" God permitted\ndestruction in order to punish the sins of his people, and yet he\npreserved and protected the Church when the pious were brought back by\nCyrus and built the temple.\n\n69. In like manner, dominion over the world was given to man in the\nbeginning of creation. This is taken away in the flood, not forever,\nbut for a time, and that not altogether. Though the greater part of\nthe world perishes, yet man retains his mastery; and this mastery is\npreserved to mankind, not as represented by a multitude, as the world\ndesired and believed, but by a few persons--eight souls--a thing which\nseemed incredible to the world.\n\n70. Hence God did not lie; he kept his promise, but not as the world\nwould have had it. He destroyed the sinners and saved the righteous\nfew, which, like a seed, he thereafter multiplied in many ways.\n\n71. The Papists should keep before their eyes this judgment of God. It\nteaches that neither numbers nor power nor his own promise is allowed\nto prevent him from punishing the impenitent. Otherwise he would have\nspared the first world and the offspring of the patriarchs to whom he\nhad granted dominion over the earth. Now he destroys all and saves\nonly eight.\n\n72. Is it wonderful, then, that he deals with the Papists in the same\nway? Though they boast of rank, dignity, numbers, and power, yet,\nbecause they trample the Word of God under foot and rage against it,\nGod will cast them away, choosing for himself another Church, which\nwill humbly obey the Word and accept with open arms the gifts of\nChrist which the pope's Church, trusting in its own merits, haughtily\nspurns.\n\n73. Therefore none should trust in the good things of present\npossession, though they be promised by the divine Word. We must look\nto the Word itself and trust in it alone. Those who set the Word aside\nand put their trust in present things, will not go unscathed in their\nfall from faith, however much they may boast of power and numbers.\nThis truth is shown by the flood, by the captivity of the Jews and\ntheir present misfortune, and by the seven thousand men in the kingdom\nof Israel.\n\n74. The proof is sufficiently strong, that great numbers do not make a\nChurch. Nor must we trust in holiness of origin, in forefathers, or in\nthe gifts of God which we enjoy. We must look to the Word alone and\njudge thereby. Those alone who truly embrace the Word will be as\nimmovable forever as Mount Zion. They may be few in number and\nthoroughly despised by the world, as were Noah and his children. But\nGod, through these few, preserved to man the truth of that promised\nmastery when he had not even room to set his foot upon the earth.\n\n75. Our enemies, setting aside the Word, make much of number, outward\nappearance, and persons. But the apostles foretold that the Antichrist\nwill be a respecter of persons, that will rely upon numbers and\nancient origin, that he will hate the Word and corrupt God's promises\nand that he will kill those who cling to the Word. Shall we, then,\nconsider such people to be the Church?\n\n76. The Church is a daughter born from the Word, not the mother of the\nWord. Therefore, whoever loses the Word and looks to men instead,\nceases to be the Church and lapses into utter blindness; nor will\neither great numbers or power avail. They who keep the word, as did\nNoah and his family, are the Church, though they be few in number,\neven but eight souls. The Papists at this time surpass us in numbers\nand rank; we not only are cursed, but suffer many things. But we must\nendure until the judgment, when God will reveal that we are his\nChurch, and the Papists the church of Satan.\n\n77. So, then, we must observe that rule in 1 Sam 16, 7, where the Lord\nsays to Samuel: \"Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his\nstature; because I have rejected him: for Jehovah seeth not as man\nseeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but Jehovah looketh\non the heart.\"\n\n78. Let us not, therefore, give heed to the greatness and might of the\npope, who boasts that he is the Church, proclaiming the apostolic\nsuccession and the majesty of his person. Let us look to the Word. If\nthe pope embraces it, let us judge him to be the Church; but if he\ndoes violence to it, let us judge him to be the slave of Satan.\n\n79. Paul says (1 Cor 2, 15) that the spiritual person judgeth all\nthings. If I were the only one on the face of the earth to keep the\nWord, I should be the Church, and rightfully pass judgment upon all\nthe rest of the world that they were not the Church. Our enemies have\nthe office without the Word, and really have nothing. We, on the other\nhand, have the Word, though we have nothing; yet we have everything\nthrough the Word. Therefore, either let the pope, the cardinals and\nthe bishops come over to our side, or let them cease to boast that\nthey are the Church, which they cannot be without the Word, since it\nis begotten only by the Word.\n\n80. We bear a great load of hatred, being accused of having deserted\nthe ancient Church. The Papists, on the other hand, boast that they\nhave remained true to the Church, and they want to leave everything to\nthe judgment of the Church. But we are accused falsely. To speak the\ntruth, we must say that we departed from the Word when we were still\nin their Church and now we have returned to the Word and have ceased\nto be apostates from the Word.\n\n81. Therefore though in their judgment they rob us of the title of the\nChurch, still we retain the Word, and through the Word we have all\nornaments of the true Church. For whoever has the Creator of all, must\nneeds also possess the creatures themselves. In this sense Noah\nremained master of the world, though the waters prevailed, and the\nearth perished. Though he lost his property, yet, because he retained\nthe Word by which everything was created, it may truly be said he\nretained everything.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\n\nI. NOAH'S CONDITION IN THE ARK; THE WATERS ABATE.\n\n   A. NOAH'S CONDITION IN THE ARK.\n\n      1. How Noah and his family anxiously waited for God's promise,\n         and lived in faith, which is a hard life 1-3.\n\n      2. He had a hard time in the ark. What sustained him 2-4.\n\n      3. How he suffered in two ways 5.\n\n       * Whether God can forget his saints 6.\n\n       * Severest temptations are when man thinks he is forsaken by\n         God 7.\n\n      4. Noah's condition became more miserable because of his\n         family's distress 8-10.\n\n      5. Noah and family with difficulty overcame their temptation 11.\n\n       * Christians need steadfastness 12.\n\n       * Why God for a time conceals himself from his faithful ones\n         13.\n\n       * Temptations severe when saints imagine God has forsaken them\n         14.\n\n   B. THE WATERS ABATE.\n\n      1. The time the waters abated 15.\n\n      2. How the wind blew upon the earth and dried it. 16-17.\n\n      3. The abating of the waters was a sign by which God comforted\n         Noah 18.\n\n       * Noah's Ark.\n\n         a. When it began to float, how long it floated and when it\n            rested 19.\n\n         b. On what mountain did it rest 20.\n\n         c. What to think of Josephus' testimony 21.\n\n      4. When the mountain tops first seen 22.\n\n      5. How Noah learned the deluge had ceased.\n\n         a. Why Noah sent forth the raven, and how the error arose the\n            raven never returned 23-24.\n\n          * The Jews' unclean thoughts of the raven 24.\n\n         b. Noah sent forth a dove, and if at the same time with the\n            raven 25.\n\n         c. Noah sent out a second dove, which assured him that the\n            flood had ceased 26.\n\n            (1) Dove returned with an olive leaf 26.\n\n            (2) Whether it did this of its own impulse, and what God\n                thereby wished to indicate 27-28.\n\n            (3) The Jews' ideas on where the dove got the olive leaf\n                27.\n\n            (4) Why an olive leaf 28.\n\n      6. How long Noah and family were in the ark 29.\n\n\nI. NOAH IN ARK--FLOOD ABATES.\n\nA. NOAH'S CONDITION IN THE ARK.\n\nV. 1a. _And God remembered Noah, and all the beasts, and all the\ncattle that were with him in the ark._\n\n1. When that horrible wrath had exhausted itself, and all flesh with\nthe earth had been destroyed, the promise made by God to Noah and his\nsons, that they were to be the seed of the human race, began to be\nrealized. No doubt this promise was to them an object of eager\nexpectation. No life is so hedged about with difficulties as that of\nfaith. This was the life lived by Noah and his sons, whom we see\nabsolutely depending upon the heavens for support. The earth was\ncovered with water. Bottom on which to stand there was none. It was\nthe word of promise that upheld them, as they drifted in this welter\nof waters.\n\n2. When the flesh is free from danger, it holds faith in contempt, as\nthe claims of the Papists show. It loves showy and toilsome tasks; in\nthese it sweats. But behold Noah, on all sides surrounded by waters,\nyet not overwhelmed! Surely it is not works that sustain him but faith\nin God's mercy extended through the word of promise.\n\n3. The difficulty besetting Noah is hinted at in the words: \"God\nremembered.\" Moses thus intimates that Noah had been tossed on the\nwater so long that God seemed to have forgotten him altogether. They\nwho pass through such a mental strain, when the rays of divine grace\nare gone and they sit in darkness or are forgotten by God, find by\nexperience that it is far more difficult to live in the Word or by\nfaith alone than to be a hermit or a Carthusian monk.\n\n4. Hence, it is not a meaningless expression when the Holy Spirit says\nthat \"God remembered Noah.\" He means that from the day Noah entered\nthe ark, no word was spoken, nothing was revealed to him; that he saw\nno ray of divine grace shining, but merely clung to the promise which\nhe had accepted, while in the meantime the waters and waves raged as\nif God had certainly forgotten. The same danger beset his children and\nalso the cattle and all the other animals throughout the one hundred\nand fifty days they were in the ark. And though the holy seed by the\naid of the conquering Spirit overcame those difficulties, the victory\nwas not won without vexation of the flesh, tears and stupendous fear,\nfelt, in my opinion, even by the brutes.\n\n5. Thus a twofold danger beset them. The universal flood which\nswallowed up all mankind could not vanish without stupendous grief to\nthe righteous, particularly as they saw themselves reduced to so small\na number. Further, it was a serious matter to be buffeted by the\nwaters for almost half a year without any consolation from God.\n\n6. The expression used by Moses, \"God remembered Noah,\" must not be\nshort of its meaning by calling it a rhetorical figure, signifying\nthat God acted after the manner of one who had forgotten Noah, whereas\nGod cannot in truth forget his saints. A mere master of rhetoric,\nindeed, does not know what it means to live in such a state as to feel\nthat God has forgotten him. Only the most perfect saints understand\nthat, and can in faith bear, so to speak, a God who forgets. Therefore\nthe Psalms and all the Scriptures are filled with complaints of this\nnature, in which God is called upon to arise, to open his eyes, to\nhear, to awaken.\n\n7. Monks possessed of a higher degree of experience, at times\nunderwent this temptation and called it a suspension of grace. The\nlatter may be experienced also in temptations of a slighter nature.\nThe flame of lust found in young people is altogether unbearable\nunless it is held in check by the Word of God and the Holy Spirit.\nSimilarly, at a more mature age, impatience and the desire for revenge\ncan nowise be overcome unless God tears them from the soul. How much\nmore liable is the soul to fall into the darkness of despair, or into\nensnaring predestinarian tenets, when more severe temptations beset us\nand the suspension of grace is felt.\n\n8. Hence this expression is not to be passed by as a mere rhetorical\nornament, according to the interpretation of the rabbis. It is\nintended rather to portray the state of soul which feels despair\ncoming on amid unutterable groanings of heart, with just a spark of\nfaith left to wrest victory from the flesh. In the same way that Paul\nsuffered from Satan's messenger, we may believe that Noah felt himself\nstabbed in the heart, and that he often argued thus within himself:\nDost thou believe that thou alone art so beloved of God? Dost thou\nbelieve that thou will be kept safe to the end, when waters are\nboundless, and those immense clouds seem to be inexhaustible?\n\n9. When, then, such broodings found their way also into the weak souls\nof the women, what cries, wails and tears may we surmise to have been\nthe result? Almost overcome by sadness and grief, he was forced to\nlift up and comfort those with the cheer his own heart did not feel.\n\n10. It was, therefore, no jest or frolic for them to live so long\nlocked up within the ark, to see the endless downpour of rain and to\nbe carried to and fro floating upon the waves. This was the experience\nof having been forgotten by God which Moses implies when he says that\nGod at last remembered Noah and his sons.\n\n11. Though the occupants of the ark overcame this feeling by faith,\nthey did not do so without great vexation of the flesh; just as a\nyoung man who leads a chaste life overcomes lust, but surely not\nwithout the greatest vexation and trouble. In this instance, where the\ntrial was greater, where all evidence was at variance with the fact\nthat God was gracious and mindful of them, they indeed triumphed, but\nnot without fearful tribulation. For the flesh, weak in itself, can\nbear nothing less patiently than the thought of a God who has\nforgotten. Human nature is prone to be puffed up and haughty when God\nremembers it, when he vouchsafes success and favor. Is it a wonder,\nthen, that we become broken in spirit and desperate when God seems to\nhave cast us away and everything goes against us?\n\n12. Let us remember that this story sets before us an example of\nfaith, of endurance, and of patience, to the end that, having the\ndivine promise, we should not only learn to believe it, but should\nalso consider that we are in need of endurance. Endurance is not\nmaintained without a great struggle, and Christ calls upon us, in the\nNew Testament, to acquire it when he says: \"He that endureth to the\nend, the same shall be saved,\" Mt 24, 13.\n\n13. This is the reason why God hides for a time, as it were, seeming\nto have forgotten us, suspending his grace, as they say in the\nschools. As in this temptation not only the spirit but also the flesh\nis afflicted, so afterward, when he again begins to remember us, the\nperception of grace which during the trial was evident only to the\nspirit and most faintly at that, is extended to the flesh also.\n\n14. Hence, the word \"remembered\" indicates that great sadness beset\nboth man and beast during the entire time of the flood. It must have\nbeen by dint of great patience and extraordinary courage that Noah and\nthe others bore this lapse from God's memory, which is simply\nunbearable to the flesh without the spirit even in slight trials.\nTrue, God always remembers his own, even when he seems to have\nforsaken them; but Moses indicates that he remembered his people here\nin a visible way, by a sign, and by openly fulfilling what he had\npreviously promised through the Word and the Spirit. This is the most\nimportant passage in this chapter.\n\nB. Waters Abate.\n\nVs. 1b-3. _And God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters\nassuaged; the fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven\nwere stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained; and the waters\nreturned from off the earth continually; and after the end of a\nhundred and fifty days the waters decreased._\n\n15. Moses said above (ch 7, 11-12) that the deluge raged in three\ndifferent ways; for not only were the fountains of the great deep\nbroken up and the windows of heaven opened, but also the rain\ndescended. When these forces ceased on the one hundred and fiftieth\nday, quiet was once more in evidence and the fact that God remembered,\nand Noah with his sons and their wives, as also the animals, was\nrefreshed after terror so great and continuous. If a storm of two days\nduration causes seafarers to despair, how much more distressing was\nthat tossing about for half a year!\n\n16. The question here arises, how the wind was made to pass over the\nearth, which as yet was entirely covered with water. It is nothing new\nthat winds have the power to dry, especially those from the east,\ncalled by our countrymen \"hohle winde,\" and by Virgil \"parching\nwinds,\" from the drouth which they bring upon the earth. These are\nmentioned also by Hosea 13, 15. The explanation, accordingly, is\nsimple. Moses says that the wind was made to pass over the earth, that\nis, over the surface of the waters, for such a length of time that at\nlast, the waters being dried up, the earth again appeared. So, in\nExodus, a burning wind is said to have dried up the Red Sea. Now, God\nmight have accomplished this without any wind, yet he habitually\nemploys a natural means to attain his purposes.\n\n17. Up to this time Noah had lived in darkness, seeing nothing but the\nwaters rolling and raging in a terrifying volume. Now the delicious\nlight of the sun bursts forth once more, and the winds cease to roar\nfrom all points of the compass. Only the east wind, calculated to\nreduce the waters, is blowing, and gradually it takes away the\nstagnant flood. Other means also are effective; the ocean no longer\nhurls its waves upon the land, but takes back the waters which it had\nspewed forth, and the floodgates of heaven are closed up.\n\n18. These are outward and tangible signs by which God consoles Noah,\nshowing him that he had not forgotten, but remembered him. This is a\npractical and needed lesson also for us. When in the midst of dangers\nwe may with certainty look for God's help, who does not desert us if\nwe continue in faith, looking forward to the fulfilment of God's\npromises.\n\nV. 4. _And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day\nof the month, upon the mountains of Ararat._\n\n19. The waters increased for forty days, until the ark was lifted from\nthe earth. Then for one hundred and fifty days it floated upon the\nwaters, driven by the winds and the waves, without a sign of God's\nremembrance. At length the waters began to decrease, and the ark\nrested.\n\n20. The point of dispute among the Jews here is the number of months.\nBut why waste any more time upon immaterial matters, particularly as\nwe see that the suggestions of the rabbis are not at all wise? It is\nmore to the purpose for us to inquire where the mountains of Ararat\nare to be found. It is generally believed that they are mountains of\nArmenia, close by the highest ranges of Asia Minor, the Caucasus and\nthe Taurus. But it appears to me that more likely the highest of all\nmountains is meant, the Imaus (Himalaya), which divides India.\nCompared to this range, other mountains are no more than warts. That\nthe ark rested upon the highest mountain is substantiated by the fact\nthat the waters continued to fall for three whole months before such\nsmaller ranges as Lebanon, Taurus, and Caucasus were uncovered, which\nare, as it were, the feet or roots of the Himalaya, just as the\nmountains of Greece may be called branches of the Alps extending up to\nour Hercinian Forest (Harz). To anyone who surveys them with care the\nmountains seem to be wonderfully related and united.\n\n21. Josephus has wonderful things to tell about the mountains of\nArmenia, and he records that during his time remains of the ark were\ndiscovered there. But I suppose nobody will judge me to be a heretic\nif I occasionally doubt the reliability of his statements.\n\nV. 5. _And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in\nthe tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the\nmountains seen._\n\n22. Moses said before that by the seventh month the waters had fallen\nso far that the ark rested upon Ararat. In the third month thereafter,\nthe tops of the lower mountains began to appear, so that Noah, looking\ndown from the mountains of Ararat as if from a watchtower, saw also\nthe peaks of the other mountains, of the Taurus in Asia, the Lebanon\nin Syria, and the like. All these were signs of God's remembrance.\n\nVs. 6-7. _And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah\nopened the window of the ark which he had made: and he sent forth a\nraven, and it went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up\nfrom off the earth._\n\n23. So far the history; the allegorical significance we shall discuss\nat its proper place. The carelessness of a translator has caused a\ndispute upon this part of the story. The Hebrew text does not say that\nthe raven did not return, as Jerome translated; hence there was no\nneed to invent a reason why he did not return--because he found dead\nbodies lying about everywhere. They claim that abundance of food\nprevented him.\n\n24. On the contrary, Moses says that the raven which had been sent\nforth, returned; although he did not permit himself to be again\nimprisoned in the ark as the dove did. Moses implies that Noah sent\nforth the raven to find out whether animals could, by that time find\ndry land and food. The raven, however, did not faithfully carry out\nhis mission, but rejoicing to be set free from his prison, he flew to\nand fro, and paying no attention to Noah, he enjoyed the free sky. The\nswinish Jews, however, show the impurity of their minds everywhere.\nFor they suppose that the raven had fears concerning his mate, and\nthat he even suspected Noah concerning her. Shame upon those impure\nminds!\n\nVs. 8-9. _And he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were\nabated from off the face of the ground; but the dove found no rest for\nthe sole of her foot, and she returned unto him to the ark; for the\nwaters were on the face of the whole earth: and he put forth his hand,\nand took her, and brought her unto him into the ark._\n\n25. When Noah's hopes had been set at naught by the raven, which flew\nabout wantonly but brought no tidings concerning the condition of the\nearth, he took a dove, thinking that she would more truly perform the\nmission. The text almost authorizes us to say that those two birds\nwere sent forth at the same time, so that Noah might have two\nwitnesses from whom to gain desired knowledge. The raven enjoying the\nfree sky, flew round about the ark, but did not want to return into\nit. The dove, however, fleeing from the corpses and corruption, comes\nback and permits itself to be caught. This story, as we shall hear,\noffers a fine allegory concerning the Church.\n\nVs. 10-12. _And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent\nforth the dove out of the ark; and the dove came in to him at\neventide; and, lo, in her mouth an olive-leaf plucked off: so Noah\nknew that the waters were abated from off the earth. And he stayed yet\nother seven days, and sent forth the dove; and she returned not again\nunto him any more._\n\n26. The dove, being a faithful messenger, is sent forth once more.\nMoses carefully describes how the waters decreased gradually, until at\nlast the surface of the earth, together with the trees, was laid bare.\nWe do not believe that the dove brought the olive leaf intentionally,\nbut by the command of God, who wanted to show Noah, little by little,\nthat he had not altogether forgotten but remembered him. This olive\nleaf was an impressive sign to Noah and his fellow-prisoners in the\nark, bringing them courage and hope of impending liberation.\n\n27. The Jews dispute sharply in respect to this matter of where the\ndove found the olive leaf, and some, in order to secure special glory\nfor their homeland, make the ludicrous assertion that she took it from\nthe Mount of Olives in the land of Israel, which God had spared from\nthe flood that destroyed the remainder of the earth. But the saner\nJews rightly refute this nonsense by arguing that if this were true,\nthe olive leaf could not have been a sign for Noah that the waters had\nfallen. Others have invented the fable that the dove was admitted to\nparadise and brought the leaf from there.\n\n28. But I have (ch 2, para 39-42) set forth at length my views\nconcerning paradise, and this nonsense is not worthy the effort of a\nrefutation. It serves a better purpose to remind you that all these\nthings happened miraculously and supernaturally. A dove is not so\nintelligent as to pluck a bough and bring it to the ark in order that\nNoah might form a judgment with reference to the decrease of waters.\nGod ordained these events. Other trees had leaves at that time,\nparticularly the taller ones which rose sooner from the waters. The\nolive tree is comparatively short, hence it was calculated to furnish\ninformation concerning the decrease of the waters and to serve as an\nobject lesson of the cessation of the wrath of God and the return of\nthe earth to its former state. Of this he had more certain proof\nhowever, when the dove, having been sent out the third time, did not\nreturn: for not only did it find food on earth, but was able to build\nnests and to flit to and fro.\n\nVs. 13-14. _And it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in\nthe first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up\nfrom off the earth: and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and\nlooked, and, behold, the face of the ground was dried. And in the\nsecond month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, was the\nearth dry._\n\n29. Here we see that Noah was in the ark an entire year and ten days;\nfor he entered the ark on the seventeenth day of the second month, and\ncame out again, after a year had passed, in the same month, but on the\ntwenty-seventh day. Poor Noah, with his sons and the women, lived in\nthe ark more than half a year in sore grief, without a sign of being\nremembered by God. Afterward God gave him gradual proof, through\nvarious signs, that he had not forgotten him, until at last, after the\nlapse of a year and ten days, he was again given dominion over the\nearth and sea. On this day of the second month, the flood had not only\ndisappeared, but the earth was dry. This is the story of the flood and\nits abatement. After this fearful wrath, there ensues an immeasurable\nlight of grace, as is shown in the following sermon addressed to Noah\nby God himself.\n\n\nII. NOAH COMMANDED TO LEAVE THE ARK; HIS OFFERING TO GOD; GOD'S\n    RESOLVE NOT TO CURSE THE EARTH AGAIN.\n\n   A. NOAH COMMANDED TO LEAVE THE ARK, AND HE OBEYED 30-32.\n\n    * Man should do nothing but what God commands 30-32.\n\n    * Is it right to start a new worship without God's command to do\n      so 33-34.\n\n    * The examples of saints and special works.\n\n      1. Should we imitate the works of the holy patriarchs 34-35.\n\n      2. The result among the Jews of a reckless imitation of the\n         saints 36.\n\n      3. Should have regard here, not to works but to faith 37-38.\n\n\nII. NOAH LEAVES ARK, HIS SACRIFICE AND GOD'S PROMISE.\n\nA. Noah Obeys Command to Leave the Ark.\n\nVs. 15-17. _And God spake unto Noah, saying, Go forth from the ark,\nthou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with thee. Bring\nforth with thee every living thing that is with thee of all flesh,\nboth birds, and cattle, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon\nthe earth; that they may breed abundantly in the earth._\n\n30. Up to this point the narrative is only a record of facts, or the\ndescription of a divine work. Though the works of God are not mute but\neloquent witnesses, and present to our vision the will of God, a still\ngreater comfort is vouchsafed when God links to the works the Word,\nwhich is not manifest to the eye but perceptible to the ear and\nintelligible to the heart through the promptings of the Holy Spirit.\nSo far God had given proof by his work that he was appeased, that the\nGod of wrath had turned into a God of mercy, who turns back the waters\nand dries up the earth. Such comfort he now amplifies by his Word in\nthat he lovingly accosts and enjoins him to leave the ark with the\nother creatures, both men and animals.\n\n31. In the light of this passage the frequent and emphatic application\nof the principle is justified that we should neither design nor do\nanything, especially in respect to God's service and worship, without\nthe initiative and command of the Word. As above narrated, Noah enters\nthe ark upon God's command; and he leaves the ark upon God's command\nto leave it. He does not follow superstitious notions, as we see the\nJews do, who, when they establish anything temporary by command,\nendeavor to retain it forever, as if it were essential to salvation.\n\n32. Noah might have argued thus: Behold, I built the ark by the\ncommand of God; I was saved in it while all other men perished:\ntherefore I will remain in it, or keep it for a place of divine\nworship, since it has been sanctified by the Word of God and the\npresence of the saints, the Church. But the godly man did nothing of\nthe kind. The Word had commanded him to go forth, therefore he obeyed.\nThe ark had done its service during the flood and he left it, assured\nthat he and his children were to live on the earth. So must we\nundertake nothing without the Word of God. In a holy calling, which\nhas the Word and command of God, let us walk! For whosoever attempts\nanything without the command of God, will labor in vain.\n\n33. To deny this, some one might cite as example the act of Noah,\ndescribed below, when he built an altar without God's command, and\noffered a burnt-offering thereon to God from the clean animals. If\nthis was permitted to Noah, why should we not be permitted to choose\ncertain forms of worship? And, in truth, the Papacy has heaped up\nworks and forms of worship in the Church without measure, just as it\npleased. But we must hold fast to the principle, which is a theorem of\ngeneral application, that whatsoever is not of faith, is sin, (Rom 14,\n23). But faith cannot be separated from the Word; hence, whatsoever is\ndone without the Word, is sin.\n\n34. Furthermore, it is plainly dangerous to take the acts of the\nfathers as models. As individuals differ, so also do their duties\ndiffer, and God requires diverse works according to the diversity of\nour calling. Accordingly the epistle to the Hebrews fitly refers the\nvarious acts of the fathers to the one faith, in order to show that\neach of us must imitate, in his calling, not the works, but the faith\nof the fathers. Heb 11.\n\n35. Hence works peculiar to the holy fathers must by no means be\nconsidered as models for us each to imitate as the monks imitate the\nfasting of Benedict, the gown of Francis, the shoes of Dominic and the\nlike. Men become apes who imitate without judgment. The monks try to\nape the works, but know nothing of the faith of the fathers.\n\n36. Abraham was commanded to slay his son. Afterward his descendants\nmost wickedly believed they should follow his example, and they filled\nthe earth with innocent blood. In a similar manner the people\nworshiped the brazen serpent and offered sacrifices before it. In both\ninstances the people wanted to justify themselves by the example of\ntheir forefathers; but since they established these forms of worship\nwithout the Word, they were righteously condemned.\n\n37. Let us, therefore, remember not to establish anything without the\nWord of God. Duties differ, and so must the works of individuals. How\nfoolish it would be for me to proclaim that I must follow Caesar's\nexample, and that others must obey my laws! How wicked it would be for\nme to assert that I must follow the example of a judge, condemning\nsome to the cross, others to the sword! Then, we must look, not upon\nthe works, but upon the faith of individuals; for the faith of all\nsaints is one, though their works are most diverse.\n\n38. Think not that because Noah built an altar, you may do likewise;\nbut follow the faith of Noah, who thought it right to show his\nmerciful Savior that he understood his beneficent gifts, and was\ngrateful for them. Follow Abraham, not in slaying your son, but in\nbelieving the promises of God, and in obeying his commandments. The\nepistle to the Hebrews fitly refers the deeds and acts of the fathers\nto their faith, setting forth that we should follow their faith.\n\n\nB. NOAH'S SACRIFICE.\n\n   1. Whether Noah was commanded to offer a sacrifice and in what way\n      sacrificing is justified 39-41.\n\n    * Have monks divine command to support their order 40.\n\n    * Shall we find fault with the works of saints, for which they\n      apparently had no command 41.\n\n    * How in all works we should have respect for God's command 42.\n\n    * Lyra's unfounded thoughts on the words, \"Be fruitful\" etc. 43.\n\n    * Why Moses said so much about their leaving the ark 44.\n\n   2. Noah's sacrifice proves Moses did not originate the idea of\n      sacrifice 45-46.\n\n   3. Why Noah's sacrifice was pleasing to God 47-48.\n\n    * The meaning of \"sweet savor\" 47-48.\n\n   4. How it can be said God \"smelled the sweet savor\", and why this\n      form of speech used 49-50.\n\n\nB. NOAH'S SACRIFICE.\n\n39. The objection under consideration can be invalidated by the\nrejoinder that Noah did have a command to erect an altar and offer\nsacrifices. God approved the rite of sacrifice by ordering that more\nof the clean animals--suitable for sacrifice--should be taken into the\nark. Nor was Noah permitted to cast aside the office of the\npriesthood, which had been established by the Word before the flood\nand had come down to him by the right of primogeniture. Adam, Seth,\nEnoch and others had been priests. From them Noah possessed the office\nof the priesthood as an inheritance.\n\n40. Therefore Noah, as priest and prophet, was not only at liberty to\noffer sacrifice, but he was under obligation to do so by virtue of his\ncalling. Since his calling was founded on God's Word, in harmony with\nthat Word and by God's command he built an altar and offered\nsacrifices. Therefore let a monk prove it is his office and calling to\nwear a cowl, to worship the blessed Virgin, to pray the rosary and do\nlike things, and we will commend his life. But since the call is\nlacking, the Word is not the authority and the office does not exist,\nthe life and works of the monks in their entirety stand justly\ncondemned.\n\n41. Finally, even if all other arguments should fail, this argument,\naccording to which man judges the cause by the effect, remains;\nnamely, that God expresses approval of Noah's deed. Although such\nreasoning from effect to cause may not be unassailable, it yet is not\nwithout value in respect to such heroic and uncommon men, who meet not\nwith rejection but approval on the part of God, although they appear\nto do what they have not been expressly commanded. They possess the\ninward conviction that they are guilty of no transgression, though the\ndisclosure of this fact is delayed until later God expresses his\napproval. Such examples are numerous and it is noteworthy that God has\nexpressed approval even of the acts of some heathen.\n\n42. Let this maxim, then, stand, that everything must be done by the\ncommand of God in order to obtain the assurance of conscience that we\nhave acted in obedience to God. Hence they who abide in their divinely\nassigned calling, will not run uncertainly nor will they beat the air\nas those who have no course in which they have been commanded to run,\nand in consequence may not look forward to a prize. 1 Cor 9, 24.\n\nBut I return to the text. Noah, with his sons and the women, is\ncommanded to leave the ark, and to lead forth upon the earth every\nspecies of animals, that all his works may be sanctified and found in\nkeeping with the Word. Concerning the animals Moses now expressly\nstates:\n\nVs. 17-19. _Be fruitful, and multiply upon the earth. And Noah went\nforth, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him: every\nbeast, every creeping thing, and every bird, whatsoever moveth upon\nthe earth, after their families, went forth out of the ark._\n\n43. The Lord speaks of the propagation of Noah and his sons in the\nninth chapter and that, I believe, is the reason why he speaks here\nonly of the propagation of the animals. From the expression here used,\nLyra foolishly concludes that cohabitation had been forbidden during\nthe flood and was now again permitted after the departure from the\nark, since God says, \"Go forth, ... thou and thy wife.\" Such thoughts\nbelong to monks not to God, who plans not sinful lust, but\npropagation; the latter is God's ordination, but lust is Satan's\npoison infused into nature through sin.\n\n44. Moses here uses many words to illustrate the overflowing joy of\nthe captives' souls, when they were commanded to leave their prison,\nthe ark, and to return upon the earth now everywhere open before them.\nIn recounting the kinds of animals, however, he arranges them in a\ndifferent order, distinguishing them by families, as it were, to let\nus see that only propagation was God's aim. It must have been a glad\nsight when each one of the many beasts, after leaving the ark, found\nits own mate, and then sought its accustomed haunt: the wolves, the\nbears, the lions, returning to the woods and groves; the sheep, the\ngoats, the swine, to the fields; the dogs, the chickens, the cats, to\nman.\n\nV. 20. _And Noah builded an altar unto Jehovah, and took of every\nclean beast, and of every clean bird, and offered burnt-offerings on\nthe altar._\n\n45. This text shows conclusively that Moses was not the first person\nto introduce sacrifices but that, like a bard who gathers chants, he\narranged and classified them as they had been in vogue among the\nfathers and transmitted from the one to the other. Thus also the law\nof circumcision was not first written by Moses but received from the\nfathers.\n\n46. Above (ch 4, 4-5), where Moses mentioned the sacrifice of Abel and\nCain, he called it _minchah_, an offering; here, however, we find the\nfirst record of a burnt-offering, one entirely consumed by fire. This,\nI say, is a clear proof that the law of sacrifices had been\nestablished before the time of Moses. His work, then, consisted in\narranging the rites of the forefathers in definite order.\n\nV. 21. _And Jehovah smelled the sweet savor._\n\n47. It is set forth here that Jehovah approved Noah's sacrifice which\nhe offered by virtue of his office as a priest, according to the\nexample of the fathers. However, the differences of phraseology is to\nreceive due attention. Of the former sacrifice he said that Jehovah\n\"had respect\" to it; here he says that \"Jehovah smelled the sweet\nsavor.\" Moses subsequently makes frequent use of this expression. The\nheathen also adopted it; Lucian, for example, makes fun of Jove who\nwas conciliated by the odor of meats.\n\n48. The word in the original, however, does not properly signify the\n\"savor of sweetness,\" but \"the savor of rest\", for _nichoach_ meaning\n\"rest\", is derived from the verb _nuach_, which Moses used before,\nwhen he said that the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat.\nTherefore it is the \"savor of rest,\" because God then rested from his\nwrath, dismissing his wrath, becoming appeased, and, as we commonly\nsay, well content.\n\n49. Here the question might be raised why does he not say, Jehovah had\nrespect to Noah and his burnt offering, rather than, Jehovah smelled\nthe savor of rest, which latter certainly sounds shocking, as though\nhe were not commending the man for his faith, but merely for his work.\nThis objection is usually answered by saying that the Scriptures speak\nof God in human fashion. Men are pleased by a sweet savor. But it\nseems to me there is still another reason for this expression, namely,\nthat God was so close at hand that he noticed the savor; for Moses\ndesires to show that this holy rite was well-pleasing to God: Solomon\nsays (Prov 27, 9) that perfume rejoiceth the heart. Physicians\nsometimes restore consciousness by sweet odors. On the other hand, a\nviolent stench is extremely offensive to our nature, and often\noverpowers it.\n\n50. In this sense, one may say that God, having been annoyed by the\nstench of wickedness, was now refreshed, so to speak, when he saw this\none priest girded himself to perform holy rites in order to give proof\nof his gratitude, and to manifest by some public act he did not belong\nto the ungodly, but that he had a God whom he feared. This is the real\nmeaning of a sacrifice. As it had pleased God to destroy mankind, he\nis now delighted to increase it. Moses uses this expression for our\nsake, that we, through the experience of God's grace, may learn that\nGod delights to do us good.\n\n\nC. GOD'S RESOLVE NOT TO CURSE THE EARTH AGAIN.\n\n   1. God solemnly and earnestly means it 51.\n\n    * How understood \"it repented God that he had made man\" 52-54.\n\n    * Experiences in spiritual temptations and how God helps us to\n      bear them 54.\n\n   2. The meaning of \"God will not again smite the earth\" 55.\n\n\nC. GOD'S RESOLVE NOT TO CURSE THE EARTH AGAIN.\n\nV. 21b. _And Jehovah said in his heart._\n\n51. Moses points out that these words were not spoken by God without\nheart and feeling, but from his very vitals. This is the meaning of\nthe Hebrew text which has it that God spoke to his own heart.\n\nV. 21c. _I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake._\n\n52. God speaks as if he were sorry for the punishment inflicted upon\nthe earth on account of man, just as formerly he expressed regret for\nhis creation, reproving himself, as it were, for his fury against man.\nThis must not, of course, be understood as implying that God could\npossibly change his mind; it is written only for our consolation. He\naccuses and blames himself in order to rouse the little flock to the\ncertain faith that God will be merciful hereafter.\n\n53. And their souls stood in real need of such consolation. They had\nbeen terrified as they witnessed God's raging wrath, and their faith\ncould not but be shaken. So now God is impelled to so order his acts\nand words that these people might expect only grace and mercy.\nAccordingly he now speaks with them, is present at their sacrifice,\nshows that he is pleased with them, blames his own counsel, and\npromises that he will never do anything like it in the future. In\nbrief, he is a different God from what he had been before. While God,\nindeed, does not change, he wants to change men, who have become\naltogether habituated to thoughts of wrath.\n\n54. They who have experienced trials of the spirit, know full well how\nmuch the soul then stands in need of sure and strong consolation to\ninduce it once more to hope for grace and to forget the wrath. One\nday, a whole month, perhaps is not enough for this change. Just as it\ntakes a long time to recover from bodily disorders, so such wounds of\nthe soul cannot be healed at once, or by one word. God sees this, and\ntries by various means to recall the terrified souls to a certain hope\nof grace; he even chides himself, speaking to his own heart, as in\nJeremiah 18, 8, where he promises to repent of the evil he thought of\ndoing, if the offenders also repent.\n\n55. It should furthermore be noted that he says, \"I will not again\ncurse the ground.\" He speaks of a general destruction of the earth,\nnot of a partial one, as when he destroys fields, cities, or kingdoms.\nThe latter instances are for a warning; as Mary says, \"He hath put\ndown princes from their thrones.\" Lk 1, 52.\n\n\nIII. MAN'S NATURAL DEPRAVITY AND HIS NATURAL POWERS.\n\n   1. Natural depravity crops out in infancy 56.\n\n   2. It is seen as the years advance 57-58.\n\n   3. Whether those who would drown it have reason for doing so 59-60.\n\n   4. There is none untainted by it 61-62.\n\n   5. The godless yield to it, believers resist it 62.\n\n    * Can God be charged with being changeable 63-64.\n\n   6. The knowledge of natural depravity is very necessary 65.\n\n   7. What moves sophists to ignore natural depravity 65-66.\n\n   8. How to view those who lightly regard natural depravity, and how\n      to refute them 68-69.\n\n    * Meaning of \"the imagination of the heart\" 70.\n\n    * True theological definition of man 71.\n\n   9. The proof of natural depravity and that the natural is not\n      perfect 72-73.\n\n  10. Consequence of false teaching on natural depravity and the\n      natural 74-75.\n\n    * What sophists understand by Merito congrui and condigni 74.\n\n  11. How Scotus tried to prove that man's natural powers were all he\n      had, and how to refute his opinion 75-76.\n\n    * Value of the Scholastics and their theology 77.\n\n  12. How teachers in these things lead astray 78.\n\n    * The virtues of the heathen.\n\n      a. Estimate of them 79-80.\n\n      b. How they differ from the good works of the saints 81.\n\n      c. What they lack 82-83.\n\n  13. Natural depravity may sleep in youth, but it will awake as the\n      years advance 84-86.\n\n  14. Those who ignore natural depravity may be refuted by experience\n      87.\n\n  15. Philosophy manifests its vanity and blindness in its attitude to\n      this doctrine 88-89.\n\n  16. Experience confirms natural depravity 89-90.\n\n  17. Whether natural depravity can be completely eradicated: how to\n      check it 91.\n\n    * How to understand \"God will not smite the earth again\" 92.\n\n    * Nature thrown into great disorder by the deluge 93.\n\n    * Seasons of the year again put in their order 94.\n\n    * The people's talk about the signs of the last times 95.\n\n    * The days of earth to be followed by the days of heaven, and we\n      should prepare for them 96.\n\n\nIII. MAN'S NATURAL DEPRAVITY AND HIS NATURAL POWERS.\n\nV. 21d. _For that the imagination of man's heart is evil from his\nyouth._\n\n56. This is a powerful passage, relating to original sin. Whoever\nweakens its force, goes straying like the blind man in the sunlight,\nfailing to see his own acts and experiences. Look at the days of our\nswaddling clothes; in how many ways sin manifests itself in our\nearlier years. What an amount of switching it requires until we are\ntaught order, as it were, and attention to duty!\n\n57. Then youth succeeds. There a stronger rebellion becomes\nnoticeable, and in addition that untamable evil, the rage of lust and\ndesire. If one take a wife, the result is weariness of his own and a\npassion for others. If the government of a State is entrusted to him,\nan exceptionally fruitful harvest of vice will follow--as jealousy,\nrivalry, haughtiness, hope of gain, avarice, wrath, anger, and other\nevils.\n\n58. It is true, as the German proverb has it, that sins grow with the\nyears: Je laenger, je aerger; je aelter, je kaerger (worse with time,\nstingier with age). All such vices are so blatant and gross as to\nbecome objects of observation and intelligence. What, then shall we\nsay of the inward vices when unbelief, presumption, neglect of the\nWord, and wicked views grow up?\n\n59. There are those who are and desire to be considered powerful\ntheologians, though they extenuate original sin by sophistry. But\nvices so numerous and great cannot be extenuated. Original sin is not\na slight disorder or infirmity, but complete lawlessness, the like of\nwhich is not found in other creatures, except in evil spirits.\n\n60. But do those extenuators have any Scriptural proof to rest upon?\nLet us see what Moses says. As I pointed out in explaining the sixth\nchapter, he does not call such things evil, as lust, tyranny, and\nother sins, but the imagination of the human heart; that is, human\nenergy, wisdom and reason, with all the faculties the mind employs\neven in our best works. Although we do not condemn acts which belong\nto the social or civil sphere, yet the human heart vitiates these\nworks in themselves proper, by doing them for glory, for profit, or\nfor oppression, and either from opposition to the neighbor or to God.\n\n61. Nor can we escape the force of this passage by saying that those\nare meant who perished by the flood. God uses a generic term which\ndenotes that the heart of man, as such, is meant. At the time this was\nspoken there were no other people than those saved in the ark, and yet\nthe declaration is: the imagination of man's heart is evil.\n\n62. Therefore, not even the saints are excepted. In Ham, the third\nson, this imagination of the heart betrayed its nature. And the other\nbrothers were no better by nature. There was only this difference,\nthat they, believing in the promised seed, retained the hope of\nforgiveness of sin, and did not give way to the evil imagination of\ntheir hearts, rather resisting it through the Holy Spirit, who is\ngiven for the very purpose of contending against, and overcoming, the\nmalignity of man's nature. Because Ham gives way to his nature, he is\nwholly evil, and totally perishes. Shem and Japheth, who contend\nagainst it in their spirit, though being evil, are not altogether so.\nThey have the Holy Spirit, through whom they contend against the evil,\nand hence are holy.\n\n63. It would seem here that God might be accused of fickleness.\nBefore, when he was about to punish man, he assigned as a reason for\nhis purpose the fact that the imagination of man's heart is evil;\nhere, when he is about to give unto man the gracious promise that he\nwill not thereafter show such anger, he puts forward the same reason.\nTo human wisdom this appears foolish and inconsistent with divine\nwisdom.\n\n64. But I gladly pass by such sublime themes, and leave them to minds\npossessed of leisure. For me it is enough that these works are spoken\nto suit our spiritual condition, inasmuch as God points out that he is\nnow appeased and no longer angry. So parents, having chastised their\ndisobedient children as they deserve, win again their affections by\nkindness. This change of mood is not deserving of criticism but rather\nof commendation. It profits the children; otherwise they, while\nfearing the rod, might also begin to hate their parents. This\nexplanation is good enough for me, for it appeals to our faith. Others\nmay explain differently.\n\n65. We should give diligent attention to this passage because it\nplainly shows that man's nature is corrupt, a truth above all others\nto be apprehended, because without it God's mercy and grace cannot be\nrightly understood. Hence, the quibblers previously mentioned are to\nbe despised and we have good reason to take to task the translator who\ngave occasion for this error by rendering the words so as to say, not\nthat the imagination of man's heart is evil, but that it is inclined\nto evil. Upon this authority the quibblers distort or set aside those\npassages of Paul where he says that all are children of wrath (Eph 2,\n3) that all have sinned (Rom 5, 12) and are under sin (Rom 3, 9). They\nargue from our passage as follows: Moses does not say that human\nnature is evil, but that it is prone to evil; this condition, call it\ninclination or proclivity, is under the control of free will, nor does\nit force man toward the evil, or (to use their own words) it imposes\nno constraint upon man.\n\n66. Then they proceed to find a reason for this statement and declare\nthat even after the fall of man, there remains in him a good will and\na right understanding. For the natural powers, say they, are\nunimpaired, not only in man but even in the devil. And finally they so\ntwist Aristotle's teachings as to make him say that reason tends\ntoward that which is best. Some traces of these views are found also\nin the writings of the Church fathers. Using Psalms 4, 6 as a basis,\nwhere the prophet says, \"Jehovah, lift thou up the light of thy\ncountenance upon us,\" they distinguish between a higher part of reason\nwhich inquires concerning God, and a lower part employed in temporal\nand civil affairs. Even Augustine is pleased with this distinction, as\nwe stated above when discussing the fall of man.\n\n67. But if only a spark of the knowledge of God had remained\nunimpaired in man, we should be different beings by far from what we\nnow are. Hence, those quibblers who pick flaws in the plain statements\nof Paul are infinitely blind. If they would carefully and devoutly\nconsider that very passage as they read it in their Latin Bible, they\nwould certainly cease to father so bad a cause. For it is not an\ninsignificant truth which Moses utters when he says the senses and the\nthoughts of the heart of man are prone to evil from his youth. This is\nthe case especially in the sixth chapter (vs 5) where he says that the\nwhole thought of his heart was bent on evil continually, meaning\nthereby that he purposes what is evil, and that in inclination,\npurpose and effort he inclines to evil. For example; an adulterer,\nwhose desires are inflamed, may lack the opportunity, the place, the\nperson, the time, and nevertheless be stirred by the fire of lust,\nunable to dwell upon anything else. In this manner, says Moses, does\nhuman nature always incline toward evil. Can, then, the natural powers\nof man be said to have remained unimpaired, seeing that man's thoughts\nare always set upon evil things?\n\n68. If the minds of the sophists were as open toward the holy doctrine\ncontained in the prophetical and apostolical writings as toward their\nown teachers who teach the freedom of the will and the merit of works,\nthey surely would not have permitted themselves by so small an\ninducement as one little word to be led away from the truth so as to\nteach, contrary to Scripture, that man's natural powers are uninjured,\nand that man, by nature, is not under wrath or condemnation.\nNotwithstanding, it appears that they turn against their own\nabsurdity. Although the natural powers of man are uninjured, yet they\nmaintain that, to become acceptable, grace is required; in other\nwords, they teach that God is not satisfied with man's natural\ngoodness, unless it be improved by love.\n\n69. But what is the need to argue longer against the madness of the\nsophists, since we know the true meaning of the Hebrew text to be, not\nthat man's mind and thoughts are inclined to evil, but that the\nimagination of the human heart is evil from youth?\n\n70. By imagination, as I stated several times before (ch 6, para 148),\nhe means reason itself, together with the will and the understanding,\neven when it dwells upon God, or occupies itself with most honorable\npursuits, be they those of State or Home. It is always contrary to\nGod's law, always in sin, always under God's wrath, and it cannot be\nfreed from this evil state by its own strength, as witness Christ's\nwords: \"If therefore the Son shall make you free, ye shall be free\nindeed,\" Jn 8, 36.\n\n71. If you wish a definition of the word \"man\" take it from this text\nteaching that he is a rational being, with a heart given to\nimagination. But what does he imagine? Moses answers, \"Evil\"; that is,\nevil against God or God's Law, and against his fellow man. Thus holy\nScriptures ascribe to man a reason that is not idle but always\nimagines something. This imagination it calls evil, wicked,\nsacrilegious, while the philosophers call it good, and the quibblers\nsay that the natural gifts are unimpaired.\n\n72. Therefore this text should be carefully noted and urged against\nthe caviling quibblers: Moses declares the imagination of the human\nheart to be evil. And if it be evil, the conclusion is natural that\nthe natural gifts are not unimpaired, but corrupted: Inasmuch as God\ndid not create man evil, but perfect, sound, holy, knowing God, his\nreason right and his will toward God good.\n\n73. Seeing we have clear testimony to the fact that man is evil and\nturned away from God, who would be mad enough to say that the natural\ngifts in man remain unimpaired? That would be practically saying that\nman's nature is unimpaired and good even now, whereas we have\noverwhelming evidence in our knowledge and experience that it is\ndebased to the utmost.\n\n74. From that wicked theory there have sprung many dangerous and some\npalpably wicked utterances, for instance, that when man does the best\nin his power, God will unfailingly give his grace. By such teaching\nthey have driven man, as by a trumpet, to prayer, fasting,\nself-torture, pilgrimages and similar performances. Thus the world was\ntaught to believe that if men did the best that nature permitted, they\nwould earn grace, if not the grace \"de merito,\" at least that \"de\ncongruo.\" A \"meritum congrui\" (title to reward based upon equity) they\nattribute to a work which has been performed not against but in\naccordance to the divine law, inasmuch as an evil work is subject not\nto a reward but a penalty. The \"meritum condigni\" (a title to reward\nbased upon desert) they attribute not to the work itself but to its\nquality as being performed in a state of grace.\n\n75. Another saying of this kind is the declaration of Scotus that man\nby mere natural powers may love God above all things. This declaration\nis based upon the principle that the natural powers are unimpaired. He\nargues as follows: A man loves a woman, who is a creature, and he\nloves her so immoderately that he will imperil his very life for her\nsake. Similarly, a merchant loves his wares, and so eagerly that he\nwill risk death a thousand times if only he can gain something. If\ntherefore, the love of created things is so great, though they rank\nfar below God, how much more will a man love God who is the highest\ngood! Hence, God can be loved with the natural powers alone.\n\n76. A fine argument, indeed, and worthy of a Franciscan monk! For he\nshows that, though he is a great teacher, he does not know what it\nmeans to love God. Nature is so corrupt that it can no longer know God\nunless it be enlightened by the Word and Spirit of God; how then can\nit love God without the Holy Spirit? For it is true that we have no\ndesire for what we do not know. Therefore, nature cannot love God whom\nit does not know, but it loves an idol, and a dream of its own heart.\nFurthermore, it is so entirely fettered by the love of created things\nthat even after it has learned to know God from his Word, it\ndisregards him and despises his Word. Of this the people of our own\ntimes are an example.\n\n77. Such foolish and blasphemous deliverances are certain proof that\nscholastic theology has degenerated into a species of philosophy that\nhas no knowledge of God, and walks in darkness because it disregards\nhis Word. Also Aristotle and Cicero, who have the greatest influence\nwith this tribe, give broad instructions concerning moral excellences.\nThey magnify these exceedingly as social forces since they recognize\nthem as useful for private and public ends. In nowise, however, do\nthey teach that God's will and command is to be regarded far more than\nprivate or public advantage (and those who do not possess the Word are\nignorant of the will of God). Quite plainly the scholastics have\nfallen victims to philosophical fancies to such an extent as to retain\ntrue knowledge neither of themselves nor of God. This is the cause of\ntheir lapse into such disastrous errors.\n\n78. And, indeed, it is easy to fall after you have departed from the\nWord; for the glitter of civil virtues is wonderfully enticing to the\nmind. Erasmus makes of Socrates almost a perfect Christian, and\nAugustine has unbounded praise for Marcus Attilius Regulus, because he\nkept faith with his enemy. Truthfulness indeed is the most beautiful\nof all virtues, and in this case another high commendation is added in\nthat there was combined with it love of country, which in itself is a\npeculiar and most praiseworthy virtue.\n\n79. You may find men of renown not famous for truthfulness.\nThemistocles, for instance, did not have this virtue though he was a\nheroic man and did his country great service. That is the reason why\nAugustine admires Attilius, finding his reason and will to be utterly\nrighteous, that is as far as it is possible for human nature to be.\nWhere, then, is vice in this case? Where is wickedness? The hero's\nwork surely cannot be censured.\n\n80. First, Regulus knew not God, and, although his conduct was right,\nit is still to be seen whether a theologian should not censure his\nmotive. For to his zeal in behalf of his country is added the thirst\nfor glory. He evinces contempt for his life so as to achieve immortal\nglory among those to live after him. Contemplating, therefore, merely\nhis life's dream, as it were, and the outward mask, it is a most\nbeautiful deed. But before God it is shameful idolatry; because he\nclaims for himself the glory of his deed. And who would doubt that he\nhad other failings besides this thirst for glory? Attilius cannot\nclaim the great virtues of truthfulness and love of country without\ntending violently and insanely toward wickedness. For it is wicked for\nhim to rob God of the glory and to claim it for himself. But human\nreason cannot recognize this spoliation of the Deity.\n\n81. A distinction must be made between the virtues of the heathen and\nthe virtues of Christians. It is true that in both instances hearts\nare divinely prompted, but in the former ambition and love of glory\nafterward defile the divine impulse.\n\n82. If now, an orator should come forth, who would dilate upon the\nefficient cause, but disguise the ultimate and vicious one, would it\nnot be apparent to every one that with the two most potent causes, the\nformal (that which gives moral value to an act) and the ultimate one,\ndisguised, an eloquent man could extol such a wretched shadow of a\nvirtue? But a man apt in logic will readily discover the deception; he\nwill observe the absence of the formal cause, namely the right\nprinciple, there being no true knowledge of God nor of the proper\nattitude toward him. He sees, furthermore, that the final cause is\nvicious, because the true end and aim, obedience to God and love of\nneighbor, is not taken into consideration. But what kind of virtue is\nthat where nearly every cause is lacking except the natural cause,\nwhich is a passion, an impetus or impulse, by which the soul is moved\nto show loyalty to an enemy? These impulses, as I said, are found also\nin the ungodly. If exercised for the good of the country, they become\nvirtues; if for its injury, they become vices. This Aristotle sets\nforth very skillfully.\n\n83. I refer to these things that students of sacred literature may\nmake special note of this passage, which advisedly declares human\nnature to be corrupt. For those make-believe virtues, found among the\nheathen, seem to prove the contrary--that some part of nature has\nremained as it was originally. Hence there is need of careful judgment\nin order to distinguish in this matter.\n\n84. Moses adds, \"from his youth,\" because this evil is concealed\nduring the first period of life and sleeps, as it were. Our early\nchildhood so passes that reason and will are dormant and we are\ncarried along by animal impulses, which pass away like a dream. Hardly\nhave we passed our fifth year when we affect idleness, play,\nunchastity, and evil lust. But we try to escape discipline, we\nendeavor to get away from obedience, and hate all virtues, especially\nof a higher order as truth and justice. Then reason awakes out of a\ndeep sleep, as it were, and sees certain kinds of pleasure, but not\nyet the true ones, and certain kinds of evils, but not yet the most\npowerful ones, by which it is held captive.\n\n85. Where, then, the understanding has attained to maturity, not only\nthe other vices are found to have grown strong, but there are joined\nto them now sexual desire and unclean passion, gluttony, gambling,\nstrife, rape, murder, theft, and what not? And as the parents had to\napply the rod, so now the government must needs use prison and chains\nin order to restrain man's evil nature.\n\n86. And who does not know the vices of a more advanced age? They march\nalong in unbroken file--love of money, ambition, pride, perfidy, envy,\nand others. These vices are so much the more harmful as at this age we\nare more crafty in concealing and masking them. Hence, the sword of\ngovernment is not sufficient in this respect; there is need of hell\nfire for the punishment of crimes so manifold and great. Justly, then,\ndid Moses say above (ch 6) that the human heart, or the imagination of\nthe heart, is only evil each day--or at all times--and here again,\nthat it is evil from youth.\n\n87. The Latin version, it is true, makes use of a weaker term; yet it\nsays enough by stating that it is inclined toward evil, just as the\ncomic dramatist says that the minds of all men are inclined to turn\nfrom labor to lust, Ter Andr 1, 1, 51. But those who try to misuse\nthis expression for the purpose of making light of original sin, are\nshown to be in the wrong by the common experience of mankind; chiefly,\nhowever, that of the heathen, or ungodly men. For if spiritual men,\nwho surely enjoy divine help from heaven, can hardly hold their ground\nagainst vices and be kept within the bounds of discipline, what can\nany man do without this help? If divine aid contends against the\ncaptivity of the law of the flesh only with fierce struggles (Rom 7,\n22-23), how insane is it to dream that, without this divine help,\nhuman nature can withstand corruption?\n\n88. Hence reason of itself does not decide upon the right, nor does\nthe will, of itself, strive after the same, as a blind philosophy\ndeclares which does not know whence these fearful impulses to sin\narise in children, youths, and old men. Therefore it defends them,\ncalls them emotions or passions only, and does not call them natural\ncorruption.\n\n89. Furthermore, in noble men, who check and control these impulses,\nit calls them virtues; in others who give the reins to their desires,\nit calls them vices. This is nothing less than ignorance of the fact\nthat human nature is evil. The Scriptures, on the contrary agree with\nour experience and declare that the human heart is evil from youth.\nFor we learn by experience that even holy men can scarcely stand firm;\nyea that even they are often entangled by gross sins, being\noverwhelmed by such natural corruptions.\n\n90. The term _ne-urim_ denotes the age when man begins to use his\nreason; this usually occurs in the sixth year. Similarly, the term\n_ne-arim_ is used to denote boys and youths who need the guidance of\nparents and teachers up to the age of manhood. It will be profitable\nfor each of us to glance backward to that period of life and consider\nhow willingly we obeyed the commands of our parents and teachers, how\ndiligent we were in studying, how persevering we were, how often our\nparents punished our sauciness. Who can say for himself that he was\nnot much more pleased to go out for a walk, to play games, and to\ngossip, than to go to Church in obedience to his parents?\n\n91. Although these impulses can be corrected or bridled to a certain\nextent by discipline, they cannot be rooted out of the heart\naltogether, as the traces of these impulses show when we are grown.\nThere is truth in that unpolished lie: \"The angelic youth becomes\nsatanic in his older years.\" God, indeed, causes some persons to\nexperience emotions which are naturally good; but they are induced by\nsupernatural power. Thus Cyrus was impelled to restore the worship of\nGod, and to preserve the Church. But such is not the tendency of human\nnature. Where God is present with his Holy Spirit, there only, the\nimagination of the human heart gives place to the thoughts of God. God\ndwells there through the Word and the Spirit. Of such, Moses does not\nspeak here, but only of those who are without the Holy Spirit; they\nare wicked, even when at their best.\n\nV. 21e. _Neither will I again smite any more everything living, as I\nhave done._\n\n92. Moses clearly speaks of a general destruction, like that which was\ncaused by the flood. From this it does not follow that God will also\nabstain from partial destruction, and that he will take no heed of\nanybody's sin. There will also be an exception in the case of the last\nday, when not only all living things will be smitten, but all creation\nwill be destroyed by fire.\n\nV. 22. _While the earth reigneth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and\nheat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease._\n\n93. Following this text, the Jews divide the year into six parts, each\ncomprising two months, a fact which Lyra also records in this\nconnection. But it seems to me that Moses simply speaks of the promise\nthat we need not fear another general flood. During the time of the\nflood such confusion reigned that there was no season, either of\nseedtime or harvest, and by reason of the great darkness caused by the\nclouds and the rain, day could not readily be distinguished from\nnight. We know how heavy clouds obscure the light. How much greater,\nthen, was the darkness when the waters, lying under the clouds like a\nmirror, reflected the darkness of the clouds into the faces and eyes\nof the beholders!\n\n94. The meaning, accordingly, is simply that God here promises Noah\nthe imminent restoration of the earth, so that the fields might again\nbe sowed; that the desolation caused by the flood should be no more;\nthat the seasons might run their course in accordance with regular\nlaw: harvest following seedtime, winter following summer, cold\nfollowing heat in due order.\n\n95. This text should be carefully remembered in view of the common\nnotions concerning the signs before the last day. Then, some declare,\nthere will be eclipses of I know not how many days duration. They say\nfoolishly that for seven years not a single woman will bring forth a\nchild, and the like. But this text declares that neither day nor\nnight, neither summer nor winter, shall cease; therefore these natural\nchanges will go on, and there will never be an eclipse which will rob\nhuman eyes of an entire day.\n\n96. Nor is it a phrase devoid of meaning when he says, \"While the\nearth remaineth,\" for he gives us to understand that the days of this\nearth shall sometime be numbered, and other days, days of heaven,\nshall follow. As long, therefore, as the days of the earth endure, so\nlong shall the earth abide, and with it the rotation of seasons. But\nwhen these days of the earth shall pass, then all these things shall\ncease, and there shall follow days of heaven, that is, eternal days.\nThere shall be one Sabbath after the other, when we shall not be\nengrossed with bodily labor for the purpose of gaining a livelihood;\nfor we shall be as the angels of God, Mk 12, 25. Our life will be to\nknow God, to delight in God's wisdom and to enjoy the presence of God.\nThis life we attain through faith in Christ, in which the eternal\nFather may mercifully keep us, through the merit of his son, our\nSavior, Jesus Christ, by the ruling and guidance of the Holy Spirit.\nAmen. Amen.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\n\nI. GOD BLESSES NOAH AND THE RACE.\n\n   A. MARRIAGE STATE BLESSED 1-5.\n\n      1. Why this blessing necessary 1.\n\n      2. Wedlock established twice 2.\n\n      3. Evidence of God's love to the human race 3.\n\n      4. Did this blessing pertain to Noah 4.\n\n       * Bearing of children a special blessing of God unknown to the\n         heathen 5.\n\n\nI. GOD BLESSES NOAH AND THE RACE.\n\nA. Marriage State Blessed.\n\nV. 1. _And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be\nfruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth._\n\n1. This consolation was indeed needed after the whole human race had\nbeen destroyed by the flood and only eight souls were saved. Now Noah\nknew that God was truly merciful, since, not content with that first\nblessing which he had bestowed upon mankind in the creation of the\nworld, he added this new blessing, that Noah might have no misgivings\nwhatever in regard to the future increase of his posterity. And the\njoy brought by this promise was all the greater for God's emphatic\npromise on a previous occasion, that he would never again visit\nmankind with such severe punishment.\n\n2. In the first place, then, this chapter renews the establishment of\nmarriage. God, by his Word and command, joins male and female for the\npurpose of repopulating the earth. Inasmuch as God had been roused to\nanger before the flood by the sin of lust, it was now needful, by\nreason of that fearful proof of wrath, to show that God does not abhor\nthe lawful cohabitation of man and woman, but that it is his will to\nincrease mankind by this means.\n\n3. The fact that God had expressed it as his will that the human race\nshould be propagated through a union between man and woman, an end\nwhich could have been attained from stones had he failed to approve\nsuch union as lawful, after the manner of Deucalion of whom the poets\nfable--this fact tended to furnish Noah sure evidence that God loved\nman, and desired his welfare, and that now all anger was at an end.\nTherefore this passage illustrates the dignity of wedlock, which is\nthe foundation of the family and State, and the nursery of the Church.\n\n4. The objection is here raised that Noah had already reached an age\nno longer fit for procreation in view of the fact that the Bible\nrecords no instance of children being born to him afterwards, and\ntherefore this promise was valueless. To this I reply that this\npromise was given, not to Noah alone, but also to his sons, even to\nall mankind; so that the expectation of offspring was entertained even\nby the grandsire Noah.\n\n5. This passage, furthermore, tends to convince us that children are a\ngift of God and a result of his blessing, as is shown in Psalms 127,\n3. The heathen, who know nothing of God's Word, ascribe the increase\nof mankind partly to nature and partly to chance, in view of the fact\nthat those who are evidently most fit for procreation often remain\nwithout offspring. Hence, they do not thank God for this gift, nor do\nthey receive their children as a blessing from God.\n\n\nB. MAN'S USE OF AND DOMINION OVER ANIMALS 6-31.\n\n   1. Whether animals feared man before the flood 6-7.\n\n   2. Relation between this use and dominion and of what they give\n      evidence 7-9.\n\n   3. This use and rule a special blessing of God 8-10.\n\n    * Whether the custom of slaying cattle dates from the beginning of\n      the world 10-11.\n\n   4. Whether Adam knew of this use and dominion 12.\n\n   5. This use of animals is evidence of God's love to the human race\n      13.\n\n    * God's blessings greater than his wrath 13.\n\n   6. Whether this use extends to unclean animals 14-15.\n\n   7. How man's fear of animals and their wildness and cruelty can\n      exist with this dominion 16-18.\n\n    * New sins accompanied by new punishments 19-20.\n\n    * Sodom before and after its destruction 21.\n\n    * God's punishment of Wittenberg, Bruges and Venice, and the cause\n      22-23.\n\n    * God's command not to eat blood.\n\n      a. Why given 24.\n\n      b. How to treat this text, which contains God's Word 25.\n\n       * Meaning of Nephesch and Basar 26.\n\n      c. Right understanding of the command 27.\n\n    * The words, \"Surely your blood will I require\" etc.\n\n      a. Lyra's and the Rabbis' explanation, 28-29.\n\n      b. Their true meaning 30-31.\n\n\nB. MAN'S USE OF AND DOMINION OVER ANIMALS.\n\nV. 2. _And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every\nbeast of the earth, and upon every bird of the heavens; with all\nwherewith the ground teemeth, and all the fishes of the sea, into your\nhand are they delivered._\n\n6. It would seem that the dominion of man is here increased for his\ngreater consolation. For though after the creation man was given\ndominion over all animals, yet we do not read that the beasts feared\nand fled from him according to the description of Moses. The reason is\nfound in the fact that heretofore the animals were not destined to be\nman's food; man had been a kind ruler of the beasts, not a killer and\neater.\n\n7. Here, however, they are subjected to man as a tyrant with unlimited\npower of life and death. Since the servitude of the beasts is\nincreased and the power of man over them extended, the animals are\nharassed by terror and fear of man. We see even the tamed ones do not\nreadily allow themselves to be handled; they feel the mastery of man\nand have a constant instinct of danger. I do not believe that such was\nthe case before this Word of God was spoken. Before that time, men\nused suitable animals for their work and for sacrifice, but not for\nfood. This increase of power also is a token of God's favor; he\nconfers a privilege unknown to the patriarchs, as a token of his love\nand interest in man.\n\n8. We must not undervalue this boon authority over the beasts; for it\nis a special gift of God, of which the heathen knew nothing, because\nthey lack the Word. We are the ones who derive the greatest benefit\nfrom this gift. When this revelation was given to Noah, and such a\nprivilege granted, there was really no need of it. A few men possessed\nthe whole earth, so that its fruits were to be enjoyed by them in\nabundance and it was not necessary to add the flesh of beasts. But we\ntoday could not live altogether on the fruits of the earth; it is a\ngreat boon to us that we are permitted to eat the flesh of beasts, of\nbirds and of fish.\n\n9. This word, therefore, establishes the butcher's trade; it puts\nhares, chickens, and geese upon the spit and fills our tables with all\nmanner of dishes. Necessity makes men industrious. Not only do they\nhunt the animals of the forests, but carefully fatten others at home\nfor food. God in this passage establishes himself a slaughterer, as it\nwere, for by his word he consigns to slaughter and death those animals\nwhich are suitable for food, as recompence to God-fearing Noah for his\ntribulations during the flood. For that reason would God feed Noah\nwith lavish hand.\n\n10. We must not think that this privilege was not divinely ordered.\nThe heathen believe that this custom of slaughtering animals always\nexisted. Such things are established, or rather permitted, by the Word\nof God; beasts could not have been killed without sin if God had not\nexpressly permitted it by his Word. It is a great liberty for man to\nslaughter all kinds of beasts fit for food and eat them without\nwrong-doing. Had but a single kind of beasts been reserved for food,\nit would still have been a great boon; how much more should we value\nthis lavish blessing, that all beasts suitable for sustenance are\ngiven into the power of man!\n\n11. The godless and the gentiles do not recognize this; nor do the\nphilosophers. They believe that this privilege has always been man's.\nAs for us, however, we should have full light on the subject, in order\nthat our consciences may enjoy both rest and freedom in the use of\nwhat God has created and allowed, there being absolutely no law\nagainst such food. There can be no sin in their use, though the wicked\npriests have criminally burdened the Church on this subject.\n\n12. In this passage, then, the power of man is increased and the brute\nbeasts are committed to him, even unto death. They fear man and flee\nhim under the new order, running counter to the experience of the\npast. Adam would have been averse to killing even a small bird for\nfood. But now, since the promulgation of this Word, we know that, as a\nspecial blessing, God has furnished our kitchens with all kinds of\nmeat. Later on he will also take care of the cellar by showing man how\nto cultivate the vine.\n\n13. These are sure proofs that God no longer hates man, but favors\nhim. This story bears witness that, as God's wrath, once aroused, is\nunbearable, so his mercy is likewise endless and without measure when\nit again begins to glow. But his mercy is the more abundantly\nexercised because it is the very nature of God, while wrath really is\nforeign to God; he takes it upon himself contrary to his nature and\nforced thereto by the wickedness of men.\n\nV. 3. _Every moving thing that liveth shall be food for you; as the\ngreen herb have I given you all._\n\n14. Here a question arises. In chapter 7, 2, Moses showed the\ndifference between clean and unclean beasts; here, however, he speaks\nof all animals, without any distinction. Did God, then, permit man to\nuse also the unclean animals for food?\n\n15. The statement as such is general: every moving thing that moveth\nupon the earth. There are some who believe that men at the time of\nNoah made no distinction between clean and unclean animals as regards\nfood. But I hold a different opinion. For since such difference had\nbeen established before that time and was carefully observed in the\nLaw afterward, I believe that men used only clean beasts for food;\nthat is, such as were offered in sacrifice. Hence the general\ndeclaration must be understood with a modification: Everything that\nliveth and moveth, of clean beasts, is to be food for you. For, in\ngeneral, human nature loathes serpents, wolves, ravens, mice, and\ndormice, though certain tribes may be found who relish even these\nanimals. The fear and terror of man is upon all beasts of the earth,\nbecause he is allowed to kill them; but it does not follow that man\nuses them all for food. It is probable that Noah ate clean beasts\nonly; and only clean beasts, he knew, were acceptable to Jehovah in\nsacrifice.\n\n16. But there is another thing hard to understand. How can it be that\nthe terror and fear of man is upon all animals when wolves, lions,\nbears, wild boars, and tigers devour men, and are rather a terror to\nmen? So with the entire family of serpents, from which we flee at a\nglance. What shall we say here? Is the Word of God untruthful? I\nanswer: Though we, being aware of our danger, flee from such beasts\nand are afraid of them, yet they, likewise, fear man. Even the\nfiercest beasts become terrified and flee at the first sight of man;\nbut when they become enraged they overcome man by reason of their\nbodily strength.\n\n17. But, you say, why do they fear when they are stronger? I answer:\nThey know that man is endowed with reason, which is more powerful than\nany beast. The skill of man masters even elephants, lions, and tigers.\nWhatever man's bodily strength is unable to do, that he accomplishes\nby his skill and his reasoning powers. How would it otherwise be\npossible for a boy of ten years to control an entire herd of cattle?\nOr for man to guide a horse, an animal of singular fierceness and\nstrength, to go in whatever direction he desires, now urging it\nforward and then compelling it to a more moderate gait? All these\nthings are done by man's skill, not by his strength. Hence, we do not\nlack clear proofs that the fear of man remains upon the beasts, which\nharm man when they become enraged, and for that reason are feared by\nhim.\n\n18. I have no doubt, however, that at the time of Noah and the\npatriarchs immediately succeeding, this fear in the beasts was\ngreater, because righteousness then flourished and there was less of\nsin. Afterward, when holiness of life declined and sin increased, man\nbegan to lose this blessing, and the wild beasts became a punishment\nfor sin. Moses threatens in Deut 32, 34 that God would send upon them\nthe teeth of beasts. How fearful, also, was the plague of the fiery\nserpents in the desert! Num 21, 6. Bears tore to pieces the lads who\nmocked the prophet, 2 Kings 2, 24. Why did the beasts here lose their\nfear of man? Why did they rage against man? Was not sin the cause?\n\n19. Therefore, as stated before, when new sins arise, new punishments\nwill also arise. So we see that in our day disease and misfortunes\nheretofore rare become general, like the English sweat, the locusts\nwhich in the year 1542 devastated great stretches of land in Poland\nand Silesia, and other examples.\n\n20. In like manner, God promised seasons of seeding and of harvest, of\nheat and cold, and yet he does not so close his eyes to our sins that\nthe seasons, both of seeding and of harvest, are not subject to\nclimatic disturbances, such as the fearful drouth of the year 1504 and\nthe almost unending rains of the two following years. Considering the\nwickedness of our age, why should we wonder that the blessing gives\nplace to a curse, so that the beasts, which would fear us were we not\nwicked, are now a terror unto us and harmful?\n\n21. The country of the Sodomites was like a paradise; but by reason of\nsin it was turned into a sea of asphalt; and those who have seen that\ncountry tell us that most beautiful apples grow there, but when they\nare cut open they are found to be filled with ashes and offensive\nodor. The reason for this is that the Sodomites did not acknowledge\nthe gifts of God who blessed them, but misused them according to their\nown will. Furthermore, they blasphemed God, and persecuted his saints,\nbeing haughty by reason of those good gifts. Therefore the blessing\nwas taken away, and everything became curse-ridden. This is the true\nexplanation of the fact that, though there are signs of terror in wild\nanimals, we are nevertheless afraid of them, and they inflict harm\nupon us.\n\n22. I am quite certain that very wicked men once lived in this country\nof ours; how could we otherwise explain the parched soil and barren\nsands? Names also show that the Jews at one time peopled this country.\nWhere bad people live, there the land gradually grows bad by the curse\nof God.\n\n23. The city of Bruges in Flanders used to be a renowned port; but\nfrom the time when they held King Maximilian captive, the sea\nretreated, and the port ceased to exist. Of Venice they say the same\nthing today. Nor is this very astonishing, since to the numberless\nsins of rulers of the State, defence of idol worship and persecution\nof the Gospel was added.\n\nV. 4. _But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof,\nshall ye not eat._\n\n24. What we have heard so far, referred to domestic matters; now God\nadds a commandment pertaining to civil government. Since it was no\nmore a sin to kill an ox or a sheep for food than it was to pluck a\nflower or an herb, growing in the field, there was some danger that\nmen might misuse this God-given power over the beasts and go beyond it\neven to the shedding of human blood. Hence, he now adds a new law,\nthat human blood must not be shed, and at the same time he curtails\nthe liberty of eating flesh; he forbids them to eat flesh which has\nnot first been drained of blood.\n\n25. The Hebrew text presents many difficulties, and, for this reason,\ninterpreters are at variance. It is needless to recite all renderings\nof this verse. I steadily follow the rule that the words must explain\nthe things, not the things the words. Hence, I spend no time upon the\nideas of those who explain the words according to their own\ninclinations, making them serve the preconceived notions which they\nbring to their literature.\n\n26. Let us first look at the meaning of the words. _Rephesh_ properly\ndenotes a body with a soul, or a living animal, such as the ox, the\nsheep, man, etc. It denotes not merely the body, but a living body, as\nwhen Christ says: I lay down my life for the sheep, Jn 10, 15. Here\nthe word \"life\" means nothing else than the life animating the body.\n_Basar_, however, means flesh, which is a part of the material\nelement, and yet has its breath and its energy, not from the body, but\nfrom the soul. For the flesh or the body, of itself and without the\nsoul, is an inanimate thing, like a log or a stone; but when it is\nfilled with the breath of the soul, then its fluids and all bodily\nforces assume activity.\n\n27. God here forbids the eating of a body which still contains the\nstirring, moving, living soul, as the hawk devours chickens, and the\nwolf sheep, without killing them, but while still alive. Such cruelty\nis here forbidden by Jehovah, who sets bounds to the privilege of\nslaughtering, lest it be done in so beastly a manner that living\nbodies or portions thereof be devoured. The lawful manner of\nslaughtering is to be observed, such as was followed at the altar and\nin religious rites, where the beast, having been slain without cruelty\nand duly cleansed from blood, was finally offered to God. I hold that\nthe simple and true meaning of the text, which is also given by some\nJewish teachers, is that we must not eat raw flesh and members still\npalpitating, as did the Laestrygones and the Cyclopes.\n\nV. 5. _And surely your blood, the blood of your lives, will I require;\nat the hand of every beast will I require it: and at the hand of man,\neven at the hand of every man's brother, will I require the life of\nman._\n\n28. Here the Hebrew text is even more difficult than in the foregoing\nverse. Lyra, quoting the Rabbins, finds four kinds of manslaughter\nindicated here; he divides the statement into two parts, and finds a\ntwofold explanation for each. He understands the first part to mean\nthose who lay murderous hands upon themselves. If this is correct,\nthen this passage is a witness for immortality; for how could God call\nto account a person who, being dead, no longer exists? Hence,\npunishment of sin after this life could be indicated here. But it\nseems to me that philology militates against this explanation. Though\nI do not lay claim to a perfect knowledge of the Hebrew tongue, yet I\nam certain that such a meaning is not here apparent.\n\n29. The second kind of murder, he illustrates by the custom of\nthrowing human beings before wild beasts, as was done aforetime in the\ntheatres, truly a barbaric spectacle, repulsive to all human feeling;\nthe third kind is murder at the instigation of another; the fourth,\nmurder of a relative.\n\n30. This distinction would be quite satisfactory if it could be proven\nfrom the words of the text; but it is a Jewish invention born of their\nhatred of the Roman laws. It is much simpler to understand this\npassage as a general prohibition of murder, according to the fifth\ncommandment, which says, \"Thou shalt not kill.\" God desires not even a\nbeast to be killed, except for a sacred purpose or for the benefit of\nman. Much less does he permit taking the life of man, except by divine\nauthority, as will be explained hereafter.\n\n31. In the first place, then, wilful and wicked slaughter is\nforbidden. Culture is opposed to the wanton killing of animals and to\nthe eating of raw meat. In the second place God forbids homicide of\nany description; for if God will require the blood of a murdered human\nbeing from the beast that slew him, how much more relentlessly will he\nrequire it at the hand of man? Thus this passage voices the sentiment\nof the fifth commandment, that no one shall spill human blood.\n\n\nII. LAW CONCERNING MAN'S SLAUGHTER; GOD'S COVENANT WITH NOAH; THE\n    RAINBOW 32-68.\n\n   A. LAW CONCERNING SLAYERS OF LIFE.\n\n      1. If it existed before the flood 32.\n\n      2. Relation of the flood to this law 33.\n\n      3. This the source of all human laws 34-36.\n\n      4. When and how this law can be executed 35.\n\n       * Why is it well to observe that government was instituted by\n         God 36-37.\n\n      5. In what respect is it a great blessing from God 37.\n\n      6. How is government a proof of God's love to man 38.\n\n      7. Why God gave this command, and why he punishes man-slaughter\n         39.\n\n      8. Hereby a new police and a new order are instituted 40.\n\n       * Verdict of philosophy and of reason on civil authority 41.\n\n       * Verdict of God's Word 42.\n\n      9. This law applies to all men 43.\n\n     10. Why God is such an enemy of man-slaughter, and so earnestly\n         forbids it 44-45.\n\n     11. The conclusion that God loves life 46.\n\n\nII. THE LAW AGAINST TAKING LIFE; GOD'S COVENANT WITH NOAH; THE\nRAINBOW.\n\nA. The Law Against Taking Life.\n\nV. 6a. _Who sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed._\n\n32. Here the carelessness of the Latin translator deserves reproof;\nfor he omitted the very necessary expression \"by man.\" The difference\nbetween the time before and that after the flood is thus brought out.\nWhen Cain had murdered his brother Abel, God revered human blood so\nhighly that he threatened to visit sevenfold punishment upon anyone\nwho should kill Cain. He would not have the slayer of man put to death\neven by due process of law; and though Adam punished the sin of his\nson severely by casting him out, he did not dare to pronounce sentence\nof death upon him.\n\n33. But here Jehovah establishes a new law, requiring the murderer be\nput to death by man--a law unprecedented, because heretofore God had\nreserved all judgment to himself. When he saw that the world was\ngrowing worse and worse, he finally enforced punishment against a\nwicked world by the flood. Here, however, God bestows a share of his\nauthority upon man, giving him the power of life and death, that thus\nhe may be the avenger of bloodshed. Whosoever takes man's life without\ndue warrant, him God subjects not only to his own judgment, but also\nto the sword of man. Though God may use man as his instrument in\npunishing, he is himself still the avenger. Were it not for the divine\ncommand, then, it would be no more lawful now to slay a murderer than\nit was before the flood.\n\n34. This is the source from which spring all civil laws and the laws\nof nations. If God grants man the power of life and death, he\ncertainly also grants power in matters of lesser importance--power\nover property, family, wife, children, servants and fields. God wills\nthat these things shall be under the control of certain men, who are\nto punish the guilty.\n\n35. We must remember well that between the power of God and of men\nthere is this difference: God has the power to slay us when the world\ncannot even accuse us--when before it we are innocent. Sin is born\nwith us; we are all guilty before God. Men have no authority to slay\nexcept where guilt is apparent and crime is proven. Hence courts have\nbeen established and a definite method of proceeding instituted for\nthe purpose of investigating and proving the crime before the sentence\nof death is passed.\n\n36. Heed, then, this passage. It establishes civil authority as God's\ninstitution, with power, not only of life and death, but jurisdiction\nin matters where life is not involved. Magistrates are to punish the\ndisobedience of children, theft, adultery, perjury--all sins which are\nforbidden in the second table. He who grants jurisdiction over the\nlife of man, at the same time grants judgment over lesser matters.\n\n37. The importance of this text and its claim to attention consists in\nthe fact that it records the establishment of civil authority by God\nwith the sword as insignia of power, for the purpose that license may\nbe curbed and anger and other sins inhibited from growing beyond all\nbounds. Had God not granted this power to man, what kind of lives, I\nask you, would we lead? He foresaw that wickedness would ever\nflourish, and established this external remedy to prevent the\nindefinite spread of license. By this safeguard God protects life and\nproperty as by a fence and a wall.\n\n38. We find here no less a proof of God's great love toward man than\nhis promise that the flood shall never again rage, and his promise\nthat flesh may be eaten for the sustenance of human life.\n\nV. 6b. _For in the image of God made he man._\n\n39. This is the powerful reason why God does not wish men to be killed\nby private arbitrament. Man is a noble creature, who, unlike other\nliving beings, has been fashioned according to the image of God. While\nit is true that he has lost this image through sin, as we have seen\nabove, it is capable of being restored through the Word and the Holy\nSpirit. This image God desires us to revere in each other; he forbids\nus to shed blood by the exercise of sheer force. But he who refuses to\nrespect the image of God in man, and gives way to anger and\nprovocation, those worst counselors of all, as some one has called\nthem, his life is surrendered to civil authority in forfeit, by God,\nin that God commands that also his blood shall be shed.\n\n40. Thus the subject under consideration teaches the establishment of\ncivil authority in the world, which did not exist before the flood.\nCain and Lamech--and this is a case in point--were not slain, though\nthe holy patriarchs were the arbiters, judges, of public action. But\nin this Scripture they who have the sword, are commanded to use it\nagainst those who have shed blood.\n\n41. Thus the problem is here solved that worried Plato and all sages.\nThey concluded that it is impossible to administer government without\ninjustice, because all men occupy the same level of dignity and\nposition. Why did Caesar rule the world? Why did others obey him,\nsince he was only human like themselves--no better, no stronger and\nliable to die as soon as themselves? He was subject to the same\nconditions as all men. Hence it seems to be tyranny for him, who was\nquite similar to other men, to usurp rulership among men. If he is\nlike other men it is the highest wrong and injustice to ignore this\nsimilarity, and to foist his rule by force upon others.\n\n42. This is the conclusion at which reason arrives and it cannot\nentertain any view to the contrary. But we, having the Word, can see\nthat we must oppose to such reasoning the command of God, the author\nof this order of things. Accordingly, it is for us to render obedience\nto the divine order and to endure it, so that to our other sins this\nmay not be added, that we are disobedient to the will of God at the\nvery point where we derive benefit in so many ways.\n\n43. To sum up, this passage permits the slaughter of animals for\nreligious and personal use, but it emphatically forbids the taking of\nman's life, because man is made in the image of God. Those who violate\nhis command he gives into the hands of the authorities to be slain.\n\nV. 7. _And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly\nin the earth, and multiply therein._\n\n44. The slaughter of animals having been granted, not only for\nsacrifice, but also for food, and the killing of human beings having\nbeen forbidden, we are given the reason why God regards the shedding\nof human blood with so much aversion. He desires mankind to multiply\non the earth; but the slaughter of men lays the earth waste and\nproduces a wilderness. We see this in case of war. God did not create\nthe earth without purpose. He intended it to be inhabited, Is 45, 18.\nHe makes it fruitful by rain and sunshine for man's benefit. Therefore\nhe is displeased with those who remove from the earth its inhabitants.\nHis will is life, and not death, Ps 30, 5.\n\n45. These and similar sayings of the prophets are based upon promises\nlike we find here, that God commands man to multiply. Plainly he is\nmore inclined to give life and to do good than to be angry and to\nkill. If it were otherwise, why should he forbid the taking of human\nlife? Why should pestilence be of rare occurrence? Pestilence and\ngeneral epidemics occur scarce once in ten years. Men are born,\nanimals grow, and crops without end are growing continually.\n\n46. All these facts go to show that God loves, not death, but life. He\ncreated man, not that he should die, but that he should live; \"but\nthrough the envy of the devil did death enter the world,\" Sap 2, 24.\nBut even after the fall, the blessings which remain are so guarded as\nto render the conclusion inevitable that God loves life rather than\ndeath.\n\nIt is well for us to ponder these matters very often; thus, as Solomon\nhas truly said, Jehovah shall be to us a fountain of blessings. Prov\n18, 22.\n\n\nB. GOD'S COVENANT WITH NOAH 47-55.\n\n * Why the same thing is repeated 47.\n\n   1. Whether this covenant applies to man alone or also to the\n      animals 48.\n\n   2. Whether this covenant applies to the men and animals of that day\n      only 49.\n\n    * God always connected signs with his promises 49.\n\n    * The significance of these to our first parents 49-50.\n\n   3. Nature of this covenant 51.\n\n    * Characteristics of a humble heart and God's dealings with it\n      52-54.\n\n   4. This covenant given for man's comfort and as a proof of God's\n      love 53-54.\n\n   5. It is a comfort to us at present 55.\n\n\nB. GOD'S COVENANT WITH NOAH.\n\nVs. 8-11. _And God spake unto Noah, and his sons with him, saying, And\nI, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after\nyou; and with every living creature that is with you, the birds, the\ncattle, and every beast of the earth with you; of all that go out of\nthe ark, even every beast of the earth. And I will establish my\ncovenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the\nwaters of the flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to\ndestroy the earth._\n\n47. Previously we at various times explained this massing of words.\nWhen the Holy Spirit is prolix, there is a cause for it. Let us\ntherefore, consider what fear, dread and peril Noah and his family\nendured and it will be easily understood why it was necessary for God\nto say and to emphasize the same things with such frequency.\n\n48. When, in addition it is remembered that the covenant here spoken\nof does not pertain to man alone but embraces every living soul, we\nrecognize that the promise does not relate to the seed but merely, to\nthis bodily life, enjoyed by man in common with the beasts; this God\nwill not destroy by another flood.\n\nVs. 12-16. _And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I\nmake between me and you and every living creature that is with you,\nfor the perpetual generations: I do set my bow in the cloud, and it\nshall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth. And it\nshall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow\nshall be seen in the cloud, and I will remember my covenant, which is\nbetween me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the\nwaters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh. And the bow\nshall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember\nthe everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all\nflesh that is upon the earth._\n\n49. The term \"perpetual generations\" deserves particular notice; it\nembraces not only man and beast at that time, but all their offspring\ndown to the end of the world. We learn another thing from this\npassage. God usually confirms his promise with an outward sign. In the\nthird chapter above we read of the coats of skin with which he covered\nthe nakedness of the first parents as token of his protection and\nguardianship.\n\n50. Some offer the following apt allegorical explanation. As the skin\nof the dead sheep keeps warm our body, so Christ, having died, keeps\nus warm by his Spirit, and will, on the last day, raise us up and give\nus life. Others say that the skins were selected as a sign of\nmortality. But this seems unnecessary; all our life reminds us of\nmortality. More expedient was a token of life, suggesting the blessing\nand favor of God. The office of such tokens is to console, not to\nterrify. So was the sign of the rainbow given, a supplement of the\npromise.\n\n51. In chapter 8, 21-22, God says in his heart that he repents of that\nterrible punishment, and promises that he will not repeat it, because\nthe imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth. If he should\ndesire to so punish evil, there would be need of a flood every day.\nHere he again sends forth his Word to mankind, through an angel, or\npossibly through the mouth of Noah, promising that no flood shall\nhereafter come upon the earth. That the promise is repeated so often\nis evidence of God's endeavor, in loving kindness, to remove man's\nfear of punishment and to set before him a hope of blessing and utmost\nmercy.\n\n52. Such consolation Noah and his loved ones required. One who has\nbeen humbled by God cannot forget the wound and the pain. Chastening\nis longer remembered than blessing. Boys are a case in point. The\ntender mother, having chastised her child with the rod, endeavors to\ncalm him with toys and other allurements, yet the memory of pain\nlingers, and the child cannot restrain frequent sighs and bitter sobs.\nHow much more difficult for the conscience to accept solace after\nhaving felt the wrath of God and the fear of death! So firmly fixed\nare these in the mind that the soul trembles and fears in spite of\ngifts and consolations offered.\n\n53. So God here shows his good will in manifold ways and feels\nsingular joy in pouring forth mercy. He is like a mother who pets and\ncaresses her boy until he at last begins to forget his tears and to\nsmile into his mother's face.\n\n54. Hence figures are employed, and words are massed and the subject\nis presented in a clearer and clearer light, in order to adapt the\nconsolation to the needs of the wretched people who, for an entire\nyear, had been witnesses of the immeasurable wrath of God. They could\nnot be delivered from fear and terror by an occasional word. There was\nneed of repeating the promise with much exposition to dry their tears\nand to soften their grief. For, though they were saints, they were\nflesh, even as we are.\n\n55. Likewise we in our day need this consolation. At all times when\nthe elements rage, we may be secure in the thought that the fountains\nof heaven and the wells of the deep are closed up by the word of God.\nThe rainbow shows itself to this day for the purpose of symbolizing\nthat, henceforth, there shall never be another general flood. And this\npromise requires, on our part, the faith that we trust God, in his\nmercy, will never bring another great flood upon us.\n\n\nC. THE RAINBOW.\n\n   1. Can it be assigned to natural causes 56-58.\n\n    * What to think of the fiery meteors 59-60.\n\n   2. Can it be caused by the position of the clouds 60.\n\n   3. The rainbow witnesses of God's wrath and of his goodness 61.\n\n   4. Did it exist before the flood?\n\n      a. Opinion of those believing it did, and their reasons 62.\n\n      b. Luther's opinion that it was a new creation 63.\n\n      c. Solomon's words, \"There is nothing new\", do not apply here\n         64.\n\n   5. Rainbow to be viewed as a new creature and as God's sign-board\n      65.\n\n   6. Colors of the rainbow.\n\n      a. What are they and their number 66.\n\n      b. What do they signify 67.\n\n   7. To what end should the rainbow serve us 68.\n\n\nC. THE RAINBOW.\n\n56. They further dispute whether the natural causes in the rainbow\nsignify this. It is well known that philosophers, especially Aristotle\nin his book on Meteors, use all sorts of arguments on the color of the\nrainbow, on the character of the clouds where it is produced, and on\nits curvature. Quite appropriately the resemblance is noted between a\nmirror, which reflects an image, and the moist and arched cloud, which\ncatches the rays of the sun, and by reflection produces the rainbow.\nReason sees in such phenomena what appears to it most probable, but it\ndoes not discover the truth everywhere. That is not in the power of\nthe creature but of the Creator alone. As for me, I have never given\nto any book less credence than to that on meteors, the basic principle\nof which is the assumption that natural causes explain everything.\n\n57. Some declare the rainbow to be a forerunner of a storm lasting\nthree days, which I am ready to admit, but this much is certain, that\nit signifies that there will never be another flood. However, it\nderives this signification, not from any natural causes but only from\nthe Word of God. Its meaning is such, only because God orders and\ndeclares it to be so through his Word. Circumcision was a token that\nthe seed of Abraham were the people of God; yet circumcision did not\nhave this meaning in itself, but only through the Word which was\njoined with it. Again, the clothing of skin signified life and safety,\nnot because they contained this guarantee by nature, but because God\nhad promised it. So, the significance of the rainbow that the flood\nshall not return, is not based upon the Word of God.\n\n58. I do not altogether ignore theories along the lines of natural law\nconcerning these matters; but since they are not substantiated, I\nplace little trust in them. The reasoning of Aristotle regarding the\nhumid and hollow cloud as the cause of the rainbow is not reliable,\nsuch clouds may exist without producing a rainbow. Again, according to\nthe greater or lesser density of the medium, the bow may appear wider\nor narrower. I have seen here at Wittenberg a circular rainbow,\nforming a complete ring, not simply an arch terminating on the surface\nof the earth, as rainbows generally appear. Why, then, do rainbows\nassume different forms at different times? A philosopher, I suppose,\nwill think of some reason; for he will consider it a disgrace not to\nbe able to assign a reason for all things. But indeed, he will never\npersuade me to believe that he speaks the truth.\n\n59. The only consistent and incontrovertable view to take is that all\nthese phenomena are either works of God or of evil spirits. I have no\ndoubt that the dancing goats (stars), the flying serpents, fiery\nlances, and the like, are produced by evil spirits, which thus gambol\nin the air, either to terrify or to deceive men. The flames which\nappear on board of ships were thought by the heathen to be Castor and\nPollux. Sometimes the image of a moon appears above the ears of\nhorses. It is certain that all these things are due to the antics of\nevil spirits in the air, though Aristotle believes them to be luminous\nair, just as he also declares that a comet is shining vapor.\n\n60. To me it appears that we shall move with greater security and\ncertainty, when, arguing from cause to effect, we conclude that the\ncomet blazes, when it pleases God, as a sign of calamity, just as the\nrainbow glows, when it pleases God as a sign of mercy. Who can compute\nall the causes which produce the appearance of the rainbow in such\ndiversity of beautiful color, and in the form of an arch of perfect\ncurvature? The arrangement of the clouds alone surely does not produce\nthis perfection. Hence it is by the will and the promise of God, and\nfulfilling his pleasure, that the rainbow is a sign to man and beast\nthat there will nevermore at any time be a flood.\n\n61. In recognition of this token we ought to give thanks to God. As\noften as the rainbow appears, it proclaims to the world with a loud\nvoice, as it were, the story of the wrath of God, which once destroyed\nthe world by a flood. And it proclaims solace for us, so that we may\nconclude that God is propitious to us henceforth and will never again\nvisit upon us so fearful a punishment. It teaches both the love and\nthe fear of God, the highest virtues, of which philosophy knows\nnothing. Philosophy only disputes about material and formal causes. It\ndoes not know the final cause of this most beautiful creation. But\ntheology does explain it.\n\n62. In this connection also the question has received much attention\nwhether the rainbow existed from the beginning. And in this\ncontroversy much force has been displayed. Since it is written above\n(ch 2, 23) that God created heaven and earth in six days, and then\nrested from all his works, some conclude that the rainbow existed from\nthe beginning. Otherwise it would follow that creation extended beyond\nthose six days. What, however, occurred in Noah's time is this, that\nthe rainbow, created in the beginning, was selected by God and made,\nthrough a new word, a fixed symbol, having existed hitherto without\nspecial significance. To support this view, they even quote the word\nof Solomon that \"there is no new thing under the sun,\" Ec 1, 9. On\nthis they base their argument that after those six days no new thing\nhas been created.\n\n63. My opinion is quite the contrary--that the rainbow never had\nexisted before; it was then and there created. Thus, the coats of skin\nwith which God clothed the first parents certainly were not created in\nthose six days, but after man's fall; hence, they were a new creation.\nThe statement that God rested, must not be interpreted to mean that he\ncreated nothing thereafter; for Christ says, \"My Father worketh even\nuntil now, and I work,\" Jn 5, 17.\n\n64. Solomon's statement that there is no new thing under the sun, has\ngiven much trouble to the learned. But is it not apparent that it\nrefers not to the works of God, but to original sin, meaning that the\nsame reasoning powers Adam had after the fall are found in man\ntoday--the same debates concerning morals, vices, virtues, the nurture\nof the body and the transaction of business? As the comic poet has it,\nspeaking of another matter, \"Nothing is said that has not been said\nbefore.\" Really, within the sphere of man's activity and effort there\nis nothing new; the same words, thoughts, designs, the same emotions,\ngriefs, affections and incidents exist now which always existed.\nConsequently it is quite inappropriate, in consequence to apply this\naphorism to God and his works.\n\n65. Therefore, I believe that the rainbow was a new creation, not seen\nin the world before that time. It was established to remind the world\nof the bygone wrath, traces of which are still seen in the rainbow,\nand to give assurance of the mercy of God. It is a record, or picture\nin which both the bygone wrath and the present mercy are revealed.\n\n66. There is also a difference of opinion as to the colors of the\nrainbow. Some say there are four colors: the fiery, the bright yellow,\nthe green and the color of water, or blue. But I think there are only\ntwo, those of fire and water. The fiery color is above, unless the\nrainbow is seen reversed; then, as in a mirror, that which is above is\nseen below. Where the hues of fire and water meet, or blend, yellow\nresults.\n\n67. The colors have been thus arranged by God for a definite purpose.\nThe blue should be a reminder of bygone wrath; the fiery color, a\npicture to us of the future judgment. While the interior or blue\nportion is restricted, the outer and fiery color is without bounds.\nThus, the first world perished by the flood, but an end was set to\nGod's wrath. A remnant was preserved and a second world arose, but\nbounds are set to it. When God shall destroy the world by fire, this\nbodily life will never be restored. The wicked will suffer the\neverlasting punishment of death in the fire, while the saints will be\nraised up unto a new and everlasting life, which, though in the body,\nshall not be of the body, but of the spirit.\n\n68. Let this sign teach us to fear God and to trust in him. So may we\nescape the punishment of fire, even as we have escaped the punishment\nof the flood. It will be more practical to think of these things than\nto consider those philosophical arguments concerning the material\ncause.\n\n\nIII. ALLEGORIES 69-132.\n\n   A. ALLEGORIES IN GENERAL 69-81.\n\n      1. Luther at first given to allegories 69-70.\n\n      2. How and why monks and Anabaptists esteem them so highly 71.\n\n      3. How we should regard them 72.\n\n      4. Are they to be entirely rejected 73.\n\n      5. Some are, and others not 74-76.\n\n      6. How to regard Origen's, Augustine's and Jerome's allegories\n         77-78.\n\n      7. Pope's allegories of the sun, moon and ark 79-80.\n\n      8. What to think of the doctrine of these allegories 81.\n\n\nIII. CONCERNING ALLEGORIES.\n\nA. Allegories in General.\n\n69. At last we have finished the story of the flood, which Moses\nsatisfactorily describes at great length. It is a fearful example of\nthe immeasurable and all but boundless wrath of God, which is beyond\nthe power of human utterance. There remains to be said a word or two\nconcerning its allegorical meaning. I have often declared that I take\nno great pleasure in allegories, although in my younger days they had\nsuch a fascination for me that I thought everything ought to be shown\nto have an allegorical meaning. I was influenced in this respect by\nthe example of Origen and Jerome, whom I admired as the greatest of\nall theologians. I may add that Augustine also uses the allegory quite\nfrequently.\n\n70. But while I followed the example of these men, I discovered at\nlast that, to my great loss, I had followed a shadow, and had\noverlooked the very sap and marrow of the Scriptures. Thereupon I\nbegan to hate allegories. They are pleasing, to be sure, especially\nwhen they contain happy allusions. They may be compared to choice\npictures. But as much as real objects with their native hues surpass a\npicture, even though it should glow, as the poet has it (stat silo V.\n1, 5), with Apelles-like colors, closely copied from nature, so much\nthe historical narrative itself is superior to the allegory.\n\n71. In our day the ignorant mob of the Anabaptists is as much filled\nwith immoderate craving for allegory as are the monks. They love to\ndelve in the more mysterious books, such as the Revelation of John,\nand that worthless fabrication passing under the title of the second\nand third books of Esdras. For, there you are at liberty to follow\nyour fancy as you please. We recall that Muntzer, the seditious\nspirit, turned everything into allegory. But true it is, that he who,\nwithout judgment, makes allegories or follows those made by others,\nwill not only be deceived but sustain deplorable injury, as there are\nexamples to prove.\n\n72. Allegories must either be avoided altogether or be worked out with\nthe best judgment. They must conform to the rule followed by the\napostles, of which we shall soon have occasion to speak. Let us avoid\nfalling into those ugly and baneful absurdities, not only of those who\nare misnamed theologians, but also of the Canonists, or rather\nAssinists, of which the decretals and decisions of that most\ndetestable master, the pope, are an example.\n\n73. This statement, however, must not be taken for a general\ncondemnation of all allegory. Christ and the apostles made use of\nallegories at times. These, however, were in keeping with the faith\naccording to the injunction of Paul (Rom 12, 6) that prophecy, or\ndoctrine, should be according to the proportion of faith.\n\n74. When we put the allegory under the ban, we confine ourselves to\nthat species which, with the setting aside of scriptural warrant, is\naltogether the product of man's mind and fancy. Those which are tested\nby the analogy of faith, serve not only as ornaments of the doctrine\nbut also as consolation for the soul.\n\n75. Peter turns this very story of the flood into a most beautiful\nallegory, saying that baptism is symbolized by the flood, and saves\nus. For, in it not only the filth of the flesh is washed away, but\nconscience makes good answer toward God through the resurrection of\nJesus Christ, who is enthroned at the right hand of God and has\ndestroyed death in order to make us heirs of eternal life; who,\nmoreover, is gone into heaven; angels and authorities and powers being\nmade subject unto him, 1 Pet 3, 21-22. This is, indeed, a theological\nallegory, in accordance with faith, and full of solace.\n\n76. Such is also the allegory of Christ in John 3, 14, concerning the\nserpent lifted up in the wilderness and the healing of those bitten by\nthe serpent's tooth who gazed upon it. Again, there is that one by\nPaul (1 Cor 10, 1), All our fathers did drink from the same spiritual\nrock, etc. Such allegories as these not only agree with the matter\nitself, but also instruct the heart in faith and are a help to the\nconscience.\n\n77. But take a look at the ordinary allegory of Jerome, Origen and\nAugustine. These men, when they create an allegory, leave faith\naltogether out of consideration, and merely air philosophical\nopinions, foreign alike to the sphere of faith and to that of morals;\nnot to speak of the fact that they are quite silly and a mass of\nabsurdities.\n\n78. In a former chapter (ch 3. paras 61, 298, 304), we heard of\nAugustine's allegory concerning the creation of man and woman, by\nwhich he illustrates the higher and the lower attributes of man, that\nis, reason and the emotions. But, I ask you, what is the value of this\nfigment?\n\n79. The pope, however, carries away the real honors for piety and\nlearning when he thunders from his high seat as follows: God made two\ngreat lights, the sun and the moon; the sun represents the authority\nof the pope, from which his imperial majesty borrows its light as the\nmoon does from the sun. Away with such rash impudence and vicious\nambition!\n\n80. In a similar style the ark, of Noah's story, is compared to the\nRoman Catholic Church, in which is found the pope with his cardinals,\nbishops, and prelates, while the laymen are swimming in the sea. That\nis, the laymen are altogether given to earthly business and would not\nbe saved did not those helmsmen of the ark, or Church, cast boards and\nropes to the swimmers, drawing them into the ark by these means.\nPictures of this nature were frequently painted by monks to represent\nthe Church.\n\n81. Origen shows more sanity than the papists, in that his allegories\nconform to moral standards, as a rule. Yet, he ought to have kept in\nview the rule laid down by Paul, who demands that prophesy is to be\nthe guardian of faith; for faith is edifying and the proper sphere of\nthe Church. Rules governing morals can be laid by even heathen\nphilosophers who know nothing whatever concerning faith.\n\n\nB. ALLEGORIES IN DETAIL 82-132.\n\n   1. Allegory of the baptism of the Israelites under Moses; the ark\n      and the flood 82ff.\n\n    * Points of likeness and unlikeness in the death of believers and\n      unbelievers 84-86.\n\n    * In what way is death to be conquered 87.\n\n    * How all temptations are to be overcome and believers be\n      preserved 88-90.\n\n   2. Allegories of the ark's proportions 91-92.\n\n   3. Allegories of the sun and moon 93.\n\n    * To what all allegories should point 94.\n\n   4. Allegory of the cup 95-96.\n\n   5. Allegory of the dove Noah sent out of the ark 97-99.\n\n   6. Allegory of the raven Noah sent forth.\n\n      a. Thoughts of the fathers on this point 100.\n\n      b. The correct allegory of the raven 101-116.\n\n       * The law and the teachings of the law 101-116.\n\n         (1) How illustrated by the raven 102-105.\n\n           * Luther's opponents falsely accuse him of forbidding good\n             works 106-107.\n\n         (2) They are no better than the intelligent moralists among\n             the heathen 108-110.\n\n         (3) They cannot quiet the conscience 111.\n\n           * The raven a perfect representative of the Papists\n             112-113.\n\n         (4) How the Papists make the unrighteous righteous and\n             condemn the righteous 114-115.\n\n   7. Allegories of the doves in detail 116-124.\n\n    * Characteristics of the dove 116.\n\n      a. First dove sent forth.\n\n         (1) A figure of the office of grace 117.\n\n         (2) A figure of the Old Testament prophets 118-119.\n\n      b. Second dove returned with the olive leaf.\n\n         (1) A figure of New Testament preachers 120-122.\n\n           * The fanatics and Anabaptists wait in vain for new\n             revelations 121.\n\n           * Nature of true Gospel preachers 122.\n\n         (2) A figure of the New Testament 123.\n\n      c. Third dove did not return 124ff.\n\n   8. Allegory of the seven days Noah waited after he sent forth the\n      first dove 125.\n\n   9. Allegory of the evening the dove returned 126-127.\n\n      *  Several things to be remembered in this connection.\n\n         (1) Allegories are not to have a world-wide treatment like\n             the articles of faith 128.\n\n         (2) Defects in the allegories of the fathers 129-130.\n\n           * Lyra is to be preferred to all commentators 131.\n\n         (3) Right use of allegories 132.\n\n\nB. ALLEGORIES IN DETAIL.\n\n82. Writing to the Corinthians, Paul says (1 Cor 10, 2) that the\nIsraelites \"were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea.\"\nIf you regard only the outward circumstance and the words, even\nPharaoh was baptized, but he perished with his men, while Israel\npassed through safe and unharmed. Noah and his sons were saved in this\nbaptism of the flood, while all the rest of the world, being outside\nof the ark, perished thereby. Such a way of speaking is appropriate\nand forcible. \"Baptism\" and \"death\" are interchangeable in Scripture.\nPaul says (Rom 6, 3): \"All we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were\nbaptized into his death,\" and Jesus says, \"I have a baptism to be\nbaptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!\" (Lk\n12, 50). And to his disciples he said, \"Ye shall ... be baptized with\nthe baptism that I am baptized with\" (Mt 20, 23).\n\n83. In this sense the Red Sea was a baptism indeed. It represented to\nPharaoh death and God's anger. Yet though Israel was baptized with the\nsame baptism, they passed through it unharmed. So the flood is truly\ndeath and the wrath of God, and yet, the faithful are saved in the\nmidst of the flood. Death engulfs and swallows all mankind; for, the\nwrath of God smites both the good and the bad, the pious and the\nwicked, without distinction. The flood was sent upon Noah the same as\nupon the rest of the world. The Red Sea that engulfed Pharaoh was the\nsame as that through which Israel passed unharmed. But in both cases\nthe believers are saved while the wicked perish. That is the point of\ndifference. The ark was Noah's salvation, and it was but an expression\nof the promise and Word of God. In these he had life, but the wicked,\nwho believed not the Word, were left to perish.\n\n84. This is the difference which the Holy Spirit desired to bring out,\nso that the righteous, warned by this example, might believe and hope\nfor salvation through the mercy of God in the very midst of death.\nThey consider baptism as bound together with the promise of life, as\nNoah did the ark. Therefore, though the wise man and the fool must\nsuffer the same death--for Peter and Paul die, not otherwise than Nero\nand other wicked persons die--yet the righteous believe that in death\nthey will be saved unto eternal life. And this hope is not vain, for\nthey have Christ, who receives their souls, and will, on the last day,\nraise up also the bodies of his believers unto eternal life.\n\n85. This class of allegory is of great service, and tends to comfort\nthe heart when you consider the contrast in the ultimate outcome. The\ntestimony of the material eye would seem to confirm the statement of\nSolomon (Ec 2, 16) that the wise man dieth as the fool, that the\nrighteous man dieth as though he were not the beloved of God. But the\neyes of the soul must view this point of difference, that Israel\nenters into the Red Sea and is saved, while Pharaoh, pressing upon the\nheels of Israel, is overwhelmed by the waves and perishes. It is the\nsame death, then, which takes away the righteous and the wicked, and\nalmost always the end of the former is ignominious, while that of the\nlatter is attended by elements of splendor and power; but in the eyes\nof God, while the death of sinners is deplorable, that of his saints\nis precious, for it is consecrated by Christ, through whom it becomes\nthe beginning of eternal life.\n\n86. As the flood and the Red Sea were instruments to save Noah and\nIsrael from death, so to us, death is but the instrument to give us\nlife, if we remain in faith. When the children of Israel were in\nutmost peril, suddenly the sea parted and rose on the right side and\non the left, like an iron wall, so that Israel passed through without\ndanger. Why was it? In order that so death might be made to serve\nlife. Divine power overcomes the assaults of Satan. Thus it was in\nParadise. Satan purposed to slay all mankind by his venom. But what\nhappens? By reason of the truly happy guilt of our first parents, as\nthe Church sings, it comes to pass that the Son of God became\nincarnate to free us from evil.\n\n87. This allegory, then, beautifully teaches, strengthens and consoles\nus, enabling us to fear neither death nor sin, but to despise all\nperils, giving thanks to God that he has so called and dealt with us\nthat even death, the universal destroyer, is compelled to be a servant\nof life, just as the flood, an occasion of destruction to the rest of\nthe world, was one of salvation for Noah; and the Red Sea, when\nPharaoh met his doom, served to save the children of Israel.\n\n88. What has been here expressed, finds application to the subject of\ntemptation in general, so that we learn to despise dangers and be\nhopeful even where no hope seems to remain. When death or any other\ndanger is imminent, we should rise to meet it, saying: Behold, here is\nmy Red Sea; here is my flood, my baptism and my death. Here my\nlife--as the philosopher said of the sea-farers--is removed from death\nbarely by a hand's breadth. But fear not; this danger is as a handful\nof water opposed to the flood of grace which is mine through the Word.\nTherefore death will not destroy me, but will lift me and bear me to\nlife. Death is so utterly incapable of destroying the Christian, that\nit constitutes the very escape from death. For bodily death ushers in\nthe emancipation of the spirit and the resurrection of the flesh.\nThus, Noah in the flood was not borne by the earth, nor by trees, nor\nby mountains, but by the very flood which destroyed the total\nremainder of the human race.\n\n89. Well may the prophets often extol those wonderful works of\nGod--the passage through the Red Sea, the exodus from Egypt, and the\nlike. For the sea, which by its nature can only devour and destroy, is\nforced to part and rise and protect the Israelites, lest they be\noverwhelmed by its tides. That which in its very nature is wrath,\nbecomes grace to the believer; that which in reality is death, becomes\nlife. Therefore, whatever calamity comes--and this life has it in\ninfinite measure--to threaten our property and our lives, it will all\nbecome salvation and joy if we only are in the ark; that is, if by\nfaith we lay hold of the promise made in Christ. Then even death, by\nwhich we are removed, must be turned into life, and the hell, which\nswallows us, into a way to heaven.\n\n90. Therefore Peter says (1 Pet 3, 21) that we are saved by the water\nin baptism, which was prefigured by the flood. The water which streams\nabout us, or the plunge into it, is death, and yet from this death or\nplunge, life results by virtue of the ark of safety--the Word of\npromise to which we cling. The inspired Scriptures set forth this\nallegory, which is not only free from weaknesses but of service in\nevery way, and worthy of our careful attention, since it offers\nwonderful consolation even in the utmost perils.\n\n91. The fathers have added another allegory taken from the form and\ndimensions of the ark. The human body, measured from the top of the\nhead to the sole of the foot, is six times as long as it is wide. Now,\nthe ark, which was fifty cubits wide, measured six times as much in\nlength, namely 300 cubits. Hence, they say, the ark typifies Christ\nthe man, in whom all promises center. Therefore, those who believe in\nhim are saved even in the midst of the flood, that is, in death\nitself.\n\n92. This conception is both appropriate and beautiful; above all, it\nagrees with faith. Though there may be a mistake in the application,\nthe groundwork is strong and secure. There is no doubt that the Holy\nSpirit found various ways to illustrate the promises to be fulfilled\nin Christ, and the wonderful counsel of salvation for mankind through\nfaith in Christ. Hence, allegories of this nature, though lacking in\naptness, are not necessarily wicked and a source of offense.\n\n93. If one were to say the sun represents Christ, while the moon\nrepresents the Church, which receives its light by the grace of\nChrist, he might possibly be mistaken in his choice of illustration,\nyet his error is based, not upon an erroneous, but upon a sure\nfoundation. But when the pope declares the sun represents the papal\nauthority, while the moon represents the emperor's, then not only the\napplication is inapt and foolish, but the very foundation is evil.\nSuch allegories are not conceived and invented by the Holy Spirit, but\nby the devil, the spirit of lies.\n\n94. Allegories must have some application to the promises and the\ndoctrine of faith if they are to comfort and strengthen the soul.\nPeter's allegory teaches us this. Because Peter saw that Noah was set\nfree in the midst of death and that the ark was an instrument of life,\nthe ark was rightly applied to typify Christ. Only divine power can\nsave in the midst of death and lead unto life. The Scriptures declare\nthat to God belong the issues from death, (Ps 68, 21), and he makes\ndeath the occasion, yea, even an aid to life.\n\n95. This has given rise to expressions used in Scripture, where\nafflictions and perils are likened to a cup that intoxicates. This is\nan apt and vivid figure of speech. So the passion of Christ is called\na draught from a brook (Ps 110, 7), meaning that it is a medicinal\ndraught or mixture, which, though bitter, is healing in its bitterness\nand gives life by causing death. Such soothing words serve to console\nus that we may learn to despise death and other perils and meet them\nwith greater readiness.\n\n96. Satan, also, has his cup; but it is sweet, and inebriates unto\nnausea. He who, attracted by its sweetness, drinks it, loses his life\nand dies the eternal death. Such was the cup the Babylonians drained,\nas the prophet has it (Jer 25, 15-27). Let us, therefore, accept the\ncup of salvation with thanksgiving, and, as Paul declares of\nbelievers, rejoice in tribulation (Rom 5, 3).\n\n97. Having explained this figure of the ark and the meaning of the\nflood according to the canonical Scriptures, we will say something\nalso about the other features of this story--about the raven which did\nnot return, and the doves, the first of which returned because she\nfound no resting-place for her foot, while the second brought back\nwith her a twig from an olive tree, and the third did not return\nbecause the earth was no more covered by water.\n\n98. In our treatise on the narrative proper, we stated that these\nthings occurred to be a consolation for Noah and his sons; to assure\nthem that God's wrath had passed and that he was now pacified. The\ndove did not bring the olive branch of her own volition. She\nmiraculously obeyed divine power. So the serpent in paradise spoke,\nnot of its own volition, but through the inspiration of the devil, who\nhad taken possession of it. As, on that occasion, the serpent, by the\ndevil's prompting, spoke, with the result that man was led into sin,\nso, on this occasion, it was not its own volition or instinct which\nmoved the dove to bring the olive branch, but the prompting of God, in\norder that Noah might gain comfort from the pleasant sight. For the\nolive does not supply the dove with food; she prefers the several\nspecies of wheat or pease.\n\n99. The incident of the dove, then, is a miraculous occurrence with a\ndefinite meaning. The prophets in their messages concerning the\nkingdom of Christ, frequently make mention of doves (Ps 68, 13) and\n(Is 60, 8). Solomon also in his Song seems to mention the dove with\nparticular pleasure. Therefore, we should not despise the picture this\nallegory holds before us, but treat its truth skillfully and aptly.\n\n100. The allegory of the raven, invented by the doctors, is well\nknown. Because ravens delight in eating dead bodies, they have been\ntaken as a likeness of carnal men, who delight in carnal pleasures and\nindulge in them. The Epicureans were an example. A very fair\nexplanation but inadequate, because it is merely of that moral and\nphilosophical sort which Erasmus was in the habit of giving after the\nexample of Origen.\n\n101. We must look for a theological explanation. In the first place,\nthose moralists fail to observe that Scripture commends the raven for\nnot leaving the ark of his own will. He went out at the bidding of\nNoah, to ascertain if the waters had ceased and if God's wrath was\nended. The raven, however, did not return, neither did he become a\nmessenger of happy omen. He remained without the ark, and, though he\ncame and went, yet he did not suffer himself to be taken by Noah.\n\n102. In all these points the allegory fittingly typifies the ministry\nof the Law. Black, the color of the bird, is a token of sadness, and\nthe sound of his voice is unpleasant. This is true of the teachers of\nthe Law, who teach justification by works. They are the ministers of\ndeath and sin, Paul calling the ministry of the Law a ministry of\ndeath, (2 Cor 3, 6). The Law is unto death (Rom 7, 10). The Law\nworketh wrath. (Rom 4, 15.) The Law entered that trespass might\nabound. (Rom 5, 20).\n\n103. And yet, Moses was sent forth by God with the Law, just as the\nraven was sent out by Noah. It is God's will that mankind be taught\nmorality and holiness of life, and that wrath and sure punishments be\nannounced to all who transgress the Law. Nevertheless, such teachers\nare naught but ravens wandering aimlessly about the ark; nor do they\nhave the certain assurance that God is pacified.\n\n104. For, the Law is a teaching of such character that it cannot\nassure, strengthen and console an uneasy conscience, but rather\nterrifies it, since it only teaches what God requires of us, what he\nwishes to be performed by us. Our consciences bear witness against us\nthat we not only have failed to carry out the will of God as set forth\nin the Law, but that we have done the very contrary.\n\n105. With all justice, therefore, we may say of the teachers of the\nLaw, in the words of Psalms 5, 9: \"There is no certainty in their\nmouth.\" Our translation has it \"There is no faithfulness in their\nmouth.\" Their teaching at its best can only say: If you do this, if\nyou do that, you will be saved. Christ speaks ironically when he\nanswers the scribe who had grandly set forth the doctrine of the Law,\nby saying, \"This do, and thou shalt live\" (Lk 10, 28). He shows the\nscribe that the doctrine is holy and good, but since we are corrupt,\nit follows that we are guilty, since we do not, and cannot, fulfil the\nLaw.\n\n106. Hence, we declare rightly that we are not justified by the works\nof the Law. By the works of the Law we mean, not the ceremonial\ncommandments, but those highest commandments of all, to love God and\nour neighbor. The reason we are not justified is that we cannot keep\nthe commandments. We have reason, however, to challenge the impudence\nof our opponents who set up the cry that we forbid good works and\ncondemn the Law of God because we deny that justification is by works.\nThis would be true if we did not admit that the raven was sent forth\nfrom the ark by Noah. But we do say that the raven was sent out from\nthe ark. And this we deny, that it was not a raven, or that it was a\ndove. All the clamor, the abuse, the blasphemy of our opponents have\nno other purpose than to force us to declare that the raven was a\ndove.\n\n107. But now examine their books and carefully consider their\ndoctrine. Is it anything but a doctrine of works? This is good, this\nis honorable, they say; this you must do; the other is dishonorable\nand wicked, hence you must not do it. On the strength of such\nteaching, they believe themselves to be true theologians and doctors.\nBut let them show us the person who either has done or will do all\nthose things, especially if you present, not only the second table of\nthe Law, as they do, but also the first one.\n\n108. He who takes his stand upon this doctrine of the Law, then, is\ntruly nothing but a hearer. He does not learn anything except its\ndemands. Since such persons have no desire to learn anything further,\nit should suffice for them if they are given the poem of Cato, or\ngiven Esop, whom I consider a better teacher of morals. These two\nwriters are profitable reading for young men. Older persons should\nstudy Cicero, who, to my astonishment, is considered by some as\ninferior to Aristotle in the sphere of ethics. This would be a\nrational course of study. So far as imparting moral precepts is\nconcerned, the good intentions and the assiduity of the heathen must\nbe commended. Yet they are inferior to Moses. He sets forth not only\nmorality, but also teaches the true worship of God. Nevertheless, he\nwho places his trust solely in Moses has nothing but the raven\nwandering aimlessly about outside of the ark. Of the dove and the\nolive branch, he has nothing.\n\n109 The raven, then, represents not only the Law given by God, but all\nlaws and all philosophy which are the product of human reason and\nwisdom. They tell us no more than what ought to be done and do not\nprovide the strength to do it. The judgment of Christ is true: \"When\nye shall have done all the things that are commanded you, say, We are\nunprofitable servants\" (Lk 17, 10).\n\n110. True the raven is sent out. God desires the Law to be taught. He\nreveals it from heaven; yea, he writes it upon the hearts of all men,\nas Paul proves (Rom 2, 15). From this inherent knowledge originated\nall writings of the saner philosophers, of Esop, Aristotle, Plato,\nXenophon, Cicero and Cato. And these are not unfit to set before\nuntrained and vicious persons, that their vile tendencies may be\ncurbed to some extent.\n\n111. If, however, you seek for peace of conscience and for certain\nhope of eternal life, such philosophers are like the raven, which\nwanders around the ark, finding no peace outside, but not looking for\nit within. Paul says of the Jews, \"Israel, following after a law of\nrighteousness, did not arrive at that law\" (Rom 9, 31). The reason for\nthis is in the fact that the Law is like the raven; it is either the\nministry of death and sin or it produces hypocrites.\n\n112. Now, let those who wish, follow out this allegory by studying the\nnature of the raven. It is an impure bird, of somber and funereal\ncolor, with a strong beak and a harsh, shrill voice. It scents dead\nbodies from a great distance, and therefore men fear its voice as a\ncertain augury of an impending death. It feeds upon carrion and enjoys\nlocalities made foul by public executions.\n\n113. Though I would not apply each and every one of these\ncharacteristics to the Law, yet who does not see how well they fit the\nservants of the Pope, the mass-priests and the monks, who were not\nonly richly fed upon the slaughter of consciences by their false\ndoctrines, but also used the dead bodies to obtain their livelihood,\nsince they made a paying business out of their vigils, their\nanniversaries, their purifying water used in burials, and even of\npurgatory itself. And surely, this devotion to the dead was more\nprofitable to them than their care of the living.\n\nTruly, then, they are ravens, feeding on corpses and sitting upon them\nwith wild cries. Not only may the popish priests be fitly likened to\nthe ravens, but indeed the whole ministry of the papacy, where it is\nat its best, does nothing but to gash and murder consciences. It does\nnot show the way to true righteousness, but merely makes hypocrites,\nas does the Law.\n\n114. Among other crimes of false prophets, Ezekiel enumerates (ch 13,\n19) the fact that, for handfuls of barley and for pieces of bread,\nthey slay souls that should not die, and save the souls alive that\nshould not live. This is true of these ravens, the teachers of the\nLaw. They call those righteous who live according to the letter of the\nLaw, and yet these are the very souls which do not live. On the other\nhand, they condemn those who violate their traditions, just as the\nPharisees condemned the disciples when they plucked ears of corn, when\nthey did not wash their hands and when they failed to fast. This is an\noutcry, fierce and dismal, reminding us of ravens which sit upon\ncorpses.\n\n115. When cursing a wicked person, the Greeks said, \"To the ravens!\"\nSimilarly, the Germans use the expression, \"May the ravens devour\nyou.\" If we make this curse an element of the allegory, its serious\ncharacter becomes evident. For what is more deplorably disastrous than\nto have teachers, the outcome of whose best teaching is death, and who\nensnare the conscience with difficulties that cannot be disentangled?\nThough some say this allegory of the raven is inaptly applied to the\npriesthood, it is true nevertheless and agrees with the fundamental\ntruth, and it is not only most apt, but very profitable for\ninstruction.\n\n116. On the other hand, the incident of the dove is a most delightful\npicture of the gospel, especially if you carefully consider the\ncharacteristics of the dove. Ten of these are usually enumerated: 1.\nIt is without guile. 2. It does not harm with its mouth. 3. It does\nnot harm with its claws. 4. It gathers pure grains. 5. It nourishes\nthe young of others. 6. Its song is a sigh. 7. It abides by the\nwaters. 8. It flies in flocks. 9. It nests in safe places. 10. Its\nflight is swift. These ten characteristics have been set forth in six\nverses, as follows:\n\n  Free from guile is the dove; the bite of her beak does not injure;\n    Wounds her claws do not strike; pure is the grain that she eats.\n  Frequent and swift is her flight to shining courses of water.\n    List to her voice, and lo! sighs you will hear but no song!\n  Other nestlings she rears; in swarms she flies through the ether.\n    Safe is the place and high where she prepares her abode.\n\n117. The New Testament tells us the Holy Spirit appeared in the form\nof a dove (Mt 3, 16). Hence, we are justified in using the dove as an\nallegory of the ministry of grace.\n\n118. Moses implies that the dove did not fly aimlessly about the ark,\nas did the raven, but having been sent out and finding no place to\nrest, it returned to the ark and was seized by Noah.\n\n119. This dove is a picture of the holy prophets sent to teach the\npeople; but the flood, that is, the time of the Law, had not yet\npassed away. Thus David, Elias, Isaiah, though they did not live to\nsee the time of the New Testament, were yet sent as messengers with\nthe tidings that the flood would eventually be brought to an end,\nthough that time was at a distance. Having delivered their message,\nthey returned to the ark; that is, they were justified and saved\nwithout the Law, by faith in the blessed seed, in which they believed\nand for which they longed.\n\n120. After this, another dove was sent forth, which found the earth\ndried, and not only the mountains, but also the trees, standing free\nfrom water. But she alighted upon an olive tree, plucked a branch, and\nbrought it back to Noah.\n\n121. The allegorical meaning of this incident is interpreted by the\nScriptures. The olive tree is very often used as a symbol of grace, of\nmercy or of forgiveness of sins. The dove brings the branch in her\nbeak, thus typifying the outward ministry, or the spoken Word. For the\nHoly Spirit does not teach by new revelations aside from the ministry\nof the Word, as the enthusiasts and Anabaptists, those truly fanatical\nteachers, dream. It was the will of God that a branch from a living\nolive tree should be carried to Noah in the mouth of the bird, to\nteach that in the New Testament, the time of the flood or anger being\npast, God desires to set his mercy before the world by the spoken\nWord.\n\n122. The messengers of this Word are doves; that is, sincere men,\nwithout guile, and filled with the Holy Spirit. Isaiah 60, 8, likens\nministers of the Gospel or of grace to doves which fly to their\nwindows. And, though Christ commands them to imitate the harmlessness\nof doves, Mt 10, 16, meaning that they should be sincere and free from\nvenom, yet, he admonishes them to be wise like serpents; that is, they\nshould be wary of false and cunning people, and cautious like the\nserpent, which is said to shield its head with special skill in a\nfight.\n\n123. The green freshness of the olive branch, also, is a type of the\nWord of the Gospel, which endureth forever and is never without fruit.\nPsalms 1, 3 likens those who study the Word to a tree, the leaves of\nwhich do not wither. We heard nothing like this above concerning the\nraven, which flew to and fro near the ark. This second dove which was\nsent forth is a type of the New Testament, where grace and the\nforgiveness of sins are promised openly through the sacrifice of\nChrist. This is why the Holy Spirit chose to appear in the form of a\ndove in the New Testament.\n\n124. The third dove did not return. After the fulfilment of the\npromise given the whole world through the mouth of the dove, no new\nteaching is to be looked for, but we simply await the revelation of\nthose things which we believe. Herein is certain testimony for us that\nthe Gospel will endure unto the end of the world.\n\n125. The text, furthermore, specifies the time Noah waited after he\nhad first sent forth a dove, namely, seven days. These seven days\ntypify the time of the Law which, of necessity, preceded the period of\nthe New Testament.\n\n126. We read, likewise, that the second dove returned at dusk,\ncarrying the olive branch. To the Gospel the last age of the world has\nbeen assigned. Nor should we look for another kind of doctrine, for it\nis to an evening meal that Christ compared the Gospel (Mt 22, 2; Lk\n14, 16).\n\n127. True, the doctrine of the Gospel has been in the world since the\nfall of our first parents, and the Lord confirmed this promise to the\npatriarchs by various signs. The first ages knew nothing of the\nrainbow, nor of circumcision, nor of other signs afterward ordained by\nGod. But all ages have known of the blessed seed. Since it has been\nrevealed, there remains nothing else than the revelation of that which\nwe believe. With the third dove, we shall fly away to that other life,\nnever to return to the life here, so wretched and so full of grief.\n\n128. These are my thoughts concerning this allegory. I have set them\nforth briefly, for we must not tarry with them as we do with\nhistorical narratives and articles of faith.\n\n129. Origen, Jerome, Augustine, and Bernard seek diligently for\nallegories. But this practice has one drawback. The more attention\nthey direct to allegories, the more do they draw it away from the\nfacts of sacred history and from faith, to the exclusion of these more\nimportant things. Allegories should be employed for the purpose of\ninducing and increasing, of explaining and strengthening, that faith\nof which all the stories treat. It is not to be wondered at, that\npersons who do not seek faith in the stories of the Bible, look for\nthe region of allegorical shades as a pleasant playground in which to\nstroll about.\n\n130. Just as in the popish Church false and unscriptural words are\nrendered in sweet music, so learned men have too often spoiled the\ngood meaning of a Bible story, which contains a useful lesson of\nfaith, by their childish allegories.\n\n131. I have often spoken of the kind of theology that prevailed when I\nbegan to study. Its advocates said that the letter killeth (2 Cor 3,\n6). Therefore I disliked Lyra most of all interpreters, because he\nfollowed the literal meaning so carefully. But now I prefer him, for\nthis very reason, to all interpreters of Scripture.\n\n132. I advise you as strongly as I can to fully appreciate the great\nvalue of the Bible history. But whenever you wish to employ allegory,\ntake pains to follow the analogy of faith; that is, make the allegory\nagree with Christ, with the Church, with faith, with the ministry of\nthe Gospel. If constructed in this manner, allegories will not go\nastray from faith, even though they may not be genuine in every point.\nThis foundation shall remain firm, while the stubble perishes. But let\nus return to our story.\n\n\nIV. NOAH AND HIS FALL.\n\n   A. NOAH.\n\n      1. Noah's character before the flood 133.\n\n      2. Noah's character after the flood 134.\n\n      3. Way Noah executed his office as bishop 135.\n\n      4. Way he executed his office as a civil ruler 136.\n\n\nIV. NOAH AND HIS FALL.\n\nA. Noah.\n\nVs. 20-22. _And Noah began to be a husbandman, and planted a vineyard;\nand he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within\nhis tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his\nfather, and told his two brethren without._\n\n133. What manner of man Noah was during the flood, is shown\nsufficiently by the story of the flood itself. What manner of man he\nhad been before the flood, is shown by Moses' declaration that he was\nrighteous and perfect. Great as this man was, we hear nothing else\nabout him, except that his wonderful and almost incredible continence\nis faintly suggested and commended by the statement that he begat his\nfirst born when five hundred years of age. This very fact shows that\nhuman nature was by far stronger in its integrity at that time, and\nthat the Holy Spirit held more perfect sway in the holy men of the\nearly world than He does in us who are, as it were, the dregs and the\nremnants of the world's production.\n\nIt surely was a commendatory record for Noah to be accorded righteous\nand perfect before God; that is, full of faith and of the Holy Spirit,\nadorned with chastity and all good works, pure in worship and\nreligion, suffering many temptations from the devil, the world, and\nhimself, all which he overcame triumphantly. Such was Noah before the\nflood.\n\n134. Of his life after the flood, Moses tells us very little. But is\nit not apparent that so noble a man, living for about 350 years after\nthe flood, could not be idle, but must have been busy with the\ngovernment of the Church, which he alone established and ruled?\n\n135. First of all, then, he performed the duties of a bishop. Beset\nwith various temptations, his foremost endeavor was to resist the\ndevil, to console the troubled ones, to bring back the erring to the\ntrue way, to strengthen the doubting, to cheer souls in despair, to\nexclude from his Church the impenitent, and to receive back with\nfatherly gladness the repentant. For, these are the duties a bishop\nmust perform through the ministry of the Word.\n\n136. Moreover, he had civil duties in establishing forms of government\nand in making laws, without which human passions cannot be held in\ncheck. To this was added the rule of his own household, or the care of\nhis home.\n\n\nB. NOAH'S FALL.\n\n   1. Why Moses omitted many important things about Noah and related\n      his fall 137-138.\n\n   2. Lyra tries to excuse Noah's fall 139.\n\n   3. Noah's fall cannot be excused 140-141.\n\n   4. His fall caused a great scandal 142.\n\n   5. Ham scandalized himself through it 142-143.\n\n      a. Real root of this scandal 144.\n\n      b. Thereby Noah greatly sinned 145ff.\n\n       * Original sin develops presumptuous people 146-148.\n\n      c. This scandal reveals Satan's bitterest enmity against God's\n         Church 149.\n\n       * Papists are Ham's disciples 150.\n\n       * David's enemies rejoiced over his fall 151.\n\n   6. To what end should Noah's fall serve us 152-154.\n\n    * The godless are not worthy to see God's glory in believers 155.\n\n    * Why we should not be vexed at the infirmities of believers\n      156-157.\n\n   7. The conduct of Shem and Japheth in this connection 158-173.\n\n      a. They still honored their father, though they approved not his\n         deed 158.\n\n       * Origin of outward sin 159.\n\n       * How to avoid offense 160-162.\n\n       * Luther aware of his own infirmities 163.\n\n       * Attitude of the opponents of the Word to true preachers 164.\n\n       * Why Moses never mentioned many great events in Noah's life,\n         and thought of his fall 165-166.\n\n      b. How the sons covered their father's shame 167.\n\n      c. Herein they had regard for God's will and were therefore\n         pleasing to God 168.\n\n       * Ham's scandal.\n\n         (1) It was a wilful and grievous sin 168-169.\n\n         (2) The lesson we may learn from it 170.\n\n         (3) Reward of this scandalous deed, and why Canaan is here\n             mentioned 172-173.\n\n\nB. Noah's Fall.\n\n137. Though reason tells us that Noah was burdened with these manifold\nduties after the flood, yet Moses does not mention them. It appears to\nhim sufficient to confine his remarks to the statement that Noah began\nto plant a vineyard, and that he lay in his tent drunken and naked.\n\nThis, surely, is a foolish and very useless tale in comparison with\nthe many praiseworthy acts he must have performed in the course of so\nmany years. Other things might have been recorded for edification and\nfor teaching righteousness of life. But this story even seems to\nendorse an offense, by abetting drunkards and those who sin in\ndrunkenness.\n\n138. The purpose of the Holy Spirit, however, is apparent from what we\nhave said. It is to console by this record of the great sins committed\nby the holiest and most perfect patriarchs those righteous persons who\nare discouraged by the knowledge of their own weakness and are,\ntherefore, cast down. In them we are to find proofs of our own\nshortcomings, that we may come to humble confession and, at the same\ntime, seek and hope for forgiveness. This is the real and\ntheologically true reason why the Holy Spirit records, rather than\nseemingly more important matters, the great fall of this grand man.\n\n139. Lyra states as excuse for Noah that he knew not the power of wine\nand was deceived into drinking a little too freely. Whether wine had\nbeen known before or whether Noah began to cultivate it by his own\nskill and by divine suggestion, I know not, but I believe that Noah\nknew the nature of this produce quite well, and that he had often made\nuse of wine in company with his family, partly for his own person and\npartly also in his offerings or libations. I think that in making use\nof wine for his own refreshment, he partook of it too freely.\n\n140. His action I excuse in no way. Should anyone want to do so, there\nwould be weightier arguments than those Lyra uses. According to him\nthis aged man, tired out by the great number of his daily duties and\ncares, had been overpowered by the wine although he was already used\nto it. For wine overcomes more easily those who are either exhausted\nby much work or burdened with age. Persons of mature age, on the other\nhand, and such of care-free mind, can drink considerable quantities of\nwine without greatly impairing their reason.\n\n141. But he who makes this excuse for the patriarch, wilfully casts\naside that consolation which the Holy Spirit considered needful for\nthe Church, that even the greatest saints sometimes fall into sin.\n\n142. Transgression like this may seem to be slight, yet it causes\ngreat offense. Not only is Ham offended, but also the other brother,\npossibly also their wives. And we must not imagine that Ham was a boy\nof seven years. Having been born when Noah was five hundred years old,\nhe had reached an age of at least one hundred years and had one or two\nchildren of his own.\n\n143. Hence, it was not boyish thoughtlessness which caused Ham to\nlaugh at his father, as boys will do when surrounding a drunken rustic\nin the street and making sport of him. He was truly offended by his\nfather's sin and thought himself to be more righteous, holy and\nreligious than his father. Noah's deed was an offense not only in\nappearance, but in very truth, since Ham was so far tempted by the\nknowledge of it that he passed judgment upon Noah, and found in such\nsin an occasion for mirth.\n\n144. If we wish to judge Ham's sin aright, we must take into account\noriginal sin, that is, the wickedness of the heart. This son would\nnever have derided his father for being overcome by wine had he not\nfirst dismissed from his soul that reverence and esteem which God's\ncommandment requires children to cherish toward their parents.\n\n145. Noah had been considered a fool before the flood, by the majority\nof mankind, and had been condemned as a false teacher and despised as\na man of wild ideas. Now he is laughed at by his son as a fool, and\ncondemned as a sinner. Noah was sole governor of the Church and State,\nand ruled his own household with tireless care and labor. He had\ndoubtless therein offended the proud and haughty spirit of his son in\nmany ways. But the depravity of his heart which now, that the father's\nsin had become manifest, leaped to the surface, had so far been\nsuccessfully concealed.\n\n146. When we consider the source of Ham's sin, its hideousness first\nappears in its true light. One never becomes an adulterer or commits\nmurder until he has first cast out of his heart the fear of God. A\npupil does not rebel against his teacher unless he has first lost due\nreverence for that teacher. The fourteenth Psalm, verse 2, says that\nJehovah looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if\nthere were any that did understand, and that did seek after God. When\nhe saw there was none he adds there was none who did good; that they\nhad all become worthless, sinning tongues, sinning with their hands,\nfearing where there was no need of fear, and the like.\n\n147. So Ham, in his own estimation, was wise and holy. In his judgment\nhis father had often acted unrighteously or foolishly. His attitude\ndiscloses a heart that despised, not only the parent, but also the\ndivine commandment. Hence, nothing remains for the evil-minded son but\nto grasp an opportunity for obtaining evidence to betray his father's\nfoolishness. He does not laugh at his drunken father as a boy would,\nnor does he call his brethren merely that they may look upon a\nlaughable spectacle. He means that this shall be open proof that God\nhas withdrawn from his father and has accepted himself. Therefore, he\ntakes delight in disclosing his father's sin to others. As I said\nbefore, Ham was not a boy of seven years, but had reached the age of\nat least one hundred.\n\n148. Original sin shows its depraving tendency in that it makes men\narrogant, haughty and conceited. Paul admonishes in Romans 12, 3, to\nthink of one's self soberly, \"according as God hath dealt to each man\na measure of faith.\" But, original sin does not permit Ham to occupy\nthis lowly level; hence, he presumes to go beyond his station in\npassing judgment upon his father.\n\n149. We observe the same attitude in Absalom. Before he stirs up a\nrebellion against David, his father, he passes unrighteous judgment\nupon David's government. This dissatisfaction with his father's rule\nwas afterward followed by unconcealed contempt and open violence, with\nDavid's destruction as the object. Ham's heart being full of poison\nwhich he had gathered from his father as a spider gathers poison from\nthe fairest rose, precisely such a result had to follow.\n\n150. These examples serve to call our attention to the battle waged\nfrom the beginning of the world between the Church and Satan with his\nfollowers, the hypocrites, or false brethren. This deed of Ham must\nnot be looked upon as a result of boyish love of pranks, but of\nSatan's most bitter enmity, wherewith he inflames his followers\nagainst the Church. Particularly does he incite them against those in\nthe ministry, leading them to close watch at all times for material\navailable for purposes of slander.\n\nThe Papists at present have no other business than to watch our\nconversation for the purpose of slander. Whenever we fall into human\nerror (for we are truly weak and are beset by our failings), they\nseize upon our moral uncleanness, like famished swine, and find great\ndelight in publishing and betraying our weaknesses, like Ham the\naccursed. They truly hunger and thirst after our offenses. Although by\nGod's grace they cannot fasten adultery, murder or like errors upon\nus, unless by their own fabrication (this shameless class of people\nabhor no kind of lie), yet they gather up smaller matters, which they\nafterward exaggerate to the public.\n\n151. David's experience is well known. He was surrounded on all sides\nby enemies who eagerly sought out every opportunity for persecution.\nThey were envious because he had been called to the throne by God;\nhence, they triumphed over his horrible fall.\n\n152. His case, however, serves for our instruction. God sometimes\npermits even righteous and holy men to stumble and fall into offenses,\neither really or apparently, and we must take heed lest we pass\njudgment at once, after the example of Ham, who, having secretly\ndespised his father long before, now does so openly. He declared that\nhis parent, being imbecile by age, had clearly been deserted by the\nHoly Spirit, since he was unable to guard against drunkenness, though\nthe government of the Church, State, and household lay upon his\nshoulders. O wretched Ham, how happy art thou, having found at last\nwhat thou soughtest--poison in a most delightful rose!\n\n153. Everlasting praises and blessings be given to God, whose dealings\nwith his saints are wonderful indeed. While he permits them to be weak\nand to fall, to be overwhelmed with disgrace and offenses, and while\nthe world judges and condemns them, he forgives them their weaknesses\nand has compassion upon them; whereas he delivers into Satan's hands\nthose who regard themselves angels, and utterly rejects them.\n\nThe first lesson of this story is that godly persons have the needed\nconsolation against their infirmities when they see that even the\nholiest men sometimes fell most disgracefully by reason of similar\ninfirmities.\n\n154. In the second place, the case of Ham is a fearful example of\ndivine judgment, to teach us by Ham's experience not to condemn at\nonce, even when we see rulers of State, Church, or household--such as\nour parents--fall into error and sin. Who can tell why God so permits?\nSuch sins must not be excused, yet we see that they are of value for\nthe consolation of the pious. They teach us that God can bear with the\nerrors and sins of his people and that even we, when beset with sins,\nmay trust in the mercy of God and need not lose heart.\n\n155. But what is medicine for the righteous, is poison for the wicked.\nThe latter do not seek to be taught and comforted by God. Their\nunworthiness prevents them from recognizing his glory in the saints.\nThey see nothing but the stumbling block and the snare, with the\nresult that they fall and are left to perish alone.\n\n156. Let us, therefore, truly respect those in authority over us. If\nthey fall, we must not be offended. We must remember that they are\nhuman, and that God's ways are wonderful in his saints, because it is\nhis will that the wicked shall be offended and provoked. Thus Moses\nthreatens the Jews: \"I will provoke them to anger with a foolish\nnation\" (Deut 32, 21). Because, during the whole period of the\nkingdom, they refused to hear the prophets, God gave the offense of\ncasting away a wise and religious people, which had the promises and\nwas descended from the patriarchs. In its place, he chose the filth\nand dregs of the world, a foolish people; that is, it was without\npiety, without religion, without worship, without that divine wisdom\nwhich is his Word. This offense roused the Jews to insane anger.\n\n157. This will be the lot of the papists. Some great offense shall be\ngiven them by God against which they shall find themselves helpless,\nand thus they shall come to grief like Ham. Renouncing the reverence\ndue both to God and his father, in deeming himself more capable of\nruling the Church than Noah, in secretly deriding or censuring his\nparent, he finally presents the spectacle of disclosing his wicked and\nirreverent attitude before others.\n\n158. The two other brothers, Shem and Japheth, did not follow Ham's\nwicked example. While conscious of the scandalous fact that their\nfather was drunk and lay in shameless nakedness like a little\nboy,--while recognizing that this ill became the ruler of Church and\nState, they remained mindful of the reverence due a parent. They\ngulped down the offense given; they hid the offense and gave it a\nworthier aspect, so to speak, by covering their father with a garment,\napproaching him with eyes averted. They would have been incapable of\nthis fine outward expression of reverence for their father, had they\nnot occupied a correct attitude toward God in their hearts and\nbelieved their father to be both priest and ruler by right divine.\n\n159. It is a fearful example, this one of Ham. Though one of the few\nsaved during the flood, he forgets all piety. It is profitable to\ncarefully consider how he came to fall. Outward sins must first be\ncommitted in our minds; that is, before sins are visibly committed,\nthe heart first departs from the Word and from the fear of God. It\nneither knows God nor seeks after him, as we read in Psalms 14, 2. As\nsoon as the heart begins to set aside the Word, and to despise the\nministers and prophets of God, ambition and pride follow. Those who\nstand in the way of our desires are overborne by hatred and slander,\nuntil finally insolent speech ends in murder.\n\n160. Those who are to become rulers of Church or State, should daily\npray earnestly to God that they may remain humble. It is the object of\nstories of this character to set this duty before us, for it is\nevident what occasioned Ham's frightful fall.\n\n161. If, then, the saints fall into sin, let us not be offended. Much\nless should we rejoice over the weakness of others, haughtily\nesteeming ourselves braver, wiser, or holier than they. Let us rather\nendure and cover up, and even put a good construction upon and excuse\nsuch errors in so far as we can, remembering that perhaps tomorrow we\nmay suffer what happened to them today. For we all constitute a unit,\nbeing born of the same flesh. Let us then heed the advice of Paul,\n\"Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall\" (1 Cor 10,\n12). In this way the other two brothers looked upon their drunken\nfather. Their thoughts were these: Behold, our father has fallen. But\nGod is wonderful in his dealing with saints, whom he sometimes permits\nto fall for our instruction, that we may not despair when afflicted by\nkindred infirmity.\n\n162. Let us imitate their wisdom! The sins of others give us no right\nto judge them. Before their own master they stand or fall (Rom 14, 4).\nFurthermore, if the downfall of others displease us (since, in truth,\nmany acts neither can nor ought to be excused), let us be so much the\nmore careful lest something like it overtake ourselves. Let us not sit\nin proud and haughty judgment, for this is original sin in all its\ncorruption: To lay claim to exceptional wisdom and to hunt for the\nmoral lapses of others in order to gain the reputation of\nrighteousness for ourselves.\n\n163. We truly are weak sinners and must freely confess, being human,\nthat our conversation is not always free from offense. But while we\nshare this weakness with our enemies, we nevertheless do our duty\ndiligently, by spreading God's Word, by teaching the churches, by\nbettering the evil, by urging the right, by consoling the weak, by\nchiding the stubborn, and, in brief, by doing whatever duty God lays\nupon us.\n\n164. On the other hand since our adversaries strive after nothing but\nhypocrisy and an outward show of holiness, so they add to the frailty\nwhich they have in common with us, the most grievous sins, because\nthey do not follow their calling, but concern themselves with their\nhonors and emoluments. They neglect the churches and suffer them to\nmiserably decay. They condemn the true doctrine and teach idolatry. In\nshort, in public life they are wise, but in their own sphere they are\nutterly foolish. This is the most destructive evil in the Church.\n\n165. This is the first part of the story, and, in the preparation of\nhis record, Moses has confined himself to the same. It is certain that\nNoah was a righteous man, gifted with many heroic virtues, and that he\naccomplished most important things both for the Church and for the\nState. It is not possible either to establish political communities or\nto found churches except by diligent effort. Life, in both these\nmanifestations (I will say nothing of the management of the home) is\nbeset with many dangers; for Satan, a liar and murderer, is the most\nrelentless enemy of Church and State.\n\n166. But Moses passes by all these achievements, not so much as\nalluding to them. He records but this one circumstance--that Noah\nbecame drunk and was scoffed at by his youngest son. He intended it as\na valuable example, teaching pious souls to trust in God's mercy. On\nthe other hand, the proud, the lovers of cant, the sanctimonious, the\nwise-acres,--let them learn to fear God and beware of passing a\nreckless judgment upon others! As Manasseh the king declares, God\ndisplays in his saints both his wonders and his terrors \"against\nwicked and sinful men.\" This is illustrated in the case of Ham, who\ndid not now first come to his downfall but had cherished this hate\nagainst his father for a long time, afterward to fill the world with\nidolatry.\n\nVs. 23-27. _And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both\ntheir shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their\nfather; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's\nnakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his youngest\nson had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of\nservants shall he be unto his brethren._\n\n167. It is truly a beautiful and memorable example of respect to a\nfather which Moses records in this passage. The sons might without sin\nhave approached their father and covered him, while turning their\nfaces toward him. What sin should it be if one, happening upon a nude\nperson, should see what is before him without his will? Still the two\nsons do not do this. When they heard from their haughty and mocking\nbrother what had happened to their father, they laid a garment upon\nboth their shoulders, entered the tent with faces turned away (how\nadmirable!), and lowering the garment backward, covered their father.\n\n168. Who can fail to observe here the thoughtfulness of the will and\nWord of God, and reverence before the majesty of fatherhood, which God\nrequires to be honored, not despised or mocked by children? God seems\nto approve this reverence and accept it as a most pleasing offering\nand the very noblest worship and obedience. But his utmost hatred\nrests upon Ham, who might have seen without sin what he saw, since it\ncame to his view by chance, if only he had covered it up, if only he\nhad remained silent about it, if only he had not shown himself to be\npleased by the sin of his father. But he who despised God, the Word,\nand the order established by God, not only failed to cover his father\nwith a garment, but even derided him and left him naked.\n\n169. In describing the act of the two brothers Moses emphasizes the\nmalice of Ham, who was filled with violent and satanic hatred against\nhis father. Who of us, on finding a stranger lying by the wayside\ndrunk and nude, would not at least cover him with his own coat to\nforestall disgrace? How much greater the demand in this case of a\nfather! Ham, however, fails to do for his father, the highest ruler of\nthe world, what common humanity teaches us to do for strangers.\nMoreover he publishes the circumstance joyfully, insulting his drunken\nfather and making the sin of his father known to his brothers as if he\nhad a piece of good news.\n\n170. Moses, therefore, sets Ham before us as a fearful example, to be\ncarefully taught in the churches, in order that young people may learn\nto respect their elders, rulers, and parents. Not on account of Noah,\nnot on account of Ham, but on account of those to come--on our\naccount--is this story written, and Ham, with his contempt for God and\nfather, pictured in most repulsive colors.\n\n171. Also the punishment of this wickedness is carefully set before\nus. Noah, looked upon by his son as a foolish, insane, and ridiculous\nold man, now steps forth in the majesty of a prophet, to announce to\nhis son a divine revelation of future events. Truly does Paul declare\nthat \"power is made perfect in weakness\" (2 Cor 12, 9); for the\ncertainty characterizing Noah's utterance is proof that he was filled\nwith the Holy Spirit, notwithstanding that his son had mocked and\ndespised him as one utterly deserted by the Holy Spirit.\n\n172. I will not attempt here to settle the question above referred to\n(ch 5, para 95) concerning the order of the sons of Noah, as to which\nof them was the first-born and which the youngest. A point more worthy\nof our attention is the fact that the Holy Spirit is so filled with\nstrong wrath against that disobedient and scornful son that he does\nnot even choose to call him by his own name, but calls him Canaan\nafter the name of his son. Some say that, because God had desired to\nsave Ham in the ark as one under his blessing the same as the others,\nhe had no wish to curse him, but cursed Canaan instead, a curse which,\nnevertheless, could not but recoil upon Ham who had provoked it. Thus\nHam's name perishes here, since the Holy Spirit hates it, whose hatred\nis, indeed, a serious hatred. We read in the psalm, \"I hate them with\nperfect hatred\" (Ps 139, 22). When the Holy Spirit exercises his\nwrath, eternal death must follow.\n\n173. Although Ham had sinned against his father in many ways, it is\nremarkable that the fruit of the first sin and the devil's malice did\nnot become manifest until the father lay drunk and bare. When, with\nthis sin, the previous ones had attained to fullness of power and\ngrowth, the Holy Spirit condemned him, and, as a warning to others,\nalso announced the infliction of impending, endless servitude.\n\nV. 26. _And he said, Blessed be Jehovah, the God of Shem; and let\nCanaan be his servant._\n\nThese are two sublime prophecies, worthy of close attention. They have\nsignificance in our time, though they were grossly garbled by the\nJews. The Jews observe that Ham is cursed thrice; this fact they wrest\nto the glory of their own nation, promising themselves worldly\ndominion.\n\n\nV. HAM CURSED; SHEM AND JAPHETH BLESSED.\n\n   A. THE CURSE PRONOUNCED UPON HAM 174-188.\n\n      1. Why Ham was thrice cursed 174.\n\n       * Disrespect of parents, pastors and authority signs of\n         approaching misfortune 175.\n\n      2. Way Ham disregarded the curse 176.\n\n      3. Why Ham disregarded the curse 177-178.\n\n      4. Ham's temporal prosperity continued with his curse 179-181.\n\n       * Faith alone grasps God's threatenings and promises 180-181.\n\n       * Reason God postpones punishment and reward 181-182.\n\n       * The Papal Church is not the true Church 183.\n\n       * Believers have comfort in their tribulations 184-185.\n\n       * The pious have their kingdom here in faith 186.\n\n      5. From this curse it is clear Noah was enlightened by the Holy\n         Spirit 187.\n\n       * Were all Ham's descendents cursed? 188.\n\n   B. BLESSING PRONOUNCED UPON SHEM 189-191.\n\n      1. This is an exceedingly great blessing 189.\n\n      2. Why is it clothed in praise to God 190.\n\n      3. This blessing proves that Noah possessed a precious light\n         191.\n\n   C. BLESSING PRONOUNCED UPON JAPHETH 192-224.\n\n      1. Why the form of Japheth's blessing differed from that of\n         Shem's 192.\n\n      2. Herein lies a special secret 193.\n\n      3. The Jews' false interpretation of this blessing 194.\n\n      4. Relation of these two blessings to each other 195.\n\n       * The Jews' false notion about Shem's blessing 196.\n\n      5. The order in which these blessings are enjoyed 197-198.\n\n       * The form God's Church takes in this world 199.\n\n       * Divine promises and threatenings to be understood in a\n         spiritual sense 199-200.\n\n       * Ham and Cain resemble one another in their positions and\n         works 201.\n\n       * The Turk and the Pope.\n\n         a. What strengthens them in their opposition to the true\n            Church 202.\n\n          * How a Christian should conduct himself in times of\n            misfortunes 203.\n\n         b. The power and advantages of the Turk and Pope of no avail\n            204.\n\n         c. Attitude of Church members to their pride 205-206.\n\n          * Why Ham's name was not mentioned when he was cursed\n            207-208.\n\n      6. The word dilatet the Latins use in explaining Japheth's\n         blessing 209-210.\n\n         a. It is not in harmony with the Hebrew 209-210.\n\n         b. Why all Latin interpreters use it 211.\n\n         c. It does not fully express the sense of the Holy Spirit\n            212.\n\n         d. What explanation should be given here 213-215.\n\n      7. All descendents of Japheth partake of this blessing through\n         the Gospel 216-217.\n\n      8. Translations of Latin interpreters of this blessing are to be\n         harmonized with the original text 218-219.\n\n       * Ham's name 220-221.\n\n         a. Its meaning and reason his parents gave it to him 220.\n\n         b. The hope of his parents in this name disappointed 221.\n\n      9. It is ascribed to this promise that Germany in these last\n         days received the light of the Gospel 222.\n\n       * Abraham had Noah as his teacher 223.\n\n       * The temporal prosperity of Ham's family, and their wickedness\n         224.\n\n\nV. HAM CURSED; SHEM AND JAPHETH BLESSED.\n\nA. The Curse Pronounced Upon Ham.\n\n174. But there is another reason for this repeatedly uttered curse.\nGod cannot forget such great irreverence toward parents, nor does he\nsuffer it to go unpunished. He requires that parents and rulers be\nregarded with reverence. He requires that elders be honored,\ncommanding that one shall rise up before a hoary head (Lev 19, 32).\nAnd, speaking of ministers of the Word, he says, \"He that despiseth\nyou, despiseth me\" (Mt 10, 40; Lk 10, 16).\n\n175. Hence disobedience of parents is a sure indication that curse and\ndisaster are close at hand. Likewise is contempt of ministers and of\nrulers punished. When the people of the primitive world began to\nderide the patriarchs and to hold their authority in contempt, the\nflood followed. When, among the people of Judah, the child began to\nbehave himself proudly against the old man, as Isaiah has it (ch 3,\n5), Jerusalem was laid waste and Judah went down. Such corruption of\nmorals is a certain sign of impending evil. We justly fear for Germany\na like fate when we look upon the prevailing disrespect for authority.\n\n176. Let us, however, bear witness of a practice to which both Holy\nWrit and our experience testify. Because God delays the threatened\npunishment he is mocked and considered a liar. In this practice we\nshould see the seal, as it were, to every prophecy. Ham hears that he\nis accursed; but inasmuch as the curse does not go into immediate\neffect, he securely despises and derides the same.\n\n177. Thus did the first world hold Noah's prophecy in ridicule when he\nspoke of the flood. Had they believed that such a punishment was close\nat hand, would they have gone on in a feeling of security? Would they\nnot rather have repented and begun a better life? If Ham had believed\nthat to be true which he heard from his father, he would have sought\nrefuge in mercy and, confessing his crime, craved forgiveness. But he\ndid neither; rather did he haughtily leave his father, to go to\nBabylon. There, with his posterity, he gave himself up to the building\nof a city and of a tower, and made himself lord of all Greater Asia.\n\n178. What is the reason for this feeling of security? It lies in the\nfact that divine prophecies must be believed; they cannot be perceived\nby our senses, or by experience. This is true both of divine promises\nand of divine threats. Therefore the opposite always seems to the\nflesh to be true.\n\n179. Ham is cursed by his father; but he lays hold upon the greater\nportion of the earth and establishes vast kingdoms. On the other hand,\nShem and Japheth are blessed, but in comparison with Ham, they and\ntheir posterity are beggarly.\n\nWhere then are we to seek the truth of this prophecy? I answer: This\nprophecy and all others, whether they be promises or threats, cannot\nbe understood by reason, but by faith alone. God delays both\npunishments and rewards; hence there is need of endurance. For \"He\nthat endureth to the end, the same shall be saved,\" as Christ says (Mt\n24, 13).\n\n180. The life of all pious people is wholly of faith and hope. The\nevidence of our senses, history, and the way of the world, would teach\nus the opposite. Ham is cursed, yet he alone obtains dominion. Shem\nand Japheth are blessed, yet they alone bear reproach and affliction.\nSince both the promises and the threats of God reach out into the\nfuture, the issue must be awaited in faith. Habakkuk says (ch 2, 3),\n\"It will surely come, it will not delay.\"\n\n181. Great is the wrath of the Holy Spirit which here prompts him to\nsay of Ham, \"A servant of servants shall he be;\" that is, the lowest\nand vilest of slaves. But if you let history speak, you will see Ham\nrule in Canaan, whereas Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and others who\nfollowed, and had the blessing, lived like servants among the\nCanaanites. The Egyptians are Ham's offspring, and how cruel was the\nservitude Israel suffered there!\n\n182. How, then, was it true that Ham was cursed and Shem was blessed?\nIn this way: The fulfillment of the promise and of the threat was in\nthe future. This delay is ordained in order that the wicked may fill\ntheir measure of sin and may not be able to accuse God of having given\nthem no room for repentance. On the other hand, when the righteous\nsuffer at the hands of the unrighteous and become the servants of\nservants, they undergo such trial and discipline for the purpose of\nincreasing in faith and in love toward God; so that, trained in\nmanifold vexations and tribulations, they may attain the promise.\n\nWhen the time was fulfilled, the might of Ham's posterity was not\ngreat enough to withstand the posterity of Shem. Then, indeed, was\nfulfilled that curse which Ham and his posterity had so long despised\nand disbelieved.\n\n183. It is much the same with us today. We have the true doctrine and\nthe true worship. Hence we can boast that we are the true Church,\nhaving the promise of spiritual blessings in Christ. As the pope's\nchurch condemns our doctrine, we know her to be not the Church of\nChrist but of Satan, and truly, like Ham, a \"servant of servants.\" And\nyet anyone may see that the pope rules, while we are servants and the\noff-scouring, as Paul says (1 Cor 4, 12).\n\n184. What, then, shall we poor, oppressed people do? We are to comfort\nour souls meanwhile with our spiritual dominion. We know we have\nforgiveness of sins and a gracious God, through Christ, until also\ntemporal freedom shall be vouchsafed on the last day. And we are not\nwithout traces of temporal freedom even in this life; for while\ntyrants stubbornly oppose the Gospel, they are cut off from the earth,\nroot and branch.\n\n185. So was the Roman empire destroyed after all the other\nworld-powers perished; but God's Word and Church remain forever.\nLikewise, Christ weakens the Pope's power, little by little; but that\nhe may be utterly removed and become a servant of servants with wicked\nHam is a matter for faith to await. Ham is shut out from the kingdom\nof God and possesses the kingdoms of the world for a time, just as the\npope is shut out from the Church of God and holds temporal dominion\nfor a time. But his dominion shall vanish.\n\n186. The divine law and order is that the righteous have dominion, but\nby faith, being satisfied with such spiritual blessing as a gracious\nGod and the certain hope of the heavenly kingdom. Meanwhile, we leave\npossession of the kingdoms of the world to the wicked until God shall\nscatter also their worldly power, and, through Christ, make us heirs\nof all things.\n\n187. Furthermore, we learn from this prophecy that Noah, by a special\nillumination of the Holy Spirit, was enabled to see, in the first\nplace, that his posterity would remain forever, and in the second\nplace, that the family of Ham, though they were to be rulers for a\ntime, would perish at last and above all would lose the spiritual\nblessing.\n\n188. However, the explanation given above (ch 4, para 182) with\nreference to the descendants of Cain, applies also here. I do not\nentertain the opinion that the offspring of Ham were doomed, without\nexception. Some found salvation by being converted to faith, but such\nsalvation was not due to a definite promise but to uncovenanted grace,\nso to speak. Likewise the Gibeonites and others were saved when the\nchildren of Israel occupied the land of Canaan. Job, Naaman the\nSyrian, the people of Nineveh, the widow of Zarephath, and others from\nthe heathen were saved, not by virtue of a promise, but by\nuncovenanted grace.\n\nB. Blessing Pronounced Upon Shem.\n\n189. But why does Noah not say, \"Blessed be Shem,\" instead of,\n\"Blessed be Jehovah, the God of Shem\"? I answer that it is because of\nthe magnitude of the blessing. The reference here is not to a temporal\nblessing, but to the future blessing through the promised seed. He\nsees this blessing to be so great that he cannot express it; hence, he\nturns to thanksgiving. It seems that Zacharias was thinking of this\nvery passage when he said, for a similar reason, \"Blessed be the Lord,\nthe God of Israel\" (Lk 1, 68).\n\n190. Noah's blessing takes the form of thanksgiving unto God. God, he\nsays, is blessed, who is the God of Shem. In other words: It is\nneedless for me to extend my blessing over Shem, who has been blessed\nbefore with spiritual blessing; he already is a child of God, and from\nhim the Church will be continued, as it was continued from Seth before\nthe flood. Full of wonderful meaning is the fact that Noah joins God\nwith Shem, his son, and, as it were, unites them.\n\n191. Noah's heart must have been divinely illumined since he makes\nsuch a distinction between his sons, rejecting Ham with his posterity\nand placing Shem in line with the saints and the Church because the\nspiritual blessing, given in paradise concerning the seed, would rest\nupon him. Therefore, this holy man blesses God and gives thanks unto\nhim.\n\nC. Blessing Pronounced Upon Japheth.\n\nV. 27. _God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem;\nand let Canaan be his servant._\n\n192. This prophecy is wonderful for the aptness of each single word.\nNoah did not bless Shem, but the God of Shem, by way of giving thanks\nto God for having embraced Shem and having adorned him with a\nspiritual promise, or the blessing of the woman's seed. But when he\nmentions Japheth he does not employ the same manner of speaking as in\nthe case of Shem. His words are chosen for the purpose of showing the\nmystery of which Paul speaks (Rom 11, 11) and Christ (Jn 4, 22), that\nsalvation is from the Jews and yet the gentiles also became partakers\nof this salvation. Shem alone is the true root and stem, yet the\nheathen are grafted upon this stem, as a foreign branch, and become\npartakers of the fatness and the sap which are in the chosen tree.\n\n193. Noah, seeing this through the Holy Spirit, predicts, in dim\nallusions but correctly, that Christ's kingdom is to spread in the\nworld from the root of Shem, and not from that of Japheth.\n\n194. The Jews prate that Japheth stands for the neighboring nations\naround Jerusalem which were admitted to the temple and its worship.\nBut Noah makes little ado about the temple of Jerusalem, or the\ntabernacle of Moses; his words refer to greater matters. He treats of\nthe three patriarchs who are to replenish the earth. While he affirms\nof Japheth that he does not belong to the root of the people of God\nwhich possesses the promise of the Christ, he declares that he shall\nbe incorporated through the call of the Gospel into the fellowship of\nthat people which has God and the promises.\n\n195. Here, then, we have a picture of the Church of the Gentiles and\nof the Jews. Ham, being wicked, is not admitted to the spiritual\nblessing of the seed, except as it happens by uncovenanted grace. To\nJapheth, however, though he has not the promise of the seed, like\nShem, the hope is nevertheless given that he will, at some future\ntime, be taken into the fellowship of the Church. Thus we Gentiles,\nbeing sons of Japheth, have no direct promise, indeed, and yet we are\nincluded in the promise given to the Jews, since we are predestined to\nthe fellowship of the holy people of God. These matters are here\nrecorded, not for Shem and Japheth so much as for their posterity.\n\n196. We learn why the Jews are so haughty and boastful. They see that\nShem, their father, alone has the promise of eternal blessing, which\nis given through Christ. So far, so good. But when they believe that\nthe promise pertains not to faith but rather to the carnal descent,\nthey are in error. This subject has been splendidly treated by Paul\n(Rom 9, 6). There he establishes the fact that the children of Abraham\nare not his carnal descendants but those who have his faith (Gal 3,\n7).\n\n197. The same thought is suggested here by Moses, who says in so many\nwords, \"Blessed be Jehovah, the God of Shem.\" This shows that there is\nno blessing except by the God of Shem. Hence, no Jew will share this\nblessing unless he have the God of Shem; that is, unless he believes.\nNor will Japheth share the blessing unless he dwells in the tents of\nShem, that is, unless he associates himself with him in faith.\n\n198. This is a grand promise, valid unto the end of the world. But\njust as it is limited to those who have the God of Shem, that is, who\nbelieve, so the curse also is limited to those who abide in the\nwickedness of Ham. Noah spoke these words, not on the strength of\nhuman authority and feeling, but by the Spirit of God. His words then\nrefer not to a temporal, but to a spiritual and eternal curse. Nor\nmust we understand him to speak of a curse that is a curse only in the\nsight of the world, but rather of one in the sight of God.\n\n199. The same statement has been made heretofore (ch 4 para 182)\nregarding the curse of Cain. Judged by outward appearances, Cain\nobtained a greater earthly blessing than Seth. God desires that his\nChurch in this world shall apparently suffer the curse pronounced upon\nthe wicked and that, on the other hand, the wicked shall seem to be\nblessed. Cain was the first man to build a city, calling it Enoch;\nwhile Seth dwelt in tents.\n\n200. Thus did Ham build the city and tower of Babel and ruled far and\nwide, while Shem and Japheth were poor, living in lowly tents. The\nfacts of history, then, teach that both the promises and the curses of\nGod are not to be understood carnally, or of the present life, but\nspiritually. Although oppressed in the world, the righteous are surely\nheirs and sons of God, while the wicked, though flourishing for a\nseason, shall ultimately be cut down and wither; a warning often\nuttered in the Psalms.\n\n201. There is a striking similarity in the conduct and the lot of Cain\nand Ham. Cain killed his brother, which shows plainly enough the lack\nof reverence for his father in his heart. Having been put in the ban\nby his father, he leaves the Church of the true God and the true\nworship, builds the city of Enoch, giving himself up altogether to\nworldly things. Just so does Ham sin by dishonoring his father. When\nalso he subsequently receives as sentence the curse whereby he is\nexcluded from the promised seed and the Church, he parts with God and\nthe Church without misgivings, since the curse rests not upon his\nperson but upon that of his son, and migrates to Babylon, where he\nestablishes a kingdom.\n\n202. These are very illustrious examples and needed by the Church,\nTurk and Pope today; allow us to boast of the heavenly and everlasting\npromise in that we have the Gospel doctrine, and are the Church. They\nknow, however, our judgment of them, that we consider and condemn both\nPope and Turk as very Antichrist. How securely they ignore our\njudgment, confidently because of the wealth and power they possess,\nand also because of our weakness in character and numbers. The very\nsame spirit we plainly see in Cain and Ham, in the condemned and\nexcommunicated.\n\n203. These truths enforce the lesson that we must not seek an abiding\ncity or country in this bodily existence, but in its varying changes\nand fortunes look to the hope of eternal life, promised through\nChrist. This is the final haven; and we must strive for it with sail\nand oar, as eager and earnest sailors while the tempest rages.\n\n204. What if the Turk should obtain sway over the whole world, which\nhe never will? Michael, as Daniel says, will bring aid to the holy\npeople, the Church (ch 10, 13). What matter if the Pope should gain\npossession of the wealth of all the world, as he has tried to do for\nmany centuries with all the wealth at his command? Will Turk and Pope\nthereby escape death, or even secure permanence of temporal power?\nWhy, then, should we be misled by the temporal blessings which they\nenjoy, or by our misfortunes and dangers, since we know that they are\nbanished from the fellowship of the saints, while we enjoy everlasting\nblessings through the Son of God?\n\n205. If Cain and Ham, and Pope and Turk, who are as father and son to\neach other, can afford to despise the judgment of the true Church on\nthe strength of fleeting and meager successes in this life, why can\nnot we afford in turn to despise their power and censure, on the\nstrength of the everlasting blessings which we possess? Ham was not\nmoved by his father's curse. Full of anger against him, and despising\nhim as a crazy old man, he goes away and arms himself with the power\nof the world, esteeming this more highly than to be blessed with Shem\nby his father.\n\n206. This story should give us strength for the similar experiences of\ntoday. The priests and bishops heap contempt upon us, saying, What can\nthose poverty stricken heretics do? Priest and bishop are puffed up\nwith their wealth and power. But let us bear this insolence of the\nwicked with undisturbed mind, as Noah bore that of his son. Let us\ntake consolation in the hope and faith of the eternal benediction, of\nwhich, we know, they are deprived.\n\n207. I said above (para 172) that the Holy Spirit was so greatly\nangered by the sin of Ham that he could not bear even to speak his\nname in the curse. And it is true, as the punishment shows, that Ham\nsinned grievously. The other reason mentioned above as not at all\nunlikely, I will here repeat: Ham had been called and received into\nthe ark by the divine Word, and had been saved with the others, and\nNoah wanted to spare him whom God had spared in the flood. Therefore,\nhe transferred the curse which Ham merited, to Canaan, his son, whom\nHam doubtless desired to keep with him.\n\n208. The Jews offer a different explanation: Canaan, the son, having\nbeen the first to see his grandfather Noah lying naked, announced it\nto his father, who then saw for himself; hence, Canaan gave his father\ncause to commit the sin. Let the reader judge what value there is in\nthis exposition.\n\n209. But there is also a philological question which must be discussed\nin connection. Scholars call translators to account for the rendering,\n\"God enlarge Japheth,\" when the Hebrew words do not permit it, though\nnot only the Hebrews but also the Chaldeans, are mostly agreed that\nthe word _jepheth_ means \"to enlarge.\" Technical discussions of this\nkind, however, are sometimes very useful to clear up the precise\nmeaning of a passage.\n\n210. Some scholars derive the name _Japheth_ from the verb _jephah_,\nwhich signifies _to be beautiful_, as in Ps 45, 2: _japhjaphita mibene\nAdam_, \"Thou art fairer than the children of men.\" But this may easily\nbe shown to be an error; for the true origin of the word is the verb\n_phatah_, which means \"to persuade,\" \"to deceive with fair words\" as\nin Ex 22 16: _ki jephateh isch betulah_, \"If a man entice a virgin, he\nshall surely pay a dowry for her.\" And in Jer 20, 7: _pethithani\njehovah va-epath_, \"O Jehovah, thou hast persuaded me and I was\npersuaded;\" Prov 1, 10: _Im-jephatukah_, \"If sinners entice thee.\"\nThere is no need of more examples, for the word occurs frequently, and\nI have no doubt that it is derived from the Greek word _peitho_, for\nit has the same meaning.\n\n211. But let us turn to the question: Why have all translators made it\nread, \"God enlarge Japheth,\" while it is not the word _pathach_, which\nmeans \"to enlarge\" or \"to open\", but rather the word _pathah_? I have\nno doubt that the translators were influenced by the harsh expression.\nSince this is a promise, it seemed too harsh to state that Noah had\nsaid, \"God deceive Japheth.\" This would appear to be a word of\ncursing, not of blessing. Hence they chose a milder term, though it\nviolated the rules of language. And since there is but a slight\ndifference between _pathach_, and _pathah_, they used one for the\nother. They meant to preserve the important fact that this is a\npromise.\n\n212. But there is no need for us to alter the text in this manner, and\nto violate its grammatical construction, since the word _pathah_,\noffers a most suitable meaning. Being a word of double meaning, as the\nword _suadere_ in Latin, it may be accepted either in a bad or in a\ngood sense. Hence, it is not irreverent to apply this word to God. We\nfind it clearly so used in Hosea 2, 14, where the Lord says:\n\"Therefore, behold, I will (_mephateha_) allure her (or, entice her by\ncoaxing), and bring her into the wilderness, and speak comfortably\nunto her.\" I will suckle her, speak sweetly unto her, and thus will I\ndeceive her, as it were, so that she may agree with me, so that the\nChurch will join herself to me, etc.\n\nIn this sense the word may here rightly be taken to mean \"allure,\"\n\"persuade,\" \"coax by means of friendly words and flattery.\" God\nsuckle, persuade, deceive Japheth by persuasion, so that Japheth\nhimself, being allured, as his name signifies, may be invited in a\nfriendly way and thus be beguiled.\n\n213. But you say, what will be the meaning of this? or why should\nthere be need for Japheth to be beguiled or persuaded, and that by God\nhimself? I answer: Noah makes the names to serve his purpose in this\nprophecy. He gives thanks to God that he establishes them to stand\nlike a firm root from which Christ was to spring. For the verb _sum_,\nsignifies \"to place,\" \"to put in position,\" \"to establish.\"\n\n214. For Japheth, however, he prays that he may become a true Japheth.\nSince he was the oldest son, who ordinarily should have been given the\nright of the first-born, he prays that God would persuade him in a\nfriendly manner, first, not to envy his brother this honor, nor to be\ndissatisfied that this privilege was taken from him and given to his\nbrother. Furthermore, because this matter touches the person of\nJapheth only, God includes his entire offspring in the blessing.\nThough the promise was given to Shem alone, yet God does not shut out\nfrom it the offspring of Japheth, but speaks to them lovingly through\nthe Gospel, that they may also become _jepheth_, being persuaded by\nthe Word of the Gospel. This is a divine persuasion, coming from the\nHoly Spirit; not from the flesh, nor from the world, nor from Satan,\nbut holy and quickening. This expression is used by Paul in Gal 1, 10,\nwhere he says, \"Am I now persuading men or God?\" And Gal 3, 1, \"Who\ndid bewitch you that ye should not obey the truth?\"--that ye do not\nagree to the truth, that ye do not permit yourselves to be persuaded\nby that which is true?\n\n215. Viewing the name Japheth in this case, it signifies a person of\nthe kind which we call guileless, who believes readily, permitting\nhimself to be easily persuaded of a matter, who does not dispute or\ncling to his own ideas but submits his mind to the Lord and rests upon\nhis Word, remaining a learner, not desiring to be master over the\nwords and works of God.\n\nHence it is a touching prayer which is here recorded, that God might\npersuade Japheth; that is, that he might speak fondly with him. Noah\nprays that, though God does not speak to Japheth on the basis of a\npromise, as he does with Shem, yet he would speak with him on the\nbasis of grace and divine goodness.\n\n216. This prayer of Noah foresees the spread of the Gospel throughout\nthe whole world. Shem is the stem. From his posterity Christ was born.\nThe Church is of the Jews, who had patriarchs, prophets, and kings.\nAnd yet God here shows Noah that also the wretched Gentiles were to\ndwell in the tents of Shem; that is, they were to come into that\nheritage of the saints which the Son of God brought into this\nworld--forgiveness of sins, the Holy Spirit, and everlasting life. He\nprophesies clearly that also Japheth will hear the sweet message of\nthe Gospel as his name suggests; so that, though he have not the same\ntitle as Shem, who was set to be the stem from which Christ was to\nspring, yet he should have the persuader, namely the Gospel.\n\n217. It was Paul through whom this prophecy was fulfilled. He almost\nunaided taught the Gospel doctrine to the posterity of Japheth. He\nsays: \"From Jerusalem, and round about even unto Illyricum, I have\nfully preached the Gospel of Christ\" (Rom 15, 19). Almost all of Asia,\nwith the exception of the oriental peoples, together with Europe,\nbelongs to the posterity of Japheth. The Gentiles, therefore, did not,\nas the Jews did, receive the kingdom and the priesthood from God. They\nhad neither the law nor the promise. Yet by the mercy of God they have\nheard that sweet voice of the Gospel, the persuader, which is\nindicated by the very name of Japheth.\n\n218. The interpreters failed to recognize this as the true meaning,\nand God permitted them to make this mistake. Still they did not miss\nthe true meaning altogether. For the verb _hirchib_, which means \"to\nenlarge,\" means also \"to give consolation,\" just as conversely in\nLatin the word _angustiae_ (narrow place) signifies also \"pains,\" or\n\"perils,\" or \"disaster.\" Thus we read in Psalms 4, 1: \"Thou hast set\nme at large when I was in distress.\" The only real enlargement, or\nconsolation, is the Word of the Gospel.\n\n219. Thus the several expositions are harmonized by proper\ninterpretation. But the primary meaning of _enlarge_, which conveys\nthe idea of _persuasion_, is the native and proper one. It sheds a\nbright light upon the fact that we Gentiles, although the promise was\nnot given to us, have nevertheless been called by the providence of\nGod to the Gospel. The promise pertains to Shem alone, but Japheth, as\nPaul has it in Romans 11, 17, was grafted into the olive tree, like a\nwild olive, and became a partaker of the original fatness, or the sap,\nof the olive. The older portions of the Bible agree with the newer,\nand what God promised in the days of Noah, he now carries out.\n\n220. \"Ham\" signifies \"the hot and burning one.\" This name was given to\nhim by his father, I believe, because of the great things he hoped for\nhis youngest son. To Noah the other two were cold men in comparison.\nEve rejoiced greatly when Cain was born (Gen 4, 1). She believed that\nhe would restore whatever had been wrought amiss. Yet he was the first\nto harm mankind in a new way, in that he killed his brother.\n\n221. Thus God, according to his unsearchable counsel, changes the\nexpectations even of the saints. Ham, whom his father, at his birth,\nhad expected to be inflamed with greater zeal for the support of the\nChurch than his brothers, was hot and burning, indeed, when he grew\nolder, but in a different sense. He burned against his parent and his\nGod, as his deed shows. Hence, his name was one of evil prophecy,\nunsuspected of Noah when he gave it.\n\n222. This is Noah's prophecy concerning his sons, who have filled the\nearth with their offspring. The fact, therefore, that God has\npermitted the light of the Gospel to shine upon Germany, is due to the\nprophecy anent Japheth. We see today the fulfillment of that which\nNoah foretold. Though we are not of the seed of Abraham, yet we dwell\nin the tents of Shem and enjoy the fulfilment of the prophecies\nconcerning Christ.\n\nVs. 28-29. _And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty\nyears. And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and\nhe died._\n\n223. History shows that Noah died fifty years after the birth of\nAbraham. Abraham, therefore, enjoying the instruction of so able and\nrenowned a teacher until his fiftieth year, had an opportunity to\nlearn something of religion. And there is no doubt that Noah, being\nfilled with the Holy Spirit, cared for this grandchild of his with\nspecial care and love, as the only heir of Shem's promises.\n\n224. At that time the offspring of Ham flourished, spreading idolatry\nthroughout the regions of the East. Abraham was in touch with it, and\nnot without danger to himself. He was saved, however, by Noah, being\nalmost alone in recognizing the greatness of a man who was the only\nsurvivor of the early world. The others, forgetful of the wrath which\nhad raged in the flood, taunted the pious, old man; particularly Ham's\nprogeny, puffed up by wealth and power. They heaped insults upon\nFather Noah, and--frenzied by success--they divided the curse of\nservitude pronounced upon them as a sign of his dotage. Amen.","title":"Commentary on Genesis, Vol. 2: Luther on Sin and the Flood","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":129331}