199
and proud for the purpose of sinning, 2. and that one and the same sin was to
the man and to the woman, which was especially masculine, for, if Eve alone
had sinned, it would not have harmed the race (Malvenda).
And the woman said, The serpent, a creature which thou hast made,
and that assisted by a higher power, by an evil angel, for such I now perceive by
sad experience there are, beguiled me, a weak and foolish woman, whose
seduction calls for thy pity, not thine anger; and I did eat, being surprised and
over-persuaded against my own judgment and resolution.
Verse 14: And the LORD God said unto the serpent (Ex. 21:29, 32),
Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every
beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the
days of thy life (Is. 65:25; Mic. 7:17).
[He said unto the serpent] That is, unto Satan. For it is a common
synecdoche, inasmuch as we might understand the author under the name of
the instrument (Munster). Through metonymy, He addresses the thing
containing in the place of the the thing contained; for He addresses the Devil,
who was in the serpent; that is to say, Devil, most cursed one, who speaketh
words in the cursed serpent. He pronounced the serpent cursed because of the
Devil, as that in which he had deceived our first parents. Thus the waters are
cursed in Numbers 5:18, 19, with respect to their effect; and earth is cursed
because of Adam, Genesis 3:17; 8:21. The Devil is cursed on account of his
crime. Thus the signification of the malediction of the serpent differs
somewhat from the signification of the malediction of the Devil; both are
maledictions, but not the same, nor similar. Similar twists occur elsewhere.
Job 1:21: I came from the womb of my mother, that is, my own, particular
mother, and I shall return thither, namely, into the womb of my mother, that
is, the common mother, that is, the earth. Additionally, I translate rwr@ )f
ht@f)a, thou cursed one, by means of the vocative case continuously unto the
end of the verse (and so I render the whole verse: Because thou hast done this,
thou most cursed of all animals, even of wild beasts, thou who art about to go
upon the ground during the entire time of thy life and to eat dust: then follows
verse 15, On account of it, enmity, etc.). So it is in Genesis 49:8, hdwF h@ y:
htf@)a, thou Judah, they shall praise, etc., which others translate, Judah, they
shall praise thee. Thus the su\ ought to be rendered by means of the vocative
case in Acts 4:24: De/spota, su\ o9 Qeoj_ o9 poi/hsaj, etc., that is, Lord
God, thou who didst make; and, in Luke 1:28, when he had saluted her,
Xair~ e, kexaritwme/nh, Hail, thou highly favored, he doubles his salutation
with other words, o9 Ku/rioj meta_ sou, eul0 oghme/nh su\ en0 gunaici/n, The
Lord be with thee, O thou most blessed among women. Thus Psalm 2:7 can be
200
translated, My Son, whom I have begotten today, demand from me. For
insofar as it is cited differently in Acts 13:33 and Hebrews 1:5, in this they
follow the Greeks (Greek interpreters), who add ei,0 Thou art (Picherel’s On
Creation). These things, in an allegorical sense, but in a sense especially
intended by the Holy Spirit, are suited to the Demon: literally to the serpent,
whom He punishes, as a devoted father and judge destroys the dagger, by which
the robber murdered his son (Tirinus); as a judge damns the forger with the
pen, and the mule with the man, in Leviticus 20:15, and the goring ox with his
master, in Exodus 21:28, 29 (Bochart’s A Sacred Catalogue of Animals
1:1:4:30:40).
Unto the serpent; or rather, this or that serpent, which, as was said
before, Genesis 3:1, was no ordinary serpent, but a serpent acted and assisted
by the devil; and therefore this sentence or curse is pronounced against both of
them: 1. Against the serpent itself, which though an unreasonable creature,
and therefore not subject to a law, and consequently not capable of guilt or sin,
Romans 4:15, yet, being the instrument of the devil’s malice, is rightly
punished; as other beasts being abused by man’s sin did suffer together with
him, Exodus 32:20; Leviticus 20:15, 16, not for their crime, but partly for the
punishment, and partly for the benefit of man, who is their lord and owner,
Psalm 8:6; for whose sake seeing they were made, it is not strange if they be
punished for his use, that in their punishment man might have a demonstration
of God’s anger against sin, and a motive to repentance. See on Genesis 6-7. 2.
Against the devil, who is here principally intended, though as he lay hid in the
body of the serpent which he possessed and used, so his curse is here
mentioned under the cover of the serpent’s curse, and under the disguise of
such terms as properly and literally agree to the serpent, but are also mystically
to be understood concerning the devil; with whom the Lord entertaineth no
conference, as he did with Adam and Eve, whose sin was less than his, and
whom God meant to bring to repentance; but immediately denounceth the
curse against him, as one that sinned against much greater knowledge, and from
far worse principles, not from mistake or misinformation, but from choice and
rebellion, from hatred of God, and from mere envy and implacable malice
against men.
[Because thou hast done this] He immediately curses the serpent, for
he committed that evil of himself through jealousy and malice, without anyone
instigating. From this place, the Hebrews gather that to the tysim,' 1 that is, to
the one inciting others to idolatry, a place for excuses is not to be given,
according to Deuteronomy 13. The Hebrews say, in the age to come, all things
will receive healing and restoration, except the serpent and Gibeonites. By the
1 tysim', the one alluring, is derived from tw@s, to incite, allure, instigate.
201
Gibeonites, they understand hypocrites, for by deceit they forced themselves
upon the Israelite people. They also say: Three sects do not see the face of
God: hypocrites, mockers, and liars or imposters (Fagius).
[Cursed] Within this curse the Hebrews gather that it labors for a
longer time, and they assert that its womb bears for seven years (Fagius).
Rather, within this curse it is, that what was formerly raised up now creeps
upon the groud (Fagius, Munster), upon thy breast thou shalt go, with thine
agility repressed (Grotius); that what was previously eating herbs and the fruit
of trees is eating dust (Fagius). See Isaiah 65:25 (Grotius). Those things were
previously natural to the serpent (for He would not destroy the natural
characteristics of the serpent, who did not destroy the natural characteristics of
sinning men and demons [Tirinus]); but now they are turned into punishment
and infamy (Menochius, Tirinus, Bochart’s A Sacred Catalogue of Animals
1:1:4:23). In the same way, the Rainbow was natural, but afterwards a sign of
covenant (Menochius). Thus, what things were natural to Adam and Eve
become punishments: the wife was placed under her husband, they feed upon
herbs, the ground brings forth thorns, etc. (Tirinus). Others maintain that
previously the serpent was gifted with feet (Piscator). In Paphos,1 a biped
serpent was sighted: Apollonius2 out of Aristotle (Menochius). This does not
satisfy (Bochart’s A Sacred Catalogue of Animals). It is not sufficiently certain
that any snake was a biped. Aristotle, On the Progression of Animals,3 satisfies
many that neither two, nor four feet can suffice for the serpent because of the
great length of its body; neither is it able to have many: from which he
concludes that it is necessary that, in relation to the serpent, there is th\n
a)podi/an, the absence of feet (Bochart’s A Sacred Catalogue of Animals
1:1:4:23:52). The serpent was previously most beautiful and pleasing to man
(Munster, Piscator); now hated and detested by man (Fagius, Estius,
Menochius, Tirinus). For this cause, Hypereides4 said that all serpents are
worthy of hatred (the Suda,5 under Parei=ai o1feij, Reddish-brown Snakes),
and to hate just as if they were snakes is a proverb in Plautus’6 Mercator 4. See
Theocritus’ Idyll 15.7 See also Artemidorus,1 The Interpretation of Dreams 2.2
1 Paphos is on the southwestern coast of Cyprus.
2 Apollonius of Dyscolos (second century AD) was a Greek grammarian of
considerable ability and of lasting influence. He lived and worked in Alexandria,
Egypt.
3 De Incessu Animalium.
4 Hypereides (c. 390-322 BC) was Greek rhetorician, speech-writer.
5 The Suda is an encyclopedia containing more that 30,000 entries concerning the
ancient Mediterranean world. It was probably composed in tenth-century Byzantium.
6 Titus Maccius Plautus (254-184 BC) was a Roman playwright. Only 21 of his
nearly 130 comedies survive.
7 Theocritus’ Idyll 15: “But from a child I feared horses and slimy snakes.”
202
See the allegorical sense in Micah 7:17; Psalm 72:9; Isaiah 49:23 (Grotius).
Insofar as this aims at Satan, it denotes that he is confounded and cast down
(Fagius), and consumes dust only, that is, earthly men (Lyra, Fagius); and
considers earthly and lowly things only, not heavenly things, as formerly
(Menochius).
[Among all living things] Therefore, also all things were cursed, in
accordance with Romans 8:22 (Fagius). The punishment to this proud one is
great, for inferior and mean things are placed before it (Lyra).
[Upon thy breast, Kn1 :xog:@-l(a] Upon thy belly (Cajetan, Junius and
Tremellius, Piscator, Ainsworth, Malvenda, Oleaster, Chalden, Samaritan
Text, Syriac), or, breast (Ainsworth, Piscator, Arabic, Oleaster), breast and
belly (Septuagint in Ainsworth), that is, with difficulty thou shalt go
(Ainsworth).
[Earth] Hebrew: dust, inasmuch as he was previously eating herbs
(Oleaster). Dust, that is, vile and foul food: it likewise denotes a most mean
condition (Ainsworth), and the difficulty of acquiring nourishment (Piscator,
Ainsworth), which will be such that it will be compelled to fill its belly with
dust. Otherwise it feeds on frogs and fish (Piscator). With food it deceived
our first parents, with food it is punished (Malvenda). Not that it would eat
dust alone; but that, since it creeps upon the earth, it cannot but bring dust into
its mouth simultaneously with its other food (compare with Psalm 102:9, 10);
for, lying prone in ashes, he was eating bread, which was thrown down upon
the ground. The Chersydrus snake, nevertheless, with water failing, feeds
upon dry furrows, as Nicander testifies in Theriaca 372.3 And a certain serpent
of India lives on dust alone, says Philo, On Creation 59. Other animals feed
upon this same food: worms (Plautus in Casina 1), beetles (Al-Jahiz4), and
scorpions, as testify Bardisanus,5 in Eusebius’ Preparation for the Gospel 6
(Bochart’s A Sacred Catalogue of Animals 1:1:4:27, and Pliny, in Natural
History 10:72, and moles (in Gate of Heaven6 22), and wolves (Pisida7 in
1 Artemidorus Daldianus, or Ephesius, was a second century professional diviner,
interpreter of dreams, and compiler of divination methods.
2 Oneirocritica, from the second of five volumes: “A snake signifies sickness and an
enemy. The way in which the snake treats the dreamer determines the way in which
the sickness or enemy will also treat him.”
3 Nicander was a second century BC Greek poet and physician. Theriaca is a poem
on venomous animals.
4 Al-Jahiz (c. 776-868) was an Arab scholar of Basra and Baghdad. He wrote a Book
of Animals, which draws heavily upon Aristotle’s Historia Animalium.
5 Bardisanus, or Bar Daisan, or Bardesanes (154-222), was an Assyrian Gnostic
interested in science and philosophy.
6 Porta Cœli is an ancient Hebrew work.
7 George of Pisida was a seventh century Byzantine poet. His Hexameron is on the
creation of the world.
203
Hexameron), namely, ravenous wolves (Aristotle in The History of Animals1
8:5).
Because thou hast done this, deceived the woman, and tempted her to
this sin, thou art cursed; or, shalt be from henceforth, both really and in the
opinion of all mankind: or, be thou.
Every beast of the field; as in other respects, so particularly in that
which here follows; upon thy belly shalt thou go. If the serpent did so before
the fall, what then was natural, is now become painful and shameful to it, as
nakedness and some other things were to man. But it seems more probable
that this serpent before the fall either had feet, or rather did go with its breast
erect, as the basilisk at this day doth; God peradventure so ordering it as a
testimony that some other serpents did once go so. And so the sense of the
curse being applied to this particular serpent, and to its kind, may be this:
Whereas thou hadst a privilege above other kinds of serpents, whereby thou
didst go with erected breast, and didst feed upon the fruits of trees and other
plants; now thou shalt be brought down to the same mean and vile estate with
them, upon thy belly (or rather, breast, as the word also signifies) shalt thou
go, etc. as they do; and dust shalt thou eat. Dust is the food, as of earthworms,
scorpions, and some other creatures, so also of some serpents, as appears both
from Isaiah 65:25; Micah 7:17, and from the testimony of Nicander, Theriaca
372, and Philo, an Arabic writer.2 Or, the dust is the serpent’s sauce rather
than his meat; whilst creeping and grovelling upon the earth, and taking his
food from thence, he must necessarily take in dust and filth together with it.
These two clauses being applied to the devil, signify his fall from his noble state
and place to earth and hell; the baseness of his nature and of his food, his
delight being in the vilest of men and things, it being now his meat and drink to
dishonour God and destroy mankind, and promote the esteem and love of
earthly things.
[All the days of thy life] The days of the life of Satan are the season
lasting unto the consummation of the age (Fagius).
Verse 15: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and
between thy seed (Matt. 3:7; 13:38; 23:33; John 8:44; Acts 13:10; 1 John 3:8)
and her seed (Ps. 132:11; Is. 7:14; Mic. 5:3; Matt. 1:23, 25; Luke 1:31, 34,
35; Gal. 4:4); it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel (Rom.
16:20; Col. 2:15; Heb. 2:14; 1 John 5:5; Rev. 12:7, 17).
[I will put enmity] Verse 14 speaks of the punishment of the serpent,
the instrument; verse 15 speaks of Satan, the author of the sin, and his
punishment (Helvicus’ The Paradisiacal Protevangelium 64). The Hebrews
1 Historia Animalium.
2 This is likely a reference to the previously mentioned Al-Jahiz.
204
crassly understand this of the bare and natural hatred between man and serpent
(Fagius, Helvicus’ The Paradisiacal Protevangelium 64). [Against those
Helvicus undertakes to prove two things; 1. that the serpent, who is
mentioned in this chapter, was not a simple serpent, but that the Devil was
operating through the serpent as an instrument.] It is demonstrated: 1.
Because this serpent speaks and reasons exquisitely. Objection: The serpent,
in the beginning, was intelligent. This is the position of Ibn Ezra. Response:
These are fantasies. For in verses 1 and 14, it is called a beast of the field, and a
brute: However, that intellect is proper to man, not common to the brutes,
many of the Rabbis acknowledge; Rabbi Saadias Gaon, Rabbi Moses ben Jacob,1
Rabbi Bechai [whose words see in Helvicus]. 2. If this serpent was conversing
from an innate duna&mei/ability, there would have been no symmetry between
the sin and the punishment: For above all the soul escaped; the grinding of the
head, etc., regards only the body, and it affects very few; moreover, most are
not observed by man. Then the man, who, being deceived, sinned, would be
punished even more gravely than the serpent, who deceived and sinned out of
malice (which is absurd). For eternal death was imposed upon the man: What
is even the loss of reason compared to this, if it should be imposed upon the
serpent? 3. Many eminent (old, more sincere by far than the rest in the
interpretation of the Scriptures [Fagius]) Hebrews acknowledge this, especially
the Kabbalists, who assert that this serpent was Satan, even the Angel of death.
This is the position of Rabbi Judah,2 Rabbi Samuel,3 Rabbi Bechai [whose
words see in Helvicus], and Rabbi Moses the Egyptian,4 who thus writes in his
Guide for the Perplexed 2:30:5 In the Midrash (old commentaries; he
understands uncritically Moses Haddarsan6), they record that the serpent in
Genesis 3 would have been ridden, and that it would have been the size of a
camel, and that the rider was he who deceived Eve, namely, Samael,7 that is
1 Rabbi Moses ben Jacob Cordovero, also known as Ramak (1522-1570), was one of
the great Kabbalistic scholars of his age. He lived and labored in Safed of Galilee,
which was a center of Kabbalistic studies.
2 Rabbi Judah Loew ben Bezalel (1525-1609) was a Torah and Talmudic scholar and
a leading public figure among the Jews at Prague. He composed works of philosophy
and exegesis (in particular, Gur Aryeh, Young Lion, a commentary on Rabbi
Salomon’s commentary on the Pentateuch), all touched with mysticism.
3 This is probably a reference to Rabbi Samuel Barzani (died c. 1630). He was
responsible for the founding of Jewish schools and seminaries in Kurdistan. His
daughter, Asenath, is recognized as the first female rabbi.
4 That is, Maimonides.
5 More Nevochim.
6 Moses Haddarsan (eleventh century) was a French rabbi. He was an expert in
rabbinical tradition. His midrashic and haggadic comments on Scripture survive only
in the quotations of others (Rabbi Salomon, for example).
7 Samael is common name for the deceiver in the Talmud.
205
Satan (Helvicus’ The Paradisiacal Protevangelium 64). 2. [Helvicus undertakes
to prove this, that this enmity, etc., is not the natural hatred between men and
serpents, but the victory of Messiah Himself over Satan.] He demonstrates: 1.
Otherwise, Satan, the author of sin, would not have been punished, which is
absurd. 2. Christ alone is able to crush the head (that is, the power) of the
serpent (that is, Satan). 3. It is evident that these words in verse 15 are set
forth for the consolation of Adam and Eve and vengeance upon the serpent.
But neither of these would be of surpassing excellence, if in this only the
enmity should be placed, that man and snake might injure one another; nor
would any solace or remedy have been bequeathed to Adam and Eve (nor to
their posterity before Moses) against the wrath of God. 4. God Himself thus
explains and teaches in Genesis 22; 26; 28; Psalm 72:17 that Messiah is that
blessed seed. 5. The Septuagint translates it aut0 oj_ , He Himself, referring to
an individual. Who is this except the Messiah? 6. It is evident that this battle
will not be physical: For one who would attack a serpent attacks, not with his
feet, but with a spear or club. 7. Concerning the remedy, both Targums agree
that it is to be provided by the Messiah. [Helvicus provides these in The
Paradisiacal Protevangelium. What he adds only take Calvin and Pareus into
consideration, not the subject matter; therefore, I gladly pass on. Let us finally
hear Master Mede setting these things thus in order:] There are four views
(says he) concerning the object of this malediction. 1. Some think that the
malediction is brought forward against the serpent alone (for the serpent is
comprehended with the other beasts), not against the Devil, for he was cursed
previously. 2. Others: against the Devil only, because a brute serpent could
not be justly punished. 3. Others apply verse 14 to the serpent and verse 15 to
the Devil. But certainly the thou and the thee have the same referent in both
verses. 4. Others judge that it is brought forward against both, which view I
judge to be most true. For: 1. The Devil, not as a bare spirit, but in the form
of a serpent, seduced man; therefore, under the same form, he received
punishment, and the composition of the punishment is suited to the condition
of a serpent: for God usually brands the punishment with some mark of the sin
itself, as in Judges 1:7, so that the sinner might understand both what and why
he suffers. 2. Because the Devil bewitched the woman with the form of a most
sagacious animal, God was pleased to alter the exemplar, to obliterate that
unhappy character, and to cast the serpent down from his position; so that that
covering, by which the Devil had hidden his own wickedness, might be made a
spectacle in which man might view its malice perpetually. In accordance with
both of these causes I understand this malediction, that it applies in a literal
sense to the serpent, but thus, that it actually includes the malediction of the
Devil also. But here it is to be further inquired: Question 1: How was it just
for God to punish the serpent, which was a a)proai/reton/non-purposing
206
instrument, which had neither a knowledge of the matter nor a will to sin;
especially if the Devil assumed only the form of a serpent? This argument
moves some, so that they think that this is delivered concerning the Devil
alone. But this reason does not suffice. For the earth is cursed, verse 17, and
the beasts are wiped out because of the sin of man, Genesis 6:5, 7. And
certainly that law in Leviticus 20:15 is just, in which the beast was to be
destroyed with the man. Therefore, the difficulty is to be resolved in another
way. 1. We know that all creatures were made for the use of man. 2. The
use of the creatures would have been more excellent and more proper, if man
had persisted in innocence; but it was made lower and meaner by our sin.
Now, therefore, the creatures are subservient to man, sometimes for
punishment (inasmuch as they sometimes attack and kill him), sometimes for
the remedy of misery, so that they might be warnings of the anger of God (and
indeed stimuli of repentance) and, at the same time, of the condition of the
Devil, so that men might abhor him and draw the hope of his conquest. Thus
the serpent was both made and punished for the use of man. Question 2: Was
this punishment denounced against: 1. the one serpent, or 2. all serpents, or
3. a particular species of serpent? The first cannot be affirmed because
mention is made of the seed, and because this memorial was destined to be for
all the posterity of Adam. 2. The second is not able to be affirmed because the
diversity of snakes is not less than the diversity of quadrupeds. Neither do I
doubt but that a great many serpents were going upon the belly before the fall.
3. Therefore, I understand this of one kind of serpent, and that by far the most
noble, which surpassed, with respect to beauty and sagacity, not only other
serpents, but all the rest of the animals, although it is now made meaner than
the rest. Consequently, it could not have been the basilisk (as some maintain),
which they say is as a king among serpents: For this one still proceeds, standing
erect from its middle, as Pliny, Natural History 8:21, and Solinus, The
Wonders of the World 28, testify, since the Scripture expressly asserts the
contrary concerning this serpent. But now let us come to the malediction. In
relation to its genus, the serpent is cursed, even indeed in comparison with the
others, because it was made viler than all with respect to even its inherent
perfections, and most destitute of external supports for preserving life. In
relation to its kind, however, it is said concerning it, first, thou shalt go -l(a
Kn1 x: og:,@ which they translate, upon thy belly. And by this interpretation, this
passage is made difficult. For, if the same form was to the serpent which is to it
today, then it could not have proceeded in any other way except upon its belly.
Hence, some have affirmed that it indeed proceeded in this way previously, but
now this is changed into a punishment: which, as most remote from the text, I
have never been able to believe. I would prefer to follow Jerome’s, or rather
the Vulgate Version, Upon thy breast thou shalt go. The breast is the upper
207
part of the body, from the navel to the head: Therefore, this serpent was
previously going in an upright posture. And this perhaps the Septuagint
translators were wishing to insinuate, thus rendering the expression, e0pi\ tw|~
sth/qei kai\ th|= koili/a| sou, upon thy breast and belly. The word NwOxgF
appears to favor this sense, which is from the Chaldean Nxga :, to be curved,
which denotes the inclination of the head and chest toward the earth, as in 1
Kings 18:42, where the Targum has Nxg. And in Mark 1:7, in the place of
ku/yaj, stooping down, the Syriac Version has Nxg, which is the same. In
addition, it is evident that this is not impossible, 1. because serpents often raise
themselves, both when they attack man, and when they swim in the water. 2.
And the basilisk proceeds in this way at the present day. And perhaps God
willed this one to go in this manner, so that there might be a memorial of the
truth of this malediction. Just as He willed that there were some giants after
the Flood, in testimony of the greater stature of man before the Flood. And
this will be more credible, if we affirm with Basil, Ephræm Syrus,1 Moses Bar
Cephas,2 and others, that the serpent once had feet, which certainly do not at
all pertain unto its essence. And he who can accept a miraculous mutation both
of man and of the earth after the fall, why would he judge that such a change
would be incredible in the serpent, especially when God had decided to leave
behind a perpetual memorial in the serpent? Finally, this will be, not only
possible, but probable, if we carefully consider, 1. that among the creatures, a
thing is more noble, the more it inclines upward and raises itself; a thing is
more ignoble, the more it inclines downward. We see this among the
elements. For fire ascends, etc. For this cause, He gave to man an elevated
face, etc. Also, heroic men proceed more erect than others. Thus, a lion
walks with his head and chest erect. In the case of the serpent, therefore, a
singular shrewdness raised the body, and it is probable that even the movement
of the body was changed by means of the change of nature. Likewise, his own
fall debilitated the man to such a degree, that, if education did not hinder, it is
believed (and confirmed by experience) that he would walk upon his hands and
feet, just like a quadruped. Consequently, I understand this part of the
malediction in this way, that the Scripture in this place, as is its habit, insinuates
the cause by sensible effect, even the fall of the serpent by the prostration of its
body; just as the removal of human perfections is called nakedness. The second
1 Ephræm Syrus was the most influential Syriac Church Father of the fourth century.
From monastic seclusion, he composed commentaries on most of the books of the Old
Testament, which commentaries demonstrate a knowledge of both the Syriac Peshitta
and the Hebrew original.
2 Moses Bar Cephas (813-903) was a monk and a bishop in Syria. He wrote
commentaries on the entire Bible, but only framents of Genesis, the Gospels, and
Paul’s Epistles survive.
208
part of the malediction is, dust thou shalt eat. This argues both the meanness of
the nature which could be sustained by such food, and its continuance in this
most vile condition; for food, as it is either better or worse, produces a similar
quality of body. The third part follows, I will put enmity. This part, without
doubt, more directly regards the Devil: nevertheless, it ought to be explained
in respect to the brute serpent also. To which experience also testifies. It is
the happiness of the creature to enjoy the favor and goodwill of its lord, that is,
of man. But the serpent is most despised by man. Likewise, the serpent dreads
to see man, especially naked (as those specializing in the natural sciences
affirm): as if a natural instinct should recall to it the time of the malediction,
when it and the naked man stood before God to receive the sentence of enmity.
The venom of the serpent is poison to man; just as the spittle of man is to the
serpent. Add that this enmity is more vehement in the feminine sex. Rupertus
affirms that, if the bare foot of a woman should even minimally press the head
of a serpent, he will immediately die. Finally, note the uneven outcome: for
the serpent does not prevail against man, except by stealth and by surprise, and
with respect to the lowest part (see Genesis 49:17); but man crushes its head.
And the serpent (when man is about to strike him) immediately coils its body
around its head, as if remembering this malediction. But now let us see how
these things were fulfilled with respect to the Devil. Upon the breast to go
denotes the casting down of the nature of devils. To eat dust denotes this, that,
just as that joy, springing from the contemplation of God, is food to the good
Angels, by which their spiritual life is preserved (see Luke 15:7, 10), so also joy
in those things which are contrary to God and His glory is food to devils: This
is his spoil which he persues, 1 Peter 5:8. By the seed of the serpent, I
understand, 1. all devils, whom Satan allured into the fellowship of his own
wickedness, over whom, therefore, he takes the supremacy; 2. impious men,
John 8:44; 1 John 3:10. See John 6:70 and Acts 13:10. To these the woman
and her seed are opposed. The woman is named, although the man is not
excluded. And the reason of this uncommon form of speech, by which a race is
called from the weaker sex, is in the following words concerning the seed, in
which is contained the great mystery of the Incarnation. For our head was
going to be the seed only of the woman, Isaiah, 7:14. Whence also some
understand seed of Christ alone, for Paul thus takes seed in Galatians 3:16. But
the reasoning is unequal. For here the seed of the woman is opposite to the
seed of the serpent, which is taken collectively. Therefore, the seed of the
woman is in like manner Christ mystical, the head with His members. Christ is
the seed of the woman kata_ fu/sin, by nature; those, kat 0 ef0 a&rmosin, that
is, by engrafting in him, and in a spiritual manner. The head of the serpent is
the dominion of the Devil, which is called the principate of death, both
objectively (for those only are under this who are obnoxious to death, both
209
spiritual and eternal) and effectively. Its scepter is sin. But the seed of the
woman destroyed the works of the Devil, 1 John 3:8. And Michael (that is,
Christ) cast him out, Revelation 12. But what is to be understood by this, thou
shalt bruise his heel? I could say that a slight wound is acknowledged, even that
the Devil would assail the body of Christ through treachery. But this, although
true, is not sufficient. It could appear to signify hypocrites among Christians,
against whom the Devil prevails. For, if permission might be granted to me,
why would not, just as souls in heaven are the upper part of the mystical body
of Christ, and saints upon earth the inferior part, the bodies of the saints (which
rightly pertain to this body, granted that they are distinguished from souls) be
had for a heel? With this admitted, immediately it will appear what this grief of
the heel was, after the head of the Devil was crushed (for the text insinuates
that the grief of the heel follows the crushing of the head). Read Revelation 13.
In that passage, after the victory of Michael, the Devil forms a new instrument
of the wounded Roman Empire, with the help of which, under the pretext of
honor rendered to the remains of the martyrs, he infused the venom of the
worship and invocation of the saints; on account of which wound the Church
hitherto limps. [These things are found in Mede’s Diatribe “Discourse 37, 38,
and 39”. Which things it seemed more fitting to exhibit with the author’s
method and singular perspective, than to break them up into scraps, and to
apply them to individual parts of the text.]
[I will put enmity, hbyf )'w:] And enmity. But because I refer this to
the preceding words, because thou hast done this, I render the w, therefore, as
in Psalm 116:2,1 and in Genesis 2:32 compared with Exodus 20:11.3 Unless
you prefer to translate it, also, or thus, with the therefore understood.
However, it is more satisfying to refer this to those preceding words; for now,
for the first time, the punishment appears properly and suitably to be
denounced against the Devil. That is, once thou wert on good terms with the
woman; but after this, thou shalt not be. Thou stirred up enmity between me
and the woman: and, therefore, I will stir up enmity between thee and the
woman. For if anyone should prefer that to creep upon the earth and to eat
1 Psalm 116:2: “Because he hath inclined his ear unto me, therefore will I call upon
him as long as I live ()rFq); e ymaybF w; ,@ with the w being translated as therefore).”
2 Genesis 2:2, 3: “And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made;
and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. Therefore
blessed (K7rEbyf :wA, with the w being translated as therefore) God the seventh day, and
sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and
made.”
3 Exodus 20:11: “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that
in them is, and rested the seventh day: therefore (Nk@'-l(a) the Lord blessed the
sabbath day, and hallowed it.”
210
dust should belong to the beginning of the punishments prescribed against the
Devil, and also here to translate, and enmity, I will not greatly object.
However, God does not address the Devil figuratively in relation to this
enmity, but openly. Just as Paul, in Romans 9:33, and Peter, in 1 Peter 2:6,
cross suddenly from the stone signifying Christ to the Christ signified; and
Daniel, in 4:22, from the tree signifying, to Nebuchadnezzar signified. Such is
the crossing in Luke 2:34 and in Luke 9:62 (Picherel).
[I will put enmity] Irreconciliable; po/lemon as@ pondon, implacable
warfare (Helvicus); open and bursting out into the act of injuring (Menochius).
Jehovah takes from the Devil the right of dominion and of possession, after
which he was striving with respect to man, and which, even now, he
celebrated, as if he had obtained his end; and He made the man, in the capacity
of a slave, into a deadly enemy (Helvicus’ The Paradisiacal Protevangelium 64,
70). The enmity is a perpetual warfare of flesh and spirit, and also of the wiles
of Satan, with which he assails us (Fagius).
[Between thee and the woman, h#%f$)ihf] Although she is a weak vessel
(Fagius). This is done for the affliction of the Devil (Helvicus). The Hebrews
say, tdA@mi dgnE kE ; hdFm@ i, Measure corresponding to measure: By what things
anyone sins, by those things he is also punished: By the woman, as he seduced,
so also is he ruined (Fagius out of Munster). The woman is more frightful unto
such than the man. See the allegorical sense in Revelation 12 (Grotius).
[h#$f%)hi f] The h is demonstrative: This woman herself, whom you
abused (Fagius). It can be referred to the Virgin Mary (Lyra, Fagius), of whom
He was born, who trampled it under foot (Fagius). Rather, to Eve, yet not
with Adam, nor their posterity, excluded (Helvicus). h#%)$f hi ,f that woman,
differs from that h#%f)$ ihf which was previously so called, the wife of Adam
herself, as it were. Mary kat 0 e0coxo\n, with respect to preeminence, is called
woman in Galatians 4:4. However, the antithesis is agreeable: just as death
came forth through the earlier h#%$)f hi ,f so also life through the other.
Moreover, this hatred against the woman is foretold, not properly because of
her, but because of her Son. Thus it is said that Mary is blessed because of her
Son, Luke 11:27 (Picherel).
Though now ye be sworn friends, leagued together against me, I will
put enmity between thee and the woman; and the man too, but the woman
alone is mentioned, for the devil’s greater confusion. 1. The woman, whom,
as the weaker vessel, thou didst seduce, shall be the great occasion of thy
overthrow. 2. Because the Son of God, who conquered this great dragon and
old serpent, Revelation 12:9, who came to destroy the works of the devil, 1
John 3:8, was made of a woman, Galatians 4:4, without the help of man, Isaiah
7:14; Luke 1:34, 35.
211
[And between thy seed and her seed1] Here, the w expresses, and her
seed, in the place of, it is her seed (Vatablus).
[Thy seed] That is, the whole race of serpents. Allegorically, it refers
to the impious, Acts 13:10; 1 John 3:8 (Grotius). He understands other evil
angels, those similar with respect to nature and malice (Lyra). The progeny of
the Devil (Helvicus). Those who obey the Devil, John 8:44 (Fagius). Those
are called sons who are devoted and obliged to someone, and who imitate him
(Helvicus).
Thy seed; literally, this serpent, and, for his sake, the whole seed or
race of serpents, which of all creatures are most loathsome and terrible to
mankind, and especially to women. Mystically, that evil spirit which seduced
her, and with him the whole society of devils, (who are generally hated and
dreaded by all men, even by those that serve and obey them, but much more by
good men), and all wicked men; who, with regard to this text, are called
devils, and the children or seed of the devil, John 6:70; 8:44; Acts 13:10; 1
John 3:8.
[And her seed] This seed is Christ and all believers (Fagius). The seed
of the woman, or all men are born of woman except Adam, Job 14:1; 15:14;
25:4; Matthew 11:11; Luke 7:28. Allegorically, the woman is the Church, and
her seed are those who pertain to the Church, Galatians 4:26 (Grotius). It is
not without emphasis that seed is singular. For these things meet exactly and
properly in Christ alone, who was rightly and truly the Son of woman (not of
man), the Son of a virgin. On the other hand, the son of the serpent is
Antichrist, with all of his members (Fagius). The seed of the woman is here to
be taken, not collectively and plhquntikwj~ , in the plural, of all men, but
en9 ikw~j/singly and monadikwj~ /individually, of one Christ (Helvicus). For,
1. the following )wh@ /he (which we will demonstrate that it is to be taken of
Christ alone) is referred back to this h(@ rf :z,A her seed. Therefore, the seed is
the same in both places (Helvicus’ The Paradisiacal Protevangelium 67). 2. If
it is taken collectively, then all men will fight that serpent (for it is said, He will
crush thee, not, thy seed), and all men will crush his head; or (if you take it of
the Devil) all men will overcome the Devil (Helvicus’ The Paradisiacal
Protevangelium 27, 28). 3. Christ alone was able to crush the head of the
serpent, and this is ascribed to Him alone, Psalm 2:9; 110:1, 6; 68:18. 4. This
very passage is selected and related to the Messiah, 2 Corinthians 11:3; 1
Timothy 2:14; Revelation 12:9; 20:2, 3; 1 John 3:8; Romans 5:11, 12, 15;
Hebrews 2:14, 15 (Helvicus’ The Paradisiacal Protevangelium 27, 28). You
will say: Do not all faithful men carry enmity against the seed of Satan? 1.
Certainly, but it does not follow that that enmity is expressed by these words
1 Hebrew: h(@ rf :zA Nybw' @ K1(jrz: A Nybw' .@
212
to the letter. 2. Therefore, it is not absurd that Adam and their posterity are
comprehended in Eve. Therefore, thus the warfare of the former expression is
between our first parents, with their posterity, and Satan, with his seed. The
warfare of the latter expression is between Christ alone and Satan, with his
entire kingdom. Nevertheless, we refuse to condemn the other opinion, which
would take the seed of the woman in the prior place collectively, if only it
would be taken individually of Messiah in the latter place (Helvicus).
[And her seed] That is, her Son, namely, Christ. Seed, in the prior
place, signifies the many, or rather their posterity, but it signifies in the latter
place one, or rather Messiah. Thus the word sons is attributed to those who
are sons by creation, like Adam in Luke 3:38, or by generation, like the rest;
indeed it spoken of a son in law in Luke 3:23. It is not new for (rAzE/seed to be
taken for one son. It is used in this way in Genesis 4:25 and 21:13. And what
in Deuteronomy 25:5 is Nb@,' a son, is spe/rma/seed to the Greeks, as in
Matthew 22:24, 25 and Mark 12:19, 20, 22. And in Genesis 27:29, thy
mother’s sons is spoken of one, even Esau, gathered out of verse 37; and in
Hosea 2:1, sisters is used of one sister (Picherel).
[She herself will crush, )wh@ ] The Vulgate has she herself, as if it were
spoken of the woman, with a sense not ill (Grotius). It is referred to Eve, or to
the Virgin Mary, because both are going to be made that through Christ, who is
to be born of them (Estius). It especially designates Mary (Tirinus), who, by
giving birth to the Christ, crushed the head (Tirinus, Brugensis’ Notations on
the Varying Passages of Sacred Scripture). But this extenuation is unsuitable:
For, in this sense, Eve, Sarah, Rebekah all crush the head, etc., although they
apply these things to Mary alone, and blasphemously sing antiphonally, This is
the woman of virtue, who crushed the head of the serpent, etc.;1 and from this
place they take an argument for the adoration of Mary. But these things are
separated by the entire breadth of heaven, that Mary crushed the head of the
serpent, and that Mary bore Him who crushed. Add that the h/that in
h#$f%)ih,f that woman, points the finger toward Eve, and to her it would more
likely refer. [Against that rendering of the Vulgate, they argue in this way:] 1.
The most ancient Latin exemplars read he himself; thus two exemplars
(Brugensis). Robertus Stephanus2 testifies to the same. Therefore, in a more
recent exemplar, which was produced by the order of Sixtus V and Clement
1 The Magnificat Antiphon was sung at vespers during the Roman Catholic Feast of
the Immaculate Conception.
2 Robertus Stephanus, or Robert Estienne (1503-1559), was a printer in Paris, with
skill in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. He employed his considerable talents in the
production of multiple editions of the Bible in each language. His work on the Greek
text of the New Testament was particularly important in the formation of the Textus
Receptus, and he did important critical work on the Vulgate.
213
VIII,1 it was restored to he himself (Helvicus). 2. All of the old interpreters
read he himself (Onkelos, Jonathan, Targum Jerusalem). And the rest of the
Hebrews [see Helvicus] and the Septuagint translate it, au0toj_ /he (although
spe/rma/seed precedes, with a joining proj_ to_ shmainom/ enon, to the
thing signified, with a congruent sense, not a congruent word2 [Grotius]). So it
is in Jerome and Irenæus3 (Helvicus), and Cyprian4 (Grotius). Thus Malvenda:
I prefer (says he) the masculine or neuter over the feminine reading, so that the
glory of redemption, in keeping with the figure, might be kept to Christ
(Malvenda). Thus Pope Leo,5 in Concerning the Nativity of the Lord,6 says,
He was announcing to the serpent the future seed of the woman, who would
crush the lifting up of his noxious head by His own strength. However, the slip
from he himself to she herself was easy, especially since upon first sight it was
not evident to what the masculine he was referring, since the feminine woman
had preceded. But there is agreement in this place, as in the writings of the
Greeks, with the thing, not with the word; as in Terence,7 Where is that
wickedness, who destroyed me?,8 and in Matthew 28:19, maqhteus/ ate
pa&nta ta_ e1qnh, bapti/zontej aut0 ouj, teach all nations, baptizing them.9
In Hebrew, there is no difficulty. For both (rAzE/seed and )wh@ /he are
masculine. Nevertheless, ou[toj, he himself, is able to be referred to seed, if
only you understand spo/roj/seed in the place of the spe/rma/seed.10 Just
as in Luke 8:5, on the other hand, A sower went out to sow to\n spo/ron
au0tou~, his seed; next he adds o# me\n, as if he had previously used to_
1 Namely, the Clementine Vulgate.
2 aut0 oj\ /he and spe/rma/seed agree in sense, having but one referent, but they agree
not in gender.
3 Irenæus was a second century Church Father, born near Smyrna, but serving as
Bishop in Lyon. He was a disciple of Polycarp, who was in turn a disciple of the
Apostle John.
4 Cyprian (d. 258) served as Bishop of Carthage. He is noted for his refusal to
readmit into the Church those who had “lapsed” under persecution.
5 Leo the Great (400-461) is esteemed by some as the first Pope. Leo is noted for
increasing the power of the Roman see, singlehandedly turning back the invasion of
Attila, and, through his famous Tome, providing a resolution to the problem, being
adjudicated by the Council of Chalcedon, of the relationship between the two natures
of Christ.
6 Nativitate Domini.
7 Andria 608.
8 Although scelus/wickedness is neuter and qui/who is masculine, it is clear that they
have the same referent.
9 Although eq1 nh/nations is neuter and au0touj/them is masculine, it is clear that they
have the same referent.
10 spor/ oj can stand as a masculine substitute for the neuter spe/rma.
214
spe/rma;1 and finally in verse 11 he returns to his own masculine, o( spo/roj.
Thus, in Proverbs 4:13, hrf cE @n; ,I keep her is in the place of wrO cn; I, keep him:
for rswf @m/instruction is in the masculine gender.2 These things are found in
Picherel [and he himself is papist]. Others translate it as it (Pagnine, Vatablus,
Tigurinus, Syriac, Oleaster, Malvenda, Samaritan Text, Junius and Tremellius,
Munster, Ainsworth), whom many papists, even Andradius,3 Cano,4 Cajetan,
etc., follow (Helvicus), bringing it into conformity with the seed of the woman
(Oleaster). 3. All things are masculine; K1p;w#@ $y,: He will crush thee, not
K1p;w#@ $t@,; she will crush thee, and the suffix is masculine, w@np@ we #@ $t@,; thou shalt
bruise Him. These things are an) anti/r0rh( ta/undeniable. 4. The
Massoretes5 have noted no diversity of readings in this place (Helvicus).
Evasion 1: Bellarmine6 finds )yh/i she in one codex. Response: This is
contrary to the credit and consensus of all exemplars which have appeared. He
himself or another forger has, without doubt, thus corrupted it (Helvicus).
Evasion 2: This enallage, the masculine in the place of the feminine, is
common (Bellarmine). Response: What is the reason that I should change
)w%h/he into )yhi/she; then K1p;w@#y$ :, He will crush thee, into Kp1 ;w@#t$ @;, she
will crush thee; then wn@ p@ we #@ $t;,@ thou shalt bruise Him, into hnF@pwe @#$t@;, thou shalt
bruise her. If Bellarmine were playing with dice, perhaps deceits of this sort
could be endured, but not in Theology, etc. (Helvicus).
And her seed, her offspring; first and principally, the Lord Christ, who
with respect to this text and promise is called, by way of eminency, the seed,
Galatians 3:16, 19; whose alone work it is to break the serpent’s head, i.e. to
destroy the devil, Hebrews 2:14. Compare John 12:31; Romans 16:20.
Secondly, and by way of participation, all the members of Christ, all believers
and holy men, who are called the children of Christ, Hebrews 2:13, and of the
1 Luke 8:5a: “A sower went out to sow his seed (to_n spo/ron, masculine): and as he
sowed, some (o3, neuter) fell by the way side . . .”
2 Proverbs 4:13: “Take fast hold of instruction (rsfw@m@b@a, masculine); let her not go:
keep her (hfrEcn;@ I); for she is thy life.”
3 Jacobus Andradius (1528-1575) was a Portuguese theologian. He was appointed to
the Council of Trent, and he ably defended its doctrine in his Defensio Tridentinæ
Fidei.
4 Melchior Cano (1525-1560) was a Spanish Dominican theologian. He held the
theological chair at the Salamanca, and his abilities are amply demonstrated in his De
Locis Theologicis.
5 The Massoretes were mediæval Jewish scribes, responsible for the preservation and
propagation of the traditional text of the Hebrew Scriptures.
6 Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621) entered the Order of the Jesuits in his late teens.
Bellarmine became one of the great theologians of his era, a Cardinal, and, after his
death, a Doctor of the Church.
215
heavenly Jerusalem, Galatians 4:26. All the members whereof are the seed of
this woman; and all these are the implacable enemies of the devil, whom also
by Christ’s merit and strength they do overcome.
[He shall crush (Samaritan Text, Montanus, Munster, Pagnine,
Oleaster, Ainsworth), K1p;w@#y$ :] He shall crush thee (Fagius, Vatablus,
Helvicus); thrh/sei, He shall watch against (Septuagint), or perhaps it is to be
translated, He shall observe. But in the Complutensian edition of the
Septuagint,1 it reads teirhs/ ei, He shall crush (Nobilius2). He himself shall
graze thee, the head (Malvenda); He shall trample (Syriac, Tirinus); He shall
pound, beat, shatter (Fagius).
[Thy head, #$)r$ ] Or it is an ellipsis of the b/in, in the place of
#)$ r$ b;,@ in the head (Piscator, Helvicus, Fagius, Vatablus, Ibn Ezra and Kimchi
in Helvicus); just as in 2 Chronicles 34:30 tyb@/' house is in the place of tybb' ;@,
into the house.3 Not incorrectly. Such is also Habakkuk 3:154 (Helvicus).
Other examples show the suffix in this place to be managed by a word in the
accusative case; as ynpI 'w@#$y: in Job 9:175 and Psalm 139:116 (Piscator). Or, He
shall crush thee, the head, that is, in a manner consistent with the head, kata_
kefalh/n. This is familiar to the Greeks. Thus it is in Habakkuk 3:9,7 Thou
didst cleave the earth, the rivers, that is, in a manner consistent with rivers
(Helvicus). Now, the head is the power, excellence, and authority (Helvicus,
Fagius); the power of the Devil, which consists of sin and death (Helvicus). To
trample the head is a note of contempt, Ezekiel 34:18. Thus to trample the
asp, Psalm 91:13; Luke 10:19. The greatest power for evil is in the head of a
1 The Complutensian Polyglot (taking its name from the university in Alcalá
[Complutum, in Latin]; 1514) contained the first printed edition of the Septuagint,
Jerome’s Vulgate, the Hebrew Text, Targum Onkelos with a Latin translation, and the
first printed edition of the Greek New Testament. The labor of the scholars was
superintended by Cardinal Francisco Ximénez de Cisneros.
2 Flaminius Nobilius (d. 1590) was a Roman Catholic text critic, who labored in the
reconstruction of the Itala, the Old Latin version.
3 2 Chronicles 34:30a: “And the king went up the house (tyb'@, with b/into clearly
needing to be supplied) of the Lord.”
4 Habakkuk 3:15: “Thou didst walk in the sea (MyF%ba, with the preposition) with thine
horses, the heap of great waters (Myb@irA MyIma rmxe o, the preposition in to be supplied
from the previous clause).”
5 Job 9:17a: “For he breaketh me (ynIpwe #% $y,: the first person suffix is rendered in the
accusative case) with a tempest.”
6 Psalm 139:11: “If I say, Surely the darkness shall cover me (ynIpew#% $y,: the first person
suffix is rendered in the accusative case); even the night shall be light about me.”
7 Habakkuk 3:9c: CrE)f-(q@Abat@; twOrhfn;. Woodenly: Rivers thou didst cleave the
earth.
216
serpent (Grotius). With an uninjured head, a serpent rarely succumbs;
wherefore in a fight almost the whole matter rests in this, that he remove his
head from danger: Tzetzes’1 Book of Histories 9:263, Epiphanius, etc.
(Bochart’s A Sacred Catalogue of Animals 1:1:4:24). Onkelos explains it in a
completely different way, He himself shall beware with regard to thee (or, he
will be mindful with regard to thee) of that which thou didst to him in the
beginning, in antiquity: Time will not cause to be forgotten this evil. In like
manner, he explains what follows, and thou shalt beware with regard to him
until (or, unto) the end. The sense can be twofold: either thus, without
intermission, all the way unto the end of the age, thy hatred towards Christ and
His members will endure; or that it might be referred to the end of days when
Christ came, 1 Corinthians 11. For at that time he drove Christ unto the cross
(Fagius). Thus both Targum Jonathan and Targum Jerusalem. To them (that
is, the sons of the woman) there will be a remedy (not to thee), and they will
withdraw the bite in the heel, in the end of days; namely, in the days of Messiah
(Fagius, Helvicus). The days of Messiah are everywhere called the last,
Hebrews 1:2; 1 John 2:18 (Helvicus).
[Thou shalt lie in wait for his heel, bq(' f wn@ p@ ew@#t$ ]@; Thou shalt crush
(Pagnine, Septuagint in Lapide, Ainsworth, Piscator, Oleaster); thou shalt
bruise (Rabbi Salomon in Lapide); thou shalt strike (Syriac, Rabbi Abraham2 in
Lapide, Oleaster); thou shalt oppress (Tigurinus) with regard to him the heel
(Pagnine, Tigurinus). Thou shalt graze, or blow upon, him with respect to the
heel, understanding b/on before bq'(,f on the heel (Vatablus). The serpent,
about to strike, blows, that is, hisses (Malvenda out of Vatablus). They say that
Pw@#n$ ,F from the cognate words P#n$a F, to blow, and hpf#f$, to sweep bare, is
quickly to overwhelm with breathing, or, with panting. Some maintain that by
this word God alludes to the name NwOpyp#i ,$; horned snake,3 which is the most
poisonous kind of snake, for it would overwhelm with its breath, like the
basilisk; and, consequently, it is supposed that this is the kind which seduced
Eve. That is to say, Thou art NwpO ypi#$;, overwhelming with thy breath: but the
seed of the woman shall overwhelm with his breath with regard to thee the
head; and thou shalt overwhelm with thy breath the heel (Malvenda). It is aptly
said, his heel; for the serpent, trampled by the foot, has nothing nearer to hand
than, if he is able, to strike the heel, and send forth the venom, which he has in
his teeth, into that part by which he is injured (Bonfrerius). It signifies that the
wound is not lethal to Christ and to the elect, and that the affliction is not going
to continue forever (Piscator). The head of Christ is His divinity, the heel His
1 John Tzetzes was a twelve century poet and grammarian, living in Constantinople.
2 This is likely Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra.
3 Genesis 49:17a: “Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder (Npoypi#)$; in the path.”
217
humanity, which, inasmuch as the Demon struck and killed it, was killed
(Lapide). By the bruised heel or foot he understands the ways of Christ, which
Satan tries to check through afflictions, and the death of Christ for our sins,
foretold here, as it is clear from the regard which other passages of Scripture
have unto this prophecy, Psalm 56:6; 89:51; 49:5; 22:16; 2 Corinthians 13:4;
1 Peter 3:18 (Ainsworth). Pw#@ ,$ which is put here in both places (It shall crush
the head, and thou shalt bruise the heel), is not taken in the same way. In the
first, it signifies to crush or to trample, and that by means of the feet, from
Romans 16:20 and Luke 10:19. But it cannot mean this in the second place,
for the heel would not be trampled by, nor be placed under, feet. It rather
signifies here, to bruise, or to beat, and to grind, to pierce, to wound, to bite;
inasmuch as grief, grinding, piercing might be to the heel by the bites or hisses
of the venomous snake. These things are found in Picherel. [He in the end
produces similar passages in which the same words are taken in diverse ways.]
In this way, Mylik@h' ,a the equipment, is doubled in 1 Samuel 17:22:1 in the
prior place it signifies David’s pack, which he was carrying with his arms; in the
other, the heavy baggage of war. Thus nekroi,\ the dead, in Matthew 8:22,
and o( qerismoj\ , the harvest, in John 4:35. Indeed a single word not
repeated, ai1rein, to take, is taken in various ways in John 11:48. They will
take away both our place and nation; that is, they will destroy, they will empty,
the place, and they will deport the nation. Thus the Hebrew xtapf% and the
Greek an) oi/gesqai, Luke 1:64, signify both to open and to loosen. Whence
to one both deaf and mute Jesus said, e1ffaqa (htp) in Chaldean), that is,
dianoi/xqhti, that is, be opened, Mark 7:35. Now, with these words God
reverts to an allegory; that is, That seed shall do to thee, Devil, what is usually
done to a serpent, that it might be destroyed, namely, that its head is crushed
or lopped off: however, conversely, thou shalt do to the seed what a serpent
does, which attacks from an ambushment the heel of the incautious; thou shalt
strike, etc., but the wound will not be lethal (Picherel’s On Creation).
Targum Jerusalem, and indeed that of Jonathan, has these things: When the
sons of the woman shall give attention to the Law, and will have performed the
precepts, then they will strive with regard to thee to crush the head, and they
will kill thee: and when they desert the words of the Law, thou shalt give
attention so that thou mightest bite (or pierce) them in their heels (Fagius,
Helvicus). Some shall cause to others grief in the heel in the end of days (thus
Fagius out of Targum Jerusalem).
The head is the principal instrument both of the serpent’s fury and
mischief, and of his defence, and the principal seat of the serpent’s life, which
1 1 Samuel 17:22: “And David left his carriage (Mylik@'h)a in the hand of the keeper of
the carriage (Mylikh'@ a), and ran into the army, and came and saluted his brethren.”
218
therefore men chiefly strike at; and which being upon the ground, a man may
conveniently tread upon, and crush it to pieces. In the devil this notes his
power and authority over men; the strength whereof consists in death, which
Christ, the blessed Seed of the woman, overthroweth by taking away the sting
of death, which is sin, 1 Corinthians 15:55, 56; and destroying him that had the
power of death, that is, the devil, Hebrews 2:14. The heel is the part which is
most within the serpent’s reach, and wherewith it was bruised, and thereby
provoked to fix his venomous teeth there; but a part remote from the head and
heart, and therefore its wounds, though painful, are not deadly, nor dangerous,
if they be observed in time. If it be applied to the Seed of the woman, Christ,
his heel may note either his humanity, whereby he trod upon the earth, which
indeed the devil, by God’s permission, and the hands of wicked men, did bruise
and kill; or his saints and members upon the earth, whom the devil doth in
diverse manners bruise, and vex, and afflict, while he cannot reach their Head,
Christ, in heaven, nor those of his members who are or shall be advanced
thither.
Verse 16: Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow
and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children (Ps. 48:6; Is.
13:8; 21:3; John 16:21; 1 Tim. 2:15); and thy desire shall be to thy husband
(or, subject to thy husband), and he shall rule over thee (1 Cor. 11:3; 14:34;
Eph. 5:22-24; 1 Tim. 2:11, 12; Tit. 2:5; 1 Pet. 3:1, 5, 6).
[hber@ ): a hbf@r:ha] hbrf@ h: a is written irregularly in the place of
hb'rh: ,a 1 as Buxtorf testifies, I will multiply, etc. Multiplying I will multiply
(Pagnine, Vatablus). Exceedingly, or greatly, I will multiply (Junius and
Tremellius, Piscator). The repetition denotes certitude and frequency. Thus
the infinitive is used to strengthen the action, as the Hebrews say (Fagius).
With many retributions I will afflict thee with pain, namely, as often as thou
wilt give birth (Vatablus). I might prefer to translate it, Increasing I will
increase; for, hb'r:ha signifies this, and it holds the notion of magnitude more
than of multitude (Gataker’s Cinnus 207).
I will greatly multiply, or certainly, as the repetition of the same word
implies.
[Thy labors and thy conceptions, Kn7 r" ho 'w: K7nw" Obc(@; ]i Thy pain and thy
conception (Pagnine). Thy pain, even of thy conception (Junius and
Tremellius). Two substantives conjoined, the second of which in Latin would
be in the genitive case without the copula; likewise the singular is in the place
of the plural, pains of conceptions (Vatablus). It is, therefore, e3n dia_ duoin~ ,
an hendiadys (Fagius, Vatablus, Piscator, Grotius, Lapide, Picherel). Thus
1 The latter is the normal pointing for the infinitive absolute.
219
Matthew 4:16, in the region and shadow of death, from Job 10:21, that is, in
the region of the shadow of death. Thus what in Genesis 2:7 is pnoh_ zwhj~ ,
the breath of life, is read, zwh\ kai\ pnoh/, life and breath, in Acts 17:25. Thus
what is often judgment and justice is in Deuteronomy 16:18 the judgment of
justice, that is, just judgment.1 Thus in Virgil, unto the shallows and the
sandbanks, the boulder and the mountains, etc.,2 Servius interprets, unto the
shallows of the sandbanks, the boulder of the mountains (Picherel). He bites
the gold and the bridle, that is, the golden bridle (Lapide). See what things we
have noted in John 3:5 (Grotius). Moreover, that nearly all translate the NwOrh'
as conception, I do not approve. And indeed who ever heard of the pains of
conception? In conception, pleasure is wont to be greater; in gestation and
delivery, anxiety. I do not understand by the name of conception
synechdochically the whole time of bearing in the womb, as if it is the former
limit of this period of time; for, not from conception, but after the tenth day,
as Pliny testifies in Natural History 7:6, do women enter into the
inconvenience of pregnancy. But neither do I understand by the name of
conception the offspring or thing conceived, although NwOyrFh' is thus used in
Ruth 4:13,3 and the word conception is thus used in Latin, whence comes the
expression dead conception in Pliny’s Natural History 20:22. For these pains
are not for the offspring conceived, but for the one bearing and bringing forth.
Accordingly, Oleaster, not at all absurdly, renders it, heaviness with child: I
might prefer, pregnancy. hrhF f properly is to be pregnant, Genesis 16:4,4 11;5
Judges 13:3.6 Which hrhF f, in Isaiah 7:14,7 is e0n gastri\ e3cei, shall hold in
the womb, in Matthew 1:23. Hence, I understand these of pregnancy or
childbearing pains, which are longer-lasting, but more leisurely; to which
parturitive pains, shorter, and sharper, succeed (Gataker’s Cinnus 2:3). To the
Hebrews, NwOrh' does not so much signify conception, as it does bearing in the
1 Deuteronomy 16:18b: “And they shall judge the people with just judgment
(qdcE -e +pa#% ;$mi, judgment of justice).”
2 Æneid 1.
3 Ruth 4:13b: “And when he went in unto her, the Lord gave her conception (NwyO rhF '),
and she bare a son.”
4 Genesis 16:4: “And he went in unto Hagar, and she became pregnant (rhata@wA): and
when she saw that she had become pregnant (htfrhF )f , her mistress was despised in
her eyes.”
5 Genesis 16:11a: “And the angel of the Lord said unto her, Behold, thou art pregnant
(hrhF )f , and shalt bear a son.”
6 Judges 13:3b: “But thou shalt become pregnant (tyrhI wf ): , and bear a son.”
7 Isaiah 7:14b: “Behold, a virgin shall conceive (hrFhf), and bear a son, and shall call
his name Immanuel.”
220
womb, that is, that distress which a woman experiences from conception up
until birth (Fagius out of Kimchi, Vatablus). He immediately makes Himself
clear, when He says, in pain thou shalt bring forth children. It includes
whatever of worry women sustain on account of which they begin to be
weighed down, namely, the loathing of food, whims, exhaustion, etc., up until
birth (Vatablus, likewise Munster, Fagius). It is evident that there are many
evils in pregnancy (Grotius). Observe that NwbO c;(i, toil, is a genus, of which
conception and birth are species. However, nurture and education the
Hebrews also refer to parturition.1 Furthermore, the termination NwO [in
NwbO c;(i], although it constitutes the diminutive form, yet sometimes it confers
an augmentation (Fagius). The Hebrews note that these punishments answer to
the pleasure in eating of the tree (Fagius). Oleaster translates, I will multiply
straits, or compressions. This is bc(. Among all living things, the woman is
the most vexed in childbirth, as Aristotle testifies in The History of Animals 7:9
(Grotius).
And thy conception, in diverse pains and infirmities peculiar to thy sex;
i.e. Thou shalt have many, and those ofttimes, false and fruitless conceptions,
and abortive births; and whereas thou mightest commonly have had many
children at one conception, as some few women yet have, now thou shalt
ordinarily undergo all the troubles and pains of conception, breeding, and
birth, for every child which thou hast. Or, thy sorrows and thy conception, by
a figure called hendiaduo, are put for thy sorrows in conception, or rather in
childbearing, which the Hebrew word here used signifies, Genesis 16:4; Judges
13:3. Aristotle, in his History of Animals 7:9, observes, that women bring
forth young with more pain than any other creatures.
Bring forth children, or bear, for the word notes all the pains and
troubles which women have, both in the time of childbearing, and in the act of
bringing forth. Sons, and daughters too, both being comprehended in the
Hebrew word Sons, as Exodus 22:24;2 Psalm 128:6.3
[Thou shalt be under the power of thy husband] Hebrew: To thy
husband.4
[hqfw@#t$ @;] Desire (Chaldean, Munster, Pagnine, Montanus, Oleaster
Ainsworth, Junius and Tremellius, Drusius, Grotius, Kimchi in Fuller,
1 There appears to be a shift at this point from the primary definition of bca(f, to hurt,
to the secondary definition, to fashion or shape.
2 Exodus 22:24b: “And your wives shall be widows, and your children (Mkye nb" w; @, your
sons) fatherless.”
3 Psalm 128:6: “Yea, thou shalt see thy children’s children (Ky1 nbE lf ; MynIb,f sons to
thy sons), and peace upon Israel.”
4 Hebrew: K7#$y' )-i l)e.
221
Hebrews in Drusius). Thy hastening toward, hastening forth (Malvenda). Thy
turning (Septuagint, Samaritan Text, Syriac). Thine impetus (Jerome in
Nobilius). Some understand this of the appetite for union unto procreation;
thou shalt desire union with him, although it is a cause of pain to thee. Hence,
the love of women exceeds other loves, 2 Samuel 1:26. To love him, who does
evil to thee, is contrary to nature (Fagius). This does not satisfy Vatablus or
Fuller. Since this appetite is common to both, it does not at all affect the
masculine preeminence or feminine submission (Fuller’s Sacred Miscellany
3:15). Others understand it of obedience (Fagius out of Ibn Ezra, Vatablus,
Grotius). There is nothing to be desired for thee except what thy husband will
desire: thou shalt hang upon his nod, thou shalt not be thine own master
(Grotius, likewise Oleaster, Piscator, Ainsworth), similar to Genesis 4:7, to
that one thy desire, supply shall be subordinate (Oleaster). They will often
command what things displease you; nevertheless, it is to be obeyed (Grotius).
Thou shalt cleave to thy husband impatiently; unwillingly thou shalt suffer his
rule. It shall be to thy husband. What is under the power of the other, unto
that very thing she will always aim; she will always earnestly desire that
(Fagius). Some render it in this way: The appetite of the woman shall be in the
power of her husband, and subject to him. This is (if I am not mistaken) an
absurd opinion. Others understand it of the appetite by which the married
woman aspires to dominion. And yet she would not strive after this yoke. And
if this expression reveals an appetite for dominion, Christ would have been
receiving to Himself the Church as domina, a female-head. For thus the
Church speaks of Christ in Song of Songs 7:10, wtO qfw#@ $t;@ yl(a fw:, and towards
me is his desire; in which place no more than the marital enthusiasm and
eagerness is indicated. Therefore, the Septuagint Version has always satisfied
me, to thy husband will be a)postrofh/, thy returning, that is, retreat or
refuge, especially in dangers; thou shalt take shelter in his protection, and shalt
seek his assurance, counsel, help. Protection is a manly duty, as the lawyers
say. To this what follows beautifully squares, He shall rule over thee. For
surely this power or authority is due to the man, on account of this protection.
Verbs, geminate and middle weak, usually are of the same significance.
Therefore, as qq#a $f signifies continual walking about or rushing about, so also
does qw%#$. Hence, hqfw@#$t@; sometimes signifies care (when it is extended from
the more powerful to the weaker), sometimes obligation (when it is of the
weaker to the more powerful), as it is in this place (Fuller’s Sacred Miscellany
3:15). Others: To thy husband shall be thy rushing (Oleaster), or, thy running
(Malvenda). Thou shalt refer all bustling activities, affairs, and proposals to
thine own husband; thou shalt do nothing without him (Malvenda). Others
explain it in this way: Thou shalt depend upon thy husband and his help in all
things (Fagius). Thy will shall depend upon thy husband; Hebrew: And unto
222
thy husband, supply shall be: without him thou shalt do nothing (Picherel).
Thy desire shall be to thy husband; thy desires shall be referred or
submitted to thy husband’s will and pleasure to grant or deny them, as he sees
fit. Which sense is confirmed from Genesis 4:7, where the same phrase is used
in the same sense. And this punishment was both very proper for her that
committed so great an error, as the eating of the forbidden fruit was, in
compliance with her own desire, without asking her husband’s advice or
consent, as in all reason she should have done in so weighty and doubtful a
matter; and very grievous to her, because women’s affections use to be
vehement, and it is irksome to them to have them restrained or denied.
Seeing, for want of thy husband’s rule and conduct, thou wast seduced by the
serpent, and didst abuse that power I gave thee together with thy husband to
draw him to sin, thou shalt now be brought down to a lower degree, for he
shall rule thee; not with that sweet and gentle hand which he formerly used, as
a guide and counsellor only, but by a higher and harder hand, as a lord and
governor, to whom I have now given a greater power and authority over thee
than he had before, (which through thy pride and corruption will be far more
uneasy unto thee than his former empire was), and who will usurp a further
power than I have given him, and will, by my permission, for thy punishment,
rule thee many times with rigour, tyranny, and cruelty, which thou wilt groan
under, but shalt not be able to deliver thyself from it. See 1 Corinthians 14:34;
1 Timothy 2:11, 12; 1 Peter 3:6.
Verse 17: And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto
the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree (Gen. 3:6), of which I
commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it (Gen. 2:17): cursed is the
ground for thy sake (Eccles. 1:2, 3; Is. 24:5, 6; Rom. 8:20); in sorrow shalt
thou eat of it all the days of thy life (1 Sam. 15:23; Job 5:7; Eccles. 2:23).
[Because thou hast heard the voice, etc., lwOql]; It is one thing to hear
a voice, another thing to hearken unto a voice. This is, by a Hebraism, to
comply, to obey (Fagius).
Hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, i.e. obeyed the word and
counsel, contrary to my express command.
[Cursed is the ground in relation to thine employment, K1rwE @b(jba@]
Because of thee (Chaldean, Aquila), that is, because of thy sin (Lyra, Fagius,
Piscator, Menochius); or, as far as thou art concerned (Piscator, Grotius): it
will be troublesome to thee. The Greeks translate it, e0n toij= er1 goij sou, in
thy labors. They were misled by the similarity of the letters, and they
understood it as Kd1 w: bO (jba1 (Fagius’s Comparison of the Principal
1 rwb@ (f is a preposition, meaning for the sake of; hdFb(o j is a noun, meaning labor. It
223
Translations). But this Buxtorf completely denies, and he renders the Greek in
this way, in relation to thy works, that is, sins, says Jerome, in On Genesis;1 in
relation to thy transgression (Theodotion). They were reading it with a r, not
with a d. hrFyb(i j is sin, from rb(a f, to pass over. Thus, Kr1 Ewb@ (bj @a is able to
signify either, because of thy transgressing, or, because of thee (Buxtorf’s
Vindication of the Integrity of the Hebrew 2:2). There is a proverb of the
Jews: If a man should prove most villainous, they (men) curse the breasts
which gave him suck. Therefore, rightly did God curse the earth (by the
breasts of which man is fed) for the sake of the great wickedness of man (de
Dieu out of Rabbi Salomon). The entire earth was created only for the sake of
man; therefore, it was cursed for the sake of man (Hebrews in Fagius).
[Thou shalt eat of it, hnlF@ ke ;)$t]@ Thou shalt eat it, that is, the fruit of
it: metonymy2 (Piscator, Bonfrerius). It is a pithy mode of expression of the
Hebrew language, just as in 1 Kings 2:7, eating of thy table, that is, thy food
(Fagius).
Cursed is the ground, which shall now yield both fewer and worse
fruits, and those too with more trouble of men’s minds, and labour of their
bodies; for thy sake, i.e. because of thy sin; or, to thy use; or, as far as concerns
thee. In sorrow; or, with toil, or, grief.
Verse 18: Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth (Heb. cause to
bud) to thee (Job 31:40); and thou shalt eat the herb of the field (Ps. 104:14).
[Thorns, CwOqw:] CwOq is a larger thorn; rdArd: A is a smaller thorn (as
Ibn Ezra testifies), so called from rwd@ /inhabiting, because it springs up here
and there in the midst of good herbs (Fagius).
[Thorns and thistles] Not as before, few and in few places, but
copiously and everywhere (Menochius). The Hiphil form3 denotes great
abundance (Malvenda). The thorn and the thistle (de Dieu). And the earth
would have brought forth none except these, if God had not blessed it anew,
says Rabbi Eliezer (Fagius).
[And thou shalt eat the herb of the field] Expressly stated; with beasts
of burden and wild beasts, the nature of which he had approached, he has herbs
in common (Fagius, Lapide); herbs of less quality than the fruits of Paradise
(Menochius, Fagius, Grotius, Piscator, Oleaster, Ainsworth). Here b#(eo /' herb
is easy to see how the r might have been mistaken for a d.
1 Liber Quæstionum Hebraicarum in Genesin.
2 Metonymy is the exchange of one word for another closely associated with it.
3 Genesis 3:18a: “Thorns also (CwOqw): and thistles (rdr@F d: wF :) shall it bring forth
(xya mci ;t,a@ in the Hiphil form) to thee.”
224
is bread which is prepared from grain (Ibn Ezra in Fagius). b#e(o ' comprehends
the grain within it. From this place it appears that it could be evinced that man
made use, not of butter, sheep, and meat, etc., but of vegetables (Munster).
Thorns also and thistles, and other unuseful and hurtful plants,
synecdochically contained under these, shall it bring forth to thee, of its own
accord, not to thy benefit, but to thy grief and punishment; and thou shalt eat
the herb of the field, instead of those generous and delicious fruits of Paradise,
which because thou didst despise, thou shalt no more taste of. See Genesis
1:29.
Verse 19: In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread (Eccle. 1:13; 2
Thess. 3:10), till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken:
for dust thou art (Gen. 2:7), and unto dust shalt thou return (Job 21:26; 34:15;
Ps. 104:29; Eccles. 3:20; 12:7; Rom. 5:12; Heb. 9:27).
[In the sweat of the face] There sweat comes forth more plentifully
(Menochius). Hebrew: In the sweat of the nose, etc.1 He calls the greatest
exertion, the sweat of the nose, on account of which exertion sweat, produced
on the forehead, runs down along the nose drop by drop. See Psalm 128:2
(Picherel).
[t(za b' @;] They think that it is from (zyA ,F to sweat, Ezekiel 44:18.
Others translated it, in great agitation of the face and spirit, from (Awz@ , to
agitate (Oleaster).
[Thou shalt eat bread] Bread signifies any food (Fagius, Ainsworth,
Menochius). The precept is general, from which no one who fears God ought
to exempt himself. Woe, therefore, to idle and lazy bellies (Fagius).
However, this is a judgment, not an injunction. Necessary labor or assiduity is
not being enjoined here, which was obtaining even before the fall; to necessary
labor a familiar, future companion is now to be adjoined, toil, exhaustion,
weariness. Wherefore, those who hurl this summary at lazy men, spread a
weak foundation for a most just censure (Gataker’s Cinnus 2:3). In general, a
punishment will answer to the sin. In relation to food, as man sinned, so also
he is punished (Grotius).
In the sweat of thy face, i.e. of thy body: he mentions the face,
because there the sweat appears first and most. Or, with labour of body or
brain, Ecclesiastes 1:13, and vexation of mind, shalt thou get thy food and
livelihood: bread being put for all nourishment, as Genesis 18:5; 28:20.
[Till thou return] That is, all the way up to death (Fagius).
[Dust thou art (thus Kimchi in Fagius)] Although he might have in
himself the four elements, nevertheless earth is the principal part of him
1 Hebrew: Ky1 pe%)a t(za 'b;.@
225
(Fagius). Dust thou art, namely, to the extent that thou art body, Genesis 2:7,
not spirit, Ecclesiastes 12:7 (Piscator). Behold, the punishment of sin is death,
Wisdom of Solomon 2:231 (Menochius). Targum Jerusalem has these words:
Because dust thou art, and in the dust thou are to be awakened, so that thou
mightest give the judgment and reason of all things which thou hast done, in the
day of the Great Judgment.
[Dust thou art] Genesis 18:27; Psalm 103:14; Ecclesiastes 12:7.
[And unto dust shalt thou return] Psalm 104:29; 146:4; 22:15. Thus
Euripides, in The Suppliants: pneu=ma me\n pro_j aiq0 e/ra, to_ swm~ a d 0 ei0j
ghn~ (the spirit unto heaven, the body unto the earth): Nearly the same words
used in Ecclesiastes 12:7 (Grotius).
Dust thou art, as to the constitution and original of thy body. See
Genesis 18:27; Job 1:21; Psalm 103:14. Though upon thy obedience I would
have preserved thy body no less than thy soul from all mortality; yet now,
having sinned, thou shalt return unto dust in thy body, whilst the immortal
spirit shall return unto God who gave it, Ecclesiastes 12:7. Thus thy end shall
be as base as thy beginning.
Verse 20: And Adam called his wife’s name Eve (Heb. Chavah; that is,
living); because she was the mother of all living.
[He called] Insofar as Adam imposes a name on her, it teaches that
more power was given to him (Fagius).
[Eve, hw@Fxa] The Greek translators render it zwh//Zoe/Life. Rightly,
for this is a woman’s name among the Greeks (Grotius). Others maintain that
she is thus named from hwxF ,f which in the Chaldean is to announce, for with
the serpent she spoke unprofitable words, and thereupon they call her
tynrbd, that is, Talkative. But certainly the Scripture relates that she was
named after life, because, she was the mother of all living, that is, of men (for it
is a synecdochical expression [Fagius]). Adam comforts himself and his wife,
both condemned by God to death, for he would bring forth through Eve living
descendants, in whom they themselves, the parents in the children, so to speak,
were going to live perpetually (Menochius). It is not doubtful that he regarded
the promised seed, and therefore calls her hw@xF ,a that is to say, giver of life
(Fagius, Piscator), for the race of dead men was to be made alive through her
childbearing (Fagius).
[She would be, htfy:hf] That is, she was going to be. The past is put
for the future tense (Vatablus).
1 Wisdom of Solomon 2:23, 24: “For God created man to be immortal, and made him
to be an image of his own eternity. Nevertheless through envy of the devil came
death into the world: and they that do hold of his side do find it.”
226
The word signifies either living, or, the giver or preserver of life.
Though for her sin justly sentenced to a present death, yet by God’s infinite
mercy, and by virtue of the promised Seed, she was both continued in life
herself, and was made the mother of all living men and women that should be
after her upon the earth; who though in and with their mother they were
condemned to speedy death, yet shall be brought forth into the state and land
of the living, and into the hopes of a blessed and eternal life by the Redeemer,
whose mother or progenitor she was.
Verse 21: Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make
coats of skins, and clothed them.
[The Lord also made] He created either by the ministry of Angels or
out of nothing, or Adam took them from living beings (Menochius). God
Himself made, namely, by His own command, these garments (Piscator).
[Skin-garments, rwO( twnO t;k]f@ Garments of skin; garments clinging
to the skin (Onkelos), upon the skin of their flesh. Others: garments taken
from skin, that is, woolen, or made from skins (Piscator, Oleaster, Ainsworth,
Fagius); namely, of beasts slaughtered at the command of God for sacrifices.
See Genesis 4:3, 4; 8:20. Of the skins of beasts. Thus He pronounces them
more similar and closer to brute animals, with whose hides they were being
clothed, than to the divine majesty, whose image already they had cast off
(Gataker’s Cinnus 202). Of the skins of dead animals, for a sign of their own
mortality, and against the intemperance of the air (Lyra). Others translate,
skins of dignity (thus the Chaldean), namely, whereby they cover their nudity,
which had now been made shameful (Fagius).
[And He clothed them] Let us consider two things in this place. 1.
That man was clothed with the hides of cattle to signify how great a happiness
he had been deprive of, and how he approached the innate character and nature
of the brutes. 2. The immeasurable goodness of God, which provides for
sinful man, not only food, but also clothing. Thus divine providence bestows in
season necessary things upon us, even upon the thoughtless (Fagius).
The Lord God, either by his own word, or by the ministry of angels,
made coats of skins, of beasts slain either for sacrifice to God, or for the use of
man, their lord and owner; and clothed them, partly to defend them from
excessive heats and colds, or other injuries of the air, to which they were now
exposed; partly to mind them of their sin, which made their nakedness, which
before was innocent and honourable, now to be an occasion of sin and shame,
and therefore to need covering; and partly to show his care even of fallen man,
and to encourage his hopes of God’s mercy through the blessed Seed, and
thereby to invite him to repentance.
227
Verse 22: And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one
of us, to know good and evil (Gen. 3:5; like Is. 19:12; 47:12, 13; Jer. 22:23):
and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life (Gen. 2:9),
and eat, and live for ever . . .
[He said] To the Angels (Grotius). Others: to the other persons of
the Godhead (Lapide, Bonfrerius out of Augustine, Piscator, Ainsworth).
[Behold, Adam, etc.] Man, male and female. He rebukes their
arrogant expectation, to serve as a medicine for their disease and a caution for
the future (Menochius).
[Behold, the man, MdF)hf ]f It is appellative, because of the article h,
which, both here and in verse 24,1 signifies man of common stock, Adam and
Eve: that is to say, Behold, men. For also, in Genesis 5:2, both are called
Adam; and the serpent foretells this of both in Genesis 3:52 (Picherel).
[Become as one of us, etc.] This is irony, by which God moves the
man to consider his loss (Fagius). That is to say, the reality is otherwise
(Vatablus). See how the serpent promised true things, how thou hast become
equal with God (Fagius). Others read it interrogatively, with this sense: How
is his condition changed from that in which We created him? (Malvenda). This
does not satisfy, because of the adverb Nh/' behold, which is affirming
(Piscator).
[One of us, w@n@m@me i] It can be translated either, of him (so that it is third
person, singular), or, of us (so that it is first person, plural) (Fagius). All our
interpreters read, of us; that is to say, like God, knowing good and evil (Fagius’
Comparison of the Principal Translations). To know many things is godlike
and angelic (Grotius). Onkelos reads, from him, or, of himself, as the
Complutensian Polyglot has it: The sense of which version is can be twofold.
The first is this: Behold, Adam alone in the world is made after Him (that is,
God), so that he might know good and evil. Rabbi Salomon: Just as I alone in
the heavens know good and evil, so also man alone in the earth is gifted with a
similar knowledge. The other sense is such: Of himself, or, of him, that is, of
Adam, or of man, this is, that he might know good and evil. Hence the
Hebrews gather and establish the free will (which also is a principal doctrine to
them). For if He had approved of this sin, there would have been collusion on
the part of that good One (Fagius’ Comparison of the Principal Translations).
The Lord God said, either within himself, or to the other persons of
the Godhead, Adam and Eve both are become such according to the devil’s
promise, and their own expectation. This is a holy irony, or sarcasm, like
those, 1 Kings 18:27; Ecclesiastes 11:9: q.d. Behold! O all ye angels, and all
1 Genesis 3:24a: “So he drove out the man (MdF)fhf, with the article).”
2 In Genesis 3:5, note the second person plural pronouns.
228
the future generations of men, how the first man hath overreached and
conquered us, and got the Divinity which he affected; and how happy he hath
made himself by his rebellion! But this bitter scorn God uttereth not to insult
over man’s misery, but to convince him of his sin, folly, danger, and calamity,
and to oblige him both to a diligent seeking after, and a greedy embracing the
remedy of the promised Seed which God offered him, and to a greater
watchfulness over himself, and respect to all God’s commands for the time to
come.
As one of us, i.e. as one of the Divine persons, of infinite wisdom and
capacity. Here is an evident proof of a plurality of persons in the Godhead;
compare Genesis 1:26, and 11:7. If it be said, God speaks this of himself and
the angels; besides that as yet not one word hath been spoken concerning the
angels, it is an absurd and unreasonable conceit that the great God should level
himself with the angels, and give them a kind of equality with himself, as this
expression intimates. To know all things, both good and evil.
[Now, therefore, ht@f(aw]: This word is never put down, except where
repentance is set forth, say the Hebrews. They prove this out of Deuteronomy
10:12, htf(@ wa : (Fagius).
[Lest perhaps] Certain Hebrews think that this speech is cropped, thus
to be completed: And now it is suitable that he be driven out, lest perhaps,
etc. (Fagius). It is left unsaid, just as in Matthew 25:9, mh/pote ouk0 a)rke/sh|,
lest there be not enough,1 and Romans 11:21, mh/pwj oud0 e/ sou fei/shtai,
lest He also not spare thee2 (Castalio). This is an aposiopesis3 of haste (Grotius,
Picherel). Understand either, This is to be guarded against by us (Vatablus,
Piscator, Grotius); thus Genesis 22:12 and Exodus 4:4 (Piscator), either, Be on
your guard, O ye Angels, lest he put forth his hand, etc. (Vatablus), or, He is to
be expelled from Paradise (Lapide); or, It is to be considered (Junius and
Tremellius), or, It is a danger (Tirinus, Castalio), or, And it is only right that he
should go forth from the garden, etc. (Arabic). It is an ellipsis, such as in
Genesis 11:4, let us consider lest we be scattered, Genesis 42:4; Matthew
25:9; Acts 5:39 (Piscator, Ainsworth).
[Lest he put forth his hand, and eat, and live] This is in the place of, so
that he might eat and live. And is often put for so that, and it denotes the
purpose of the action. Thus 2 Samuel 21:3;4 2 Kings 3:11;1 Lamentations
1 Matthew 25:9: “But the wise answered, saying, Lest there be not enough for us and
you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.”
2 Romans 11:21: “For if God spared not the natural branches, lest he also spare not
thee.”
3 An aposiopesis is a sudden breaking off of dialogue.
4 2 Samuel 21:3b: “What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make the
atonement, that ye may bless (w@krb: fw@, and ye bless) the inheritance of the Lord?”
229
1:192 (Ainsworth). It is likely that Adam (and also the Devil) did not know
where the tree of life was situated; by which ignorance God mercifully looked
after him, lest he who was about to be miserable should be made miserable
forever (Menochius). It is to be noted that this is the word of God to the
Angels (Lyra).
[And live forever, Mlwf O(l; (thus the Septuagint, Chaldean, Samaritan
Text, Syriac, Ainsworth)] Unto the ages (Arabic, Munster, Pagnine, Oleaster,
Junius and Tremellius), that is, for a great period of time. Thus the Hebrews
and the Latins. For, if he had not sinned, by eating of the tree of life he would
have continued living unto a great many years, until he had gradually been
transformed unto immortality. But after the fall, it was good for man soon to
die. Thus was the mercy of God, that He banished man from Paradise. For this
(as the Hebrews say) made known to him the paths of repentance. Thus He
took from the man the occasion of sinning, and admonished him concerning sin
and practicing repentance (Fagius). Live forever. Which power the fruits of
the tree were able to grant to him (Menochius). He proceeds to speak
ironically; that is, Lest it should seem to him, according to his own foolish
conviction, that he is going to live forever by eating of this tree (Lyra,
Piscator). When He condemned him to death, He removed the symbol of the
promise of life and immortality, which was able to be to him a source of
confident hope; lest he should delight in a vain expectation (Vatablus).
Lest he put forth his hand: the speech is defective, and to be supplied
thus, or some such way. But now care must be taken, or man must be banished
hence, lest he take also of the tree of life, as he did take of the tree of
knowledge, and thereby profane that sacrament of eternal life, and fondly
persuade himself that he shall live for ever. This is another scoff or irony,
whereby God upbraideth man’s presumption, and those vain hopes wherewith
he did still feed himself.
Verse 23: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of
Eden, to till the ground (Gen. 4:2; 9:20) from whence he was taken.
[And He sent forth, wh@ x'l;@#ay$ w: A] He expelled ignominiously (thus
xl#a $,f to send forth, with a following m/from signifies,3 as Ibn Ezra testifies)
1 2 Kings 3:11a: “But Jehoshaphat said, Is there not here a prophet of the Lord, that
we may enquire (h#f$rd: :nwi :, and we enquire) of the Lord by him?”
2 Lamentations 1:19b: “My priests and mine elders gave up the ghost in the city,
while they sought their meat to relieve (wb@ y#$iyFw:, and they relieve) their souls.”
3 Genesis 3:23a: “Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden (Ng@mA )i of
Eden . . .”
230
and violently (Fagius, Menochius); as in Jeremiah 15:1.1 It signifies to send
forth in such a way, that thou mightest never return. For the Law of divorce
uses this word2 (Fagius). It is probable that this was done on the same day on
which he sinned. How long a time he was in Paradise, it is not agreed. It
appears that the space of a few days was needed, so that he might experience in
some measure that blessed state (Menochius). I cannot acquiesce to the
common opinion, in accordance with which it is asserted that man, on the same
day in which he was created by God, fell and was ejected from the garden. I
pass over asking whether other living things were created on that day. I limit
myself to man, concerning whom Moses relates that these things were
accomplished before the ejection: On the sixth day, he is created outside of the
garden and led into the garden; the tree of life and the tree of knowledge are
pointed out to him; the Law is given; the animals are caused to stand before
him so that he might consider each one separately and give a name in
accordance with the nature of each species; the man falls asleep, and a rib is
removed from the sleeping man; the woman is made, is brought to her
husband, and is claimed by him. These all occur on the sixth day. After these,
as if a new beginning had been taken up, those things, which pertain to the fall
of man, etc., are narrated. Satan assails the woman, and various discussions are
held between the woman and Satan, and indeed between the woman and the
man. The things that followed are added to these: the girdles made, the hiding
place selected, the majestic summons, the inquiry and judicial censure,
garments newly devised and presented to them both, and finally the expulsion
of them both. These things so constrain me that I cannot not postpone the
defection of man until a time more distantly separated from their first
beginning, and to insert a pause in the primæval state, a pause at least more
lasting than one little day (Gataker’s Cinnus 192).
For prevention thereof, the Lord God sent him forth, or expelled him
with shame and violence, and so as never to restore him thither; for it is the
same word which is used concerning divorced wives.
[So that he might work the earth] So that, by means of perpetual
misery, he might be reminded of sin and the loss incurred.
[From whence he was taken] Therefore, he was created outside of
Paradise, because he was sent unto the earth outside of it.
To till, to wit, with toil and sweat, as was threatened, Genesis 3:17,
the ground without Paradise; for he was made without Paradise, and then put
into it, as was noted before.
1 Jeremiah 15:1b: “Cast them out of my sight (ynAp%f-l(am' xl#a@ )$a , and let them go
forth.”
2 Deuteromomy 24:1b: “. . . then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it
in her hand, and send her out of his house (wtO yb@m' i h@xlf #;@ w$i :).”
231
Verse 24: So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the
garden of Eden (Gen. 2:8) Cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every
way (Ps. 104:4; Heb. 1:7), to keep the way of the tree of life.
[He drove out, #r$ "gyF w: ]A Properly this means to repudiate, just as a
husband rejects his wife.1 For God had associated Himself with man as with a
spouse. Thus God changes eternal into temporal death, and promises a
deliverer: and the Hebrews speak correctly that always greater and more
ample is Mymxi jrAhf tdA@mi, the measure of grace, than Nydh@I a td@Am,i the
measure of judgment (Fagius). Memory of this fact was preserved among the
Gentiles: For this was among the oracles of the Chaldeans, Seek Paradise, the
glorious fatherland of the soul (Ainsworth).
[And He placed before Paradise, NglA ; MdqE em@ ]i Onkelos translates in
this way, before the garden of Eden was. Angels were created on the second
day, Paradise on the third (Hebrews in Fagius). But the simplest version is, to
the east of the garden (Fagius, Rabbi Salomon and Ibn Ezra in Fagius,
Montanus, Tigurinus, Syriac, Arabic); from the anterior part of the garden of
Eden (Targum Jerusalem).
The east of the garden, where the entrance into it was, the other sides
of it being enclosed or secured by God to preserve it from the entrance and
annoyance of wild beasts. Or, before the garden, i.e. near to the garden;
before any man could come at the garden any way.
[Cherubims, Mybwi r@ kh@; ]a I translate, select Cherubims, because of the
article h (Picherel). Ibn Ezra says that Cherubims is a generic term for every
figure, but that here those noted Angels are signified (Fagius). Others of the
Arabs derive it from k, just as, and )ybr/boy, for they have the form of boys
(Kimchi in Fagius). But this conjecture is foolish, not squaring with philological
analogy (de Dieu). Rabbi Salomon explains Cherubim as destroying angels
(Fagius). No one doubts that Angels are understood, says Loius de Dieu. [But
Grotius appears to doubt it, as we shall see.] All the Hebrews attribute to the
Cherubim in Moses the form of boys: which is received among the learned.
Whence they are called is not proven. To us bwr@ k@; is the same as bw@kr:, a
chariot carriage. I approve this, 1. because bw@rk;@ is put for clouds, insofar as
God uses them as a chariot; as in Psalm 18:10, He was carried upon bwr@ k@,; a
cherub; which is said in Psalm 104:3, who maketh the clouds wbO w@kr:, His
chariot. 2. Angels are here and there called the carriage of God, as in Psalm
68:17 and Ezekiel 10:1, 5, 17; and therefore, they are described with wheels,
1 For example, Leviticus 21:7b: “Neither shall they take a woman put away (h#$wf @rg:@)
from her husband.”
232
for they are the chariot of God. See also Zechariah 6:1. 3. Because bw@rk@; is
to the Arabs a transport ship, on account of carrying. 4. Therefore, in Ezekiel
10:14, that living being which had the face of an ox is said to have the face of a
Cherub: because among those four living beings the ox alone could have the
function of a vehicle (de Dieu). They compare bw@rk@; with bker/E chariot, so
that they are, as it were, swift, winged, carrying a rider, conveying (Malvenda).
[Cherubim] Angels, so called on account of their excellent knowledge.
He mades these as defenders of the omniscience of God, which Adam and Eve
had sought to obtain (Tirinus). By Cherubim, the ministry of the Word is
signified (as it is gathered out of Ezekiel 3), by which it would be exhibited to
man that the approach to the tree of life was closed, neither is there a return to
it, except through Christ (Fagius).
Cherubims, i.e. angels, so called from their exquisite knowledge, and
therefore fitly here used for the punishment of man, who sinned by affecting
Divine knowledge.
[And a sword, etc.] Elsewhere such swords are likewise attributed to
Angles, Numbers 22:23; 1 Chronicles 21:16, 27 (Menochius).
[And a flaming, etc., brxE eha +hala t)w' :] Flame (blade [Syriac],
point [Montanus, Pagnine], flash [Arabic]) of a sword (Malvenda, Ainsworth,
Junius and Tremellius, thus many others), that is, a sword of flame, that is,
setting on fire. Thus en0 flogi\ puro_j, in a flame of fire, in Acts 7:30, and
flaming fire, in 2 Thessalonians 1:8, signify. However, I take the singular for
the plural, for there were several Cherubs (Picherel). Some translated, flaming
sword (Vulgate, Septuagint, Fagius, Grotius, Menochius, Tirinus). Others:
blade of a sword (Munster, Fagius), that is, a polished sword which appears to
cast forth flame, for +hla a is both flame and blade (Fagius, Munster). That
flaming sword, either, 1. is to be taken properly for a physical sword of iron,
or air, etc. (Bonfrerius, Menochius). Thus swords are called flaming by the
Poets (Bonfrerius). Thus Virgil in the Æneid 8: helmets, terrible with plumes,
casting flames; and in Book 4, and from the sheath he draws the sword of
lightning (Malvenda). Or, 2. metaphorically, namely, for the angelic power
and might (Tirinus). Or, 3. for a flame molded into the form of a sword
(Menochius, Malvenda).
[Flaming] Glittering and sharp to such a degree, that having been
brandished it appears to spew forth flames and lightening (Menochius).
[Cherubim and a flaming sword] It is en4 dia_ duoi=n, an hendiadys, for
a Cherub, that is, a flaming sword (Grotius); or, for a Cherub with the flame of
a sword (Piscator). (It is the custom of the Hebrews to call all the
extraordinary works of God Angels, such as winds and fire, Psalm 104:4.) The
Hebrew is flame of a sword, that is, of division; for the sword in Matthew
233
10:34 is translated division in Luke 12:51. The sense is that Paradise was
encircled by an impenetrable fire. There is in Babylon a region of naphtha
(which has a great affinity to fire) or full of pitch (concerning which Pliny, in
Natural History 2:109, says, The plain in Babylon is burning by day, etc.;
Plutarch, in The Life of Alexander; Strabo, in Geography 15; and Curtius, in
History of Alexander the Great). Therefore, among these sites was Paradise.
And the pitch there is not less than that near Sodom, the remnants of a fire
divinely sent (Grotius). This sword, flaming and sharp, bears a twofold type of
the Word of God; fire, Luke 12:49, and sword, Hebrew 4:12. According to
the Rabbis, it adumbrates the eternal punishments of the wicked (Fagius).
Some think that the singular is put for the plural, and that there were a
multiplicity of Angels, who appeared in human form, and were brandishing and
waving a multiplicity of drawn swords, standing guard after the custom of the
military (Vatablus, likewise Piscator, Malvenda, Picherel). For since there
were a multiplicity of Cherubim, it is likely that each held a sword (Piscator).
The Hebrews relate that the high priest under the Law, if he did not conduct
himself rightly, was consumed by a flaming sword proceeding from the midst of
the Cherubim, and thus he died. It is well known from the writings of the
Hebrews that a number of high priests (especially those of the Sadducees)
perished in the sanctuary (Fagius).
[Revolving (Cajetan, Vatablus, Samaritan Text, Oleaster, Septuagint),
tkpe eh% ta ;mi@h]a Turning itself (Chaldean), which would have been spinning most
rapidly and nimbly (which the Hithpael form denotes), which would have been
whirled around by the Cherubim (Malvenda). Others: two-edged; and they
understand it to be sharp in both directions (Fagius out of Ibn Ezra, Munster,
Bonfrerius). Others conjoin both, that is, suited to be turned in every
direction, because two-edged (Melvenda, Tirinus). tkep%he at;mh@i a1 is not rightly
connected with +hal/a flame, which is masculine, but with brxE e/sword, which
is feminine. Translate, a flame of a revolving sword, not, as others less aptly,
revolving edge of a sword (as Pagnine), or, turned, or, turning itself
(Malvenda). Of a sword brandishing itself (Junius and Tremellius), turning, or
turning itself (Ainsworth, Malvenda, Junius and Tremellius). Which sword
was turning itself, that is, it was revolving itself around. It is attributed to the
instrument, what belongs to the one making use of the instrument (Picherel).
[To guard] To keep men and demons away; lest the latter, having
entered, should pluck and give to man; and, with such an amulet, and with the
hope of immortal life, they should seduce senseless men unto their own
subservience and idolatry (Bonfrerius, Menochius, Tirinus). Through Christ,
the faithful are given the ability to eat of the tree of life, Revelation 2:7; 22:14
1 tkpe e%hat;mhi@ a is a feminine participle.
234
(Picherel).
And a flaming sword in the cherubims’ hands, as it was upon other
occasions, Numbers 22:23; Joshua 5:13; 1 Chronicles 21:16, 27. And this was
either a material sword, bright, and being brandished, shining and glittering
like a flame of fire; or flaming fire, in the shape of a sword. Or, flaming
swords, because there were divers cherubims, and each of them had a sword;
the singular number for the plural. Or, a two-edged sword, which turned
every way, was brandished and nimbly whirled about by the cherubims; which
posture was fittest for the present service, to keep the way that leads to
Paradise, and so to the tree of life, that man might be deterred and kept from
coming thither.
Chapter 4
The birth of Cain and Abel, and their employment, 1, 2. Cain’s
offering, 3. Abel’s sacrifice, and God’s acceptance, 4. Cain’s rejected; his
discontent, 5. God expostulates it with him, 6, 7. He murders Abel, 8. God
makes inquiry after Abel, 9. The cry of his blood, 10. God’s curse upon Cain,
11, 12. His complaint, 13, 14. God mitigates it, 15. Its execution, 16.
Cain’s posterity, 17, 18. Lamech’s two wives, 19. They bear unto him sons,
who dwell in tents, 20; invent musical instruments, 21; have skill in brass and
iron, 22. His boasting, 23, 24. The birth of Seth, 25. His son; the revival of
religion, 26.
[4003 BC] Verse 1: And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived,
and bare Cain (that is, gotten, or, acquired), and said, I have gotten a man from
the LORD.
[He knew1] That is, he lay with her. It is thus called, either, 1.
because coitus ought to be performed with a sober spirit and decorously with
respect to disposition (Hebrews in Fagius); or, 2. because manly seed flows
down from the head (others in Fagius); or, 3. in opposition to hmfl;(a2/virgin,
so called as if hidden or unknown (Menochius); or, 4. because in nothing is the
feminine sex known so plainly as in sexual union (Oleaster, Malvenda). Others
have imitated this phrase: Plutarch, The Life of Alexander, He did not know
another woman; Cæsar, The Gallic Wars3 6:21, Before the twentieth year, to
have the knowledge of woman they reckon among the most indecent acts;
Horace, She had no knowledge of man; Menander4 in Hermogenes’5
Concerning Invention 5. See the notes of Xylander6 in Plutarch’s “Romulus”7
(Malvenda). Plutarch, “Pompey”: He knew none of the concubines of
Mithridates.8 Iamblichus,9 The Life of Pythagoras:1 Pythagoras gave
1 Hebrew: (dyA F.
2 To conceal is a common definition of the verb Mla(f.
3 De Bello Gallico.
4 Menander (342-291 BC) was a Greek playwright. He wrote more than a hundred
comedies, but they survive only in fragments.
5 Hermogenes of Tarsus was a Greek rhetorician, who lived during the second century
AD.
6 Guilielmus Xylander (1532-1576) was a German classicist.
7 Lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans.
8 Mithridates VI (132-63 BC) was king of Pontus. He was one of Rome’s most
vexing foes until finally defeated by Pompey.
9 Iamblichus (c. 245-c. 325) was instrumental in both shaping and spreading
236
commandment to men that they should know only those women who were not
illegitimate. Ovid, Letters of Heroines2 6: Disgracefully that unchaste maiden
knew the man. Bisciolus, in Spare Hours3 10:3. Donatus4 on Terence’s
Phormio: Chastity is knowledge of one man. Hermongenes, Concerning
Invention 4: A certain girl, when asked how she was spoiled, portrayed the
indecent matter decently (semnw~j; peri\ semnou= lo/gou, in a decent
expression), e1gnw me, he knew me (Gataker). The Hebrew tongue expresses
obscene matters in decent words, and, therefore, they assert that it is to be
called the holy tongue. Rabbi Salomon expounds it, he had known, that is,
before the transgression; which they maintain to be spoken by recapitulation
(Fagius). The old Jews, who feel this way, confirm it from this, that it was
commanded, Be fruitful and multiply, which is understood of the act of
generation. Otherwise, Adam would have been a transgressor of that precept,
And he shall cleave unto his wife (Lyra). But this is a Jewish error (Fagius).
Roman Catholic doctors think that they went forth from Paradise as virgins.
Now the precept was awaiting the determination of God in this case until the
suitable time, etc. (Lyra).
[Who conceived and bare] rhta @a, she conceived, to the Hebrews does
not only denote that which it does to the Latins and Greeks, but all the trouble
of pregnant women; as dlet',@ she bares, signifies, not so much parturition, as
the pains of cherishing and training (Fagius). She conceived, namely, the seed,
partly of the husband, partly her own, in the womb (Piscator).
This modest expression is used both in Scripture and other authors, to
signify the conjugal act or carnal knowledge. So Genesis 19:8; 24:16;
Numbers 31:17; Matthew 1:25; Luke 1:34.
[Cain, saying, I have possessed] Cain is Possession.5 That is to say, A
son is born to me, who will be my possession and inheritance (Menochius). In
Cain, they believed redemption to be at the door, therefore they imposed this
favorable name upon him; and they held him to be a great treasure, for he
would be the firstborn king and priest. Concerning Abel, there was no such
hope; therefore, they named him vain.6 But human judgment is greatly
Neoplatonic philosophy in the ancient world.
1 De Vita Pythagoræ.
2 Epistulæ Heroidum.
3 Horæ Subsecivæ.
4 Ælius Donatus was a fourth century, Latin grammarian, who wrote commentaries on
Terence and Virgil. He is remembered largely on account of his most famous pupil,
Jerome.
5 The name NyqI a/Cain is derived from the verbal root hnqF f, to acquire.
6 Here the name lbhe f/Abel is related to lbehe/vapour.
237
mistaken: God cast out Cain, chooses Abel (Munster, Fagius). Cedrenus1
expounds Cain as envy. Mistakenly. h)nf :qi is envy, from which is derived
)n@qF a/envious, not NyqI a/Cain. I render it, lamentation, or one who laments,
from Nw@q, from which is derived hnyF q/i lamentations, Ezekiel 2:102 (de Dieu).
This mystical and pious imposition of names implies the concern of the parents
that they be set free from sin (Tirinus).
[A man3] That is, a male, as in Genesis 7:2.4 They were rejoicing
chiefly over the masculine sex (Drusius).
[By God, hwOFhy:-t)e5] The word t)e is variously taken (Fagius). It can
be rendered, either a man of the Lord; or a man, the Lord; or from the Lord;
or through the Lord; or with, by, or in the presence of the Lord (Helvicus’
Longing of Mother Eve). Certain interpreters: through God, or the Lord.
Thus the Greeks, dia_ Qeo\n, through God (Drusius), that is, by the divine
favor and kindness (Menochius). For fruitfulness is a singular blessing of God
(Grotius). Others thus: in the presence of the Lord, that is, one who, although
we will die, will live to worship God in our stead. Thus it is in that good
author, Nahmanides [who is called by Drusius Gerundensis, of Gerona
(Munster, Fagius)]. He will govern himself more properly than we did in
Paradise (Munster, Fagius out of Onkelos). The interpretation of Gerundensis
does not approve itself to me, that t)e might stand in the place of l, as if it
were hwFOhyl: a, to the the Lord (Drusius). Eve was hoping that Cain was he
through whom, or through whose seed, God might put an end to their
calamities (Munster). Others read, by the Lord (Ainsworth, Oleaster). I have
acquired a man from the Lord, that is, by my prayers (Oleaster). Others: with
the Lord (Pareus, Piscator, Junius and Tremellius, Drusius, Vatablus,
Ainsworth), that is, with the Lord helping, like Rabbi Salomon (who explains it
thus: God alone created us; however, in the composition of Cain He used us as
assistants [Fagius]), with the Lord like a leader going before. God poured in the
soul; we, the body (Rabbi Judah in Drusius). With God willing; or, if pleases,
with God helping. The Greeks would say, sun\ Qew,|~ with God. Thus, in 1
1 George Cedrenus was an eleventh century Byzantine historian. His Concise History
of the World begins at the creation, and runs all the through to his own day.
2 Ezekiel 2:10b: “And there was written therein lamentations (MynyI qi), and mourning,
and woe.”
3 Hebrew: #$y).i
4 Genesis 7:2: “Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male (#y$ ),i
a man) and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male (#$y),i a man)
and his female.”
5 Genesis 4:1b: “And she bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord
(hwOhF y:-t)e).”
238
Samuel 14:45, he hath wrought with God, that is, made use of the help of God
(Drusius); with God supporting, or, from the gift of God (Vatablus). t)e is
taken for M(i/with, as in Proverbs 13:20,1 he who walks with the wise. But to
prove this with examples is to light a candle at noonday. Grammarians note
t)e in the place of Nm/i from. I would say that it is a defective form from the
full t)em,' from proximity with (Drusius). Others read: a man, the Lord,
namely, whom God promised to me. For because Eve believed the promise of
the seed, etc., she no doubt concluded that this was that seed, etc. (Fagius).
Thus Jonathan ben Uzziel (who, if we follow the title, is by far older than
Onkelos [Helvicus’ Longing of Mother Eve 26]) in the Targum translates, a
man, the Angel of the Lord (Fagius); that is, Messiah, who is thus called in
Isaiah 63:9 and Malachi 3:1. Thus Pellican,2 who supported this out of the
Kabbalists, and Luther (Helvicus’ Longing of Mother Eve 15). Thus Marinus,3
Avenarius,4 and Schindler5 (Malvenda). And certainly the Tipha accent does
not appear to hinder apposition;6 for it is found in apposition in Jonah 2:17
(Piscator). And thus it is a valid argument for the divinity of the Messiah
(Fagius, Helvicus). [But interpreters quarrel about this; while Pareus, Piscator,
and Drusius after Calvin assert that this is excessively subtle and weak, Helvicus
vindicates it as solid.] The question is whether the little word t)e is the marker
of the accusative case. We affirm this; they deny it (Helvicus). The particle
t)e either is deiktikh\ e0mfatikh,\ able to demonstrate emphasis, and with
transitive verbs, or active verbs, is constructed as the marker of the accusative
case, with passive, on the other hand, and intransitive verbs, or middle verbs,
the marker of the nominative case; or it is the preposition with. Yet here it is
not the preposition with: which is demonstrated: 1. The Hebrew language
expresses su\n Qew,~| with God, not usually through hwOFhy-: t)e, but through
1 Proverbs 13:20a: “He that walketh with (t))e wise men shall be wise . . .”
2 Conrad Pellican (1478-1556) began his career as a Roman Catholic priest and
scholar in Germany. He sided with the Reformers, and, on account of his extensive
knowledge and great skill in the Hebrew tongue, he was appointed Professor of
Hebrew at Zurich.
3 Marcus Marinus was a sixteenth century Hebrew scholar and papal inquisitor/
censor. He deleted from the Basel Talmud five chapters, which reflected negatively
upon Christianity.
4 Johannes Habermann, Avenarius (1516-1590), was a learned Lutheran pastor and
Hebrew scholar, Professor at Jena and Wittenberg.
5 Valentine Schindler (d. 1604) was a Lutheran Hebraist. He was Professor of
Oriental Languages at Wittenberg and at Helmstadt.
6 Genesis 4:1b: “I have gotten a man (Tipha accent) the Lord.”
7 Jonah 2:1: “Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord (Tipha accent) his God out of the
fish’s belly.”
239
these words, Myhi$l)b'@ hwhOF y:ba,@ Psalm 60:12;1 108:13;2 Jeremiah 3:23;3
Hosea 1:7;4 Isaiah 45:17;5 Deuteronomy 33:29.6 2. It is acknowledged that
that signification with is extraordinary for t).e Therefore, the ordinary
signification ought to prevail at least for the present, until the necessity of the
extraordinary might be demonstrated, which necessity cannot be found here.
3. On nine occasions in the preceding and following verses, t)e is found, in
which eight times it indubitably signifies the marker of the accusative case,
constructed, as is apparent, with active verbs.7 4. Thus Jonathan takes it as
spoken. Everywhere it expresses the accusative, as in Jeremiah 17:13, they
have forsaken the fount of waters, hwFhO y:-t)e/Jehovah, which example is
obviously parallel with the present text.8 Thus Helvicus [who produces
twenty-five other examples]. Let us now see what they produce from the
contrary position. 1. There is an ellipsis of the m, t)e in the place of t)em',
and it is to be translated, from Jehovah, just as it is in Genesis 44:49 and
Deuteronomy 34:110 (Junius). Response 1: If it is an ellipsis in these places, is
the plainest signification, therefore, to be given up, and conformed to a
distorted and elliptical signification? This certainly is a!nw potamw~n, above
rivers, extraordinary (Helvicus). Response 2: I deny that there are ellipses in
the places cited. There is no ellipsis in Genesis 44:4. But just as the Latins say
1 Psalm 60:12a: “With God (Myhl$i )b@)' we shall do valiantly.”
2 Psalm 108:13a: “With God (Myh$li )b@)' we shall do valiantly.”
3 Jeremiah 3:23b: “Truly with the Lord (hwhFO y:b@a) our God is the salvation of Israel.”
4 Hosea 1:7b: “And I will save them by the Lord (hwOFhy:ba)@ their God.”
5 Isaiah 45:17a: “But Israel shall be saved in the Lord (hwOhF yb: @)a with an everlasting
salvation.”
6 Deuteronomy 33:29a: “Happy art thou, O Israel: who is like unto thee, O people
saved by the Lord (hwhFO y:b)@a . . .”
7 Genesis 3:24-4:2a: “So he drove out the man (MdF)fhf-t)e); and he placed at the east
of the garden of Eden Cherubims (Mybri kU @;h-a t)e), and a flaming sword (+hala t)w' :
brExeh)a which turned every way, to keep the way (Kr7 dE -E t))e of the tree of life. And
Adam knew Eve (hw@xf -a t))e his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain (NyIq-a t)e), and
said, I have gotten a man, the Lord (hwFhO y-: t))e . And she again bare his brother
(wyxi)-f t)e) Abel (lbeh-f t)e).”
8 Jeremiah 17:13b: “They have forsaken the fountain of living waters, the Lord
(hwFOhy-: t)e MyyI%xa-MyIma rwOqm;).” Genesis 4:1b: “I have gotten a man, the Lord (#$y)i
hwOhF y-: t)e).”
9 Genesis 44:4a: “And when they were gone out of the city (ry(hi -f t),e t)e in the
place of t)em)' . . .”
10 Deuteronomy 34:1b: “And the Lord shewed him all the land from (t)e in the place
of t)me )' Gilead, unto Dan.”
240
to leave the threshold (Terence), to leave the camp (Statius1), to surpass laws2
(Tacitus3); so also the Hebrews there, ry(hi f-t)e w)@ cy; ,F they left the city.
Neither is there an ellipsis in Deuteronomy 34:1, and d(lf ;ghI@ -a t)e is to be
translated (not from Gilead, as Junius and Tremellius, but) Gilead.4 Thus
other interpreters, however many I have seen (Helvicus). Another alleges 1
Kings 18:32. But neither is there an ellipsis in that place, but a double
accusative after the Hebrew custom, he built those stones (MynbI )f jhf-t))e an
altar; just as the Latins say, I hide this matter from thee;5 I ask a favor of you6
(Helvicus). 2. There are many passages in which t)e is a marker of the
ablative case; as Genesis 5:22;7 6:9;8 12:4;9 31:25;10 Leviticus 16:15;11 Exodus
1:1, they came into Egypt t)/e with Jacob (Pareus). Response 1: If in these
passages, the signification is extraordinary, this is not prejudicial to the
ordinary. What, I ask, is necessary here? 2. Leviticus 16:15 can be rendered
in this way, he shall handle its blood. 3. The Messiah was going to be the seed
of the woman (of the virgin). Could it be that Eve was ignorant of this (certain
interpreters in Helvicus)? But she knew that Cain was the seed of man
(Drusius, Pareus). Response: She understood that this seed was going to be
the Messiah, etc. There was no consideration of virginity here in Eve
(Helvicus). 4. If God had desired this, he would have duplicated the t)e and
said hwOhF y-: t)e #$y)i-t)e, as it is duplicated in Genesis 4:2.12 Likewise, in
Zechariah 11:1013 (Drusius). Kimchi notes that t)e is taken for l)/e to, and he
advances various examples. But, 1. this opinion does not satisfy his opponents
1 Publius Papinius Statius (c. 45-96) was a Roman poet.
2 Although these Latin verbs contain the idea of motion away from, they take an
ordinary accusative object.
3 Publius Cornelius Tacitus (c. 56-c. 117) was a Roman historian. The information
that he preserves about his era and its emperors is invaluable.
4 Deuteronomy 34:1b: “And the Lord shewed him all the land, Gilead, unto Dan.”
5 Latin: Celo te hanc rem. Both te/thee and hanc rem, this matter, are in the
accusative.
6 Latin: Rogo te veniam. Both te/thee and veniam/favor are in the accusative.
7 Genesis 5:22a: “And Enoch walked with (t))e God . . .”
8 Genesis 6:9b: “And Noah walked with (t))e God.”
9 Genesis 12:4b: “And Lot went with him (wtO @))i .”
10 Genesis 31:25b: “And Laban with (t))e his brethren pitched in the mount of
Gilead.”
11 Leviticus 16:15a: “Then shall he kill the goat of the sin offering . . . and do with
(t)e) that blood as he did with the blood of the bullock.”
12 Genesis 4:2a: “And she again bare his brother (wyx)i f-t))e Abel (lbeh-f t)e).”
13 Zechariah 11:10a: “And I took my staff (yliqm; -a t))e , even Beauty (M(an-O t))e , and
cut it asunder.
241
at all (for it is plain that it cannot be taken for l)e here). In Leviticus 13:49,
Nhk' oh@ -a t)e h)rf h: fw: is to be translated (not as Junius, it shall be showed to
the priest, but) in the Hophal, the priest was made to see. Genesis 49:25:
t)we : K1rEz(; y; wA : Ky1 b)i f l)m' ' K@fkerJbfywI yd@#A a$ , from the God of thy father,
who shall help thee; and from (t)we :) the Almighty, who shall bless thee.
Response 1: In poetic speech many things are irregular: but in this place it is
plainly another style of speaking. 2. Whether the irregularity is to be supplied
through an ellipsis of m, this is yet the matter of inquiry. 3. If it is an ellipsis of
m, it is supplied from l)m' ', from God (Helvicus). [Concerning the remaining
passages (which are more easily opened) consult, if you will, Helvicus.] Isaac
Karus says that Adam decided after his repentance that his first son would be
devoted to divine worship, his second to domestic matters, which, compared
with the worship of God, are sheer vanity; therefore, he called the first Cain,
that is, an acquisition from God (and thus it is to be translated, I acquired a man
from the Lord, as Rambam takes it, who also demonstrates that t)e is
sometimes used for l/by and for l)/e to), and the second Abel, vanity (de
Muis).
Cain, whose name signifies a possession. A man, a male child, as
Genesis 7:2, which was most welcome. From the Lord; or, by or with the
Lord, i.e. by virtue of his first blessing, Genesis 1:28, and special favour. Or, a
man the Lord, as the words properly signify: q.d. God-man, or the Messias,
hoping that this was the promised Seed.
Verse 2: And she again bare his brother Abel (Heb. Hebel). And Abel
was a keeper (Heb. a feeder) of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground (Gen.
3:23; 9:20).
[She bare] It does not say, she conceived. Therefore, Cain and Abel
were twins (rabbis in Ainsworth).
[Abel, lbehf] It signifies either, 1. sorrow, for his parents mourned
him first and for a long time (certain interpreters in Lyra, Cedrenus in
Drusius). However, then he would have been lb)e /f mourning (de Dieu). Or,
2. vanity (Lyra, Fagius, Piscator, Oleaster, Ainsworth, de Dieu, Menochius):
either because Eve had from his birth a presentiment of hastening death; or she
implied the vanity of mortality, to which all were subjected (Menochius); or
because she discovered that she did not have in Cain the promised seed, and
that, to that extent, her thoughts had been vanity; or he was, as it were, a gift
of superabundance, for she thought that she had enough in Cain (Fagius).
[Abel was a pastor, and Cain was a farmer] He describes in what
manner God separates the pious from the reprobates, even so that He might
242
shape their life. Cain was attentive to property and profit: Abel desired to
have more free time for God (to which the pastoral life was more
accommodating). Also, shepherds are believed to be of a more placid nature,
and they are more vividly reminded, by duty of feeding sheep, of God and of
His benefits (Fagius).
Abel signifies vanity, a vain, mortal, miserable man, whereas she
thought Cain to be more than an ordinary man; or this name might
prophetically design his miserable life, and untimely and unnatural death. To
till the ground was esteemed a more honourable calling than that of a shepherd,
and therefore either chosen by the elder brother, or allotted to him by his
father.
Verse 3: And in process of time (Heb. at the end of days) it came to
pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD
(Num. 18:12).
[It was after many days, Mymyi F Cq@m' i] At (or after, or from) the end,
or after the end, of days (Munster, Pagnine, Montanus, Malvenda, Oleaster,
Ainsworth); after days (Septuagint); after a number of days (Samaritan Text);
after not a few days (Chaldean, Syriac, Arabic, Tigurinus). At the end, in the
place of after the end; just as in Latin, from the funeral is after the funeral
(Fagius). Or m/from has been put for b/at.
[Days] Mymiy/F days is taken for a year, especially if it is set down
without qualification, say the Hebrews, especially Ibn Ezra, who cites these
passages: Leviticus 25:29, its redemption will be within the days of a year
(MymiyF/days);1 1 Samuel 1:3, he went up from year to year (hmyf miyF Mymiy%mF i,
from days to days). Therefore, the sense is, after a year, with the turning of the
year. And it is altogether satisfying to me, that it should be understood of a
definite and stated time of worship. Perhaps the observance was annual. Cq"
denotes a precise and certain end. There was always order in the Church
(Fagius). Others understand it somewhat otherwise, after a few years
(Vatablus). Days are put for years (not for a year) in this place, according to
the opinion of the Hebrews (Vatablus): in the same way days are put for years
in Judges 17:10, I will give to thee by years (MymiyF) ten pieces of silver. Days
are put for a year of days according to the Hebraic terseness; a year of days is so
called because of the fixed days which are in a year, as well as months. Thus
days, in Leviticus 25:29, is a whole year, in verse 30; and the cycle of days, in 1
1 Leviticus 25:29: “And if a man sell a dwelling house in a walled city, then he may
redeem it within a whole year (tnA#$;/year) after it is sold; within a full year (Mymiy,F
literally days) may he redeem it.”
243
Samuel 1:20,1 is the same as the cycle of the year in Exodus 34:22.2 And in
Numbers 9:22: whether for two days, or a month, or days, that is, a year.3
And in Amos 4:4: after three days, that is, three years,4 as Deuteronomy
14:28 has it; and in Exodus 13:10 and 1 Samuel 1:3, from days to days, that is,
from year to year. And the sacrifice of days, 1 Samuel 2:19, was the yearly
sacrifice.5 It is an expression of fullness, a year of days, Genesis 41:1;6 2
Samuel 14:28.7 Wherefore in the prophets, days are put for years, Revelation
11:2, 11. At the end of the year, when they brought in the produce, they
honored God with sacrifices and praise, both the Fathers from the beginning,
and the Gentiles, Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics 8:9, who were offering the
fruits of the earth. See Homer’s Iliad 1; Pliny’s Natural History 18:2; Law of
the Twelve Tables8 concerning religion 1:4 (Ainsworth). Otherwise Leifield;
in the end of days, that is, the Sabbath Day, which concludes the week: for a
division of the days, other than that which concluded on the seventh day, had
not yet been thought of (Castalio). After days, etc.; but why not immediately?
In the first days of life, he was restrained by inculcated principles of the paternal
prevarication; however, after those days, he came to his senses and offered a
sacrifice (Origen9 in Gataker).
Either, 1. In general, at the return of the set time then appointed, and
used for the solemn service of God. Or, 2. At the end of the year, when there
might be now, as there was afterward among the Jews, more solemn worship
and sacrifices; the word days being often put for a year, as Leviticus 25:29; 1
Samuel 1:3; 27:7.10 Or, 3. More probably at the end of the days of the week,
1 1 Samuel 1:20a: “Wherefore it came to pass, at the turning of the days (twpO qutl; i
Mymyi F%h)a , Hannah had conceived, that she bare a son.”
2 Exodus 34:22b: “. . . and the feast of ingathering at the year’s end (hn#F %$fha tpawq% t,;@
at the turning of the year).”
3 Numbers 9:22a: “Or whether it were two days, or a month, or a year (MymiyF, literally
days) . . .”
4 Amos 4:4b: “. . . and bring your sacrifices every morning, and your tithes after three
years (Mymyi F, literally days).”
5 1 Samuel 2:19b: “. . . when she came up with her husband to offer the yearly
sacrifice (Mymyi hF% a xbza E, sacrifice of the days).”
6 Genesis 41:1a: “And it came to pass at the end of two full years (Mymyi F MyItanF#;$, two
years of days), that Pharaoh dreamed.”
7 2 Samuel 14:28: “So Absalom dwelt two full years (MymiyF MytI na #F $;, two years of
days) in Jerusalem, and saw not the king's face.”
8 The Law of the Twelve Tables was an ancient Roman “bill of rights,” which stood
at the heart of Roman law.
9 Origen (c. 185-c. 254) succeeded Clement of Alexandria as the head of the
catechetical school in Alexandria. He was perhaps the greatest scholar of his age.
10 1 Samuel 27:7: “And the time that David dwelt in the country of the Philistines
244
or upon the seventh and last day of the week, Saturday, which then was the
sabbath day, which before this time was blessed and sanctified, Genesis 2:3.
[That he offered] Hebrew: he brought (Oleaster, Vatablus), namely,
unto the place designated for prayer, says Ibn Ezra. Hence it is gathered that
they came together in a certain place and worshiped God. You see that there
were always regular and solemn assemblies of the pious. Hence the Hebrews
say, Whoever despises the solemn assemblies of the Church, he will not have a
portion in the future age (Fagius). He brought, that is, he offered, as it often is
in the Scriptures (Vatablus). But whence had they it that they should honor
God by sacrifices? Response: either, 1. from their father (Fagius, Lyra), who
instructed them, and was the priest, unto whom certain of the Hebrews think
that they brought their sacrifices (Fagius). It is plausible that the first parents
brought, etc., on account of the inspiration or word of God (Oleaster). Or, 2.
not from any command of God, but by reason dictating that respect for God is
also to be visible, which is best able to be done through gifts to God, gifts of
things which are most dear to man (Grotius).
Cain brought an offering, either to the place appointed for the solemn
worship of God, or to his father, who at that time was both king, and prophet,
and priest. Or brought, i.e. offered.
[Of the fruits of the ground] Inferior and meaner fruit, which is called
in Scripture the fruit of the ground (Menochius, Lapide). By the wayside, and
as they might come to hand; not from the fat, nor from the first fruits, but from
the remainders with the year completed, as the Hebrews gather from the
words, MymiyF Cq'm@ ,i at the end of days, and, yrpI ;m% i, of the fruit. Thus the
Hebrews conclude that Cain sinned through negligence, and through an
arrangement of the sacrifice not governed by, and in conformity with, the Law.
However, certain interpreters among us think that the sacrifice of Cain was in
kind more splendid than Abel’s, for it was hxfnm; ,i a grain offering, and he
himself was the firstborn (Fagius).
[Offering, hxnf m; ]i Concerning which see Leviticus 2 (Fagius). Every
honorific offering, even every tribute to man is thus called (Piscator,
Ainsworth, Malvenda).
Verse 4: And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock (Heb.
sheep, or, goats) and of the fat thereof (Num. 18:17; Prov. 3:9). And the
LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering (Heb. 11:4).
[He brought of the firstlings, twOrkbo @;mi] Some understand by firstlings
the finest ones (Chrysostom in Fagius), those which were excellent of size and
was a full year (Mymyi ,F literally days) and four months.”
245
form: as twEmf rwOkb;,@ the firstborn of death,1 is a very deadly disease;
MyrIwk@ @bi,@ the first-fruits, refers to a very fruitful early autumn; hrFkb; i,@ a
dromedary, is an exceedingly swift camel (Grotius).
The firstlings; either, 1. The firstborn, which God reserved to himself,
both at this time, and afterwards by an express law, Exodus 13:2; Numbers
3:13. Or, 2. The choicest and most eminent of the flock; for the best of any
kind are oft called firstborn, as Job 18:13; Jeremiah 31:9; Hebrews 12:23.
[And of the fat] Not without cause does this appear to be said. The
one had picked out what things he would offer, the other was offering what
meaner things he had (Estius).
[Nhebl@' x; em]' Of the fat thereof; understand, of the flock, or of those
sheep. Certain exemplars have Nhye b'l;xme ,' of their fat ones; that is to say, he
offered the fattest sheep. Thus they take it for an adjective (Vatablus); as if he
took the fatter ones from among the fat ones. He selected the best of the best
(Chrysostom). In the heart of Abel, God was great; therefore, he offered to
God great things, even the best things (Fagius). The Hebrews call the best of
something the fat: thus, the fat of crops, the marrow of wheat, etc. See
Genesis 45:18; Numbers 18:12;2 Psalm 147:143 (Piscator). Hence the
Hebrews gather that it was a peace offering. Neither does it hinder that it is
also called hxnf ;m.i 4 For at the end of a sacrifice, a libation was made, just as in
hxfn;mi, a grain offering. Others read it substantively, as if the fat was burned,
just as afterwards under the Law (Fagius, Piscator). [Grotius maintains
otherwise:] Since nothing is wont to be consecrated to God except what is
used by men, but to feed upon animals before the flood was probably not
permitted, it is possible that offered wool and the richest milk are mentioned,
which in the most ancient times were offered, as Porphyry and Virgil teach.
Concerning wool, there is a passage in Sophocles:5 hn] me\n ga_r o!in+ oj
malloj\ , that is, it was the fleece of a sheep and a libation of wine, etc.
Pausanias, concerning Ceres of Phigaleia: eq1 usan th|= Qew,~| kai\ kaqa_ oi9
ep0 ixw&rioi nomi/zousin ou0den\ , etc. [Thus Grotius transcribes it; but the
passage from the author, in whose “Arcadia”, or Book 8, it occurs at the end of
a verse, is thus to be corrected, e1qusa th=| Qew|,~ kaqa_ kai\ oi9 e0pixw&rioi
1 Job 18:13.
2 Numbers 18:12a: “All the best (blxe '/fat) of the oil, and all the best (blex'/fat) of the
wine, and of the wheat . . .”
3 Psalm 147:14b: “He filleth thee with the finest (blex/' fat) of the wheat.”
4 Genesis 4:4b: “And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering (wOtxnf ;m)i .”
hxnf m; i usually signifies an offering of grain, but not so here.
5 Sophocles (c. 495-406) was a Greek playwright. Of his 123 plays, only seven
tragedies survive.
246
nomi/zousin, ou0de\n, etc.; that is, To the goddess (by the received custom
among the natives) I offered no burnt sacrifice, but I offered the fruit of
cultivated trees, and especially of the vine, honeycombs also, and wool, etc.]
What Plato has, in Laws 6, is similar: Qu/mata de\ ouk0 hn] toij= qeois= i zw~a,
etc., Animal offerings were not made to the gods, but cakes and fruit
moistened with honey. Empedocles,1 concerning the most ancient times:
Tau/rwn d 0 a)kri/toisi fo/noij ou0 deu/etai bwmoj_ , The alter was not
sodden with the undeserved slaughter of bulls. But the Talmudists believe that,
in those earliest times, before men were eating flesh, burnt offerings were in
use, from which nothing would be for the enjoyment of men, and through
which the God of all things would be acknowledged as the Lord of life and
death. Consequently, even after the Law they received from uncircumcised
foreigners victims for burnt offerings only, not for the other sacrifices instituted
by the Law. The Septuagint translators often translate blex'/fat by ga&la/
milk, as in Genesis 18:8; 49:12; Exodus 3:8, 17; 23:19; Leviticus 20:24;
Numbers 13:27; 14:8; Deuteronomy 6:3; 14:21 (Grotius).2 The question here
is moved, whether before the flood it was permitted to eat meat, namely, one
portion of the sacrifice. Jerome, in Against Jovinianus 2:10, and Thomas, in his
Summa 1:2:102:6:2 and on Romans 14, deny it. Soto,3 in On Justice and Law4
5:1:1, affirms it (and demonstrates it with good arguments). See also Pererius.
Nevertheless, this does not follow from this passage, since it was a burnt
offering, that is, the whole consumed (Estius). [Concerning this question, see
the comments on Genesis 1:29.]
The fat thereof was either, 1. Properly, the fat being properly now
required by God, as afterwards was expressed, Exodus 29:13, 22; Leviticus
3:3. Or, 2. The best of them, as the word fat is often used, as Genesis 45:18;
49:20; Numbers 18:12; Nehemiah 8:10; Psalm 147:14.
[And He regarded (thus most interpreters), (#$aywI% ]A He turned Himself.
What things are agreeable to us, to those we turn ourselves, and upon those we
gladly look. That is to say, it pleased God (Fagius). He rested in Abel
(Oleaster). He was smelling (Samaritan Version). He was pleased (Syriac).
He accepted (Samaritan Text). He was soothed (Symmachus, Procopius).
Aquila translates it, a)pekhlh/qh, He was placated, from khle/omai, to soothe,
to delight. Jerome soundly translates h(#e ;$)ew,: in Psalm 119:117,5 as and I will
1 Empedocles (c. 490-c. 430) was a Greek philosopher, noted for originating the
theory of the four elements.
2 The Authorized Version also renders blxe ' in these passages milk.
3 Domingo de Soto (1494-1560) was a Spanish Dominican. He was a priest and
Professor of Theology at Salamanca University.
4 De Justitia et Jure.
5 Psalm 119:117: “Hold thou me up, and I shall be safe: and I will have respect unto
247
delight (Drusius). Theodotion translates it, en0 epu/risen, He set on fire, that
is, He consumed it with fire from heaven, and thus proved that it was agreeable
(Fagius, Lyra). Thus nearly all of the Fathers believe (Menochius, Tirinus).
This interpretation is certainly plausible, which was also satisfying to Julian
(Grotius). It is satisfying to others also (Oleaster, Piscator, Ainsworth, Lapide,
Bonfrerius, Bochart’s A Sacred Catalogue of Animals 1:2:49). In this way, God
used to bear witness to His favor, as in Leviticus 9:24; 1 Chronicles 21:26; 2
Chronicles 7:1; 1 Kings 18:38. See Psalm 20:3 (Ainsworth). This was visible
approbation, which Cain saw, and which God is said to have given as testimony
to him, Hebrews 11:4 (Ainsworth, Malvenda). Compare Leviticus 9:24;
Judges 6:21; 1 Kings 18:38; 2 Chronicles 7:1; Hebrews 11:4,
marturoun~ toj Qeou,~ God testifying. (The ancestors were drawing forth by
prayers the divine fire, which was consuming their burnt offerings, says Servius
on the Æneid 12 [Grotius].) Ibn Ezra, and the author of Bundle of Myrrh1 after
him, think the same, A fire from the Lord consumed the fat. Neither are
Hebrews lacking, who say that, in the fire consuming the sacrifices, there
always appeared the face of a Lion. Which, if true, was an illustrious type of
Christ, the Lion of the tribe of Judah (Fagius). On the other hand, this fire left
the sacrifice of Cain intact (Menochius, Tirinus). Except this interpretation be
true, whence learned Cain that his brother was accepted and he himself
repudiated (Jerome in Drusius)? God regarded by favoring, approving, and
making fertile his flocks and lands (Tirinus).
The Lord had respect, or, looked to him with a gracious eye, kindly
accepted and owned him and his sacrifice, and testified this (Hebrews 11:4) to
Cain and all there present, either by express word, or by some visible sign;
probably by consuming his sacrifice by fire from heaven, as the fathers generally
think; whereby also God did afterwards frequently signify, his acceptance of
sacrifices, as Leviticus 9:24; Judges 6:21; 1 Kings 18:38; 1 Chronicles 21:26; 2
Chronicles 7:1.
[Unto Abel and his offerings] The first was the cause of the second.
The offerings were pleasing because Abel was pleasing (Fagius, likewise Lyra,
Lapide, Menochius, Tirinus). Note that the person is regarded first, then the
sacrifice. Therefore, it is fitting that we are justified through faith, before our
works are acceptable to God (Fagius). Dion Prusæensis,2 Concerning the Pious
King:3 ou1pote dwr~ on de/cetai para_ twn~ kakwn~ an) drw~n: oud0 e\
tou_j qeou_j a)naqh/masin ou0de\ qusi/aij oie1 tai xai/rein tw~n ad) i/kwn
a0ndrwn~ , that is, He will not receive a gift from wicked men, neither should
(h(e#;$)ew:, delight in) thy statutes continually.”
1 Fasciculus Myrrhæ.
2 Dion of Prusa (c. 40-c. 120) was a Greek orator and author.
3 De Pio Rege.
248
one think that God rejoices in the sacrifices of the impious. Porphyry, On
Abstinence from Animal Food 2: Ma/llon to_ daimo/nion pro_j to_ twn~
quo/ntwn hq] oj, h2 proj_ to_ tw~n quome/nwn plh~qoj, ble/pei, that is,
God has more regard for the ethics of the one offering than the number of
oblations (Gataker).
Unto Abel’s person, who was a truly good man; and then to his
sacrifice, which was offered with faith in God’s mercy and in the promised
Mediator, Hebrews 11:4.
Verse 5: But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And
Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell (Gen. 31:2).
[Unto Cain, etc.] See the cause in verse 3.
[And he was wroth, rxya %wI A] The Hebrews have eight words signifying
anger, among which hrxF f is the most vehement (Fagius): it signifies to be set
ablaze, either with anger, or with indignation (Ainsworth)
[NyIqla ; rxya %wI A] An extraordinary construction (Malvenda). There is
an ellipsis of P)/a anger, it was kindled, or inflamed, namely, anger, or his nose
(for the angry breathe through the nose), to Cain. The ellipsis in Genesis 18:30
is similar.1 It is explained elsewhere, where the anger of God is said to be
inflamed, Exodus 32:11; Deuteronomy 6:15; Zechariah 10:3 (Piscator).
NwOrx/j anger is latent in the etymologically related word, rxay%wI A, as it often
happens in the Scripture that an elided word is to be drawn out from an
etymologically related word (Glassius, “Grammar” 711).
Cain was very wroth; partly with God, who had cast so public a
disgrace upon him, and given the preference to his younger brother; and partly
with Abel, because he had received more honour from God, and therefore was
likely to have more respect and privilege from his parents than himself.
[His face fell] As it is common with the envious, and with those whom
an ill conscience rends (Bonfrerius), and with those treated with disgrace
(Fagius). An indication of shame (Vatablus, Grotius) and grief (Vatablus). To
this is opposed t)'#;o, below in verse 7,2 an erect contenance, the sign of a
good conscience (Grotius, likewise Menochius). Compare Job 11:15 with Job
29:24 (Ainsworth). But those, who are consumed with envy and plot evil,
furrow their brow: and they cast their eyes down to the earth (Menochius).
The face is the window of the soul: and what things are feigned, are not
lasting. Thence he revealed his anger with signs (Fagius).
1 Genesis 18:30a: “And he said unto him, Oh let not the Lord be angry (yndF o)la yxya ,I
let it not burn to the Lord), and I will speak.”
2 Genesis 4:7a: “If thou doest well, an uplifted countenance (t)#' o); ?”
The words you are searching are inside this book. To get more targeted content, please make full-text search by clicking here.
Genesis-Commentary-1-to-9-Synopsis-Matthew-Poole-Trans-Steven-Dilday
Related Publications
Discover the best professional documents and content resources in AnyFlip Document Base.
Search
Genesis-Commentary-1-to-9-Synopsis-Matthew-Poole-Trans-Steven-Dilday
- 1 - 50
- 51 - 100
- 101 - 150
- 151 - 200
- 201 - 250
- 251 - 300
- 301 - 350
- 351 - 400
- 401 - 450
- 451 - 465
Pages: