were many occasions of suspicion, and such as could not easily escape a weaker circumspection, yet did the unwary apprehension of Eve take no advantage thereof. It hath therefore seemed strange unto some, she should be deluded by a serpent, or subject her reason to a beast, which God had subjected unto hers. It hath empuzzled the enquiries of others to apprehend, and enforced them unto strange conceptions, to make out, how without fear or doubt she could discourse with such a creature, or hear a serpent speak, without suspicion of imposture.1 The wits of others have been so bold as to accuse her simplicity, in receiving his temptation so coldly; and, when such specious effects of the fruit were promised as to make them like gods, not to desire, at least not to wonder, he pursued not that benefit himself. And had it been their own case, would perhaps have replyed, if the taste of this fruit maketh the eaters like Gods why remainest thou a beast? If it maketh us but like gods, we are so already. If thereby our eyes shall be opened hereafter, they are at present quick enough to discover thy deceit; and we desire them no opener to behold our own shame. If to know good and evil be our advantage, although we have free will unto both, we desire to perform but one. We know 'tis good to obey the commandment of God, but evil if we transgress it.

They were deceived by one another, and in the greatest disadvantage of delusion, that is, the stronger by the weaker: for Eve presented the fruit, and Adam received it from her. Thus the serpent was cunning enough to begin the deceit in the weaker; and the weaker of strength sufficient to consummate the fraud in the stronger. Art and fallacy was used unto her; a naked offer proved sufficient to him; so his superstruction was his ruin, and the fertility of his sleep an issue of death unto him. And although the condition of sex, and posteriority of creation, might somewhat extenuate the error of the woman, yet was it very strange and inexcusable in the man: especially, if, as some affirm, he was the wisest of all men since; or if, as others have conceived, he was not ignorant of the fall of the angels, and had thereby example and punishment to deter him.

how without fear, &c.] See Religio Medici, p. 15, note 9.

They were deceived from themselves, and their own apprehensions; for Eve either mistook, or traduced the commandment of God. "Of every tree of the garden thou maist freely eat, but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat for in the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely dye." Now Eve upon the question of the serpent, returned the precept in different terms: "You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest perhaps you dye." In which delivery there were no less than two mistakes, or rather additional mendacities: for the commandment forbad not the touch of the fruit; and positively said, ye shall surely dye, but she extenuating replied, ne forte moriamini, lest perhaps ye dye. For so in the vulgar translation it runneth, and so it is expressed in the Thargum or paraphrase of Jonathan. And therefore although it be said, and that very truly, that the Devil was a lyer from the beginning, yet was the woman herein the first express beginner, and falsified twice, before the reply of Satan. And therefore also, to speak strictly, the sin of the fruit was not the first offence. They first transgressed the rule of their own reason, and after, the commandment of God.2

They were deceived through the conduct of their senses, and by temptations from the object itself; whereby although their intellectuals had not failed in the theory3 of truth, yet did the inservient and brutal faculties controll the suggestion of reason: pleasure and profit already overswaying the instructions of honesty, and sensuality perturbing the reasonable commands of virtue. For so it is delivered in the text; that when the woman saw " that the tree was good for food," and "that it was pleasant unto the eye," and "a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof and did eat." Now hereby it appeareth, that Eve, before the fall, was by the same and beaten way of allurements inveigled, whereby her posterity hath been deluded ever since; that is, those three delivered by St. John, "the lust of the flesh, the lust of

2 and after, the commandment of God.] As indeed none can transgress his commandment without first transgressing reason.-Capel Loft.

3 theory.] Theorys, in Greeke signifies, search into the nature of things. - Wr.

the eye, and the pride of life:" where indeed they seemed as weakly to fail, as their debilitated posterity, ever after. Whereof, notwithstanding, some in their imperfection have resisted more powerful temptations, and in many moralities condemned the facility of their seductions.

Again, they might, for ought we know, be still deceived in the unbelief of their mortality, even after they had eat of the fruit. For, Eve observing no immediate execution of the curse, she delivered the fruit unto Adam; who after the taste thereof, perceiving himself still to live, might yet remain in doubt, whether he had incurred death; which perhaps he did not indubitably believe, until he was after convicted in the visible example of Abel. For he that would not believe the menace of God at first, it may be doubted whether, before an ocular example, he believed the curse at last. And therefore they are not without all reason, who have disputed the fact of Cain; that is, although he purposed to do mischief, whether he intended to kill his brother; or designed that, whereof he had not beheld an example in his own kind. There might be somewhat in it, that he would not have done, or desired undone, when he brake forth as desperately, as before he had done uncivilly, my iniquity is greater than can be forgiven me.*

Some niceties I confess there are which extenuate, but many more that aggravate this delusion; which exceeding the bounds of this discourse, and perhaps our satisfaction, we shall at present pass over. And therefore whether the sin of our first parents were the greatest of any since; whether the transgression of Eve seducing did not exceed that of Adam seduced; or whether the resistibility of his reason, did not equivalence the facility of her seduction, we shall refer it to the schoolman. Whether there was not in Eve as great injustice in deceiving her husband, as imprudence in being deceived herself, especially, if fore-tasting the fruit, her eyes

"My iniquity," &c.] The authorized version gives the passage thus; "my punishment is greater than I can bear." Sir Thomas prefers the marginal reading, which he contrasts with the surly question of Cain, in the 9th verse ;-"Am I

my brother's keeper? "-Drs. Clarke and Robertson give the same meaning to the words of the sentence, but the former makes it interrogative:-"Is my sin too great to be forgiven?"

were opened before his, and she knew the effect of it, before he tasted of it, we leave it unto the moralist. Whether the whole relation be not allegorical, that is, whether the temptation of the man by the woman be not the seduction of the rational and higher parts by the inferior and feminine faculties; or whether the tree in the midst of the garden, were not that part in the centre of the body, in which was afterward the appointment of circumcision in males, we leave it unto the thalmudist. Whether there were any policy in the devil to tempt them before the conjunction, or whether the issue, before tentation, might in justice have suffered with those after, we leave it unto the lawyer. Whether Adam foreknew the advent of Christ, or the reparation of his error by his Saviour; how the execution of the curse should have been ordered, if, after Eve had eaten, Adam had yet refused; whether, if they had tasted the tree of life, before that of good and evil, they had yet suffered the curse of mortality; or whether the efficacy of the one had not overpowered the penalty of the other, we leave it unto God. For he alone can truly determine these, and all things else; who, as he hath proposed the world unto our disputation, so hath he reserved many things unto his own resolution; whose determination we cannot hope from flesh, but must with reverence suspend unto that great day, whose justice shall either condemn our curiosities, or resolve our disquisitions.

Lastly, man was not only deceivable in his integrity, but the angels of light in all their clarity. He that said, he would be like the highest, did err, if in some way he conceived not himself so already but in attempting so high an effect from himself, he misunderstood the nature of God, and held a false apprehension of his own; whereby vainly attempting not only insolencies, but impossibilities, he deceived himself as low as hell. In brief, there is nothing infallible but God, who

5 whether the tree, &c.] See the Count de Gabalis, p. 54, Lond. 1714. This is the theory of Hadrian Beverland's celebrated work, De Peccato originali, 1679, 8vo. It may be observed by the way, as a fact not generally known, that many curious papers and MSS. of this singular writer, throwing great light on

that period of his life which he passed in England, may be found in the British Museum.-J. C.

6 Man was not only deceivable, &c.] More correctly, "not only was man deceivable in his integrity, but the angels of light in all their clarity."

cannot possibly err. For things are really true, as they correspond unto His conception; and have so much verity, as they hold of conformity unto that intellect, in whose idea they had their first determinations. And, therefore, being the rule, he cannot be irregular; nor, being truth itself, conceivably admit the impossible society of error.

CHAPTER II.

A further Illustration of the same.

BEING thus deluded before the fall, it is no wonder if their conceptions were deceitful, and could scarce speak without an error after. For, what is very remarkable (and no man that I know hath yet observed) in the relations of Scripture before the flood, there is but one speech delivered by man, wherein there is not an erroneous conception; and, strictly examined, most heinously injurious unto truth. The pen of Moses is brief in the account before the flood, and the speeches recorded are but six. The first is that of Adam, when, upon the expostulation of God, he replied, "I heard thy voice in the garden, and, because I was naked, I hid myself." In which reply there was included a very gross mistake, and, if with pertinacity maintained, a high and capital error. For, thinking by this retirement to obscure himself from God, he infringed the omnisciency and essential ubiquity of his maker: who, as he created all things, so is he beyond and in them all; not only in power, as under his subjection, or in his presence, as being in his cognition; but in his very essence, as being the soul of their causalities, and the essential cause of their existencies. Certainly, his posterity at this distance, and after so perpetuated an impair

7 For things are really true as they correspond, &c.] But not arbitrarily. They conform to his conception, because they are true; and he seeth all things as they are; and maketh their physical constitution to be what it is: and know

eth the moral relations thereunto belonging according to eternal rectitude, which is his nature. -Capel Loft.

There is but one speech, &c.] Adverting probably to the speech of Lamech at the birth of Noah.