|
Some one, then, will say, Is it to be believe that a man who
intended to beget children, and had no intention of continence,
abstained from sexual intercourse a hundred years and more, or even,
according to the Hebrew version, only a little less, say eighty,
seventy, or sixty years; or, if he did not abstain, was unable to
beget offspring? This question admits of two solutions. For either
puberty was so much later as the whole life was longer, or, which
seems to me more likely, it is not the first-born sons that are here
mentioned, but those whose names were required to fill up the series
until Noah was reached, from whom again we see that the succession is
continued to Abraham, and after him down to that point of time until
which it was needful to mark by pedigree the course of the most glorious
city, which sojourns as a stranger in this world, and seeks the
heavenly country. That which is undeniable is that Cain was the first
who was born of man and woman. For had he not been the first who was
added by birth to the two unborn persons, Adam could not have said
what he is recorded to have said, "I have gotten a man by the
Lord." He was followed by Abel, whom the eider brother slew, and
who was the first to show by a kind of foreshadowing of the sojourning
city of God, what iniquitous persecutions that city would suffer at
the hands of wicked and, as it were, earth-born men, who love their
earthly origin, and delight in the earthly happiness of the earthly
city. But how old Adam was when he begat these sons does not appear.
After this the generations diverge, the one branch deriving from
Cain, the other from him whom Adam begot in the room of Abel slain
by his brother, and whom he called Seth, saying, as it is written,
"For God hath raised me up another seed for Abel whom Cain slew."
These two series of generations accordingly, the one of Cain, the
other of Seth, represent the two cities in their distinctive ranks,
the one the heavenly city, which sojourns on earth, the other the
earthly, which gapes after earthly joys, and grovels in them as if
they were the only joys. But though eight generations, including
Adam, are registered before the flood, no man of Cain's line has
his age recorded at which the son who succeeded him was begotten. For
the Spirit of God refused to mark the times before the flood in the
generations of the earthly city, but preferred to do so in the heavenly
line, as if it were more worthy of being remembered. Further, when
Seth was born, the age of his father is mentioned; but already he had
begotten other sons, and who will presume to say that Cain and Abel
were the only ones previously begotten? For it does not follow that
they alone had been begotten of Adam, because they alone were named in
order to continue the series of generations which it was desirable to
mention. For though the names of all the rest are buried in silence,
yet it is said that Adam begot sons and daughters; and who that cares
to be free from the charge of temerity will dare to say how many his
offspring numbered? It was possible enough that Adam was divinely
prompted to say, after Seth was born, "For God hath raised up to
me another seed for Abel," because that son was to be capable of
representing Abel's holiness, not because he was born first after him
in point of time. Then because it is written, "And Seth lived
205 years," or, according to the Hebrew reading, "105
years, and begat Enos," who but a rash man could affirm that this
was his first-born? Will any man do so to excite our wonder, and
cause us to inquire how for so many years he remained free from sexual
intercourse, though without any purpose of continuing so, or how, if
he did not abstain, he yet had no children? Will any man do so when
it is written of him, "And he begat sons and daughters, and all the
days of Seth were 912 years, and he died?" And similarly
regarding those whose years are afterwards mentioned, it is not
disguised that they begat sons and daughters.
Consequently it does not at all appear whether he who is named as the
son was himself the first begotten. Nay, since it is incredible that
those fathers were either so long in attaining puberty, or could not
get wives, or could not impregnate them, it is also incredible that
those sons were their first-born. But as the writer of the sacred
history designed to descend by well-marked intervals through a series
of generations to the birth and life of Noah, in whose time the flood
occurred, he mentioned not those sons who were first begotten, but
those by whom the succession was handed down.
Let me make this clearer by here inserting an example, in regard to
which no one can have any doubt that what I am asserting is true. The
evangelist Matthew, where he designs to commit to our memories the
generation of the Lord's flesh by a series of parents, beginning from
Abraham and intending to reach David, says, "Abraham begat
Isaac;" why did he not say Ishmael, whom he first begat? Then
"Isaac begat Jacob;" why did he not say Esau, who was the
first-born? Simply because these sons would not have helped him to
reach David. Then follows, "And Jacob begat Judah and his
brethren:" was Judah the first begotten? "Judah," he says,
"begat Pharez and Zara;" yet neither were these twins the
first-born of Judah, but before them he had begotten three other
sons. And so in the order of the generations he retained those by whom
he might reach David, so as to proceed onwards to the end he had in
view. And from this we may understand that the antediluvians who are
mentioned were not the first-born, but those through whom the order of
the succeeding generations might be carried on to the patriarch Noah.
We need not, therefore, weary ourselves with discussing the needless
and obscure question as to their lateness of reaching puberty.
|
|