Most fruitful [and] learned co[m]mentaries of Doctor Peter Martyr Vermil Florentine, professor of divinity,…Most fruitfull [and] learned co[m]mentaries of Doctor Peter Martir Vermil Florentine, professor of deuinitie,…

¹Now must we speak somewhat of the Israelites cause against the Canaanites which may be considered of us two manner of ways, namely either by common law and ordinary law of nature, or else by faith, and by the word of GOD. Concerning the natural or common law Epiphanius writeth that the land of Palestine pertained in very deed to the children of Shem, by occasion whereof Melchizedek reigned there, which was either Shem him self, or else one of his children. But the Canaanites which came of Ham, passing over the bounds of Egypt and Africa, which were appointed unto them, did caste out of Palestine the sons of Shem. And therefore the Hebrews, which were the posterity of Shem, when they required to be restored to their Fathers ⟨p. 38⟩lands, seemed to do it justly, and rightfully. Wherefore (as he sayeth) GOD did both restore unto the Israelites the countries which belonged unto their ancestors, and also punished the Canaanites for their wickedness, and this he did all with one and the self same work. Howbeit I can not easily agree to Epiphanius opinion, for there was past prescription of very long time, for at the least there were five hundred years. Wherefore it could not be said that the Canaanites possessed that land unjustly. If we should go by this reason now in our time, then should there be none in a manner counted a lawful prince and just possessor, when as their ancestor came to the possession of those provinces and kingdoms by violence, driving out both the kings and the inhabitors that were in them before. Wherefore the Israelites seemed not to have any just causes by mans law, by which they might make claim unto the land of Palestine as to their own, neither alleged they at any time any such reason. And yet for all that they had good right thereunto for as much as god testified as well by words as by wonderful works, that it was his will that the Hebrews should have the possession of those regions, to whom (as David hath well said) both the earth and the fullness thereof belongeth. Neither could the Canaanites murmur against the judgement of God, for as much as they were justly cut of from their right, for their sundry and manifold wicked Acts. Wherefore none could in this cause justly defend the Canaanites if they will cleave to the true God, and believe his words.

¹Now must we speake somewhat of the Israelites cause agaynst the Chananites whiche may be considered of vs two manner of wayes, namely either by common lawe and ordinary lawe of nature, or elles by fayth, and by the worde of GOD. Concerning the naturall or common lawe Epiphanius writeth that the lande of Palestine pertayned in very dede to the children of Sem, by occasion whereof Melchisedek reygned there, whiche was either Sem hym selfe, or elles one of hys children. But the Chananites whiche came of Cham, passyng ouer the boundes of Egypte and Africa, whiche were appoynted vnto them, dyd caste out of Palestine the sonnes of Sem. And therefore the Hebrues, whiche were the posteritie of Sem, when they required to be restored to their Fathers