worke See 2. Tim. 3.16 17. 2. And if it might with due reverence unto God be supposed that the holy Scriptures have not sufficiently instructed us in every thing Yet who is he or what is that Church that may presume to adde to His word Proverb 30.6 Lest if they teach things that are not to be beleeved or command that which is not to be done our faith be found to be foolishnesse and our obedience become if not sinne yet without reward as the Prophet saith Esay 1.12 Who hath required this at your hand 3. As the man is so is his strength Iud 8.21 as his wisedome is such are his words And seeing it is evident by the Scripture which is given that it was the good will and pleasure of Almighty God to give instructions unto His Church and that it hath already been prooved that the Wisedome Chapter 5. and the Trueth of God as all His others dignities are infinite Chapter 7. if the instructions and directions of the Scriptures were not in every respect perfect and sufficient for the Church to that end for which they were written then the Wisedome of Goodnes of God should be defective in that which was necessary for His Church to know But that is impossible Therefore the Holy Scripture is sufficient 4. If God have not sufficiently and perfectly instructed us by His word what we ought to doe and to beleeve then can He not in Iustice punish those defects which shall be found in our Faith or obedience especially seeing we are not bound by any precept in His revealed will to hearken to any traditions with that reverence as to His word but rather are every where commanded to hearken to His word and that without any adding thereto or taking away therefrom Deut. 4.1 2. and 5.32 Esay 8.20 sends us to the Law and to the Testimony and if any one shall speake not according to this Word it is because there is no light in them So our Lord sends us to the Scriptures Iohn 5.39 Therefore the holy Scriptures are perfect and sufficient to teach all things that belong by way of divine revelation to faith and godlinesse All the Fathers runne this way and the most learned among the Schoolemen and later Papists as you may see them cited by Master G. Langford Enquiry after verity § 2. Of Traditions Object 1 Against this doctrine of the sufficiency and perfection of the Scriptures Obiect 1 doubts are raised two wayes First from the necessity of Traditions Secondly for that it is supposed that some bookes of the holy Writ are lost For the first it is manifest even by the reasons that are brought for the sufficiency of the Scripture For if it were alwayes necessary that the service of God in His Church should be according to His owne commandement and direction it must follow necessarily either that the Scriptures should have beene given even from the beginning of the world for the Church of the redeemed began in Adam or else that the seruice of the Church was onely according to tradition The first is apparently false For Moses was the first inditer of any Scripture and that after the deliverance out of Egypt which was after the Creation of the world 2513 yeeres Therefore the second followes of necessity that Traditions were necessary Answer This is a wilfull mistaking of the question which being about the sufficiency of the Scriptures must needs be limited to the times since the Scripture was given But Moses was not the first inditer of the holy Scripture but God Himselfe who had first written His Law in mans heart did secondly write it in two Tables of stone with His owne hand in mount Sinai And thirdly againe when the Tables of the Covenant were broken this was the first of all that which we call holy Scripture After which time God taught Moses the Originall of the world the sinne and redemption of mankind the order of times and whatsoever was necessary for that people to know and to doe And although it bee most true that the faith and seruices of the Church before the law was onely according to tradition yet because those traditions were not kept as God had taught them God brought upon the world of the ungodly the Flood Yet even within foure hundred yeeres after the Flood by the craft of the devill and his new revelations the best among men became Idolaters as it is manifest in Iosh 24.2 And therefore God gave Ordinances and Lawes by Moses in writing to the obseruation of which the whole Church of Israel was bound without any addition thereto or taking away therefrom Deut. 12.32 Object 2. But traditions may be necessary for the Church Object 2 as well since the Scriptures were written as before as Saint Paul 2. Thess 2.15 exhorts them to hold the Traditions which they had been taught whether by word or by Epistle So the Councill at Trent Sess 4. Can. 1. commands them to be received as the holy Canonicall Scripture Answer The word Tradition there is doubtfull For either it may signifie at large any thing that is delivered either by word or by writing and that may be any fundamentall trueth according to the holy Scripture as Saint Paul meanes in that place as Saint Athanasius Epist ad Adelphium de Incarn Contr. Samos calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Apostolicall Tradition and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the faith delivered by tradition that God was manifest in the flesh or else it may signifie any canon or rule for the ordering of things indifferent in Ecclesiasticall policy wherein all things ought to be done in order And in these two sences traditions are to be held the first in obedience to God and His trueth as we receive the Apostles Creed and as you read in the Note on Chap. 33. § 2. N. 4. how Hosius speakes of the coessentiall Persons of the Trinity as a tradition from Christ to His Apostles and from them to us the second for peace and avoiding of divisions in the Church as to kneele at the holy Communion rather then to fit or to stand though none of all these gestures be essentiall to the Sacrament In the third place Traditions may signifie any rule thrust upon the Church as necessary to be beleeved or obserued quite besides or contrary to the word of God for conscience sake toward God that Priests and Nunnes may not marry which things though they be brought in as Apostolicall or Ecclesiasticall Traditions yet by the rule of Saint Paul 1. Tim. 4.1 2 3. they seeme rather to leane to the doctrines of devills beleeved by such as speake lyes in hypocrifie and have their consciences seared No part of Holy Scripture lost Object 3. ANd if Traditions might therefore seeme to be necessary Object 3 because it is yeelded by some of the Fathers that some of the Canonicall Scriptures are lost by whose reasons or authority some of the later writers have strayed after them yet
the same purpose a Wisdome increated and a Wisedome created and although Arius affirmed as Postellus That Christ was a creature but not as one of the creatures made but not as one of other things that were made c. and therefore concluded that he held the same faith with the Church and detracted nothing from the glory of Christ when hee called him the first and chiefe creature Epiph. haeres 69. yet Postellus whether he were indeed ignorant of it or whether he dissembled his knowledge makes no mention thereof lest the name Arius might discredit the position although the difference betweene Arius and Postellus be as much as from the East to the West For though Arius held the increated Wisdome or Word to be in the Trinity yet he could not yeeld to this that that Wisdome tooke flesh and became that Saviour to whom we confesse And this was the businesse betweene him and the right meaning Fathers But Postellus held that the created Wisdome that first borne of every creature which in the fulnesse of time tooke flesh of the Virgin Mary and in that flesh made satisfaction for the sinnes of the world was hee in whom all the fulnesse of the Godhead did dwell Now by the rule of our faith both the extremities are yeelded unto that Christ is God blessed above all and that he is man as hath beene proved But this is now to be examined whether it be necessary to the beeing of our mediatour that hee be that first creature of God created before all times and ages of the world by whom all other things were afterwards made in their due times and are governed as Postellus affirmed The Authorities which Postellus brings are either forraine or else out of the holy Scripture you shall first see them of the first kind with their exceptions then his reasons with their answers and lastly those enforcements which are by him and may beside bee brought from the Word of truth 1. First he saith he is urged to the declaration of this truth by the Spirit of Christ pag. 1 3 7 c. but I say these enthusiasmes and revelations are a common claime not onely to them that speake the truth from God as the holy Prophets say Thus saith the Lord but also to them that vent their owne fantasies and heresies in stead of the truth The second authority is that of the Abisine Church which commonly they call of Presbyter Iohn out of whose Creed he cites for his purpose thus much Pag. 24. 25. We beleeve in the name of the holy Trimty the Father the Son and the holy Ghost who is one Lord three names one Deity three Faces one Similitude the conjunction of the three persons is equall in their Godhead one Kingdome one Throne one Iudge one Love one Word one Spirit But there is a Word of the Father a Word of the Soune and a Word of the Holy Ghost and the Son is the same Word And the Word was with God and with the Holy Ghost and with himselfe without any defect or division the Sonne of the Father the Sonne of himselfe and the beginning of himselfe Where in the first Article you see that Church acknowledges the Trinitie of Persons in the unitie of the Deity according to that faith which wee beleeve The second Article But there is a Word of the Father c. is altogether a declaration of this created Word of Sonne of God by whom all the holy Scriptures were given and inspired as Postel speakes But concerning that Church though Postel to make the authority thereof without exception say it was never troubled with any heresie yet it is not unlikely to have nursed that arch-heretick Arius whom all writers account to be a Lybian Besides it is manifest that they are all Monothelites and so farre forth Iacobites or Eutychians that they condemne the fourth generall Councell of Chalcedon for determining two natures to be in Christ Moreover what their learning is like to be you may judge by this that their inferiour Church Ministers and Monkes must live by their labor having no other maintenance nor being suffered to crave almes see Mr Brerewoods Enquiry Chap. 23. 21. a state of the Ministery whereto our sacrilegious patrons and detainers of those livings rightly called Impropriations because they belong most improperly to them that unjustly withhold them from the Church would bring our Church unto But see whereto this want of maintenance hath brought that Church which in the time of the Nicene Councell was of so great regard that their Patriarch had the seventh place in all generall Councels yet now as I have read have they of late yeares beene compelled to send to Rome to beg a religion and teachers from them And this is the Authority of that Church But you will say their Creed is ancient and of authority I say though it be as ancient as Arius yet what wit or judgement was in this to put such a point into their Creed which they themselves by Postels owne confession doe not understand If it were necessary to beleeve it other Churches would not have omitted it if not necessary why was it brought into their Creed But the ancient Paraphrasts Anchelus and Ionathan are without exception and where the Text is And the Lord spake unto Moses they explaine it thus And the Lord spake unto Moses by his word which all the old Interpreters and especially Rambam understand to be spoken of the created Word of God that Word of the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost or the Divinitie which is appliable to the created beeings Pag. 24. The Cabalists also concurre with this interpretation and therefore call him the inferiour VVisdome the Throne of Glory the house of the Sanctuary the heaven of heavens united to eternity the superiour habitation in which God dwels for ever as his body is the inferiour habitation after he was incarnate the great Steward of the house of God who according to the eternall decree brings forth every thing in due time And these as I remember are all the authorities which Postellus cites except you will add this that whereas he writes to the Councell of Trent they of the Councell being called for other purposes did not at all passe any censure of the booke or this position which is the maine point therein You may add to these authorities many other and first out of Iesus the Sonne of Sirach Chap. 1. vers 4 5. Wisdome hath beene created before all things and the understanding of Prudence from everlasting The VVord of God most high is the fountaine of wisdome c. which agrees with that in the Creed before that hee is the VVord of the Sonne and the beginning of himselfe And againe verse 9. The Lord created her and saw her and numbred her And Chap. 24.8 9. He that made me caused me to rest he created me from the beginning before the world and I shall never faile And this authority
is commonly called the Apostles Creed ought firmly to be observed and beleeved For they may bee prooved by most certaine warrant of Holy Scripture And because it may not bee supposed that our Church cites the authority of Athanasius but according to his owne meaning as he himselfe hath explained it if it were the meaning of Athanasius that Christ after His suffering descended locally into the hell of the damned it must needes bee that our Church accorded to his meaning And what the meaning of this Article in the Creed of Athanasius is we need not to doubt who have Athanasius himselfe to declare it in his Epistle of the incarnation of our Lord Iesus Christ against Apollinarius where hee prooves against his Heresie that there bee onely two parts of the humane nature in Christ a body which the grave received and a soule which went downe into hell the grave received that which was bodily hell that which was not bodily And by his reason you may yet understand his meaning better When the Creator saith he call'd man into question for his disobedience Hee decreed against him a double punishment For to the body He said Thou art earth and unto earth thou shalt returne But to the soule He said Thou shalt die the death And for this cause man being dead is condemned to depart to two places And therefore it was also necessary that the Iudge Himselfe that made this decree should also undergoe it that in the estate of man condemned shewing Himselfe free from sin uncondemned He might reconcile man unto God and restore him to perfect libertie In the same Epistle hee had said a little before that in hell He condemned death that Hee might every way perfect the salvation of man in our image which He had put on and in his fourth oration against the Arians hee saith that the powers of hell withdrew themselues being afraid at the sight of Christ. So the meaning of Athanasius is plaine that the soule of Christ did locally goe downe to hell and withall the meaning of our Church Now among these texts of Scripture by which this doctrine of Athanasius may bee warranted that text of the 1. Pet. 3.18.19 is most plaine especially as it stands in the Greeke Christ suffered for our sinnes that He might bring us unto God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being put to death in the flesh but quickened in the Spirit by which He went and preached to the Spirits in prison Which Scripture must be applied onely to the manly being of Christ who Himselfe had set an example to His followers to suffer ill patiently which could be onely in His manly being For as God He could not suffer ill Beside His God-head mooves not by any locall motion as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doeth signifie And moreover His divine spirit was no way quickned nor could be but He went and preached in that Spirit in which He was quickned which could bee onely in His humane spirit or soule in which having once suffered death He manifested His power to the disobedient spirits by taking to Himselfe the keyes or power over hell and death to shut in and keepe out whom Hee will Reuel 1.18 And although I deny not that the sence is true and good He was quickned by the Spirit that holy Spirit which Hee received not by measure yet I hold that this is not the native meaning of this place and the best printed copies of Stephan Plantin and others are with me Neither will the words naturally beare that change of In and By Neither did the reverend Noel Deane of Pauls and other like Him accord with them Neither is this the onely place of Scripture that prooves the locall descent of Christs soule into hell For that argument of Saint Peter Act. 2.31 whereby hee prooves the resurrection of Christ out of Psalm 16. because His soule was not left in Hell strangles these interpreters harder then Achelous was strangled in the hand of Hercules So that which Ionah the figure said of himselfe being by Christ the substance applied to Himselfe To be three dayes in the heart of the earth must bee as true in the substance as it was figuratively true in Ionah This is the confession of him that was holy as no man was Psalm 68.2 Thou hast delivered my soule from the lowest hell vers 13. as the Apostle speakes Ephes 4.9 10. He descended first into the lower parts of the earth and ascended above all heavens that Hee might fill all things So then the Scriptures not being of any private interpretation that is to set out the stories of private men 2. Peter 1.20 must have their highest and uttermost interpretation in Christ Now that this is the native interpretation of this Article and consequently the right meaning of the Composer or Composers of the Creed beside the texts of Scripture on which the Article is grounded it will bee further manifest by the Reasons 1. In a Catechisme the use of Tropes or borrowed speeches are not fit for the use of children and novices and such is the Creed or forme of the confession of our Faith as it is manifest Hebr. 6.1 And the suffering of Christ His Death Buriall c. is taken properly therefore His going downe also into hell Object If Christ went to the faithfull that were dead Object whose soules were in Paradise why doe you say to hell whereby is specially meant the place of the damned Answer Hee first went to the dead in Paradise as His promise was That the Thiefe should there bee with Him in Paradise Then to hell to take to Himselfe all rule all authority and power For God had put all things in subjection under His feet 2. If this Article He went downe to hell be not to bee referred to the soule of Christ after His death then have we no direction by the Creed to know what became of His soule neither are wee taught hereby whether He had a humane and immortall soule or no. So we are still left in doubt whether this Christ be the Saviour of the world But if this Article be referred to the state of Christs soule after His death then are we truely taught and informed against these doubts But that adulterate interpretation of His sufferings is excluded 3. And seeing our Lord Christ is appointed of God to bee the Iudge of the world and that as He is the Sonne of man it was necessary that our Lord should goe downe to hell both in regard of the justice and of the mercy which ought to appeare in His judgement of His justice that the enemies of mankind the devills may not torment them according to their cruelty and hatred of man but onely in justice afflict them according to the sentence passed on them according to the measure of their sinne and not beyond as it is said Luk. 12.47 and 48. The servant which knew his masters will and prepared not himselfe shall be beaten with
of Arius should not provide for your safety as he did He denied the authority of S. Iohns writings to be authenticall And why because this earth-bred Giant which would pull Christ out of the throne of His Deitie should with his lightning be suddenly burnt Beleeve you the Scripture Is Iohns authority sufficient then the case is plaine We are in Him that is true in His Son Iesus Christ who is very God and eternall life 1. Ioh. 5.20 Can you now confer this Scripture with that place I have said yee are Gods and not be ashamed I and the Father are one The Iewes understood that He herein professed Himselfe to be very God and are you His enemy more then they Reade Ioh. 10. ver 30. 33. 34. and you may understand the meaning of both places The devills acknowledged Him to be God of Infinite power I know Thee who Thou art even that Holy One of God And will not you confesse as much as the devills But this is more then I thought to say onely you may see hereby that we speake no other thing then Christ Himselfe even in His enemies understanding said Now if you could see a little the folly of your own opinion that were inough to cause you to put on a better mind I will touch it as lightening doth touch the ground for if you be willing to be reformed there is no doubt but you may propound it to the learned Divines and be fully satisfied You say Christ is onely man but yet indued with the infinite Power of God Here first you doe injurie to the Highest to make the Power of God to be accidentall unto Him whereas hee is purus actus absolute perfection and without shadow of change His Being is most simple and pure not capeable of accidents Then His Being is such as no addition can be made thereto to make it more then it is therefore it is necessary that He be ever actually whatsoever he may be Besides His Being is Infinitely distant from Not-Being therefore His Power is inseparable Againe if there come any thing to God as an accident it must come unto Him from Himselfe or else from another not from another for He is impassible or such as cānot suffer violence not from Himselfe for all such accidents doe proceed à potentiâ that is from the imbecillity or imperfection of the subject but His Being is most simple and infinitely perfect Againe all accidents do rise from the matier forme or composition of the subject In Him is neither matier forme nor cōposition Now al things we see in this world do consist ex actu potentiâ of perfection from God imperfection from thēselues for of themselues they are non entia absolutely nothing Yea even the very Angels and the soule it selfe are partakers of this composition for nothing is purus actus but God alone therefore are they subject to accidents yet they which come neerest to perfection are most free from accidents as that which is meere perfection hath no accidents at all Know then that all the dignities of God are in him essentially one God For the Goodnesse of God His Power His Wisedome His Glory c. Being all infinite do of necessitie concurre in the nature of Infinitie Whence it followeth that whatsoever is in Him is essentially Himselfe therefore the power of God is not accidental or such as may be imparted to a man The learned Hebrues according to this doe hold that Ensoph or Infinitie is not to be numbred among the other attributes of God because it is that abstract Vnity whereinto they all essentially concurre and from which they all essentially proceed and hence by the way take another strong argument to the former question for if God bee essentially a Father then the terme correlative a Sonne must be in the Godhead also and that essentially But now againe see another folly in your supposition The work of our Redemption is a work of infinite goodnesse mercie power wisedome and glory therefore it followeth that Christ the worker had infinite mercie power wisedome c. Now I demand had Christ this infinite goodnesse and power so given to Him of God that the Father Himselfe had in the meane time none This you dare not say for that were to say that God did cease to be God which cannot stand with His Eternity Now if God the Father had notwithstanding this absolute infinite power of Christ of which he spake All power is given unto Me both in heaven and in earth then it followeth that either there were two infinities of power or else that these two which had this infinite Power were all one Infinite The first is against the nature of Infinitie for that is absolutely infinite which so comprehendeth all things as that it leaveth nothing without it selfe and yet is not comprehended to any other Besides if you would say that the Father and the Sonne had each of them severall indiuisible infinite Powers it must follow that neither of their Powers were absolutely infinite because each of them had not the infinite Power of the other And besides that both these infinite Powers must be conjoyned with infinite weakenes because they must be mutually subjected to the infinite Power one of the other But both these things are impossible So you see that two Infinities can by no meanes stand together therefore it followeth that these two to wit the Father and the Son are in Being one and that of infinite Power and this is that which I strive for which as you see I have concluded by your own assertion The time would faile me to lay before your eyes the manifold untruths which would ensue of your position which savoureth neither of wit judgement nor learning And therefore I see how they which have once departed from the truth must of necessrity run into infinite absurdities Therefore looke back and be ashamed of such new-fangled toys as you do daily imagine which in truth do argue the great inconstancy and vanity of your mind withall such palpable blindnes of understanding as the darknes of Egypt For tel me without selfe-liking what sound judgement doth this argue to be driven about with every wind of doctrine a Protestant a Brownist an Anabaptist an Antichrist What bringing up what gift of learning and knowledge have you that you should presume to oppose your sentence against the faith doctrine of all the Christian Churches in the world Blush and learne with meeknes the truth of that Word which is able to save your soule You may see by your owne miserable experience what it is to forsake the Vnitie of Faith and the Communion of the Saints who imbrace the truth of Gods word and have manifest tokens that they are the true Church to wit The word of God truely taught and the Sacraments duely administred What if there want perfection The Church militant must ever confesse I am lovely yet black For it is impossible that any church should be without imperfection so long as the world standeth but at the end it shall be presented without spot or wrinkle Therefore remember from whence you are fallen and repent and doe the works of righteousnesse lest Christ whom you so despite come against you shortly The worke of Christianity is not in foolish questions and disputing about needles subtilties but in doing the works of truth and righteousnesse Pray and endeavour your selfe thereto And till such time as God for His Christs sake vouchsafe to have mercy on you the enemy of His Son and give you grace to repent of this great wickednes I am neither your friend nor yet your foe ALEX. GIL FINIS
from heaven Yet this prooves not that the body of Christ was not taken from His mother but rather that as wee are stained with originall sinne by Adam so are wee washed and clensed by the blood of Christ for so it followes Verse 49. As we have borne the image of the earthly we shall also beare the image of the heavenly And although it be said The second man is the Lord from heaven yet prooves it not that He brought His body from heaven but rather because wee understand nothing of heavenly things but by bodily likenesses therefore is Hee called the man from heaven to signifie that new manner of being which God had with us in our nature and to assure us that Hee our Redeemer is our eternall God able to save us and man with us that doeth pitie our miseries 3. The Heresies of Apelles are refuted by Epiphanius Haer. 44. briefly and plainely but this which concernes the body of our Lord more fully by Tertullian in his Booke De carne Christi You shall have what I held fit to gather from both or to adde thereto The arguments of Apelles are in part all one with those of Valentin already answered The rest are these that follow 1. If the Angels appeared in flesh not taken from mankinde much more might Christ But the first is true therefore the later Answer The consequence in the Proposition is not good For the Angels came not to die therefore not to be borne as our Lord Hinselfe appeared to Abraham not borne of a woman because the time appointed that He should die was not yet But when the fulnesse of the time was come that He by His death should take away the sinnes of the world then God sent His Sonne made of a woman Besides this they are beside the question For to proove their Pofition that Christ tooke His body of the Starres and Elements they ought to proove that the Angels also tooke such bodies But that they cannot proove For if the Angels made themselves that which by nature they were not why might they not doe it by that which was not 2. It is said Matth. 12.48 Who is my mother and who are my brethren If then Christ had no mother or brethren but in that spirituall kindred of them which kept the word of God He had no body taken of the Virgin Answer No man would have told Him that His mother stood without which did not know that snee was His mother Therefore the circumstances and time of His speech must be observed He was now in the businesse of God His Father for whom all earthly parents must be denied as He also answered Luke 2.49 3. But the flesh of sinfull man was an unfit and unworthy dwelling for Him that came to destroy the workes of the devill Answer As sinne the worke of the devill was brought into mankinde by the body and the bodily sences as it appeares Gen. 3.6 The woman seeing that the fruit was good for food and pleasant to sight tooke and did eat it So was it necessary that sinne should be destroyed in the body of that flesh wherein sinne was conceived and wrought Moreover the difference not of the matter which must be one but of the Spirit of sanctification which was in Christ made His body a fit sacrifice for sinne But concerning this unworthinesse alleadged answere was made before Note a ob 1. 3. on Chap. 25. 4. But if He had flesh like ours Hee should have beene begotten like us Answer The consequence is not good as was shewed before Note a § 2. on Chap. 26. 5. If the flesh of Christ were the same with ours the common accidents of both should be alike so that our flesh should forthwith rise againe like His or His like ours bee resolved to dust Answer When our Lord had fully satisfied the Iustice of God for the sinne of mankinde it had beene agianst Iustice that He which had done no sinne should have still continued under the power of death and therefore impossible Act. 2.24 But our bodies doe therefore still rest in hope because all His enemies are not subjected unto Him among which the last is death 1. Cor. 15.26 Therefore for conclusion of this point over and above those reasons which you had in the twentieth Chapter and the authorities in the end of the three and twentieth Chapter and these which are heere already cited take that of Eph. 5.30 We are members of His body of His flesh and of His bones So that if we know or beleeve that we our selves have a body of flesh and bones we must also know that our Lord had a true naturall and humane body as one of us Which authority is yet of so much the greater regard because it was prophesied in Paradice Gen. 2.22 That our Redeemer should be incarnate that in the body of His flesh through death He might present us holy and unblameable Col. 2.22 For seeing the children are partakers of flesh and blood Hee also Himselfe likewise tooke part of the same that through death Hee might destroy him that had the power of death that is the devill Heb. 2.14 Reade the Chapter from verse 5. unto the end and see how many arguments you find to this purpose onely The fancies therefore of these Hereticks being lighter than vanity it will follow that all those opinions which might seeme to bee raised there-from were as false as foolish As first that of Celsas That the body of Christ was not subject to paine and griefe Against which Saint Origen disputes lib. 2. Cont. Cels For as for that Stoicall vnsufferance of His mind which Clemens Alex. Strom. lib. 7. thought not to bee subject either to joy or sorrow it was onely an over-sight in so learned a Writer and directly contrary to the Text of the Scripture Iohn 11.35 Matth. 26.38 where Iesus wept and was exceeding sorrowfull even unto death And concerning the joy of His Spirit See Luke 10.21 Secondly that of Saturnilus That Christ did suffer onely in shew Epiph. Haer. 23. Thirdly that of the neat-heard Basilides who taught that Simon of Cyrene was crucifyed in Christs stead Epiph. Har. 24. Of all which if any thing were true what thanks were due to Him from vs when He had suffered nothing for our sakes 2. How are wee freed from that damnation under which we were brought through the sinne of Adam while the Divine Iustice is yet unsatisfied 3. And if Christ have not suffered for vs what example hath He left unto vs that wee should follow his steps 4. Wee that are the Disciples should bee above our Master-our patience more then His our love to Him more then His to vs If wee for His sake should willingly suffer persecution shame losse imprisonment death which He Himselfe had not suffered for vs. And 5. It had been utterly to no end that He should have become man For as it had been in vaine for Him to have taken a
which is said is agreeable to the trueth of the Scripture and the analogie of Faith onely they cannot yeeld that it is the true and native meaning of this Article And betweene these two parties all those texts of Scripture which are brought for the locall descent of Christ are hammered so thinne that may seeme plyable every way But let the strength of the Holy Text for ever stand sure and let us see the reasons a little on all sides with their answeres and exceptions And first of them that interpret this Article by the sufferings of Christs soule Object 1. Sect. 3 As the sufferings of Christ even from the first minute of His Incarnation were meritorious for us yet our ransome from the torments of hell was wrought especially by the suffering of His humane soule which torments of His soule Hee endured not onely by the torture or fellow-feeling of His naturall body nor by compassion onely on the sins and sorrowes of His body mysticall but also He might be said even to feele the sorrowes of eternall death when He saw Himselfe to be now set to suffer the wrath of God due to the sinnes of the whole world And if this bee not the proper and native sence of this Article how are wee taught by our Creed to beleeve more concerning Christ than wee confesse to be true of the theeves of whom wee may say they suffered under Pontius Pilate that they were crucified dead and buryed Al. Hume Rejoynd to Doctor Hil. I answere First the holy Scripture is profitable for doctrine for instruction for reproofe c. But the object of our faith is onely the Holy Trinity in Vnity and the satisfaction of Christ for our Redemption and the benefits which wee receive thereby And therefore although I beleeve and know by the Scriptures that Samson was the Sonne of Manoa yet I neither beleeve in Samson nor Manoa And though I know by the Scriptures that the penitent thiefe suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucifyed and dyed yet I beleeve not in him But concerning Christ as I beleeve that all His merits redound to us so I beleeve that all His sufferings were according to the Scripture a satisfaction to the justice of God for the sinnes of the world which they could not be but by the suffering both of His soule and body as it is said Esay 53. Hee shall see the travaile of His soule and bee satisfied If then wee know that whatsoever befell unto our Lord was that the Scripture might be fulfilled Matth. 26.54.56 and if wee beleeve and confesse in our Creed that He suffered according to the Scriptures and dyed and rose againe according to the Scriptures and that the Scriptures doe plainely testifie that by His sufferings and death the wrath of God against mans sinne is fully satisfied which as I said could not be but by His sufferings in His soule as well as in His body After these sufferings under Pontius Pilate what needes a second remembrance of His suffrings in soule under a title of a descent into hell Therefore when as I am bound to beleeve and confesse that the sufferings of Christ under Pontius Pilate were according to the Scriptures that is in soule and body I am bound to deny that the suffering of Christ in His soule is the native meaning of this Article He descended into hell 2. Beside the doctrine of Faith being a catechisme doctrine Heb. 6.1 and the sum thereof being for the use of children and novices it is not likely that the Church would have so generally received a creed wherin the thing to be beleeved should be laid down inwords that were tropicall and obscure when plaine and proper termes were necessary and at hand But hell cannot signifie the torments of hell but by a metonymia of the place for the adjunct of the place neither yet could it properly be said That our Saviour went down into bell when He was lifted up upon the Crosse where the especiall endurance and expression of His hellish torments were both in soule and body 2. Neither can it truely be said He descended into hell that is He suffered in soule the torments of hell but by a Synecdoche of the whole man for one part Neither were these torments of His soule more properly or truely called torments of hel then those torments of His body which we confesse He suffered under Pontius Pilate 3. Moreover after He was dead and buried it comes in unduly againe to make mention of His sufferings in soule a great part of which were endured in the garden before He came to the hands either of Pilate or of the Priests 4. And yet beyond all these reasons there is another argument that the Church did not interpret this Article by the sufferings of Christs Soule because as Gerrardus Vossius puts it De statu animae separatae Qu 1. It was the received opinion of the ancient Fathers even to this our time That the soules of the faithfull before Christ entred not into Paradise till Christ by His death had set it open and entred thereinto according to His promise to the thiefe on the Crosse And if all the soules of the faithfull were in hell taken in the second sence before mentioned though in a place of rest as Theophilus speakes and that by the comming of Christ thither they were brought to Paradise or a place of further joy then certainely this Article must in their iudgement be interpreted by the descent of Christ into hell after his death rather then by the sorrowes of His soule before it And to this purpose the learned Vossius brings some 20. Fathers from Tacianus the schollar of Iustin Martyr about the yeere of Christ 180. before whom He might have put His master Iustin as it is plaine in his Triphon Among those Fathers are Irenaeus Tertullian Origen Eusebius Athanasius Ambrose Ierom Epiphanius Chrysostom Augustin Cyril and beside them whom he reckons up he ads innumerable others and with them the sentence of the Councill of Toledo in the yeere 633. He descended into Hell that He might free them which were there detained Aug. Ep 99. writes thus If the reason be asked why our Saviour would come into hell where those sorrowes are of which He could not be held it was Because He was free among the dead Psal 88.5 Moreover concerning the first Father of mankind almost the whole Church agrees that He freed him there which may not be thought that the Church beleeved without cause although the expresse authority of the Canonicall Scripture be not alleadged He saith almost the whole Church because the heretickes called Tacians denyed that Adam was saved De Haeres Cap. 25. Vossius beside all these brings the consent of the Africane and of the Easterne Churches both of the Greekes and of the Nestorians with divers later writers as Zuinglius P. Martyr and others Obiect 1. Sect. 4 But the Fathers agreed not all in one judgement Answer True Neither
manner of being is when any thing is changed from any estate either proper thereto or else appropriate to an estate or condition that is or seemes to be lower or worse Thus our Lord was said to descend or come downe from heaven when He clouded His Deitie in our humanitie as I have shewed heretofore Thus also He and all man-kind may be said to descend to be abased or brought low when the soule is parted from the body For seeing both the parts are for the perfection of the whole the whole must needs be more excellent than either of the parts so that the whole being dissolved both the parts doe suffer hurt or losse thereby especially the soule which sees the losse and findes it selfe in a state of being beside the end of the creation of it selfe which was to give life unto the body and this is the cause why the soule would not bee unclothed but rather that this mortalitie might bee swallowed up of life And this is the lowest state of humiliation whereto the soule of our Lord could come naturally and by this state some will interpret the descent into hell as I shewed in the beginning Nu. 2. But if this humiliation must meane also the separation of the soule from the body while the body was laid in the dust it reaches no further than to his death For a man is not said to bee dead till his soule be departed from his body But if this state of humiliation be taken in that sence as some doe very fitly interpret it by that phrase used often in the Scripture of a mans being gathered unto his people or cōming unto that congregation of the saints which had died in the faith of Him that was to come then taking also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or hell according to the interpretation of the word Vnseen it will easily be admitted of all that when our Saviour was dead His body was buryed and his soule went unto the assembly of them that were unseene And because this is true safe and unquestionable it may on all parts be agreed unto as I said before and yet the word of descending or going downe reserved to the right meaning by the abatement or losse of that estate which the soule had with the body in the being of the whole and perfect man So also the question about the place of hell and Paradise which hath moved most doubt herein by this interpretation is avoyded But because all this will reach no further than to be perfectly dead and because the Latine interpretation Descendit ad inferos rendered by our Church Hee went downe into hell suffers us not to stay here and because the most voices amongst the Fathers have swayed the meaning to a locall descent and that as it seemes in the third sence spoken of before and most of all because the holy Scripture binds us thereto let us follow our best and surest guides and confesse with the Prophets and Apostles that the soule of our Lord after His death on the Crosse went downe into hell or the place of the dead and there continued three dayes and three nights in the heart of the earth as it was prophesied in the signe of Ionas the Prophet Matth. 12.40 And let us beleeve that the flesh of Christ did therefore rest in hope because His soule was not left in hell nor His body was suffered to see corruption Psal 16.9 10. Actes 2.31 Objection 1. Obiect 1 They object that the soule may signifie the whole man as in Gen. 46.27 All the soules of the house of Iacob were 70. But how doth that helpe to prove that this Article must bee interpreted onely of the torments of Christs soule while Hee was yet alive For it is manifest that Saint Peter bringing that text to prove His resurrection speakes not of Christs soule while it was yet in his body when He was not subject to a state of resurrection but of His soule after His death But if they will hope by that text of Gen. or the like to interpret it as Al. Hume loc cit Thou shalt not leave mee in the grave let them answere mee what they meane by this word Mee whether the body or the soule or both together If they say the soule it was not in the graue they will bee ashamed to say both together for so they should make Him not yet to be dead as the word Mee doth truely signifie the whole Person yet alive jf they say the body let them see what an unfit tautologie it will make with that which followeth Nor suffer thy Holy one that is the body of Thy Holy one to see corruption But in this place the soule and the body are made direct disparates so hell and the place of corruption so that we may argue the body was in the place of corruption Ergo not in hell the soule was in hell Ergo not in the grave or place of corruption Object 2. Obiect 2 The purpose of Saint Peter was to prove the resurrection of Christ and that belonged to the body which had died not to the soule which died not Answere If this be given what will you conclude thereon But I say the resurrection is of the whole man returned againe to life after the parting of the soule and the body So it is neither of the body onely nor of the soule onely but of the whole man which Saint Peter prooves heere to have beene done in Christ because His soule was not left in hell where it was but was againe joyned to the body to cause it to live that it might not see corruption And because all the glorious doings and sufferings of our Saviour were for our uttermost benefit and comfort therefore is this going downe of His into hell also to give us assurance of our full and perfect deliverance from all the powers of death and hell and restoring of all His beleevers unto an immortall life and glory And because the doctrine of our Church into which I was baptized bindes me to beleeve that our Lord Iesus after His death went downe into hell-locally and that by the authorities of the Scripture and because I have before shewed that the soule of Christ did not ascend to heaven before His resurrection and have denied also that I thinke with them that say that He went downe to suffer for our sinne And having as I thinke said enough to all contrary opinions the trueth by the Holy Scripture and the reasons grounded thereon must be made to appeare But first of all it is plaine that the meaning of our Church is such for in the 8. Article it is said that the Creed of Athanasius ought thorowly to bee received and beleeved and that because it may be prooved by most certaine warrants of Holy Scripture And in the 7. Article the Church of Ireland agreeth hereto in these words All and every the Articles conteined in the Nicene Creed the Creed of Athanasius and that which
Therefore He is a creature Answere 1. He is no where in the Scripture called a creature or mentioned among the creatures in Psal 148. or else-where Therefore He is God Answer 2. The proposition is false as it appeared by the texts cited out of Actes 5.3 4. and Matth. 28.19 where He is equalled with the Father and the Sonne and 2. Cor. 13.14 And Iohn 5.7 Moreover no sinne doth make a man lyable to an infinite punishment but that which is against an infinite being But the sinne against the Holy-Ghost shall not bee pardoned neither in this world nor yet in that which is to come Matth. 12.32 Therefore the Holy-Ghost is God Take hereto Actes 28. verso 25. and 27. with Rom. 11.8 and 1. Cor. 3.16 And as these texts of Scripture are sufficient to shew the falshood of this last objection So doe they manifest the vanitie of all the rest and confirme abundantly the trueth of this Article that the Holy-Ghost is God To bring the consent of Fathers and Councelis to these Scriptures were as to encrease the light of the Sun by a burning candle yet because it was so plainely declared in the first generall Councell held at Nice by 318. Fathers in the yeere of Christ 325. you may remember it if you will In that Councell this Article was thus declared in that forme of confession which was framed by Hosius Bishop of Corduba As the Father and the Sonne so also the Holy-Ghost subsisteth with them of the same being of the same power of which they are And a little after Wee ought to confesse one God-head one being of the Father of the Sonne and of the Holy-Ghost not teaching any confusion or division of the Persons of the unspeakeable and blessed Trinitie But according to the integritie of that faith and doctrine which was heretofore delivered by the Lord Himselfe to His Apostles and hath beene sincerely taught to us by our holy Fathers who kept it pure and intire as they received it from the Apostles wee beleeve and confesse the undivideable Trinitie which cannot sufficiently either be conceived in the understanding or expressed in wordes that is the Father eternally and truely subsisting a true Father of a true Sonne and the Sonne eternally and truely subsisting a true Sonne of a true Father and the Holy-Ghost verily and eternally subsisting with them And wee are ever ready by the power of the Holy-Ghost to proove that this is the trueth by the manifold testimony of the holy Scripture Histor Gelasij Cyzie Act. Conc. Nic. lib. 2. cap. 12. This faith was approved of all but because the present businesse with Arius was especially about the Sonne For he held that the Son was not of the subsistence of the Father nor yet very God That they might meet fully with that errour they agreed to that forme wherein it is confessed that the Sonne is light of light very God of very God begotten not made being of one substance with the Father c. Thus having ended the controversie about the God-head of the Sonne they come to the question of the Holy-Ghost against whom Phaedon a Philosopher and patron of Arius his cause objected thus It is no where written in the Scripture that the Holy-Ghost is a Creater and therefore Hee is not God To which the Councell opposed that which is in Iob 33.4 The Spirit of God hath made mee and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life And that in Psal 33.6 By the word of the Lord were the heavens made and all the hosts of them by the Spirit of His mouth To which they added that of Saint Paul 1. Cor. 12. verse 4 5 6. where the Holy-Ghost is called both Lord and God And so concluded that all the three Persons that is the Father the Sonne and the Holy-Ghost were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consubstantiall or of the same substance Lib. Cit. Cap. 25. Likewise when this heresie of Arius concerning the Holy-Ghost was againe revived by Macedonius the second generall Councell held at Constantinople in the yeere 381. condemned the heresies of all Arians Apollinarists and Macedenians confirmed the faith professed in the Nicene Creed and for further explanation of the trueth in this point to that clause Wee believe in the Holy-Ghost they added the Lord and giver of life who proceedeth from the Father who with the Father and the Sonne together is worshipped and glorified c. And this is sufficient for the declaration of the trueth in this point by the authority of generall Councells All the orthodox Fathers consent hereunto Among whom if you desire to bee further acquainted with the arguments and objections on both sides you may reade the writings of that most noble Champion of the trueth of the holy Trinitie Athanasius and in speciall that sermon of the humane nature taken by the Word the oration against the ging of Sabellius and the first and second Epistle to Serapion and his first dialogue against Macedonius with him Macedonianus See also Greg. Nyss vol. 2. pag. 439. edit Paris 1615. you may also if you will take these objections and their answeres brought by Epiphanius to this question Haer. 74. and with them those in Thomas Aquinas Contra gentes Liber 4. Cap. 16. and their answeres Cap. 23. Another errour against the being of the Holy-Ghost is that which they call of the later Greekes and yet is not onely of the Grecians themselves but of all those Nations and Peoples that are of the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople which if you leave out the Countreys of the poore Painims in the East and West Indies is far greater than the pretended universality of the Bishop of Rome both in Europe and in Asia See Brerew Enq. Chap. 15. and besides them the Melchites or Christians of Syria the Armenians and Maronites hold the same heresie All these though they confesse that the Holy-Ghost is God the third Person in the Trinitie yet they say that He proceedeth onely from the Father not from the Sonne But although they account this but a later errour among the Greekes perhaps because the stirres thereabout after the Councell of Florence in the yeere 1439. grew more hot than they had beene before and that because the Greekes then present in that Councell in hope to draw them of the West into their helpe against the Turks did seemingly yeeld to that trueth which these Churches in the West doe holde in that point yet it appeares that in the time of Damascen about the yeere 750. it was their received opinion For thus he writes Orthod fidet lib. 1. Cap. 13. He is the Spirit of the Sonne not proceeding from Him but from the Father by Him For the Father onely is the cause Nay if you looke yet higher in that explanation which the Councell of Constantinople spoken of even now made of that Article of the Holy-Ghost in the Nicene Creed that clause and from the Sonne is left out so that this errour
1. Sect. 1 Concerning the first it is an irrefragable argument that the Scriptures were given of God because the Prophecies in them which were before-hand concerning things to come were such perfect declarations of them as that they may rather seeme to be Histories then Prophecies Take for instance that promise to Abraham that his seed should possesse Canaan after 430. yeeres and accordingly in the selfe same day Exod. 12.40 41. were they brought out of Egypt Or the promise of Iudahs Kingdome foretold by Iacob Gen. 49.8 9 10. Of Iosia and Cyrus prophecied by name the one above 300. yeeres the other above 100. yeeres before he was borne Of the captivity of that nation and destruction of Ierusalem foretold by Daniel For seeing God alone is infinite in His wisedome and that all His workes are foreknowne to Him alone therefore can He alone declare from the beginning what shall come to passe at the last as He saith of Himselfe Isa 42.9 whereas the Angels being finite both in their wisedome and knowledge know nothing of things to come but either by speciall revelation as Gabriel foretold the birth of Iohn Baptist or by the Prophecies of the Scripture or by observation of naturall causes in their long and subtile experiences And therefore it came to passe that all the devils that mocked the heathen by their Oracles were so uncertaine in their answeres except they were informed by some of the meanes spoken of As the devil gave a certaine answere to Alexander concerning his expedition against Darius because he knew what the Decree of God was by the Prophecie of Daniel Chap. 8. 2. Another Argument that the Scriptures were given by the Holy-Ghost is that admirable consent of all the Doctrines contained therein which are delivered with that certaintie of Truth and Knowledge with that authority and power over the soule of the faithfull Reader and that in so simple and plaine a manner of writing as no other whereas in mens writings the unsetlednesse of their judgement their ignorance and doubtfull suppositions especially when they speake of their owne as seldome they doe justifies the holy Text Rome 1.22 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 professing to teach they shew their folly 3. Moreover the Argument or things contained in the holy Scriptures doth manifest the Author thereof the Writers for the most part shewing their Commission Thus saith the Lord and Paul an Apostle not by man but by Iesus Christ and God the Father Then the purport or intent of the Commission We are Ambassadors for Christ as though God did beseech you by us we pray you in Christs stead to be reconciled unto God And this under such conditions as none but God alone is able to performe of acceptance eternall life or refusall eternall fire 4. The glorious and mighty workes which Almighty God gave especially to the first Writers of the Law and of the Gospel to doe and those miracles whereby He continually justified the trueth thereof the wonderous preservation and deliverances of the professors as of Daniel c. And the balefull confusion of the adversaries of the Trueth contained in the Scriptures in all ages approve that God alone is the Author thereof 5. The hatred of the devil and his continuall endeavours either utterly to deface the Bookes of the holy Scripture or upon pretext of obscurity and danger of Heresie not to reade them And againe the providence of God in preserving those Bookes and the love and delight which He hath begotten in the hearts of His Saints to reade and understand them are no lesse proofe that these holy Scriptures are the Word of God and the Testimony of His eternall Truth 6. The extraordinary calling of many of the Pen-men of the holy Bookes and the enabling of them being simple and unlettered men to write and to preach those high Mysteries which none of the Princes of this world did understand as of Amos among the Herdmen of Peter Iames and Iohn and the other of the twelve Apostles shew that the Author of that Truth and their Bookes was God alone 7. The great 1. Antiquity of the Bookes of the Law preserved so long uncorrupted for in comparison of Moses almost all the writings of the heathen all their religions and many of their Gods are but upstarts and things of yesterday 2. The great simplieity and sincerity of the Writers who sought not their own praise nor concealed their owne faults and imperfections 3. The consent of the Church which receiued the Scriptures as the word of God 4. The consent of forraine Histories writing of the same things with such uncertaintie and untruth as time and heare-say use to bring into History as of Berosus Herodotus Strabo Trogus and others are a manifest proofe that the true records of the same things are the writings which God Himselfe did dictate to Moses and the Prophets which followed after him For none but God did truely know the creation of the world and none among men did certainely record the universall flood the Tower of Babel the actes of Abraham Iacob Ioseph Moses Ioshua and others So that if the devill might vaunt as he did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I did indite and Homer did write In the perfection of truth might the Holy Spirit of God say as it is recorded 2. Tim. 3.16 All Scripture is given by the inspiration of God And 1. Pet. 1.21 Prophecie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy-Ghost 6. And if wee beleeve that the writings of Historians and Poets and other profane Authors are indeed theirs under whose names they goe shall wee not much rather beleeve that they are the writings of God Himselfe that goe under His Name especially seeing wee know that Hee is a jealous God and neither would suffer His authority to bee abused to falshood neither would Hee give His Church to bee ever seduced by lyars and false prophets § 2. Sect. 2 And these holy Oracles God of His Goodnesse and Mercy would have to bee written from whence by their excellencie above all other they are called Scriptures or Writings 1. First that wee through patience and comfort of these Scriptures might have firme and sure hope in God and His promises Rom. 15.4 2. Secondly that nothing through mans infirmity might be forgotten of all that which ought to be in continuall remembrance 3. Lest by the wickednesse of men and the subtilty of the devil inciting them thereto the holy Doctrine of God might be corrupted from the native and true meaning and so new Doctrines and new Religions brought in in stead of that Service which we owe onely to God and that according to His owne revealed Will and Word 4. No man knoweth the thoughts of a man but onely that spirit of a man which is within him much lesse can any know the things of God but onely the holy Spirit of God The things of God of which I
understanding and light of Nature given us withall His Word as a greater light whereby our lesser lights might become more shining That He hath given unto us not onely an inward Word to wit our naturall understanding but also an outward word as a most illustrious Commentary both of declaration and amplification of that text whereby we may the better understand whatsoever wee ought to understand without it But how then cometh it to passe that all men have not Faith And how is Faith said to bee the gift of God The first answered Rom. 1.21 and Ephe. 4.18 For hardnesse of their heart who when they knew God did not glorifie him as they ought therefore their imaginations became vaine and their foolish heart was full of darknesse And for this cause is Faith also said to bee the gift of God First in respect of that knowledge whence it doth proceed which knowledge is His gift Secondly because it is the onely worke of God to make that knowledge to become fruitfull by laying it so unto mans heart that the hardnesse thereof may be removed that when wee know God to bee good and just wee also beleeve and worship Him as wee ought Thirdly and most especially because that God oftentimes pardoning the ignorance which men have of Himselfe and the creature doth so enlighten the heart with His Holy Spirit that it is suddenly framed without any previant knowledge to faith and obedience The trueth whereof neverthelesse doth not any whit impugne that which I say That God hath given unto every man so much understanding as to know what he ought to beleeve and to be satisfied for the reasons of his Faith if he could open his eyes to see in the middest of what wondrous light he were placed This point is manifest both by many scripture-Scripture-authorities and by many reasons which I omitt But taking this as either granted or sufficiently prooved that God hath given us light of understanding whereby to yeeld a reason of the Hope that is in us a reason I say even of every Article of our Faith let us with holy reverence come unto the thing in question and see what reason wee have for our defence I will therefore a while forbeare to use the authoritie of holy Scripture not that I esteeme the waight or evidence of any reason comparable thereto but onely perceiving by that talk I had with you that you had read the Scripture as one of those whom Peter noteth 2. Epist 3.16 Not intending to wrangle about your wrested interpretations I will first propose the evidence of reasonable proofe and afterwards bring in the assent of holy Scripture that you may perceive in what wondrous cleare light you strive to bee blinde And because I know not what your opinion is concerning God for he that denieth the God-head of Christ may as well denie the God-head absolutely that being one step toward the question I will proceed orderly and give you also a reason of our faith concerning that matier taking this onely as granted which is rife in every mans knowledge that both the termes of Contradiction cannot bee affirmed of the same subject that is that one and the same thing cannot be both affirmed and denied of the same subject at one time and in the same respect But first by the name of God know that I meane an Eternall Being infinite in goodnesse in power in wisedome in glorie in vertue and onely worthy of endlesse love and honour My reason is thus If there be not a Being which had no beginning then of necessitie that which was first existent or begun must be a beginning unto it selfe by causing of it selfe to be when it was not But this is impossible that any thing should be a cause and not be for so should it both be and not be therefore there is an eternall Being which is the beginning middle and end of all things and Himselfe without beginning and this eternall Being wee call God My reason is plaine to bee understood and remember what I have said that I may goe on Whatsoever is without beginning is also without ending because it hath no Superiour which might bring it to nothing therefore God is eternall Againe whatsoever comes to nothing is corrupted by his contrarie but nothing can be opposite to God therefore He is Eternall Or else I might thus reason 2. Being and Not-being are such contraries as one of them cannot spring out of another for every thing for the preservations sake of it selfe doth represse and corrupt the contrarie Seeing then that there is Being which could not possibly raise it selfe out of Not-Being it followes that Being had a primacy or priority before Not-Being and therefore of necessitie must be eternall for otherwise there was a time wherein it might be said that Being is not Being and so Not-Being should have beene first and contradictories might have stood together but both these are impossible therefore there is an eternall Being and this eternall Being wee call God Furthermore wee know that the greatest excellency or perfection of every thing is in the nearenesse or likenesse thereof unto the first cause But every thing is more excellent in the Being therof then in the Not-Being Therefore Being was before Not-Being and for that cause Eternall Now Eternitie is an infinite Continuance Therfore whatsoever is Eternall must of necessitie be Infinite and this Infinite being we call God Moreover whatsoever hath Infinite continuance hath Infinite Power to continue infinitely and this omnipotent or endlesse power we call God I might reason likewise of His Goodnesse of His Wisedome Truth Glory c. But one shall serue in stead of the rest and I will take His Wisedome for my example and prove unto you that likewise to be Infinite and that not onely in existence but in action also And first that hee is wise God is most worthy to be such as He is but if He were not wise He were not worthy to bee God Ergo he is wise Now marke how these depend one on another In God is Wisedome which by reason of His Infinitie is also Infinite and by His Eternitie is also Eternall so that there is no time wherein it may be said that this infinite Wisedome is not infinitely exercised for then were it not eternally infinite Therefore His wisedome is infinite not in existence onely but also in action Againe the Wisedome of God is such as hath no defect or imbecillitie therein But if it were not infinite both in action and in existence a man might finde defect therein and imagine a more Infinite wisdome then that is but this is impossible So might I conclude of all the other dignities of God But I haste to the purpose and I thinke that you will not unwillingly grant what I have said but understand the rest All the Dignities of God being actuated or brought into working require of necessitie an Infinite Object whereon they work because they themselues are
this will nothing at all support those unwritten verities For it is utterly denyed and that according to reason and the word of God that any part of the holy Scripture is perished 1. For can we thinke that it stood with the goodnesse of God to give His Word to His Church for comfort and instruction and stood it not with His providence to preserue that Word that it should not perish but accomplish that thing for which it was sent Esay 55.11 But divers objections are brought hereto as you may see in the author G. Langf forenamed in the 4. § 1. The booke of the warres of IEHOVAH is mentioned Numb 21.14 but not extant Therefore some part of the holy Scripture is perished Answer It ought first to be manifest what this booke was but in briefe the bookes of the Chronicles of the Kings of Iudah and of the Kings of Israel are often mentioned in the bookes of Kings and Chronicles yet were not those bookes therefore holy Scripture written by the Prophets but rather by the Recorders or Secretaries of state appointed for that purpose as the histories of other kingdomes are or ought to be written and of this ranke may that booke mentioned by Moses seeme to be For it is not necessary that all writings mentioned in the holy Scripture should be holy Scripture For the Poets whose writings Saint Paul mentions were but Heathens and Iannes and Iambres as profane writers call him Mambres are no where mentioned in holy Scripture but onely 2 Tim. 3.8 2. A second doubt is from that which is in Ioshua 10.13 and 2 Sam. 1.18 where mention is made of the booke of Iasher whereto though some according to the interpretation of the word just or upright will have the sence of that text of Ioshua Is it not recorded by him whose writings are upright and true as it is said Iohn 21.24 This is the Disciple that testifieth these things and we know that his testimony is true yet because the booke is mentioned in times above 390. yeeres distant it seemes to me rather to be some Liger or booke of record wherein such memorable things were written by the appointment of their Synedrion as might serue for remembrance to future ages for that Synedrion or great Councill of 70. Elders instituted by God under Moses Numb 11. never failed so long as their state lasted 3. The writings of the Prophets themselues as of Nathan and Gad mentioned in 1 Chron. 29.29 of Ahia and Iddo 2 Chron. 9.29 of Iehu 2 Chron. 20.34 are utterly lost Answer Not so For as it is manifest that all the things written in the 2 of Sam. were done after his death so likewise may we very well thinke that both the bookes of Iudges and Ruth 2 of Samuel and the two bookes of Kings for some give the Chronicles wholly to Ezra were written by divers Prophets whom God raised up in all the ages of that Church to bee inditers of His Word and were as Saint Luke saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eye-witnesses of the things which they recorded and these Prophets here mentioned with others were the Authors of those bookes 4. But some texts are cited in the new Testament which are 1. not found in the old as that in Matth. 2.23 Hee shall be a Nazarite or else are 2. not found in the Author cited by which we may thinke that some booke of his is lost as that which S. Matthew cites out of Ieremy Chap. 2.17 is not found in all that booke 3. Moreover S. Paul remembers the word of our Lord Actes 20.35 which is no where extant beside 5. And the Epistle to the Laodiceans mentioned Coloss 4.16 is utterly lost For that schedule which is found here and there is rejected by every one as unworthily to be remembred by the Apostle 5. Iude likewise cites the prophecie of Henoch which is not found except in the Talmud Answere 1. Some referre that of Matth. 2.23 to Esay 11.1 The Branch that should grow out of the roote of Iesse But it is more fully verefyed in that which is written Iud. 13.5 Where Sampson the Figure that should begin to save Israel is a Nazarite unto God and Hee much more which is separate from sinners and should perfect the deliverance of all the Israel of God and the text cited by the Evangelist may not onely intend both these but whatsoever else either the Law or the Prophets understand by the figurative snow-white puritie of the Nazarites Lam. 4.7 and is therefore cited in the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all the Prophets 2. The other citation in Saint Matthew where one Prophet is named by another doth not prove that any booke of Ieremiah is lost neither was it of any ignorance or forgetfulnesse in the Evangelist or yet mistaking of them that have copied out that booke but because that the seed of the Woman so long expected was now to come into the world it may be that Zachariah by interpretation Remember the Lord is now Ieremiah exalt the Lord who never ought to hee remembred without his praise especially in the performance of that inestimable benefit for man-kind 3. Concerning that which is cited by Saint Paul Actes 2.25 If he had that which he cites by the suggestion of the Holy-Ghost as wee may well thinke or that the saying of Christ was in fresh remembrance with them that heard it it is not therefore to bee concluded that S. Paul cites it out of any booke now lost seeing he might receive it from those Disciples which had heard it 4. And as to that Epistle to the Laodiceans it is but a common errour that S. Paul makes mention of any such but hee perswades the Colossians for the better understanding of some passages in the Epistle written to them to read the Epistle sent from Laodicea to him and that they of Laodicea should read that which he sent to the Colossians as containing doctrine and instruction fit for both the Churches to know and doe 5. And if Saint Iude were taught of God that Henoch had so prophecied though the prophecie were never written or if he cited it from any booke which went under the name of Henoch if nothing in the booke were Henoch's beside this prophecie Saint Iudes citing doth not make the booke Canonicall Scripture no more than S. Pauls citing the heathen Poets or if S. Iude had it onely by tradition that Henoch had so prophecied how doth it make for the question For it is not said that all things are false which are delivered by tradition but that in the matiers of the faith and doctrine of the Church those traditions have no force or credit which are contrary to the truth of God revealed in His Word 5. But it is yeelded that though some part of Scripture be lost yet that which remains is sufficient and containes all things necessary Answere Our Lord saith Luk. 10.42 That one thing is necessary which in Iohn 17.3 he