of Spelling and Orthography we are not to account for as they were then They then consisted of the Law Prophets and Psalms or Poetical books at least the third part was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or HAGIOGRAPHA wherein the Psalms are Luke xxiv 44. They consist of the same still and as far as can appear in the self-same order Act. xiii 33. It is written in the second Psalm Thou art my son this day have I begotten thee These words are in our second Psalm to this day And again he saith in another Psalm thou shalt not suffer thine Holy one to see corruption v. 35. these words are in that other Psalm viz. Psal xvi 10. And again David himself saith in the book of Psalms The Lord said unto my Lord sit thou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footstool Luk. xx 42. That passage is also in our Psalms and in a Psalm inscribed to David as the Author viz. in Psal cx Not to instance in more passages as might be done abundantly §. VIII Besides it is not credible as S. Hierom in his time out of Origen answered those who objected the falsification of the Old Testament it is not credible I say that our Lord and his Apostles who so sharply reproved the other crimes and vices of the Scribes and the several Sects of the Jews should have been silent of this which was the greatest of all being false in the greatest DEPOSITVM taking from or corrupting the Divine Oracles committed to their charge And this Argument though from Negative Authority is the more considerable upon the score of S. Austin's Doctrine who gives it as a general Rule that where there is a fit place in Scripture to say a thing if it were so and it is not said the argument is good though from Negative Authority that it is not so Now what more fit places can be imagined than where our Lord appeals to the Scriptures touching his Mission and Doctrine when he commands his hearers to search the Scriptures when he tells his Disciples and the multitude The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses's seat and requires them to observe and do what they bid them but not to do after their works for they say and do not In all appearance what they said as from Moses or sitting in his seat the Scripture as reported or delivered by them was genuin and sincere enough however vitious their practices were Who here can imagin that had the Scribes then and Scribes must do it or none could had they I say then falsified corrupted or curtail'd the Scriptures we should not in some of these and like places have heard of it Would not some Caution or other have been annext to this purpose Search but take heed of corruptions in such a place Know there are defalcations in such In a word and to speak out Our Lord had not been faithful in the house of God had he not warned the family of such an evil I know a certain Person has pretended to reply to this answer but his reply is empty and frivolous §. IX Lastly as to this Objection I say 't is morally impossible since our Saviours time and indeed for many hundred years before that that the Scriptures should have been corrupted for the multitude of Copies was then such has been since much more such and so far dispersed that neither one man nor one body of men could ever get them into their hands to corrupt them and if some few or many Copies had been corrupted but not all the sincere number would have detected the corrupt To give a parallel instance which will easily be understood by all who can read English Our English Bibles in sundry impressions of this age are corrupted in Act. vi 3. Chuse seven men whom ye may appoint YE falsly for WE 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The corruption may be found in the later Edinburgh Cambridge and since very ordinarily in divers indeed most London Editions Now this being done not till the Faction had crumbled it self into several minute parties all pretending Scripture for their several distinctive little opinions 't is not improbable it might be done at first with design and particularly of those who would establish the peoples power not only in Electing but even in Ordaining their own Ministers Mean while let it be done by whom it might Take an Edinburgh Edition of 1636. a Cambridge one of 16. a London one of 1642. being it was not possible for the Faction to get all these Copies and a multitude more in as being so vastly numerous the true old Copies examined and compared discover the Variation from them that is the Corruption and a more Authentick one than any of them that is the Original Greek if any doubt remain decides the whole Controversie In like manner there were amongst the Jews even in our Saviour's days and much more since a vast number of Copies of the Old Testament for they read in their Synagogues every Sabbath day both Law and Prophets Act. xiii 27 xv 21. wherefore besides what they had for private use they must at least have as many publick Books as Synagogues and Synagogues they had divers in every City 'T is incredible almost what their Authors report of the number of Synagogues in Jerusalem it self And there were amongst them several Sects too and Scribes of every Sect all sufficiently watching over one another had there been any false dealing of this kind Nay the very Ten Tribes upon their Secession and in probability much more after their dispersion had Copies of the Law to which we owe the present Samaritan-Hebrew Text. But it is certain the Jews and Samaritans were mortal enemies would not eat converse discourse together Now that all their several Sects and Synagogues that these two last named adverse and mutually incensed Nations should conspire to bring all their Copies together to vary or corrupt them all alike and the world never hear of this combination and the reconcilement of the Parties in order thereunto is not morally possible But if all were not brought together and altered alike as before said one must convince another of falshood And there being as shall be presently made out no Variations of any considerable moment betwixt the Copies of the Old Testament which we now have in common use and the most antient or sincere ones that can be produced at least none having made it appear there is any such Variation but in the stead thereof a marvelous agreement there can be no such corruption as the Objection pretends And this brings us to the §. X Second Objection There are in the Hebrew Originals actually produced say some different Readings and both cannot be true for truth is but one therefore the one of them must be corrupt Answ There are indeed different Readings and some too as pretended from famed different Traditions Rabbi Ascher setting up one way and R. Naphthali another and from them the
Boring of the Ear. By either of these short Paraphrases others have made larger we see the discrepancy is naturally removed either phrase being the same in effect and both pertinent to the scope or design of the whole Paragraph And the like accommodation might be made of other seemingly discordant passages would the bounds of this discourse permit §. XVI To put into one all which has been said to this last Objection The summ of our Answer is Our Saviour and his Apostles in their ordinary preaching to the Jews used not the Septuagint part therefore of what our Adversaries object is false In the Penning of the Gospel or New Testament because a then received though not exact Version was Argumentum ad Homines a fit proof to many of that age and people and would besides serve well enough for all in general the Version of the Septuagint was used ordinarily and yet very * See herein the Appendix A. frequently deserted There is therefore still more falsity in our Adversaries clamours But it were Non-sense to infer hence as some do that therefore the Septuagint is more Authentick than the Hebrew that is a Translation than its Original Besides after all this coil the authority both of Old Testament and New stands firm above the attempts of its enemies Wit Learning or Malice For generally in both the Sense is the same the way of expressing only different The Old Testament as extant in our English Bibles is translated Grammatically or in a manner word for word What is produced out of the Old in the New Testament is often a Paraphrase of the Original text as being translated from a kind of Greek Paraphrase rather than a simple Version commonly called the Septuagint and thence arises that seeming discrepancy I conclude therefore upon the whole the Scriptures of the Old Testament to be a sure word of Prophecy notwithstanding those loud imputations of Corruptions of various Readings of None or Indeterminate sense All which imputations for the main are false and where they are not affect not any considerable substantial part of Scripture that is of DIVINE VERITY or point of Christian Faith and Practice And the same by the premises is conclusible also of the New Testament Therefore Scripture is Authentick §. XVII It remains now in the next place to propound terms on which we may be ascertained of our Faith from the Scriptures which have been thus proved to be sure And they shall be very brief few and reasonable terms which I will propound The first Article shall be That in all controverted points of Faith for there are points of Faith at least points which some men obtrude on our Faith that are controverted and rejected too very commonly and justly I say that in such controverted points of Faith That doctrine wherein both Originals and Translations generally agree whether in a deep silence or a contradiction thereof be adjudged either spurious or no point of Faith This will at once strike off all the new Articles of the Tridentine Creed I mean the Creed framed from the Decrees of the Council of Trent together with all Doctrines favoured there though not expresly decreed for Faith but since improved and received as Faith by the Romanists And particularly the Popes Infallibility will be gone for if Scripture had asserted Infallibility to any Vicegerents of God on earth it would be to Kings not to Popes Prov. xvi 10. A Divine Sentence is in the lips of the King his mouth transgresseth not in judgment Which text though it manifestly restrain it self to the Administration of Civil justice wherein none of our Church ever thought of any Appeal from a Royal Decree or in any other case of resistance to the Royal Authority yet doth it suppose a more generally infallible conduct and superintendency of God's Providence over the Decrees of Kings than is any where in Holy Scripture asserted over the Sentences or Determinations of any other Judges on Earth in any cause whatsoever And I would fain see produced from any part of Holy yea even of Apocryphal Writ so fair and express a Text for an Infallibility of Popes or any other on Earth But this by the bye Secondly I propound only further That whatsoever Originals and Translations generally agree in asserting as necessary to be believed or done in order to Salvation be admitted as such And I am sure then the whole Doctrine both of Faith and Practice of the Protestants stands establisht For our Foundation is Scripture and that interpreted by the Vniversal Tradition of the Church in its first and purest ages even when the boldest Adversaries we have dare not say those corruptions of Scripture of which now they make so clamorous pretences were in being and in Scripture our Foundation is not dubious Texts perplext with Criticisms uncertain by various Readings suspected for Corruptions Interpolations c. but plain express undoubted and repeated ones And as long as our Foundation thus is Scripture if that be a sure Word our Faith is sure §. XVIII Whether then some men dispute against Scripture meerly out of wantonness and to shew their Learning or for other ends it concerns not us to enquire But both they and all our Enemies must know 't is past time of day to put us out of conceit with our Bibles or to perswade them out of our Hands or Hearts Graecum est non potest legi might down in Monkish ages it will not now no not even with those whom some disdainfully and with a greater pride than is due to the Merits of their own Learning call Laicks And God be blessed for this glorious Light Upon the whole therefore We remain sure both of our Scriptures and of our Faith §. XIX And here by the way I must take the liberty to say All other imaginable ways of making us sure of our Faith without Scripture in the present state of things are idle and vain And whatever carries any plausible pretence of certainty will at length resolve it self into this of Scripture There has been a long time and still is a great cry in the world about Tradition But if we look into the case it is not Tradition that is the Constant consent of the Antient and Catholick Church which the Romanists have to vouch for their present Traditions or peculiar Doctrines but the late corrupt use and bold say-so of their Church Thus in the Council of Trent when the Evidence of any of these their new at least comparatively new Doctrines had been sifted and could be found neither in Scripture nor Fathers or any ancient Councils it was but saying the point was so held or practised by the Church and the Church was Infallible therefore being the Church taught it it must be an Apostolick Tradition though not extant in Scripture and so whatever they pleased to give this venerable name to was thereby presently dub'd an Article of Faith And particularly thus was the matter carried in the
mouth but S. Luke as we have seen to be sure of expressing the full Hebrew sense both takes the restrained translation of the Septuagint which would emphatically touch some of our Lord's Miracles and adds a more general one of his own For we found he there receded from the Septuagints as well as they from the Hebrew expressions Thus far then only in these forty Texts the Evangelists have departed from the Hebrew to hold with the Vulgar Greek Translation then in the hand of the Grecising Jews †5 Lastly There are five Texts of the number of those wherein the Evangelists have left the Septuagint clearly and held with the Hebrew in which the Septuagint have so distorted or perverted the sense that had the Evangelists reported them as the Septuagint rendred them they would have proved Testimonies rather against the Truth than for it At least there would have been so many Testimonies lost It would be too tedious here to repeat them CHAP. VII Observations upon the former Account and the Conclusion AND now things ly thus before us a man would think we might be able to see in a manner into the depth of this mighty pretended accord of the Evangelists so peculiarly with the Septuagint and what Authority it derives to the Septuagint or detracts from the Hebrew In which that we may proceed with as clear and demonstrative evidence as we can let me premit by way of PO-STVLATA what I think all the world cannot deny I. Forasmuch as it cannot be reputed a meerly casual and accidental Act in the Evangelists that they thus or thus report any Text out of the Old Testament therefore their receding from or agreeing with the Septuagint was with design or an Act of deliberation and choice II. Their great design in Allegation of Testimonies out of the Old Testament being to assert and prove Christian Truth especially to the Jews therefore as it was rational when they saw any Emphasis or Advantage more in the Septuagint than in the Hebrew because the Septuagint was commonly known and sacredly received by the Jews to use it as an Argumentum ad homines to their purpose so if at any time we find the Hebrew text to serve more to their purpose than the Septuagint and them to have followed the Hebrew text leaving the Septuagint we cannot but conclude in such case they designedly left the Septuagint as less comporting with the Christian Truth and kept to the Hebrew as being therein more firm and favourable to Christianity Now from hence it must follow which I advance as my First Proposition in order to making a clear estimate of the Accord of the Evangelists and Apostles with the Septuagin◠and so of the Authority as well of the Hebrew text and the Translations from it as of the Septuagints Version From hence I say it must follow that where the Hebrew text and the Septuagints perfectly agreeing the Evangelists keep to the Septuagint for as much as it appears by what was last premitted they would not have kept thereto had the Hebrew made more for their purpose that therefore it is not the Septuagint absolutely which is in such case observed or kept to but the Septuagint as agreeing with the Hebrew That is the Evangelists in those fourteen Texts wherein they agree both with Hebrew and Septuagint principally eyed the Hebrew as most Authentick that is the Hebrew is principally Authentick Secondly I say further whether the Evangelists accord with the Septuagint or translate anew from the Hebrew they generally confirm the Hebrew text as Original and Authentick For of the Forty texts above examined there are 22. in which the Evangelists having left the Septuagint and either in exact expression or in general sense or in both kept to the Hebrew have confirmed the Hebrew against the Septuagint And there are 14. in which the Septuagint agreeing with the Hebrew it comes to pass that the Evangelists agree with both in which therefore the Evangelists have confirmed the Hebrew with the Septuagint That is in 36. Texts of forty that is generally the Evangelists rendring confirms the Hebrew Thirdly I fear not to advance further and say the Evangelists agreement or accord with the Septuagint yea even wherein the Septuagint seem to go by themselves without or from the Hebrew does not take off the Authority of the Hebrew in those very Texts For in two of them viz. Matth. iv 10. and Mark x. 8. There are only two new Emphases as I may call them added to the old Text. And in the other two namely in Mark vii 7. and Luke iv 18. as in the former there was one word viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was easily mis-read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so mis-rendred yet not so as to alter the main sense or scope of the Text so in the other there was a word capable of two senses Now S. Luke gives both one from the Septuagint another of his own accord But as he who makes any argument fuller and clearer by varying the terms still keeping to the main sense or by unfolding all the force which a word of manifold signification bears or be inserting some new Emphatical term which shall more press the Adversary takes not off the Validity of that Argument so neither doth the Evangelists thus using or manageing Texts of the Old Testament with all the Emphases which either by the Septuagints or their own rendring them at all detract from the Original Hebrew which both only improve Had the Septuagint contradicted the Hebrew and the Evangelists in such contradictions kept with them the case had been otherwise But the main Doctrine and sense being the same still by this following the Septuagint there is no impeachment at all of the Hebrew Fourthly On the other side I do and must affirm the Septuagints receding from the Original Hebrew does derogate from the authority of the Septuagint For 1. It is plain the Evangelists in the instances brought generally leave the Septuagint where they leave the Hebrew Now as the Evangelists use of the Septuagint is the great Mean which conciliates Authority to the Septuagint so their departing from the Septuagints Version to keep with the Hebrew derogates 2. It appears by the deduction of Particulars that the present Version of the Septuagint hath in forty Testimonies out of the Old Testament perverted five important and some of the most considerable Prophecies relating to the proof that Jesus Christ is the true Messias A greater derogation from its authority cannot be conceived except in multiplying instances of that kind Fifthly The proof of Christianity more relies upon the Hebrew Text than on the Septuagints Version For it appears the Evangelists who deliver the Doctrine thereof unto us make more use of the Hebrew Text diverse Prophecies by the Septuagint distorted and mangled are in the Hebrew intire and direct to our purpose and though we should suppose as verily I believe that the Evangelists being to write in