Christ and his Apostles were sufficient evidences of a divine spirit in them and that the Scriptures were recorded by them to be an infallible rule of faith here we have more clear reason as to the primary motives and grounds of faith and withall the infallible veracity of God in the Scriptures as the last resolution of faith And while we assert such an infallible rule of faith delivered to us by such an unanimous consent from the first delivery of it and then so fully attested by such uncontroulable miracles we cannot in the least understand to what end a power of miracles should now serve in the Church especially among those who all believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God Indeed before the great harvest of Converts in the primitive times were brought in both of Iews and Gentiles and the Church sully setled in receiving the Canon of the Scriptures universally we find God did continue this power among them but after the books of the New Testament were generally imbraced as the rule of faith among Christians we find them so far from pretending to any such power that they reject the pretenders to it such as the Donatists were and plead upon the same accounts as we do now against the necessity of it We see then no reason in the world for miracles to be continued where the doctrine of faith is setled as being confirmed by miracles in the first preachers of it There are only these two cases then wherein miracles may justly and with reason be expected First when any person comes as by an extraordinary commission from God to the world either to deliver some peculiar message or to do some more then ordinary service Secondly When something that hath been before established by Divine Law is to be repealed and some other way of worship established in stead of it First When any comes upon an extraordinary message to the world in the name of and by commission from God then it is but reason to require some more then ordinary evidence of such authority Because of the main importance of the duty of giving credit to such a person and the great sin of being guilty of rejecting that divine authority which appears in him And in this case we cannot think that God would require it as a duty to believe where he doth not give sufficient arguments for faith nor that he will punish persons for such a fault which an invincible ignorance was the cause of Indeed God doth not use to necessitate faith as to the act of it but he doth so clearly propound the object of it with all arguments inducing to it as may sufficiently justifie a Believers choice in point of reason and prudence and may leave all unbelievers without excuse I cannot see what account a man can give to himself of his faith much less what Apology he can make to others for it unless he be sufficiently convinced in point of the highest reason that it was his duty to believe and in order to that conviction there must be some clear evidence given that what is spoken hath the impress of Divine authority upon it Now what convictions there can be to any sober mind concerning Divine authority in any person without such a power of miracles going along with him when he is to deliver some new doctrine to the world to be believed I confess I cannot understand For although I doubt not but where ever God doth reveal any thing to any person immediately he gives demonstrable evidence to the inward senses of the soul that it comes from himself yet this inward sense can be no ground to another person to believe his doctrine divine because no man can be a competent judge of the actings of anothers senses and it is impossible to another person to distinguish the actings of the divine Spirit from strong impressions of fancy by the force and energy of them If it be said that we are bound to believe those who say they are fully satisfied of their Divine Commission I answer First this will expose us to all delusions imaginable for if we are bound to believe them because they say so we are bound to believe all which say so and none are more confident pretenders to this then the greatest deceivers as the experience of our age will sufficiently witness Secondly Men must necessarly be bound to believe contradictions for nothing more ordinary then for such confident pretenders to a Divine Spirit to contradict one another and it may be the same person in a little time contradict himself and must we still be bound to believe all they say If so no Philosophers would be so much in request as those Aristotle disputes against in his Metaphysicks who thought a thing might be and not be at the same time Thirdly The ground of faith at last will be but a meer humane testimony as far as the person who is to believe is capable of judging of it For the Question being Whether the person I am to believe hath divine authority for what he saith What ground can I have to believe that he hath so Must I take his bare affirmation for it If so then a meer humane testimony must be the ground of divine faith and that which it is last resolved into if it be said that I am to believe the divine authority by which he speaks when he speaks in the name of God I answer the question will again return how I shall know he speaks this from divine authority and so there must be a progress in infinitum or founding divine faith on a meer humane testimony if I am to believe divine revelation meerly on the account of the persons affirmation who pretends unto it For in this case it holds good non apparentis non existentis eadem est ratio if he be divinely inspired and there be no ground inducing me to believe that he is so I shall be excused if I believe him not if my wilfulness and laziness be not the cause of my unbelief If it be said that God will satisfie the minds of good men concerning the truth of divine revelation I grant it to be wonderfully true but all the question is de modo how God will satisfie them whether meerly by inspiration of his own spirit in them assuring them that it is God that speaks in such persons or by giving them rational evidence convincing them of sufficient grounds to believe it If we assert the former way we run into these inconveniences First we make as immediate a revelation in all those who believe as in those who are to reveal divine truths to us for there is a new revelation of an object immediately to the mind viz. that such a person is inspired of God and so is not after the common way of the Spirits illumination in Believers which is by inlightning the faculty without the proposition of any new object as it
mysteries our faith stands upon this twofold bottom First that the being understanding and power of God doth infinitely transcend ours and therefore he may reveal to us matters above our reach and capacity Secondly that whatever God doth reveal is undoubtedly true though we may not fully understand it for this is a most undoubted principle that God cannot and will not deceive any in those things which he reveals to men Thus our first supposition is cleared that it is not repugnant to reason that a doctrine may be true which depends not on the evidence of the thing it self The second is That in matters whose truth depends not on the evidence of the things themselves infallible testimony is the fullest demonstration of them For these things not being of Mathematical evidence there must be some other way found out for demonstrating the truth of them And in all those things whose truth depends on Testimony the more creditable the Testimony is the higher evidence is given to them but that testimony which may deceive cannot give so pregnant an evidence as that which cannot for then all imaginable objections are taken off This is so clear that it needs no further proof and therefore the third follows That there are certain ways whereby to know that a Testimony delivered is infallible and that is fully proved by these two Arguments 1. That it is the duty of all those to whom it is propounded to believe it now how could that be a duty in them to believe which they had no ways to know whether it were a Testimony to be believed or no. 2. Because God will condemn the world for unbelief In which the Justice of Gods proceedings doth necessarily suppose that there were sufficient arguments to induce them to believe which could not be unless there were some certain way supposed whereby a Testimony may be known to be infallible These three things now being supposed viz. that a doctrine may be true which depends not on evidonce of reason that the greatest demonstration of the truth of such a doctrine is its being delivered by infallible Testimony and that there are certain ways whereby a Testimony may be known to be infallible Our first principle is fully confirmed which was that where the truth of a doctrine depends not on evidence of reason but on the authority of him that reveals it the only way to prove the doctrine to be true is to prove the Testimony of him that reveals it to be infallible The next principle or Hypothesis which I lay down is That there can be no greater evidence that a Testimony is infallible then that it is the Testimony of God himself The truth of this depends upon a common notion of humane nature which is the veracity of God in whatever way he discovers himself to men and therefore the ultimate resolution of our faith as to its formal object must be alone into the veracity of God revealing things unto us for the principium certitudinis or foundation of all certain assent can be fetched no higher neither will it stand any lower then the infallible verity of God himself and the principium patefactionis or the ground of discovery of spiritual truth to our minds must be resolved into Divine Testimony or revelation These two then not taken asunder but joyntly God who cannot lye hath revealed these things is the only certain foundation for a divine faith to rest its self upon But now the particular exercise of a Divine faith lies in a firm assent to such a particular thing as Divinely revealed and herein lyes not so much the Testimony as the peculiar energy of the Spirit of God in inclining the soul to believe peculiar objects of faith as of Divine revelation But the general ground of faith which they call the formal object or the ratio propter quam credimus is the general infallibility of a Divine Testimony For in a matter concerning divine revelation there are two great questions to be resolved The first is Why I believe a Divine Testimony with a firm assent The answer to that is because I am assured that what ever God speaks is true the other is upon what grounds do I believe this to be a Divine Testimony the resolution of which as far as I can understand must be fetched from those rational evidences whereby a Divine Testimony must be distinguished from one meerly humane and fallible For the Spirit of God in its workings upon the mind doth not carry it on by a brutish impulse but draws it by a spiritual discovery of such strong and perswasive grounds to assent to what is revealed that the mind doth readily give a firm assent to that which it sees such convincing reason to believe Now the strongest reason to believe is the manifestation of a divine Testimony which the Spirit of God so clearly discovers to a true believer that he not only firmly assents to the general foundation of faith the veracity of God but to the particular object propounded as a matter of Divine Revelation But this latter question is not here the matter of our discourse our proposition only concerns the general foundation of faith which appears to be so rational and evident as no principle in nature can be more For if the Testimony on which I am to rely be only Gods and I be assured from natural reason that his Testimony can be no other then infallible wherein doth the certainty of the foundation of faith fall short of that in any Mathematical demonstration Upon which account a Divine Testimony hath been regarded with so much veneration among all who have owned a Deity although they have been unacquainted with any certain way of Divine revelation And the reason why any rejected such a Testimony among the Heathens was either because they believed not a Deity or else that the particular Testimonies produced were meer frauds and impostures and therefore no Divine Testimony as it was given out to be But the principle still remained indisputable that on supposition the Testimony were what it pretended to be there was the greatest reason to believe it although it came not in such a way of probation as their sciences proceeded in From which principle arose that speech of Tully which he hath translated out of Plato's Timaeus Ac difficillimum factu à Diis ortis sidem non haber◠quanquam nec argumentis nec rationibus certis eorum oratio confirmetur By which we see what a presumption there was of Truth where there was any evidence of a Divine Testimony And no doubt upon the advantage of this principle it was the Devil gained so great credit to his oracles for therein he did the most imitate Divine revelation From hence then we see what a firm bottom faith in the general stands upon which is nothing short of an Infallible Divine Testimony other things may conduce by way of subserviency for the discovery of this but nothing
else can be a sure foundation for a Divine faith but what is a Testimony of God himself A Testimony may be known to be Divine and infallible though God himself do not speak in an immediate way By being known I do not mean the firm perswasion of a mind inlightned by the Spirit of God but that there are sufficient evidences ex parte rei to convince men of it which are not wilfully blind and obstinate i. e. that the ground of unbelief in any cannot be imputed to the defect of sufficient motives to faith but to their own perversness and prejudice in not discerning them Now that God may reveal and declare his mind to the world not in an immediate way but by some instruments he may make use of to that end is not only evident from the great suitableness of such a way to the conditions of the persons he speaks to but from the general perswasion of the world concerning the possibility of Inspiration The Iews are so far from denying this that it is the very foundation of their religion as well as ours God discovering the most of his will to them by the Prophets or by persons Divinely inspired And the general consent of all other Nations that there is such a principle as Divination in the world doth make it evident that it carryes no repugnancy at all to natural light supposing that there is a God that he should reveal his mind by some particular persons unto the world For which purpose the Testimony of Tully in the entrance of his books de Divinatione is very considerable Vetus opinio est jam usque ab Heroicis ducta temporibus eáque populi Romani omnium gentium firmata consensu versari quandam inter homines divinationem quam Graeci 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appellant i. e. praesensionem scientiam rerum futurarum and soon after adds gentem quidem nullam video neque tam humanam at que doctam neque tam immanem atque barbaram quae non significari futura et à quibusdam intelligi praedicique posse censeat He makes it appear to be an universal sentiment of all Nations in the world and instanceth particularly in the Assyrians Aegyptians Cilicians Pisidians Pamphilians Grecians Romans Etrurians and others It is true indeed he after mentions some Philosophers who denyed it but they were most part the followers of Epicurus who denyed any providence and therefore might well take away divination but if Xenophanes Colophonius had any followers who asserted the one and denyed the other as Tully seems to intimate that he was alone in that perswasion yet we may probably suppose the reason of their rejecting it might be the impostures which went under the name of Divination among them which are excellently discovered by that Prince of Roman Philosophers as well as Orators in his second book of Divination but it is apparent by the same Author that the generality of Philosophers consented with the people in this perswasion as the followers of those three great sects of Socrates Pythagoras and Aristotle were all approvers of it but of all persons the Stoicks were the most zealous contenders for it especially Chrysippus Diogenes Babylonius Antipater and Possidonius some indeed rejected some wayes of Divination yet embraced others as Dicaearchus and Cratippus who rejected all but dreams and extasies but in the general we find these two principles went together among them the existence of a Deity and the certainty of Divination so that from Divination they proved a Deity and from a Deity Divination Si sunt genera divinandi vera esse Deos vicissimque si Dii sint esse qui divinent as Quintus Cicero there speaks and at last thus triumphs in the multitude of his witnesses An dum bestiae loquantur expectamus hominum consentiâ—nte auctoritate contenti non simus It may not be amiss to produce the chief argument on which the Stoicks insisted to prove the necessity of Divination supposing the existence of a Deity If there be Gods say they and they do not reveal to men things to come it either is because they do not love them or because they do not know themselves what shall come to pass or they think it is of no concernment to men to know future things or that it doth not become their Majesty to reveal them or that they cannot reveal them to men if they would but neither is it true that they do not love men for the Gods are of a bountiful nature and friends to mankind neither can they be ignorant of future things because they are appointed and decreed by them neither is it of no concernment to men to know future things for that makes them more cautious if they know them neither is it repugnant to their Majesty to reveal them for nothing is more noble then bounty and doing good and they must needs know these things therefore they may make them known to others and if they do make them known there must be some way whereby to know that they do so or else they signifie them to no purpose If now instead of the knowledge of future contingencies and the multitude of their Gods they had insisted on the discovery and revelation by the true God of those wayes which may lead men to eternal happiness that argument had been strong and convincing which as it stands is Sophistical and fallacious So that it is very plain that not only a possibility of Divination was acknowledged by those who wanted Divine revelation but that this divination did not arise from meer natural causes but from an afflatus Divinus and a concitatio quaedam animi as they there speak which imports nothing short of Divine inspiration Nay the opinion of this was so common among them that they thought any extraordinary persons had something of Divine Enthusiasm in them as Tully elsewhere tells us Nemo vir magnus sine aliquo afflatu Divino unquam fuit Although then these Heathens were greatly mistaken as to those things they took for a Divine afflatus and Divination yet we cannot conceive so general a sense should be imprinted on the minds of men of such a thing as that was were it not a thing highly consonant to principles of reason that God should communicate his mind to the world by the inspiration of some persons And therefore I conceive that Cicero and his brother Quintus who manage that excellent dispute of Divination between them have divided the truth between them too For on the one side Quintus evidently proves the possibility of the thing the consequence of it upon the acknowledgement of a Deity and the general consent of mankind in the owning of it and on the other side Tully himself excellently layes open the vanity folly and uncertainty not only of the common wayes of Divination but of the oracles which were in such great esteem among the Heathens And although Tully doth so sharply and
the Indians were in darkness while the Bacchae enjoyed light which circumstances considered will make every one that hath judgement say as Bochartus doth ex mirabili illâ— concentu vel coecis apparebit priscos fabularum architectos e scriptoribus sacris multa â—sse mutuatos From this wonderful agreement of Heathen Mythology with the Scriptures it cannot but appear that one is a corruption of the other That the memory of Iâ—shua and Sampson was preserved under Hercules Tyrius is made likewise very probable from several circumstances of the stories Others have deduced the many rites of Heathen worship from those used in the Tabernacle among the Iews Several others might be insisted on as the Parallel between Og and Typho and between the old Silenus and Balaam both noted for their skill in divination both taken by the water Num. 22. 5. both noted for riding on an ass 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Lucian of the old Silenus and that which makes it yet more probable is that of Pausanias 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which some learned men have been much puzled to find out the truth of and this conjecture which I here propound may pass at least for a probable account of it but I shall no longer insist on these things having I suppose done what is sufficient to our purpose which is to make it appear what footsteps there are of the truth of Scripture-history amidst all the corruptions of Heathen Mythology CHAP. VI. Of the Excellency of the Scriptures Concerning matters of pure divine revelation in Scripture the terms of Salvation only contained therein The ground of the disesteem of the Scriptures is tacite unbelief The Excellency of the Scriptures manifested as to the matters which God hath revealed therein The excellency of the discoveryes of Gods nature which are in Scripture Of the goodness and love of God in Christ. The suitableness of those discoveries of God to our natural notions of a Deity The necessity of Gods making known himself to us in order to the regulating our conceptions of him The Scriptures give the fullest account of the state of mens souls and the corruptions which are in them The only way of pleasing God discovered in Scriptures The Scriptures contain matters of greatest mysteriousness and mest universal satisfaction to mens minds The excellency of the manner wherein things are revealed in Scriptures in regard of clearness authority purity uniformity and perswasiveness The excellency of the Scriptures as a rule of life The nature of the duties of Religion and the reasonableness of them The greatness of the encouragements to Religion contained in the Scriptures The great excellency of the Scriptures as containing in them the Coveâ—ant of Grace in order to mans Salvation HAving thus largely proved the Truth of all those passages of sacred Scripture which concern the history of the first ages of the world by all those arguments which a subject of that nature is capable of the only thing leâ—t in order to our full proving the Divinity of the Scriptures is the consideration of â—hose matters contained in it which are in an especâ—al maâ—neâ— said to be of Divine Revelation For those historical pâ—ssages though we believe them as contained in the Scripture to have been Divinely inspired as well as others yet they are such things as supposing no Divine Revelatiâ—n might have been known sufficiently to the world had not men bâ—en wanting to themselves as to the care and means of preserving them but those matters which I now come to discourse of are of a more sublime and transcendent nature such as it had been impâ—ssible for the minds of men to reach had they not been immediately discovered by God himself And those are the terms and conditions on which the soul of man may upon good grounds expect an eternal happiness which we assert the book of Scriptures to be the only authentick and infallible records of Men might by the improvements of reason and the sagacity of their minds discover much not only of the lapsed condition of their souls and the necessity of a purgation of them in order to their felicity but might in the general know what things are pleasing and acceptable to the Divine nature from those differences of good and evil which are unalterably fixed in the things themselves but which way to obtain any certainty of the remission of sins to recover the Grace and Favour of God to enjoy perfect tranquillity and peace of conscience to be able to please God in things agreeable to his will and by these to be assured of eternal bliss had been impossible for men to have ever found had not God himself been graciously pleased to reveal them to us Men might still have bewildred themselvs in following the ignes fatui of their own imaginations and hunting up and down the world for a path which leads to heaven but could have found none unless God himself taking pitty of the wandrings of men had been pleased to hang out a light from heaven to direct them in their way thither and by this Pharos of Divine Revelation to direct them so to stear their course as to escape splitting themselves on the rocks of open impieties or being swallowed up in the quicksands of terrene delights Neither doth he shew them only what shâ—lves and rocks they must escape but what particular course they must steâ—re what star they must have in their eye what compass they must observe what winds and gales they must expect and pray for if they would at last arrive at eternal bliss Eternal bliss What more could a God of infinite goodness promise or the soul of man ever wish â—or A Reward to such who are so â—ar from deserving that they are still provâ—king Glory to such who are more apt to be ashamed of their duties then of their offences but that it should not only be a glorious reward but eternal too is that which though it infinitely transcend the deserts of the receivers yet it highly discovers the infinite goodness of the Giver But when we not only know that there is so rich a mine of inestimable treasures but if the owner of it undertakes to shew us the way to it and gives us certain and infallible directions how to come to the full pâ—ssession of it how much are we in love with misery and do we court our own ruine if we neglect to hearken to his directions and observe his commands This is that we are now undertaking to make good concerning the Scriptures that these alone contain those sacred discoveries by which the souls of men may come at last to enjoy a compleat and eternal happiness One would think there could be nothing more needless in the world then to bid men regard their own welfare and to seek to be happy yet whoever casts his eye into the world will find no counsel so little hearkned to as this nor any thing which is more generally looked on
subjects they treated of and some fragments 3. Those that are extant either confess their Ignorance of eldest times or plainly discover it Of the first sort are Thucydides and Plutarch several evidences of the Graecians Ignorance of the true original of Nations Of Herodotus and his mistakes the Greeks ignorance in Geography discovered and thence their insufficiency as to an account of ancient history page 56 CHAP. V. The general uncertainty of Heathen Chronology The want of credibility in Heathen History further proved from the uncertainty and confusion in their accounts of ancient times that discovered by the uncertain form of their years An enquiry into the different forms of the Aegyptian years the first of thirty dayes the second of four Months of both instances given in the Aegyptian history Of the Chaldaean accounts and the first Dynastyes mentioned by Berosus how they may be reduced to probability Of the Aegyptian Dynastyes Of Manetho Reasons of accounting them fabulous because not attested by any credible authority and rejected by the best Historians The opinion of Scaliger and Vossius concerning their being cotemporary propounded and rejected with reasons against it Of the ancient division of Aegypt into Nomi or Provinces and the number of them against Vossius and Kircher Page 73 CHAP. VI. The uncertain Epocha's of Heathen Chronology An account given of the defect of Chronology in the â—ldest times Of the Solar year among the Aegyptians the original of the Epacts the antiquity of Intercalation among them Of the several Canicular years the difference between Scaliger and Petavius considered The certain Epocha's of the Aegyptian history no elder then Nabonasser Of the Graecian accounts The fabulousness of the Heroical age of Greece Of the ancient Graecian Kingdoms The beginning of the Olympiads The uncertain Origines of the Western Nations Of the Latine Dynastyes The different Palilia of Rome The uncertain reckoning Ab. V. C. Of impostures as to ancient histories Of Annius Inghiramius and others Of the characters used by Heathen Priests No sacred characters among the fews The partiality and inconsistency of Heathen bistories with each other From all which the want of credibility in them as to an account of ancient times is clearly demonstrated page 89 BOOK II. CHAP. I. The certainty of the Writings of Moses In order to the proving the truth of Scripture-history several Hypotheses laid down The first concerns the reasonableness of preserving the ancient History of the world in some certain Records from the importance of the things and the inconveniencies of meer tradition or constant Revelationâ— The second concerns the certainty that the Records under Moses his name were undoubtedly his The certainty of a matter of fact enquired into in general and proved as to this particular by universal consent and settling a Common-wealth upon his Laws The impossibility of an Imposture as to the writings of Moses demonstrated The plea's to the contrary largely answered page 107 CHAP. II. Moses his certain knowledge of what he writ The third Hypothesis concerns the certainty of the matter of Moses his history that gradually proved First Moses his knowledge cleared by his education and experience and certain information His education in the wisdom of Aegypt what that was The old Aegyptian learning enquired into the conveniences for it of the Aegyptian Priests Moses reckoned among them for his knowledge The Mathematical Natural Divine and Moral learning of Aegypt their Political wisdom most considerable The advantage of Moses above the Greek Philosophers as to wisdom and reason Moses himself an eye witness of most of his history the certain uninterrupted tradition of the other part among the fews manifested by rational evidence p. 119 CHAP. III. Moses his fidelity and integrity proved Moses considered as an Historian and as a Lawgiver his fidelity in both proved clear evidences that he had no intent to deceive in his History freedom from private interest impartiality in his relations plainness and â—erspicuity of stile As a Lawgiver be came armed with Divine authority which being the main thing is fixed on to be fully proved from his actions and writings The power of miracles the great evidence of Divine revelation Two grand questions propounded In what cases miracles may be expected and how known to be true No necessity of a constant power of miracles in a Church Two Cases alone wherein they may be expected When any thing comes as a Law from God and when a Divine Law is to be repealed The necessity of miracles in those cases as an evidence of Divine revelation asserted Objections answered No use of miracles when the doctrine is setled and owned by miracles in the first revelation No need of miracles in reformation of a Church pag. 134 CHAP. IV. The fidelity of the Prophets succeeding Moses In order of Prophets to succeed Moses by Gods own appointment in the Law of Moses The Schools of the Prophets the original and institution of them The Cities of the Levites The occasion of their first institution The places of the Schools of the Prophets and the tendency of the institution there to a Prophetical office Of the Musick used in the Schools of the Prophets The Roman Assamâ—nta and the Greek Hymns in their solemn worship The two sorts of Prophets among the jews Lieger and extraordinary Ordinary Prophets taken out of the Schools proved by Amos and Saul pag. 149 CHAP. V. The tryal of Prophetical Doctrine Rules of trying Prophets established in the Law of Moses The punishment of pretenders The several sorts of false Prophets The case of the Prophet at Bethel discussed The tryal of false Prophets belonging to the great Sanhedrin The particular rules whereby the Doctrine of Prophets was judged The proper notion of a Prophet not foretelling future contingencies but having immediate Divine revelation Several principles laid down for clearing the doctrine of the Prophets 1. That immediate dictates of natural light are not to be the measure of Divine revelation Several grounds for Divine revelation from natural light 2. What ever is directly repugnant to the dictates of nature cannot be of Divine revelation 3. No Divine revelation doth contradict a Divine positive Law without sufficient evidence of Gods intention to repeal that Law 4. Divine revelation in the Prophets was not to be measured by the words of the Law but by the intention and reason of it The Prophetical office a kind of Chancery to the Law of Moses pag. 165 CHAP. VI. The tryal of Prophetical Predictions and Miracles The great difficulty of the trying the truth of Prophetical predictions from Jerem. 18. 7 8 c. Some general Hypotheâ—es premised for the clearing of it The first concerns the grounds why predictions are accounted an evidence of divine revelation Three Consectaries drawn thence The second the manner of Gods revelation of his will to the minds of the Prophets Of the several degrees of Prophecy The third is that God did not alwayes reveal the internal purposes of his
rejected The Hellens not the first inhabitants of Greece but the Pelasgi The large spread of them over the parts of Greece Of their language different from the Greeks Whence these Pelasgi came that Phaleg was the Pelasgus of Greece and the leader of that Colony proved from Epiphanius the language of the Pelasgi in Greece Oriental thence an account given of the many Hebrew words in the Greek language and the remainders of the Eastern languages in the Islands of Greece both which not from the Phaenicians as Bochartus thinks but from the old Pelasgi Of the ground of the affinity between the Jews and Lacedaemonians Of the peopling of America pag. 533 CHAP. V. Of the Origine of the Heathen Mythology That there were some remainders of the ancient history of the world preserved in the several Nations after the dispersion How it came to be corrupted by decay of knowledge increase of Idolatry confusion of languages An enquiry into the cause of that Difficulties against the common opinion that languages were confounded at Babel Those difficulties cleared Of the fabulousness of Poets The particular ways whereby the Heathen Mythology arose Attributing the general history of the World to their own Nation The corruption of Hebraisms Alteration of names Ambiguity of sense in the Oriental languages Attributing the actions of many to one person as in Jupiter Bacchus c. The remainders of Scripture history among the Heathens The names of God Chaos formation of man among the Phaenicians Of Adam among the Germans Aegyptians Cilicians Adam under Saturn Cain among the Phaenicians Tubalcain and Jubal under Vulcan and Apollo Naamah under Minerva Noah under Saturn Janus Prometheus and Bacchus Noahs three sons under Jupiter Neptune and Pluto Canaan under Mercury Nimrod under Bacchus Magog under Prometheus Of Abraham and Isaac among the Phaenicians Jacobs service under Apollo's The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Bethel Joseph under Apis. Moses under Bacchus Joshua under Hercules Balaam under the old Silenus pag. 577 CHAP. VI. Of the Excellency of the Scriptures Concerning matters of pure divine revelation in Scripture the terms of Salvation only contained therein The ground of the disesteem of the Scriptures is tacite unbelief The Excellency of the Scriptures manifested as to the matters which God hath revealed therein The excellency of the discoveries of Gods nature which are in Scripture Of the goodness and love of God in Christ. The suitableness of those discoveryes of God to our natural notions of a Deity The necessity of Gods making known himself to us in order to the regulating our conceptions of him The Scriptures give the fullest account of the state of mens souls and the corruptions which are in them The only way of pleasing God discovered in Scriptures The Scriptures contain matters of greatest mysteriousness and most universal satisfaction to mens minds The excellency of the manner wherein things are revealed in Scriptures in regard of clearness authority purity uniformity and perswasiveness The excellency of the Scriptures as a rule of life The nature of the duties of Religion and the reasonableness of them The greatness of the encouragements to Religion contained in the Scriptures The great excellency of the Scriptures as containing in them the Covenant of Grace in order to mans Salvation pag. 599 ERRATA PAge 11. l. 15. r. existence p. 17. l. 28. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 21. l. 19. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 22. l. 21. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 27. l. 14. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 31. l. 2. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 35. l. 16. r. Anebo p. 36. l. 1. r. Sebennyta p. 37. l. 9. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 52. l. 28. r. accederent And Causaubon p. 57. l. 26. r. others p. 61. l. 14. r. Pisistratidae p. 63. l. 35. r. Hierocles Apollonius p. 64. l. 11. r. Acusilaus p 83. l. 29 30. r. the Patriarch Tarasius p. 91. l. 3. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 94 l. 23. for but r. by p. 96. l. 26. for to r. and. p. 104. l. 22. r. Hecataeus p. 105. l. 33. r. Panchotis p. 112. l. 15. r. as to p. 120. l. 14 r. he for we p. 125. l. 4. r. provided l. 20. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 126. l. 15. r. Peteseph p. 132. r. deceived p. 140. l. 19 r. continued p. 150. l. 16. r. Deut. 18. p. 149. l. 12. r. An order p. 156. l 5. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p 167. l. 21. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 171. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 180 l. 11. r. are p 182. l. 3â— r. ordinat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 184. l. 39. before those insert though p. 201. l 18. r. imploy l. 35. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 202. l 14. r. Vorstius p. 209. l. 9. r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 226. l 5. r. meanness p. 254. l. 26. r. Table p. 267. l. 17. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 293. l. 17. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 302. l. 28. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 323. l. 19. for it r. they p. 328. l. 9. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 334 l. 11. r. Barchochebas p. 346. between us and in insert a. p 348. l. 21. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 349. l. 29. r. incredibilia p. 364. l. 17. blot out the comma between Euhemerus and Messenius l 29 and elsewhere r. salve for solve p. 365. l. 20. r. Elastical p. 395. l. 3. r. Toupinamboults p. 409. l. 21. r. Peristaltic p. 424. l. 15. for it r. them p. 425. l. 7. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 427. l. r. insert â—â— between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 32. r fluidane p. 443. l. 10. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 32. for Col r. l. nomine appellasse p. 464. l. 26. r. whose surface is supposed to be p. 488. l. 36. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 493. l. 5. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 28. r. coaeterna p. 502. l. 29. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p 518. l. 35. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 520. l. 10. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 13. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ORIGINES SACRAE The Truth of Scripture-History asserted BOOK I. CHAP. I. The obscurity and defect of Ancient History The knowledge of truth proved to be the most natural perfection of the rational soul yet error often mistaken for truth the accounts of it Want of diligence in its search the mixture of truth and falshood Thence comes either rejecting truth for the errors sake or embracing the error for the truths sake the first instanced in Heathen Philosophers the second in vulgar Heathen Of Philosophical Atheism and the grounds of it The History of Antiquity very obscure The question stated where the true History of ancient times to be found in Heathen Histories or only in Scripture The want of credibility in Heathen Histories asserted and proved by
truths but contrary to their pre-conceptions or interests have been forbidden entrance Prejudice is the wrong bias of the soul that effectually keeps it from coming near the mark of truth nay sets it at the greatest distance from it There are few in the world that look after truth with their own eyes most make use of spectacles of others making which makes them so seldom behold the proper lineaments in the face of Truth which the several tinctures from education authority custom and predisposition do exceedingly hinder men from discerning of Another reason why there are so few who find truth when so many pretend to seek it is that near resemblance which Error often bears to Truth It hath been well observed that Error seldom walks abroad the world in her own raiments she always borrows something of truth to make her more acceptable to the world It hath been always the subtilty of grand deceivers to graft their greatest errors on some material truths to make them pass more undiscernable to all such who look more at the root on which they stand then on the fruits which they bring forth It will hereafter appear how most of the grossest of the heathen errors have as Plutarch saith of the Egyptian Fables 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some faint and obscure resemblances of truth nay more then so as most pernicious weeds are bred in the fattest soyls their most destructive principles have been founded on some necessary and important truths Thus Idolatry doth suppose the belief of the existence of a Deity and superstition the Immortality of the souls of men The Devil could never have built his Chappels but on the same ground whereon Gods Temples stood which makes me far less wonder then many do at the meeting with many expressions concerning these two grand truths in the writings of ancient Heathens knowing how willing the devil might be to have such principles still owned in the world which by his depraving of them might be the nourishers of Idolatry and Superstition For the general knowledge of a Divine nature supposing men Ignorant of the true God did only lay a foundation to erect his Idolatrous Temples upon and the belief of the souls surviving the body after death without knowledge of the true way of attaining happiness did make men more eager of imbracing those Rites and Ceremonies which canie with a pretence of shewing the way to a blessed immortality Which may be a most probable reason why Philosophy and Idolatry did increase so much together as they did for though right reason fully improved would have overthrown all those cursed and Idolatrous practises among the Heathens yet reason only discerning some general notions without their particular application and improvement did only dispose the most ordinary sort of people to a more ready entertainment of the most gross Idolatry For hereby they discerned the necessity of some kind of worship but could not find out the right way of it and therefore they greedily followed that which was commended to them by such who did withall agree with them in the common sentiments of humane nature Nay and those persons themselves who were the great maintainers of these sublimer notions concerning God and the soul of man were either the great instruments of advancing that horrid superstition among them as Orpheus Apollonius or very forward Complyers with it as many of the Philosophers were Although withall it cannot be denied to have been a wonderful discovery of Divine providence by these general notions to keep waking the inward senses of mens souls that thereby it might appear when Divine Revelation should be manifested to them that it brought nothing contrary to the common principles of humane nature but did only rectifie the depravations of it and clearly shew men that way which they had long been ignorantly seeking after Which was the excellent advantage the Apostle made of the Inscription on the Altar at Athens to the unknown God Whom saith he ye ignorantly serve him I declare unto you And which was the happy use the Primitive learned Christians made of all those passages concerning the divine nature and the Immortality of the souls of men which they found in the Heathen Writers thereby to evidence to the world that the main postulata or suppositions of Christian Religion were granted by their own most admired men and that Christianity did not race out but only build upon those common foundations which were entertained by all who had any name for reason Though this I say were the happy effect of this building errors on common truths to all that had the advantage of Divine revelation to discern the one from the other yet as to others who were destitute of it they were lyable to this twofold great inconvenience by it First for the sake of the apparent rottenness of the Superstructures to question the soundness of the foundations on which they stood And this I doubt not was the case of many considerative heathens who observing that monstrous and unreasonable way of worship obtaining among the heathen and not being able by the strength of their own reason through the want of divine revelation to deduce any certain instituted worship they were shrewdly tempted to renounce those principles when they could not but abhor the conclusions drawn from them for there is nothing more usual then for men who exceedingly detest some absurd consequence they see may be drawn from a principle supposed to reject the principle its self for the sake of that consequence which it may be doth not necessarily follow from it but through the shortness of their own reason doth appear to them to do so Thus when the Intelligent heathen did apparently see that from the principles of the Being of God and the Immortality of souls did flow all those unnatural and inhumane Sacrifices all those absurd and ridiculous Rites all those execrable and profane mysteries out of a loathing the Immoralities and impieties which attended these they were brought to question the very truth and certainty of those principles which were capable of being thus abused And therefore I am very prone to suspect the Apology usually made for Protagoras Diagoras and such others of them who were accounted Atheists to be more favourable then true viz. that they only rejected those heathen Deities and not the belief of the Divine nature I should think this account of their reputed Atheism rational were it any wayes evident that they did build their belief of a Divine nature upon any other grounds then such as were common to them with those whose worship they so much derided And therefore when the Heathens accused the Christians of Atheism I have full and clear evidence that no more could be meant thereby then the rejection of their way of worship because I have sufficient Assurance from them that they did believe in a Divine nature and an instituted Religion most suitable to the most common received notions
God or our selves that God should when it pleases him single out some instrument to manifest his will to the world our enquiry then leads us to those things which may be proper notes and characters of such a person who is imployed on so high an Embassy And those are chiefly these two if his actions be such as could not flow from the power of meer natural causes and if the things he reveals be such as could not proceed from any created understanding First then for his actions these striking most upon our outward senses when they are any thing extraordinary do transmit along with the impressions of them to the understanding an high opinion of the person that does them Whereas the meer height of knowledge or profoundness of things discovered can have no such present power and influence upon any but such as are of more raised and inquisitive minds And the world is generally more apt to suspect its self deceived with words then it can be with actions and hence Miracles or the doing of things above the reach of nature hath been alwayes embraced as the greatest testimony of Divine authority and revelation For which there is this evident reason that the course of nature being setled by divine power and every thing acting there by the force of that power it received at first it seems impossible that any thing should really alter the series of things without the same power which at first produced them This then we take for granted that where ever such a power appears there is a certain evidence of a Divine presence going along with such a person who enjoyes it And this is that which is most evident in the actions of Moses both as to the Miracles he wrought both in Aegypt and the Wilderness and his miraculous deliverance of the Israelites out of Aegypt this latter being as much above the reach of any meerly civil power as the other above natural We therefore come to the rational evidence of that divine authority whereby Moses acted which may be gathered from that divine power which appeared in his actions which being a matter of so great weight and importance it being one of the main bases whereon the evidence of divine revelation as to us doth stand and withall of so great difficulty and obscurity caused through the preferring some parties in Religion above the common interest of it it will require more care and diligence to search what influence the power of miracles hath upon the proving the Divine Commission of those who do them Whether they are such undoubted credentials that where ever they are produced we are presently to receive the persons who bring them as extraordinary Embassadors from heaven imployed on some peculiar message to the sons of men For the full stating of this important question two things must be cleared First In what cases miracles may be expected as credentials to confirm an immediate commission from heaven Secondly What rational evidence do attend those miracles to assure us they are such as they pretend to be First For the cases wherein these miracles are to be expected as inducements to or confirmations of our faith concerning the Divine imployment of any persons in the world And here I lay down this as a certain foundation that a power of miracles is not constantly and perpetually necessary in all those who mannage the affairs of Heaven here on earth or that act in the name of God in the world When the doctrine of faith is once setled in sacred records and the divine revelation of that doctrine sufficiently attested by a power of miracles in the revealers of it What imaginable necessity or pretext can there be for a contrived power of miracles especially among such as already own the Divine revelation of the Scriptures To make then a power of working miracles to be constantly resident in the Church of God as one of the necessary notes and characters of it is to put God upon that necessity which common nature is freed from viz. of multiplying things without sufficient cause to be given for them and to leave mens faith at a stand when God hath given sufficient testimony for it to rely upon It is a thing too common and easie to be observed that some persons out of their eagerness to uphold the interest of their own party have been fain to establish it upon such grounds which when they are sufficiently searched to the bottom do apparently undermine the common and sure foundations whereon the belief of our common Christianity doth mainly stand It were easie to make a large discourse on this subject whereby we may rip open the wounds that Christianity hath received through the contentions of the several parties of it but this imputation cannot with so much reason be fastened on any party as that which is nailed to a pretended infallible chair for which we need no other instance then this before us For while the leaders of that party make a power of miracles to be a necessary note of the true Church they unavoidably run men upon this dangerous precipice not to believe any thing as a matter of faith where they find not sufficient miracles to convince them that is the true Church which propounds it to them Which necessarily follows from their acknowledged principles for it being impossible according to them to believe any thing with a divine faith but what is propounded by the Church as an infallible guide and it being impossible to know which is this infallible guide but by the notes and characters of it and one of those notes being a power of miracles I cannot find out my guide but by this power and this power must be present in the Church for nothing of former ages concerning faith as the Miracles of Christ his resurrection c. is to be believed but on the Churches account and therefore where men do not find sufficient conviction from present miracles to believe the Church to be an infallible guide they must throw off all faith concerning the Gospel for as good never a whit as never the better And therefore it is no wonder Atâ—eism should be so thriving a plant in Italy nay under if not within the walls of Rome it self where inquisitive persons do daily see the juglings and impostures of Priests in their pretended miracles and from thence are brought to look upon Religion its self as a meer imposture and to think no Pope so infallible as he that said Quantum nobis profuit haec de Christo fabula Such horrid consequences do men drive others if not bring themselves to when they imploy their parts and industry rather to uphold a corrupt interest then to promote the belief of the acknowledged principles of Christian faith But as long as we assert no necessity of such a power of miracles to be the note of any true Church nor any such necessity of an infallible guide but that the miracles wrought by
put too great a restraint upon the boundless spirit of God For sometimes as will appear afterwards God sent the Prophets upon extraordinary messages and then furnished them with sufficient evidence of their Divine commission without being beholding to the Testimonials of the Schools of the Prophets But besides these God had a kind of Leiger-Prophets among his people such were the most of those whom we read of in Scripture which were no pen-men of the sacred Scripture such in Davids time we may conceive Gad and Nathan and afterwards we read of many other Prophets and Seers among them to whom the people made their resort Now these in probability were such as had been trained up in the Prophetick Schools wherein the spirit of God did appear but in a more fixed and setled way then in the extraordinary Prophets whom God did call out on some more signal occasions such as Isaiah and Ieremiah were We have a clear foundation for such a distinction of Prophets in those words of Amos to Amaziah Amos 7. 14 15. I was no Prophet neither was I a Prophets son but I was a herdman and a gatherer of Sycamore fruits And the Lord took me as I followed the stock and the Lord said unto me Go prophecie to my people Israel Some understand the first words I was not a Prophet that he was not born a Prophet as Ieremiah was not designed and set apart to it from his mothers womb but I rather think by his not being a Prophet he means he was none of those resident Prophets in the Colledges or Schools of them not any of those who had led a prophetick life and withdrawn themselves from converse with the world nor was I saith he the son of a Prophet i. e. not brought up in discipleship under those Prophets and thereby trained up in order to the prophetick function Non didici inter discipulos Prophetarum as Pellican renders it nec institutione qua filii Prophetarum quasi ad donum Prâ—phetiae à parentibus praeparabantur saith Estius Non à puero educatus in Schol is Propheticis so Calvin and most other modern Interpreters understand it as well as Abarbinel and the Jewish Writers Whereby it is evident that Gods ordinary way for the Prophets was to take such as had been trained up and educated in order to that end although God did not tye up hmself to this method but sometimes called one from the Court as he did Isaiah sometimes one from the herds as here he did Amos and bid them go prophecie to the house of Israel There was then a kind of a standing Colledge of Prophets among the Israelites who shined as fixed Stars in the Firmament and there were others who had a more planetary motion and withall a more lively and resplendent illumination from the fountain of prophetick light And further it seems that the spirit of prophecie did not ordinarily seize on any but such whose institution was in order to that end by the great admiration which was caused among the people at Sauls so sudden prophecying that it became a proverb Is Saul also among the Prophets which had not given the least foundation for an adage for a strange and unwonted thing unless the most common appearances of the spirit of Prophecie had been among those who were trained up in order to it Thus I suppose we have fully cleared the first reason why there was no necessity for the ordinary Prophets whose chief office was instruction of the people to prove their commission by miracles because God had promised a succession of Prophets by Moses and these were brought up ordinarily to that end among them so that all prejudices were sufficiently removed from their persons without any such extraordinary power as that of miracles CHAP. V. The tryal of Prophetical Doctrine Rules of trying Prophets established in the Law of Moses The punishment of pretenders The several sorts of false Prophets The case of the Prophet at Bethel discussed The tryâ—l of false Prophets belonging to the great Sanhedrin The particular rules whereby the Doctrine of Prophets was judged The proper notion of a Prophet not forâ—telling future contingencies but having immediate Divine revelation Several principles laid down for clearing the doctrine of the Prophets 1. That immediate dictates of natural light are not to be the measure of Divine revelation Several grounds for Divine revelation from natural light 2. What ever is directly repugnant to the dictates of nature cannot be of Divine revelation 3. No Divine revelation doth contradict a Divine positive Law without sufficient evidence of Gods intention to repeal that Law 4. Divine revelation in the Prophets was not to be measured by the words of the Law but by the intention and reason of it The Prophetical office a kind of Chancery to the Law of Moses THE second reason why those Prophets whose main office was instruction of the people or meerly foretelling future events needed not to confirm their doctrine by mirales is because they had certain rules of tryal by their Law whereby to discern the false Prophets from the true So that if they were deceived by them it was their own oscitancy and inadvertency which was the cause of it God in that Law which was confirmed by miracles undoubtedly Divine had established a Court of tryal for Prophetick Spirits and given such certain rules of procedure in it that no men needed to be deceived unless they would themselves And there was a greater necessity of such a certain way of tryal among them because it could not otherwise be expected but in a Nation where a Prophetick Spirit was so common there would be very many pretenders to it who might much endanger the faith of the people unless there were some certain way to find them out And the more effectually to deterre men either from counterfeiting a Prophetick Spirit or from hearkâ—ning to such as did God appointed a severe punishment for every such pretender viz. upon legal conviction that he be punished with death Deut. 18. 20. But the Prophet which shall presume to speak a word in my name which I have not commanded him to speak or that shall speak in the name of other Gods shall surely dye The Iews generally understand this of strangling as they do alwayes in the Law when the particular manner of death is not expressed And therein a salse Prophet and a seducer were distinguished each from other that a meer seducer was to be stoned to death under sufficient testimony Deut. 13. 6 10. But the false Prophet is there said in general only to be put to death Deut. 13. 1 5. The main difference between the seducer and false Prophet was that the seducer sought by cunning perswasions and plausible arguments to draw them off from the worship of the true God but the false Prophet alwayes pretended Divine revelation for what he perswaded them to whether he gave out that he had that revelation
from the true God or from Idols and false Gods So that the meer pretence to Divine revelation was that which God would have punished with so great severity The Iews tell us of three sorts of Prophets who were to be punished with death by men and three other sorts who were reserved to divine punishment Of the first rank were these 1. He that prophecyed that which he had not heard and for this they instance in Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah who made him horns of iron and said Thus saith the Lord this was the lying Prophet 2. He that speaks that which was revealed not to him but to another and for this they instance in Hananiah the son of Azur but how truly I shall not determine this was the Plagiary Prophet 3. He that prophesied in the name of an Idol as the Prophets of Baal did this was the Idol Prophet These three when once fully convicted were to be put to death The other rank of those which were left to Gods hand consisted of these 1. He that stisles and smothers his own prophecy as Jonas did by which it may seem that when the Divine Spirit did overshadow the understanding of the Prophets yet it offered no violence to their faculties but left them to the free determination of their own wills in the execution of their office but this must be understood of a lower degree of prophecy for at sometimes their prophecyes were as fire in their bones that they were never at any rest till they had discharged their office But withall by the example of Ionas we see that though the Spirit of prophecy like the fire on the Altar could only be kindled from heaven yet it might be destroyed when it was not maintained with something to feed upon or when it met not with suitable entertainment from the spirits of those it fell upon it might retreat back again to heaven or at least lie hid in the embers till a new blast from the Spirit of God doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 retrieve it into its former heat and activity Thus it was with Ionas 2. The other was he that despised the words of a true Prophet of such God saith Deut. 18. 19. And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall not hearken to my words which he shall speak in my name I will require it of him Which Maimonides explains by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 death by the hands of God which he thus distinguisheth from the Cereth that he makes the death per manus coeli to be less then the Cereth because this latter continued in the soul after death but the other was expiated by death but generally they interpret it of a sudden death which falls upon the person 3. The last is he who hearkens not to the words of his own Prophecy of which we have a most remarkable instance in Scripture concerning the Prophet whom God sent to Bethel whom Tertullian calls Sameas the Iews Hedua whom God destroyed in an unusual manner for not observing the command which God had given him not to eat bread nor drink water at Bethel nor turn again by the way he came Neither was it any excuse to this Prophet that the old Prophet at Bethel told him that an Angel spake unto him by the word of the Lord that he should turn back For 1. Those whom God reveals his will unto he gives them full assurance of it in that they have a clear and distinct perception of God upon their own minds and so they have no doubt but it is the word of the Lord which comes unto them but this Prophet could have no such certainty of the Divine revelation which was made to another especially when it came immediately to contradict that which was so specially enjoyned him 2. Where God commands a Prophet to do any thing in the pursuit of his message there he can have no ground to question whether God should countermand it or no by another Prophet because that was in effect to thwart the whole design of his message So it was in this action of the Prophets for God intended his not eating and drinking in Bethel to testifie how much he loathed and abominated that place since its being polluted with Idolatry 3. He might have just cause to question the integrity of the old Prophet both because of his living in Bethel and not openly according to his office reproving their Idolatry and that God should send him out of Iudea upon that very errand which would not have seemed so probable if there had been true Prophets resident upon the place 4. The thing he desired him to do was not an act of that weight and importance on which God useth to send his Word to any Prophets much less by one Prophet to contradict what he had said by another and therefore Tertullian saith of him poenam deserti jejunii luit God punished him for breaking his fast at Bethel and therefore that message of this Prophet seemed to gratifie more mans carnal appetite then usually the actions of Prophets did which were most times matters of hardship and uneasiness to the flesh 5. However all these were yet he yeilded too soon especially having so much reason on his side as he had being well assured that God had commanded him he had reason to see some clear evidence of a countermand before he altered his mind if he had seen any thing upon tryal which might have staggerd his faith he ought to have made his immediate recourse to God by prayer for the settlement of his mind and removal of this great temptation But so easily to hearken to the words of a lying Prophet which contradicted his own message argued either great unbelief as to his own commission or too great easiness and inadvertency in being drawn aside by the old Prophet And therefore God made that old Prophet himself in the midst of his entertainment as with a hand writing against the wall to tell him he was weighed in the ballance and found too light and therefore his life should be taken from him Thus we see how dangerous a thing it was either to counterfeit a Spirit of Prophecy or to hearken to those who did It is the generally received opinion among the Iewish Doctors that the cognizance and tryal of false Prophets did peculiarly belong to the great Sanhedrin And that this was one end of its institution So Maimonides after he hath largely discoursed of the punishment of a seducer and speaking of that of a false Prophet he layes this down as a standing rule among them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No false Prophet was to be judged but in the Court of seventy one which was the number of the great Sanhedrin And there is some thing looks very like this in the proceedings of the people of Israel against the Prophet Ieremiah for the people the Priests and the Prophets they laid hold on him and immediately
great irregularities in the observation of it for it is expresly said That a multitude of the people had not cleansed themselves yet they did eat the Passeover otherwise then it was written And yet it is said upon Hezekiah's prayer that the Lord hearkened to Hezekiah and healed every one So that we see God himself did dispense with the strict ceremonial precepts of the Law where men did look after the main and substantial parts of the worship God required from them Nay God himself hath expresly declared his own will to dispense with the ritual and ceremonial Law where it comees to stand in competition with such things as have an internal goodness in them when he saith he desired mercy and not sacrifice and the knowledge of God more then burnt-offerings Thus we plainly see that the ceremonial Law however positive it was did yield as to its obligation when any thing that was moral stood in competition with it And so the Iews themselves suppose an open violation of the judicial Law to have been in the hanging up of Sauls sons a long time together directly contrary to Deut. 21. 23. which they conceive to have been from the 16. of Nisan to the 17. of Marchesvan which is as much as from our March to September whereas the Law saith expresly that the body of one that is hanged shall not remain all night upon the tree but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day One of the Iewish Rabbies as G. Vorstius tells us is so troubled at this that he wisheth that place in Samuel expunged out of Scripture that the name of God might be sanctified But whether this were done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the command of the Oracle or no or whether only by a general permission we see it was acceptable unto God for upon that the Gibeonites famine was removed and God was intreated for the Land Thus we have now proved that there is no immutable and indispensable obligation which ariseth from the things themselves Secondly it is no ways inconsistent with the wisdom of God to repeal such a Law when once established The main argument of that learned R. Abravanel whereby he would establish the eternity of the Law of Moses is fetched from hence That this Law was the result of the wisdom of God who knows the suitableness of things he appoints to the ends he appoints them for as God hath appointed bread to be the food of mans body Now we are not to enquire why God hath appointed bread and no other thing to be the food of man no more saith he are we to enquire why God hath appointed this Law rather then another for the food of our souls but we are to rest contented with the counsels of God though we understand not tht reasons of them This is the substance of that argument which he more largely deduceth To which we answer that his argument holds good for obedience to all Gods positive precepts of what kind or nature soever they be so long as we know their obligation to continue but all the question is whether every positive precept must always continue to oblige And thus far his similitude will hold good that whatever God doth command we are to look upon it to be as necessary to our souls as bread to our bodies but hence it follows not that our souls must be always held to the same positive precepts any more then our bodies to the same kind of food Nay as in our bodies we find some kind of food always necessary but the kind of it to alter according to age health and constitutions so we say some kind of Divine revelation is always necessary but God is graciously pleased to temper it according to the age and growth of his people so he fed them as with milk in their nonage with a ritual and ceremonial Law and trained them up by degrees under the Nursery of the Prophets till the Church was grown to age and then God fed it with the strong meat which is contained in Gods revelation of his will by the Gospel of his Son And therein was abundantly seen Gods 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his variegated wisdom that he made choise of such excellent and proportionable wayes to his peoples capacity to prepare them gradually for that full and compleat revelation which was reserved for the time of the appearance of the true Messias in the world For can any thing be more plain then the gradual progress of Divine revelation from the beginning of the world That fair resemblance and portraicture of God himself and his will upon his word if I may so express it had its ground work laid upon mans first Apostacy in the promise made Gen. 3. 15. whereon some further lines were drawn in the times of the Patriarchs but it had its 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was shadowed out the most in the typical and ceremonial Law but was never filled up to the life nor had its perfect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 till the Son of God himself appeared unto the world If then it be inconsistent with the wisdom of God to add any thing to the Law of Moses why not to the revelation made to Adam or the Patriarchs or especially to the seven precepts of Noah which they suppose to have been given to all mankind after the flood If it were not repugnant to the wisdom of God to superadd rituals and ceremonials to morals and naturals why shall it be to take down the Scaffolds of Ceremonies when Gods spiritual Temple the Church of God is come to its full height Is there not more reason that rituals should give place to substantials then that such should be superinduced to morals There are only two things can be pleaded by the Iewes why it should be more repugnant to the wisdom of God to add to the Law of Moses then to any former revelation which are the greater perfection they suppose to be in this revelation above others and that God in the promulgation of it did express that he would never alter it But both these are manifestly defective and insufficient in order to the end for which they are produced For first what evidence is there that the Law of Moses contained so great perfection in it as that it was not capable of having any additions made to it by God himself We speak not now of the perfection of the Moral Law which it is granted contained in it the foundation of all positive precepts for this we never contend for the abrogation of but the ritual Law is that we meddle with and is it possible any men should be so little befriended by reason as to think this to be the utmost pitch of what God could reveal to the world as to the way of his own worship Let any indifferent rational person take the precepts of the Gospel and lay them in the ballance with those of the
sarcastically answer the argument from the common consent of men quasi verò quidquam sit tam valdè quam nihil sapere vulgare as though nothing men did more generally agree in then in being fools yet as it is evident that the ground of that scoffe was from the several manners of Divination then in use so it cannot be thought to be a general impeachment of humane nature in a thing so consequent upon the being of a God which as himself elsewhere proves is as clear from reason as from that Testimonium gentium in hac una re non dissidentium as the Christian Cicero Lactantius speaks the consent of Nations which scarce agree in any thing else but that there is a God That which we now infer from hence is that God may make known his mind in a way infallible though not immediate for in case of Inspiration of meer men it is not they so much which speak as God by them and in case that God himself should speak through the vail of humane nature the Testimony must needs be infallible though the appearance of the Divinity be not visible Those evidences whereby a Divine Testimony may be known must be such as may not leave mens minds in suspense but are of their own nature convincing proofs of it For although as to the event some may doubt and others disbelieve the Testimony so proved yet it is sufficient for our purpose that in the nature of the things supposing them to be such as we speak of they are sufficient for the eviction that the testimony attested by them is divine and infallible I know it is a great dispute among many whether those things which are usually called the common motives of faith do of their own nature only induce a probable perswasion of the truth of the doctrine as probable which they are joyned with or else are they sufficient for the producing a firm assent to the doctrine as True I grant they are not demonstrative so as to inforce assent for we see the contrary by the experience of all ages but that they are not sufficient foundation for an unprejudiced mind to establish a firm assent upon is a thing not easie to be granted chiefly upon this account that an obligation to believe doth lie upon every one to whom these evidences of a Divine Testimony are sufficiently discovered And otherwise of all sins the sin of unbelief as to God revealing his mind were the most excusable and pardonable sin nay it would be little less then a part of prudence because what can it be accounted but temerity and imprudence in any to believe a doctrine as true only upon probable inducements and what can it be but wisdom to withhold assent upon a meer verisimilitude considering what the Lyrick Poet hath long since truly told us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That a falshood may frequently seem truer to common understandings then truth its self and as Menander speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that a meer verisimilitude may have more force on vulgar minds then truth hath If therefore there be no evidences given sufficient to carry the minds of men beyond meer probability what sin can it be in those to disbelieve who cannot be obliged to believe as true what is only discovered as probable I cannot therefore see how an obligation to believe a Divine Testimony is consistent with their opinion who make the utmost which any outward evidences can extend to to be only the bare credibility of the doctrine attested by them I can very well satisfie my self with the ground and reason why the more subtle wits of the Church of Rome do essert this for if nothing else can be produced by all motives of faith but only a probable perswasion of the truth of Christian doctrine then here comes in the fairest pretence for the Infallibility of their Church for otherwise they tell us we can have no foundation for a Divine faith for how can that be a foundation for Divine faith which can reach no higher then a moral inducement and beget only a probable perswasion of the credibility of the doctrine of Christ But on what account those who disown the Infallibility of the Church of Rome in the proposal of matters of faith should yet consent with those of it in an hypothesis taken up in probability meerly out of subserviency to that most advantagious piece of the mysterie of iniquity is not easie to resolve Unless the over-fondness of some upon the doctrine of the Schools more then of the Gospel hath been the occasion of it For how agreeable can that opinion be to the Gospel which so evidently puts the most defensive weapons into the hands of unbelief For doubtless in the judgement of any rational person a meer probable perswasion of the credibility of the doctrine of Christ where an assent to it as true is required can never be looked on as an act of faith for if my assent to the truth of the thing be according to the strength of the arguments inducing me to believe and these arguments do only prove a probability of Divine Testimony my assent can be no stronger then to a thing meerly probable which is that it may be or not be true which is not properly assent but a suspending our judgements till some convincing argument be produced on either side And therefore according to this opinion those who saw all the miracles which Christ did could not be bound to believe in Christ but only to have a favourable opinion of his person and doctrine as a thing which though not evidenced to be true by what he did yet it was very piously credible but they must have a care withall of venturing their belief too far only on such moral inducements as miracels were for fear they should go farther then the force of the arguments would carry them Had not this opinion now think we been a very probable way to have converted the world upon the Preaching of Christ and his Apostles when Christ saith though ye believe not me believe the works that ye may know and believe that the Father is in me and I in him Nay saith this opinion that is more then we are bound to do though we see thy works we are not bound to believe thy Testimony to be Divine and certainly true but we will do all we are bound to do we will entertain a favourable opinion of thy person and doctrine and wait for somewhat else but we do not well know what to perswade us to believe When the Apostles Preach the danger of unbelief because the doctrine of the Gospel was confirmed by signs and wonders and divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost what a fair answer doth this opinion put into the mouths of Infidels that notwithstanding all these signs and wonders they were never bound to believe the Gospel
eorum qui eam non putamus in manibus esse plumbatis The accusation for treason lay in their refusing to supplicate the Idols for the Emperors welfare 2. Because they would not swear by the Emperors Genius Thence Saturnius said to the Martyr Tantum jura per genium Caesaris nostri if he would but swear by the Genius of Caesar he should be saved Yet though they refused to swear by the Emperours genius they did not refuse to testifie their Allegiance and to swear by the Emperors safety Sed juramus saith Tertullian Sicut non per genios Caesarum it ae per salutem corum quae est augustior omnibus geniis 3. Because they would not worship the Emperours as Gods which was then grown a common custom Non enim Deum Imperatorem dicam vel quia mentirinescio vel quia illum deridere non audeo vel quia necipse se Deum volet dici si homo sit as the same Author speaks Nay the primitive Christians were very scrupulous of calling the Emperours Dominus hoc enim Dei est cognomen because the name Lord was an attribute of Gods and applied as his name to him in Scripture The reason of this Scrupulosity was not from any question they made of the Soveraignty of Princes or their obligation to obedience to them which they are very free in the acknowledgement of but from a jealousie and just suspicion that something of Divine honour might be implyed in it when the adoration of Princes was grown a custom Therefore Tertullian to prevent misunderstandings saith Dicam plane Imperatorem Dominum sed more Communi sed quando non cogor ut Dominum Dei vice dicam They refused not the name in a common sense but as it implyed Divine honour 4. Because they would not observe the publick festivals of the Emperors in the way that others did which it seems were observed with abundance of looseness and debauchery by all sorts of persons and as Tertullian smartly sayes malorum morum licentia piet as erit occasio luxuriae religio deputabitur Debauchery is accounted a piece of loyalty and intemperance a part of religion Which made the Christians rather hazard the reputation of their loyalty then bear a part in so much rudeness as was then used and thence they abhorred all the solemn spectacles of the Romans nihil est nobis saith the same author dictu visu auditu cum insania Circi cum impudicitia Theatri cum atrocitate arenae cum Xysti vanitate They had nothing to do either with the madness of the Cirque or the immodesty of the Theatre or the cruelty of the Amphitheatre or the vanity of the publick wrestlings We see then what a hard Province the Christians had when so many Laws were laid as birdlime in their way to catch them that it was impossible for them to profess themselves Christians and not run into a Praemunire by their Laws And therefore it cannot be conceived that many out of affectation of novelty should then declare themselves Christians when so great hazards were run upon the professing of it Few soft-spirited men and lovers of their own ease but would have found some fine distinctions and nice evasions to have reconciled themselves to the publick Laws by such things which the Primitive Christians so unaenimously refused when tending to prophaness or Idolatry And from this discourse we cannot but conclude with the Apostle Paul that the weapons whereby the Apâ—stles and Primitive Christians encountered the Heathen world were not fleshly or weak but exceeding strong and powerfull in that they obtained so great a conquest over the imaginations and carnal reasonings of men which were their strong holds they secured themselves in as to make them readily to forsake their Heathen worship and become chearful servants to Christ. Thus we see the power of the doctrine of Christ which prevailed over the principles of education though backt with pretended antiquity universality and establishment by civil Laws But this will further appear if we consider that not only the matters of faith were contrary to the principles of education but because many of them seemed incredible to mens natural reason that we cannot think persons would be over forward to believe such things Every one being so ready to take any advantage against a religion which did so little flatter corrupt nature either as to its power or capacity in so much that those who preached this doctrine declared openly to the world that such persons who would judge of the Christian doctrine by such principles which meer natural reason did proceed upon such one I suppose it is whom the Apostle calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one that owned nothing but natural reason whereby to judge of Divine truths could not entertain matters of faith or of Divine revelation because such things would seem but folly to him that owned no higher principle then Philosophy or that did not believe any Divine inspiration neither can such a one know them because a Divine revelation is the only way to come to a through understanding of them and a person who doth not believe such a Divine revelation it is impossible he should be a competent judge of the truth of the doctrine of Christ. So that the only ground of receiving the doctrine of the Gospel is upon a Divine revelation that God himself by his Son and his Apostles hath revealed these deep mysteries to the world on which account it is we are bound to receive them although they go beyond our reach and comprehension But we see generally in the Heathen world how few of those did believe the doctrine of Christ in comparison who were the great admirers of the Philosophy and way of learning which was then cryed up the reason was because Christianity not only contained far deeper mysteries then any they were acquainted with but delivered them in such a way of authority commanding them to believe the doctrine they preached on the account of the Divine authority of the revealers of it Such a way of proposal of doctrines to the world the Philosophy of the Greeks was unacquainted with which on that account they derided as not being suited to the exact method which their sciences proceeded in No doubt had the Apostles come among the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a great deal of pomp and ostentation and had fed mens curiositiâ—s with vain and unnecessary speculations they might have had as many followers among the Greeks for their sakes as Christ had among the Iews for the sake of the loaves But the matters of the Gospel being more of inward worth and moment then of outward pomp and shew the vain and empty Greeks presently finde a quarrel with the manner of proposing them that they came not in a way of clear demonstrâ—tion but stood so much upon faith as soon as it were delivered Thence Celsus and Galen think they have
aut sine Deo corum tantas animorum ficri conversiones ut cum carnisices unci aliique innumeri cruciatus quemadmodum diximus impendeant credituris vâ—luti quadam dulcedine atque omnium virtutum amore correpti cognitas accipiant rationes atque mundi omnibus rebus praeponant amicitias Christi That no fears penalties or torments were able to mâ—ke a Christian alter his profession but he would rather bid adiâ—u to his life then to his Saviour This Origen likewise frequently takes notice of when Celsus had objected the novelty of Christianity the more wonderful it is saith Origen that in so short a time it should so largely spread its self in the world for if the cure of mens bodies be not wrought without Divine Providence how much less the cure of so many thousands of souls which have been converted at once to humanity and Christianity especially when all the powâ—rs of the world were from the first engaged to hinder the progress of this doctrine and yet notwithstanding all this opposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Word of God prâ—vailed as not being able to be stopt by men and became master over all its enemies and not only spread its self quite through Greece but through a great part of the world besides and converted an innumerable company of souls to the true worship and service of God Thus we have now manifested from all the circumstances of the propagation of the doctrine of Christ what evidence there was of a divine power accompanying of it and how useful the first miracles were in order to it CHAP. X. The difference of true miracles from false The unreasonableness of rejecting the evidence from miracles because of impostures That there are certain rules of distinguishing true miracles from false and Divine from diabolical proved from Gods intention in giving a power of miracles and the providence of God in the world The inconvenience of taking away the rational grounds of faith and placing it on self-evidence Of the self-evidence of the Scriptures and the insufficiency of that for resolving the question about the authority of the Scriptures Of the pretended miracles of Impostors and false Christs as Barchochelas David el-David and others The rules whereby to judge true miracles from false 1. True Divine miracles are wrought to confirm a Divine testimony No miracles necessary for the certain conveyance of a Divine testimony proved from the evidences that the Scriptures could not be corrupted 2. No miracles Divine which contradict Divine revelation Of Popish miracles 3. Divine miracles leave Divine effects on those who believe them Of the miracles of Simon Magus 4. Divine miracles tend to the overthrow of the devils power in the world the antipathy of the doctrine of Christ to the devils designs in the world 5. The distinction of true miracles from others from the circumstances and manner of their operation The miracles of Christ compared with those of the Heathen Gods 6. God makes it evident to all impartial judgements that Divine miracles exceed created power This manifested from the unparalleld miracles of Moses and our Saviour From all which the rational evidence of Divine revelation is manifested as to the persons whom God imployes to teach the world HAving thus far stated the cases wherein miracles may justly be expected as a rational evidence of Divine authority in the persons whom God imployes by way of peculiar message to the world and in the prosecution of this discourse manifested the evidences of Divine authority in Moses and the Prophets and in our Saviour and his Apostles the only remaining question concerning this subject is how we may certainly distinguish true and real miracles from such as are only pretended and counterfeit For it being as evident that there have been impostures and delusions in the world as real miracles the minds of men will be wholly to seek when to rely upon the evidence of miracles as an argument of Divine authority in those persons who do them unless a way be found out to distinguish them from each other But if we can make it appear that unless men through weakness of judgement or incogitancy deceive themselves they may have certain evidence of the truth of miracles then there can be nothing wanting as to the establishment of their minds in the truth of that doctrine which is confirmed by them There hath been nothing which hath made men of better affections then understandings so ready to suspect the strength of the evidence from miracles concerning Divine testimony as the multitude of impostures in the world under the name of miracles and that the Scripture its self tells us we must not hearken to such as come with lying wonders But may we not therefore safely rely on such miracles which we have certain evidence could not be wrought but by Divine power because forsooth the Devil may sometimes abuse the ignorance and credulity of unwary men or is it because the Scripture forbids us to believe such as should come with a pretence of miracles therefore we cannot rely on the miracles of Christ himself which is as much as to say because the Scripture tells us that we must not believe every spirit therefore we must believe none at all or because we must not entertain any other doctrine besides the Gospel therefore we have no reason to believe that For the ground whereby we are assured by the Scriptures that the testimony of Christ was Divine and therefore his doctrine true is because it was confirmed by such miracles as he did now if that argument were insufficient which the Scriptures tell us was the great evidence of Christs being sent from God we cannot give our selves a sufficient account in point of evidence on which we believe the doctrine of the Gospel to be true and Divine But the only rational pretence of any scruple in this case must be a supposed uncertainty in our rules of judging concerning the nature of miracles for if there be no certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or notes of difference whereby to know Divine miracles from delusions of senses and the impostures of the Devil I must confess that there is an apparent insufficiency in the evidence from miracles but if there be any certain rules of proceeding in this case we are to blame nothing but our incredulity if we be not satisfied by them For the full clearing of this I shall first make it appear that there may be certain evidence found out whereby we may know true miracles from false and Divine from diabolical And Secondly Enquire into those things which are the main notes of difference between them First That there may be certain evidence whereby to know the truth of miracles I speak not of the difference ex parte râ—i between miracles and those called wonders as that the one exceed the power of created agents and the other doth not for this leaves the enquirer as far to
seek for satisfaction as ever for granting that a Divine power is seen in one and not in the other he must needs be still dissatisfied unless it can be made evident to him that such things are from Divine power and others cannot be Now the main distinction being placed here in the natures of the things abstractly considered and not as they bear any evidence to our understandings in stead of resolving doubts it increaseth more for as for instance in the case of the Magicians rods turning into scrpents as well as Moses his what satisfaction could this yeild to any spectator to tell him that in the one there was a Divine power and not in the other unless it were made appear by some evidence from the thing that the one was a meer imposture and the other a real alteration in the thing it self I take it then for granted that no general discourses concerning the formal difference of miracles and wonders considered in themselves can afford any rational satisfaction to an inquisitive mind that which alone is able to give it must be something which may be discerned by any judicious and considerative person And that God never gives to any a power of miracles but he gives some such ground of satisfaction concerning them will appear upon these two considerations 1. From Gods intention in giving to any this power of doing miracles We have largely made it manifest that the end of true miracles is to be a confirmation to the world of the Divine commission of the persons who have it and that the testimony is Divine which is confirmed by it Now if there be no way to know when miracles are true or false this power is to no purpose at all for men are as much to seek for satisfaction as if there had been no such things at all Therefore if men are bound to believe a Divine testimony and to rely on the miracles wrought by the persons bringing it as an evidence of it they must have some assurance that these miracles could not come from any but a Divine power 2. From the providence of God in the world which if we own we cannot imagine that God should permit the Devil whose only design is to ruine mankind to abuse the credulity of the world so far as to have his lying wonders pass uncontrouled which they must do if nothing can be found out as a certain difference between such things as are only of Diabolical and such as are of Divine power If then it may be discovered that there is a malignant spirit which acts in the world and doth produce strange things either we must impute all strange things to him which must be to attribute to him an infinite power or else that there is a being infinitely perfect which crosseth this malignant spirit in his designs and if so we cannot imagine he should suffer him to usurpe so much tyranny over the minds of men as to make those things pass in the more sober and inquisitive part of the world for Divine miracles which were only counterfeits and impostures If then the providence of God be so deeply engaged in the discovering the designs of Satan there must be some means of this discovery and that means can be supposed to be no other in this case but some rational and satisfactory evidence whereby we may know when strange and miraculous things are done by Satan to deceive men and when by a Divine power to confirm a Divine testimony But how is it possible say some that miracles should be any ground on which to believe a testimony Divine when Christ himself hath told us that there shall arise false Christs and false Prophets and shall shew great signs and wonders in so much that if it were possible they should deceive the very elect and the Apostle tells us that the coming of Antichrist will be with all power and signs and lying wonders How then can we fix on miracles as an evidence of Divine testimony when we see they are common to good and bad men and may seal indifferently either truth or falshood To this I reply 1. Men are guilty of doing no small disservice to the doctrine of Christ when upon such weak and frivolous pretences they give so great an advantage to infidelity as to call in question the validity of that which yeilded so ample a testimony to the truth of Christian religion For if once the rational grounds on which we believe the doctrine of Christ to be true and Divine be taken away and the whole evidence of the truth of it be laid on things not only derided by men of Atheistical spirits but in themselves such as cannot be discerned or judged of by any but themselves upon what grounds can we proceed to convince an unbeliever that the doctrine which we believe is true If they tell him that as light and fire manifest themselves so doth the doctrine of the Scriâ—ture to those who believe it It will be soon replyed that self-evidence in a matter of faith can imply nothing but either a firm perswasion of the mind concerning the thing propounded or else that there are such clear evidences in the thing it self that none who freely use their reason can deny it the first can be no argument to any other person any further then the authority of the person who declares it to have such self-evidence to him doth extend its self over the mind of the other and to ones self it seems a strange way of arguing I believe the Scriptures because they are true and they are true because I believe them for self-evidence implyes so much if by it be meant the perswasion of the mind that the thing is true but if by self-evidence be further meant such clear evidence in the matter propounded that all who do consider it must believe it I then further enquire whether this evidence doth lie in the nâ—ked proposal of the things to the understanding and if so then every one who assents to this proposition that the whole is greater then the part must likewise assent to this that the Scripture is the Word of God or whether doth the evidence lie not in the naked proposal but in the efficacy of the Spirit of God on the minds of those to whom it is propounded Then 1. The self-evidence is taken off from the written Word which was the object and removed to a quite different thing which is the efficient cause 2. Whether then any persons who want this efficacious operation of the Spirit of God are or can be bound to believe the Scripture to be Gods Word If they are bound the duty must be propounded in such a way as may be sufficient to convince them that it is their duty but if all the evidence of the truth of the Scripture lie on this testimony of the Spirit then such as want this can have none at all But if â—astly by this self-evidence be meant
such an impress of Gods authority on the Scriptures that any who consider them as they ought cannot but discern I still further enquire whether this impress lies in the positive assertions in Scripture that they are from God and that cannot be unless it be made appear to be impossible that any writing should pretend to be from God when it is not or else in the written books of Scripture and then let it be made appear that any one meerly by the evidence of the writings themselves without any further arguments can pronounce the Proverbs to be the Word of God and not the book of Wisdom and Ecclesiastes to be Divinely inspired and not Ecclesiasticus or else the self-evidence must be in the excellency of the matters which are revealed in Scripture but this still falls very short of resolving wholly the question whether the Scripture be the Word of God for the utmost that this can reach to is that the things contained in Scripture are of so high and excellent a nature that we cannot conceive that any other should be the author of them but God himself all which being granted I am as far to seek as ever what grounds I have to believe that those particular writings which we call the Scripture are the Word of God or that God did immediately imploy such and such persons to write such and such books for I may believe the substance of the doctrine to be of God and yet not believe the books wherein it is contained to be a Divine and infallible testimony as is evident in the many excellent devotional books which are in the world But yet further if the only ground on which we are to believe a doctrine Divine be the self-evidencing light and power of it then I suppose there was the same ground of beliâ—ving a Divine testimony when the doctrine was declared without writing by the first Preachers of it So that by this method of proceeding the ground of believing Christ to be sent as the Mâ—ssias sent from God must be wholly and solely resolved into this that there was so much self-evidence in this proposition uttered by Christ I am the light of the world that all the Iews had been bound to have believed him sent from God for light manifests its self although our Saviour had never done any one miracle to make it appear that he came from God And we cannot but charge our Saviour on this account with being at a very unnecessary expence upon the world in doing so many miracles when the bare naked affirmation that he was the Messias had been sufficient to have convinced the whole world But is it conceivable then upon what account our Saviour should lay so much force on the miracles done by himself in order to the proving his testimony to be Divine that he saith himself that he had a greater witness then that of John who yet doubtless had self-evidencing light going along with his doctrine too for the works which the Father hath given me to finish the same works that I do bear witness of me that the Father hath sent me Can any thing be more plain or have greater self-evidence in it then that our Saviour in these words doth lay the evidence of his Divine testimony upon the miracles which he wrought which on that account he so often appeals to on this very reason because they bear witness of him and if they would not believe him on his own testimony yet they ought to believe him for his works sake Doth all this now amount only to a removing of prejudices from the person of Christ which yet according to the tenour of the objection we are considering of it is impossible the power of miracles should do if these miracles may be so far done or counterfeited by false Christs that we can have no certain evidence to distinguish the one from the other Which the objection pretends and was the great thing wherein Celsus the Epicurean triumphed so much that Christ should foretell that others should come and do miracles which they must not hearken to and thence would infer as from Christs own confession that miracles have in them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nothing divine but what may be done by wicked men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Is it not a wretched thing saith he that from the same works one should be accounted a God and others deceivers Whereby those who would invalidate the argument from miracles may take notice how finely they fall in with one of the most bitter enemies of Christian religion and make use of the same arguments which he did and therefore Origens reply to him will reach them too For saith he our Saviour in those words of his doth not bid men beware in general of such as did miracles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but bids them beware of that when men gave themselves out to be the true Christ the Son of God and endeavour to draw Christs Disciples from him by some meer appearances in stead of miracles Therefore Christ being evidently made appear to be the Son of God by the powerful and uncontrouled miracles which he wrought what pretence of reason could there be to hearken to any who gave themselves out to be Christs meerly from some strange wonders which they wrought And from hence as he further observes may be justly inferd contrary to what Celsus imagined that there was certainly an evidence of Divine power in miracles when these false Christs gave themselves out to be Christs meerly from the supposal that they had this power of doing miracles And so it is evident in all the false Christs which have appeared they have made this their great pretence that they did many signs and wonders which God might justly permit them to do to punish the great infidelity of the Iews who would not believe in Christ notwithstanding those frequent and apparent miracles which he did which did infinitely transcend those of any such pretenders Such among the Iews were Ionathas who after the dâ—struction of Jerusalem as Iosephus tells us drew many of the people into the Wilderness of Cyrene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 promising to shew them many prodigies and strange appearances Not long after in the times of Adrian appeared that famous blazing-star Barchochebas who not only portended but brought so much mischief upon the Iews his pretence was that he vomited flames and so he did such as consumed himself and his followers after him many other Impostors arose in Aegypt Cyprus and Crete who all went upon the same pretence of doing Miracles In latter times the famous impostor was David el-David whose story is thus briefly reported by David Ganz David el-David pretended to be the true Messias and rebelled against the King of Persia and did many signs and prodigies before the Iews and the King of Persia at last his head was cut off and the Iews fined an hundred talents of Gold in the Epistle
pimple any the most trivial thing with a word speaking or the touch of the hand Upon this Arnobius challengeth the most famous of all the Heathen Magicians Zoroastres Armenius Pamphilus Apollonius Damigero Dardanus Velus Iulianus and Baebulus or any other renowned Magician to give power to any one to make the dumb to speak the deaf to hear the blind to see or bring life into a dead body Or if this be too hard with all their Magical rites and incantations but to do that quod à rusticis Christianis jussienibus factitatum est nudis which ordinary Christians do by their meer words So great a difference was there between the highest that could be done by Magick and the least that was done by the Name and Power of Christ. Where miracles are truly Divine God makes it evident to all impartial judgements that the things do exceed all created power For which purpose we are to observe that though impostures and delusions may go far the power of Magicians further when God permits them yet when God works miracles to confirm a Divine Testimony he makes it evident that his power doth infinitely exceed them all This is most conspicuous in the case of Moses and our blessed Saviour First Moses he began to do some miracles in the presence of Pharaoh and the Aegyptians turning his rod into a Serpent but we do not finde Pharaoh at all amazed at it but sends presently for the Magicians to do the same who did it whether really or only in appearance is not material to our purpose but Aarons rod swallowed up theirs The next time the waters are turned into blood by Moses the Magicians they do so too After this Moses brings up Frogs upon the Land so do the Magicians So that here now is a plain and open contest in the presence of Pharaoh and his people between Moses and the Magicians and they try for victory over each other so that if Moses do no more then they they would look upon him but as a Magician but if Moses do that which by the acknowledgement of these Magicians themselves could be only by Divine Power then it is demonstrably evident that his power was as far above the power of Magick as God is above the Devil Accordingly we finde it in the very next miracle in turning the dust into Ciniphes which we render lice the Magicians are non-plust and give out saying in plain terms This is the finger of God And what greater acknowledgement can there be of Divine Power then the confession of those who seemed to contest with it and to imitate it as much as possible After this we finde not the Magicians offering to contest with Moses and in the plague of boyles we particularly read that they could not stand before Moses Thus we see in the case of Moses how evident it was that there was a power above all power of Magick which did appear in Moses And so likewise in the case of our blessed Saviour for although Simon Magus Apollonius or others might do some small things or make some great shew and noise by what they did yet none of them ever came near the doing things of the same kind which our Saviour did curing the born blind restoring the dead to life after four dayes and so as to live a considerable time after or in the manner he did them with a word a touch with that frequency and openness before his greatest enemies as well as followers and in such an uncontrouled manner that neither Iews or Heathens ever questioned the truth of them And after all these when he was laid in the grave after his crucifixion exactly according to his own prediction he rose again the third day appeared frequently among his Disciples for forty dayes together After which in their presence he ascended up to heaven and soon after made good his promise to them by sending his holy Spirit upon them by which they spake with tongues wrought miracles went up and down Preaching the Gospel of Christ with great boldness chearfulness and constancy and after undergoing a great deal of hardship in it they sealed the truth of all they spake with their blood laying down their lives to give witness to it Thus abundantly to the satisfaction of the minds of all good men hath God given the highest rational evidence of the truth of the doctrine which he hath revealed to the world And thus I have finished the second part of my task which concerned the rational evidence of the truth of Divine Revelation from the persons who were imployed to deliver Gods mind to the world And therein have I hope made it evident that both Moses and the Prophets our Saviour and his Apostles did come with sufficient rational evidence to convince the world that they were persons immediately sent from God BOOK III. CHAP. I. Of the Being of God The Principles of all Religion lie in the Being of God and immortality of the soul from them the necessity of a particular Divine revelation rationally deduced the method laid down for proving the Divine authority of the Scriptures Why Moses doth not prove the Being of God but suppose it The notion of a Deity very consonant to reason Of the nature of Idea's and particularly of the Idea of God How we can form an Idea of an infinite Being How far such an Idea argues existence The great unreasonableness of Atheism demonstrated Of the Hypotheses of the Aristotelian and Epicurean Atheists The Atheists pretences examined and refuted Of the nature of the arguments whereby we prove there is a God Of universal consent and the evidence of that to prove a Deity and immortality of souls Of necessity of existence implyed in the notion of God and how far that proves the Being of God The order of the world and usefulness of the parts of it and especially of mans body an argument of a Deity Some higher principle proved to be in the world then matter and motion The nature of the soul and possibility of its subsisting after death Strange appearances in nature not solvable by the power of imagination HAving in the precedent book largely given a rational account of the grounds of our faith as to the persons whom God imployes to reveal his mind to the world if we can now make it appear that those sacred records which we embrace as Divinely inspired contain in them nothing unworthy of so great a name or unbecoming persons sent from God to deliver there will be nothing wanting to justifie our Religion in point of reason to be true and of revelation to be Divine For the Scriptures themselves coming to us in the name of God we are bound to believe them to be such as they pretend to be unless we have ground to question the general foundations of all religion as uncertain or this particular way of religion as not suitable to those general foundations The foundations of all
of Heathen Fables insists on this very story of Ophioneus as the groundwâ—rk of that relation in Genesis concerning the Fall But Origen well answers him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See therefore if this rare Antiquary who chargâ—â—h us with impiâ—â—y in corrupting and altâ—â—ing the Heathen Fables be not himself â—erâ— justly chargeable with the same fault not understanding the far greater antiquity of the writings of Moâ—es then either of Heraclitus or Pherecydes or Homer himself which reports the story of that evil one which fell from heaven 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the Serpent from which O hioneus in Pherecydes derived his name which was the cause why man was cast forth of Paradise doth intimate some such thing while under a pretence of Divinity and of a 〈◊〉 condition 〈◊〉 fi st deceived the woman and by her means 〈◊〉 man Câ—lius Rhodiginus câ—lls this Ophioneus Daemonicum Serpentem qui antesignanus fuâ—rit agminis à Divinae mentis placito deficientis This Pherecydes as appears by Eusebius had much converse with the Phaenicians where he purposely speaks concerning this Ophioneus Now the Phaenicians as Eusebius likewise tells us worshipped their God under the Form of a Serpent which probably might be occasioned by the Devils ambition and Tyranny over men that he would be worshipped among them in that very Form wherein he had done so much mischief to the world It was very early in the world when the Phaenicians and Aegyptians did begin to adore their Gods under the Form of Serpents for the beginning of it is attributed to Taautus by Eusebius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither was this only among the Phaenicians and Aegyptians but whereever the Devil raigned the Serpent was had in some peculiar veneration thence Iustin Martyr saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Serpent was the Symbol of adoration among them and was the proper Indicium or note of a consecrated place as is evident by that of Persius Pinge duos angues pueri sacer est locus Thence the Scholiast on Aristophanes on that place in Plutus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 observes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that where ever any God or Heroe was to be worshipped there were Serpents painted to denote so much So Orus Apollo saith of the Aegyptians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were wont to put the form of a golden basilisk to their Gods Heinsius conceives that the first worship of Apollo at Delphi was under the form of a Serpent whether Nonnus tells us that Cadmus the Phaenician went upon his first coming into Baeotia and from hence he derives the name Pytho from the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies a Serpent Ut non dubitandum sit saith he quin Pythius Apollo hoc est Spurcus ille spiritus quem Hebraei Ob Abaddon Hellenistâ—â— ad verbum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 caeteri 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dixerunt sub hac 〈◊〉 qua miseriam humano generi invexit primo cultus sit in Graecia And which is further observable the Devil was alwayes ambitious to have the world think that the knowledge of good and evil was to come by the Serpent still thence the famous oracle of Apollo here at Delphi thence came the use of Serpents so much in Divination thence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to divine from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Serpent and so among the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken in the same sense from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Serpent So that excellent Glossographer Hesychius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Serpent was reckoned among the pedestria auspicia by the Romans and Homer tells in that solemn divination concerning the Greeks success at Troy there appears 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which saith Heinsius is an exact description of the Nachas whom they would have so called from the marks on hâ—s back which they accurately observed in divination Thus we see how careful the Devil was to advance his honour in the world under that Form wherein he had deceived mankind into so much folly and misery We meet with some remainders of mans being cast out of Paradise upon his fall among the Heathens Origen thinks that Plato by his converse with the Iews in Aegypt did understand the history of the fall of man which he after his way aenigmatically describes in his Symposiacks Where he brings in Porus the God of plenty feasting with the rest of the Gods after supper Penia comes a begging to the door Porus being drunk with Nectar goes into Jupiters garden and there falls asleep Penia observing it steals to him and by this deceit conceived by him In this Fable of Plato Origen takes notice what a near resemblance the garden of Iupiter hath to Paradise Penia to the Serpent which circumvented Adam and Porus to man who was deceived by the Serpent Which he conceives more probable because of Plato his custom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to wrap up thoâ—e excellent things he knew under some fables because of the vâ—gar for which he after speaks of his custom in altering and disguising what he had from the Iews lest he should too much displease the fabulous Greeks if he should adhere too close to the Iews who were so infamous among them Some have thought the story of Paradise was preserved among the Heathens in the fable of the gardens of Adonis which comes near that of Eden but what footsteps may be gathered of the truth of Scripture history in the Heathen Mythology will appear afterwards Thus much here then may serve to have manifested the account which the Scripture gives of the Origine of evil by the fall of man to be in its self rational and attested by the consent of such persons who cannot be suspected of any partiality to the Scriptures We come now to consider the other grand difficulty which concerns the Origine of evil and the truth of Divine providence together Which is that if sin be the cause of misery and there be a God which governs the world whence comes it to pass that the worst of men do so frequently escape sufferings and the best do so commonly undergo them This hath been in all ages of the world where men have been Philosophical and inquisitive one of the great inquiries which the minds of men have been perplexed about The true and full resolution of which question depends much upon those grounds and principles which are discovered to us by Divine revelation in the Scriptures concerning the grounds of Gods patience towards wicked men the nature and end of sufferings which good men are exercised with And certainly this should very much commend the Scriptures to all sober and inquisitive persons that they contain in them the most clear and certain grounds of satisfaction to the minds of men in such things wherein they are otherwise so irresolved But of that afterwards Our present business is
condition of our souls 3. The Scripture discovers to us the only way of pleasing God and enjoying his favour That clearly reveals the way which man might have sought for to all eternity without particular revelation whereby sins may be pardond and whatever we do may be acceptable unto God It shews us that the ground of our acceptance with God is through Christ whom he hath made a propitiation for the sins of the world and who alone is the true and living way whereby we may draw near to God with a true heart in full assurance of faith having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience Through Christ we understand the terms on which God will shew favour and grace to the world and by him we have ground of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 access with freedome and boldness unto God On his account we may hope not only for grace so subdue our sins resist temptations conquer the devil and the world but having fought this good fight and finished our course by patient continuance in well doing we may justly look for glory honour and immortality and that crown of righteousness which is laid up for those who wait in faith holiness and humility for the appearance of Christ from heaven Now what things can there be of greater moment and importance for men to know or God to reveal then the nature of God and our selves the state and condition of our souls the only way to avoid eternal misery and enjoy everlasting Bliss The Scriptures discover not only matters of importance but of the greatest depth and mysteriousness There are many wonderful things in the Law of God things we may admire but are never able to comprehend Such are the eternal purposes and decrees of God the doctrine of the Trinity the Incarnation of the Son of God and the manner of the operation of the Spirit of God on the souls of men which are all things of great weight and moment for us to understand and believe that they are and yet may be unsearchable to our reason as to the particular manner of them What certain ground our faith stands on as to these things hath been already shewed and therefore I forbear insisting on them The Scripture comprehends matters of the most universal satisfaction to the minds of men though many things do much exceed our apprehensions yet others are most suâ—table to the dictates of our nature As Origen bid Celsus see 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether it was not the agreeableness of the principles of faith with the common notions of humane nature that which prevailed most upon all candid and ingenuous auditors of them And therefore as Socrates said of Heraclitus his books What he understood was excellent and therefore he supposed that which he did not understand was so too so ought we to say of the Scriptures if those things which are within our capacity be so suitable to our natures and reasons those cannot contradict our reason which yet are above them There are many things which the minds of men were sufficiently assured that they were yet were to seek for satisfaction concerning them which they could never have had without Divine revelation As the nature of true happiness wherein it lay and how to be obtained which the Philosophers were so puzled with the Scripture gives us full satisfaction concerning it True contentment under the troubles of life which the Scripture only acquaints us with the true grounds of and all the prescriptions of Heathen Moralists fall as much short of as the directions of an Empirick doth of a wise and skilful Physitian Avoiding the fears of death which can alone be through a grounded expectation of a future state of happiness which death leads men to which cannot be had but through the right understanding of the Word of God Thus we see the excellency of the matters themselves contained in this revelation of the mind of God to the world As the matters themselves are of an excellent nature so is the manner wherein they are revealed in the Scriptures and that 1. In a clear and perspicuous manner not but there may be still some passages which are hard to be understood as being either prophetical or consisting of ambiguous phrases or containing matters above our comprehension but all those things which concern the terms of mans salvation are delivered with the greatest evidence and perspicuiry Who cannot understand what these things mean What doth the Lord require of thee but to do justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with thy God that without faith it is impossible to please God that without holiness none shall see the Lord that unless we be born again we can never enter into the Kingdom of heaven these and such like things are so plain and clear that it is nothing but mens shutting their eyes against the light can keep them from understanding them God intended these things as directions to men and is not he able to speak intelligibly when he please he that made the tongue shall he not speak so as to be understood without an infallible interpreter especially when it is his design to make known to men the terms of their eternal happiness Will God judge men at the great day for not believing those things which they could not understand Strange that ever men should judge the Scriptures obscure in matters necessary when the Scripture accounts it so great a judgement for men not to understand them If our Gospel be hid it is hid to them that are lost In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not least the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ should shine unto them Sure Lots door was visible enough if it were a judgement for the men of Sodom not to see it and the Scriptures then are plain and intelligible enough if it be so great a judgement not to understand them 2. In a powerful and authoritative manner as the things contained in Scripture do not so much beg acceptance as command it in that the expressions wherein our duty is concerned are such as awe mens consciences and pierce to their hearts and to their secret thoughts All things are open and naked before this Word of God every secret of the mind and thought of the heart lyes open to its stroke and force it is quick and powerful sharper then a two-edged sword piercing to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit and of the joynts and marrow and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart The word is a Telescope to discover the great Luminaries of the world the truths of highest concernment to the souls of men and it is such a Microscope as discovers to us the smallest Atome of our thoughts and discerns the most secret intent of the heart And as far as this light reacheth it comes with power and authority as it comes armed with the Majesty
will unto the true Prophets The grand question propounded how it may be known when predictions express Gods decrees and when only the series of causes For the first several rules laid down 1. When the prediction is confirmed by a present miracle 2. When the things foretold exceed the probability of second causes 3. When confirmed by Gods oath 4. When the blâ—ssings fore-told are purely spiritual Three rules for interpreting the Prophâ—cyes which respect the state of things under the Gâ—spel 5. When all circumstances are foretold 6. When many Prophets in several ages agree in the same predictions Predictions do not express Gods unalterable purposes when they only contain comminations of judgments or are predictions of temporal blâ—ssings The case of the Ninivites Hezekiah and others opened Of repentance in God what it implyes The jewish objâ—ctions â—bout predictions of temporal blâ—ssings answered In what cases miracles were expected from the Prophets when they were to confirm the truth of their religion Instanced in the Prophet at Bethel Elijah Elishah and of Moses himself Whose divine authority that it was proved by miracles is demonstrated against the modern Iews and their pretences answered p. 177 CHAP. VII The eternity of the Law of Moses discussed The second case wherein miracles may be expected when a Divine positive Law is to be repealed and another way of worship established in stead of it The possibility in general of a repeal of a Divine Law asserted the particular case of the Law of Moses disputed against the Iews the matter of that Law proved not to be immutably obligatory because the ceremonial precepts were required not for themselves but for some further end that proved from Maimonides his confession the precepts of the Ceremonial Law frequently dispensed with while the Law was in force Of the Passover of Hezekiah and several other instances It is not inconsistent with the wisdom of God to repeal such an established Law Abravanels arguments answered Of the perfection of the Law of Moses compared with the Gospel Whether God hath ever declared he would never repeal the Law of Moses Of adding to the precepts Of the expressions seeming to imply the perpetuity of the Law of Moses Reasons assigned why those expressions are used though perpetuity be not implyed The Law of Moses not built upon immutable reason because many particular precepts were founded upon particular occasions as the customs of the Zabii many ceremonial precepts thence deduced out of Maimonides and because such a state of things was foretold with which the observation of the Ceremonial Law would be inconsistent That largely discovered from the Prophecies of the old Testament CHAP. VIII General Hypotheses concerning the Truth of the Doctrine of Christ. The great prejudice against our Saviour among Iews and Heathens was the meaness of his appearance The difference of the miracles at the delivery of the Law and Gospel Some general Hypotheses to clear the subserviency of miracles to the Doctrine of Christ. 1. That where the truth of a doctrine depends not on evidence but authority the only way to prove the truth of the Doctrine is to prove the Testimony of the revealer to be infallible Things may be true which depend not on evidence of the things What that is and on what it depends The uncertainty of natural knowledge The existence of God the foundation of all certainty The certainty of matters of faith proved from the same principle Our knowledge of any thing supposeth something incomprehensible The certainty of faith as great as that of knowledge the grounds of it stronger The consistency of rational evidence with faith Yet objects of faith exceed reason the absurdities following the contrary opinion The uncertainty of that which is called reason Philosophical dictates no standard of reason Of transubstantiation and ubiquity c. why rejected as contrary to reason The foundation of faith in matters above reason Which is infallible Testimony that there are wayes to know which is infallible proved 2. Hypoth A Divine Testimony the most infallible The resolution of faith into Gods veracity as its formal object 3. Hypoth A Divine Testimony may be known though God speak not immediatly Of inspiration among the Iews and Divination among the Heathens 4. Hyp. The evidences of a Divine Testimony must be clear and certain Of the common motives of faith and the obligation to faith arising from them The original of Infidelity CHAP. IX The rational evidence of the Truth of Christian Religion from Miracles The possibility of miracles appears from God and providence the evidence of a Divine Testimony by them God alone can really alter the course of nature The Devils power of working miracles considered Of Simon Magus Apollonius The cures in the Temple of Aeseulapius at Rome c. God never works miracles but for some particular end The particular reasons of the miracles of Christ. The repealing the Law of Moses which had been setled by miracles Why Christ checked the Pharisees for demanding a sign when himself appeals to his miracles The power of Christs miracles on many who did not throughly believâ— Christs miracles made it evident that he was the Messias because the predictions were fulfilled in him Why John Baptist wrought no miracles Christs miracles necessary for the everthrow of the Devils Kingdom Of the Daemoniaeks and Lunaticks in the Gospel and in the Primitive Church The power of the name of Christ over them largely proved by several Testimonies The evidence thence of a Divine power in Christ. Of counterfeit dispossessions Of miracles wrought among Infidels Of the future state of the Church The necessity of the miracles of Christ as to the propagation of Christian Religion that proved from the condition of the publishers and the success of the Doctrine The Apostles knew the hazard of their imployment before they entred on it The boldness and resolution of the Apostles notwithstanding this compared with heathen Philosophers No motive could carry the Apostles through their imployment but the truth of their Doctrine not seeking the honour profit or pleasure of the world The Apostles evidence of the truth of their doctrine lay in being eye-witnesses of our Saviours miracles and resurrâ—ction That attested by themselves their sufficiency thence for preaching the Gospel Of the nature of the doctrine of the Gospel contrariety of it to natural inclinations Strange success of it notwithstanding it came not with humane power No Christian Emperour till the Gospel universally preached The weakness and simplicity of the instruments which preached the Gospel From all which the great evidence of the power of miracles is proved pag. 252 CHAP. X. The difference of true miracles from false The unreasonableness of rejecting the evidence from miracles because of impostures That there are certain rules of distinguishing true miracles from false and Divine from diabolical proved from Gods intention in giving a power of miracles and the providence of God in the world The inconvenience of taking
away the rational grounds of faith and placing it on self-evidence Of the self-evidence of the Scriptures and the insufficiency of that for resolving the question about the authority of the Scriptures Of the pretended miracles of Impostors and false Christs as Barchochebas David el David and others The rules whereby to judge true miracles from false 1. True Divine miracles are wrought to confirm a Divine testimony No miracles necâ—ssary for the certain conveyance of a Divine testimony proved from the evidences that the Scriptures could not be corrupted 2. No miracles Divine which contradict Divine revelation Of Popish miracles 3. Divine miracles leave Divine effects on those who believe them Of the miracles of Simon Magus 4. Divine miracles tend to the overthrow of the devils power in the world the antipathy of the doctrine of Christ to the devils designs in the world 5. The distinction of true miracles from others from the circumstances and manner of their operation The miracles of Christ compared with those of the Hâ—athen Gods 6. God makes it evident to all impartial judgments that Divine miracles exceed created power This manifested from the unparalleld miracles of Moses and our Saviour From all which the rational evidence of Divine revelation is manifested as to the persons whom God imployes to teach the world pag. 334 BOOK III. CHAP. I. Of the Being of God The Principles of all Religion lie in the Being of God and immortality of the soul from them the necessity of a particular Divine revelation rationally deduced the method laid down for proving the Divine authority of the Scriptures Why Moses doth not prove the Being of God but suppose it The notion of a Deity very consonant to reason Of the nature of Idea's and particularly of the Idea of God How we can form an Idea of an infinite Being How far such an Idea argues existence The great unreasonableness of Atheism demonstrated Of the Hypotheses of the Aristotelian and Epicurean Atheists The Atheists pretences examined and refuted Of the nature of the arguments whereby we prove there is a God Of universal consent and the evidence of that to prove a Deity and immortality of souls Of necessity of existence implyed in the notion of God and how far that proves the Being of God The order of the world and usefulness of the parts of it and especially of mans body an argument of a Deity Some higher principle proved to be in the world then matter and motion The nature of the soul and possibility of its subsisting after death Strange appearances in nature not solvable by the power of imagination pag. 360 CHAP. II. Of the Origine of the Universe The necessity of the belief of the creation of the world in order to the truth of Religion Of the several Hypotheses of the Philosophers who contradict Moses with a particular examination of them The ancïent tradition of the world consonant to Moses proved from the fonick Philosophy of Thales and the Italick of Pythagoras The Pythagorick Cabbala rather Aegyptian then Mosaick Of the fluid matter which was the material principle of the universe Of the Hypothesis of the eternity of the world asserted by Ocellus Lucanus and Aristotle The weakness of the foundations on which that opinion is built Of the manner of forming principles of Philosophy The possibility of creation proved No arguing from the present state of the world against its beginning shewed from Maimonides The Platonists arguments from the goodness of God for the eternity of the world answered Of the Stoical Hypothesis of the eternity of matter whether reconcilable with the text of Moses Of the opinions of Plato and Pythagoras concerning the praeexistence of matter to the formation of the world The contradiction of the eternity of matter to the nature and attributes of God Of the Atomical Hypothesis of the Origine of the Universe The World could not be produced by a casual concourse of Atoms proved from the nature and motion of Epicurus his Atoms and the Phaenomena of the Universe especially the production and nature of Animals Of the Cartesian Hypothesis that it cannot salve the Origine of the Universe without a Deity giving motion to matter pag. 421 CHAP. III. Of the Origine of Evil. Of the Being of Providence Epicurus his arguments against it refuted The necessity of the belief of Providence in order to Religion Providence proved from a consideration of the nature of God and the things of the world Of the Spirit of nature The great objections against Providence propounded The first concerns the Origine of evil God cannot be the author of sin if the Scriptures be true The account which the Scriptures give of the fall of man doth not charge God with mans fault Gods power to govern man by Laws though he gives no particular reason of every Positive precept The reason of Gods creating man with freedom of will largely shewed from Simplicius and the true account of the Origine of evil Gods permitting the fall makes him not the author of it The account which the Scriptures give of the Origine of evil compared with that of heathen Philosophers The antiquity of the opinion of ascribing the Origine of evil to an evil principle Of the judgment of the Persians Aegyptians and others about it Of Manichaism The opinion of the ancient Greek Philosophers of Pythagoras Plato the Stoicks the Origine of evil not from the necessity of matter The remainders of the history of the fall among the Heathens Of the malignity of Daemons Providence vindicated as to the sufferings of the good and impunity of bad men An account of both from natural light manifested by Seneca Plutarch and others pag. 470 CHAP. IV. Of the Origine of Nations All mankind derived from Adam if the Scriptures be true The contrary supposition an introduction to Atheism The truth of the history of the flood The possibility of an universal deluge proved The flood universal as to mankind whether universal as to the earth and animals no necessity of asserting either Yet supposing the possibility of it demonstrated without creation of new waters Of the fountains of the deep The proportion which the height of mountains bears to the Diameter of the earth No mountains much above three mile perpendicular Of the Origine of fountains The opinion of Aristotle and others concerning it discussed The true account of them from the vapours arising from the mass of subterraneous waters Of the capacity of the Ark for receiving the Animals from Buteo and others The truth of the deluge from the Testimony of Heathen Nations Of the propagation of Nations from Noahs posterity Of the beginning of the Assyrian Empire The multiplication of mankind after the flood Of the Chronology of the LXX Of the time between the flood and Abraham and the advantages of it Of the pretence of such Nations who called themselves Aborigines A discourse concerning the first plantation of Greece the common opinion propounded and