and the other Sacred Writings of Moses perhaps also books of other men to which he alluded and yet there was no writing before the Law Concerning the book Numb 21.14 suppose the word runne in the present tense Dicitur It is said in the book of the Warres of the Lord yet it is expounded by the Chaldee as of a thing past What God did in the Red Sea and in the brooks of Arnon which latter clause necessarily implyeth that the book was written after the Law for The battle of Arnon was the fourtieth yeare after their Exodus saith a Jew by Vatablus his commendation very eminent Or say it be read as Robert Stephen in his Annotations on the Pentateuch gathered from the Kings Professours at Paris hath it Sicut fecitin Mari Rubro sic faciet in torrentibus Arnon which sense Cornelius à Lapide embraceth yet those words evince that the book was written since their going out of Egypt which was but fourty dayes before the giving of the Law saith Helvicus But indeed first the word Sepher doth not alwayes signifie a book but sometimes a Narrative of things past whereupon Tremellius readeth it Idcirco dici solet IN RECENSIONE BELLORUM JEHOVAE And so others have held saith Vatablus plainly denying that there was ever any such especiall book of warres Others read it in the future It shall be read and thereupon some of the Jews think it is the Book of Judges which handleth the Warre with Amalek or another book which recounted the miracles of God in the Red Sea and by the river Arnon which book perhaps is now perished as divers others of the holy Scriptures and amongst them a book made by Samuel 1 Samuel 10.25 Which I wondred that neither Drusius nor any who handled the controversies whom I could yet meet with ever observed before me And indeed Jeamar is the future tense It shall be said or it shall be written So Vatablus the Interlineary Eugubinus and the Genevians So the words are rather propheticall then historicall and so no particular book of the warres of the Lord was written before the two Tables Lastly that I may leave no objection unanswered adde this to the answer of S. Augustine That Christ speaking of a prophesie in Paradise concerning himself doth not say It was written before Moses but It is written by Moses of me John 5.46 Moreover if we can read the Hebrew now without vowels much easier and better could they whose daily speech it was The necessity of pronouncing the consonaÌ„ts by the vowels evinceth not the writing of consonaÌ„ts the necessity of writing the Hebrew tongue by consonants evinceth not the necessity of writingvowels they may be of a later invention Secondly saith he * Quum duae linguae Syriaca Arabica quae ab Hebraea ortae sunt vocales habeant ut ex libris manuscriptis impressis apparet Matrem uempe Hebraeam illis carere verisimile non est Seeing that the two tongues the Syriack and the Arabick which came from the Hebrew have vowels as it appeares out of manuscripts and printed books it is not likely that the Mother-tongue to wit the Hebrew wants them I answer it followeth not Because the Syriack Arabick have now points therefore they had ever so when they were written and if they had ever points it is likely they invented them and added them to their consonants the rather because the Hebrew wanted them Thirdly * Quâ Linguâ Deus Sacra sua oracula promulgavit banc certam miniméque ambiguant esse necessariò statuendum est We must needs hold that tongue to be certain and no way ambiguous or doubtfull in which God hath published his sacred Oracles I answer Then God should have writ in any other language for the Hebrew of all other is most dubious and ambiguous And whereas he addeth That the Hebrew without vowels hath no certain signification but from the antecedent and consequent and admitteth three foure or five significations according to the diversity of vowels I answer the antecedents and consequents are guides sufficient and God did it purposely to exercise our wits and to make us know that though in things necessary to salvation the Scripture is easy yet in some matters there are depths not to be sounded in others The lips of the Priest should keep knowledge and they should seek the law at his mouth Malach. 2.7 which the unlearned scorn now adayes to do though there be much ambiguitie but how bold-daring self-willed would they be if there were no difficulties I return from the words to the matter and say That as the strong births of the wombe are a blessing of God whether in women or in beasts Deuter. 30.9 So an abortion is a curse and abortives I mean that had life and reasonable souls by the ordinary rules of Genes 17.14 when Circumcision was in force and of John 3.3 whilest Baptisme is in force is a fearfull estate Howsoever God may dispense with his own Law and shew mercy extraordinarily yet David when he wished his enemies to be like abortives wished them no good but evill yea if he did not curse them but foretold what they should be like and that they were not the words of imprecation but prediction yet he did not fore-divine or fore-prophesie any good estate to them whom he likeneth to abortives Let this suffice concerning abortives incapable of sinne or punishment and abortives whose estate of soul is dangerous being measured by the rules of precepts Which I say against Anabaptists and the contemners or causelesse delayers of that gracious Sacrament 5 It is now supposed and shall if it please God hereafter be demonstrated That humane souls are not traducted nor causally brought out of the flesh yet are they occasionally that I may touch at the manner God having resolved and decreed after generation and fit organization of the Embryo to create and infuse a reasonable soul which soul because it is united to a masse corrupted in such a manner as a spiritlesse masse may be corrupted or rather to a masse inclining or inducing to corruption in the very unition it contracteth originall sinne Hugo Eterianus thus descanteth on this point * Cum anima languore afficitur non voluntate non necessitate sed solâ societate peroellitur si voluntate corrumperetur anima non originale sed actuale peccatum censeretur si necessitate câ—deret von ultrà esset imputandum illud vitium Hugo Eter de Animarum regressu ab Inferis cap. 4. When the soul languisheth it is neither cast down by the will nor by necessity but onely by fellowship if the soul were corrupted by the will it should not be counted originall sinne but actuall if it should fall by necessitie that vice were no further to be imputed Concerning the latter part I answer if in his necessity he imply coaction he saith true otherwise by this concurrence of our condescending will in Adam or by
to the first place of Matth. 13.35 and say Who ever denyed but that some Copies have been corrupted and in some of them some words foisted in but all Greek all Latine Copies with the Arabick and Syriack translations reade Abraham and not Jacob Whereas some Copies were alwayes perfect in that place of Matthew Now if you grant corruption in any point or title in all the Greek and all the Latine Copies how will you prove any part or word of the New Testament to be uncorrupt Which razeth up the very Corner-stone of our Faith Mr Beza again objecteth that the name of Jeremie is written for Zacharie Matth. 27.9 I answer that the Authour of the book of Maccabees giveth us to understand that Jeremie wrote other things which now we have not 2. Maccab. 2.1 and so did divers of the Prophets and why may not this be then taken from some of those works which are perished Secondly S. Hierome saith a Jew brought him an Apocryphall book of Jeremie in which he found this testimonie word for word and this book was called APOCRYPHA or OCCULTA JEREMIAE The Apocryphals or hid writings of Jeremie saith Erasmus on Matth. 27. As what S. Paul saith of Jannes and Jambres 2. Tim. 3.8 and what S. Jude saith of Michael the Archangel striving with the Devil is thought to be taken out of the books Apocryphall so might this testimonie be cited also out of Jeremies Apocryphals Thirdly Erasmus supposeth that Zacharie had two names and was called both Zacharie and Jeremie and so no inconvenience followeth Fourthly not onely the Syriack leaves out the name of Jeremie but even in Augustines time the name of Jeremie was not in many Latine Copies as Augustine himself testifieth de Consensu Evangelistarum lib. 3. cap. 7. The ordinarie glosse also saith that in some editions it is onely thus By the Prophet and the name of Jeremie is left unmentioned Fifthly Augustine in the last recited place of his resolveth that the Divine providence purposely set down Jeremie for Zacharie and what the holy Spirit did dictate S. Matthew did truely write And one reason why the Spirit of God confounded the names of Jeremie and Zacharie was this saith Augustine To insinuate that all the Prophets wrote by one Spirit and wonderfully consented in one and therefore we must beleeve that e Quacunque per eos Spâ—itus Sanctus dixit singula esse omnium omnia singulorum What the holy Ghost spake by them is not to be appropriated unto any one but to all and every of them What was said by Jeremie was as well Zacharies as Jeremies and what was said by Zacharie was as well Jeremies as Zacharies God spake not by the MOUTHS but by the MOUTH of all his holy Prophets since the world began Act. 3.21 and they had but one Spirit to guide them into all truth The Prophesie of Amos is called The book of the Prophets Acts 7.42 and the Word of God which in divers places is called in the plurall number Scriptures as John 5.39 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Search the Scriptures is also oftentimes called in the singular number The Scripture as John 2.22 they beleeved the Scripture and the word which Jesus had said Beleef was to rest as well on his Word onely without Scripture as on Scripture though he had said nothing and the word Scripture is not to be restrained onely to that place of Scripture before pointed at but to the whole Word of God written which they beleeved The Scripture hath concluded all under sinne Gal. 3.22 where not one single place onely but either common places of that point or the whole bodie of the Scripture is to be understood A few words of a Psalme of David is called by Christ himself The law of the Jews It is written in their law They hated me without a cause John 15.25 which is onely so written Psal 35.19 Again he saith to the Jews John 10.34 Is it not written in your Law I have said ye are Gods but it is written so onely Psal 83.6 Yea though one and the same thing in effect be written both Isa 28.16 and Psal 118.22 as also Matth 21.42 and Acts 4.12 yet S. Peter reckoneth all but as one All but one Scripture though severally written by these foure It is contained in the Scripture saith he 1. Pet. 2.6 in the singular number he mentioneth Scripture as if what one wrote the rest wrote S. Peter saith not It is contained in the Word with reference to one Spirit inditing or inspiring though that might have also been truely spoken but contained in the Scripture with relation to the unity and consent of the Pen-men Lastly the words of the Evangelist are these Matth. 27.9 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the Prophet Jeremie saying And they took the thirty pieces of silver 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 effatum Jeremiae dicentis That which was spoken by Jeremie saying c. Now Jeremiae might say it speak it dictate it which is most true and is all that S. Matthew saith who by the Spirit might also know that Jeremie did teach preach prophesie and utter these words and yet for all this and after all this Zacharie by the same Spirit might write transcribe and insert those words of Jeremie into his own Prophesie which S. Matthew denieth not as Baruch wrote divers things which he had heard from Jeremie as Agur collected some Proverbs of Solomon Again there was no necessitie that all things whatsoever Jeremie as a Prophet did speak g Jerem. 36.2 he himself or Baruch should write much lesse presently since there were many yeares between Jeremie his speaking and his writing for Enoch prophesied as it is in the 14. verse of the Epist of S. Jude but he prophesied Saying c. as it is there written for writing was none till God set the Copie unto Moses by writing the Law in the Tables on the mount Again S. Paul Act. 24.35 remembreth the words of our Lord Jesus how he said It is more blessed to give then to receive yet none of the Evangelists record such words but this might the Apostles relate unto S. Paul or by divine inspiration he might know that Christ spake them or they might be part of the words which Christ himself spake unto S. Paul for there is no certaintie that they were written S. John the Evangelist was commanded to conceal and not to write the words of the seven thunders Revel 10.4 If he had wholly concealed such a thing we could not know it he spake it but wrote it not Jeremie might speak this and not write it or write it and not speak it Any of these answers is better then to incline to Beza that the Text is erroneous or patched up with a false addition or to Erasmus on Matth. 27. intimating there was lapsus memoriae in Evangelistis howsoever he qualifieth it That if there were memoriae lapsus in Nomine duntaxat he
the living God and not with penne and ink For though the sense and words of this Epistle to the Galatians be from God and most divine yet there is no reason to imagine that S. Paul intended to include that sense under these words Videte or Videtis qualibus literis scripsi vobis manu meâ You see how large a letter I have written to you with mine own hand But if the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie quantitie though S. Paul wrote in great letters and characters yet it might be a verie good and fair hand as there are few fairer writings then some where the letters are large and full drawn and I doubt not but he who gave them the extraordinary gift of tongues and languages did also as a necessarie appendant give them the power to write well those languages especially since their writings were to benefit more then their voices could reach unto We never reade that the holy Apostles Peter James or John were learned or could reade or write before their calling or learned it by degrees after their Apostleship yet they could and did write and as the Spirit guided their thoughts and words so did he their hands and they wrote both divinely for matter and as I think exquisitely for the manner yea more exquisitely then other men as being governed and actuated by the hand of God which is perfect in all his works And indeed the true sense of the place in my opinion toucheth not at the deformednesse of the characters or at the grand-greatnesse of them but at the length or prolixitie of the Epistle which is excellently rendered by our English You see how large a letter I have written as if S. Paul had spoke thus more at large I who before told you that we must not be weary of well-doing but must do good unto all men whilest we have time especially to the houshold of faith I say I my self have not been wearie in writing this Epistle though it be long and whilest I had time I have spent that time in doing you good by writing this letter by writing this long and large letter to you For though I have written longer Epistles yet I did rather subscribe to them and wrote not all of any one of them with mine own hand but you may take it as a token of my heartie love that I wrote all this Epistle my self You see how large a letter I have writ to you with mine own hand And this sense better answereth to the coherence then that of S. Hierom or of the other learned man whom S. Hierom wondered at So much for the third Lemma 8. I come now to the first Question viz. Whether it was necessarie that Scripture should be written for mens instruction That it was not absolutely necessarie must be confest for God might have used other means He is liberrimum agens the freest agent or rather ipsa libertas libertie it self not chained to fate nor bound in with nature or second causes Necessitie freedome of our will or indifferencie to either side and contingencie are the issues of his will Yea God did use other means in the law of nature for above 2450 yeares the Patriarchs were nourished with agraphall Tradition onely No word was ever written till God wrote the Law the two first Tables the work of the onely-wise Almightie The writing was the writing of God graven upon the Tables Exod. 32.16 Written with the finger of God Exod 31.18 The Jews say The book of Genesis was written by Moses before God wrote the Law For though God spake all the words of the Decalogue Exod. 20.1 c. yet he delivered not the Tables to Moses till Exod. 31.18 but Exod. 24.4 it is related that Moses wrote all the words of the Lord and vers 7. that he took the book of the Law and read it in the audience of the people Kemnitius answereth That the things are recorded per Anticipationem seu per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The last is recorded in the first place for the writing and dedication here mentioned were accomplished afterward Exod. 34.32 The pillar of stone and that other of brick which Josephus Antiq. 1.4 saith the children of Seth did write in before the floud were either fictions or antidated The prophesie of Enoch was not written by him as S. Augustine de Civit. 15.22 and Origen Hom. 28. in Num. think but Enoch prophesied Saying Jude 14. As the prophesie of Adam Genes 2.24 and of God himself Genes 3.15 both of them concerning Christ were spoken in Paradise not written and as the Apostles wrote not the Creed but delivered it onely vivâ voce by word of mouth saith Irenaeus 3.4 and Augustine de Fide Oper. cap. 9. and Ruffinus on the Creed and divers others so is it likely that Enochs prophesie was not written or rather was written long after it was spoken for writing was not so necessarie for the Patriarchs First because they were purer in minde saith Chrysostom Hom. 1. in Matth. And it is the fault of our corrupt nature and we may be rightly impleaded that ever there was any writing as may be gathered from Isidorus Peleusiota lib. 3. epist 106. Secondly the long lives of the Patriarchs supplied the room of writing for Methusalah who lived 240 yeares with Adam with the first Adam who was AETATIS ILLIUS EPISCOPUS Bishop of those times saith Kemnitius in Examine part 1. pag. 13. lived also 90 and odde yeares with Sem and Sem lived 50 yeares in Jacobs time by the calculation of Helvicus and there were not 200 yeares from Jacobs death to the writing of the Law Thirdly besides such aged venerable Prophets as were Adam Enoch Noah and Abraham who was an eminent instructer with authoritie and as it were with a Pretorian power Gen. 18.19 I know that Abraham will command his sonnes and his houshold after him that they keep the way of the Lord other Patriarchs knew the will of God by immediate revelation by dreams and visions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 At sundrie times and in divers manners Heb. 1.1 Gods speech was in stead of writing But when men grew more impure and upon the increase of sinne mans dayes were shortened God did withdraw himself and his familiar conversation was not so common but because their hearts of flesh were hardened in which was printed the law of nature by them even obliterated and they received new evil impressions in stonie hearts God himself wrote the Morall Law in two Tables of stone and Gods own handie-work being broken by the occasion of their sinne to shew that the Morall Law should continue for ever the broken Tables were removed and none knoweth what ever became of them and Moses was commanded to frame two new whole Tables of stone like the former Two extreams about the written word are here to be avoided The first is of the Papists who too much disgrace the Scripture at least comparatively
minde In the state of integritie it was farre otherwise Adam was new in his minde and holy and righteous as was proved before in which regard * Chrys Hom. 16. in Gen. Chrysostom saith Adam was a terrestriall Angel * Bas Homil. Quòd Deus non sit author malorum Basil reckoneth up as Adams chief good in Paradise His sitting with God and conjunction by love As all things els so Adams will was good and tended unto good there is the object his love in innocencie was entire and united to God there was his perfection Thirdly the object of his and our part concupiscible is moderate delight the perfection and felicitie of it was contentment As now this part is gauled with insatiable itchings and given over to lasciviousnesse to work all uncleannesse with greedines Ephes 4.19 But at the first Adam was free Augustine saith * Gratia Dei ibi magna erâ—t vbi terrenum animale corpus besâ—ialem libidinem non habebat There the grace of God was great where an earthy and sensuall body had no beastly lust The place he was in was a Paradise of pleasure a garden of delight nothing was wanting which might give true content Fourthly the object of his and our irascible part may in a sort be called Difficulty or rather Constancy whose glory of endeavours end and felicitie was Victorie This part now is much weakned with infirmitie In the best of us the Flesh lusteth against the Spirit and alas we are often vanquished as being weak by nature But Adam was strong and could have overcome any temptation Augustine saith * Felices erant primi homines nullis agitabantur perturbatio ibus animorum nullis corporis laedebantur incommodis De Civit. 14.10 Our first parents were happy being neither shaken with any trouble of minde nor hurt with any infirmitie of body * Adam non opus habebat eo adjutorio quod implorant isti cùm dicunt Video aliam legem in membris meis c. Lib. De Corrept Gratia Adam had no need of that help which these crave when they say I see another law in my members c. Yea he is more bold there saying * Adam in illis bonis in quibus creatus est Christ morte non â—guit Ibid. Adam in those good things wherein he was created had no need of Christs death He had with libertie and will grace sufficient whereby he might have triumphed over all difficulties and temptations Augustine thus * In Paradiso etiamsi omnia non poterat Adam ante peccatum quicquid tum non poterat non volebat ideo poterat omnia quae volebat De Civit. 14.15 In Paradise before sinne although Adam could not do all things yet he then would not do whatsoever he could not and therefore could do all that he would Adam having these excellent endowments of nature and grace had also necessarily certain objects about which they should be conversant These objects were all the parts and branches of the Law of nature whereby he fully knew his dutie And all and every one of these he did for a while or at the least not break and he and his posteritie should and ought to fulfill as they were private persons and for the performance and non-performance thereof both he and we should and shall answer unto God at the high Throne and Tribunall of the just and righteous Judge 2. But there was one precept and onely one given to Eve perhaps to all Adams posteritie as private persons who if they had eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evill can not be imagined that they could have ruinated all mankinde but commanded to Adam onely as the publick person as the Idea of humane nature as the stock and root by whose obedience or disobedience all mankinde was to be happie or unhappie as the figure of Christ to come And this sin was not to be a sin of thought onely as the sin of the Angels who each of them sinned by his own expressed will but such a sinne as might bring a deserved blot and punishment upon all his posteritie who were in him which could not be unles it had been committed both by his soul and his body and thereby had power to infect all the parts and faculties both of souls and bodies Again the body of Adam could not sinne without the soul neither could this be a sinne of the soul alone without some concurrents of the bodily parts for then Adams sinning soul should have been damned and his innocent bodie saved but it was to be a sinne compounded of inward aversion and outward transgression So that if Adam had seen Eve eat and had himself lusted after the fruit and yet before the orall manducation had disliked his liking had feared the punishment and not proceeded to eat of it or touch it I do not think his posteritie had been engaged as they are Augustine citeth this out of S. Ambrose and approveth it * Si anima Adami appetentiam corporis refranâsset in ipso ortu extincta esset origo peccati Cont. Julian Pelag. lib. 2. If Adams soul had bridled the bodily appetite in the very beginning the originall of sinne had been quenched Catharinus thinketh there was an expresse covenant between God and Adam that Adam and his posteritie should be blessed or cursed according to the breaking or keeping of that one law What Catharinus saith is probable and may be most true though it be not so written For first if the prohibition had concerned Adams person onely since the precept was given before Eve was created Adam onely should have tasted of death and not Eve Secondly questionlesse that law and covenant included posteritie as is verified in the event When Morte Morieris was threatned unto Adam he was then Rectus in Curia and stood as a publique person representing all his branches If it concerned him as a private person he onely should personally have died and we escaped but our dying in him evinceth that he was reputed if I may so say a generall universall feoffee or person to whose freewill the happie or unhappie future estate of all his descendants was intrusted conditionally to live for ever upon the observance of one law or to die the death for the breach of it Life and death was propounded †Non uni sed universitati Not to one man but to all mankinde 3. And this law is registred and recorded Genes 2.17 Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evill thou shalt not eat for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die Which words I verily beleeve that Adam understood either by his naturall wisedome which was very great or by divine conference or revelation which to him was not unfrequent to involve his posteritie as well as himself For if immediatly upon the creation of woman Adam could foresee and prophesie Genes 2.24 That a man shall leave
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Tremellius and the Preacher ex ratione carnis saith the same that is as I interpret him out of carnall reasoning he might rather have said ratione carnis because the flesh of the abortive was buried and the churls carcase unburied Nor let any man thwart me by saying that in the Septuagint is no such matter but the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Vulgat accordeth Supercecidit ignis and the whole troups both of Greek and Latine Fathers so read it and so expound it I answer ingenuously that ascribing so much as I do to the Septuagint and Vulgat I wondred how there should be so great difference from the uncorrupt originall The Vulgat thought I trusted to the 70. and the 70. to some Hebrew Copy varying from others more perfect The 70 rendred Gen. 4.8 not according to the Hebrew which is certainly defective saith Vatablus and somewhat is to be understood for indeed there is an extraordinary pause but according to the Samaritan Pentateuch Cain said unto his brother Let us go into the field as Mr. Selden evinceth by the authority of Hierom and Cyrill of old and by a Samaritan Copy now in the hands of Bishop Usher which the Hierusalem Targum amplifieth relating That Cain told Abel there was no future world nor reward for goodnesse nor punishment for sinne all which Abel contradicted and thereupon Cain slew him So might the 70. or the Vulgat or both translate the passage of the Psalmist not accordant to those Copies which are now in price but answerable to some other Hebrew one At length I rested assured that the Copies which they used differed onely in one letter and in the points For instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with five points as it is most commonly read and with six points saith Kimchi which signifieth abortivus and is in the Psalmist their Copies had it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth cecidit there being the same Radicals and no letter changed Secondly for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mulieris which is in David they read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth fire the omission onely of one letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath caused abortivus mulieris to be translated cecidit ignis For as for the variety of punctations that is of small moment by reason of their often interchangings and easie mistakings and points were not used in the dayes of the Septuagint as some say scarce when the Vulgat first was as others say not from the beginning say I if the names of the points and accents be Syriacall Drusius in his Henoch chap. 1. saith Hieronymus ante Masoritarum tempora à quibus apices habemus ut communis opinio est qui nunc in vsu vixit Mercer in the great Dictionary of Pagnine on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relates that when the Chaldee translates Deuter. 26.5 Laban Syrus quaerebat perdere patrem meum and when the Vulgat rendred it Syrus persequebatur patrem meum whereas indeed it ought to be read as it is in our last Translation A Syrian ready to perish was my father non est dubium saith he quin sine punctis quibus tunc carebant Biblia legerint in Pihel non in Kal. Yea Sine dubio novas literas habemus if we may beleeve Bellarmine De Verbo Dei 1.1 And indeed the three fundamenta laid by Balthasar Bambach That the points were coëtaneall to the Hebrew letters are founded on the sands First saith he Sine vocalibus consonantes proferri non possunt omnis lingua quae illis destituta est manca imperfecta mutila efficitur What of all this how followeth this Because the consonants cannot be pronounced without vowells therefore the vowells were underwritten Let him know the Hebrew Tongue was most perfect when it was least written and till Moses his time there were not so much as consonants written howsoever they fable of a pillar written upon long before for God invented the letters first when he made his Two Tables and writ the Law in them See this proved by our learned Whitaker saying * Deus ipse scribendi exemplum modúmque ost endit quando Legem suis digitis conscriptam Mosi tradidit Sic Chrysost Theophylact in 1 Matth. Papistae in confess Petrocoviensi cap. 15 Screckins Jesuita Thes 13 De Verbo Dei Whitak De Script Controvers 1. quaest cap 2. God himself hath shewed an example and manner of writing when he delivered to Moses the Law written with his own fingers So Chrysostom and Theophylact write on the first of Matthew and the Papists in their Confession c. But though Eusebius Praeparat Evangel lib. 18. saith Moses first taught the use of letters to the Jews yet Saint Augustine De Civitate 15.23 saith Enoch wrote * Nonuulla divina some divine things since Saint Jude testifieth so much But that ever honoured Father considered not that Jude said onely Enoch prophesied which he might do by saying onely and not writing as Adam Genes 2.24 yea God himself prophesied of Christ in Paradise Genes 3.15 which Moses first wrote for ought that we know and S. Judes words are Enoch prophesied saying in which writing is rather excluded then included Drusius in his Enoch cap. 27 saith There was a book called LIBER BELLORUM DOMINI out of which Moses bringeth a testimony Cornelius à Lapide saith It was written before the Pentateuch Aben Ezra saith The book was in the dayes of Abraham In the book of Job who lived before Moses is mention of writing and of books as of things common and of graving in stone with a pen of iron Cusanus prinketh higher in his Compend chap. 3. pag. 241. he saith Our first parents had the art of writing since by it man hath many helps for things past and absent are by it made present By the same reason he may say Adam knew the art of Printing of Brachygraphy of Characters Let us passe-by the unauthorized vast fancy of Cusanus and answer the objection drawn from Jobs book which if it were written by his three friends or their Scribes at their dictate as saith Bolducus the Carthusian since they could make Job no better satisfaction then to historifie his innocency and their own petulancy or if by Elihu the Buzite as is very probable for he was young when they were old Job 32.6 and might well live till after the writing of the Pentateuch and publishing of books or by Job himself for Job himself might have conferred in Midian with Moses saith Bolducus who also died but thirteen yeares before Moses died saith that Carthusian yea Job lived after Moses if he lived 248 yeares as the Septuagint and Olympiodorus do account And certainly after all Jobs misery he lived in prosperity 20 yeares longer then the whole yeares of Moses compare Job 42.16 with Deuter. 33.7 and so Job might know the writing of the Law in Tables of stone
unbridled Circumcellions to choose their own wayes which is the guise of Separatists and to be their own judges and judges of whatsoever their Pastours preach which is the practice of ill taught zelots in our Church and by necessary consequence judges of things of Faith of Controversies and of Scripture it self And so the supreamest Tribunall for interpretation of matters religious to be the conscience of an unlearned brain But thou O Man of God flee these extreams and O blessed God and man O Saviour of mankinde Jesu Christ keep us in the mean and bring us by holinesse to the truth and by thy truth unto thy glory So be it Lord Jesu so be it The word of God is a sea saith p Epist 44. ad Constanâ—num S. Ambrose having in it deep senses and height of propheticall riddles But in these dayes of Libertinisme the simplest presume they can sound these deeps and finde out the riddle though they plow not with Samsons heifer Hence are these innumerable springs of errours which Luther even in his own time seeing to overflow Germany in his first book against Zwinglius and Oecolampadius saith If the world continue it will be again necessary by reason of the divers interpretations of Scripture that now are if we will keep the unity of the faith that we receive the decrees of Councels and flee to them The place of Augustine is common and in every mans mouth q Ego Evangelio non crederem nisi me Ecclesiae Catholicae authoritas commoveret I would not beleeve the Gospel unlesse the authority of the Catholick Church moved â—â—e How should we know that such and such things are Sâ—â—â—â—ure and not such or such but by the Church as by the fâ—â—â—â—â—â—roductary means or why should not the unlearned people as well trust their Pastours for the exposition of Scripture as they have done and do and must do for the translation For be ye not deceived O over-inspired brethren neither Moses nor the Prophets nor Christ nor the Evangelists or Apostles ever wrote or penned your English Scripture They wrote in Hebrew Chaldee Syriack and Greek but they were your Pastours who translated the word of God into our mother tongue and some translations are more imperfect then other and no one absolutely perfect And will you silly ignaroes who cannot know whether the words be true or false well or ill translated be every one of you your judges of the meaning thereof which in deep points is harder then translating and usurp the power of interpretation I may take up the complaint of Michael Piccart in his epigram before Balthasar Bambach his tractates Et tractare quidem quisnam est qui sacra veretur Imberbes pueri jam quoque sacra crepant But I am loath to adde as he doth O pecus Arcadicum linguas priùs imbibe sanctas Et sacra ex ipso fonte deinde pete Yea I have an intent to have a bout with the learned Daniel Heinsius for maintaining in the preface to his Aristarchus Sacer upon Nonnus That no man can rightly interpret the Scriptures but he that is skilled in Eastern languages Hebrew Chaldee Syriack and Greek both sacred and profane Hellenistical and the pure which is all one in effect with the Jewish-Greek and the Heathen-Greek Some of his words pag. 53. are these r Multum resert scire Hebraea Hellenistes Graecè expresserit an Syra Hebraeum item textum an interpretationes respiciat Graecorum Quae nisi omnia distinguat operam necesse est interpres ludat Nos autem ut exiguae scientiae it à nullius ut loquuntur vulgò conscientiae existimamus qui transferre Sacra audet nec de istis cogitavit It is very materiall to know whether it be Hebrew or Syriack which the Hellenist expresseth in Greek also whether he hath respect to the Hebrew Text or to the Greek translations of it All which unlesse the expositour distinctly considereth he must needs lose his labour And we think him to be a man as of little skill so of no conscience that dares translate the Scriptures without any consideration of these things Both these were eminent professours and men singular among thousands the first in High-Germany the other in the Netherlands from whence some of them brag and some of us rejoyce that we have received the reformation of religion I will onely humbly propound to your religious considerations these things First that the difficulties of the Hebrew Chaldee and Aramean languages in the Old Testament and of the Greek in the New especially where it reflecteth up to the Syriack are above common capacities even of the learned I might adde that words of divers other languages are part of the sacred Text. The Egyptian Abrech Genes 41.43 the Arabick Lehhem Job 6.7 and Totaphoth Exod. 13.16 a compound of Egyptian and African languages and the like Yea one verse and one onely was written by Jeremy in the Chaldee language viz. Jeremy 10.11 which every captive Jew was commanded to cast in the teeth of the Babylonians Moreover Daniel 5.25 Mene Mene Tekel Vpharsin was written in the Chaldee with the Samaritan letters so that the Chaldeans themselves could not reade their own language I would tell you of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 finall being placed in the middle of a word of the Text and of divers other difficulties which in part I passe over and in part thus contract in the observations following Secondly that Hebrew words without points may have foure or five significations according to the diversity of vowels affixed to them and have no certain meaning but as it is guided by antecedents and consequents And yet you shall have an ignorant mechanick or talkative woman as confident of the Genevean Translation and notes as if God himself did speak or write the same words as he did once the law on Horeb. Thirdly that in the Hebrew many words are written with fewer letters then they are pronounced Fourthly that many are written with more letters then they are pronounced Fifthly that divers words are written in the sacred Text which are not pronounced at all but others are read in their stead Å¿ Sunt octo voces quae sâ—riptae sunt in Textu sed non leguntur quas adducit Masora Ruth 3.12 There are eight words written in the Text but not read which the Masora alledgeth Ruth 3.12 Sixthly that the Jews have most severely and strictly forbidden that any Rabbin should teach Christians the true sense of the Talmuds which as they boast no labour and endeavour can attain unto without such a guide Elias Levita in Masâ—oreth-Hammassoreth complaineth that the Jews were wonderfully offended with him because he instructed Christians in the Hebrew And though some tax him for singing placentia to sooth flatter his patron Aegidius and call him a turn-coat because he came forth of the Jewish synagogue to pray with us in our temples yet that odious name ought to have been spared
in a long narration especially if it be sudden he hath mingled and confounded some things a In quibusdam etiam memoriâ lapsus fuerit And forgot himself in some things to wit in such things as belonged little or nothing to the purpose for he was busily musing and intent upon the main matter But saith he S. Luke writing the historie changed not one jot but writ as Steven spoke Now we need not defend Steven from all errour and fault saith he but we must quit the Evangelist For onely the Prophets Apostles and Evangelists did never labi memoriâ or erre in any matter great or small other men did His proofs are these Jephthah in Judges 11.26 pretendeth 300 yeares possession when they were not so many and the divine Pen-man or Historiographer writeth as Jephthah pretended and established not the truth of the thing it self I answer that Salianus in his Annales Anno Mundi 2849 maketh one account wherein the time of the Israelites coming out of Egypt to the instant of Jephthahs arguing is 377 yeares and from the death of Sihon king of the Amorites 337 yeares But the truth is if we will hit the exact number both Salianus and Tremellius and many others say That from the coming out of Egypt and from the giving of the Law unto this present controversie of Jephthah with the King of the Amorites there were 305 or 306 yeares expired And Tremellius well observeth that Jephthah began his narration from their coming forth of Egypt vers 16. Therefore thence beginneth the number and the reckoning Now the shortning of an account is an usuall Ellipsis both in Scripture and in other Authours The 70 Interpreters are cited for 72. Among the Romanes the Centum-viri consisted of one hundred and five men Judges 20.46 all which fell of Benjamin that day were 25000. yet there fell that day 100 more vers 35. So 2. Sam. 5.5 the account is shortened by six moneths lesse then was set down in the precedent verse it being b Synecdoche frequent ad rotunditatem numeri A frequent Synecdoche to make a round and smooth reckoning saith Tremellius If any shall yet contend that Jephthah saith expresly v. 26. Israel dwelt in Heshbon and her towns and in Aroer and her towns and in all the cities that be along by the coasts of Arnon 300 yeares Peter Martyr on the place answereth That the Scripture-account often followeth the greater number Now because the yeares from Sihons death were nearer 300. then 200. Jephthah reckoneth not the refract but the whole number and accounteth them 300 yeares as inclining to the greater number For Sihon was overcome and slain the last yeare of Moses his life being to the present debate 266 yeares saith Abulensis 267 saith Lyranus 270 yeares saith Peter Martyr If Peter Martyrs answer be sleighted I adde that the perfection of Scriptures stands not so strictly on exactnesse of number but that it puts a certain number for an uncertain Instances are obvious So while we plead too much for number we shall as S. Augustine saith forget or neglect both weight and measure Lastly grant that Jephthah either mistook or mispleaded the yeares in a braving fashion and say that the holy Ghost hath penned not what was truth in it self but what Jephthah alledged erroneously or covetously for his prescription for Jephthah had more then one errour yet it followeth not that S. Steven was deceived for he was full of the holy Ghost when he spake this Act. 7.55 and before he spake this he was full of faith and of the holy Ghost Act. 6.5 Full of faith and power vers 8. and they that disputed with Steven were not able to resist the wisdome and the Spirit by which he spake v. 10. Therefore he spake wisely truely and by the Spirit as well as S. Luke wrote by the Spirit and neither of them could in this passage erre though Jephthah be held a man of imperfections 2. Secondly saith Canus the Evangelist hath it Matth. 2.6 That IT IS WRITTEN BY THE PROPHET AND THOU BETHLEHEM IN THE LAND OF JUDAH ART NOT THE LEAST AMONG THE PRINCES OF JUDAH when it is not so written by the prophet who saith Micah 5.2 BUT THOU BETHLEHEM EUPHRATA THOUGH THOU BE LITTLE AMONG THE THOUSANDS OF JUDAH the sense being very different almost contrary In which place S. Matthew reports the words not as they are in Micah but as the chief Priests and Scribes recited them to Herod c Quod testimonium nec Hebraico textui nec 70 Interpretibus convenire me quoque tacente perspicuum est Which testimonie saith Hierome on Micah 5.2 agreeth neither with the Hebrew nor the Seventie as is plain though I say nothing Then followeth his opinion d Arbitror Matthaeum volentem arguere Scribarum Sacerdotum erga divinae Scripturae lectionem negligentiam sic etiam posuisse ut ab iis dictum est I think that S. Matthew being willing to reprove the negligence of the Scribes and Priests toward the reading of holy Scriptures related the words as they were cited by them So that though the Scribes and Pharisees were blinde and seeing the Prophet through a vail took one thing for an other and though the Evangelist purposely reciteth their mistaking that we might discern the fault of these ill guides and ignorant teachers yet it no way followeth that S. Steven did erre or was mistaken or that S. Luke misreported the words of S. Steven But enough of this to testifie my dislike of the second opinion and of such who excusing the Greek Text from corruption wherein I wonderfully applaud them do impute an errour and slip unto the holy powerfull gracefull truth-speaking and dying Protomartyr S. Steven which I cannot endure in them And certes both these former rejected opinions are built on a false ground and idlely do presuppose that there is no reall historicall truth in the words as they are in the Greek and in the Latine Text. But truth there is and though truth lie deep hid as in a well said he of old yet by Gods help we shall winde her up and draw her above ground that every eye may see her though we have many turnings 3. Which that I may the better accomplish I must straggle awhile after two most learned men Cardinall Cusanus and Daniel Heinsius especially Heinsius whom when I have overtaken and wrung and wonne from him some holds which are offensive to the majestie of sacred Scripture then shall I return and descend to the most difficult place of Acts 7.16 c. The learned worthie Heinsius whom I name not without honour though I dissent from him in his Exercitations upon Nonnus and in the Prolegomena beats out certain paths which never any on the earth trode upon before him pag. 27. making the Hellenisticall language to be the best interpreter of the Hebrew and Chaldee and the Hebrew and Chaldee interchangeably the best interpreters of it Before all his
Solomon himself by the meer strength of Nature could from thence draw saving knowledge without saving grace The question is not Whether the Scripture or Church shall be Judge but Whether the Clergie or Laitie shall be Interpreters of this dead word and unprofitable without further illumination We bid not the people to pluck out their eies that they may be led by us as the Jesuites and Popish Priests do neither do we like the other extream of the people presuming that they can give better answer then the Ephod the Urim and the Thummim and over-see the Seers who ought by the expresse commandment of God himself to have the oversight of them Heb. 13.7 But they are to rest contented with the generall Commission given to the Ministerie He that heareth you heareth me especially in things as most things are above their capacitie But the people will expound Scriptures contradict their Pastours censure their labours judge their Judges even in matters of such speculation as they may most safely be ignorant of and under pretence of desire to have their consciences well informed will not be informed at all in any thing against their humours and fancie but monopolize the Spirit to themselves and yeeld no more in this point to the ordinance of God who hath committed to us the word of reconciliation then to the very devils whom they are bound to beleeve and follow in all things wherein their consciences are well informed My former task recalleth me Bezaleel and Aholiab both did and could work all manner of work for the service of the Sanctuarie according to all that the Lord had commanded Exod. 36.1 Had God more care of his Sanctuarie then of the Church of Christ Or could God command an untruth when he guided the Apostles and Evangelists as powerfully if not more then ever he did the workmen of his Sanctuarie Or had the Pen-men lesse grace or goodnesse then the workmen Certainly they had if they swarved in writing from what was commanded by God Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the Tabernacle See saith God that thou makest all things according to the pattern shewed thee in the mount Hebr. 8.5 which the Apostle borrowed from Exod. 25.8 c. where God giveth this charge Let them make me a Sanctuarie according to all that I shew thee after the pattern of the Tabernacle and the pattern of all the instruments thereof even so shall ye make it So and no otherwise not so much as a little nail or peg shall make any difference And shall we think that the Evangelists and Apostles might swarve in writing from what was delivered unto them That Christ himself could and did reade is proved Luk. 4.16 That he could and did write is plain John 8.6 c. That he ever wrote any part of his doctrine of the Law of Grace of our Scripture is not evident for though Baronius ad annum Christi 31. saith That many of the Ancients beleeved that our blesved Saviour wrote an epistle unto Abagarus or Abgarus Prince of Edessa yet since Salianus wholly balketh this storie which he would not have done if there had been either truth or likelihood in the matter because of the miracles mentioned by Baronius wrought by the image of our Saviours face which himself sent to the same Prince let us esteem it as a thing unworthy of belief That whatsoever Christ did he did both well and conveniently and whatsoever he omitted he also omitted well and conveniently I take for most certain and yet if he had done something which he omitted I dare say he had also done well and conveniently and I should be afraid to say That it was not convenient for Christ to write any part of Scripture therefore because personally he wrote none It was convenient for others and not for Christ himself to write his own doctrine saith Aquin. 3. part quaest 42. art 4. for the excellencie both of the Teacher and of the doctrine which he confirmeth thus The most excellent way was to imprint his doctrine in their hearts So did Christ teach As HAVING POWER Matth. 7.29 and Pythagoras and Socrates the excellentest teachers among the Gentiles would write nothing For the Scripture is ordained to imprint doctrine in the hearts as to an end Moreover if Christ had written his own doctrine q Nihil altiùs de ejus doctrina bomines aestimarent quà m quod Scriptura contineret men would never have had an higher esteem of his doctrine then of that which might arise from things contained in Scripture Those are the words of Aquin. Much of this is but meer froth and the shadow of reason unfitting the pen of so Angelicall a Doctour who remembred not that God himself wrote the Law and that God did write the Law in some mens hearts as well as in stone Hebr. 8.10 and so might Christ in both if he had pleased As for Pythagoras and Socrates if they wrote nothing yet their words made no deeper impression upon the hearts of their auditours then the writings of many other men have done upon the hearts of their readers Moreover some have thought that Pythagoras and Socrates were not the excellentest teachers among the Gentiles Aristotle and Plato are esteemed their equals and some have preferred Hermes Trismegistus and Homer before both of them Indeed the Scripture was ordained to imprint doctrine in the heart was it therefore inconvenient that Christ himself should write His speech was ordained to imprint his doctrine in their hearts as to an end yet was not his speech inconvenient no more inconvenient had been his writing yea rather more convenient if so it had pleased him because many of his words reached but to a few but his writings might have reached to many millions of places and persons more and might have been everlasting To conclude If the Jews looked through the vails types and shadows of Moses Law to the more spirituall things of Christ then certainly if Christ had writ his doctrine we would not esteem of him according to the letter onely of that doctrine but we would think as we ought that either he wrote not all or wrote onely such things as were fit for us to know or as we could understand reserving more secret deep and divine things to himself For reasons best known to himself he baptized not any no not his own Apostles For reasons best known to himself he wrote not immediately any part of Scripture To say it was not convenient because Christ did it not inferreth that Christ was bound to do all things convenient yea and which man judgeth convenient and what he did not do was not convenient God might have bettered and may yet better some of his own works though they be very good Shall we conclude that because he did not therefore it was not fit he should have done so God did not say at the end of the second dayes work particularly and expressely It was
thoughts were in my heart The like I say of all and every of them Psal 39.2 I was dumbe with silence I held my peace even from good and my sorrow was stirred and vers 3. My heart was hot within me while I was musing the fire burned then spake I with my tongue and vers 4. Lord make me to know mine end From whence appeareth that David was premeditating as other people do and at the last as other mens his thoughts brake forth The similitude is taken from sorrow and grief which being for a while suppressed groweth greater or from fire which being smothered or half quenched with water upon recovery of its strength groweth farre more violent The answer is that David relateth what course he took when he could not exonerate and alleviate his soul by conference with men whose wayes he liked not He poured out his complaints and prayers unto God So Musculus And this no doubt did the Spirit of God stirre him up to do It pleased the holy Ghost to make those thoughts of David which before were pure and divine yet private now to be divine publick and canonicall Again That they might conceive and understand by the Spirit a great deal more then the holy Ghost would have to be written I denie not and on such things they might muse Yet I conjecture that what they wrote in holy Scripture they studied not before-hand the Spirit hath no need of mans studie or learning and I do remove from every part of it all humane premeditation and maintain that the Spirit did frame both matter and words as by Gods grace shall anon appeare pro re nata as occasion offered it self One chief reason may be this That nature which is the right hand of God hath greatest care of greatest matters and lesse of least and equall care of things equall If the Apostolicall and Evangelicall writings are not consideratis considerandis weighing one thing with an other of more esteem then their words were yet let them go as equivalent Then Christ will have as much care of their writings as of their speaking But their speeches were without premeditation and were commanded so to be Therefore all their writings Matth. 10.19 Take no thought how or what ye shall speak you see both the matter and manner is not to be from them For it is not ye that speak but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you vers 20. Not they there is the negative but the Spirit there is the positive Likewise Mark 13.11 Take no thought before-hand neither do ye premeditate An absolute inhibition and it had been a great sinne to transgresse it and a distrust of the holy Ghost The like I say concerning all their writings They might have indeed in their meditation before-hand divers of those things which afterwards they wrote but when they thought on them they knew not they should write them and when they did write they wrote them not as copies or extracts of former conceits out of the wombe of their own memories but as freshly and newly inspired apprehended indited and dictated unto them There is one kinde of knowledge proceeding from principles known by the naturall light of the intellect as Arithmetick Geometrie c. Others proceed out of principles known by light of an higher knowledge as Perspective from the principles evinced by Geometrie and Musick from principles known by Arithmetick So is the Scripture beleeved by an higher light even by the revelation of God saith Aquin. part 1. quaest 1. art 2. and not beleeved onely but the matter and manner and words proceeded from a diviner understanding then humane conceit could reach unto and were written by an higher and better hand then the hand of man All was the holy Spirits doing even the leading of their hands whilest they wrote that they could not erre Cornelius Cornelii à Lapide on 2. Tim. 3.16 thus The Spirit did not dictate all Scripture after one manner The Law and the Prophesies are revealed and dictated to a word the Histories and Morall exercitations which before by sight hearing reading or meditation the holy Writers had learned there was no necessitie to be inspired or dictated from the Spirit since they knew them alreadie So John 19.35 He that saw it bare record and Luk. 1.3 It seemed good to me also having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first to write unto thee in order Then doth he mince modifie and qualifie his former saying in this manner But the holy Spirit may be said to have dictated even the latter also First because q Astitit scribentibus nè vel in puncto à veritate aberrarent he was present whilest they wrote that they could not go one jot from the truth Secondly because it stirred them up and suggested that they should write this rather then that r Conceptum ergò memoriam corum quae sciebant non iis ingessit Spiritus Sanctus Therefore the conceptions and remembrance of such things as they knew the Spirit did not inspire into them Thirdly saith he The Spirit did order direct and methodize all their conceits that they might put this in the first that in the second another in the third place In which words of his three things deserve censure even the strict censure of the Inquisition First That the Spirit did not dictate all Scripture after one manner I answer Then all is not of a like dignitie that which is after the divinest manner is to be held best that wherein there is a medly of divine and humane knowledge and wisdome is of an inferiour sort But this may not be granted for All Scripture is of divine inspiration Excellently saith Doctour Estius on 2. Tim. 3.16 Rightly and most truely from hence do we conclude that all the sacred Canonicall Scripture was written by the dictate of the holy Spirit not in that manner say I that he left the Penmen to their own memories and knowledge which as humane were weak and imperfect but f Ità nimirum ut non solùm sententiae sed verba singula verborum ordo ac tota dispositio sit à Deo tanquam per semetipsum loquente aut scribente so that not onely the sentences but every word and the order placing and the whole disposing of the words was from God as speaking or writing by himself But God I dare say hath no need of their memories nor his writing or speech of their hearing reading sight or premeditation Secondly he is to be taxed for saying there was no necessitie that things Morall and Historicall should be inspired I say there was a necessitie that histories and moralities should be inspired if they are to be parts of the sacred Writ otherwise this knowledge and writing are onely parcels of humane learning Though S. John bare record to what he saw his bearing record without the Spirit had been but an ordinary testimonie Not his saying but
the inspiration makes the record divine and his testimonie from the Spirit That he saw is of more force then his testimonie could be to the Spirit What he saw It seemeth good unto me saith S. Luke but it was made to seem good unto him by the Spirit yea first it seemed good unto the holy Ghost as the Apostles in the like case said Act. 15.28 It seemed good unto the holy Ghost and to us The words do not notifie the pleasing of his own fancie without the dictate of the holy Ghost say I. And the understanding that he had of things from the first was not by sight for he was not then called nor by humane relation for that may be mistaken increased or decreased or subject to errour But the knowledge issued out from the light divine and therefore is there tearmed perfect understanding like Gods gifts James 1.17 All other guides are somewhat imperfect Thirdly the Jesuite is justly blameable for saying The Spirit need not tell them what they knew before I say they might have forgotten or mistaken some things as they were men and by the Spirit they might know more certainly what they knew before more doubtingly and by the same Spirit they might know some circumstances more then before they knew what they knew humanely they now know divinely I will not discusse the question at large Whether the Law written by the hand and finger of God immediately were to be regarded above other things divinely inspired into holy men and written by them This I will say That if I were ascertained that I saw the very tables the latter tables of stone which God himself wrote or if I had seen any thing which Christ himself had written for I will not say he wrote nothing and I know he could write I should prefer them somewhat above whatsoever should be transcribed or written by any other whosoever and this is my reason Though Moses his writings were inspired and dictated from God yet he placed them in the side of the Ark Deut. 31.26 a place not altogether so noble see Cajetan on Heb. 9. but the tables and onely the tables written by Gods own finger were laid up in the Ark it self as appeareth 1. Kings 8.9 and 2. Chron. 5.10 howsoever afterward it seemeth there was a change Hebr. 9.4 At length I am come to the five Conclusions which beat directly upon the learned Heinsius whereof the first is this There was no difference between the Penmen of the divine Writ of the Old and New Testament in the point of conceiving and writing in different languages Which in this manner I do explain If I demand of the worthy Heinsius in what tongue the Old Testament was conceived his answer is peremptorie Prolegom pag. 26. f Hebraeâ ac Chaldaeâ conceptum est linguâ It was conceived in the Hebrew and Chaldee language It had been clearer if he had used some disjunctive rather then a copulative Preposition For none will imagine that the skilfull Heinsius did ever mean that all of the Old Testament was conceived both in Hebrew and in Chaldee to which his words seem to incline but either in Hebrew or in Chaldee was it conceived and they who wrote in Hebrew conceived in Hebrew and they who wrote in Chaldee conceived in Chaldee I do not think but he would thus have expressed himself and explained his own meaning if he had been put unto it Whereupon I discourse in this manner Jeremie wrote somewhat in Chaldee and Daniel wrote some chapters If they being Hebrews or Jews by generation and birth and perfect in their mother-tongue readie Scribes in the law of Moses as well as Ezra Ezra 7.6 did yet conceive in the Chaldee that Chaldee which they wrote which the ingenuous Heinsius will not denie for what was conceived in Chaldee if that which was written in Chaldee was not so conceived why did not the Writers of the New Testament though they were born and bred in the use of the Syriack conceive in Greek what they wrote in Greek What reason have we to discriminate them so that the Penmen of the Old shall conceive and write in one and the same language the Chaldee in Chaldee and Hebrew in Hebrew and not the Penmen of the New Testament but they forsooth must conceive in Syriack and write or dictate in Greek especially since all of them conceived and wrote by the inspiration and dictate of one and the same Spirit Either let him make the forenamed passages of the Chaldee language in the Old Testament to be conceived in Hebrew though writ in Chaldee and so none at all to be conceived in Chaldee or let him equall the Penmen of the New Law to those of the Old in this point That they wrote in the self-same tongue in which they conceived Besides it will be hard to prove that Jeremie ever knew any part of the Chaldean language till that very verse was inspired into him and so with it both the knowledge and the words and the power both of pronuntiation and of writing So that Jeremie could not possibly conceive and utter also the Chaldee in the Hebrew but conceived that verse in Chaldee and in Chaldee pronounced or wrote it A second errour in the learned Heinsius Pag. 49. Prolegom is this t Quare ad allusiones non quae extant sed quas animo conceperat Joannes eundum est Wherefore we must rest not on the allusions which now are but which S. John conceived in his minde Against which I set down the second Conclusion viz. We must have recourse to the allusions which are S. John was Sol Evangelii The light the sunshine the very Sunne of the Gospel as Dionysius termed him This Sunne is in eclipse and we have not cannot have his true and perfect light if we must not look to his rayes and shine which are his words but to his thoughts that is the light which is in himself to his internall and substantiall light and not to the externall The certainest rule is most to be trusted unto therefore let us not go from the words and extant allusions which we know to the thoughts of S. John which we know not For Who knoweth the thoughts of a man save the spirit of man which is in him 1. Cor. 2.11 And if the finite thought of every man be unknown can the thoughts of him who is inspired by the infinite Spirit be so soon and so easily known Moreover the same words written in Greek may be conceived two or three wayes in the Syriack for variations are in that language and different expressions of the same things And which of those shall we think was the conceit of S. John And when we have lighted on divers and all of them good expressions of Syriack yet the Spirit might guide S. John to an other which we never thought upon And so we are for ever uncertain what allusion S. John conceived in his thoughts For he
the same also I answer that he might speak or write some things like an other man some things unexpressed in their Law but now he speaketh or writeth for they are both one sense in this notion as an Apostle who therefore was equally to be regarded as a Penman of the Law of Grace with Moses a Penman of the Law Leviticall It may yet be objected what S. John saith 2. Epist vers 12. Having many things to write unto you I would not write with paper and ink and 3. Epist John ver 13. I had many things to write but I will not with ink and pen write unto thee From whence a power seemeth to be wholly left in him both whether he would write or no and what he would write I answer to both places If he had said he had writ any thing without or beyond the Spirit or what he was bid not to write he had spoken home to the purpose but these words do not imply that he had either power or will to write any thing of his own head or by the wisdome or learning of man but they fully evidence that the holy Ghost had suggested many things unto him which the same blessed Spirit would not have him to write as being fitter perhaps to be delivered face to face and not concerning posteritie If I knew any more opposite arguments I would endeavour their answer The positive proofs I referre to the last point of all it being the very main hinge of the controversie Onely consider this one thing The Scripture hath a priviledge above all other writings Aquinas on 2. Timoth. 3.15 giveth this reason u Quia aliae traditae sunt per rationem bumanam sacra autem Scriptura est divina Because other writings savour of humane reason but the Scripture is divine Where he excludeth the prudence of man from composing any Scripture If any earthly wisdome wrote any part of it it is no more to be accounted our Scripture Let this suffice for the third conclusion concerning the matter of Scripture wherein the holy Penmen had no libertie left them to put in their own conceits or in writing to adde or blot out what they had done whereby all humane literature and wisdome is removed from sharing part in the holy Writ The fourth conclusion followeth concerning the manner of writing viz. They had no libertie to clothe their inward apprehensions with words of their own Either all the Pen-men had the libertie or none The disjunction stands upon a Da tertium Give me a reason why some should and not others Who were these some and why those But all had not libertie for the very words were dictated unto some of them Ergò c. Either every Penman did apparrell his understanding with words of his own throughout all and every of his own writings or it was practised in some places onely If so then again I enquire what places they were and why those had an especiall priviledge above others S. John indeed was bid to write the things which he had seen and the things which are and the things which shall be hereafter Revel 1.19 I answer This generall command evinceth not that the holy Ghost did not administer as well the words as the matter If it be objected that the Evangelicall Prophet Isaiah and the Psalmograph and some others are most eloquent in the Old and in the New Testament the beloved disciple S. John is compared to an Eagle for his loftie flight and S. Paul may seem to have brought some of the third heaven down with him so heavenly is he but Amos and some others writ more plainly in an homely style I answer If all this were true yet it proveth not that any of them were left to expresse as they would their own dreams visions or illuminations neither did they frame and fit their styles to the Spirit or their words to the matter nor indeed could they For what proportion is there between finite and infinite and how can the shallow capacitie of man comprehend the depth of God God forbad the linsie-woolsie and to the divine truths would he suffer them to adapt humane expressions How often in the Old Testament is both the matter put into their hearts and the manner with the words into their mouthes And is the Law of Grace of lesse worth then the Law of Moses God forbid But whosoever readeth the Prophet Amos and the rest that are undervalued shall finde more in Amos then Amos more in him then in one among the herd-men of Tekoa Amos 1.1 and shall heare the piercing language of the Spirit in others sometimes perhaps attempering it self to the partie writing and making both words and matter easie but at other times it rapteth him above himself and maketh him as it were to prink it in loftie and almost undiscernable towring by infusing things phrasing sentences and dictating words above what was agreeable to the meannesse of his former calling That the holy Ghost can and hath suggested the very words very often I think none will denie That ever he permitted them a libertie of many sentences of many phrases of many variations of words to choose what they liked and to refuse the rest I think few ancient Divines ever said before but to that effect saith Heinsius Els what can his meaning be when he saith S. John saw the Chaldee Paraphrase and Hellenists and had often reference to them and that divers things were taken from the Targummim x Ad Targumistas semper respicit Evangelista The Evangelist alwayes hath an eye to the Targumists saith he pag. 550. If the noble Heinsius had said in any one place which he did not so farre as my remembrance now beareth that the holy Spirit had guided S. John to those Authours and authorities of the Targumists Hellenists and Chaldee Paraphrast I should have subscribed and sat down at his feet But when he so often appealeth from the Greek to the Syriack and saith S. John was so conversant with the forenamed Authours he derogateth in mine opinion from the majestie of the holy Writ whilest he would seem to have ought of it taken from humane reading or wisdome though of an Apostle unlesse it were added That the holy Spirit guided the Apostle unto it and did dictate it unto him not as it was known before to the Apostle but as the holy Ghost thought fit to make use of it and to sanctifie that part of humane literature to dictate I say the words and syllables yea every letter and iota and in the writing to guide their hands aright as a good master of writing over-spreadeth and over-ruleth the hand of his scholar and writeth what copie he pleaseth without reference or regard to the scholars former knowledge but rather to his future instruction This is that which against Heinsius may be averred That though many things which are in S. John and other holy Penmen were before in the Targum Talmud
Hellenists Chaldee Paraphrase or any heathen Authours yet it doth not necessarily evince that the holy Actuaries or Notaries did oversee reade heare or transcribe those things out of their knowledge from the said Authours but both the names of those Authours and the things themselves were presented to them by that blessed Spirit which knew all things and this among the rest That these words phrases and sentences were fit to be inserted into the holy Writ which now are in it All Scripture is of divine inspiration But the very words are part of Scripture Therefore even they were inspired Revel 19.9 The Angel said Write Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage-supper of the Lambe Did not the Angel speak the words Did not he give the Apostle both matter and words When the Apostle was commanded Revel 14.13 by a voice from heaven to write Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord c. was he commanded to write his conceits and thoughts apprehended in Syriack and translate them into Hellenisticall Greek or did the heavenly voice suggest onely an holy inspiration into him and left him to coyn words as Heinsius would have it or rather did not the voice teach the very words which should be written viz. Blessed are the dead c. Now let us passe to the fifth and last Conclusion in which we must dissent from the worthy Heinsius and disarm him of his often-inculcated but not once proved Tenet The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Writers of holy Scripture conceived in one language and writ in an other Upon which ground he hath raised a strange structure but his very ground-work is sandie slipperie and false And this I hope to evince by Scripture Authoritie and Reason All which shall be squared to that Corner-stone which more then once before I hewed upon more roughly and now by Gods grace intend to polish namely That the very words and letters were dictated unto the holy Scribes and therefore they had no power to change or transchange to adde or diminish or to expresse by their own words their internall irradiation but in the language which they conceived they also wrote their heavenly dictates 2. Pet. 1.21 The Prophesie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost Therefore their very speech being according to the motion of the holy Ghost their words were not of their own choice but from above and not onely divine thoughts but sacred words were also given them 1. Cor. 2.13 S. Paul spake in words which the holy Ghost taught Did the holy Ghost inspire thoughts into them in one language and teach them words to speak in an other language Cui bono To what end and purpose and why not all done in the language which they conceived 2. Tim. 3.16 Scriptura per Spiritum scripta est The Scripture was writ by the Spirit saith the Syriack not onely inspired as it is from the Greek but written and as it was inspired written Revel 19.9 The Angel saith concerning very words which he commanded to be wrote These are the true sayings of God Not inspirations onely of God and the words of Men but the sayings of God Exod. 34.27 Write thou these words for after the tenour of these words I have made a covenant God was not tied to the words Moses was to the writing of the very words Jerem. 30.2 Write thee all the words which I have spoken unto thee in a book He gave him no power to put in words of his own Twelve times in the Revelation was S. John commanded to write and knew he not the words Hos 8.12 I have written to Ephraim the great things of my Law Even all what my Prophets have done I challenge as mine own writing Authorities of men The Scriptures were written y Magisterio Spiritus in obedience to the Spirit saith Sasbout on Peter Therefore the Apostles had not the power left unto them of writing their own conceits but were fitted with words by the Spirit z Si Spiritu saucto inspirati ab eo impulsi locuti sunt Prophetae caeteri librorum sacrorum scriptores Consequens est Scripturam totam esse verbum Dei non aliter à nobis accipiendam quà m si Deus immediatè absque humano vel Angelico ministerio eam edidisset ut ità dicam digito suo scripsisset If the Prophets and other writers of holy Scripture spake by the moving and inspiration of the holy Ghost it followeth that all the Scripture is the word of God no otherwise to be esteemed of by us then if God immediately without the ministery of men or Angels had set it forth and as I may say had written it with his own finger saith the learned Estius Even Cornelius Cornelii à Lapide himself on Timothie thus a Prophetae alii scriptores 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocantur calami instrumenta Spiritus sancti quast scribae velociter scribentis inspirantis dictantis sacras literas The Prophets and other holy Penmen of Scripture are styled the pens and instruments of the holy Ghost as of that scribe who speedily writeth inspireth and dictateth the divine writ Where he confesseth the holy Spirit not to inspire onely but to dictate yea to write like a swift scribe the holy Scripture Gregorius Praefat. in Job cap. 2. b Scriptores sacri Eloquii quia repleti Spiritu sancto super se trahuntur quasi extra semetipsos fiunt sic Dei sententias quasi de labiis proferunt The writers of the heavenly word because they are filled with the holy Ghost are elevated above themselves in him and as it were out of themselves and so the sentences of God are uttered as it were by their lips Athanasius Epist ad Lib. saith c Christus vetus novum Testamentum composuit Christ made the Old and New Testament d Quid est illud o◠Domini nisi Scripturae per quas loquitur Dominu◠What is the mouth of the Lord but the Scriptures by which the Lord speaketh saith Rupert on Matth. lib. 4. Philo Judaeus in lib. Quis rerum divinarum haeres thus e Propheta nihil ex se proloquitur sed omnia submonente alio A Prophet prophesieth nothing out of his own brain but all things by the prompting of the holy Ghost as he wittily concludeth Therefore not so much as the words are his own Chrysostom de Lazaro Homil. 4. Though a dead man revive and an Angel come from heaven you must beleeve Scriptures above all for the Master of Angels the Lord of the living and the dead he himself framed them The same Chrysostom de expulsione ipsius sheweth the manner I reade his own handwriting c. They are done by his hand the very writing it self is his and therefore called Chyrographum Dei A writing under Gods own hand by Augustine