leasure-Time The Iewish Sanhedrim may easily have received into their Canon Books that had no Divine Authority To come now to the Doctrines which are in the Holy Scriptures and not there attributed to a partcular Revelation I will begin with examining those which are in the Writings of the Apostles after which I will pass to those of the Old Testament It is commonly believed that the Apostles as well as the Prophets were inspir'd both as to Words and Things Yet with this difference that the Prophets were not always inspir'd but only when God gave them order to speak to the People in his Name Whereas the Apostles were always inspir'd without being ravisht into Extasies as the Prophets were before their prophesying This Opinion is founded upon the Promise that Christ made his Apostles to send them the holy Spirit which he performed on the Day of Pentecost The words of Christ are Iohn XVI 13. When he the Spirit of Truth shall come he will guide you into all Truth He says also elsewhere to his Apostles When they bring you into the Synagogues and unto Magistrates and Powers take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer or what ye shall say for the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say Luk. XII 11. These are two the most formal Passages that can be quoted in this Matter It is requisite that we examine them with some attention to see if they prove that which they are produc'd for viz. That the Apostles were honour'd with a continual presence of the Holy Ghost who dictated to them all that they said in matter of Religion insomuch that all their words ought to be considered as Oracles To begin with the latter I observe first That he does not promise a perpetual Inspiration but only upon certain Occasions viz. when the Apostles should be brought before the Tribunals of Judges So that if there were nothing else in it this Passage would not at all favour the common Opinion But there is more in it for it wholly destroys it If Jesus Christ had resolv'd to give his Apostles the Holy Spirit to inspire them perpetually he would not have told them singly that they should not troble themselves for what they had to say before the Judges because then the Spirit should speak in them But he would have said that they need not fear that at any time they should want words because the holy Spirit should accompany them without ceasing as well before the Powers of the World as when they should speak to the People If a Man had a Design to supply another with Mony for all his Expences Would he say to him Do not trouble your self to get Mony for the Journies you are to take for you shall then be supplied He would rather say to him doubtless that he should not fear to want Mony because he should be suppli'd constantly for all his Occasions A Man promises not for a particular Occasion that which he intends to give alike at all Times And when a Man makes a particular Promise it is a plain sign that he intends to perform it but upon certain Occasions In the second place As I acknowledg that the Apostles may have had Prophetick Inspirations on certain Occasions and that in effect they have had them so I confess that I find my self tempted to believe that by these words The Holy Ghost shall teach you in that hour what ye ought to say Or as St. Matthew has expressed it It is not ye that speak it is the Spirit of your Heavenly Father that speaks in you I am I say tempted to believe that by these words Christ meant only to say this viz. The Spirit of Courage and Holiness which the Gospel produces in your Hearts will teach ye what ye ought to say That is to say That the Apostles had no more to do but to believe in the Gospel to be assur'd that the Disposition of Spirit which that Heavenly Doctrine would give them would never let them want words not even when they were to defend themselves before the Tribunals of the greatest Powers That which inclines me to this Explication of Christ's words is that in comparing this Promise with the Event it seems not to have been performed in any other sense than that which I have now observ'd and that neither ought it to be interpreted so strictly as if on these Occasions a Word might not slip from the Apostles that were not conformable to the Spirit of the Gospel St. Luke tell us Acts XXIII that St. Paul having been brought before the Sanhedrim began to speak after this manner Men and Brethren I have liv'd in all good Conscience before God until this day Here is nothing yet that one might not say without Inspiration as neither is there any thing but what is conformable to the Gospel But what follows is a sign of Passion wherewith neither the Spirit of Prophecy nor the Patient Spirit of the Gospel inspired St. Paul At that words says St. Luke Ananias the High Priest commanded them that stood by to smite him on the Mouth The Apostle provok'd by this Unjustice answers him angrily God shall smite thee thou whited Wall For sittest thou to judg me according to the Law and commandest thou me to be smitten contrary to the Law And they that stood by says St. Luke said to Paul Revilest thou God's High Priest Then said Paul I wist not Brethren that he was the High Priest For it is written Thou shalt not speak Evil of the Ruler of thy People It is plain me-thinks that if the Spirit of Prophecy had inspir'd St. Paul with the beginning of this Discourse it did not so neither with the Answer he made the High Priest nor with the Excuse he made use of afterward when they told him he was the High Priest that he spoke to He gave Sentence against himself by his Answer supposing that he had known him who order'd him to be smitten And as for the Excuse it is plain it is not very good because the Gospel allows not to revile any Man whether he be a Magistrate or a private Man Iesus Christ says St. Peter has suffered for us leaving us an Example that we should follow his steps who when he was reviled reviled not again when he suffered threatned not but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously Neither do I believe that the Spirit of Prophecy inspir'd St. Paul with what he said afterward At least there is no Body but could have said as much without Inspiration Now St. Paul knowing says the Historian that the one part were Sadduces and the other Pharisees cried out in the Council Men and Brethren I am a Pharisee the Son of a Pharisee of the Hope and Resurrection of the Dead I am called in question This expression also of St. Luke Paul knowing makes it evident that his Speech was an Effect of his Prudence rather than
continue uncircumcis'd because St. Peter forbore to live familiarly with them on that account and on the contrary that it was a Duty to observe the Circumcision So that it was by his Conduct only that St. Peter forc'd them to live as Iews And indeed it is true that by efficaciously engaging one to do a thing after what manner soever it be we are said to force one to do it See Gen. xix 3. Luke xxiv 19. I believe really that this is the best Explanation But it proves clearly that the Metaphysical Infallibility which is attributed to the Apostles is not of Apostolick Tradition For in truth to dissemble a true Doctrine when they ought to preach it and to ingage People in an Error by their Conduct is visibly a human Weakness and which becomes not those who are look'd upon as the simple Instruments of the holy Spirit speaking by their Mouths St. Peter's Conduct gave the Gentiles to understand as well as if he had told it them that they must observe the Circumcision and to give them to understand it by forbearing to eat with them was almost the same thing as to tell it them by word of Mouth Nay more it is not unlikely that St. Peter believed that this Dissimulation was lawful as well as St. Barnabas and the other Iews who had followed his Example otherwise it is not credible that so pious Men who were the first Ministers of the Gospel would have done it And so we must confess that they were guilty of some weakness even in Doctrine although they recanted it soon nor was it of great importance There is also a great difference observable in the manner of Christ's speaking He that had received the Spirit without measure and that in which the Apostles express themselves whereas according to the common Opinion it ought to be the same If the same Spirit had render'd them infallible they had right to declare to the World the Doctrine of Salvation with the same Power and to speak as authoritatively as Jesus Christ. But we see the contrary in their Writings Christ spoke as one having Authority You have heard it was said of old c. But I say unto you c. The Apostles on the contrary declare that they say nothing of themselves and refer all to the Prophets and to Jesus Christ Acts xxvi 22. 1 Cor. xi 23. And that which is yet more considerable is that they distinguish manifestly that which they say themselves from that which Christ had said And unto the Married I command yet not I but the Lord c. But to the rest speak I not the Lord c. So St. Paul speaks 1 Cor. vii 10 12. which he would not have done had he been aware that his Auditors had believ'd his words as infallible as the words of Christ. Methinks these are convincing Proofs that the Apostles had not a perpetual Inspiration which might give their words an indisputable Authority I do not deny but they had many immediate Inspirations and divers Heavenly Visions as appears by the Acts by the Revelations and by divers other places of Scripture Nay I am so fully perswaded they had that I think him no good Christian who doubts of it But the Question here is concerning an uniform constant and ordinary Inspiration as it is commonly explained in the Divinity-Schools It may be you will say there are divers Arguments for this sort of Inspiration as strong as those I have brought to shew the contrary The Apostles began their Letter Acts xv after this manner It has seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us By which it appears say some that they were fill'd with the Spirit of Infallibility which dictated to them what they ought to say I desire first that those who say so reconcile this Supposition with the Dispute that was among the Apostles before they came to this Conclusion In the second place It is not likely that if the Holy Ghost had possess'd them in such a manner that they had been only simple Instruments by which He express'd his Will they should not have plac'd themselves in equal Rank with the Him but should have said simply It has appear'd good to the Holy Ghost who speaks by us What Prophet ever said it seem'd good to God and to me In the third place Suppose there be here as the Critics say a Figure by which is express'd one and the same thing by two words and that this manner of speaking amounts to no more but this It has seemed good to us who are full of the Holy Ghost The perpetual Inspiration about which I am now arguing cannot be hence concluded The Apostles and all the Church of Ierusalem were animated by the Spirit of the Gospel without being continually full of the Spirit of Prophecy If it were otherwise we should be forced to say that the whole Church of Ierusalem not only the Apostles but also the Elders of the Church and all those who were assembled were perpetually accompanied with a Spirit of Infallibility which no body ever yet said nor is it at all likely In the fourth place The Conclusion of the Letter they write seems extreamly weak for the Conclusion of a positive Law FROM WHICH YOU SHALL DO WELL TO KEEP YOUR SELVES A Prophet under the Old Testament would have said From which keep your selves for so saith the Lord whose Commandments you cannot slight without your own Destruction c. Some may also here object the Spirit of Miracles and Tongues which the Apostles received the day of Pentecost But the Effusion of that miraculous Spirit did not necessarily render all those that receiv'd it infallible in Doctrine Otherwise all the Christians of that time had been infallible The Church of Corinth had receiv'd the Holy Ghost as appears by the Epistles St. Paul directs to it and so should not have needed that Apostle's Instructions because it had a great number of infallible Persons within it self But it appears on the contrary that it needed his Instructions not only to correct its Vices but also to resolve its Doubts and even to rectify its Errors Thus then the Spirit of Miracles not being accompanied with Infallibility it connot be concluded because the Apostles receiv'd that Spirit the day of Pentecost that they became as Gods and that they were out of all danger of ever falling into the least Error But what signify then these words When the Spirit of Truth shall come he will lead you into all Truth This Spirit of Truth is it not the miraculous Spirit which the Apostles receiv'd I have already observ'd that these words cannot be understood rigorously as if the Apostles had known all Sciences I must add further that there is something extreamly figurative in them as appears by the following words For he shall not speak of himself but what soever he shall hear that he shall speak and he shall shew ye things to come He shall glorify me for he shall receive
were to say On the contrary my Opinion is That it is only in Prophecies and some other places as in the Sermons of Jesus Christ and where God himself is introduc'd speaking that the Matter or Things have been immediately reveal'd to those who spoke them That the Stile for the most part was left to the liberty of those who spoke or writ That there are some Books that are not inspir'd neither as to the Matter nor Words as Iob Ecclesiastes c. That there are some Passages which Passion dictated to those that writ them as many Curses in the Psalms That the sacred Historians might commit and have actually committed some light Faults which are of no moment That the Apostles in preaching the Gospel or in writing their Works were not ordinarily inspir'd neither as to the Matter nor the Words but that they had recourse to their Memory and Judgment in declaring what Jesus Christ had taught them or framing Arguments or drawing Consequences from thence That the Apostles while they liv'd were only look'd upon as faithful Witnesses of what they had seen and heard and as Persons well instructed in the Christian Religion whereof no part was unknown to them or conceal'd by them from their Disciples but not as Men that preach'd and taught by perpetual Inspiration I believe indeed that they were not deceiv'd in any Point of Doctrine and that it was very unlikely they should be so because Christian Religion is easy and compris'd in a few Articles That they pretended not to enter into deep Argumentations and to draw Conseqrences remote from their Principles and that they never undertook to treat of nice and controversial Matters as is plain by reading of their Writings Or if it happen'd sometimes that they were mistaken in any thing as it seems to have happen'd to St. Peter and to St. Barnabas it has been in things of small consequence and they soon perceiv'd their Error as did these two Apostles This sort of Infallibility is easy to be conceiv'd if it be consider'd that a Man of Sense and Integrity who is well instructed in his Religion and who does not much enter into Argumentations and drawing of Inferences can hardly err so long as he continues in that Temper and observes that Conduct This is the Sum of what I have said in my Writing concerning the Inspiration of the sacred Pen-Men and it is herein precisely that I differ from the common Opinion of Divines You see how much these Principles are contrary to those of the Deists who reject all sort of Inspiration and who look upon the holy Scripture as a Work full of Falsities and wherein there is nothing but what is purely human The Divines that have accus'd me of Deism on account of this Writing certainly either never took the pains to read it or did not understand it for I cannot believe that they would accuse me of so detestable an Opinion out of pure Malice and against their own Consciences They were undoubtedly in some measure mis-led by a false Zeal that render'd them little attentive to what they read or made them suspect that the Author had not discover'd all that he had in his Mind It is an ill Custom that some peevish and ill-natur'd Persons have to judg of other Mens Opinions rather by the Suspicions which their own deprav'd Imaginations suggest to them than by those Mens Expressions and Actions which are the only Evidence that ought to be regarded on these occasions A Man ought to be judged by what he says and not by what he says not nor by what is injuriously imputed to him without any Proof And if this ought always to be the Rule of our Carriage one towards another there is more particular Reason that it should be so when a Man protests as I do at present that he is not of any other Opinion than what he expresly sets down and that he disowns the ill Consequences which are pretended to be drawn from his Discourses and which to him seem not to be deducible from them By this Explanation of Mr. N's Principles which I receiv'd from himself you may see Sir that he is very far from those impious Opinions which some too hot-headed Divines have charg'd him with Candid and equitable Readers had no need of this Explanation in which I see nothing but what is plainly enough set down in his first Writing But as Equity is a Vertue seldom practis'd in Theological Controversies he thought it necessary to give these further Explications to those who persisted still in suspecting him to believe things which he abhors We shall see hereafter if any ill Consequence can be drawn from his Opinion But before I come to that I will transcribe here what he further adds to that which you have already seen In reading says he the Prior of Bolleville's Answer to the Thoughts of some Holland Divines I observ'd that Mr. Simon accuses me of having taken part of what I have said out Grotius his Book call'd Votum pro Pace Ecclesiasticâ I should be well pleas'd that my Reader believ'd it I could not then be accus'd as I am by some of Innovation It is true I have read that Book but it being long ago that Passage of Grotius was not in my Mind otherwise I should not have fail'd to have cited it as I have cited others of the same Author that are less express I think it therefore not amiss to take advantage of this Advertisement and now to set down that Passage together with another taken out of his Defence of the Vow for Peace titl'd Discussio Apologetici Rivetiani Grotius had said in a Work wherein he defends his Observations upon the Consultation of Cassander against Rivet that this last Divine was very much deceiv'd in believing that all the Books of the Old Testament that are in the Hebrew Canon were dictated by the Holy Ghost that Esdras in the Opinion of all the Iews was not a Prophet nor had the holy Spirit that his Books and the Collection he made of the more ancient Books had been approv'd by the great Synagogue in which indeed there were some Prophets although the Iews hold that there was a doubt concerning the Book of Ecclesiastes c. Rivet liked not this Opinion of Grotius and indeavoured to prove the contrary by Scripture and by some Jewish Authors Grotius replied to him in these terms in his Vow for Peace I said indeed that the Books in the Hebrew Canon were not all dictated by the holy Spirit But I do not deny that they were written with a pious intention of Mind And this was the Determination of the great Synagogue whose Iudgment in this matter the Iews submit to For there was no need that the Histories should be dictated by the holy Spirit It was sufficient that the Writer had a good Memory for the things he had seen or that he were careful in transcribing the ancient Records The word Holy
Apostles where they do not say that God has taught them by extraordinary Revelation that which they publish And where the matter it self shows that there was no need of his doing it It does not therefore follow that those who acknowledge the Inspiration of the Prophets are obliged to acknowledg the like of all other sacred Writers because there are convincing Reasons which oblige us to believe that the Prophets speak Truth when they say Thus saith the Lord c. and no reason to believe that the Apostles were extraordinarily inspir'd when they say it not and when their Discourses have in them no mark of such like Inspiration If we reflect upon this difference between Prophecies and Discourses which have nothing of Prophetic in them we shall take heed of applying to this Subject a loose Maxim and which is good for nothing viz. That is happens most frequently that those who distinguish and divide Matters with design to make use of part and reject the other do give great advantage to their Adversaries On the contrary it scarce ever happens that in handling a compounded Subject there can be made such general Rules as may be equally apply'd to all the parts of it Parts of different nature must of necessity be differently handled Objection 11. It has been said that by the holy Spirit or the Spirit of God may be understood the Spirit of Holiness and of Constancy which the Gospel inspires or such a Disposition of Mind as is an Effect of our Faith But the general Reasons there made use of which are grounded only upon equivocal words can prove nothing but Generals They must be apply'd and particular Enquiry made whether the holy Spirit has any other Signification in Scripture or no. Mr. Simon Resp. Pag. 131. Answer When a Passage is to be answer'd wherein there is an equivocal word upon which an Objection is founded it is sufficient to show that such a word may be understood in another Sense than that in which it has been taken There is no need of examining all the other Significations that it may have It suffices to show that the Signification then given it is agreeable to the ordinary use of the Language and suitable to the Subject there treated of It was Mr. Simon 's part therefore to show that where it is said of St. Stephen on occasion of whom the Observation was made That they could not resist the Wisdom and Spirit by which he spoke I say it was his part to show that by the word Sprit any thing ought to be understood but the Spirit of the Gospel that is to say a Disposition of Mind conformable to the Precepts of Jesus Christ. He ought to have shown that this word in this place ought necessarily to be understood in another Sense But Mr. Simon seldom gives himself the trouble to read the places of Scripture that are cited as appears in the same Page where he says that St. Paul told the High Priest with a just Indignation God shall smite thee thou whited Wall and where he compares the words of St. Paul to those of Jesus Christ when he calls Herod Fox and to the Reproaches that the Prophets make to the Kings of Israel But he should have shown us in what place Jesus Christ and the Prophets confess'd they were to blame in doing so as St. Paul confesses he was God has Power to censure Princes But it belongs not to Subjects to do it when they think sit So St. Paul had no right to abuse the High Priest on his own Head though those who had receiv'd express Order from God to make such like Reproaches to Princes cannot be blam'd for it But Mr. Simon who probably never thought of all this is not aware of this difference and argues always on without understanding what he finds fault with Obiection 12. The Promise which Jesus Christ made his Apostles that the holy Spirit should teach them what they should say when they came before the Iudges seems to have been explain'd as a general Promise for all that they should say whereas it only relates to what they should say for the defence of the Gospel Luc. Chap. 12. ver 11. Answer The promise is express'd in general terms and must relate to that which the Apostles should be oblig'd to say as well for the defence of their own Persons as for that of the Gospel For it was of the greatest importance that these first Ministers of Jesus Christ should then say nothing unworthy of the Doctrine of which they were the Heraulds But if this Promise must not be taken in so large a Sense in relation to the Discourses which the Apostles should make before Judges neither ought it to be so taken in relation to their preaching of the Gospel My Design was only to shew that since the words could not be taken in the whole extent of their Signification it could not from thence be necessarily inferr'd that the Apostles had then a Prophetic Inspiration Objection 13. The Promise Iohn 16. that when the Spirit of Truth shall come it shall lead you into all Truth ought not to be understood so as if it were intirely accomplish'd the day of Pentecost but as a thing that should be accomplish'd according to the occasions and necessities that the Apostles should be in of knowing some further Truths But it seems as if Mr. N. suppos'd that this promise is ordinarily understood as if it ought to have been accomplish'd all at once Answer The reason of my insisting upon that was to make appear that this Promise though conceiv'd in so general terms ought necessarily to receive some Qualification and consequently that it ought not to be understood like an Axiom of Geometry in the utmost Signification of its Terms Now that being once granted it cannot be made appear that this Promise relates to a Prophetic Inspiration There is a Passage very like this in the first Epistle of St. Iohn Chap. 2. ver 27. But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you and ye need not that any Man teach you but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things and is Truth and is no Lie and even as it hath taught you ye shall abide in him It is apparent that this cannot be understood strictly since St. Iohn speaks to all the Christians to whom he writ Objection 14. Whereas it has been affirmed that the Apostles did not agree Acts 15. till after they had disputed a great while it is not said in that Chapter That the Apostles disputed but only that When there had been much disputing Peter rose up c. Answer Two things were considered in this History The first is The Opinion that Men had of the Apostles viz. That they were not look'd upon as Persons infallible whensoever they began to speak of the Gospel since they were not believ'd just at their first speaking The second is The Conduct of the Apostles on
Shepherd knows nothing more terrible than a Lion he compares the Anger of God to Lions St. Ierom should have said according to the common Opinion that God made use in speaking to Amos of popular terms and suitable to his Profession whereas he attributes plainly to the Prophet the choice of the Terms in which the Prophecy is expressed That words were dictated by God to the Prophets says a late Learned Critick as it cannot be denied to have been done sometimes so it does not seem to have been done always And hence it is that according to the variety of the Times and the Speakers the Phrase of the Prophets is also different But it is commonly alledged that the Prophets recite the same words they heard Because they introduce God himself speaking Thus saith the Lord c. That is no Proof For it is the custom both of the Hebrews and Greeks to bring in always those whose Sense they relate as speaking in their own Persons though in doing so they tye not themselves to their words I will give you a plain Example thereof It is the different manner in which the Decalogue is set down in Exodus and in Deuteronomy although God is said to speak personally in both places God says in Exodus Remember the Sabbath day c. In Deuteronomy Keep the Sabbath-day c. It is in Exodus To keep it holy Six days shalt thou labour c. In Deuteronomy To keep it holy as the Lord thy God commanded thee Six days shalt thou labour c. It is in Exodus Nor thy Cattel c. In Deuteronomy Nor thine Ox nor thine Ass nor any of thy Cattel c. And this Commandment ends thus That thy Man-Servant and thy Maid-Servant may rest as well as thou And remember that thou wast a Servant in the Land of Egypt and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence thrô a mighty Hand and a stretched-out-Arm therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath Day In Exodus the reason of keeping the Sabbath is taken from the Creation of the World in Six Days without any mention of Slaves or of the slavery of Egypt There are some other Differences in that which follows but not considerable However it appears by this that either Moses in Deuteronomy or the Author of the Book of Exodus did not tie themselves scrupulously to exact words as the Jews now a-days do altho both these Authors bring in God speaking personally Grotius has hereupon made this judicious Remark It is to be observed says he that the Words set down in this place in Exodus were pronounced by an Angel in the Name of God but those which are in Deuteronomy are the words of Moses repeating the same things and that with so great liberty that sometimes he transposes words changes some for others of the same signification omits some as sufficiently known by those gone before and adds others by way of Interpretation The like liberty of changing words is obvious to a careful Reader in other places of Sacred Writ as Gen. XVII 4. compared with 7. Gen. XXIV 17. compar'd with 43 Exod. XI 4. compar'd with XII 28. Exod. XXXII 11 c. compar'd with Deut. IX 27 c. Now this shews That we should not catch at words in Holy Writ as some of the Iews do who fancy that those words in Exodus and those in Deuteronomy were pronounc'd in one and the same moment of time They fancy also that where there is transposition and changing the order of what was said first what last that the last importing the same sense were also said first There are in the Holy Histories so many Miracles that we ought not to invent new ones without necessity and such as are of no use If you require yet another convincing Proof that this manner of speaking personally does not denote that they are the proper Words of him that is introduc'd speaking after this manner you have no more to do but to look into the Gospels where the Evangelists always make our Saviour to speak personally and yet recite not the same words that he made use of For beside that Christ spoke Syriac or Chaldee there is oft great difference between their Recitals The Holy Spirit never tied it self up to words as many of our Divines do now a-days He only prompted the Holy Pen-men to give us the true sense of the Words that God made use of to make the Prophets understand his Will and it is only in respect to the sense and to the things that the Apostles assure us that they were inspired from God The third sort of Prophecy or manner by which God made known his Will was by inward Inspiration without Vision and without Voice Hereof two different sorts may be conceiv'd For either God might inspire Prophecies or Predictions word for word as the Prophets should pronounce them As when there was occasion to tell some Name unknown before to the Prophet Or he might inspire only the sense which they might express afterwards in their own way As most commonly it happen'd the first Occasion being very rare It seems to me that when any one does apprehend a sense distinctly it is not difficult for him to express it faithfully And we ought to suppose that the Prophets full of the thoughts wherewith God inspir'd them had a very clear and distinct Idea thereof Which will be easily understood if we consider that the things wherewith God inspir'd them were easy to be conceiv'd and proportion'd to the understanding of all the World at least as to the literal sense It happened also sometimes that without inspiring either Words or Sense God drew from the Mouth of some Persons Prophecies which those who spoke them understood otherwise and did not think them to be Prophecies He cast them into certain Circumstances and involv'd them in certain Events which made them say things that were true Predictions without their knowing them to be so Such was Caiaphas's Prediction when he says That it was better that one Man should die for the People than that the whole Nation should perish Now he said not that of himself says St. Iohn but being High Priest that Year he prophesied To speak properly God inspir'd him not those words but the Nature of the Business they were about in the Sanhedrim drew them from him They were afraid that Jesus would draw all the People to him and enterprise something against the Roman Authority which would not then fail to send a puissant Army into Palestine and totally waste it Caiaphas thereupon urges a very common Politic Maxim That is were better to destroy one Man though he were innocent than to expose the whole State to utter Desolation In Caiaphas's sense there is nothing of Prophetic or Inspir'd But in the Gospel-sense that which Caiaphas said signifi'd more than he intended and contained a true Prophecy It 's very likely that more Predictions of this nature
of particular Writings of divers Prophets to whom the Authors at every turn refer the Reader Lastly It is very plain that the Historians of the Scripture were not inspir'd by the Contradictions that are found in several Circumstances of their Histories The Evangelists agree perfectly among themselves in what concerns the main of the History of Jesus Christ but there are some Circumstances wherein they disagree a clear proof that every Particular was not inspir'd For although the Circumstances wherein they differ are things of small Consequence yet if the holy Spirit had dictated all to them as is pretended they would perfectly agree in every thing these Circumstances being as well known to God as the main of the History For Example St. Matthew says That Judas repenting that he had delivered our Lord to the Iews threw the Mony into the Temple that going away he hang'd himself and that the Priests having gathered up the Mony bought therewith a Field St. Luke in the Acts brings in Peter saying That Judas after having purchased a Field with the Reward of Iniquity falling headlong burst asunder in the midst insomuch that his Bowels gushed out Here is a manifest Contradiction which the Learned in vain endeavour to reconcile And there are many other such like But this you will say lessens very much the Authority of the Evangelists For if they could be deceiv'd in any thing who will secure us that they were not deceiv'd in every thing I answer to that in the words of Grotius Even this it self ought to free these Writers from all Suspicion of Deceit For those who testify Falshoods use so to agree their Stories that there may not so much as seem to be any difference But if because of any small Disagreement although it could not be reconcil'd whole Books should lose their Credit then no Book especially of History would deserve to be believed whereas the Authority of Polibius and Halicarnassensis and Livy and Plutarch in whom such things are found as to the main stands firm among us St. Chrysostom also in his first Homily on St. Matthew very plainly assures us that God permitted the Apostles to fall into these little Contrarieties that we might see that they were not agreed to feign a History at Pleasure and that we might more readily believe them in the main of the History When a Man has seen most of the Things which he relates in those he can hardly be deceiv'd But he may be easily deceiv'd in some Circumstances of Things which he has not seen We might yet add a fifth Proof which Grotius affords us in his Notes on that part of his Treatise of the Verity of the Christian Religion which I lately cited It is that the Evangelists in setting down a certain time do not determine it exactly because they did not know it so precisely that they could set down the number of Days or Months See Luke I. 56. III. 23. Iohn II. 6. VI. 10 19. XIX 14. You find in those places About a certain Time or About a certain Number Which shews evidently that the History was not dictated immediately by the Holy Spirit who knew exactly the Number and the Time that was in question It is clear then in my Judgment that the Things were not Inspir'd nor by consequence the Words which are less considerable than the Things It is not certain Terms that are the Rule of our Faith but a certain Sense And it is little matter what words we make use of provided we go not astray from the Doctrine which God has reveal'd Those who read the Originals are in no better way of being sav'd than those that can read only the Translations For there is no Translation so false but that taken in gross it expresses clearly enough that which is necessary to Salvation Otherwise it would be necessary that all Christians had learn'd Hebrew and Greek which is altogether impossible and we should exclude from Salvation almost all those who have made profession of the Christian Religion in our Western Parts from the Time of the Apostles to the Age we live in That providence also which has preserved us these Holy Books to lead us in the way to Salvation so many Ages after the death of those that writ them has preserv'd inviolably nothing but the Sense It has suffer'd Men to put in Synonimous Words one for another and not hinder'd the slipping in of a great many Varieties little considerable as to the Sense but remarkable as to the Words and Order There is in St. Matthew for Example more than a thousand divers Readings in less than eleven hundred Verses but whereof there is not perhaps fifty that can make any change in the Sense and that change too is but in things of little importance to piety If God had thought it necessary for the Good of his Church to inspire into the Sacred Historians the terms which they ought to use he would undoubtedly have taken more care to preserve them It is plain therefore that he design'd principally to preserve the Sense Thus then neither the Words nor the things have been inspir'd into those who have given us the Sacred History altho in the main that History is very true in the principal Facts It may be that in certain Circumstances little considerable there may be some Fault as appears sufficiently by the contradictory Passages It is ture that some have strain'd themselves to reconcile those Passages as I have already observ'd but it is after so violent and constrain'd a fashion and there are such divers Opinions about these Reconciliations that if we examine the thing never so little without prejudice we shall find that the Learned trouble themselves to no purpose and that they would do much better to confess ingenuously that there are some Contradictions in things of small importance Nay further I know some that believe we ought not to receive all the Jewish Histories without distinction for true Histories They Pertend we ought to except the Book of Esther And it is true that if Assuerus of whom the Book of Esther speaks be Ochus that raign'd after Artaxerxes Mnemon this Book would have been written at such a time as there was no Prophet in Israel But altho Mr. Cappel pretend that Achasueros is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his conjecture is not unquestionable They pretend also that this History has all the Characters of a History made at pleasure I shall not examine that at present But however it be it is no Heresy to reject a Book of the Iewish Canon as neither is it to reject one of our own At least the Protestants have not call'd a Lutheran an Heretick for having said that the Epistle of St. Iames is an Epistle of Straw no more than they have many of the Learned for not receiving the Second Epistle of St. Peter which a famous Critic stiles A Fiction of some ancient Christian misimploying his
Judgment not to answer at all than to answer ill and to seek only to defame an Author whom one cannot confute I should be the more troubled to see that done by how much I understand that the Author is a very pious Man and one who assuredly believes not the evil Consequences which some Men too ready to judg of their Neighbours may draw from his Notions I fear that he you speak of would content himself in gathering together a great number of those odious Consequences and would think that he had thereby sufficiently refuted the Opinion without considering that tho a Man cannot disingage a Doctrine from the absurd Consequences that by some may be link'd to it it does not therefore follow that the Doctrine is false It should first be made appear that the Arguments brought for an Opinion are not solid and after that one may come to the Consequences Otherwise while the Arguments that prove an Opinion subsist in full force all the Consequences that may be deriv'd from it cannot overthrow it Nevertheless if you believe him capable to acquit himself of this undertaking you may perswade him to it when you think fit But put him in Mind at the same time that it is the part of an honest Man and of one that would bestow his Pains to some good purpose to do it with all the Moderation and Meekness imaginable St. Ierom commends Nepotien That he used to hear willingly answer modestly allow Truth not sharply confute Error and teach rather than conquer whom he disputed with And it were to be wished that our Divines now adays would make it their business to deserve so good an Elogy whereas it seems that they strive only to attain to the Name of great Railers and value not Peoples having an ill Opinion of their Manners provided that they pass for Men of Parts I speak not this as if I suspected that Mr. resembles one of those Divines I find fault with but because I believe a Man cannot be too much caution'd against so general a Defect But these Moralities would carry me too far if I should give my self the liberty to pursue them It is better that I keep my word with you and give you the following part of that Writing And here it is Let us now examine that Passage of St. Iohn When the Spirit of Truth shall come he will lead you into all Truth Interpreters observe that we must not understand by All Truths any others than those which the Apostles were ignorant of and which it was needful for them to know that they might be able to acquit themselves as they ought to do of their Charge They receiv'd not the holy Spirit to learn for Example that there was a God nor to be instructed in the Mathematicks They knew already this first Truth and of the other they had no need The generality of Interpreters believe that these words denote a perpetual Assistance of the holy Spirit that made the Apostles absolutely infallible To know whether they are in the right or no we must examine the Accomplishment of the Promise and if it appear that it agrees not with this Explanation of our Saviour's words we must seek another sense and try to discover wherein the Infallibility of the Apostles consists We find a Story Acts xv whereby it appears manifestly that the Apostles did not pass in their own time for persons whose every word was an Oracle as they are now reputed to have done Some Jews converted to the Christian Religion not being able to shake off their ancient Opinion concerning Ceremonies would have had the Gentiles circumcis'd St. Paul and St. Barnabas were against this but their Authority was not sufficient to put to silence the Judaizing Christians Altho St. Paul was as much an Apostle as those whom our Lord had chosen while he was on Earth yet they would not believe him The Church at Ierusalem must be consulted Further also the Apostles and Elders of the Church being assembl'd to examine and determine this Affair dispute a great while before they agree upon it and it was not till after they had heard St. Peter St. Paul St. Barnahas and St. Iames that the Assembly came to a Resolution If they had been fill'd with the Spirit of Infallibility such as is conceiv'd now adays they would have been all at first of one Mind and there would have needed no more to be done but to charge one of them to give out the Oracle in the Name of the whole Assembly There happen'd likewise before that another thing related by St. Luke Acts x. which makes it also very evident that the Holy Ghost which the Apostles receiv'd the day of Pentecost had not taught them all they ought to know so far was it from rendring them at first dash infallible and that they were not then consider'd as Persons out of danger of falling into Error as they have been since accounted St. Peter needed a Vision as appears by the Story of Cornelius the Centurion to learn that he ought not to scruple preaching the Gospel to the Gentiles although Christ had order'd his Apostles before his ascending into Heaven to preach the Gospel unto all Creatures whereby he clearly enough denoted the Gentiles as well as the Iews St. Peter after having obey'd the express Order which he receiv'd from God to preach the Gospel to Cornelius was no sooner returned to Ierusalem but the faithful Ones of the Circumcision not dreaming that his Apostleship render'd him infallible dispute with him and tell him after a manner that shows that the Infallibility which we now attribute to him was to them unknown Thou wentest unto Men uncircumcis'd and didst eat with them Many Years as it seems after that Peter being at Antioch had not the Courage to maintain openly that the Jews might eat with the Gentiles without scruple For before that certain Persons came from James he did eat with the Gentiles but when they were come he withdrew and separated himself fearing them which were of the Circumcision And the other Iews dissembled likewise with him insomuch that St. Paul observing that they walked not uprightly was obliged to tell Peter before them all If thou being a Iew livest after the manner of Gentiles and not as do the Iews why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Iews It is said that St. Peter was guilty of a fault only in his Conduct and not in his Doctrine that he believ'd and maintain'd the same with St. Paul but that on this occasion he dissembled his Opinion and that he did not otherways constrain the Gentiles to live as the Iews but in abstaining to eat with them The Gentiles say they seeing that St. Peter did not eat with them because they were uncircumcis'd did by reason of this his Conduct believe themselves oblig'd to be circumcis'd and consequently to observe the other Ceremonies of the Law They believ'd that it was a Sin to
of mine and shall shew it unto you All things that the Father hath are mine therefore said I that he shall take of mine and shew it unto you What Opinion soever a Man may be of concerning the Holy Spirit it is plain that these words cannot be taken properly as if the Holy Spirit had heard from God or Jesus Christ that with which he ought to inspire the Apostles The most simple sense and most conformable to the accomplishment of this Promise which can be given to these words is to my thinking this I should explain many things to you more clearly than I have done but you are not yet in condition to receive them as you should When you shall have received the Spirit of Miracles he will teach you the rest that you ought to know either by Visions or by making you call to mind that which I have told you so that he will make you apprehend the sense and will teach you what you ought to do afterwards To speak properly he will tell you nothing new he will but recal into your memory to make you better understand it the Doctrine of my Father which is the same that I have taught you and which I may also call my Doctrine because my Father has charg'd me to preach it as the only Doctor of his Church The Holy Spirit led the Apostles into all Truths and took that which was Christ's without ever speaking of himself in making them call to mind that which they had forgotten and in making them understand on divers occasions or even by extraordinary Revelations that which Christ had said to them but which they then understood not This is plainly that which Christ teaches us in these words These things have I spoken unto you being yet present with you But the Comforter which is the Holy Ghost whom the Father will send in my Name he shall teach you ALL THINGS AND BRING ALL THINGS TO YOUR REMEMBRANCE WHATSOEVER I HAVE SAID UNTO YOU Iohn XIV 25 These last words apparently explain the foregoing He shall teach you all Things In effect there is nothing in the Doctrine of the Apostles which Christ had not told them and in leaving them he gave them no other order for the preaching of the Gospel but to teach all People to observe all those things which he had commanded them And the Apostles observe in several places that it was not till after they had received the Holy Spirit that they remember'd and understood divers things which Christ had told them when he was here below These things understood not the Disciples at the first says St. Ioh. XII 16. but when Iesus was enter'd into his Glory then remember'd they that these things were written of him See the same Evangelist II. 22. and Acts XI 16. This is in my Opinion the sense of Christ's words at least I find nothing among the Interpreters that answers so well to the Event which thorowly convinces me that Christ must have meant some such thing For when all 's done whatsoever may be said the Promise ought to be understood by its correspondency with the Accomplishment and there is no better Interpreter of Prophecies than their execution This being so the Infallibility of the Apostles according to my judgment consisted in this They knew clearly the general Principles of the Jewish Religion which had been taught them from their Cradle they had heard Christ often tell what the Gospel added to Judaism or if you will Christ had explain'd to them more clearly the Will of God and had shown them the Errors of the Pharisees He had instructed them concerning the Messiah and had made appear to them by many Proofs that himself was HE God had rais'd him from the Dead and they had convers'd with him after his Resurrection and in the last place they had seen him ascend into Heaven from whence he assur'd them he would come one Day to judg the Quick and the Dead They preach'd faithfully that which they had heard that which they had seen with their Eyes that which they had observ'd with attention and that which they had touch'd with their Hands They could declare without any mistake what they had seen they could preach what they had heard For the Doctrine of Jesus Christ was compris'd in a few Articles plain enough to be understood and consequently easy to be remembered Thus they related infallibly what they had seen and heard and therein it is that their Infallibility consisted Perhaps also the Spirit of Miracles which Christ sent them strengthned their Memories and open'd their Minds after a manner we comprehend not But it is certain as I have made it appear that this Spirit directed them not in so miraculous a manner as to make it necessary for us to regard all they said or writ with the same respect as the words of Jesus Christ the only Master and the only infallible Doctor that ever was amongst Men. He was the only Mystical Ark in which the Godhead dwelt bodily from whence proceeded nothing but Oracles Some may ask perhaps Whether it might not so happen that the Apostles might abandon the Truth of the Gospel and preach a false Doctrine and if it might be so how we can be assur'd that they were not Deceivers I confess that though it was very unlikely that after having receiv'd so many Illuminations and Graces they should fall into Apostacy yet it was not absolutely impossible But in that case God would not have approv'd by Miracles the Doctrine they taught and thereby it is that we may know they were no Seducers There crept in during their Time many false Prophets among the Christians but they were presently discover'd because they could not maintain by Miracles a Doctrine contrary to that of the Apostles which was confirm'd by an infinity of Wonders God made appear by those Prodigies that the Apostles declar'd nothing but what was conformable to his Will nor any thing that could be hurtful to Piety for it is impossible that God would favour a Doctrine which should turn Men from Holiness But we must not believe neither as I have already observ'd that because God wrought Miracles in favour of any Person it therefore follows that all things pronounced by that Person were immediately inspir'd and ought to be receiv'd as the infallible Decisions of him that never errs Provided that Person maintained the Substance of the Gospel and said nothing but what conduced to Piety God would not cease to bear Witness to his Doctrine although all his Reasonings were not Demonstrations God would not that this Mark of his Approbation should be interpreted as if he had thereby declared that he would have all the Words of those that had miraculous Gifts receiv'd as Oracles To be fully convinc'd hereof we need but read the first Epistle to the Corinthians I must nevertheless ingenuously confess that there is mention made in this Epistle of some miraculous Gifts which seem to have
been pure Inspirations and which ought to make the Speakers attended unto as if they were the simple Interpreters of the Holy Spirit The Spirit says St. Paul 1 Cor. VII 8. gives to one the word of Wisdom to another the word of Knowledg It seems as if he meant thereby the Gift of prophesying that is to say of instructing others in Piety of which he says many things in the XIVth Chapter of the same Epistle This seems contrary to what I have been saying concerning the Inspiration of the Apostles and I confess I cannot see how according to my Notion this difficulty can be clearly solv'd I might say that this Gift of Prophecy was perhaps no other than a Disposition of Mind which God infus'd sometimes into those on whom he bestow'd it by which they became fit to instruct although he inspir'd them not extraordinarily with that which they were to say which is so much the more likely by how much this Gift was preserv'd and increas'd by Study and Reading as appears by those words of St. Paul to Timothy First Epist. Chap. IV. 13 c. Vntil I come give thy self to Reading to Exhortation to Instruction Neglect not the Grace which is in thee which was given thee by Prophecy through the Imposition of the Presbytery Meditate on these things be always imployed to the end they Improvement may be known of all Men. Now it is plain that the Gifts which are owing to an actual and immediate Inspiration of the holy Spirit such as curing Diseases c. could not be increas'd by Application of Mind as not depending upon Man in any sort The most assiduous Study cannot contribute any thing to prophetick or immediate Revelations This Conjecture seems probable enough And indeed I see no other way of explaining what St. Paul says to Timothy But without determining any thing concerning the Gift of Prophecy it appears plainly by what St. Paul says 1 Cor. XIV that it consisted not in an immediate Revelation of the holy Spirit that forced the Prophets to speak He there gives them this Advice Let the Prophets speak two or three and let another judg but if any thing be revealed to one of those that sits by let the first hold his Peace for ye may all prophesy one by one to the end that all may learn and all may be comforted And the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets The Prophets whom the holy Spirit had inspir'd immediately with what they ought to say had no need of this Advice Nay it had even been ridiculous Because the holy Spirit inspiring them with what they had to say would have inspired them likewise as to the occasion and the place and would not have put many Persons on speaking at one time in the same place nor so as to interrupt others who spake by his Inspiration Moreover St. Paul would have the Prophets judg one another and that the Spirits of the Prophets be subject to the Prophets which cannot be understood of Prophets immediately inspir'd who are subject to none but God and who are to give account to none but him The Prophets of the Old Testament spoke as long as God inspir'd them after which they held their Peace without needing any Advertisement because they easily perceiv'd when the Inspiration ceas'd It seems to me that we may now conclude that there never was any body but our Saviour who had a constant and perpetual Inspiration and all whose words we ought to receive as Oracles As he alone amongst Men was incapable of sinning so it was he alone whom God indow'd with an absolute Infallibility The same Light which perpetually inlighten'd his Mind regulated also the Motions of his Affections otherwise it would be difficult to conceive how he could chuse but be subject to Error if he had been subject to Sin There is so great a Correspondence between the Mind and the Affections that it is not almost possible there should be any Irregularity in the one without a disorder in the other But that you may not believe I am the first Author of this Opinion and that it is a desire to appear singular or an Affectation of Novelty that has ingag'd me in this Notion I must also let you see that some great Men have been of the same Mind before me St. Ierom makes this Observation upon the fifth Chapter of the Prophet Micah in speaking of this Passage And thou Bethlehem Ephratah though thou be little among the thousands of Judah c. which St. Matthew cites otherwise than it is either in the Hebrew or Septuagint There are says he that affirm there is the like Error in almost all the Testimonies that are taken out of the Old Testament that either the Order is chang'd or the Words and that sometimes the Sense it self differs the Apostles or Evangelists not transcribing the Testimonies out of the Book but trusting to their Memory which sometimes fail'd them It is true St. Ierom says not that he approves this Opinion but he makes it appear elsewhere that he is not very far from it In his Letter to Pammachius de optimo genere interpretandi of the best way of interpreting He gathers together many Examples of the New Testament by which he shews that the Apostles tie themselves more to the Sense than to the Words and maintains with good reason that we should not play the Criticks on them for it nor even for the places where they have mistaken Names After having compar'd the Quotation Matth. XXVII 9. with the Original he adds One may accuse the Apostle of falsity in that he agrees neither with the Hebrew nor with the Septuagint and which is more that he is mistaken in the Name putting Jeremy for Zachary He seems indeed elsewhere to disapprove that Opinion but it is usual with him to accommodate himself to the common Opinion and yet not omit to give his own without being concern'd whether he contradicted himself or no. When he speaks as others do you must not conclude presently that he is of the same Opinion with them because it may be he speaks so by way of Condescension whereas when he says the contrary it seems rather that he speaks his own Thoughts You need but read what he says of the Dissimulation which he attributes to St. Peter and St. Paul in his Commentary upon the second Chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians and in his Answer to St. Austin to see that he believ'd that St. Paul by a Prudence purely human which he calls a Dispensation made shew of believing that St. Peter was in the wrong insomuch that when St. Paul says that St. Peter was to be reprov'd because he walked not uprightly according to the Truth of the Gospel It was not that he believ'd so but only to hinder the converted Gentiles from imitating that Apostle I say not that St. Ierom was herein in the right but at least it hereby appears that
they have taken much pains to correct in themselves the Faults which others commit they have apply'd themselves to reading or they have travell'd in France These Jews born in the Countries where nothing but Greek was spoken understood not the ancient Hebrew nor the Hebrew then spoken in Iudaea They made use in their Synagogues of the Version of the Septuagint and because they spoke nothing but Greek they were call'd the Hellenist Iews Salmasius in his Book of the Hellenist Tongue against Heinsius shows that these Jews spoke very good Greek and that it is very absurd in some Learned Men to imagine there was an Hellenish Tongue as if the Hebrews that knew not their own Language had a particular one different from that of the places where they dwelt and that this Language was that of the Septuagint and of the New Testament If a Name were to be given to this corrupted Greek it should rather be call'd Hebraistic because it is full of Hebraisms or Chaldaisms But as the Language of the Walloons or of some of the Provinces of France cannot pass for a particular Language being nothing but a corrupted French so neither ought the barbarous Greek of Iudaea to pass for a Language by it self different from the Greek Language It is no wonder then if the Apostles who had liv'd a good part of their Lives in Iudaea or who were born there and had not apply'd themselves to learn perfectly the Greek Tongue nor to speak it in purity use it so improperly in their Writings St. Paul himself born in a Town that spoke nothing but Greek had so corrupted his Speech by his long dwelling in Iudaea that he confesses he was ignorant in the Language 2 Cor. XI 6. as sufficiently appears by all his Epistles the Greek whereof is very different from that of Iosephus And therefore the Greek Fathers have complain'd of the obscurity of his Stile of the barbarous Phrases that are therein and of apparent Confusion in the order of his Discourses and those who very readily understood Plato and Demosthenes were oblig'd as Erasums judiciously observes to take great pains to understand St. Paul We need but compare his Stile with that of some Greek Author to find that this Apostle apply'd himself not much to the Greek Eloquence It is plain then that the holy Spirit inspir'd not the Apostles with the Expressions they were to use If it had been so St. Paul could not have said he was ignorant in the Language He should have said that the holy Spirit inspir'd him with a Language such as was that of the People And all the Greek Fathers would have blasphemed against the holy Spirit when they observ'd the little Eloquence of St. Paul for according to this Supposition that would not have proceeded from St. Paul but from the holy Spirit If any one doubt of this he need but read Erasmus in the places I have cited It is true that a famous Protestant Divine has undertaken to confute him in his Annotations upon the 10 th Chapter of the Acts but he does nothing but declame as he is us'd to do against an Author more learned and more judicious than himself without bringing any solid Reason We must now speak a word of some Books of the Old Testament that contain neither History nor Prophecy such are the Books of Proverbs Ecclesiastes the Song of Solomon and Iob which last is apparently a Dramatic Piece whereof nothing but the Subject is true as are the Tragedies of the Greek Poets There is no Proof that what is contained in the Proverbs was inspir'd to Solomon by God after a Prophetic manner They are Moral Sentences which a good Man might well pronounce without Inspiration as are those contain'd in Ecclesiastious There are very many of them that are but vulgar Proverbs which carry indeed a good Sense but have nothing in them of Divine There are a great many Directions about Oeconomy which Women and Country-People every-where know without Revelation See Chap. XXIV 27. and XXVII 23. and the Description of a vertuous Woman at the latter end of the Book The Name of Prophet is very liberally bestow'd on Agur the Son of Iakeh for some Moralities that are found under his Name Prov. XXX Whereas I dare be bold to say better things might have been said without the Spirit of Prophecy Three things says he for Example are too marvellouss for me and even four which I know not The way of an Eagle in the Air The way of a Serpent on a Rock The way of a Ship in the midst of the Sea and the way of a Man with a Maid One must have a mean Opinion of the Spirit of Prophecy to believe that it dictated such things as these And indeed neither does the Author pretend to that Eminency but says modestly concerning himself That he is more brutish than any Man and has not the Vnderstanding of a Man But there is particularly one Precept of good Husbandry that is often repeated which our Merchants now adays know as well as the Israelites that liv'd in Solomon's time It is that which expresly forbids them to be Surety for any body Chap. VI. 1. XVII 18. XX. 16. XXII 26. XXVII 13. It is true by the Rules of good Husbandry a Man should never be Surety but there happens oftentimes Cases wherein Charity ought to be preferr'd before good Husbandry as appears by the Parable of the Samaritan who became Surety for the Expence of the Jew that was found hurt on the Road. There is methinks no great need that God should send Prophets to teach Men good Husbandry on the contrary it was very necessary that Christ should preach Liberality Some Learned Men have believ'd that Ecclesiastes is a Dialogue where a pious Man disputes with an impious one who is of the Opinion of the Sadduces And in effect there are things directly oppos'd one to another which it cannot be suppos'd the same Person speaks The Epicurean Conclusion To eat drink and be merry because a Man has nothing else which is up and down in many places of this Book is altogether contrary to that Conclusion at the end of the Work Fear God and keep his Commandments c. But it is extreamly difficult to distinguish the Persons or to find out exactly in the Name of what Person the Author speaks in every Passage However it be there appears in it nothing of Prophetic and there is little likelihood that the Spirit of God would set out with so great strength the Arguments of Sadduces or perhaps of worse Men to answer them but in two or three words Read the beginning of the ninth Chapter and make Reflection on these words The living know that they shall die but the dead know not any thing neither have they any more a Reward for the Memory of them is forgotten Also their Love and their Hatred and their Envy is now perish'd neither have they any more a Portion for ever
Spirit is also ambiguous for either it signifies as I have taken it a certain divine Inspiration which both the ordinary Prophets had and sometimes David and Daniel or it signifies a pious Motion or Faculty stirring a Man up to utter useful Precepts relating to Human Life or Political or Civil Matters Thus Maimonides interprets the word Holy Spirit where he treats of those Historical and Moral Writings If Luke had written by the dictating of the Holy Spirit he would have fetch'd his Authority from thence as the Prophets do rather than from Witnesses whose Credit he follows c. Rivet was mightily scandalized or at least seem'd to be so at an answer so contradictory to the common Opinions But Grotius explain'd himself yet more clearly and strongly in his Refutation of Rivet 's Apology Grotius says he himself willingly acknowledges that the Prophets who were commanded by God to write or speak did write and spoke by Inspiration from him His Opinion is also the same as to the Apocalyse and the Predictions made by the Apostles He esteems it the highest Impiety to make any doubt that all that was said by Iesus Christ was said by God himself Concerning the Historical Writings and the Moral Sentences of the Hebrews he is of another Opinion He thinks it sufficient to believe that they were written out of a pious Intention and with great Ingenuity and concerning matters of highest importance c. Neither Esdras nor Luke were Prophets but grave and prudent Men who neither were minded to deceive nor would suffer themselves to be deceived Did Luke say The Word of the Lord came to Luke and the Lord said to him write as the Prophets us'd to say Nothing like it What then For as much as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a Declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us He says not that by Command but by the Example of others he was induced to write Even as they delivered them to us who from the beginning were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word viz. Mary the Mother of our Lord other of his Kinsmen the Apostles the seventy Disciples and the Saints that had been rais'd again by Iesus many Witnesses of his Resurrection It seemed good to me also having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first c. Vnderstanding how acquir'd From Eye-witnesses not by Revelation To write not things dictated but in order The Prophets then had another sort of Impulse than Luke whose good Design nevertheless may be ascrib'd to the Holy Spirit After the Death of Grotius there came out a third Answer of Rivert's wherein he strives to defend the common Opinion against his famous Antagonist It appears plainly by the manner of his answering that he believ'd that the Holy Spirit had dictated the Scripture word for word and this Opinion is known to be the common Opinion of Protestants who on all occasions call the sacred Writers Amanuenses of the holy Spirit Nay even Catholick Authors Gregory de Valence Bellarmin Tolet and Estius cited by Rivet seem to have been of the same Opinion Cornelius à Lapide whom Mr. Simon cites holds the same concerning the Law and the Prophets though he confesses it was not necessary that God should dictate the words when it was only matter of History or of Moral Precepts which might be known otherways So that it may be reasonably suppos'd that the greatest part of Christian Divines now adays are of the Opinion of verbal Inspiration if we may so call it since there are very few that say the contrary and those who do say it only of some Books as Cornelius à Lapide Every body knows that not only in Sermons but also in Divinity-Lectures upon any part of Scripture some Men strangely wire-draw the Words of the Scripture and seek after Reasons why the holy Spirit as they speak makes use of one Expression rather than another The same thing they do also in Commentaries Which would be altogether absurd if my Supposition were admitted that the Stile of the Scriptures is for the most part human and even careless enough But this is because they commonly take the Opinion of the Jews for granted who have a Proverb or general Maxim concerning the Books of the Law in which they believe all to be inspir'd even to a single Letter that there is not a Letter in the Law whereon there depends not great Mountains I am very glad however that Mr. Simon declares himself openly of the same Opinion with me concerning the Stile of the sacred Writers I wish all Protestants would do the same We should then soon be free from many Disputes that are grounded upon nothing but Grammatical Subtilties We should then perceive that we ought not rigorously to insist upon a great many Expressions in the utmost extent of their Signification as if the sacred Pen-Men had spoken with the same Exactness as do Geometricians We should then understand that no Doctrines which we esteem important ought to be grounded barely upon certain manners of speaking which we cannot be sure were exact because the sacred Writers not affecting exactness of Stile may have used that manner of Expression without any design Such is the Doctrine of the antecedent Imputation of the Sin of Adam which is founded upon the Comparison St. Paul makes Chap. V. of the Epistle to the Romans between the Grace that came by Jesus Christ and the Sin that entred into the World by Adam Men stretch this Comparison with too much Rigor not considering that St. Paul's Stile is the Stile of one that observes little Exactness in his Expressions although in the main his Arguments are admirable and that the laying too great stress upon the turn of his Phrases may expose us to the hazard of falling into gross Error The general Design that he proposes to himself ought only to be stuck to without insisting particularly upon every term and every distinct Period which taken separately and strictly may oft-times prove contrary to what he drives at Those who are a little conversant in the Disputes amongst Protestants will easily see the importance of this Remark The ingenuous Acknowledgment of what there is of Human in the sacred Writings would render the Truth of our Religion more conspicuous to the Eyes of the incredulous whereas it is hid from them by clothing it in certain Notions which common Sense makes them reject and from among which they are not able to pick out the Heavenly Truths Men fancy that for the Establishment of Religion it is requisite to maintain every thing or any thing that if true would be an invincible Proof of it they cast therefore about in their own Minds for such Foundations as they conceive would make it most stable With this their Brain becomes so heated that in the end they rashly assert that these are the real Foundations of Religion and that if these be taken
away Religion will fall to the ground and be destroy'd Thus some Romish Doctors have fancy'd that Men for the most part not being capable to examine Religion themselves it was necessary that God should settle a way whereby they might find it without Examination viz. by the way of Authority And from thence they have concluded That to deny there is an Authority in the World to which People ought intirely to submit is to overthrow Religion But to these Gentlemen it is answer'd That it is absurd in them to fancy that God will not preserve the true Religion amongst Men unless it be in the way that they have imagin'd The same may be answer'd to our Protestant Divines who believe the Inspiration of every word viz. that they are deceived in believing that the Truth of Christian Religion is founded upon that Opinion We ought not to reckon every thing among the Principles of our Religion that unto us seems proper to strengthen it nor to trouble our selves in examining after what manner we would have establish'd it had the thing depended upon us or in asserting how God ought to have done it But we ought to consider things in themselves as they really are and learn what has been the Will of God by what he has done not conclude that he has done this or the other thing because we fancy he ought to have will'd it Libertines who see that to uphold the Truth of Christian Religion Men bring long Metaphysical Arguments which often prove nothing but that according to the Suppositions they have thought fit to make it ought to be so believe presently that Christian Religion has no better Foundation and so reject it as much perhaps through the fault of those Divines who argue in that manner as their own But if things were represented to them as they are in themselves without going about to force them to allow that which is not prov'd they would submit to our Reasons and we should not need to teach them any thing but what Religion injoins them after having convinc'd them of its Truth This is Sir what Mr. N. has writ to me upon the desire that was intimated of his giving some further Explication of his Thoughts I hope it will be found sufficient to convince those who may have mistaken his Sense and who on that account have charg'd him with Opinions which he never had that he is very far from being guilty of what he is so uncharitably accus'd of I will send you by the next the Answers which he makes to divers Objections that have been propos'd to him THE FOURTH LETTER I Believe Sir there is no Condition in the World more deplorable than theirs that publish any thing in Print if it be so that they are bound to satisfy all those that censure them Some Persons have taken it ill that it should be said It was hard to confute the Opinions of Mr. N. They hold it very easy and that there needs no great Ability to do it But they either undertake it not Or if they make any Objection they show that they understand nothing of the matter as the Prior of Bolleville who seems to understand neither what Mr. N. has said nor what himself objects Others confess that it is a very difficult matter and pretend that therefore a Man ought not to trouble himself with it nor raise Scruples in weak Heads which the strongest would find it a difficulty to remove To satisfy the first it would be requisite to show that the Objections propos'd are not strong enough to refute Mr. N's Opinions And that is the very thing that will infallibly offend the others who would have nothing said on that Subject If the Advice of these last be taken the first will undoubtedly say that we were much in the wrong to say that it was very hard to confute an Opinion which they have easily overthrown They will be apt even to say that it is not without design that we have made use of weak Arguments and their crazy Fancies will set no bounds to their Suspicions according to the Custom of too many Divines who glory in a shew of diving into other Mens Thoughts What is to be done in this case One of the two must unavoidably be displeas'd I will not then be afraid Sir to communicate to you the Answers of Mr. N. to some Objections Such as have not read the Explanations which I sent you a while ago with sufficient Attention may perhaps by our Friend's Answers better apprehend his true meaning Objection 1. To say that the Prophets have often express'd themselves in their Prophecies after the same manner that they were wont to do on other occasions and that they were not constantly inspir'd by God with all their Expressions is to lessen the Authority of the Prophecies Answer They that make this Objection could not say any thing that can give more advantage to the Profane For it is as clear as day that the Stile of the Prophets varies according to the diversity of their Genius as has been observ'd and as is agreed by the most able Interpreters Mr. Simon proves it himself Pag. 123. of his Answer and makes appear that what the Prophets said was not the less God's Word But I cannot forbear to observe that our Divines are even more scrupulous than the Jews For these believe the Inspiration of Words only in the Pentateuch whereas they believe it throughout all the Old Testament The Prophecy of Moses says Manasseth Ben. Israel after many other Rabbins was in every respect more honourable and more excellent than the Prophecies of all the other Prophets For to them whensoever they receiv'd the Prophecy the Sense only or the Substance of the matter to be foretold was reveal'd but they declar'd to the People this Thing or Matter in their own words And for that Reason they made use of this form of speaking And the Lord said unto me As if they would say these things which we say to you although we express them in our words contain the Sense which we have receiv'd from God c. Many Christian Divines have said the same things of all the Prophets in general as Mr. Huet in his Demonstration who plainly affirms that the things are to be attributed to the holy Spirit but the Words and the Language to the Prophets He says also elsewhere that Prophetic Extasy does ordinarily produce a hard rough and broken Stile Many others have held the same thing without being thought guilty of Heterodoxy Objection 2. It has been said that David says many things of himself and of his Enemies not thinking to prophesy which contain notwithstanding Predictions of what was to happen to Jesus Christ and his Enemies as what he says Psal. XLI 10. LXIX 26. CIX 8. places which Christ and his Apostles apply to Iudas Nevertheless St. Peter after citing some words of Psal. XVI where David speaks of himself in the