may be found in the Old Testament For Example David says of himself and of his Enemies divers things without thinking of prophesying which contain nevertheless Predictions of that which ought to happen to Christ and his Enemies He says Psal. XLI 10. He that ate of my Bread hath lift up his Heel against me He meant surely some of those who were risen against him in Asolom's Conspiracy as Achitophel or some other and he speaks plainly of a thing happened to himself It is this very thing that inspires him if one may so say these words which betoken what should befal Jesus Christ by the Treachery of one of his Disciples as appears by Iohn XIII 18. The Author of the LXIX th and CIX th Psalms whether it were David or some other did not probably think of fore-telling what should one day befal a Disciple of the Messiah when he curs'd his Enemies And yet St. Peter in the Acts applies some words of these Psalms to Iudas There needs no great sharpsightedness to see that the Author pretended not to speak of Iudas and that he was not immediately inspir'd by the good and merciful Spirit of God when he said Set thou a wicked Man over him and let Satan stand at his Right-hand When he shall be judged let him be condemned and let his Prayer become Sin Let his days be few and let another take his Office Let his Children be Fatherless and his Wife a Widow Let his Children continually be Vagabonds and beg let them seek their Bread also out of their desolate places Let the Extortioner catch all that he hath and let the Stranger spoil his Labour Let there be none to extend Mercy unto him neither let there be any to favour his Fatherless Children Let his Posterity be cut off and in the Generation following let their Name be blotted out Let the Iniquity of his Fathers be remembred with the Lord and let not the Sin of his Mother be blotted out c. It is plain that these are the words of a Man full of excessive Choler and of an extream desire to be revenged Now the Law of Moses permitted not any more than the Gospel to with ill or do it to Children in revenge of the Injury received from their Parents Yet some famous Divines have put in the Title of this Psalm That David AS A TYPE OF JESUS CHRIST being driven on by a singular Zeal prays that Vengeance may be executed on his Enemies And where do they find that Jesus Christ does curse his Enemies at that rate Have they forgotten the words that proceeded from his dying Mouth in favour of the wickedest Race that ever was Those that crucified him were they not the greatest Enemies he had and the most obstinate Adversaries of the Gospel And far from making the Imprecations against them that they deserved did not he pray to his Father to forgive them Has he not ordered us to imitate him and to pray for those that persecute us I cannot understand how it can be said that David as a Type of Iesus Christ made such horrible Imprecations against his Enemies I confess I understand not Christian Religion if it permit the pronouncing such Curses and the wishing to be revenged after so cruel a manner as does the Author of this Psalm and those of divers others in which we find such like Imprecations As that of Psal. cxxxvii O Daughter of Babylon who art to be destroyed happy shall he be that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little Ones against the Stones God forbid that we should desire to dash out the Brains of Infidel's Children Yet nevertheless we see that all these Psalms are indifferently sung in Protestant Churches without taking notice that they are not all equally inspir'd And I remember that asking a Divine how we could sing Psalms full of such Imprecations He answered me slightly that it was lawful to use them against the Enemies of the Church and that for his part he made that Application to them when he sung these Psalms Thus you see what the Jewish Opinion of the Inspiration of words and of the Divinity of each Verse of the Scripture produces We may conceive another sort of Prophecies which consisted not in foretelling things to come but in explaining the Scripture and in composing readily Hymns to the Honour of God There are some Examples of these Hymns in the New Testament as that of the blessed Virgin Mary and some others It seems as if there went only Piety and Zeal to the composing them At least it is very conceivable that a pious zealous Man may easily now a days praise God in that manner without any Preparation A good part of the Psalms seems to have been thus compos'd as also divers other Songs which are in the Old Testament The Psalms where the Verses or the Pauses begin with the Letters of the Hebrew Alphabet seem to have been compos'd at more leisure For this Regularity shews that there was Meditation and Pains used as is in Acrosticks See Psal. cxix and the Lamentations of Ieremy So we see too that in this sort of Works the Holy Writers do not speak in the Name of God nor begin their Discourse with Thus saith the Lord. Yet we may say that the Authors of these pious Songs were full of the Holy Spirit when they compos'd them that is to say it was a Spirit of Piety that carry'd them to take pains in those Compositions and in that sense we may say that they were inspir'd by God though not so immediately as Predictions The Spirit of God is often taken for the Spirit of Holiness that is to say for a disposition of Spirit conformable to the Commandments of God as many Learned Men have observed I will now remark briefly in what manner the Sacred Histories have been written And then in treating of Doctrines I will speak of that sort of Prophecy that consists in explaining the Holy Scripture It is certain that those who took pains in the Histories of the Old and New Testament were pious Persons who had not writ those Histories but out of a Principle of Piety It was not to satisfy our Curiosity that they undertook those Works but to show us the Care that the Providence of God hath always taken of good People and the Punishments it inflicts upon the wicked to give us Examples of Piety and Vertue and lastly to inform us of certain matters of Fact upon which our Faith is founded and of the Precepts which God had given to Jews and Christians by the Ministry of his Prophets Apostles Angels themselves and even of his own Son We ought also to believe that they have given us the Truth of the History to the best of their knowledg without adding or substracting any thing out of design to deceive us And as they were very well informed of the principal matters of Fact which they relate
hundred others that may be brought off from their Inclination to Libertinism by the same Reasons which those are offended at If indeed we ought always to be afraid of saying any thing that is not generally approv'd we should quickly be oblig'd not only to keep silence but also to suppress many things which are both useful and necessary to Salvation There is no Doctrine in the Gospel how holy soever which some Sect of Christians has not perverted and misused Nay the same is yet done daily All the difficulty then lies in knowing whether the treating concerning this Question of the Inspiration of the Authors of the Bible will occasion more Good or Hurt In it self the Thing is good even by the Concession of those that argue against it and there is nothing but the weakness of some Mens Minds that can render it dangerous Thus then the Good or Evil of this Disquisition depends wholly upon the Event which therefore these Gentlemen ought to suffer us to expect before we acknowledg that we have done ill in publishing this Writing of Mr. N. We must add to this that Mr. N. is not the first that has spoken as he does of the Inspiration of the sacred Writers We see many Proofs of it in his Dissertation And besides the places which he has cited out of some Books of Grotius there are others infinitely more strong and more express in those against Rivet Now after having thus answer'd those that would have had this Writing suppress'd it is necessary to give some satisfaction to those also who complain that the Author has not express'd his Opinion with sufficient clearness I have therefore desir'd Mr. N. to explain it to me himself if it were possible in few words and more distinctly in order to remove those injurious Suspicions that may have risen from any Obscurity in his Writing concerning his Faith and his Piety And these are the Heads to which he has reduc'd his Opinion and wherein he agrees with us In the first place says he I believe that no Prophet either of the Old or New Testament has said any thing in the Name of God or as by his order which God had not effectually order'd him to say nor has undertaken to foretel any thing which God had not indeed truly reveal'd to him and that this cannot be doubted of without great Impiety I have said it expresly in many places of my Treatise In the second place I believe that there is no matter of Fact of an importance related in the History of the Old or New Testament which in effect is not true And that tho there may be some slight Circumstances wherein some of the Historians were mistaken yet we ought nevertheless to look upon that History in general as the truest and most holy History that ever was publish'd amongst Men. I am perswaded that those who writ it were very well inform'd of all they relate and that they had not the least intention to deceive us insomuch that it was impossible they should fall into any considerable Error as neither can we do in believing what they have said And that there may be no Equivocation By a matter of importance I mean all the Commandments that the sacred Historians assure us were given to the Jews by God all the Miracles that are found in the History of the Scripture all the principal Events in that History and generally all the matters of Fact on which our Faith is grounded In the third place I believe with all Christians that all the Doctrines propos'd by the Authors of the Scriptures to Jews and Christians to be believ'd are really and truly Divine Doctrines although it may be suppos'd that they did not immediately learn them from Heaven I am as much perswaded as any Man that there is no sort of reasoning made use of in the dogmatical places of the holy Scripture where the Prophets and Apostles instruct us concerning the Promises or the Will of God that can lead us into Error or into the belief of any thing that is false or contrary to Piety I believe in the fourth place That Jesus Christ was absolutely infallible as well as free from all Sin because of the Godhead that was always united to him and which perpetually inspir'd him insomuch that all that he taught is as certain as if God himself had pronounc'd it I have explain'd this clearly in my Writing In the last place I believe that God has often dictated to the Prophets and to the Apostles the very words which they should use Of this I have also given some Examples In these things I agree with all Christian Divines And I believe further as well as they that these five Heads of our Belief may be undeniably prov'd against Libertines and Atheists by the Authority of Jesus Christ and his Apostles to whom God has born Testimony by an infinite number of Miracles which are more clearly demonstrable to have been really done than any Fact whatsoever of all ancient History For Example it may be prov'd by positive Testimonies of Matters of Fact that Jesus Christ did really rise again from the Dead and that the Apostles had the Gift of Miracles more clearly than it can be prov'd that ever there was a Roman Emperor call'd Trajan If any one conceive that this kind of Evidence is not sufficient to convince us of the Truth of these Facts or that the Resurrection of Jesus Christ and the Miracles of his Apostles do not sufficiently prove without any thing further that they were not Deceivers I confess I understand not what further Proofs can be given of these things unless God should raise in our days a Prophet that should do the same Miracles over again before our Eyes It may be there are some who believe that the holy Spirit gives them inward assurance of the Truth of the Gospel and who imagine that this inward Testimony is a more convincing Proof than all those I have spoken of But as there are not many that have this Belief and as those that have it cannot make use of that pretended inward Testimony to convince another who does not himself feel it we may without troubling our selves further with them leave them to enjoy that Chimerical Satisfaction which their meer Imagination affords them The Authority of the holy Scriptures being thus settl'd I will now shew you wherein it seems to me that the generality of Divines are deceiv'd and in what I am not of their Opinion They affirm that all that is in the sacred Books Histories Prophecies c. has been immediately inspir'd both as to the Matter and Words That all the Books in the Jews Catalogue ought to be reckon'd amongst the inspir'd Books That when the Apostles preach'd the Gospel they were so inspir'd that they could not be deceiv'd not even in a thing of no consequence at all and that they knew at the very first without any exercise either of Reason or Memory what they
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
and Protestants who injudiciously oppose the Opinions of their Adversaries and as ill defend their own to be guilty of ill Design If a Man would make an exact Catalogue of all the Catholick Authors who have made impertinent Answers to the Protestants and have used as impertinent Objections against them it would amount to several Volumes in Folio and the number of Protestant Authors who have succeeded no better would be little less Nevertheless I do not believe there is any Body so unjust as to pretend That the generality of those Authors on both sides have been Cheats who maintained what they did not Believe or opposed what they did You Sir have too much knowledg of the Frame and Constitution of Man's Mind to be ignorant that it is capable of believing in good earnest the most ridiculous things in the World and which is yet more astonishing of giving its Assent at the same time to two things directly opposite If you should on purpose invent the most ridiculous Religion imaginable there would be People found in Asia whose Opinions would not appear more rational You have read Mr. Bernier's Travels and the History of the Bramins What do you think of the Heathens of the great Mogul's Country and of those famous Indian Philosophers Do you think there is none among them that believes the monstrous Principles of their Theology For my part I am perswaded there are very few that see the absurdity of it You will say perhaps That those Nations are under a blindness which is next to down-right Foolishness and that the Europeans are not to be judged of by Indians But are there not in your Opinion some even among the Christians who believe things absurd and against all sort of appearance The Protestants at least do pass that censure upon many of the Roman Catholic Doctrines as Transubstantiation the Infallibility of the Pope or Council c. And the Catholicks are not wanting to make like reproaches to Protestants The Catholicks believe That many Units make more than a single one and do so much believe it that he would pass for a Fool amongst them as well as amongst other Christians that would undertake to deny it and nevertheless they believe that a Million of Humane Bodies separate from one another make but One. This is a visible Contradiction Yet you know this is their Opinion concerning the Body of Christ. There are some that assuredly believe That God is not the Author of Sin c. Who at the same time assert That he created Man with a Design to let him fall into Sin as a means to make his Justice Eminent in punishing the greatest part and his Mercy in pardoning some few It is evident that to say God ordered Sin should be on purpose to accomplish thereby his Ends is to make him the Author of it But this is the frailty of Man's Mind he sees not these Contradictions because he has been so long accustomed to shut his Eyes when they are presented to him A Man may then not only defend an ill Opinion that he believes but also believe things absurd and even contrary to one another without being aware And that 's the Reason our Friends suspect not Mr. N. to be a Deist though some may think his Opinions favour those that are so called But that you may be able to judg I send you here an abridgment of what he says which one of my Friends imparted to me a while ago There are says Mr. N. three sorts of things in Holy Writ Prophecies Histories and Doctrines which are not ascribed to particular Revelation To begin with the First God made himself known to the Prophets after several manners but it seems as if they might be reduced to these three They had Visions by Day or by Night they heard Voices or they were inwardly Inspired It is not our business here to examine these things in themselves We only enquire after what manner they have written that which they learnt by these Visions bythese Voices or by these Inspirations Prophecies have been written by God's express Command by the Prophets themselves or by others For we cannot tell whether the Prophets themselves have always Written or Dictated them or whether their Disciples have Collected and Written them as exactly as their memory would serve However it be we cannot doubt but God made known to the Prophets that which we find in their Books and that we ought to believe St. Peter when he says Prophecy came not in old time by the Will of Man but holy Men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost To tell us that which appeared to them in Visions whether it be they themselves that writ it or others that heard them tell it there needed nothing but a good memory A Man has no need of inspiration to relate faithfully what he has seen especially when the impression it made upon him was strong as commonly happen'd to those to whom God sent any Vision Hence it is observed that every Prophet has his particular Stile by which it appears that they related what they had seen as they used to relate other things Their Stile was the same when they spake by the Order of God with that which they us'd in their ordinary Discourse The same Judgment is to be made concerning the recital of the words they heard There needed no more but a good Memory to retain them But we cannot be Assured that they have always recited exactly the very words they heard and not sometimes thought it sufficient only to tell us the sense When God told them the Name of some Person it was necessary they should retain the Syllables of that Name as when God ordered Isaiah to foretel that Cyrus should give the Jews liberty to return into Palestine it behoved Isaiah to remember those two Syllables Co-res But there is no likelihood that in the rest of his Discourse Isaiah has related word for word what he heard The diversity of Stile does moreover prove that the Prophets expressed after their own manner the sense of what they heard There is for example much difference between the Stiles of Isaiah and Amos. Isaiah's manner of writing is high and lofty On the contrary that of Amos is low and vulgar and we find in it divers popular Expressions and many Proverbs which sufficiently testify that this Prophet who was a Shepherd expressed after his own way what God had said to him This is the Opinion of St. Ierom in the Preface of his Commentary on this Prophet The Prophet Amos saith he was skilled in Knowledg not in Language for the same Holy Spirit spoke in him that spoke by all the Prophets This Doctrine attributes clearly the expression to the Prophets and the thing it self to the Holy Spirit which appears also by the Remark he makes on Chap. III. saying We told you that he uses the Terms of his own Profession and because a
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
of Prophetic Inspiration I am not the first that has made such-like Observations St. Ierom in his Dialogue against the Pelagians Lib. 3. brings in Atticus who bears the part of an Orthodox Doctor speaking of St. Paul Do you think St. Paul at that time when he writ The Cloak which I left at Troas when thou comest bring with thee and the Books but especially the Parchments did think of the Heavenly Mysteries and not of those things which are useful to Humane Life and necessary to the Body c The Apostle is struck by an Officer and he falls foul upon the High Priest that commanded him to be smitten God shall smite thee thou whited Wall Where is that patience of our Saviour who as a Lamb led to the Slaughter open'd not his Mouth but answered mildly to him that struck him If I have spoken Ill convince me of the ill but if Well why do you strike me We do not detract from the Apostle but we declare the Glory of our Lord who suffering in the Flesh overcame the difficulties and weaknesses of the Flesh. Not to mention what he says in another place Alexander the Copper-smith did me much Evil the Lord the Righteous Iudg will reward him in that day It is true St. Ierom elsewhere disapproves a part of that which here he makes his Orthodox Doctor speak but it is plain at least that one might speak it without being guilty of Heresy Lastly When we examine the Discourses which we have of Christ's Disciples before divers Judges we may easily perceive that they speak with much Piety and Courage but it seems not that they say any thing which one might not as well say without Inspiration If we read the Histories of those that have been put to death for Religion in the last Ages we shall find many that were not Prophets making excellent Discourses at their Trials without being prepar'd before-hand St. Stephen was full of the gospel-Gospel-Spirit when he made the Harangue we read Acts VII It seems nevertheless that he therein mix'd divers Circumstances of History which were nothing to the purpose of the matter he spoke about and which neither can tolerably be reconcil'd with the History of the Old Testament And indeed very learned Men have been of Opinion that St. Stephen's Memory fail'd him Mr. Cappel in his Spicilegium on Vers. 16. says It is certain that in this place we should read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and understand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it might not be said Abraham but his Grandchild Jacob bought this Monument Or we may say that Stephen by the fault of his Memory confounded two Facts that were somewhat alike to wit the Purchase made by Abraham whereof Gen. XXIII with that made by Jacob Gen. XXXIII 19. However it is no ways incongruous that by the Holy Spirit or the Spirit of God we should understand the Spirit of Holiness and Constancy which the Gospel gives or such a disposition of Mind as is an Effect of our Faith We know it is a manner of speaking common in the Old and New Testament and that the Hebrews call the Spirit of Iealousy the Spirit of Stupidity the Spirit of Fear the Spirit of Courage the Spirit of Meekness c. the different dispositions of Mind that render a Man Jealous Stupid Fearful Couragious Meek c. The Criticks have observ'd this long ago But I must needs desire you once again to take notice that when I say the Disciples of Christ had not Prophetic Inspirations for answering before the Tribunal of Judges to the Accusations brought against them I do not mean thereby that it never so fell out but only that ordinarily they spoke without particular Inspiration I conceive indeed that if one of them had appeared before a Judg whose Language he naturally understood not it would have been necessary that God should have dictated to him the proper words he was to make use of And I doubt not but God has often done even that in favour of such of the Apostles as have preach'd the Gospel to barbarous Nations beyond the Limits of the Roman Empire and perhaps too sometimes amongst the Romans and Greeks However it be it seems to me that if what I have been saying be consider'd it must be granted that the Passages of St. Luke and St. Matthew where Christ promises his Spirit to his Disciples are not strong enough to render the common Opinion indisputable This Sir is about half the Writing which was given me concerning the thoughts of Mr. N. on this Subject It is too long to make an end of transcribing it at present But you shall have the rest by the next Post upon condition you will promise me to peruse it carefully and give me your sense of it It were extreamly to be wished that some able and judicious Person would undertake to handle this Matter thorowly in opposition to our Author but without Heat and Passion This Opinion is maintain'd by so many Proofs and Arguments that seem so strong that tho I know it may be render'd very odious and that very malicious Consequences may be drawn from it yet I must confess I do not know by what Principles it can be overthrown And that which gives this Author yet more advantage is That this Matter has been so little handled that all the Writings upon the Scripture to this day afford us scarce any light therein A Man must fetch all out of his own Stock to answer him And it is no small trouble to have one's Mind continually exercised in clearing up the Difficulties of a Subject so little known and giving clear Principles in so obscure a Matter I would be glad Sir that there were any in your Province or elsewhere that would undertake to clear it for I know none of my Friends here that will ingage in it If you could prevail with some learned and moderate Divine to take that task in hand without railing as Divines too often do when they know not how to answer their Antagonist you would infinitely oblige those who have read this little Writing I am c. THE SECOND LETTER I Am not surpriz'd Sir at your desire to see the latter part of that Writing whereof I sent you the former by last Post before your are willing to give me your Judgment on it A matter so important and so delicate requires to be considered with much Attentiveness We must lay aside then once again the Examination of the critical History to resume it next Post. For I cannot transcribe the rest of the Writing of Mr. N. and entertain you at the same time upon any other Subject Mr. whom you mention is well qualified to instruct his Flock in matters of Piety but has not I doubt Learning sufficient nor Parts strong enough to master the Difficulties that attend the answering directly and by positive Arguments a Writing which some other very able Divines dare not meddle with It were better in my
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
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
Piety they say that the Controversy about them is not considerable Now if there be no danger in believing Expressions to be divine that have nothing in them but human when the Doctrines therein contain'd are not contrary to the reveal'd Truth What danger can there be in believing that any Truths which we acknowledg to be Divine are express'd in Terms not divinely inspir'd The same reason that makes us believe there is no danger in the one perswades us also there is none in the other It is because we are not sav'd by the Words but by the Things The other thing observable is that we receive amongst the Canonical Books of the New Testament Writings whose Authors are not well known which we could not do if we thought it necessary in receiving a Book as Canonical to be assur'd that every Word was inspir'd since to be assur'd thereof we sought to have evident Proofs that it was a Man inspir'd by God who was the Author of that Book For Example it is not known who writ the Epistle to the Hebrews whether it were an Apostle or some Disciple of the Apostles so that we cannot know whether the words of that Epistle were inspir'd or not But for all that it is receiv'd because it is certain it was written in the Apostles time and because it contains nothing that is not perfectly conformable to their Doctrine Thus it is generally thought of little importance whether the words be divinely inspir'd or no provided the things they express be true So that one may say that in truth Divines are generally very favourable to the Opinion I maintain although themselves are not aware of it I do not think it necessary to insist much in proving that God has not always dictated to the Apostles the very words that they used since it is evident that he did not always dictate to them the things Not that I make any doubt but he has often reveal'd to them the things and even inspir'd them with the very words as in the Prophecies where there was need to remember divers Names and when they spoke strange Languages Tho it may nevertheless be suppos'd that as to what concerns the Gift of Tongues God dispos'd at once the Brains of them that receiv'd it in such a manner that they could without trouble joyn certain Sounds to certain Ideas just as they would have done if they had been us'd to it from their Infancy and that afterwards he left them at liberty to make use of those new Languages according as they should think fit And thus those that learn'd by Inspiration the Language of the Medes for Example had their Brains dispos'd in the same manner as they would have had if they had learn'd that Language from their Infancy and could make use of it as easily as their Mother-Tongue At least it is evident that some who had receiv'd this miraculous Gift did sometimes abuse it which they would not have done if they never had spoken those Languages but by present immediate Inspiration See 1 Cor. XIV But without determining that Point I believe with Erasmus that the Apostles learn'd not the Greek they us'd by Inspiration because if it were so they would have spoke it like the Native Grecians whereas they mix'd with it a world of Hebraisms as the French that speak Latin do Gallicisms See Erasmus upon Acts X. Not that I believe neither that they had learn'd the Greek Language by the Commerce they had with the Greeks during the Functions of their Charge as Erasmus thought probable it is more likely they had learn'd it from their Infancy For St. Paul who was born in Cilicia where they spoke nothing but Greek undoubtedly had learn'd it young but he corrupted it afterwards by his long dwelling in Iudaea where besides the Greek they spake a broken Chaldee whose Dialect mixing with the Greek render'd it obscure and difficult such as is the Stile of that Apostle The others that were born in Iudaea had learn'd it also from their Infancy as it was commonly there spoken that is to say extreamly corrupted by the ancient Language of the Country which was still spoken there as appears by divers places of the New Testament This the same Erasmus has well observ'd in the places already cited When I excuse the Apostles says he in his Letter to Eckius who learn'd their Greek not out of Demosthenes his Orations but out of the Discourse of the common People I deny not their Gift of Tongues nor does it thence follow that they might not learn Greek by common Converse Assuredly they learn'd the Syriac by common Converse Why might they not in like manner learn the Greek For by means of Alexander the Great and the Roman Empire Aegypt and the greater part of Syria and all the lesser Asia nay almost all the East as Jerom says spoke Greek And I cannot think that the holy Spirit made them to forget what they had formerly learn'd The Greek Language then was spoken in Iudaea together with the ancient Language which the Jews brought from Babylon that is to say the Chaldean but corrupted in process of time as the French and Flemish are spoke together now adays in Flanders And as the French they now speak in Flanders is full of the Flemish Dialect and of Terms unknown in France so the Greek of Iudaea vvas heretofore full of Chaldaisms and of barbarous ways of speaking which undoubtedly grated the Grecian's Ears The History of the Acts of the Apostles that tells us in several places that Hebrew or Chaldean was spoken in Iudaea tells us also that they us'd another Language which could be no other than Greek St. Luke observes Acts XXII that St. Paul haranguing the Jews began to speak to them in Hebrew and that when they understood him speak to them in the Hebrew Language they hearken'd to him with the greater silence which gives us to understand that he might have spoke to the People in another Language for otherwise there had been no ground to observe that they listn'd more attentively when they perceiv'd he spake Hebrew seeing that in speaking any other Language but Hebrew they could not have understood him It appears then that Greek was spoken in Iudaea and it is likely Pilat spoke Greek to our Lord and that our Lord answer'd him in the same The People only preferr'd the Language of the Country before the Greek which was not so ancient and which they had not learn'd but by force because of the Kings of Syria that tyranniz'd over them and so they spoke it not exactly It is true there were Iews that spoke Greek very purely but they were such as were born in Countries where only Greek was spoken as Philo or they had acquir'd a habit of speaking good Greek by reading or studying as Iosephus So at this day there are Walloons that speak French very well altho the generality of that People speak it extreamly ill because
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
and believes Haman was about to force the Queen Haman is seiz'd upon to be put to Death and the Gibbet being found ready sitted for Mordecai Haman by the king's order is hanged upon it Mordecai succeeds in the place of Haman and by Esther's means obtains another Edict whereby the Jews are permitted to take Arms and defend themselves against those that should fall upon them The day mention'd in the Edict being come the Jews kill all those that went about to destroy them They slay five hundred in Shushan And the like leave being given them the next day they kill three hundred more besides Haman's ten Sons who were hang'd by the King's order Now upon the consideration of all these Circumstances it is observ'd by some that if Vnity of Time and Place had been observ'd in this Story there would have been nothing wanting to have made it a good Tragi-Comedy For my part I determine nothing upon the Point But this I can say that in all likelihood Mr. Simon had not read of a long time this Book when he writ the 129th Page of his Answer where he says That though it should be suppos'd that the Books of Esther Judith and Tobit are not true Histories yet it does not follow therefore that they ought to be left out of the Catalogue of Canonical Books And that he has observ'd in his Critical History after St. Jerom that the Parabolical Stile has always been in esteem amongst the Eastern People and that a Book whether it contain a true History or a plain Parable or a History mix'd with Parables is not therefore the less true or less Canonical If the Histories contain'd in these Books are not true they are certainly not Parables but Romances The bare reading them is sufficient to show that those who writ them publish'd them not for Books of Morality but only as surprizing and wonderful Stories To say nothing of Iudith and Tobit it is plain by the Original which the Author of the Book of Esther gives to the Feast of Purim that he compos'd that Book with design to make it look like a true History See the IXth Chap. v. 27. to the end The Original of a Feast uses not to be founded upon a Parable and such a History as that of Esther is not wont to be mix'd with Parables Mr. Simon says well that there are Parables in the New Testament so well circumstantiated that one would take them for true Histories But we must not have read either the Book of Esther or the New Testament to be perswaded that there is any resemblance betwixt the History of that Book and the Parables of our Saviour The Parable most like to a History is that of Dives and Lazarus but there is nothing in it like the History of Esther See Ioseph Antiq. lib. 11. cap. 6. Objection 9. The Prudence and Reason of the Apostles is often spoken of as if the use they made thereof were inconsistent with the Inspiration attributed to them but these things may well agree together as Mr. Simon observes Answer If Mr. Simon understood what he would say when he speaks of reconciling Human Prudence with Inspiration he believes undoubtedly the same thing that I do concerning the Inspiration of the Apostles We agree that the Terms were not inspir'd The question is only about the Things The Inspiration of the things consists either in presenting to the Mind general Principles from whence they that are inspir'd according as they have occasion afterward draw Consequences or in furnishing it with Arguments ready fram'd If God furnish'd the Minds of the Apostles with Arguments ready fram'd they made no use of their Reason having nothing to do but to declare what the holy Spirit had inspir'd them with as the Prophets were only to express the Sense of what God had said to them And this is that which every body calls properly Inspiration But if it be suppos'd that God presented to the Minds of the Apostles only general Principles of which by their own reasoning they made necessary and fit Application upon emergent occasions they were in that case no more inspir'd than those who having carefully read the holy Scripture have the Ideas thereof so present in their Minds that they never fail to make use of it when it is necessary In this last Supposition Reason indeed is made use of but in the other it is not Now it appears that Mr. Simon is not of the Opinion that excludes the use of Reason And therefore I say it is probable that he is of the same Opinion with me though he know it not For I deny not but God might have presented to the Minds of the Apostles either by supernatural or natural ways the general Ideas of which they should stand in need to defend themselves at their Trials I only deny that God always inspir'd them with all the Arguments they made use of on those occasions Mr. Simon adds That to say that the Spirit of Courage and Holiness which the Gospel produces in our Hearts dictated to the Apostles what they should say is to destroy intirely the inward Grace which God did spread abroad in the Hearts of his Apostles and which he yet daily spreads abroad in the Hearts of the Faithful But what does he mean by this inward Grace which is common to the Apostles and the Faithful Is it not the Spirit of the Gospel At least the Faithful have nothing else in common with the Apostles Now if the Apostles by virtue of this Promise It is not you that speak it is the Spirit of your Father that speaks in you have receiv'd as Mr. Simon gives us to understand only the inward Grace which God spreads abroad daily in the Hearts of the Faithful the Inspirations of the Apostles were not different from those of the Faithful now a days Objection 10. Whereas it is said That the Apostles spoke many things at their Trials which might have been spoken without Inspiration and from thence is inferr'd that it is not necessary to believe that they were inspir'd with those things This way of arguing may be apply'd to the Prophets whom nevertheless we acknowledg to have been truly inspir'd Mr. Simon Resp. 131. Answer Mr. Simon who sees nothing in Books but what his Passion shows him might have taken notice that I said that the Prophets teach us they are inspir'd when they say Thus saith the Lord c. There are two ways to know if a thing be inspir'd The first consists in observing if those who say this or that thing maintain that they had it from God by an extraordinary Revelation whereof they give undeniable Proofs as did the Prophets The second is when the thing it self declar'd shows it to be so When the first way fails we must have recourse to the second and where they both fail we have no reason to believe there is any Inspiration Now this is that which appears in many Discourses of the
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
having themselves seen them or taken them out of good Records we may be consident that for the main of the History they tell us nothing that is not exactly true These Qualifications alone are sufficient to oblige us to give Credit to them An Historian that is honest and well inform'd of that which he relates is worthy of Credit And if you add thereto that he has also suffer'd Death in maintaining the Truth of his History as the Apostles did who were put to death for maintaining that they had seen and heard that which the Gospel tells us of Jesus Christ then not only that History will be worthy of Credit but they who shall refuse to believe it can pass for no other than Fools or obstinate Persons In this manner we may be fully assur'd of the Truth of the History of the New Testament that is to say That there was a Jesus who did divers Miracles who was rais'd from the Dead ascended up into Heaven and who taught the Doctrine which we find in the Gospels And this Jesus having born witness to the History of the Jews we cannot doubt its truth at least as to the principal Matters This can not be call'd in question without absolutely renouncing Christianity But People believe commonly two things which seem to me groundless unless they ground them upon Jewish Tradition a Principle as is well known extreamly uncertain They believe first that the sacred Historians were inspir'd with the Things themselves And next that they were inspir'd also with the Terms in which they have express'd them In a word that the holy History was dictated word for word by the holy Spirit and that the Authors whose Names it bears were no other than Secretaries of that Spirit who writ exactly as it dictated As to what concerns the Inspiration of Historical Matters of Fact I observe First That they suppose it without bringing any positive Proof and that consequently a Man may with good reason reject their Supposition They say only that if it were not so we could not be perfectly certain of the truth of the History But beside that a Consequence cannot undeniably prove a Fact and that it may happen that one cannot disprove a Consequence although that which is pretended to be prov'd thereby be not true I affirm that it is false that we cannot be perfectly certain of the main substance of a History unless we suppose it inspir'd We are for Example perfectly certain that Iulius Caesar was kill'd in the Senate by a Conspiracy whereof Brutus and Cassius were the Chiefs without believing that they who have inform'd us hereof were inspir'd There are such like matters in the Histories of all Nations which we cannot doubt of without being guilty of Folly and Opiniatrety and yet without supposing that these Histories were writ by Divine Inspiration In the second place this Opinion supposes without necessity a Miracle of which the Scripture it self says nothing To relate faithfully a matter of Fact which a Man has seen and well observed requires no Inspiration The Apostles had no need of Inspiration to tell what they had seen and what they had heard Christ say There needs nothing for that but Memory and Honesty Neither had those Authors who writ only the things that came to pass before their time as the Author of the Books of Chronicles any more need of Inspiration for copying of good Records And as for those who made the Records there was no more requisite than that they should be well inform'd of what they set down either by their Eyes or by their Ears or by faithful Witnesses It will be said perhaps that according to this Opinion the Faith which we build upon the Scripture will be no other than a Faith purely human because it will be grounded only upon Human Testimonies To this I answer That neither do we know any more than by a Human Faith that the Book which we call the Gospel of St. Matthew is truly his It is nothing but the uniform Consent of Christians since the beginning of Christianity to this day that makes us believe it which in truth is no more than a Testimony purely Human. We do not believe it because we are assur'd of it by an Oracle from Heaven which has told us that this Book is truly that Apostle's but on the same account that we believe that the Eneid is truly Virgil's and the Iliad Homer's But that which they here call Human Faith is of as great certainty as the Demonstrations of Geometry And even Divine Faith it self as they call it is built upon this Certainty For in truth we do not believe in Jesus Christ but because we are perswaded that the History we have of him is true And how do we know that this History is true Because Eye-witnesses have written it and have suffer'd Death to maintain the truth of their Testimonies And how are we certain that these were Eye-witnesses and that they suffer'd Death rather than deny what they said By History that is to say by the Testimony of Men who affirm it to us constantly from the time of the Establishment of the Christian Religion to the Age we live in So that Human Faith is found to be the ground of Divine Faith But we need not fear that this Foundation is not solid enough For without ceasing to be a Man and reasoning no more than a Brute it cannot be disputed as has been made appear by many Learned Men who have written of the Truth of Christian Religion In the third place The common Opinion is contrary to the Testimony even of the Sacred Writers St. Luke begins his Gospel after this manner For asmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in Order a Declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us even as they delivered them unto us who from the beginning were Eye-witnesses and Ministers of the Word It seemed good to me also having had perfect Vnderstanding of all things from the very first to write unto thee in order most excellent Theophilus that thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed You may observe in these words a Confirmation of what I have been saying and a full Proof that St. Luke learn'd not that which he told us by Inspiration but by Information from those who knew it exactly Now if you allow St. Luke to have so faithfully related to us the Life and Discourses of Jesus without having been particularly inspir'd that we ought to receive what he tells us with an entire belief in his Fidelity you ought not to make any difficulty to grant the same concerning the other Historians of the Scripture If any of them ought to be inspir'd certainly they were the Evangelists And if you will have another Example of a Histoory written without Inspiration you have but to read the Books of Kings and of the Chronicles being Extracts out of publick Registers and out
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
he believ'd not that the Apostles were mov'd by a perpetual Inspiration to write what they did We may joyn with St. Ierom Origen from whom he had this Opinion concerning the Dispensation that he attributes to these two Apostles and divers Greek Fathers who also followed Origen as St. Ierom writing to St. Austin observes in the Apology he makes for this part of his Commentary Thus you see that the most able Interpreters of Scripture that Christian Antiquity has had have been of the same Opinion with me I may also say that the most Learned Criticks of these last Ages have believ'd the same thing since Erasmus and Grotius have publickly maintain'd it those two great Men who are beyond dispute in the first Rank amongst the Moderns that have concern'd themselves in writing on the Bible Quorum se pectore tota Vetustas Condidit major collestis viribus exit Erasmus upon the second Chapter of St. Matthew says thus St. Jerom abhors the Imputation of Falshood to the Apostles not that of slips of Memory Nor is the Authority of the Scripture forthwith questionable because they differ in Words or Sense as long as the main of the Matter treated of and that whereon our Salvation depends is clear For as that Divine Spirit that govern'd the Mind of the Apostles suffered them to be ignorant of some things to make Mistakes and to err either in Iudgment or Affection without any damage to the Gospel nay it improves that failing to the help of our Faith so it is not unlikely that it so influenced the Faculty of their Memory that though something after the manner of Men might scape them yet that should not only not derogate from the Credit of the Holy Scripture but might even gain Credit to it with those who otherwise might be apt to slander it as written by Confederacy Of this sort is that of putting one Name for another which Jerom confesses to be somewhere done or of relating things out of order c. Christ only is stiled the Truth He alone was free from all Error He says also upon Acts X. Neither do I think it necessary to attribute every thing that was in the Apostles to a Miracle They were Men some things they were ignorant of in some they were mistaken He maintains likewise the same Opinion at large in his Epistles lib. 2. Ep. 6. against Eckius who had blam'd him in a Letter he had written to him and he thus concludes all that matter Christ suffer'd his own to err even after they had receiv'd the Comforter but without danger of Apostatizing from the Fundamentals of the Christian Faith even as at this day we confess the Church may err witthout that danger And to conclude how do you know whether Christ would not that this compleat Praise should be kept only for himself who stiles himself alone the Truth As he alone was without Spot or Blemish of Sin according to the Opinion of the Antients so perhaps he only was beyond all exception true Nothing could be said more formally upon this Subject But Grotius who speaks not so plainly is not wanting for all that to explain himself sufficiently giving us to understand that all that the Apostles said was not in his Opinion immediately inspir'd Paul says he in his Appendix to his Commentary concerning Anti-Christ in two places 1 Thess. IV. 14. and 2 Cor. XV. 22. speaking of the Resurection divides those that are to rise again into two kinds Those who are already dead and those who shall be alive at that time But of this last number he makes himself one using this Pronoun We And in that to the Corinthians We that shall be alive as much as to say he made account that the Resurrection would happen within the time of his Life speaking herein not dogmatically but conjecturally as he does also concerning his Iourney into Spain Rom. XV. 28. and frequently in other places As not the Prophets so neither had the Apostles constant Revelations in all things And the things in which they had not receiv'd Revelation of those they speak conjecturally as other Men. We have Examples thereof 1 Sam. XVI 6. 2 Sam. VII 3. The ablest Divine among the Arminians was also of this Opinion as you may see by consulting the place in the Margent but to ease you of seeking it if you are not at leisure or want convenience I will transcribe some of the words It is not absurd to grant says he that the holy Spirit may have left the Writers of the sacred Books to the common Condition of Mankind and to their own Frailty in relating those things that belonged to the Circumstance of a Fact for which a due knowledg and Memory was sufficient even altho that was subject to failing He says also a little lower It is better and would perhaps cause less Scandal to acknowledg freely and willingly a light failing of Memory that so we may not seem to favour things wrested and absurd rather than to make use of absurd Interpretations in excuse of lighter failings Otherwise the suspicion of a failing is not only not avoided but it is increased and because the Fault is not acknowledged it seems as if Truth were not in good earnest sought by us but that Obstinacy were for some reason or other made use of which ought to be look'd upon as the greatest Reproach imaginable to Professors of the Christian Religion He shows afterwards That it follows not because the Apostles might be deceived in things of small importance that therefore they could fall into any considerable Error for want of Memory And the principal Reason he gives is For that the Fundamental Doctrines depend not on a Circumstance which they could forget nor have they any thing in them obscure or hard to be retain'd Which is so true says he that I make no difficulty to affirm That if any one says there is a Sense in the Scripture necessary to Salvation which appears at first contrary to Reason we ought thereby to judg he attributes to the Scripture a Sense it has not And this is what I believe and am convinc'd of by reading the sacred Books I confess that the most part of Divines now a days are of a contrary Opinion But as I pretend not to oblige any body to approve my Judgment by the Authority of those I have quoted so neither do I hold my self obliged to submit to the Authority of a crowd of Learned Men who do but say the same thing one after another without ever examining or bringing Reasons for it We must however observe here two things of very great importance which are not ordinarily reflected on The first is That in one Controversy which we have with the Roman Church our Divines do all agree that we ought not to have so much regard to Words as Things for upon supposition that in the Apocryphal Books there is nothing contrary to
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
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
this occasion which is express'd in these terms The Apostles and Elders came together for to consider of this matter And when there had been much disputing Peter rose up and said c. The common Opinion is that when the Debate was about Doctrinal Matters the Truth was immediately presented to the Minds of the Apostles without any need of Meditation This is undoubtedly true as to the things that Jesus Christ had taught them clearly And they needed no extraordinary Inspiration to call them to mind But this Principle is extended by some to all the Functions of their Charge Now ask if that were so what need was there that the Apostles should not only meet but also talk a long while together The first that had spoke would have sound all the rest of the same mind and there would have been no more to do but for him to pronounce upon the Question according to their general though tacit Agreement It cannot be said there was no Conference amongst the Apostles and Elders concerning this doctrine since St. Luke after having said that the Apostles and Elders came together immediately adds that there was much disputing and that Peter rose up and said c. Neither can the Principle of Mr. Simon be here made use of who says that the Apostles might not determine any thing by their own Authority but by the common Consent of all the Church and that therefore it was that they assembl'd and expos'd in publick their Reasons for not imposing Jewish Ceremonies upon the Gentiles If the Apostles were as much inspir'd as the Jewish Prophets of the Old Testament it is ridiculous to say that they ought to determine nothing by their own Authority but by the Consent of all the Church They had no more to do but to declare what the holy Spirit had reveal'd to them as did the Prophets who met not together to confer about their prophecies before the pronouncing of them but pronounc'd them as soon as God had commanded them without staying for any body's Consent And herein they acted not by their private Authority but by the Authority that God gave them in commanding them to speak to the People No more would the Apostles have acted by their own private Authority in following the Motions of the holy Spirit But Mr. Simon has fancy'd a very particular sort of Inspiration in the Apostles He says it was necessary they should declare that they determin'd nothing which was not conformable to the holy Scriptures and to the Doctrine which they had receiv'd from their Master and that for that Reason it was necessary to deliberate thereupon in Assemblies in which their Opinions happen'd to be sometimes divided A Man must be very acute that can comprehend how Men inspir'd after a Prophetic manner could be of different Opinions But Mr. Simon clears this Difficulty wonderfully in the following words We ought not says he to be surpriz'd at this Diversity of Opinions since every one grounded his particular one upon Inspiration Now this is that which should have hinder'd them from being of different Opinions since assuredly God inspires not several Opinions about one and the same thing It is all one as if one should say that we ought not to be surpriz'd that of two Prophets one should say a thing shall happen and the other that it shall not happen because they both ground their Predictions upon Inspiration And indeed Mr. Simon corrects himself after a fashion by adding Or rather upon the Authority of the Scriptures and the Light which they had receiv'd from Religion If he understands by the Inspiration of the Apostles nothing but the Light which they had receiv'd from Religion why does he make all this ado since herein we agree with him He ought to tell us whether or no when the Apostles spoke by Inspiration they did any thing but express in their own way the Reasonings which God had put ready fram'd into their Minds If that be so how can we conceive that their Opinions should not be one and the same And if he inspir'd them not with the Reasonings they used then we cannot attribute Prophetic Inspiration to them since it is therein that Prophetic Inspiration consists It is very absurd therefore to believe that all the Reasonings the Apostles us'd in preaching the Gospel and all those we read in their Books were inspir'd For it is therein that the Inspiration of the Apostles is ordinarily conceiv'd to consist This is that uniform constant and ordinary Inspiration which Mr. Simon comprehends not because he never thought well upon it Nor indeed does he know what Opinion he is of Sometimes he speaks like the generality of Divines sometimes again he openly contradicts them as may be seen by the words I have cited He must study a little better this matter if he will have us answer him For it is very likely that for the most part he understands not himself I will give but one Example more of it It is that which he says concerning the Author of Ecclesiastes p. 138. For we need but read his words to find that the Prior of Bolleville minds not what he says The Author says he of this Work did not design ONLY to perswade Men to pass their Time in Pleasure To which may be added that Declamation being the proper Character of a Preacher it is no wonder to see him despise all the ordinary Business and Imployments of the World and to prefer an easy commodious Life before all the Troubles that attend a contrary Practice For which he is not to be censur'd as if he were an Epicure after the manner that Mr. N. here understands the Opinions of the Epicureans He would have done well to have told us of what sort of Epicurism the Author of the Ecclesiastes may be accus'd Objection 15. It is a great piece of Boldness to judg four Books of the Old Testament three that bear the Name of Solomon and that of Iob as unworthy to be in the Hebrew Canon That Liberty of censuring would weaken the Principles of our Religion For every one by the same Rule may say that such or such a Book is not Canonical according to his own fancy Answer Although we may reject some Books of the Old Testament it does not follow that we may do the same by all of them Neither does it follow because many Ancient and Modern Divines have thought it would have been better not to have joined with the Writings of the Apostles certain Books that are now in the Canon of the New Testament that therefore we may reject all the Books of the Apostles There are Books that are indisputably of those Authors whose Name they bear and there are others which have been questionable and are so still amongst the Learned as the Epistle to the Hebrews that of St. Iames the second of St. Peter the two last of St. Iohn and that of St. Iude. These Doubts hinder us not from
all those Scriptural Truths without which a Man cannot perfom his Duty as that there is a God absolutely perfect who has sent Jesus Christ into the World to draw Men from their Sins and guide them to eternal Salvation that this Jesus has been rais'd from the Dead and that he now reigns in Heaven c. All Christians agree in all this Let us suspend still our Jugdment concerning Doctrines and speak yet only of the practical Part of our Religion It cannot be deny'd but that if all Men liv'd according to the Precepts of the Gospel and that out of the hope of another Life they betook themselves with Care to adore the Creator of the Universe to live always in Temperance and Sobriety and to do constantly to their Neighbour as they desire their Neighbour should do to them It cannot be deny'd I say but this manner of living would be very agreeable and very advantagious to Human Society We should not then hear any words spoken that could cause us Trouble or that would kindle Divisions in Religion There would be no Sickness through Intemperance no Vexation nor any Quarrel occasion'd by Debauchery The doing Wrong to ones Neighbour and the suffering any Inconvenience through the Inhumanity or Malice of Men would be things unknown Men would help one another in all their Needs with all the Fervency and Earnestness that could be desir'd If by mistake any of them had been the occasion of Inconvenience to one another they would mutually pardon one another and repair that Damage by all sorts of Services The love of Honours or of Riches would trouble no Man's Mind nor cause any Envy or Discord In a word the Mind being in a perfect Tranquillity the Body as healthful as feeble Nature will admit and both Mind and Body enjoying the innocent Pleasures which the Gospel allows this amiable Life would not be quitted but for the enjoyment of another freed from all the inevitable Inconveniences entail'd by Nature upon the Inhabitants of this Earth All that have any Idea of the Rules of Morality taught by Jesus Christ must necessarily agree in this Truth that by generally observing them Men would be exceedingly happy But it may perhaps be ask'd Where is there in the World a Society in which Men live conformably to these Rules of Morality That is not the Question It is sufficient for our present purpose that there are at this time many Nations that make Profession of it though they live not up to the Practice Let us enquire whether these Nations invented those Rules or receiv'd them from their Predecessors They all tell us they are not the Inventers and it may well be judg'd by their way of living that they say true For it is not probable they should have invented the Precepts of the Gospel and yet live so contrary to them Inventions always savour something of the temper of the Spirit of the Inventors But we have no need of Arguments to convince us of this We may examine from Age to Age the Authors that are left us beginning at our own and going backwards to that wherein Christian Religion was first spoken of to see who they were that brought it into the World We shall readily find by reading those Authors that it is more than thirteen hundred Years since the Roman Emperors being become Christians Christianity has flourish'd in a great part of Europe Asia and Africa Since that time we may be convinced by a very great number of Christian Authors that Profession has been constantly made of believing that the Morality taught us in the Gospel came from Heaven If we go yet further backwards we shall find that even under the Pagan Emperors there was a great multitude of Christians that profess'd the same Doctrine We have many Christian Authors of those times who assure us of it But without staying to reckon up needlesly Authors sufficiently known let us examine in what Age Christianity began first to be spoken of All Christians agree that it was under the Reign of Tiberius and if we consult Heathen Authors we shall see that before that time it was altogether unknown Tacitus who was born towards the end of the Reign of Claudius or about the beginning of that of Nero says that Nero after having set Rome on fire in divers places and thereby destroy'd the City accus'd the Christians of it and made them suffer horrible Punishments Upon that occasion he speaks of the beginning of Christianity in these terms The Author of this Sect says he was Christ who in the Reign of Tiberius was put to death by Pontius Pilate Governour of Judaea This dangerous Superstition continues he in speaking of the Christian Religion though nipp'd in the Bud broke out a fresh and spread not only through Judaea where the Mischief first began but came even into Rome it self where all things shameful and abominable are brought and find Persons ready to join with and uphold them Presently as many as confess'd they were Christians were seiz'd on and soon after a great many more were discover'd but were not found guilty of the Fire though they were the Objects of the public Hatred c. You see here the Testimony of a Heathen Author who being born in the beginning of Christianity and very well vers'd in the Passages of his Time assures us of two things then publickly notorious The one that the Authors of the Christian Religion had liv'd in Iudaea in the Reign of Tiberius and had been punish'd during the Government of Pontius Pilate The other that after his Death in few Years the Embracers of his Doctrine were extreamly multiply'd Suetonius also tells us that in the time of the Emperor Claudius the Christians were banish'd out of Rome which shows that there were then a great number of them in that Capital City We find also by the Testimony of another Author contemporary to Tacitus that the Christians at that time made Profession of the same Morals they teach now a-days Pliny being Proconsul of Bithynia about threescore and ten Years after Pontius Pilate had been Governour of Iudaea by Trajan's Order sought out the Christians within his Province and inform'd himself with all the care imaginable concerning their Opinions Hereupon he writes a Letter to Trajan which Letter is still preserv'd I was inform'd says he that all their Crime or Error consisted only in that they us'd to assemble themselves upon a certain Night and to sing together a Hymn to Christ as to a God That they all oblig'd themselves by Oath not to any Crime but on the contrary that they would not commit Felony Robbery or Adultery and that they would deceive no Man nor break a Trust This done they dispers'd and return'd again after sometime to eat together which they did in common and without any harm But that they had given over doing it upon my Proclamation wherein according to your Orders I had forbidden all sorts of Conventicles This