shall not presently be judged a Falshood till there be some further demonstration of its absurdity 3. That you allow the same liberty of deducing Consequences from Texts of Scripture aâ— you take to your selves 4. Then that due regard be had to the Writings of the New as well as of the Old A. With all my heart 1st Then God revealed the Law to Moses by a true Voice as we are told Exod. 25. 22. but this was the only true Voice from God that ever was heard The words of the Decalogue according to some Men were not spoken they only heard a confused Noise and so perceiv'd the Law as then written in their Hearts tho in truth those Notions of Good and Evil were engrafted there long before Nay it is evident that what you call Revelation was only the Appearance of some Images to the sight or Phantacy of the Prophet See Chron. 22. how God shewed David his Anger by an Angel holding a Sword in his hand and the same hapned to Balaam By Images not real but depending upon the Phantacy of the Prophet God revealed to Joseph that he should have the Dominion over all his Brethren Observe Numb 12. 6 7. and you will see what slight assurance was given to the other Prophets If there be a Prophet amongst you I the Lord will make my self known unto him in a Vision and will speak unto him in a Dream T. Confident Assertions without Equivalent Strength of Reason impose upon none but those that are willing to be cheated It is spoken without Authority of Scripture that God pronounced the Law only with a true and real Voice All that we can learn from Exod. 25. 22. is That God promised to be ready to communicate his Will to Moses from above the Mercy-seat and from between the two Cherubims But that place of Scripture does not explain the manner of that Communication so as to determine it to a real Voice much less does it exclude all former Revelations from that priviledg Nay nothing is more evident than that other Revelations were made by a real Voice before the delivery of the Law of Moses Immediately after the Fall Gen. 9. 10. we read that God called unto Adam and said unto him Where art thou And he said I heard thy Voice in the Garden and I was afraid Or if our bold Author will turn this into Figure as indeed he ventures to turn so whatsoever he pleases yet in the 18th of Genesis we read of a Revelation made by a real Voice or there is no description of a real Voice in rerum naturâ—â— For the three Angels that appeared as Men to Abraham and eat as Men without doubt spake as Men when the promise was made to Abraham that Sarah should bring forth a Son When God was about to destroy the Old World Gen. 6. he foretold that dismal Execution of Vengeance to his Servant Noah and if you will stick to the Words of the Scripture according to our first agreement gave him a punctual description of the Ark he should make and the Persons and Living Creatures that should enter into it which it is hard to imagine could be done without a real Voice Or at least it is as rational to suppose one here as in the place cited out of Gen. 25. 22. But your Author is still more Quod Revelatioper solas imagines continget patet ex primo paralip Ch. 22. v. p. 5. v. p. 3. impudent or unwary when he tells us it is evident from Chron. 22. that Revelation is sometimes made by Images only and that none are capable of receiving the revealed Will of God but only by the help of Imagination and that the Words or Figures were sometimes real that is existing without the mind of the Prophet and sometimes imaginary that is framed by the mind of the Prophet himself From whence he infers That the Certainty of Prophecy is not Mathematical but only Moral or rather according to those Principles nothing but a Fanciful Whimsey that may as well be false or true Now by this Author's leave no such conclusion nor indeed can any conclusion at all be drawn from the Mediums of Divine Revelation that concern the Certainty or Fallibility of it For all the Mediums of Revelation being supernatural we may call 'em by what Names we please yet still we must borrow those Names from some Natural Things because of those only we have compleat Idea's He that is a Prophet must be certain it is God who speaks to him but the bare hearing of a Voice or the seeing of an Image will not create this Certainty according to the Laws of Nature For Voices and Words may be framed by other invisible Powers and therefore we are not so foolish as to conclude that Moses was a Prophet of God because he heard a Voice or saw a Figure but because he was enabled to shew forth sensible Demonstrations that the power of God was with him But tho we do not conclude the certainty of Revelation from the Mediums of Revelation so is it the greatest madness in the World to infer from thence the Uncertainty of it For we who have not seen those Figures nor heard those Words nor felt those Divine Impressions can frame no compleat Idea's of them And your bold Author draws Conclusions from such Premises which 't is plain he could never understand unless he can pretend that himself has been inspired Supposing it therefore true that Preter haec nulla alia singenda c. p. 7. the Scripture made mention of no other Mediums of Revelation than Signs or Figures and Words yet cannot he from thence infer any Necessity of the Uncertainty of Divine Revelation unless he could give us compleat Idea's of what manner of Impressions those Words or Signs made upon the Minds of the Prophets Which is a matter impossible for him to teach or us to learn One Man can inform another of his Mind by Words and Figures and why must God be excluded from that power which he gives his Creature But after all it is not true that Words and Figures are the only Mediums of Divine Revelation which the Scriptures mention There is a Communication of the Spirit of God immediately infusing Knowledge into the Mind without any Organs of Speech or Corporeal Representations which yet is as infallible as the other Joh. 16. 17. Our Saviour promises his Disciples That the Spirit of Truth should lead them into all Truth And this Communication of the Spirit we call Inspiration using a Metaphorical Word to express a Notion which we cannot possibly receive from the bare knowledge of Nature And tho this Spirit appear'd to the Apostles Acts 2. in the shape of Cloven Tongues yet we read it bestowed upon them and upon others in the Primitive Times the Gift of Drivers Languages before utterly unknown unto them by a secret and invisible Operation If therefore the Spirit of God can reveal to the Mind of Man
Gods Providence nor at all prove that he takes any care of mankind is the third and last part of the Riddle which I humbly beg you would be pleased to unfold to me S. That I will and very briefly too We gather the Existence of God from known and received Notions but if there were any superiour Power that could alter these Notions it must necessarily destroy the very knowledge of a God or at least compel us to doubt of his Existence L. It is not by Miracles but by the very light of Nature that we understand that there is a Being superiour to our Faculties who can alter them for the better or the worse according as he pleases But then the same reason tells us that Truth is one of his most adorable perfections and from thence we conclude that he has given us right Faculties and will not become the Author of deceit But it seems your Author thinks that he can never be secure of the Truth of his Faculties if he should once believe that there is a God who is a Powerful and Voluntary Agent S. No there is a further reason for if any thing be repugnant to Nature it is repugnant to those first Principles from whence we conclude the Existence of Nature it self And what certainty is there if you destroy first Principles L. A Miracle is so far from being repugnant to first Principles that it is altogether declarative of them Is it not to be admitted as a first Principle in reason That there is a God who made the World S. Heavens forbid I should deny it L. And that can annihilate the World S. I see no reason to deny it L. If then alteration of some part of the Universe be less than annihilation you must grant it possible and what then is there in a Miracle that is repugnant to the first and most obvious Principles of Reason S. But he tells you that whether a Miracle be a work either which proceeds from Natural causes which cannot be explained or has no other cause than the immediate Will of God yet still it exceeds the reach of humane understanding and we can understand nothing from that which exceeds the very Standard of our Faculties L. There is nothing in a Miracle that exceeds the bounds of humane understanding but only the manner of the Divine Operation in the Production of it Our senses bear Witness that the work is done and our reason concludes that none but God could do it But we do not know the manner of the Divine Operation Nor no more do we comprehend the manner of the Divine Operation in the Creation of the World but does it therefore follow that Creation because it exceeds the bounds of humane understanding can give us no true knowledge of the Essence Existence or Providence of God S. I cannot well answer your last Argument but in the 72d page I think my Author argues very well viz. That if any thing was done above the power of Nature or contrary to Nature it would be repugnant to that Order which God has appointed by universal Laws to be eternal and the belief of such a thing would make us doubt of all things and bring us at last to Atheism L. And pray why so What do you understand by Nature but those Laws of Motion by which God does preserve the Vniverse in that Beauty and Order wherein we now enjoy it These we acknowledge to be sufficient to give us knowledge of the Existence and Wisdom of God vvhich vvould be knovvn by the Work of his hands tho there vvere no such thing as a Miracle Nor do vve say That a Miracle is absolutely necessary to punish ill men or to reward the good God can do that by his Providence and the setled Course and Order of things And though God does it by Miracles sometimes yet that is not for want of Power to do it otherwise but only that these Miracles may the more be considered as Testimonials of a Divine Mission Tho therefore the frequent interruption of the setled Course of Nature would render the Endeavours of those Vain who gave their minds to the study of Natural Philosophy yet the interruption of it at some certain Times and Seasons when God is pleased to communicate some particular message to mankind is no obstruction to the study of Nature and is a great and necessary introduction to a compleater knowledge of the Will of God For what proportion of time is there between the Miraculous Ages of Moses and our Saviour and the duration of the VVorld And how small is the Number of well attested Miracles in respect to all the other works of Nature S. Suppose there were real Miracles yet my Author proves from Scripture that they can lead us into no true Knowledge of God For a Prophet of the false Gods might work Signs and Wonders and yet deserve to be Stoned for his pains See Deut. 13. 1 2 3. Verses L. A Miracle is an appeal to our senses that what is done is not done by any Visible or Material Being But because there are Bad as well as Good Invisible Agents we are to Judge of the reality of a Miracle by the Good or ill Doctrines which it is alledged to support The Magicians of Pharaoh and the Pagan Priests in all Ages alledged Miracles to destroy the true Notion of a God and to loosen all the sacred Bonds of Morality but neither were these Miracles well attested nor were they to be regarded because they tended only to destroy and corrupt Natural Religion and Natural honesty too And indeed the Pagan Superstition seems to me to have been nothing else but a Diabolical Revelation of certain Names of Deities Rites and Ceremonies as might keep men furthest from God and corrupt that Idea of him which is easy enough to be deduced from the Light of Nature It is very plain that they knew not the Original of their own Religious Rites and Ceremonies for so says Antigone in Sophocles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sophoc in Antigone 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Why should a Mortal break immortal Laws Not made by Man but by the Gods themselves That ever must remain tho none can know The Fountain whence those lasting Rivulets flow Nor indeed is it any wonder that they should not know the Original of those Rites and Ceremonies which have no Foundation in Nature nor were so much as of humane institution but shuffled into the world by the Tricks and Impostures of Evil Spirits But tho Evil Spirits may be Authors of some things that look like Prophesies Miracle or Inspiration yet they never can nor will do any thing to establish a Religion that gives a true Notion of God and Teaches a rational worship of him and tends to the good and benefit of mankind If therefore we have distinct Notions of Moral Good and Evil and of Natural Religion we must have distinct
man must needs be that holds the infinity and immutability of the Power of Nature As also by his partial Distorture of Scripture by denying it the same liberty of using words in a Translated sense which is given to all other Writings As for clearness of Judgment which is the second Commendation of an Historian I cannot see how your Author can pretend to that whom I have shew'd to have laid down so many false propositions drawn so many false conclusions and so frequently to have contradicted himself And as for his opportunities of knowing the Matters of Fact of the most grand importance of those Ages we all know that he is as ignorant of them as our selves and therefore we had rather believe those who liv'd in Ancient times and were Eye-Witnesses of what our Saviour did or suffered for our sakes than a Modern upstart whom we are sure can understand at most no more than our selves of the matter S. But tho you slight his Authority yet if he can prove by solid reasons as he attempts in his 8th Chapter That the Pentateuch was not wrote by Moses c. You are bound to yield to them and to deny its Divine Authority L. But if his Reasons are fallacious and Conjectural as I could easily demonstrate had we Books and leisure in this place to go through the Argument which yet at best would be but loss of time then you cannot blame me if I withdraw my assent from his Pernicious Doctrines But to bring matters to a short issue Do you believe that the Account the Evangelists give of the Life of our Saviour and the Acts of his Apostles is altogether unintelligible by the Hebriasms and various Lections S. No I think no man of common sense or modesty will pretend to say so L. Do you think that all therein recorded of them could be done by any Natural or Diabolical Power S. You have already demonstrated the impossibility of the first and the absurdity of the second assertion L. Then if our S. and his Apostles who prov'd their own Divine Mission did bear Testimony to the Writings of Moses and the other Prophets all your Authors Criticisms or Conjectural fancies of Esaras Vanish into nothing For with what truth could our Saviour have said Mat. the 19th and the 7th That Moses Commanded to give a Bill of Divorcement and that Moses for the hardness of their Hearts suffer'd them to put away their Wives or St. John 19. 17. That the Law was given by Moses if the whole Pentateuch had been a Fiction of Esdras Our Saviour therefore has confirm'd the Law of Moses and the Divine Authority of the Old Testament by a new addition of Signs and Wonders impossible to be gainsaid by the Cunning or Malice of Man S. You have now given me full satisfaction concerning the Divine Authority of the Scriptures into a dislike of which I was led by the Sophistry of this intrieguing Author For it mightily pleas'd me to hear his project to deduce all knowledge from Natural reason which as he teaches p. 98. Proceeds from plain and obvious Notions to the most obscure and remotest objects L. Let Natural reason proceed never so cautiously yet she can never ascend so high as to understand clearly those supernatural things which concern a future State of which she has here no compleat Ideas And besides if God is a free Agent it follows he can prescribe what conditions of salvation do best please him And Natural reason can never ascend to the knowledge of what a free Agent will have done from any known or obvious Maxims in Nature S. No more than one man by reason alone can tell what is the will and pleasure of another But I will ask you one Question more Viz. Who ought to be the Interpreter of Scripture * P. 103. penes unumquemque snmmum jus summaque authoritas de religione libere judicandi c. for Spinosa gives away that Authority to every private Man L. The ambiguous use of the word Interpretation has been the cause of much Error and much Mischief in the World it is a Multiplied Idea which will breed confusion in the understanding if it be not carefully resolved into its first Principles For first sometimes to interpret Scripture is put to signify only a right apprehension of what is the true sense of Scripture and an expression of that true sense in plain and proper terms And this belongs to every individual Man to whom the Gospel is Preached For every man has a right to understand those truths that are a-like beneficial to all mankind and which are therefore promulged that they may be made known unto all And as every man has a right to understand as much as he can of Divine truths so also may be Communicate that knowledge by Speech to others tho the publick Exercise of that Office do most properly belong to the Ministers of God But others by the word Interpret do understand the Power of affixing what sense they please upon the Scriptures and constraining others to admit the same be it what it will as true and genuine But such an Authority as this can neither belong to every Private man nor to any humane Power whatsoever For no man can have Authority from the God of Truth to oppose truth it self and it is gross non-sense to call Contradiction of Scripture an Interpretation of it There is no room for Interpretation but in places that are obscure and dubious but plain Texts expound themselves and to pretend that every man has a right of affixing a contradictory sense to the most easy express and intelligible Texts of Scripture is as much as to say Every Man Summum jus summa authoritas has a right to be a Fool and to deceive himself and to live in Error and be nurst up in the ignorance of those things that most concern his Happiness and to give the Lye to his great Creator Instead of believing the Scriptures to be the Word of God every private man according to your Authors Hypothesis may believe them lawfully to be the invention of Sathan or the dictates of Mad-men or the invention of some cunning Politicians What is more plain than our Saviours words Mat. 16. 17. Verses Go you into all the World and Preach the Gospel unto every Creature He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned Suppose a man discoursing upon these words should pretend to teach from hence that no Gospel either was is or ever ought to be Preached to the World That no man ought to believe that Jesus is the Messiah and that there is no Condemnation to unbelievers either in this World or in the World to come Would you call this an Interpretation of that Text of Scripture S. Not if I was in my right Senses L. And yet your prodigal Author gives this large Authority to every private Man of Interpreting Scripture after