the Greeks received from the Barbarians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they put it into a better fashion i. e. they disguise it alter and change it as they please and put it into a Greek habit that it might never be suspected to have been a Forraigner Thence Tertullian speaks with a great deal of truth and freedom of such Philosophers who did ingenii sitim de prophetarum fonte irrigare as he expresseth it that quenched their thirst after knowledge with the waters of Iordan though they did not like Naaman cure the leproâ—ic of the head by washing in them for as Tertullian saith theâ— came only ex negotio curiositatis more to please the i tch oâ— their curiosity then to cure it And wherein they seemed most to agree with the Scriptures their difference was beyond their agreement Siquidem vera quaeque consonantia Prophetis aut aliunde commendant aut aliorsum subornant cum maxima injuria veritatis quam efficiunt aut adjuvari falsis aut patrocinari Whatever the Philosophers speak agreeable to the Scriptures either they do not own whence they had it or turn it quite another way whereby they have done the truth a great deal of injury by mixing it with their corruptions of it and making that little truth a plea for the rest of their errors Neither was this only among the ancient Philosophers but the Primitive Christians began to discern the underhand workings of such who sought to blend Philosophy and Christianity together for Tertullian himself takes great notice of such who did Veritatis dogmata ad Philosophicas sententias adulterare suborn Christianity to maintain Philosophy which makes him cry out Viderint qui Stoicum Platonicum Dialecticum Christianismum protulerunt by which we see what tampering there was betimes rather to bring Christianity down to Philosophy rather then to make Philosophy truckle under the truth and simplicity of the Scriptures Whether Ammonius himself and some others of the School of Alexandria might be guilty in this kind is not here a place to enquire though it be too evident in the writings of some that they rather seek to accommodate the Scriptures to the Sentiments of the School of Plato then to reform that by the Scriptures but I say however it were with those who were Christians yet those who were not but only Philosophers made their great advantage by it For when they found what was reconcileable with the doctrine of Plato in the Scriptures done already to their hands by the endeavours chiefly of Ammonius and Origen they greedily embrace those improvements of their Philosophy which would tend so much to the credit of it and as contemptuously reject what they found irreconcileable with the dictates of their Philosophy Now what an unreasonable thing is it when what ever was noble and excellent in the Heathen Philosophy was derivative from 〈◊〉 Scriptures as the sacred Fountâ—in of it that the meeting with such things should in the least redound to the prejudice of the Scriptures from whence it was originally derived when on the other side it should be a great confirmation to our faith as to the Scriptures that they who were professed Philosophers and admirers only of reason did so readily embrace some of those grand Truths which are contained in the word of God For which we need no other instance then that before us concerning the Origine of evil the making out of which will tend to the clearing the last thing mentioned concerning it which was that the most material things in it are attested by the Heathens themselves And this honey which is gained out of the Lions mouth must needs tast sweeter then any other doth For it is a weak and groundless mistake on the other side which is the second which ariseth from meeting things consonant to the Scriptures in the writings of Philosophers presently to conclude from such things that they were Christians as it is said some have lately done in the behalf of Hierocles For there being such clear accounts given in Scripture of the grand difficulties and perplexities which the minds of men were troubled with when these came to the knowledge of such who were of Philosophick and inquisitive heads we cannot but think they would meet with acceptation among them especially if they might be made consistent with their former speculations Thus it was in our present case concerning the Origine of evil we have already beheld the lamentable perplexities the ancient Philosophers were in about it what Maeanders they were lost in for want of a clue to guide them through them now it pleased God after the coming of Christ in the flâ—shâ—o â—o declare to the world the only way for the recovery 〈◊〉 souls and their eternal salvation the news of which being spread so far that it soon got among the Philosophers could not but make them more inquisitive concerning the state and condition of their souls and when they had searched what the Philosophers had formerly discovered of it their curiosity would presently prompt them to see what account of things concerning the souls of 〈◊〉 delivered by the preachers of this New Doctrine B◠〈◊〉 they could not but presently understand that they declared all mens souls to be in a most degenerate and low condition by being so continually under the power of the most unreasonable and unruly passions that they were estranged from God and prone to fix on things very unsuitable to their nature as to all which their own inward sense and experience could but tell them that these things were notoriously true and therefore they enquire further how these things came to be so which they receive a full account of in Scripture that mans soul was at first created pure and holy and in perfect friendship with God that God dealt bountifully and favourably with man only expected obedience to his Laws that man being a free agent did abuse his liberty and disobeyed his Maker and thence came the true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the feathers of the soul whereby it soared up to heaven moulted away and the soul sunk below its self into a degenerate and apostate condition out of which it is impossible to be recovered without some extraordinary expression of Divine Favour Now what is there in all this account but what is hugely suitable to principles of reason and to the general experience of the world as to those things which were capable of being tryed by it And those Philosophers who were any thing ingenuâ—us and lovers of truth could not but confess the truth of those things which we are now speaking of viz. That mens souls are in a very degenerate condition That the most rational account of it is that man by the act of his own will brought himself into it and that in order to the happiness of mens souls there was a necessity of recovery out of this condition As to the degeneracy of the souls of men This
is in the work of Grace So that according to this opinion there must be immediate inspiration as to that act of faith whereby we believe any one to have been divinely inspired and consequently to that whereby we believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God Secondly Doth not this make the fairest plea for mens unbelief For I demand Is it the duty of those who want that immediate illumination to believe or no If it be not their duty unbelief can be no sin to them if it be a duty it must be made known to be a duty and how can that be made known to them to be a duty when they want the only and necessary means of instruction in order to it Will God condemn them for that which it was impossible they should have unless God gave it them And how can they be left inexcuseable who want so much as rational inducements to faith for of these I now speak and not of efficacious perswasions of the mind when there are rational arguments for faith propounded But lastly I suppose the case will be cleared when we take notice what course God hath alwayes taken to give all rational satisfaction to the minds of men concerning the persons whom he hath imployed in either of the fore-mentioned cases First for those who have been imployed upon some special message and service for God he hath sent them forth sufficiently provided with manifestations of the Divine power whereby they acted As is most clear and evident in the present case of Moses Exodus 4. 1 2 3 4 5. where Moses puts the case to God which we are now debating of Supposing saith he that I should go to the Israelites and tell them God had appeared to me and sent me to deliver them and they should say God had not appeared unto me how should I satisfie them God doth not reject this objection of Moses as favouring of unbelief but presently shews him how he should satisfie them by causing a miracle before his face turning his rod into a Serpent and God gives this as the reason of it vers 5. That they may believe that the Lord God of their Fathers the God of Abraham the God of Isaac the God of Jacob hath appeared unto thee It seems God himself thought this would be the most pregnant evidence of Gods appearing to him if he wrought miracles before their faces Nay lest they should think one single miracle was not sufficient God in the immediate following verses adjoyns two more which he should do in order to their satisfaction and further verse 21. God gave him a charge to do all those wonders before Pharoah which he had put into his hand And accordingly we find Pharoah presently demanding a miracle of Moses Exodus 7. 9. which accordingly Moses did in his presence though he might suppose Pharoahs demand not to proceed from desire of satisfaction but from some hopes that for want of it he might have rendred his credit suspected among the Israelites Indeed after God had delivered his people and had setled them in a way of serving him according to the Laws delivered by Moses which he had confirmed by unquestionable miracles among them we find a caution laid in by Moses himself against those which should pretend signs and wonders to draw them off from the Religion established by the Law of Moses And so likewise under the Gospel after that was established by the unparallel'd miracles of our Saviour and his Apostles we find frequent cautions against being deceived by those who came with pretences of doing great miracles But this is so far from infringing the credibility of such a Testimony which is confirmed by miracles that it yields a strong confirmation to the truth of what I now assert For the doctrine is supposed to be already established by miracles according to which we are to judge of the spirits of such pretenders Now it stands to the greatest reason that when a Religion is once established by uncontrouled miracles we should not hearken to every whiffling Conjurer that will pretend to do great feats to draw us off from the truth established In which case the surest way to discover the imposture is to compare his pretended miracles with those true and real ones which were done by Moses and Christ and the ground of it is because every person is no competent judge of the truth of a miracle for the Devil by his power and subtilty may easily deceive all such as will be led by the nose by him in expectation of some wonders to be done by him And therefore as long as we have no ground to question the oertainty of those miracles which were wrought by Christ or Moses I am bound to adhere to the doctrine established by those miracles and to make them my rule of judging all persons who shall pretend to work miracles Because 1. I do not know how far God may give men over to be deceived by lying wonders who will not receive the truth in the love of it i. e. those that think not the Christian Religion sufficiently confirmed by the miracles wrought at the first promulgation of it God in justice may permit the Devil to go further then otherwise he could and leave such persons to their own credulity to believe every imposture and illusion of their senses for true miracles 2. That doctrine which was confirmed by undoubted miracles hath assured us of the coming of lying wonders whereby many should be deceived Now this part of the doctrine of the Gospel is as certainly true as any of the rest for it was confirmed by the same miracles that the other was and besides that the very coming of such miracles is an evidence of the truth of it it falling out so exactly according to what was foretold so many hundred years since Now if this doctrine be true then am I certain the intent of these miracles is to deceive and that those are deceived who hearken to them and what reason then have I to believe them 3. To what end do these miracles serve Are they to confirm the truths contained in Scripture But what need they any confirmation now when we are assured by the miracles wrought by Christ and his Apostles that the doctrine by them preached came from God and so hath been received upon the credit of those miracles ever since Were these truths sufficiently proved to be from God before or no If not then all former ages have believed without sufficient ground for faith if they were then what ground can there be to confirm us in them now certainly God who never doth anything but for very great purposes will never alter the course of nature meerly for satisfaction of mens vain curiosities But it may be it will be said It was something not fully revealed in Scripture which is thus confirmed by miracles but where hath the Scripture told us that anything not fully revealed
mysteries our faith stands upon this twofold bottom First that the being understanding and power of God doth infinitely transcend ours and therefore he may reveal to us matters above our reach and capacity Secondly that whatever God doth reveal is undoubtedly true though we may not fully understand it for this is a most undoubted principle that God cannot and will not deceive any in those things which he reveals to men Thus our first supposition is cleared that it is not repugnant to reason that a doctrine may be true which depends not on the evidence of the thing it self The second is That in matters whose truth depends not on the evidence of the things themselves infallible testimony is the fullest demonstration of them For these things not being of Mathematical evidence there must be some other way found out for demonstrating the truth of them And in all those things whose truth depends on Testimony the more creditable the Testimony is the higher evidence is given to them but that testimony which may deceive cannot give so pregnant an evidence as that which cannot for then all imaginable objections are taken off This is so clear that it needs no further proof and therefore the third follows That there are certain ways whereby to know that a Testimony delivered is infallible and that is fully proved by these two Arguments 1. That it is the duty of all those to whom it is propounded to believe it now how could that be a duty in them to believe which they had no ways to know whether it were a Testimony to be believed or no. 2. Because God will condemn the world for unbelief In which the Justice of Gods proceedings doth necessarily suppose that there were sufficient arguments to induce them to believe which could not be unless there were some certain way supposed whereby a Testimony may be known to be infallible These three things now being supposed viz. that a doctrine may be true which depends not on evidonce of reason that the greatest demonstration of the truth of such a doctrine is its being delivered by infallible Testimony and that there are certain ways whereby a Testimony may be known to be infallible Our first principle is fully confirmed which was that where the truth of a doctrine depends not on evidence of reason but on the authority of him that reveals it the only way to prove the doctrine to be true is to prove the Testimony of him that reveals it to be infallible The next principle or Hypothesis which I lay down is That there can be no greater evidence that a Testimony is infallible then that it is the Testimony of God himself The truth of this depends upon a common notion of humane nature which is the veracity of God in whatever way he discovers himself to men and therefore the ultimate resolution of our faith as to its formal object must be alone into the veracity of God revealing things unto us for the principium certitudinis or foundation of all certain assent can be fetched no higher neither will it stand any lower then the infallible verity of God himself and the principium patefactionis or the ground of discovery of spiritual truth to our minds must be resolved into Divine Testimony or revelation These two then not taken asunder but joyntly God who cannot lye hath revealed these things is the only certain foundation for a divine faith to rest its self upon But now the particular exercise of a Divine faith lies in a firm assent to such a particular thing as Divinely revealed and herein lyes not so much the Testimony as the peculiar energy of the Spirit of God in inclining the soul to believe peculiar objects of faith as of Divine revelation But the general ground of faith which they call the formal object or the ratio propter quam credimus is the general infallibility of a Divine Testimony For in a matter concerning divine revelation there are two great questions to be resolved The first is Why I believe a Divine Testimony with a firm assent The answer to that is because I am assured that what ever God speaks is true the other is upon what grounds do I believe this to be a Divine Testimony the resolution of which as far as I can understand must be fetched from those rational evidences whereby a Divine Testimony must be distinguished from one meerly humane and fallible For the Spirit of God in its workings upon the mind doth not carry it on by a brutish impulse but draws it by a spiritual discovery of such strong and perswasive grounds to assent to what is revealed that the mind doth readily give a firm assent to that which it sees such convincing reason to believe Now the strongest reason to believe is the manifestation of a divine Testimony which the Spirit of God so clearly discovers to a true believer that he not only firmly assents to the general foundation of faith the veracity of God but to the particular object propounded as a matter of Divine Revelation But this latter question is not here the matter of our discourse our proposition only concerns the general foundation of faith which appears to be so rational and evident as no principle in nature can be more For if the Testimony on which I am to rely be only Gods and I be assured from natural reason that his Testimony can be no other then infallible wherein doth the certainty of the foundation of faith fall short of that in any Mathematical demonstration Upon which account a Divine Testimony hath been regarded with so much veneration among all who have owned a Deity although they have been unacquainted with any certain way of Divine revelation And the reason why any rejected such a Testimony among the Heathens was either because they believed not a Deity or else that the particular Testimonies produced were meer frauds and impostures and therefore no Divine Testimony as it was given out to be But the principle still remained indisputable that on supposition the Testimony were what it pretended to be there was the greatest reason to believe it although it came not in such a way of probation as their sciences proceeded in From which principle arose that speech of Tully which he hath translated out of Plato's Timaeus Ac difficillimum factu à Diis ortis sidem non haber◠quanquam nec argumentis nec rationibus certis eorum oratio confirmetur By which we see what a presumption there was of Truth where there was any evidence of a Divine Testimony And no doubt upon the advantage of this principle it was the Devil gained so great credit to his oracles for therein he did the most imitate Divine revelation From hence then we see what a firm bottom faith in the general stands upon which is nothing short of an Infallible Divine Testimony other things may conduce by way of subserviency for the discovery of this but nothing
convictions should stick so fast in the minds of those who would fain pull out those pierâ—ing arrows but that there is a greater power in them then they are mnsters of and they cannot stand against the force whereby they come upon them nor find any salve to cure the wounds which are made within them but by those weapons which were the causes of them And therefore when wicked persons under conflicts of conscience cannot ease themselves by direct Atheism or finding reasons to cast off such convictions by discerning any invalidity in the Testimony whereon the truth of these things depends it is a certain argument that there is abundant truth in that Testimony when men would fain perswade themselves to believe the contrary and yet cannot 5. The truth of this consent appears from the unanimity of it among those persons who have yet strangely differed from each other in many controversies in Religion We see thereby this unanimity is no forced or designed thing because we see the persons agreeing in this do very much disagree from each other in other things And the same grounds and reasons whereon they disagree as to other things would have held as to these too were there not greater evidence of the certainty of these things then of those they fall out about It hath not yet become a question among those who differ so much about the sense of Scripture whether the Scripture its self be the Word of God although the very accounts on which we are to believe it to be so hath been the subject of no mean Controversies All the divided parts of the Christian world do yet fully agree in the matters of fact viz. that there was such a person as Iesus Christ and that he did many great miracles that he dyed on the Cross at Jerusalem and rose again from the dead now these contain the great foundations of Christian faith and therefore the multitude of other controversies in the world ought to be so far from weakning our faith as to the truth of the doctrine of Christ which men of weak judgements and Atheistical spirits preâ—end that it ought to be a strong confirmation of it when we see persons which so peevishly quarrel with each other about some inferiour and less weighty parts of Religion do yet unanimously consent in the principal foundations of Christian faith and such whereon the necessity of faith and obedience as the way to salvation doth more immediately depend And this may be one great reason why the infinitely wise God may suffer such lamentable contentions and divisions to be in the Christian world that thereby inquisitive persons may see that if Religion had been a meer design of some few politick persons the quarrelsom world where it is not held in by force would never have consented so long in the owning such common principles which all the other controversies are built upon And although it be continually seen that in divided parties one is apt to run from any thing which is received by the other and men generally think they can never run far enough from them whose errours they have discovered that yet this principle hath not carryed any considerable party of the Christian world out of their indignation against those great corruptions which have crept into the world under a pretence of Religion to the disowning the foundation of Christian Faith must be â—artly imputed to the signal hand of divine providence and partly to those strong â—vidences which there are of the truth of that Testimony which conveyes to uâ— the foundations of Christian Faith Thus we see now how great and uncontrouled this consent is as to the matters of fact delivered down from the eye-witnesses of them concerning the actions and miracles of our blessed Saviour which are contained in the Scriptures as authentical records of them and what a sure foundation there is for a firm assent to the truth of the things from so universal and uninterrupted a tradition Thus far we have now manifested the necessity of the miracles of Christ in order to the propagation of Christianity in the world from the consideration of the persons who were to propagate it in the world the next thing we are to considâ—r is the admirable success which the Gospel met with in the world upon its being preached to it Of whâ—ch no rational account can be given unless the actions and miracles of our Saviour were most undoubtedly true That the Gospel of Christ had very strange and wonderful success upon its first preaching hath been partly discovered already and is withall so plain from the long continuance of it in these European parts that none any wayes conversant in the history of former ages can have any ground to question it But that this strange and admirable success of the doctrine of Christ should be an evidence of the Truth of it and the miracles wrought in confirmation of it will appear from these two considerations 1. That the doctrine its self was so directly contrary to the general inclinations of the world 2. That the propagation of it was so much opposed by all worldly power 1. That the doctrine its self was so opposite to the general inclinations of the world The doctrine may be considered either as to its credenda or matters of faith or as to its agenda or matters of life and practice both these were contrary to the inclinations of the world the former seemed hard and incredible the latter harsh and impossible 1. The matters of faith which were to be believed by the world were not such things which we may imagine the vulgar sort of men would be very forward to run after nor very greedy to imbrace 1. Because contrary to the principles of their education and the Religion they were brought up in the generality of mankind is very tenacious of those principles and prejudices which are sucked in in the time of Infancy There are some Religions one would think it were impossible that any rational men should believe them but only on this account because they are bred up under them It is a very great advantage any Religion hath against another that it comes to speak first and thereby insinuates such an apprehension of its self to the mind that it is very hard removing it afterwards The understanding seems to be of the nature of those things which are communis juris and therefore primi sunt possidentis when an opinion hath once got possession of the mind it usually keeps out whatever comes to disturb it Now we cannot otherwise conceive but all those persons who had been bred up under Paganism and the most gross Idolatry must needs have a very potent prejudice against such a doctrine which was wholly irreconcileable with that Religion which they had been devoted to Now the stronger the prejudice is which is conveyed into mens minds by the force of education the greater strength and power must there needs be in
of their Ancestors Those who recede from the common opinion lest they should give advantage to Infidels by attributing that to a miracle which might be done without seem to be more wary then wise in it For besides that it is certain that miracles may be in those things which might be effected otherwise by natural causes when they are produced without the help of those causes and in a space of time impossible to nature and that it hath not been as yet proved how such diversity of tongues as is in the world would have been effected without such a miracle it must be granted by them that there was a miracle in it and what greater difficulty there should be in the variety of languages then in the signification of the same words I understand not But I see no necessity of asserting that every one of the families had a distinct language and the common opinion of 70. or 72. as the Gr. families and as many languages is now taken for a groundless fancy by learned men as is easily proved from the dividing Father and Children whose families could not certainly be without them and some supposed to be unborn then as Ioctans 13. Children especially if we say as many do that the Confusion was at the birth of Phaleg and Ioctan was his younger brother as the Iews generally do To the last objection it may be replyed that the agreement of languages in some radical words doth not infer the derivation of the one from the other as is plain in the Persian and German in which learned men have observed so many words alike And so by Busbequius of the inhabitants about Taunche Cheelsonese and so in most of our modern tongues there may be some words alike without any such dependence or derivation Again though it be granted that the languages of them who were at Babel were confounded yet it is not necessary we should say that all Noahs posterity were there It is thought by some that they were chiefly Cham and his company if so then Sem and his posterity might retain the language they had before only with some variations But this is very uncertain unless we take it for Heber and Peleg from whose vicinity other bordering Nations might make use of many of their primitive words and for the Greeks it will be granted that many of their words especially the old Baeotick had affinity with the Hebrew but it was from the Pelasgi at first and Cadmus the Phaenician afterwards the old Canaanitish language being if not the pure Hebrew yet a dialect of that tongue as is proved by many learned men But however these things be it is not necessary to say that all Mother tongues so called were then existent at that confusion but the present curse did divide their languages who were there and that all division of languages since is to be looked upon as the effect of that curse It being thus manifested what a strange confusion of languages was caused in the world we may thereby easily understand how the ancient tradition came to be corrupted and altered in the world Another reason of the alteration of the ancient tradition was the fabulousness of the Poets for these made it their design to disguise all their ancient stories under Fables in which they were so lost that they could never recover them afterwards For the elder Poets of Greece being men of greater learning then generally the people were of and being conversant in Aegypt and other parts did bring in new reports of the ancient times which they received from the Nations they went to and by mixing their own traditions and others together and by suiting what was remaining of the ancient tradition to these they must needs make a strange confusion of things together and leave them much more obscure and fabulous then they found them And herein all their cunning and subtilty lay in putting a new face on whatever they borrowed from other Nations and making them appear among themselves in a Greek habit that the former owners of those traditions could scarce challenge them as theirs under so strange a Metamorphosis For those things which were most plain and historical in the Fountains whence they derived them they did so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Clemens Alexandrinus speaks or as Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wrap them up under so great Mythology that the Original Truths can hardly be discerned because of that multitude of prodigious fables with which they have inlaid them But as great as their artifice was in the doing this we may yet discern apparently many of those particular courses which were taken by them to disguise and alter the primitive tradition 1. Attributing what was done by the great Ancestors of mankind to some persons of their own Nations Thus the Thessalians make Deucalion to be the person who escaped the flood and from whom the world was peopled after it And whoever compares the relation of the flood of Deucalion in Apollodorus with that in the Scripture might easily render Apollodorus his Greek in the language of the Scriptures only changing Greece into the whole earth and Deucalion into Noah Parnassus into Ararat and Iupiter into Iehova On the same account the Athenians attribute the flood to Ogyges not that the flood of Ogyges and Deucalion were particular and distinct deluges which many have taken a great deal of needless pains to place in their several ages But as Deucalion was of the eldest memory in Thessaly so was Ogyges at Athens and so the flood as being a matter of remotest antiquity was on the same account in both places attributed to both these Because as mankind was supposed to begin again after the flood so they had among them no memory extant of any elder then these two from whom on that account they supposed mankind derived And on the same reason it may be supposed that the Assyrians attribute the â—lood to Xisuthrus whom they supposed to be a King of Assyria but the circumstances of the story as delivered by Alexander Polyhistor and Abydenus are such as make it clear to be only a remainder of the universal flood which happened in the time of Noah So the Thessalians make Prometheus to be the Protoplast the Pelopponesians Phoroneus as Clemens Alexandrinus tells us whom Phoronides the Poet calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Father of mankind This may be now the first way of corrupting the ancient tradition by supposing all that was conveyed by it to have been acted among themselves Which may be imputed partly to their ignorance of the state of their ancient times and partly to their pride lest they should seem to come behind others in matters of Antiquity 2. Another fountain of Heathen Mythology was the taking the Idiome of the Oriental languages in a proper sense For whether we suppose the ancient traditions were conveyed to them in the ancient Hebrew by the Pelasgi or were
ORIGINES SACRAE OR A Rational Account of the Grounds OF Christian Faith AS TO THE TRUTH AND Divine Authority OF THE SCRIPTURES And the matters therein contained By EDWARD STILLINGFLEET Rector of Sutton in Bedfordshire 2 Pet. 1. 16. For we have not followed cunningly devised Fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ but were eye-witnesses of his Majesty Neque religio ulla sine sapientia suscipienda est nec ulla sine religione probanda sapientia Lactant. de fals relig cap. 1. LONDON Printed by R. W. for Henry Mortlock at the sign of the Phoenâ—â— in St. Pauls Church-yard near the little North-door 1662. To his most Honoured Friend and Patron Sr. ROGER BURGOINE Knight and Baronet Sir IT was the early felicitie of Moses when exposed in an Ark of Nilotick papyre to be adopted into the favour of so great a personage as the Daughter of Pharaoh Such another Ark is this vindication of the writings of that Divine and excellent Person exposed to the world in and the greatest ambition of the Author of it is to have it received into your Patronage and Protection But although the contexture and frame of this Treatise be far below the excellency and worth of the subject as you know the Ark in which Moses was put was of bulrushes daubed with slime and pitch yet when You please to cast your eye on the matter contained in it you will not think it beneath your Favour and unworthy your Protection For if Truth be the greatest Present which God could bestow or man receive according to that of Plurarch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then certainly those Truths deserve our most ready acceptance which are in themselves of greatest importance and have the greatest evidence that they come from God And although I have had the happiness of so near relation to You acquaintance with You as to know how little You need such discourses which tend to settle the Foundations of Religion which you have raised so happy a Superstructure upon yet withal I consider what particular Kindness the souls of all good men bear to such Designs whose end is to assert and vindicate the Truth and Excellency of Religion For those who are enriched themselves with the inestimable Treasure of true Goodness and Piety are far from that envious temper to think nothing valuable but what they are the sole Possessors of but such are the most satisfied themselves when they see others not only admire but enjoy what they have the highest estimation of Were all who make a shew of Religion in the World really such as they pretend to be discourses of this nature vvould be no more seasonable then the commendations of a great Beauty to one vvho is already a passionate admirer of it but on the contrary vve see how common it is for men first to throw dirt in the face of Religion and then perswade themselves it is its natural Complexion they represent it to themselves in a shape least pleasing to them and then bring that as a Plea why they give it no better entertainment It may justly seem strange that true Religion which contains nothing in it but what is truly Noble and Generous most rational and pleasing to the spirits of all good men should yet suffer so much in its esteem in the world through those strange and uncouth vizards it is represented under Some accouting the life and practice of it as it speaks subduing our wills to the will of God which is the substance of all Religion a thing too low and mean for their rank and condition in the World while others pretend a quarrel against the principles of it as unsatisfactory to Humane reason Thus Religion suffers with the Author of it between two Thieves and it is hard to define which is more injurious to it that which questions the Principles or that which despiseth the Practice of it And nothing certainly will more incline men to believe that we live in an Age of Prodigies then that there should be any such in the Christian World who should account it a piece of Gentility to despise Religion and a piece of Reason to be Atheists For if there be any such things in the World as a true height and magnanimity of spirit if there be any solid reason and depth of judgement they are not only consistent with but only attainable by a true generous spirit of Religion But if we look at that which the loose and profane World is apt to account the greatest gallantry we shall find it made up of such pitiful Ingredients which any skilful rational mind will be ashamed to plead for much less to mention them in competition with true goodness and unfeigned piety For how easie is it to observe such who would be accounted the most high and gallant spirits to quarry on such mean preys which only tend to satisfie their brutish appetites or flesh revenge with the blood of such who have stood in the way of that ayery title Honour Or else they are so little apprehensive of the in ward worth and excellency of humane nature that they seem to envy the gallantry of Peacocks and strive to outvy them in the gayety of their Plumes such vvho are as seneca saith ad similitudinem parietum extrinsecùs culti vvho imitate the walls of their houses in the fairness of the outsides but matter not vvhat rubbish there lies within The utmost of their ambition is to attain enervatam felicitatem quâ permadescunt animi such a felicity as evigorates the soul by too long steeping it being the nature of all terrestrial pleasures that they do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by degrees consume reason by effeminating and softening the Intellectuals Must we appeal then to the judgement of Sardanapalus concerning the nature of Felicity or enquire of Apicius what temperance is or desire that Sybarite to define Magnanimity who fainted to see a man at hard labour Or doth now the conquest of passions forgiving injuries doing good self-denial humility patience under crosses which are the real expressions of piety speak nothing more noble generous then a luxurious malicious proud and impatient spirit Is there nothing more becoming and agreeable to the soul of man in exemplary Piety and a Holy well-orderd Conversation then in the lightness and vanity not to say rudeness and debaucheries of those whom the world accounts the greatest gallants Is there nothing more graceful and pleasing in the sweetness candour and ingenuity of a truly Christian temper and disposition then in the revengeful implacable spirit of such whose Honour lives and is fed by the Blood of their enemies Is it not more truly honourable and glorious to serve that God who commands the World then to be a slave to those passions and lusts which put men upon continual hard service and torment them for it when they have done it Were there nothing else to commend Religion
will unto the true Prophets The grand question propounded how it may be known when predictions express Gods decrees and when only the series of causes For the first several rules laid down 1. When the prediction is confirmed by a present miracle 2. When the things foretold exceed the probability of second causes 3. When confirmed by Gods oath 4. When the blâ—ssings fore-told are purely spiritual Three rules for interpreting the Prophâ—cyes which respect the state of things under the Gâ—spel 5. When all circumstances are foretold 6. When many Prophets in several ages agree in the same predictions Predictions do not express Gods unalterable purposes when they only contain comminations of judgments or are predictions of temporal blâ—ssings The case of the Ninivites Hezekiah and others opened Of repentance in God what it implyes The jewish objâ—ctions â—bout predictions of temporal blâ—ssings answered In what cases miracles were expected from the Prophets when they were to confirm the truth of their religion Instanced in the Prophet at Bethel Elijah Elishah and of Moses himself Whose divine authority that it was proved by miracles is demonstrated against the modern Iews and their pretences answered p. 177 CHAP. VII The eternity of the Law of Moses discussed The second case wherein miracles may be expected when a Divine positive Law is to be repealed and another way of worship established in stead of it The possibility in general of a repeal of a Divine Law asserted the particular case of the Law of Moses disputed against the Iews the matter of that Law proved not to be immutably obligatory because the ceremonial precepts were required not for themselves but for some further end that proved from Maimonides his confession the precepts of the Ceremonial Law frequently dispensed with while the Law was in force Of the Passover of Hezekiah and several other instances It is not inconsistent with the wisdom of God to repeal such an established Law Abravanels arguments answered Of the perfection of the Law of Moses compared with the Gospel Whether God hath ever declared he would never repeal the Law of Moses Of adding to the precepts Of the expressions seeming to imply the perpetuity of the Law of Moses Reasons assigned why those expressions are used though perpetuity be not implyed The Law of Moses not built upon immutable reason because many particular precepts were founded upon particular occasions as the customs of the Zabii many ceremonial precepts thence deduced out of Maimonides and because such a state of things was foretold with which the observation of the Ceremonial Law would be inconsistent That largely discovered from the Prophecies of the old Testament CHAP. VIII General Hypotheses concerning the Truth of the Doctrine of Christ. The great prejudice against our Saviour among Iews and Heathens was the meaness of his appearance The difference of the miracles at the delivery of the Law and Gospel Some general Hypotheses to clear the subserviency of miracles to the Doctrine of Christ. 1. That where the truth of a doctrine depends not on evidence but authority the only way to prove the truth of the Doctrine is to prove the Testimony of the revealer to be infallible Things may be true which depend not on evidence of the things What that is and on what it depends The uncertainty of natural knowledge The existence of God the foundation of all certainty The certainty of matters of faith proved from the same principle Our knowledge of any thing supposeth something incomprehensible The certainty of faith as great as that of knowledge the grounds of it stronger The consistency of rational evidence with faith Yet objects of faith exceed reason the absurdities following the contrary opinion The uncertainty of that which is called reason Philosophical dictates no standard of reason Of transubstantiation and ubiquity c. why rejected as contrary to reason The foundation of faith in matters above reason Which is infallible Testimony that there are wayes to know which is infallible proved 2. Hypoth A Divine Testimony the most infallible The resolution of faith into Gods veracity as its formal object 3. Hypoth A Divine Testimony may be known though God speak not immediatly Of inspiration among the Iews and Divination among the Heathens 4. Hyp. The evidences of a Divine Testimony must be clear and certain Of the common motives of faith and the obligation to faith arising from them The original of Infidelity CHAP. IX The rational evidence of the Truth of Christian Religion from Miracles The possibility of miracles appears from God and providence the evidence of a Divine Testimony by them God alone can really alter the course of nature The Devils power of working miracles considered Of Simon Magus Apollonius The cures in the Temple of Aeseulapius at Rome c. God never works miracles but for some particular end The particular reasons of the miracles of Christ. The repealing the Law of Moses which had been setled by miracles Why Christ checked the Pharisees for demanding a sign when himself appeals to his miracles The power of Christs miracles on many who did not throughly believâ— Christs miracles made it evident that he was the Messias because the predictions were fulfilled in him Why John Baptist wrought no miracles Christs miracles necessary for the everthrow of the Devils Kingdom Of the Daemoniaeks and Lunaticks in the Gospel and in the Primitive Church The power of the name of Christ over them largely proved by several Testimonies The evidence thence of a Divine power in Christ. Of counterfeit dispossessions Of miracles wrought among Infidels Of the future state of the Church The necessity of the miracles of Christ as to the propagation of Christian Religion that proved from the condition of the publishers and the success of the Doctrine The Apostles knew the hazard of their imployment before they entred on it The boldness and resolution of the Apostles notwithstanding this compared with heathen Philosophers No motive could carry the Apostles through their imployment but the truth of their Doctrine not seeking the honour profit or pleasure of the world The Apostles evidence of the truth of their doctrine lay in being eye-witnesses of our Saviours miracles and resurrâ—ction That attested by themselves their sufficiency thence for preaching the Gospel Of the nature of the doctrine of the Gospel contrariety of it to natural inclinations Strange success of it notwithstanding it came not with humane power No Christian Emperour till the Gospel universally preached The weakness and simplicity of the instruments which preached the Gospel From all which the great evidence of the power of miracles is proved pag. 252 CHAP. X. The difference of true miracles from false The unreasonableness of rejecting the evidence from miracles because of impostures That there are certain rules of distinguishing true miracles from false and Divine from diabolical proved from Gods intention in giving a power of miracles and the providence of God in the world The inconvenience of taking
away the rational grounds of faith and placing it on self-evidence Of the self-evidence of the Scriptures and the insufficiency of that for resolving the question about the authority of the Scriptures Of the pretended miracles of Impostors and false Christs as Barchochebas David el David and others The rules whereby to judge true miracles from false 1. True Divine miracles are wrought to confirm a Divine testimony No miracles necâ—ssary for the certain conveyance of a Divine testimony proved from the evidences that the Scriptures could not be corrupted 2. No miracles Divine which contradict Divine revelation Of Popish miracles 3. Divine miracles leave Divine effects on those who believe them Of the miracles of Simon Magus 4. Divine miracles tend to the overthrow of the devils power in the world the antipathy of the doctrine of Christ to the devils designs in the world 5. The distinction of true miracles from others from the circumstances and manner of their operation The miracles of Christ compared with those of the Hâ—athen Gods 6. God makes it evident to all impartial judgments that Divine miracles exceed created power This manifested from the unparalleld miracles of Moses and our Saviour From all which the rational evidence of Divine revelation is manifested as to the persons whom God imployes to teach the world pag. 334 BOOK III. CHAP. I. Of the Being of God The Principles of all Religion lie in the Being of God and immortality of the soul from them the necessity of a particular Divine revelation rationally deduced the method laid down for proving the Divine authority of the Scriptures Why Moses doth not prove the Being of God but suppose it The notion of a Deity very consonant to reason Of the nature of Idea's and particularly of the Idea of God How we can form an Idea of an infinite Being How far such an Idea argues existence The great unreasonableness of Atheism demonstrated Of the Hypotheses of the Aristotelian and Epicurean Atheists The Atheists pretences examined and refuted Of the nature of the arguments whereby we prove there is a God Of universal consent and the evidence of that to prove a Deity and immortality of souls Of necessity of existence implyed in the notion of God and how far that proves the Being of God The order of the world and usefulness of the parts of it and especially of mans body an argument of a Deity Some higher principle proved to be in the world then matter and motion The nature of the soul and possibility of its subsisting after death Strange appearances in nature not solvable by the power of imagination pag. 360 CHAP. II. Of the Origine of the Universe The necessity of the belief of the creation of the world in order to the truth of Religion Of the several Hypotheses of the Philosophers who contradict Moses with a particular examination of them The ancïent tradition of the world consonant to Moses proved from the fonick Philosophy of Thales and the Italick of Pythagoras The Pythagorick Cabbala rather Aegyptian then Mosaick Of the fluid matter which was the material principle of the universe Of the Hypothesis of the eternity of the world asserted by Ocellus Lucanus and Aristotle The weakness of the foundations on which that opinion is built Of the manner of forming principles of Philosophy The possibility of creation proved No arguing from the present state of the world against its beginning shewed from Maimonides The Platonists arguments from the goodness of God for the eternity of the world answered Of the Stoical Hypothesis of the eternity of matter whether reconcilable with the text of Moses Of the opinions of Plato and Pythagoras concerning the praeexistence of matter to the formation of the world The contradiction of the eternity of matter to the nature and attributes of God Of the Atomical Hypothesis of the Origine of the Universe The World could not be produced by a casual concourse of Atoms proved from the nature and motion of Epicurus his Atoms and the Phaenomena of the Universe especially the production and nature of Animals Of the Cartesian Hypothesis that it cannot salve the Origine of the Universe without a Deity giving motion to matter pag. 421 CHAP. III. Of the Origine of Evil. Of the Being of Providence Epicurus his arguments against it refuted The necessity of the belief of Providence in order to Religion Providence proved from a consideration of the nature of God and the things of the world Of the Spirit of nature The great objections against Providence propounded The first concerns the Origine of evil God cannot be the author of sin if the Scriptures be true The account which the Scriptures give of the fall of man doth not charge God with mans fault Gods power to govern man by Laws though he gives no particular reason of every Positive precept The reason of Gods creating man with freedom of will largely shewed from Simplicius and the true account of the Origine of evil Gods permitting the fall makes him not the author of it The account which the Scriptures give of the Origine of evil compared with that of heathen Philosophers The antiquity of the opinion of ascribing the Origine of evil to an evil principle Of the judgment of the Persians Aegyptians and others about it Of Manichaism The opinion of the ancient Greek Philosophers of Pythagoras Plato the Stoicks the Origine of evil not from the necessity of matter The remainders of the history of the fall among the Heathens Of the malignity of Daemons Providence vindicated as to the sufferings of the good and impunity of bad men An account of both from natural light manifested by Seneca Plutarch and others pag. 470 CHAP. IV. Of the Origine of Nations All mankind derived from Adam if the Scriptures be true The contrary supposition an introduction to Atheism The truth of the history of the flood The possibility of an universal deluge proved The flood universal as to mankind whether universal as to the earth and animals no necessity of asserting either Yet supposing the possibility of it demonstrated without creation of new waters Of the fountains of the deep The proportion which the height of mountains bears to the Diameter of the earth No mountains much above three mile perpendicular Of the Origine of fountains The opinion of Aristotle and others concerning it discussed The true account of them from the vapours arising from the mass of subterraneous waters Of the capacity of the Ark for receiving the Animals from Buteo and others The truth of the deluge from the Testimony of Heathen Nations Of the propagation of Nations from Noahs posterity Of the beginning of the Assyrian Empire The multiplication of mankind after the flood Of the Chronology of the LXX Of the time between the flood and Abraham and the advantages of it Of the pretence of such Nations who called themselves Aborigines A discourse concerning the first plantation of Greece the common opinion propounded and
the general defect for want of timely records among Heathen Nations the reason of it shewed from the first Plantations of the World The manner of them discovered The Original of Civil Government Of Hieroglyphicks The use of letters among the Greeks no elder then Cadmus his time enquired into no elder then Joshua the learning brought into Greece by him ENquiries after truth have that peculiar commendation above all other designs that they come on purpose to gratifie the most noble faculty of our souls and do most immediately tend to re-advance the highest perfection of our rational beings For all our most laudable endeavours after knowledge now are only the gathering up some scattered fragments of what was once an entire Fabrick and the recovery of some precious Iewels which were lost out of sight and sunk in the shipwrack of humane nature That saying of Plato that all knowledge is remembrance and all ignorance forgetfulness is a certain and undoubted truth if by forgetfulness be meant the loss and by remembrance the recovery of those notions and conceptions of things which the mind of man once had in its pure and primitive state wherein the understanding was the truest Microcosm in which all the beings of the inferiour world were faithfully represented according to their true native and genuine perfections God created the soul of man not only capable of finding out the truth of things but furnished him with a sufficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or touchstone to discover truth from falshood by a light set up in his understanding which if he had attended to he might have secured himself from all impostures and deceits As all other beings were created in the full possession of the agreeable perfections of their several natures so was man too else God would have never closed the work of Creation with those words And God saw all that he had made and behold it was very good that is endued with all those perfections which were suitable to their several beings Which man had been most defective in if his understanding had not been endowed with a large stock of intellectual knowledge which is the most natural and genuine perfection belonging to his rational being For reason being the most raised faculty of humane nature if that had been defective in its discoveries of truth which is its proper object it would have argued the greatest maim and imperfection in the being it self For if it belongs to the perfection of the sensitive faculties to discern what is pleasant from what is hurtful it must needs be the perfection of the rational to find out the difference of truth from falshood Not as though the soul could then have had any more then now an actual notion of all the beings in the world ocexisting at the same time but that it would have been free from all deceits in its conceptions of things which were not caused through inadvertency Which will appear from the several aspects mans knowledge ledge hath which are either upwards towards his Maker or abroad on his fellow-creatures If we consider that contemplation of the soul which fixes its self on that infinite being which was the cause of it and is properly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it will be found necessary for the soul to be created in a clear and distinct knowledge of him because of mans immediate obligation to obedience unto him Which must necessarily suppose the knowledge of him whose will must be his rule for if man were not fully convinced in the first moment after his creation of the being of him whom he was to obey his first work and duty would not have been actual obedience but a search whether there was any supreme infinite and eternal being or no and whereon his duty to him was founded and what might be sufficient declaration of his Will and Laws according to which he must regulate his obedience The taking off all which doubts and scruples from the soul of man must suppose him fully satisfied upon the first free use of reason that there was an Infinite Power and Being which produced him and on that account had a right to command him in whatsoever he pleased and that those commands of his were declared to him in so certain a way that he could not be deceived in the judging of them The clear knowledge of God will further appear most necessary to man in his first creation if we consider that God created him for this end and purpose to enjoy converse and an humble familiarity with himself he had then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the language of Clemens Alexandrinus Converse with God was as natural to him as his being was For man as he came first out of Gods hands was the reflection of God himself on a dark Cloud the Iris of the Deity the Similitude was the same but the substance different Thence he is said to be created after the Image of God His knowledge then had been more intellectual then discursive not so much imploying his faculties in the operose deductions of reason the pleasant toyl of the rational faculties since the Fall but had immediately imployed them about the sublimest objects not about quiddities and formalities but about him who was the fountain of his being and the center of his happiness There was not then so vast a difference between the Angelical and humane life The Angels and men both fed on the same dainties all the difference was they were in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the upper room in heaven and man in the Summer Parlour in Paradise If we take a view of mans knowledge as it respects his fellow-creatures we shall find these were so fully known to him on his first creation that he needed not to go to School to the wide world to gather up his conceptions of them For the right exercise of that Dominion which he was instated in over the inferiour world doth imply a particular knowledge of the nature being and properties of those things which he was to make use of without which he could not have improved them for their peculiar ends And from this knowledge did proceed the giving the creatures those proper and peculiar names which were expressive of their several natures For as Plato tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The imposition of names on things belongs not to every one but only to him that hath a full prospect into their several natures For it is most agreeable to reason that names should carry in them a suitableness to the things they express for words being for no other end but to express our conceptions of things and our conceptions being but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the same Philosopher speaks the resemblances and representations of the things it must needs follow that where there was a true knowledge the conceptions must agree with the things and words being to express our conceptions none are so fit to do it as those which
are expressive of the several natures of the things they are used to represent For otherwise all the use of words is to be a meer vocabulary to the understanding and an Index to memory and of no further use in the pursuit of knowledge then to let us know what words men are agreed to call things by But something further seems to be intended in their first imposition whence the Iews call it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Mercer tells us a separation and distinction of the several kinds of things and Kircher thus paraphraseth the words of Moses And whatsoever Adam called every living creature that was the name thereof i. e. saith he Fuerunt illis vera germane nomina rerum naturis propriè accommodata But however this be we have this further evidence of that height of knowledge which must be supposed in the first man that as he was the first in his kind so he was to be the standard and measure of all that followed and therefore could not want any thing of the due perfections of humane nature And as the shekel of the Sanctuary was if not double to others as men ordinarily mistake yet of a full and exact weight because it was to be the standard for all other weights which was the cause of its being kept in the Temple So if the first man had not double the proportion and measure of knowledge which his posterity hath if it was not running over in regard of abundance yet it must be pressed down and shaken together in regard of weight else he would be a very unfit standard for us to judge by concerning the due and suitable perfections of humane nature But we need not have run so far back as the first man to evince the knowledge of truth to be the most natural perfection of the soul of man for even among the present ruines of humane nature we may find some such noble and generous spirits that discern so much beauty in the face of truth that to such as should enquire what they find so attractive in it their answer would be the same with Aristotles in a like case it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Question of those who never saw it For so pleasing is the enquiry and so satisfactory the finding of truth after the search that the relish of it doth far exceed the greatest Epicurism of Apicius or the most costly entertainments of Cleopatra there being no Gust so exquisite as that of the mind nor any Iewels to be compared with Truth Nor do any persons certainly better deserve the name of men then such who allow their reason a full employment and think not the erectness of mans stature a sufficient distinction of him from Brutes Of which those may be accounted only a higher species who can patiently suffer the imprisonment of their Intellectuals in a Dungeon of Ignorance and know themselves to be men only by those Characters by which Alexander knew himself not to be a God by their proneness to intemperance and sleep So strange a Metempsychosis may there be without any change of bodies and Euphorbus his soul might become a Brute without ever removing its lodging into the body of an Ass. So much will the soul degenerate from its self if not improved and in a kind of sullenness scarce appear to be what it is because it is not improved to what it may be But if this knowledge of truth be so great so natural so valuable a perfection of humane nature whence comes so much of the world to be over-run with Ignorance and Barbarism whence come so many pretenders to knowledge to court a cloud instead of Juno to pretend a Love to truth and yet to fall down and worship errour If there were so great a sympathy between the soul and truth there would be an impatient desire after it and a most ready embracing and closing with it We see the Magnet doth not draw the iron with greater force then it seems to run with impatience into its closest embraces If there had been formerly so intimate an acquaintance between the soul and truth as Socrates fancied of friends in the other world there would be an harmonious closure upon the first appearance and no divorce to be after made between them True but then we must consider there is an intermediate state between the former acquaintance and the renewal of it wherein all those remaining characters of mutual knowledge are sunk so deep and lie so hid that there needs a new fire to be kindled to bring forth those latent figures and make them again appear legible And when once those tokens are produced of the former friendship there are not more impatient longings nor more close embraces between the touched needle and the Magnet then there are between the understanding and discovered truth But then withall we are to consider that they are but few whose souls are awakened out of that Lethargy they are fallen into in this degenerate condition the most are so pleased with their sleep that they are loth to disturb their rest and set a higher price upon a lazy Ignorance then upon a restless knowledge And even of those whose souls are as it were between sleeping and waking what by reason of the remaining confusion of the species in their brains what by the present dimness of their sight and the hovering uncertain light they are to judge by there are few that can put a difference between a meer phantasm and a real truth Of which these rational accounts may be given viz. Why so few pretenders to knowledge do light on truth First Want of an impartial diligence in the search of it Truth now must be sought and that with care and dilgence before we find it jewels do not use to lye upon the surface of the earth Highways are seldom paved with gold what is most worth our Finding calls for the greatest search If one that walks the streets should finde some inestimable jewel or one that travels the road meet with a bag of gold it would be but a silly design of any to walk the street or travel the road in hopes to meet with such a purchase to make them rich If some have happily light on some valuable truths when they minded nothing less then them must this render a diligence useless in inquiries after such No Truth though she be so fair and pleasing as to draw our affections is yet so modest as to admit of being courted and it may be deny the first suit to heighten our importunity And certainly nothing hath oftner forbid the banes between the understanding and Truth inquired after then partiality and preoccupation of Iudgement which makes men enquire more diligently after the dowry then the beauty of Truth its correspondency to their Interests then its evidence to their understandings An useful error hath often kept the Keys of the mind for free admission when important
truths but contrary to their pre-conceptions or interests have been forbidden entrance Prejudice is the wrong bias of the soul that effectually keeps it from coming near the mark of truth nay sets it at the greatest distance from it There are few in the world that look after truth with their own eyes most make use of spectacles of others making which makes them so seldom behold the proper lineaments in the face of Truth which the several tinctures from education authority custom and predisposition do exceedingly hinder men from discerning of Another reason why there are so few who find truth when so many pretend to seek it is that near resemblance which Error often bears to Truth It hath been well observed that Error seldom walks abroad the world in her own raiments she always borrows something of truth to make her more acceptable to the world It hath been always the subtilty of grand deceivers to graft their greatest errors on some material truths to make them pass more undiscernable to all such who look more at the root on which they stand then on the fruits which they bring forth It will hereafter appear how most of the grossest of the heathen errors have as Plutarch saith of the Egyptian Fables 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some faint and obscure resemblances of truth nay more then so as most pernicious weeds are bred in the fattest soyls their most destructive principles have been founded on some necessary and important truths Thus Idolatry doth suppose the belief of the existence of a Deity and superstition the Immortality of the souls of men The Devil could never have built his Chappels but on the same ground whereon Gods Temples stood which makes me far less wonder then many do at the meeting with many expressions concerning these two grand truths in the writings of ancient Heathens knowing how willing the devil might be to have such principles still owned in the world which by his depraving of them might be the nourishers of Idolatry and Superstition For the general knowledge of a Divine nature supposing men Ignorant of the true God did only lay a foundation to erect his Idolatrous Temples upon and the belief of the souls surviving the body after death without knowledge of the true way of attaining happiness did make men more eager of imbracing those Rites and Ceremonies which canie with a pretence of shewing the way to a blessed immortality Which may be a most probable reason why Philosophy and Idolatry did increase so much together as they did for though right reason fully improved would have overthrown all those cursed and Idolatrous practises among the Heathens yet reason only discerning some general notions without their particular application and improvement did only dispose the most ordinary sort of people to a more ready entertainment of the most gross Idolatry For hereby they discerned the necessity of some kind of worship but could not find out the right way of it and therefore they greedily followed that which was commended to them by such who did withall agree with them in the common sentiments of humane nature Nay and those persons themselves who were the great maintainers of these sublimer notions concerning God and the soul of man were either the great instruments of advancing that horrid superstition among them as Orpheus Apollonius or very forward Complyers with it as many of the Philosophers were Although withall it cannot be denied to have been a wonderful discovery of Divine providence by these general notions to keep waking the inward senses of mens souls that thereby it might appear when Divine Revelation should be manifested to them that it brought nothing contrary to the common principles of humane nature but did only rectifie the depravations of it and clearly shew men that way which they had long been ignorantly seeking after Which was the excellent advantage the Apostle made of the Inscription on the Altar at Athens to the unknown God Whom saith he ye ignorantly serve him I declare unto you And which was the happy use the Primitive learned Christians made of all those passages concerning the divine nature and the Immortality of the souls of men which they found in the Heathen Writers thereby to evidence to the world that the main postulata or suppositions of Christian Religion were granted by their own most admired men and that Christianity did not race out but only build upon those common foundations which were entertained by all who had any name for reason Though this I say were the happy effect of this building errors on common truths to all that had the advantage of Divine revelation to discern the one from the other yet as to others who were destitute of it they were lyable to this twofold great inconvenience by it First for the sake of the apparent rottenness of the Superstructures to question the soundness of the foundations on which they stood And this I doubt not was the case of many considerative heathens who observing that monstrous and unreasonable way of worship obtaining among the heathen and not being able by the strength of their own reason through the want of divine revelation to deduce any certain instituted worship they were shrewdly tempted to renounce those principles when they could not but abhor the conclusions drawn from them for there is nothing more usual then for men who exceedingly detest some absurd consequence they see may be drawn from a principle supposed to reject the principle its self for the sake of that consequence which it may be doth not necessarily follow from it but through the shortness of their own reason doth appear to them to do so Thus when the Intelligent heathen did apparently see that from the principles of the Being of God and the Immortality of souls did flow all those unnatural and inhumane Sacrifices all those absurd and ridiculous Rites all those execrable and profane mysteries out of a loathing the Immoralities and impieties which attended these they were brought to question the very truth and certainty of those principles which were capable of being thus abused And therefore I am very prone to suspect the Apology usually made for Protagoras Diagoras and such others of them who were accounted Atheists to be more favourable then true viz. that they only rejected those heathen Deities and not the belief of the Divine nature I should think this account of their reputed Atheism rational were it any wayes evident that they did build their belief of a Divine nature upon any other grounds then such as were common to them with those whose worship they so much derided And therefore when the Heathens accused the Christians of Atheism I have full and clear evidence that no more could be meant thereby then the rejection of their way of worship because I have sufficient Assurance from them that they did believe in a Divine nature and an instituted Religion most suitable to the most common received notions
of God which they owned in opposition to all heathen worship Which I find not in the least pretended to by any of the forementioned persons nor any thing of any different way of Religion asserted but only a destruction of that in use among them And although the case of Anaxagoras Clazomenius and the rest of the Ionicke Philosophers might seem very different from Diagoras Theodorus and those beforementioned because although they denied the Gods in vulgar repute to be such as they were thought to be as Anaxagor as call'd the Sun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a meer globe of fire for which he was condemned at Athens to banishment and sined five talents yet the learned Vossius puts in this plea in his behalf that he was one that asserted the creation of the world to flow from an eternal mind although therefore I say the case of the Ionick Philosophers may seem far different from the others because of their asserting the production of the world which from Thales Milesius was conveyed by Anaeximander and Anaximenes to Anoxagoras yet to one that throughly considers what they understood by their eternal mind they may be sooner cleared from the imputation of Atheism then irreligion Which two certainly ought in this case to be distinguished for it is very possible for men meeting with such insuperable difficulties about the casual concourse of Atoms for the production of the world or the eternal existences of matter to assert some eternal mind as the first cause of these things which yet they may imbrace only as an hypothesis in Philosophy to solve the phoenomena of nature with but yet not to make this eternal mind the object of adoration And so their asserting a Deity was only on the same account as the Tragedians used to bring in their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when their Fables were brought to such an issue and perplexed with so many difficulties that they saw no way to clear them again but to make some God come down upon the Stage to selve the difficulties they were engaged in or as Seneca saith of many great Families when they had run up their Genealogies so high that they could go no further they then fetched their pedegree from the Gods So when these Philosophers saw such incongruities in asserting an infinite and eternal series of matter they might by this be brought to acknowledge some active principle which produced the world though they were far enough from giving any religious worship to that eternal mind Thus even Epicurus and his followers would not stick to assert the being of a God so they might but circumscribe him within the heavens and let him have nothing to do with things that were done on earth And how uncertain the most dogmatical of them all were as to their opinions concerning the being and nature of their geds doth fully appear from the large discourses of Tully upon that subject where is fully manifested their variety of opinions and mutual repugnancies their self contradictions and inconstancy in their own assertions which hath made me somewhat inclinable to think that the reason why many of them did to the world own a Deity was that they might not be Martyrsâ—or â—or Atheism Which Tully likewise seems to acknowledge when speaking of the punishment of Protagoras for that speech of his De diis neque ut sint neque ut non sint habeo dicere Ex quo equidem existimo tardiores ad hanc sententiam profitendam multos esse factos quippe cum poenam ne dubitatio quidem effugere potuisset So that for all the verbal asserting of a Deity among them we have no certain evidence of their firm belief of it and much less of any worship and service they owed unto it And though it may be they could not totally excuss the notions of a Deity out of their minds partly through that natural sense which is engraven on the souls of men partly as being unable to solve the difficulties of nature without a Deity yet the observing the notorious vanities of Heathen Worship might make them look upon it as a meer Philosophical speculation and not any thing that had an influence upon the government of mens lives For as in nature the observing the great mixture of falshood and truth made the Academicks deny any certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or rule of judging truth and the Scepticks take away all certain assent so the same consequence was nnavoidable here upon the same principle and that made even Plato himself so ambiguous and uncertain in his discourses of a Deity sometimes making him an eternal mind sometimes asserting the whole world Sun Moon Stars Earth Souls and all to be Gods and even those that were worshipped among the heathens as Tully tells us out of his Timaeus and de Legibus which as Velleius the Epicurean there speaks Et per se sunt falsa sibi invicem repugnantia This is the first inconvenience following the mixture of truth and falshood for the sake of the falshood to question the truth its self it was joyned with The other is as great which follows when truth and falshood are mixed for the sake of the truth to embrace the falshood Which is a mistake as common as the other because men are apt to think that things so vastly different as truth and falshood could never blend or be incorporate together therefore when they are certain they have some truth they conclude no falshood to be joyned with it And this I suppose to have been the case of the more credulous and vulgar Heathen as the other was of the Philosphers for they finding mankind to agree in this not only that there is a God but that he must be worship'd did without scruple make use of the way of worship among them as knowing there must be some and they were ignorant of any else And from hence they grew to be as confident believers of all those fables and traditions on which their Idolatry was founded as of those first principles and notions from which the necessity of divine worship did arise And being thus habituated to the belief of these things when truth it self was divulged among them they suspected it to be only a corruption of some of their Fables This Celsus the Epicurean on all occasions in his Books against the Christians did fly to Thus he saith the building of the Tower of Babel and the confusion of Tongues was taken from the fable of the Aloadae in Homers Odysses the story of the Flood from Deucalion Paradise from Alcinous his gardens the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah from the story of Phaeton Which Origen well resutes from the far greater antiquity of those relations among the Iewes then any among the Greeks and therefore the corruption of the tradition was in them and not the Iews Which must be our only way for finding out which was the Original and which the corruption by
demonstrating the undoubted antiquity of one beyond the other whereby we must do as Archimedes did by the crown of Hiero find out the exact proportions of truth and falshood which lay in all those Heathen Fables And this now leads to the third account why truth is so hardly discerned from errour even by those who search after it which is the great obscurity of the History of Ancient Times which should decide the Controversie For there being an universal agreement in some common principles and a frequent resemblance in particular traditions we must of necessity for the clearing the truth from its corruption have recourse to ancient history to see if thereby we can find out where the Original tradition was best preserved by what means it came to be corrupted and whereby we may distinguish those corruptions from the Truths to which they are annexed Which is the design and subject of our future discourse viz. to demonstrate that there was a certain original and general tradition preserved in the world concerning the oldest Ages of the world that this tradition was gradually corrupted among the Heathens that not withstanding this corruption there were sufficient remainders of it to evidence its true original that the sull account of this tradition is alone preserved in those books we call the Scriptures That where any other histery seems to cross the report contained in them we have sufficient ground to question their credibility and that there is sufficient evidence to clear the undoubted certainty of that histery which is contained in the sacred Records of Scripture Wherein we shall observe the same method which Thales took in taking the height of the Pyramids by measuring the length of their shadow so shall we the height and antiquity of truth from the extent of the fabulous corruptions of it Which will be a work of so much the greater difficulty because the truth we pursue after takes covert in so great antiquity and we must be forced to follow its most flying footsteps through the dark and shady paths of ancient history For though history be frequently called the Light of Truth and the Herald of Times yet that light is so faint and dim especially in Heathen Nations as not to serve to discover the face of Truth from her counterseit Error and that Herald so little skill'd as not to be able to tell us which is of the Elder house The reason is though Truth be always of greater Antiquity yet Errour may have the more wrinkled face by which it often imposeth on such who guess antiquity by deformity and think nothing so old as that which can give the least account of its own age This is evidently the case of those who make the pretence of ancient history a plea for Insidelity and think no argument more plausible to impugn the certainty of Divine Revâ—lation with then the seeming repugnancy of some pretended histories with the account of ancient time reported in the Bible Which being a pretext so unworthy designed for solill an end and so frequently made use of by such who account Infidelity a piece of antiquity as well as reason it may be worth our while to shew that it is not more liable to be baffled with reason then to be confuted by Antiquity In order therefore to the removing of this stumbling-block in our way I shall first evince that there is no certain credibility in any of those ancient histories which seem to contradict the Scriptures nor any ground of reason why we should assent to them when they differ from the Bible and then prove that all those undoubted characters of a most certain and authentick historie are legible in those records contained in Scripture Whereby we shall not only shew the unreasonableness of Infidelity but the rational evidence which our faith doth stand on as to these things I shall demonstrate the first of these viz that there is no ground of assent to any ancient histories which give an account of things different from the Scriptures from these arguments the apparent desect weakness and insufficiency of them as to the giving an account of elder times The monstrous confusion ambiguity and uncertainty of them in the account which they give the evident partiality of them to themselves and inconsistency with each other I begin with the first of these the defect and insufficiency of them to give in such an account of elder times as may amount to certain credibility which if cleared will of its self be sufficient to manifest the incompetency of those records as to the laying any foundation for any firm assent to be given to them Now this defect and insufficiency of those histories is either more general which lies in common to them all or such as may be observed in a particular consideration of the histories of those several Nations which have pretended highest to Antiquity The General defect is the want of timely records to preserve their histories in For it is most evident that the truest history in the world is liable to various corruptions through length of time if there be no certain way of preserving it entire And that through the frailty of memory in those who had integrity to preserve it through the gradual increase of Barbarism and Ignorance where there are no wayes of instruction and through the subtilty of such whose interest it may be to corrupt and alter that tradition If we find such infinite variety and difference of men as to the histories of their own times when they have all possible means to be acquainted with the truth of them what account can we imagine can be given by those who had no certain way of preserving to posterity the most authentick relation of former Ages Especially it being most evident that where any certain way of preserving tradition is wanting a people must soon degenerate into the greatest stupidity and Barbarism because all will be taken up in minding their own petty concerns and no encouragement at all given to such publick spirits who would mind the credit of the whole Nation For what was there for such to employ themselves upon or spend their time in when they had no other kind of Learning among them but some general traditions conveyed from Father to Son which might be learned by such who followed nothing but domestick employments So that the sons of Noah after their several dispersions and plantations of several Countries did gradually degenerate into Ignorance and Barbarism for upon their first setling in any Countrey they found it employment sufficient to cultivate the Land and fit themselves habitations to live in and to provide themselves of necessities for their mutual comfort and subsistence Besides this they were often put to removes from one place to another where they could not conveniently reside which Thucydides speaks much of as to the ancient state of Greece and it was a great while before they came to imbody themselves together
the wonderful providence of God that out of this eater came forth meat and out of that Lion honey that the most considerable testimonies by him produced against our Religion were of the greatest strength to refute his own For he being of too great Learning to be satisfied with the vain pretences of the Graecians he made it his business to search after the most ancient Records to find out somewhat in them to confront with the antiquity of the Scriptures but upon his search could find none of greater veneration then the Phoenician History nor any Author contending for age with this Sanchoniathon Yet when he had made the most of his Testimony he was fain to yield him younger then Moses◠though he supposeth him elder then the Trojan Wars And yet herein was he guilty of a most gross 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not much exceeding the Graecians in his skill in Chronology when he makes Semiramis coexistent with the Siege of Troy as is evident in his testimony produced at large by Eusebius out of his fourth Book against the Christians nay he goes to prove the truth of Sanchoniathons History by the agreement of it with that of Moses concerning the Iews both as to their names and places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereby he doth evidently assert the greater Truth and Antiquity of Moses his History when he proves the truth of Sanchoniathons from his consonancy with that Two things more Porphyrie insists on to manifest his credibility the one I suppose relates to what he reports concerning the Iews the other concerning the Phoenicians themselves For the first that he made use of the Records of Ierombaal the Priest of the God Ieuo or rather Iao for the other that he used all the records of the several Cities and the sacred inscriptions in the Temples Who that Ierombaal was is much discussed among learned men the finding out of which hath been thought to be the most certain way to determine the age of Sanchoniathon The learned Bochartus conceives him to be Gideon who in Scripture is called Ierub-baal which is of the same sense in the Phoenician language only after their custome changing one b into m as in Ambubajae Sambuca c. But admitting the conjecture of this learned person concerning Ierub-baal yet I see no necessity of making Sanchoniathon and him co-temporary for I no where find any thing mentioned in Porphyrie implying that but only that he made use of the records of Ierub-baal which he might very probably do at a considerable distance of time from him whether by those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we mean the Annals written by him or the records concerning his actions either of which might give Sanchoniathon considerable light into the history either of the Isralites or Phoenicians And it is so much the more probable because presently after the death of Gideon the Israelites worshipped Baal-berith by which most probably is meant the Idol of Berith or Berytus the place where Sanchoniathen lived by which means the Berytians might come easily acquainted with all the remarkable passages of Ierubbaal But I cannot conceive how Sanchoniathon could be cotemporary with Gideon which yet if he were he falls 182 years short of Moses especially because the building of Tyre which that Author mentions as an ancient thing as hath been observed by Scaliger is by our best Chronologers placed about the time of Gideon and about 65 years before the destruction of Troy I know Bochartus to avoid this argument hath brought some evidence of several places called Tyrus in Phoenicia from Scylax his Periplus but none that there was any more then one Tyrus of any great repute for antiquity Now this Tyrus Iosephus makes but 240 years elder then Solomons Temple and Iustin but one year elder then the destruction of Troy Neither can any account be given why Sidon should be so much celebrated by ancient Poets as Strabo tells us when Tyre is not so much as mentioned by Homer if the famous Tyre were of so great antiquity and repute as is pretended It cannot be denied but that there is mention in Scripture of a Tyre elder then this we speak of which we read of Ioshua 19. 29. which some think to be that wch was called Palaetyrus which Strabo makes to be 30 furlongs distant from the great Tyre but Pliny includes Palaetyrus within the circumference of Tyre and so makes the whole circuit of the City to be 19 miles It is not to me so certain to what place the name of Palaetyrus refers whether to any Tyrus before the first building of the great Tyre or to the ruines of the great Tyre after its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar compared with the new Tyre which was built more inward to the Sea and was after besieged by Alexander the great It may seem probable that Palaetyrus may relate to the ruins of the great Tyre in that it was after included in its circuit and chiefly because of the prediction in Ezekiel 26. 4. Thou shalt be built no more for the Tyre erected after was built not on the Continent but almost in the Sea If so then Palaetyrus or the old famous Tyrus might stand upon a rock upon the brink-of the Continent and so the great argument of Bo-chartus is easily answered which is that after it is mentioned in Sanchoniathons history that Hypsouranius dwelt in Tyre upon the falling out between him and his brother Usous Usous first adventured 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to go to sea which saith he evidently manifests that the Tyre mentioned by Sanchoniathon was not the famous Insular Tyrus but some other Tyre This argument I say is now easily answered if the famous Tyre before its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar did stand upon the Continent for then it might be the old famous Tyre still notwithstanding what Sanchoniathon speaks of the first venturing to sea after Tyre was built So then I conceive these several ages agreeable to the same Tyre the first was when it was a high strong rock on the sea-side without many inhabitants so I suppose it was when mentioned by Ioshua as the bound of the tribe of Asher The second Age was when it was built a great City by the Sidonians upon the former place and grew very populous and famous which lasted till Nebuchadnezzars time after this though it were never built up in the Continent again yet a little further into the Sea a new and goodly City was erected which was called new Tyre and the remains on the Continent side Palaetyrus Thus far then we have made good Scaligers opinion against Bochartus that the famous Sanchoniathon is not so old as he is pretended to be Which will be further manifest if that Abibalus to whom Sanchoniathon is supposed to dedicate his History were the Father to Hiram co-temporary with Solomon as Ios. Scaliger supposeth who was 154 years after the destruction of Troy In the Tyrian Dynasties produced
to then are the Aegyptians a people so unreasonably given to fables that the wisest action they did was to conceal their Religion the best office their Gods had was to hold their fingers in their mouths to command silence to all that came to worship them But we design not here any set discourse concerning the vanity of the Aegyptian Theology which yet was so monstrously ridiculous that even those who were over-run with the height of Idolatry themselves did make it the object of their scorn and laughter And certainly had we no other demonstration of the greatness of mans Apostacy and degeneracy the Egyptian Theology would be an irrefragable evidence of it For who could but imagine a strange lowness of spirit in those who could fall down and worship the basest and most contemptible of creatures Their Temples were the best Hieroglyphicks of themselves fair and goodly structures without but within some deformed creature enshrin'd for veneration But though the Egyptians had lost their credit so much as to matters of Religion yet it may be supposed that they who were so famed for wisdom and antiquity should be able to give a full and exact account of themselves through all the ages of the world And this they are so far from being defective in that if you will believe them they will give you an account of themselves many thousands of years before ever the world was made but the peculiar vanity of their Chronology will be handled afterwards That we now enquire into is what certain records they had of their own antiquity which might call for assent from any unprejudiced mind whether there be any thing really answering that loud and unparalleld cry of antiquity among the Egyptians whereby they will make all other Nations in comparison of them to be but of yesterday and to know nothing We question not now their pretence to wisdom and learning but are the more in hopes to meet with some certain way of satisfaction concerning ancient times where learning is supposed to have flourished so much when even Greece it self was accounted Barbarous The great Basis of all the Egyptian History depends on the credit of their ancient Hermes whom out of their veneration they called Trismegistus for to him they ascribe the first invention of their learning and all excellent Arts from him they derive their history their famous Historian Manâ—tho professing to transcribe his Dynastyes from the pillars of Hermes We shall therefore first see of what credit and antiquity Hermes himself was and of what account particularly those pillars were which hold up all the Fabrick of Manetho his Dynastyes For Hermes himself the story concerning him is so various and uncertain that some have from thence questioned whether ever there were such a person or no because of the strangely different account that is given of him Cotta in Tully in order to the establishing his Academical doctrine of withholding assent mentions no fewer then five Mercuries of which two he makes Egyptian one of them the Hermes we now speak of whom the Egyptians call Thoyth and was the Author both of their Laws and Letters The Egyptians as appears by Diodorus make him to be a sacred Scribe to Osiris and to have instructed Isis and when Osiris went upon any warlike Expedition he committed the management of affairs to him for his great wisdom The Phoenicians preserve his memory among them too for Philo Byblius saith that Sanchoniathon described his Theology from the books of Taautus whom the Egyptians call Thoyth who was the first inventer of Letters and was a Counsellor to Saturn whose advice he much relied on What now must we pitch upon in so great uncertainties how come the Phoenician and Egyptian Theology to come both from the same person which are conceived so much to differ from each other If we make the stories of Osiris and Isis to be fabulous and meerly Allegorical as Plutarch doth then Mercury himself must become an Allegory and the Father of Letters must be an Hieroglyphick If we admit the Egyptians narrations to be real and seek to reduce them to truth and thereby make Osiris to be Mitsraim the son of Cham who first ruled in Egypt all that we can then affirm of Hermes is that he might be some useful person who had a great influence both upon the King and State and did first settle the Nation in a politick way of government whose memory on that accout the Egyptians might preserve with the greatest veneration and when they were once fallen into that Idolatry of consecrating the memories of the first contributers to the good of mankind they thought they had the greatest reason to adore his memory and so by degrees attributed the invention of all useful things to him For so it is apparent they did when Iamblichus tells us the Egyptians attributed all their books to Mercury as the Father of them because he was reputed the Father of wit and learning they made all the off-springs of their brains to bear their Fathers name And this hath been the great reason the world hath been so long time imposed upon with varieties of books going under the name of Hermes Tresmegistus For he was not the first of his kind who in the early days of the Christian world obtruded upon the world that Cento or confused mixture of the Christian Platonick and Aegyptïan doctrine which is extant still under the name of Hermes Trismegistus whose vanity and falshood hath been sufficiently detected by learned men There were long before his time extant several Mercurial books as they were called which none of the wiser Heathen did ever look on as any other then Fables and Impostures as appears by Porphyries letter to Arebo the Egyptian Priest and Iamblichus his answer to it in his Book of the Aegyptian Mysteries We have then no certainty at all notwithstanding the great fame of Hermes of any certain records of antient times unless they be contained in those sacred inscriptions from whence Manetho took his history It must be acknowledged that the most antient way of preserving any monuments of learning in those elder times was by these inscriptions on pillars especially among the Aegyptians as is evident from the several testimonies of Galen Proclus Iamblichus and the author of the Book called Sapientia secundum Egytios adjoyned to Aristotle who all concur in this that what ever laudable invention they had among them it was inscribed on some pillars and those preserved in their Temples which were instead of Libraries to them Manetho therefore to make his story the more probable pretends to take all his relations from these sacred inscriptions and as Eusebius tells us translated the whole Egyptian History into Greek beginning from their Gods and continuing his History down near the time of Darius Codomannus whom Alexander conquered for in Eusebius his Chronica mention is made of Manetho his History ending 16. year of Artaxerxes
of Nabonasser Which if we should be so greedy of all empty conjectures which tend to our purpose as to take them for truths would be a very strong evidence of the falshood and vanity of the Chaldeans in their great pretences to antiquity But as the case stands in reference to their history we finde more evidence from Scripture to assert their just antiquity then ever they are able to produce out of any undoubted records of their own Which yet hath been endeavoured by an Author both of some credit and antiquity the true Berosus not the counterfeit of Annius whose vizard we shall have occasion to pull off afterwards This Berosus was as Iosephus and Tatianus assure us a Priest of Belus and a Babylonian born but afterwards flourished in the isle of Co and was the first who brought the Chaldean Astrology in request among the Greeks in honour to whose name and memory the Athenians who were never backward in applauding those who brought them the greatest news especially i suitable to their former superstition erected a statue for him with a guilded tongue A good emblem of his history which made a fair and specious shew but was not that within which it pretended to be especially where he pretends to give an account of the most antient times and reckons up his two Dynastyes before the time of Belus but of them afterwards It cannot be denyed but some fragments of his history which have been preserved from ruine by the care and industry of Iosephus Tatianus Eusebius and others have been very useful not only for proving the truth of the history of Scripture to the heathens but also for illustrating some passages concerning the Babylonian Empire as making Nabopolasser the Father of Nebucadonosor of which Scaliger hath fully spoken in his notes upon his fragments Far be it from me to derogate any thing even from prophane histories where they do not enterfere with the Sacred history of Scripture and it is certainly the best improvement of these to make them draw water to the Sanctuary and to serve as smaller Stars to conduct us in our way when we cannot enjoy the benefit of that greater light of Sacred history But that which I impeach these prophane histories of is only an insufficiency as to that account of antient times wherein they are so far from giving light to Sacred records that the design of setting of them up seems to be for casting a cloud upon them Which may seem somewhat the more probable in that those monstrous accounts of the Aegyptian and Chaldean Dynastyes did never publickly appear in the world in the Greek tongue till the time that our Sacred records were translated into Greek at Alexandria For till that time when this authentick history of the world was drawn forth from its privacy and retirement being as it were lookt up before among the Israelites at Iudea into the publick notice of the world about the time of Ptolomaeus Philadelphus these vain pretenders to antiquity thought not themselves so much concerned to stand up for the credit of their own Nations For till that time the onedulous world not being acquainted with any certain report of the creation and propagation of the world was apt to swallow any thing that was given forth by those who were had in so great esteem as the Chaldean and Aegyptian Priests were Because it was supposed that those persons who were freed from other avocations had more leasure to inquire into these things and because of their mysterious hiding what they had from the vulgar were presumed to have a great deal more then they had But now when the Sun of righteousness was approaching this Horizon of the world and in order to that the Sacred history like the day-star was to give the world notice of it by which the former shadows and mists began to fly away it concerned all those whose interest lay in the former ignorance of mankind as much as they could to raise all their ignes fatui and whatever might tend to obscure that approaching light by invalidating the credit of that which came to bespeak its acceptance It is very observable to consider what gradations and steps there were in the world to the appearance of that grand light which came down from heaven to direct us in our way thither how the world not long before was awakened into a greater inquisitiveness then ever before how knowledge grew into repute and what methods divine providence used to give the inquisitive world a taste of Truth at present to stay their stomacks and prepare them for that further discovery of it afterwards In order to this that Nation of the Iews which was an inclosed garden before was now thrown open and many of the plants removed and set in forraign Countries not only in Babylon where even after their return were left three famous Schools of learning Sora Pombeditha and Neharda but in Aegypt too where multitudes of them by Alexanders favour were setled at Alexandria where they had opportunity to season those two great fountains whence the current of knowledge ran into the rest of the world And now it was not in Iewry only that God was known but he whose name was great in Israel did make way for the knowledge of himself among all the Nations of the earth And that allwise God who directed the Magi by a star to Christ making use of their former skill in Astronomy to take notice of that star which came now on a peculiar errand to them to lead them to their Saviour The great God condescending so far to mankind as to take advantage of particular inclinations and to accommodate himself to them for which purpose it is very observable that he appeared in another way to the Wisemen then to the poor Shepherds the same God made use of the curiosity and inquisitiveness after knowledge which was in Ptolomaeus Philadelphus which he is so much applauded for by Athenaeus and others to bring to light the most advantageous knowleage which the world ever had before the coming of Christ in the slesh And that great Library of his erecting at Alexandria did never deserve that title till it had lodged those Sacred records and then it did far better then the old one of Osymanduas of which Historians tells us this was the Inscription 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The shop of the souls Physick But this being a matter of so much concernment in order to our better understanding the original of these vast accounts of time among the Chaldaeans and Aegyptians and a subject not yet touched by any we shall a little further improve the probability of it by taking a more particular account of the time when the Scriptures were first translated and the occasion might thereby be given to these Aegyptians Chaldaeans to produce their fabulous account into the view of the world Whether the Scriptures had been ever before translated into the Greek
he tells us himself courting the Aegyptian Mysteries for compassing his Oedipus should have found some better arguments to prove an assertion of this nature then meerly the testimony of Iosephus the Hebrew book Iuchasin and some Arabick Writers not one of all which do mention the thing they are brought for viz. that Manetho was elder then Alexander All the business is they quote him as an ancient Writer but what then The Author of the Book Iuchasim was Abraham Zacuth a Iew of Salamancha who writ in the year of our Lord 1502. and this book was first printed at Constantinople 1556. Might not this man then well mention Manetho as an ancient Writer if he flourished above 1600 years before him in the time of Ptolomaeus Philadelphus And what if some Arabick Writers mention him are they of so great antiquity and credit themselves that it is an evidence Manetho lived in Alexanders time to be praised by them It would be well if Kircber and other learned men who think the world is grown to so great stupidity as to believe every thing to be a Iewel which is far fetched would first assert and vindicate the antiquity and fidelity of their Arabick Authors such as Gelaldinus Abenephi and many others before they expect we should part with our more authentick Records of History for those fabulous relations which they are so full fraught withall Were it here any part of my present business it were an easie matter so to lay open the ignorance falsity and fabulousness of those Arabians whom that Author relies so much upon that he could not be freed from a design to impose upon the world who makes use of their Testimony in matters of ancient times without a Caveat I know none fit to believe these Arabick Writers as to these things but those who have faith enough to concoct the Rabbins in matter of History Of whom Origen saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who are as Grotius truly saith pessimi historiae Magistri nam ex quo patria expulsi sunt omnis apud illos historia crassis erroribus fabulis est inquinata quibus proinde nihil credendum est nisi aliunde testes accederunt And as Is. Caubason passeth this sharp but due censure upon them Rabbinis ubi de Lingna Hebraica agitur vocis alicujus proprietate vel aliquo Talmudico instituto meritò à Christianis tribui non parum nbi verò à verbis venitur ad res aut ad historiam vel rerum antiquarum veteris populi explicationem nisi falli decipi volumus nihil admodum esse illis fidei habendum Sexcentis argumentis hoc facilè probarem si id nunc agerem And in reference to their ancient rites as well as history Ioseph Scaliger hath given this verdict of them Manifesta est Iudaeorum inscitia qui cum usu veterum rituum etiam corum cognitionem amiserunt multa quae ad eorum sacra historiam pertinent longè meliùs nos teneamus quam ipsi The same which these very learned persons say of Rabbinical may with as much truth be said of these Arabick Writers in matters of ancient history which I have here inserted to shew the reason why I have thought the testimony of either of these two sorts of persons so inconsiderable in the matter of our future discourse which being historical and that of the greatest antiquity little relief is to be expected from either of them in order thereto But to return to Kircher It is freely granted that Iosephus an Author of credit and age sufficient to give his opinion in this case doth very frequently cite Manetho in his Aegyptian History particularly in his learned Books against Appion but where he doth give the least intimation of Manetho being elder then Alexander I am yet to seek But Kircher will not yet leave the matter so but undertakes to give an account of the mistake which is that there were two Manetho's besides and both Aegyptians mentioned by Suidas one a Mendesian who writ of the Preparation of the Aegyptian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a kind of perfume used by the Aegyptian Priests The other a Diospolitan who writ some Physiological and Astronomical Treatises whose works he hears are preserved in the Duke of Florenee his Librarie and this was he saith he who lived in the times of Augustus whom many by the aequivocation of the name have confounded with the ancient Writer of the Aegyptian Dynastyes Is it possible so learned a Iesuite should discover so little judgement in so few words For first who ever asserted the Writer of the Dynastyes to have lived in the time of Augustus Yet secondly if that Manetho whom Suidas there speaks of lived in Augustus his time according to Kircher then it must necessarily follow that the Compiler of the Dynastyes did for it is evident to any one that looks into Suidas that he there speaks of the same Manetho for these are his words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Can any thing be more plain then that he here speaks of Manetho Sebennyta who was the Author of the Dynastyes though he might write other things besides of which Suidas there speaks But Kircher very wisely in translating Suidas his words leaves out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which decides the controversie and makes it clear that he speaks of the same Manetho of whom we have been discoursing Thus it still appears that this Manetho is no elder then the time of Ptolomy Philadelphus which was the thing to be proved Now for Berosus although the Chaldeans had occasion enough given them before this time to produce their antiquities by the Iews converse with them in Babylon yet we find this Author the first who durst adventure them abroad such as they were in Greek Now that this Berosus published his history after the time mentioned I thus prove Tatianus Assyrius tells us that he writ the Chaldaick history in three books and dedicated them to Antiochus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is read in the fragment of Tatianus preserved in Eusebius but it must be acknowledged that in the Paris edition of Tatianus as well as the Basil it is thus read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here it relates to the third from Alexander in the other to the third from Seleucus Now if we reckon the third so as to take the person from whom we reckon in for the first according to the reading in Eusebius it falls to be Antiochus called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the other reading it falls to be Antiochus Soter for Seleucus succeeded Alexander in the Kingdom of Syria Antiochus Soter Seleucus Antiochus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Antiochus Soter But according to either of these readings our purpose is sufficiently proved For Antiochus Soter began to reign in Syria in the sixth year of Ptol. Philadelphus in Aegypt Antiochus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 succeeded him in the 22. year of Philadelphus
real learning or truth at all in them For this though he be sharply censured by Strabo in his first Book who undertakes to vindicate the Geography of Homer from the exceptions of Eratosthenes yet himself cannot but confess that there is a â—very great mixture of Fables in all their Poets which is saith he partly to delight the people and partly to awe them For the minds of men being always desirous of novelties such things do hugely please the natural humours of weak people especially if there be something in them that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very strange and wonderful it increaseth the delight in hearing it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which draws them on to a desire of hearing more of it And by this means saith he are children first brought on to learning and all ignorant persons are kept in awe nay and the more learned themselves partly for want of reason and judgement and partly from the remainder of those impressions which these things made upon them when they were children cannot shake off that former credulity which they had as to these things By which discourse of Strabo though intended wholly by him in vindication of Poetick Fables it is plain and evident what great disservice hath been done to truth by them by reason they had no other Records to preserve their ancient history but these fabulous Writers and therefore supposing a mixture of truth and falshood together which Strabo contends for yet what way should be taken to distinguish the true from the false when they had no other certain Records and besides he himself acknowledgeth how hard a matter it is even for wise men to excuss those fabulous narrations out of their minds which were insinuated into them by all the advantages which prejudice custome and education could work upon them Granting then there may be some truth at the bottom of their fabulous narrations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which may be gilded over with some pleasing tales as himself compares it yet how shall those come to know that it is only gilded that never saw any pure mettal and did always believe that it was what it seemed to be Had there been any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or touchstone to have differenced between the one and the other there might have been some way for a separation of them but there being none such we must conclude that the fabulous Narrations of Poets in stead of making Truth more pleasant by their fictions have so adulterated it that we cannot find any credibility at all in their narrations of elder times where the truth of the story hath had no other way of conveyance but through their fictions But though Poets may be allowed their liberty for representing things with the greatest advantage to the palats of their Readers yet we may justly expect when men profess to be historical they should deliver us nothing but what upon strictest examination may prove undoubted truth Yet even this were the Greeks far from for Strabo himself confesseth of their eldest Historians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their first Historians both of persens and things were fabulous Diodorus particularly instanceth in their eldest Historians as Cadmus Milesius Hecataeus and Hellanicus and condemns them for fabulousness Strabo condemns Damastes Sigeensis for vanity and falshood and wonders at Eratosthenes for making use of him yet this man is of great antiquity among them and his testimony used by Authors of good credit as Dionys Halycarnassius Plutarch and others Nay Pliny professeth to follow him and so he doth Aristeus Procennesius in his Arimaspia which may render the credit of his History very suspicious with whom it was a sufficient ground of credibility to any story that he found it in some Greek Authors Strabo reckons Damastes with Euëmerus Messenius and Antiphanes Bergeus which latter was so noted a lyar that from him as Stephanus tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was used as a proverb for to speak never a word of truth Aristeus Proconnesius lived in the time of Cyrus and writ a History of the Arimaspi in three Books who seems to have been the Sir Iohn Maridevil of Greece from his Stories of the Arimaspi with one eye in their foreheads and their continual fighting with the Gryphens for gold yet the story was taken upon trust by Herodotus Pliny and many others though the experience of all who have visited those Northern Climats do sufficiently refute these follies Strabo saith of this Aristeus that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one inferiour to none for juggling which cenfure was probably occasioned by the common story of him that he could let his soul out of his body when he pleased and bring it again yet this Juggler did Celsus pitch on to confront with our blessed Saviour as Herocles did on Apollinus so much have those been to seek for reason who have fought to oppose the doctrine of faith But further what credit can we give to those Historians who have striven to confute each other and lay open one anothers falshood to the world Where was there ever any such dissonancy in the sacred History of Scripture doth the Writer of one Book discover the weakness of another do not all the parts so exactly agree that the most probable suspicion could ever fall into the heart of an Infidel is that they were all written by the same person which yet the series of times manifests to have been impossible But now if we look into the ancient Greek Historians we need no other testimony then themselves to take away their credibility The Genealogies of Hesiod are corrected by Acusiddus Acusiddus is condemned by Hellanicus Hellanicus accused of falshood by Ephorus Ephorus by Timaeus Timaeus by such who followed him as Iosephus fully shews Where must we then fix our belief upon all in common that is the ready way to believe contradictions for they condemn one another of falshood Must we believe one and reject the rest but what evidence doth that one give why he should be credited more then the rest And which is a most irrefragable argument against the Graecian history their eldest historians are ackowledged to be the most fabulous for our only recourse for deciding the controversies among the younger historians must be to the elder And here we are further to seek then ever for the first ages are confessed to be Poetical and to have no certainty of truth in them So that it is impossible to find out any undoubted certainty of ancient times among the Greek Historians which will be yet more evident when we add this that there are very few extant of those Historians who did carry the greatest name for Antiquity The highest antiquity of the Greek Historians doth not much exceed the time of Cyrus and Cambyses as Vossius hath fully demonstrated in his learned book De Historiâ—is Graecis and therefore I shall spare particular enquiries into their
the sense saith he is clear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to thâ— Chaldee account comprehends 222. months which come to â—ighteen years and sixth months therefore 120. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make 2220. years and therefore he adds for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I read leaving out the last 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now according to this sense of 120. Sari to comprehend the sum of 2220. years it will be no difficult matter to reduce the fragment of Berosus concerning the ten Kings before the flood reigning 120. Sari to some degree of probability As to which I shall only suppose these two things First that the ancient Chaldeans had preserved among them some tradition of the number of the chief persons before the flood for we find them exactly agreeing with the Scriptures as to the number though differing as to the names of them which may be seen in the fragments of Africanus preserved in Eusebius his Greek Chronica Secondly that Berosus from whom Apollodorus and Alexander Polyhistor deliver these computations might as to the account of the times of those persons follow the translation of the Septuagint For I have already made it evident that Berosus did not publish his History till after the Septuagint was abroad now according to the computation of the Septuagint of the ages before the flood these 120. Sari of the ten Kings will not much disagtee from it For these make 2220. years of these ten persons and the Septuagint in all make 2242. so that if in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Suidas we only read it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we have the exact computation of the Septuagint in these 120. Sari but of this let the learned judge We now to come to the Aegyptian Dynastyes of Manetho as to which I doubt we must be fain to take the same course that Eusebius did with the Chaldean 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to trouble our selves overmuch in seeking to reconcile Fables to truth Great pains is taken by some very learned men to reduce the disorderly Dynastyes of Manetho to some probable account but I must confess upon an impartial examination of them that I think they have striven if not to make an Ethiopian white yet an Aegyptian to speak truth concerning his own Country which are almost of an equal impossibility Ioseph Scaliger who first in this latter age of the world pâ—oduced them into the light out of Georgius Syncellus hath a more favourable opinion of them then of the Aegyptian History of Herodotus Diodorus and others but upon what account I cannot imagine Is it because four Dynastyes according to his own computation exceed the creation of the world according to the true account for which he is fain to make use of his Tempus prolepticum and Iulian period which reacheth 764. years beyond the age of the world and was invented by him from the multiplication of the great Cycle into the indiction i. e. of 532. into 15. Or is it because for sooth Manâ—tho hath digested all into better order and reckoned up the several Dynastyes which lay consused in other authors but this only shews him a more cunning impostor who saw the former accounts given by others would not serve the turn and therefore pretends to more exactness and diligence that he might more easily deceive his readers But setting aside those things which have been said already concerning Manetho I have these things which make me reject his Dynastyes as fabulous first the vast difference between Manetho his accounts and all others who have written the Aegyptian History in the order and names of his Dynastyes Where do we ever read of the several Dynastyes of the Thinites Memphites Suites Diospolitans and many others but in himself It is very strange that neither Herodotus nor Eratosthenes nor Diodorus who have all written a succession of the Egyptian Kings should neither by their own industry nor by all the interest they had in Egypt get any knowledge of these methodically digested Dynastyes Besides had there been any historical certainty in these Dynastyes of Manetho whence comes it to pass that they should be so silently passed over by those who were Egyptian Priests themselves and undertook to write the History of Egypt Such were Chaeremon who was an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sacred scribe and Ptolomaeus Mendesius who was an Egyptian Priest as Eusebius tells us and comprehended the history of Egypt in three books Now had this History been so authentical as is pretended whence come so many and great contradictions between them in so much that Iosephus saith If that which they report were true it were impossible they should so much differ but they labour in the invention of lyes and write neither agreeably to the truth nor to one another So that it is next to a miracle almost to see how prodigiously fond of these Dynastyes Kircher is and what pains he hath taken to no purpose about them scio multos esse â—aith he qui hujusmodi Dynastias meras nugas commenta putant very true but why is not he of the same mind too he confesseth himself to have been so once but since he had conversed more with the Oriental traditions he hath found them not to be so fabulous as many make them It seems then the Basis of the Aegyptian Dynastyes as well before the flood as after must lye in this Oriental tradition a thing which some to shew their great skill in those Eastern languages are grown very fond of But as far as I can yet see they sail to Ophir not for gold but Peacocks and the next Legend the world hath should be called Legenda Orientalis For can any thing be more irrational absurd and fabulous then those Arabick traditions which that author scrapes as much for as Aesops Cock did on the Dunghill but there is no jewell to be found among them Unless we should take those 15. hard names of men for such which by the Arabick writers are said to have succeeded each other in Egypt before the flood viz. Nacraus Nathras Mesram Henoah Arjak Hasilim Husal Tatrasan Sarkak Schaluk Surith who they say built the Pyramids Hugith Manaus Aphrus Malinus Abn Ama Pharaun in whose time they say the flood came But should we be so little befriended by reason as to grant all this what advantage will this be to Manetho who speaks not of Kings but whole Dynastyes so that it still appears these Dynastyes are fabulous not being attested by any credible witnesses Secondly All those who profess to follow Manetho differ strangely from one another as Iosephus Africanus Eusebius George the Syncellus of the patriarchs of Tarasius and Scaliger who hath taken so much pains in digesting of them yet he is condemned by others since and Isaac Vossius gives a particular caution to his reader In his Dynastiis compingendis nequaquam esse sequendum ordinem calculum Scaligeri What should be the
which account we may justly reject all those pretended successions of Kings hâ—re in Britain from Gomer to Brute as fabulous And it will be the less wonder it should be so in those then accounted barbarous Nations when even among those who were the Planters of knowledge and civility among others the account of their ancient times is so dark confused and uncertain As it would sufficiently appear to any that would take the pains to examine the succession of the two first Dynastyes among the Latins the first before Aeneas his coming into Italy and the second of the Aeneadae after and certainly it will be sufficient ground to question the account of times before if in the third Dynasty when the succession seems so clear and so certain an Epocha as the building of Rome to deduce their accounts from their Chronology be uncertain which I shall briefly speak to For although Porcius Cato have in Dionysius the honour of finding out the first Palilia of the City of Rome which was the Feast observed to the honour of the God Pales in the time of which the foundations of Rome were laid yet there appears no great certainty in his undertaking for therein he was after contradicted by the learned Roman Varro Dionysius tells us that Cato found by the Censors tables the exact time from the expulsion of the Kings to the time of the Cities being taken by the Gauls from which time to his own he could not miss of it from the Fasti Consulares so that it cannot be denied but that Cato might have a certain account of times from the Regifugium to the time he writ his Origines But what certainty Cato could have from the first Palilia of the City to the expulsion of Tarquin we cannot understand For the succession of Kings must needs be very uncertain unless it be demonstrated from some publick monuments or certain records or some publick actions certainly known to have fallen out precisely in such a year of their several Reigns Now none of these do occur in the Roman history in all that Interval from the Palilia to the Regifugium so that not only the whole interval but the time of every particular Kings Reign are very uncertain And therefore Varro being destitute of any demonstration of that time had recourse to L. Tarrutius Firmanus to see if by his skill in Astronomy he could certainly find out the first Palilia of Rome His answer was that he found that the City was built in the time of an Eclipse of the Sun which was in the third year of the sixth Olympiad according to which account Varro proceeded and thence arose the difference between the Palilia Catoniana and Varroniana the latter falling out in the 23 of Iphitus the other in the 24. But if we believe Ioseph Scaliger there could not be an Eclipse of the Sun at the time affirmed by Tarrutius But yet granting an Eclipse of the Sun then what certainty can we have of the succession of the several Kings afterwards without which there can be no certain computation ab Urbe Condita If then the Romans who had so great advantage of knowing times and were withall so inquisitive concerning the building of their City which was a thing of no very remote distacne could attain to no absolute certainty without it what certainty can we expect as to an account of far ancienter times either from them or others when they had no Censors tables nor Fasti Consulares to be guided by And thus much may serve to shew the great uncertainty of Heathen Chronology as to the giving an account of ancient times And yet were it only an uncertainty as to Chronology we might better bear with it for the mistake meerly in computation of times were not so dangerous any further then the credibility of the history depends on the computation as in point of antiquity if we were but certain that the persons and actions related of them were such as they are reported to be But that which adds much to the confusion and uncertainty of Heathen history is the frequency of Impostures which are more hard to be discovered in that there are no authentick histories of those times extant which hath both given occasion to variety of imposture and much hindered their discovery For the curiosity of men leading them back into a search after ancient times it makes them exceeding credulous in embracing whatever pretends to give them any conduct through those dark and obscure paths of ancient history And the world hath never been wanting of such as would be ready to abuse the simple credulity of well-meaning but less wary men but those ages have been most feracious in the production of such persons which have pretended to more Learning then they had The pretence of learning made such persons appear and the want of it made them not be discovered Thus it was not only of old among the Chaldean and Aegyptian Priests and the Graecian Poets and Historians of whom we have spoken already but even among those who might have learned more truth from the Religion they professed then to think it stood in need of their lyes For there can be no greater disparagement offered to truth then to defend it with any thing but it self nothing laying truth so open to suspicion as when falshood comes to be its advocate And a false testimony discovered doth more prejudice to a good cause then it could any wayes advantage it were it not discovered and therefore their labours have been as serviceable to the world who have discovered Impostors as those who have directly maintained truth against its open opposers those being so much more dangerous in that they appear in the disguise of truth and therefore are with more difficulty discovered Such a one was that ignis fatuus that appeared in a kind of twilight in the Christian world between the former darkness of Barbarism and the approaching light of knowledge I mean Annius Viterbiensis who like Hannibal in passing the Alps not finding a way ready to his mind sets himself to burning the woods and firing the rocks and dissolving them with vinegar to make a passage through them So Annius being beset in those snowy and gray-headed Alps of ancient history and finding no way clear for him according to his fancy he labours to burn down all certain Records to eat through the credit of undoubted Authors to make a more free passage for his own history which he deduceth suitably to Scripture from the concurrent testimony of the eldest Historians To which purpose a New Berosus Manetho Philo Metasthenes as he mistook for Megasthenes and Xenophon must put on a grave disguise and walk abroad the world with a mantle of Antiquity about their shoulders although they were nothing else but aery Phantasms covered over with the Cowl of the Monk of Viterbo For being himself somewhat more versed in the history of those elder times then generally persons were
to be as frontlets between their eyes and signs upon their hands not that Phylacteries should be made of the Law to wear as the Pharisees interpreted it and others from them have mistaken but that they should have the Law in continual remembrance as if it were always between their eyes and ingraven upon their hands Again if we suppose the Law to be among the people but in the vulgar character I would fain know what sanctity majesty and authority there was in that character more then in the words and matter and if there were how comes the vulgar use of it to be nowhere forbidden and how durst Ezra as is supposed after the Captivity profane so sacred a thing by exposing it to Common use But granting them yet further that it was lawful but not useful to make use of that sacred character I demand then how comes that disuse to continue so punctually till the time of Ezra and that it should never be divulged before when there was so great reason to make it common since the square letters are less operose more expedite and facile then the Samaritan which is when time serves used as a plea for their great Antiquity But yeilding yet more that the Sacred Character was only used for the authentick coppy of the Law which was to decide all differences of other coppies which some run to as their last shift I appeal to any mans reason whether this be not the most improbable of all For how could such a coppy be the Iudge of all others which could not be read or understood by those who appealed to it Or was the knowledge and reading of this character peculiar to the High Priest and conveyed down as a Cabala from one to another but how many incongruities would follow hence in case one High Priest should dye before his son was capable of understanding the letters and so that Sacred treasure must needs be lost or had they it all by inspiration and understood the Sacred Character by Urim and Thummim Thus every way this opinion among the Iews is pressed with inconveniencies but it was most suitable to the Heathens Priests to maintain a Meum and Tuum between their own Character and the vulgar For hereby they prohibited all prying into their mysteries by any but those who had the same Interest with themselves and therefore were unlikely to discover any thing that might lessen their reputation Whereas had there been nothing but Truth in their records or that Truth had been for their Interest what need had there been of so great reservedness and privacy but when the discovery of truth would undeceive the world it was their Interest to lock it up and to give out such things to the vulgar which might advance themselves and please them which artifices of theirs give no small ground to Question the credibility of their Histories Especially if we add what we promised in the last place to shew the want of credibility in the report of ancient times among them which was not only defectiveness and uncertainty but apparent partiality to themselves and inconsistency with each other How evident is it in all these Nations we have spoken to how much they strive to inhance the reputation of their own Nation and to that end blend the History of other Nations with their own to make theirs seem the greater How much do the Aegyptians tell us of the excellency of their ancient Laws and Government and yet how evident is it from their own Histories that no such Laws were observed by their Kings as they speak of Can we think that such Kings as Chemmis and the rest of them who built those vast structures of the Pyramids and imployed myriads of men for so many years for the doing of them would be content to be so dieted by their Laws as Hercataeus and Diodorus tell us they were to be Nay it seems to be very suspitious that the great enterprises of their famous Sesoosis are meerly fabulous and some think an attributing to themselves what was done by the Assyrian Emperour in his time By which we may guess what to think of the great Conquests of Osiris and Isis and their subduing almost the whole world to them And it is most evident how partial the Aegyptians are in dissembling their greatest losses as is clear in the story of the Conquest of Pharao Neco by Nâ—buchadnezzar Jer. 46. 12. of which there is not the least mention in Herodotus or Diodorus But on the contrary Herodotus tells us this Necos as he calls him conquered the Syrians at Magdalos and the story of Vaphres and Amasis in him seems to be only a disguise of Nebuchadnezzars Conquest only lest men should think them conquered by a Forraigner they make Amasis to be an Aegyptian Plebeian Again what a vast number of Cities doth Diodorus tell us of that were in Aegypt in their eldest times no less then 18000. when yet himself confesseth in the time of Ptolomaeus Lagi there were reckoned but somewhat above 3000 Cities and then Aegypt was the most populous that ever it had been How probable doth this sound that in those eldest times such vast multitudes of Cities should be erected But the truth is it is not unsuitable to their opinion of the production of the first men which were caused say they by the heat of Sun and the mud of Nilus and it is certain then they might be the most populous Nation in the world for there could be no defect as to either efficient or material cause there being mud enough to produce Myriads and the Sun hot enough to impregnate it The partiality of other Nations hath been already discoursed of in our passage and so likewise hath their mutual repugnancy to and inconsistency with each other Which yet might be more fully manifested from the contradictions in reference to the Aegyptian History between Manetho Herodotus Diodorus Dicaearchus Eratosthenes and all who have spoken of it as to the Assyrian Empire between Herodotus Diodorus and Iulius Africanus as to the Persian Empire between Herodotus and Ctesias and those in no inconsiderable things as is evident in Photius his excerpta out of him Among the Graecians we have already discovered it as to their History and Geography and if we should enter into their Theology and the History of that we should find their other differences inconsiderable if compared with these Of which we may partly make a conjecture by the incredible spight that is born by the gravest Greek Authors as Strabo Plutarch and others towards Euemerus Siculus for offering to deliver the History of Iupiter which he saith he transcribed from the golden pillar in the Temple of Jupiter Triphyllius in Panchetis But I suppose enough hath been discovered already to prove that there is no credibility in any of those Heathen Histories which pretend to give an account of ancient times there being in all of them so much defect and insufficiency
served other Gods How unlikely then was it that this tradition should be afterwards preserved entire when the people God had peculiarly chosen to himself were so mixed among the Aegyptians and so prone to the Idolatries of the Nations round about them and that even after God had given them a written Law attested with the greatest miracles what would they have done then had they never been brought forth of Aegypt by such signs and wonders and had no certain records left to preserve the memory of former ages Thus we see how much it stands to the greatest reason that so memorable things should be digested into sacred records We have as great certainty that Moses was the author of the records going under his name as we can have of any matter of fact done at so great a distance of time from us We are to consider that there are two very distinct questions to be thought of concerning a Divine revelation to any person at a considerable distance of time from us and those are what evidences can be given that the matters recorded are of a true divine revelation and what evidence we have of the truth of the matter of fact that such things were recorded by such persons They who do not carefully distinguish between these two questions will soon run themselves into an inextricable labyrinth when they either seek to understand themselves or explain to others the grounds on which they believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God The first step in order to which must be the proving the undoubted certainty of the matter of fact or the truth of the History that such persons were really existent and did either do or record the things we speak of After this succeeds the other to prove not only the real existence of the things but that the persons who recorded the things were assisted by an infallible spirit then there can be no reason at all to doubt but those records are the Word of God The first of these is that which at present we enquire after the certainty of the matter of fact that the records under the name of Moses were undoubtedly his And here it will be most unreasonable for any to seek for further evidence and demonstration of it then the matter to be proved is capable of But if they should I suppose we have sufficient reason to demonstrate the folly of such a demand and that on these accounts 1. Whoever yet undertook to bring matters of fact into Mathematical demonstrations or thought he had ground to question the certainty of any thing that was not proved in a Mathematical way to him Who would ever undertake to prove that Archimedes was kild at Syracuse by any of the demonstrations he was then about or that Euclide was the undoubted Author of the Geometry under his name or do men question these things for want of such demonstrations Yet this is all we at present desire but the same liberty here which is used in any thing of a like nature 2. I demand of the person who denyes this moral certainty to be sufficient for an assent whether he doth question every thing in the world which he was not present at the doing of himself If he be peremptorily resolved to believe nothing but what he sees he is fit for nothing but a voyage to Anticyrae or to be soundly purged with Hellebore to free him from those cloudy humours that make him suspect the whole world to be an imposture But we cannot suppose any man so destitute of reason as â—o question the truth of every matter of fact which he doth not see himself if he doth then firmly believe any thing there must be supposed sufficient grounds to induce him to such a belief And then what ground can there be to question the certainty of such things which have as great evidence as any of those things have which he most firmly believes and this is all we desire from him 3. Do we not see that the most concerning and weighty actions of mens lives are built on no other foundation then this moral certainty yet men do not in the least question the truth of the thing they rely upon As is most evident in all titles to estates derived from Ancestors either by donation or purchase In all trading which goes upon the moral certainty that there are such places as the Indyes or France or Spain c. In all journyings that there is such a place as that I am going to and this is the way thither for these we have but this moral certainty for the contrary to both these are possible and the affirmatives are indemonstrable In eating and drinking there is a possibility of being poisoned by every bit of meat or drop of drink do we therefore continually doubt whether we shall be so or no Chiefly this is seen in all natural affection and piety in Children towards Parents which undoubtedly suppose the truth of that which it was impossible they could be witnesses of themselves viz. their coming out of their Mothers wombs And doth any one think this sufficient ground to question his mother because the contrary is impossible to be demonstrated to him In short then either we must destroy all Historical faith out of the world and believe nothing though never so much attested but what we see our selves or else we must acknowledge that a moral certainty is a sufficient foundation for an undoubted assent not such a one cui non potest subesse falsum but such a one cui non subest dubium i. e. an assent undoubted though not infallible By which we see what little reason the Aâ—heist on one side can have to question the truth of the Scriptures to the History of it and what little ground the Papists on the other side have to make a pretence of the necessity of infallibility as to the proposal of such things where moral certainty is sufficient that is to the matter of fâ—ct Which I now come to prove as to the subject in hand viz. that the writings of Moses are undoubtedly his which I prove by a twofold argument 1. An universal consent of persons who were best able to know the truth of the things in question 2. The setling of a Commonwealth upon the Laws delivered by Moses 1. The universal Consent of persons most capable of judging in the Case in hand I know nothing the most scrupulous and inquisitive mind can possibly desire in order to satisfaction concerning any matter of fact beyond an universal Consent of such persons who have a greater capacity of knowing the truth of it then we can have And those are all such persons who have lived nearest those times when the things were done and have best understood the affairs of the times when the things were pretended to be done Can we possibly conceive that among the people of the Iews who were so exceedingly prone to transgress the Law
undertook to write of and so be deceived himself Secondly That it was utterly impossible he should have any design in deceiving others in reporting it Thirdly That it is certain from all rational evidence that he hath not dâ—ceived the world but that his History is undoubtedly true First That it was morally impossible Moses should be deceived himsâ—lf or be ignorant of the things which he writ of Two things are requisite to prevent a mans being deceived himself First That he be a person of more then ordinary judgement wisdom and knowledge Secondly That we have sufficient information concerning the things he undertakes to write of If either of these two be wanting it is possible for a man of integrity to be deceived for an honest heart hath not alwayes an Urim and Thummim upon it nor is fideâ—â—ty alwayes furnished with the acutest intellectuals The simplicity of the Dove is as lyable to be deceived its self as the subtilty of the serpent is to deceive others but where the wisdom of the serpent is to prevent being deceived and the Doves innocency in not deceiving others there are all the qualifications can be desired in any one who undertakes only to tell the Truth First Then that Moses was a person of a great understanding and sufficiently qualified to put a difference between truth and falshood will appear first from the ingenuity of his education secondly from the ripeness of his judgement and greatness of his experience when he penned these things First We begin with his education And here we require at present no further assent to be given to what is reported concerning Moses in Scripture then what we give to Plutarchs lives or any other relations concerning the actions of persons who lived in former ages Two things then we find recorded in Scripture concerning Moses his education that he was brought up in the Court of Aegypt and that he was skild in all the learning of the Aegyptians and these two will abundantly prove the ingenuity of hiâ— education viz. That he was a person both conversant in civil affairs and acquainted with the abstruser parts of all the Aegyptian wisdom And I confess there is nothing to me which doth advance so much the repute of the antient Aegyptian Learning as that the Spirit of God in Scripture should take so much notice of it as to set forth a person otherwise renowned for greater accomplishments by his skill in this For if it be below the wisdom of any ordinary person to set forth a person by that which in its self is no matter of commendation how much less can we imagine it of that infinite wisdom which inspired Stephen in that Apology which he makes for himself against the Libertines who charged him with contempt of Moses and the Law And therefore certainly this was some very observable thing which was brought in as a singular commendation of Moses by that person whose design was to make it appear how high an esteem he had of him And hence it appears that Learning is not only in its self a great accomplishment of humane nature but that it ought to be looked upon with veneration even in those who have excellencies of a higher nature to commend them If a Pearl retains its excellency when it lyes upon a dunghill it can certainly lose nothing of its lustre by being set in a crown of gold if Learning be commendable in an Aegyptian it is no less in Moses where it is enameled with more noble perfections then of it self it can reach unto All the question is Whither the antient learning of the Aegyptians was such as might be supposed to improve the reason and understanding of men to such an height as thereby to make them more capable of putting a difference between truth and falshood Whether it were such an overflowing Nilus as would enrich the understandings of all those who were in a capacity to receive its streams The truth is there want not grounds of suspicion that the old Aegyptian Learning was not of that elevation which the present distance of our age makes us apt to think it was And a learned man hath in a set discourse endeavoured to shew the great defects that there were in it Neither can it I think be denyed but according to the reports we have now concerning it some parts of their Learning were frivilous others obscure a great deal Magical and the rest short of that improvement which the accession of the parts and industry of after ages gave unto it But yet it is again as evident that some parts of learning were invented by the Aegyptians others much improved and that the Greeks did at first set up with the stock they borrowed out of Aegypt and that learning chiefly flourished there when there was I had almost said an Aegyptian darkness of Ignorance overspreading the face of Greece as well as other Nations Which will appear by these considerations the great antiquity of their repute for Learning the great advantages they had for promoting it and the parts of Learning most in use among them This though it may seem a digression here will yet tend to promote our design by shewing thereby how qualified and accomplished Moses was to deliver to the world an history of antient times If we believe Macrobius there was no people in the world could â—ye for Learning with the Aegyptians who makes Aegypt in one place the mother of all Arts and in another the Aegyptians omnium Philosophiae disciplinarum parentes the Fathers of the Philosophick Sciences he derives elsewhere the original of all Astronomy from them quos constat primos omnium coelum metiri scrutari ausos though it be more probable that the Nativity even of Astronomy it self was first calculated by the Chaldâ—ans from whom it was conveyed to the Aegyptians He likewise appropriates all divine knowledge to them where he saith they were Soli rerum divinarum conscii and after calls Aegypt divinarum omnium disciplinarum compotem It is sufficiently notorious what great repute the Aegyptian Learning hath been in with some in our latter times in that our Chymists look upon it as the greatest honour to their profession that they think they can claim kindred of the old Aegyptian Learning and derive the pedigree of their Chymistry from the old Aegyptian Hermes But that vain pretence is sufficiently refuted by the fore-mentioned learned man Conringius in his Tract on this subject de Hermeticâ Medicinâ Franciscus Patricius professeth himself so great an admirer of the old Aegyptian Learning that he thought it would be no bad exchange if the Peripatetick Philosophy were extruded and the old Aegyptian received instead of it But the world is now grown wiser then to receive his Hermes Trismegistus for the Author of the old Aegyptian Philosophy the credit of his Author being for ever blasted and the doctrine contained in the books under his name manifested to be a
a Crocodile for impudence and all to express this venerable Apothegm O ye that come into the world and that go out of it God hates impudence And therefore certainly this kind of Learning deserves the highest form among the difficiles Nugae and all these Hieroglyphicks put together will make but one good one and that should be for Labour lost There is yet one part of Learning more among them which the Aegyptians are esteemed for which is the Political and civil part of it which may better be called wisdom then most of the fore-going two things speak much the wisdom of a Nation good Laws and a prudent management of them their Laws are highly commended by Strabo and Diodorus and it is none of the least commendations of them that Solon and Lycurgus borrowed so many of their constitutions from them and for the prudent management of their government as the continuance of their state so long in peace and quietness is an invincible demonstration of it so the report given of them in Scripture adds a further testimony to it for therein the King of Aegypt is called the Son of the wise as well as the son of ancient Kings and his counsellors are called wise counsellors of Pharaoh and the wise men whereby a more then ordinary prudence and policy must be understood Can we now imagine such a person as Moses was bred up in all the ingenucus literature of Aegypt conversant among their wisest persons in Pharaohs Court having thereby all advantages to improve himself and to understand the utmost of all that they knew should not be able to pass a judgement between a meer prâ—tence and imposture and real and important Tâ—uths Can we think that one who had interest in so great a Court all advantages of raising himself therein should willingly forsake all the pleasures and delights at present all his hopes and advantages for the future were he not fully perswaded of the certain and undoubted truth of all those things which are recorded in his books Is it possible a man of ordinary wisdom should venture himself upon so hazardous unlikely and dangerous employment â—s that was Moses undertook which could have no probability of success but only upon the belief that that God who appeared unto him was greater then all the Gods of Aegypt and could carry on his own design by his own power maugre all the opposition which the Princes of the world could make against it And what possible ground can we have to think that such a person who did verily believe the truth of what God revealed unto him should dare to write any otherwise then as it was revealed unto him If there had been any thing repugnant to common reason in the history of the Creation the fall of man the universal deluge the propagation of the world by the sons of Noah the history of the Patriarchs had not Moses rational faculties as well as we nay had he them not far better improved then any of ours are and was not he then able to judge what was suitable to reason and what not and can we think he would then deliver any thing inconsistent with reason or undoubted tradition then when the Aegyptian Priests might so readily and plainly have triumphed over him by discovering the falshood of what he wrote Thus we see that Moses was as highly qualified as any of the acutest Heathen Philosophers could be for discerning truth from falshood nay in all probability he far excelled the most renowned of the Graecian Philosophers in that very kind of learning wherewith they made so great noise in the world which was originally Aegyptian as is evident in the whole series of the Graecian Philosphers who went age after age to Aegypt to get some scraps of that learning there which Moses could not have but full meals of because of his high place great interest and power in Aegypt And must those hungry Philosophers then become the only Masters of our reason and their dictates be received as the sâ—nse and voice of nature which they either received from uncertain tradition or else delivered in opposition to it that they might be more taken notice of in the world Must an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be confronted with Thus saith the Lord and a few pitiful symbols vye authority with divine commands and Ex nihilo nihil fit be sooner believed then In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth What irrefragable evidence of reason is that so confident a presumption built upon when it can signifie nothing without this hypothesis that there is nothing but matter in the world and let this first be proved and we will never stick to grant the other I may confidently say the great gullery of the world hath been taking philosophical dictates for the standard of reason and unproved hypotheses for certain foundations for our discourse to rely upon And the seeking to reconcile the mysteries of our faith to these hath been that whith hath almost destroyed it and turned our Religion into a meer philosophical speculation But of this elsewhere We see then that insisting meerly on the accomplishments and rational perfections of the persons who speak we have more reason to yield credit to Moses in his history then to any Philosophers in their speculations And that which in the next place speaks Moses to be a person of wisdom and judgement and ability to finde out truth was his age and experience when he delivered these things to the world He vented no crude and indigested conceptions no sudden and temerarious fancies the usual issues of teeming and juvenile wits he lived long enough to have experience to try and judgement to distinguish a meer outside and varnish from what was solid and substantial We cannot then have the least ground of suspition that Moses was any wayes unfit to discern truth from falshood and therefore was capable of judging the one from the other But though persons be never so highly accomplisht for parts learning and experience yet if they want due information of the certainty of the things they deliver they may be still decâ—iving themselves and if they preserve it for posterity be guilty of deceiving others Let us now therefore see whether Moses had not as great advantages for understanding the truth of his History as he had judgement to discern it And concerning all those things contained in the four last books of his to his own death it was impossible any should have greater then himself writing nothing but what he was pars magna himself of what he saw and heard and did and can any testimony be desired greater then his whose actions they were or who was present at the doing of them and that not in any private way but in the most publick capacity For although private persons may be present at great actions yet they may be guilty of misrepresenting them for want of understanding all circumstances precedent and
subsequent or for want of understanding the designs of the chief instruments of action but when the person himself who was the chief in all shall undertake to write an exact History of it what evidence can be desired more certain then that is that there could be no defect as to information concerning what was done The only seruple then that can be made must be concerning the passages of former times which Moses relates And here I doubt not but to make it appear that insisting only on all that can be desired in a bare Historian setting aside Divine revelation he had as true and certain information of the History of those former ages as any one can have of things at that distance from themselves and that is by a certain â—â—interrupted tradition of them which will appear more clear and evident in that Nation of which Moses was then in any other Nation in the world And that on these two accounts first the undoubted linâ—al deseent from Father to Son in the Iâ—wish Nation Secondly Their intâ—rest lying so much in the preserving this tradition entire First That there was a certain unmixed linâ—al descent from Father to Son in the Iewish Nation the great â—ause of most of the confusion in the tradition of other Nations was the frequent mixing of several families one with another now that God might as it were on purpose satisfie the world of the Israelites capacity to preserve the tradition entire he prohibited their mixture by marriages with the people of other Nations and families So that in Moses his time it was a very easie matter to run up their lineal descent as far as the flood nay up to Adam for Adam conversed sometime with Noah Sem his Son was probably living in some part of Iacobs time or Isaac's at least and how easily and uninterruptedly might the general tradition of the ancient History be continued thence to the time of Moses when the number of families agreeing in this tradition was increased and withall incorporated by a common ligament of Religion I demand then where can we suppose any ignorance or cutting off this general tradition in so continued a succession as here was Can we imagine that the Grand-children of Iacob could be ignorant of their own pedigree and whence they came into Egypt can we think a thing so late and so remarkable as the account of their coming thither should be forgotten which was attended with so many memorable circumstances especially the selling and advancement of Ioseph whose memory it was impossible should be obliterated in so short a time Could Iacob be ignorant of the Country whence his Grand-father Abraham came especially when he lived so long in it himself and married into that branch of the family that was remaining there when he had served his Uncle Laban Could Abraham when he was cotemporary with Sem be ignorant of the truth of the flood when Sem from whom he derived himself was one of the persons who escaped it in the Ark Could Sem be ignorant of the actions before the flood when Adam the first man lived some part of his time with Noah and could Noah then be ignorant of the Creation and the fall of man Thus we see it almost impossible that any age among them then could be ignorant of the passages of the precedent which they were so few Generations removed from that they could with ease derive themselves from the first man What then can we say that any of these had a design of deceiving their posterity and so corrupted the tradition but besides that it could be hardly possible at that time when there were so many remaining testimonies of former times what end can we imagine that any Parents should have in thus deceiving their Children or what advantage should come to them by such a deceit Nay I shall now manifest in the sicond place that the whole interest of their children lay in preserving this tradition certain and entire For their hopes of possessing Canaan and title to it depended upon the promise made to Abraham 400 years before which would not only keep awake their sense of Divine Providence but would make them careful during their bondage to preserve their Genealogies because all the right they could plead to their pâ—ssessions in Canaan was from their being of Abrahams seed And besides this on purpose to be a memorial to them of passâ—ges between God and Abraham they had in their flesh a badge of circumcision which would serve to call to mind those transactions which had been between God and their forâ—-fathers These things then do fully demonstrate that insisting only on rational evidence the Israelites were the most certain conservatours of the ancient History of the world and can we then think that Moses who was the Ruler among them should not fully understand those things which every Israelite could scarce be ignorant of and might correct the mistakes of Moses in his History if he had been guilty of any such These things I suppose have made the first proposition evident that it was morally impossible Moses should be deceived himself or be ignorant of the things which he reports to others both because he had abilities sufficient to discover truth from falshood and sufficient information of the passages of former times CHAP. III. Moses his fidelity and integrity proved Moses considered as an Historian and as a Lawgiver his fidelity in both proved clear evidences that he had no intent to deceive in his History freedom from private interest impartiality in his relations plainness and perspicuity of stile As a Lawgiver he came armed with Divine authority which being the main thing is fixed on to be fully proved from his actions and writings The power of miracles the great evidence of Divine revelation Two grand questions propounded In what cases miracles may be expected and how known to be true No necessity of a constant power of miracles in a Church Two Cases alone wherein they may be expected When any thing comes as a Law from God and when a Divine Law is to be repealed The necessity of miracles in those cases as an evidence of Divine revelation asserted Objections answered No use of miracles when the doctrine is setled and owned by miracles in the first revelation No need of miracles in reformation of a Church THE second proposition contains the proof of Moses his fidelity that he was as far from having any intent to deceive others as he was being deceived himself Two wayes Moses must be considered as an Historian and as a Law-giver the only inducement for him to deceive as an Historian must be some particular interest which must draw him aside from an impartial delivery of the truth as a Law-giver he might deceive if he pretended Divine revelation for those Laws which were only the issues of his own brain that they might be received with a greater veneration among the people as Numa Pompilius and others did
Now if we prove that Moses had no interest to deceive in his History and had all rational evidence of Divine revelation in his Laws we shall abundantly evince the undoubted fidelity of Moses in every thing recorded by him We begin then with his fidelity as an Historian and it being contrary to the common interest of the world to deceive and be deceived we have no reason to entertain any suspitions of the veracity of any person where we cannot discern some pecâ—liar interest that might have a stronger biass upon him then the common interest of the world For it is otherwise in morals then in naturals for in naturals we see that every thing will leave its proper interest to preserve the common interest of nature but in morals there is nothing more common then deserting the common interest of mankind to set up a peculiar interest against it It being the truest description of a Politician that he is one who makes himself the centre and the whole world his circumference that he regards not how much the whole world is abused if any advantage doth accrue to himself by it Where we see it then the design of any person to advance himself or his posterity or to set up the credit of the Nation whose History he writes we may have just cause to suspect his partiality because we then finde a sufficient inducement for such a one to leave the common road of truth and to fall into the paths of deceit But we have not the least ground to suspect any such partiality in the History of Moses for nothing is more clear then that he was free from the ambitious design of advancing himself and his posterity who notwithstanding the great honour he enjoyed himself was content to leave his posterity in the meanest sort of attendance upon the Tabernacle And as little have we ground to think he intended to flatter that Nation which he so lively describes that one would think he had rather an interest to set forth the frowardness unbelief unthankfulness and disobedience of a Nation towards a Gracious God then any wayes to inhance their reputation in the world or to ingratiate himself with them by writing this History of them Nay and he sets forth so exactly the lesser failings and grosser enormities of all the Ancestours of this Nation whose acts he records that any impartial reader will soon acquit him of a design of flattery when after he hath recorded those faults he seeks not to extenuate them or bring any excuse or pretence to palliate them So that any observing reader may easily take notice that he was carried on by a higher design then the common people of Historians are and that his drift and scope was to exalt the goodness and favour of God towards a rebellious and obstinate people Of which there can be no greater nor more lively demonstration then the History of all the transactions of the Iewish Nation from their coming forth of Aegypt to their utter ruine and desolation And Moses tells them as from God himself it was neither for their number nor their goodness that God set his Love upon them but he loved them because he loved them i. e. no other account was to be given of his gracious dealing with them but the freeness of his own bonnty and the exuberancy of his goodness towards them Nay have we not cause to admire the ingenuity as well as veracity of this excellent personage who not only layes so notorious a blot upon the stock of his own family Levi recording so punctually the inhumanity and cruelty of him and Simeon in their dealings with the Shechemites but likewise inserts that curse which was left upon their memory for it by their own Father at his decease And that he might not leave the least suspition of partiality behind him he hath not done as the statuary did who engraved his own name so artificially in the statue of Iupiter that one should continue as long as the other but what the other intended for the praise of his skill Moses hath done for his ingenuity that he hath so interwoven the History of his own failings and disobedience with those of the Nation that his spots are like to continue as long as the whole web of his History is like to do Had it been the least part of his design to have his memory preserved with a superstitious veneration among the Iews how easie had it been for him to have left out any thing that might in the least entrench upon his reputation but we finde him very secure and careless in that particular nay on the other side very studious and industrious in depressing the honour and deserts of men and advancing the power and goodness of God And all this he doth not in an affected strain of Rhetorick whose proper work is impetrare fidem mendacio and as Tully somewhere confesseth to make things seem otherwise then they are but with that innate simplicity and plainness and yet withall with that Imperatoria brevit as that Majesty and authority that it is thereby evident he sought not to court acceptance but to demand belief Nor had any such pittiful design of pleasing his Readers with some affected phrases but thought that Truth it self had presence enough with it to command the submission of our understandings to it Especially when all these were delivered by such a one who came sufficiently armed with all motives of credibility and inducements to assent by that evidence which he gave that he was no pretender to divine revelation but was really imployed as a peculiar instrument of State under the God and Ruler of the whole world Which if it be made clear then all our further doubts must presently cease and all impertinent disputes be silenced when the supream Majesty appears impowring any person to dictate to the world the Laws they must be governed by For if any thing be repugnant to our rational faculties that is that God should dictate any thing but what is most certainly true or that the Governor of the world should prescribe any Laws but such as were most just and reasonable If we suppose a God we cannot question veracity to be one of his chiefest Attributes and that it is impossible the God of truth should imploy any to reveal any thing as from him but what was undoubtedly true So that it were an argument of the most gross and unreasonable incredulity to distrust the certainty of any thing which comes to us with sufficient evidence of divine revelation because thereby we shew our distrust of the veracity of God himself All that we can desire then is only reasonable satisfactisn concerning the evidence of Divine revelation in the person whose words we are to credit and this our Gracious God hath been so far from denying men that he hath given all rational evidence of the truth of it For it implying no incongruity at all to any notions of
convince them of that which they believed already For we never read among all the revolts of the people of the Iews that they were lapsed so far as totally to reject the Law of Moses which had been to alter the constitution of their Commonwealth although they did enormously offend against the Precepts of it and that in those things wherein the honour of God was mainly concernd as is most plain in their frequent and gross Idolatry Which we are not so to understand as though they wholly cast off the worship of the true God but they superinduced as the Samaritans did the worship of Heathen Idols with that of the God of Israel But when the revolt grew so great and dangerous that it was ready to swallow up the true worship of God unless some apparent evidence were given of the falsity of those Heathen mixtures and further confirmation of the truth of the established religion it pleased God sometimes to send his Prophets on this peculiar message to the main instruments of this revolt As is most conspicuous in that dangerous design of Ieroboam when he out of a Politick end set up his two calves in opposition to the Temple at Ierusalem and therein it was the more dangerous in that in all probability he designed not the alteration of the worship it self but the establishment of it in Dan and Bethel For his interest lay not in drawing of the people from the worship of God but from his worship at Ierusalem which was contrary to his design of Cantonizing the Kingdom and taking the greatest share to himself Now that God might confirm his peoples faith in this dangerous juncture of time he sends a Prophet to Bethel who by the working of present miracles there viz. the renting the Altar and withering of Jeroboams hand did manifest to them that these Altars were displeasing to God and that the true place of worship was at Ierusalem So in that famous fire-Ordeal for trying the truth of religion between God and Baal upon mount Carmel by Elijah God was pleased in a miraculous way to give the most prâ—gnant testimony to the truth of his own worship by causing a fire to come down from heaven and consume the sacrifice by which the Priests of Baal were confounded and the people confirmed in the belief of the only true God for presently upon the sight of this miracle the people fall on their faces and say the Lord he is God the Lord he is God Whereby we plainly see what clear evidence is given to the truth of that religion which is attested with a power of miracles Thus the widdow of Sarepta which was in the Country of Zidon was brought to believe Elijah to be a true Prophet by his raising up her son to life And the woman said to Elijah Now by this I know that thou art a man of God and that the Word of the Lord by thy mouth is truth So we see how Naaman was convinced of the true God by his miraculous cure in Iordan by the appointment of Elisha Behold now I know that there is no God in all the earth but in Israel by which instances it is demonstrable that either the faith of all these persons was built upon weak and insufficient grounds or that a power of miracles is an evident confirmation of the truth of that religion which is established by them For this we see was the great end for which God did improve any of his Prophets to work miracles viz. to be as an evident demonstration of the truth of what was revealed by him So that this power of miracles is not meerly a motive of credibility or a probable inducement to remove prejudice from the person as many of our Divines speak but it doth contain an evident demonstration to common sense of the truth of that religion which is confirmed by them And thus we assert it to have been in the case of Moses the truth of whose message was attested both among the Aegyptians and the Israelites by that power of miracles which he had But herein we have the great Patrons of Moses our greatest enemies viz the present Iews who by reason of their emnity to the doctrine of Christ which was attested by unparalleld miracles are grown very shy of the argument drawn from thence In so much that their great Dr. Maimonides layes down this for a confident maxime 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Israelites did not believe in Moses our Master for the sake of the miracles which he wrought Did they not the more shame for them and if they did the more shame for this great Rabbi thus to bely them But the reason he gives for it is because there may remain some suspition in ones mind that all miracles may be wrought by a power of Magick or Incantation Say you so what when Moses confounded all the Magicians in Aegypt and made themselves who were the most cunning in these things confess it was the finger of God and at last give out as not able to stand before Moses might one still suspect all this to be done by a Magical power Credat Iudaeus Apella non ego This is much like what another of their Doctors sayes whom they call the Divine Philosopher that Elisha his raising the child to life and curing Naamans leprosie and Daniels escaping the Lions and Ionas out of the Whales belly might all come to pass by the influence of the stars or by Pythonisme Very probable but it is most true which Vortius there observes of the Iews nibil non nugacissimi mortalium fingunt ne cogantur agnoscere virtute ac digito quasi ipsius Dei Iesum nostrum effecisse miracula sua All their design in this is only to elevate the miracles of our blessed Saviour and to derogate all they can from the belief of them Hence they tell us that nothing is so easie to be done as miracles the meer recital of the tetragrammaton will work wonders that by this Ieremiah and our Saviour did all their miracles It is well yet that he did more then one of their own Prophets had done before him but where I wonder do we read that ever the pronouncing of four letters raised one from the dead who had lain four dayes in the grave or by what power did Christ raise himself from the dead which was the greatest miracle of all could his dead body pronounce the tetragrammaton to awaken its self with But Maimonides further tells us that the miracles which Moses wrought among the Israelites were meerly for necessity and not to prove the truth of his Divine commission for which he instanceth in dividing the red sea the raining of Manna and the destruction of Corah and his complices But setting aside that these two latter were the immediate hand of God and not miracles done by Moses yet it is evidence that the intent of them was to manifest a Divine
by reason of the large diffusion of a Spirit of Holiness in the days of the Gospel be set upon the bells of Horses and that the pots in the Lords house should be as bowls before the altar i. e. that when the Levitical service should be laid aside and that Holiness which was that appropriated to the Priests and Instruments of the Temple should be discerned in those things which seemed most remote from it That a Priesthood after another order then that of Aaron should be established viz. after the order of Melchisedek and that he that was the Priest after this order should judge among the Heathen and wound the heads over many Countries that in the day of his power the people should not be frighted to obedience with thunderclaps and earthquakes as at Mount Sinai but should come and yield themselves as a free-will offering unto him and yet their number be as great as the drops of the dew which distill in the morning That God out of other nations would take unto himself for Priests and for Levites that the desire of all Nations should speedily come that the Messenger of the Covenant should come into his Temple nay that seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy City that then the vision and prophecie should be sealed up that the Sacrifice and oblation should be caused to cease that the City and the sanctuary should be destroyed and the end thereof shall be with a flood and unto the end of the War desolations are determined that after three score and two weeks Messias should be cut off but not for himself that by him transgression should be finished and reconciliation for iniquity should be made and everlasting righteousness should be brought in And least all these things should be apprehended to be only a higher advancing of the Levitical worship and the way of external Ceremonies God expresly saith that he would make a New Covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah not according to the Covenant that I made with their Fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the Land of Egypt which my Covenant they brake although I was an husband to them saith the Lord But this shall be the Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days saith the Lord I will put my Law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts and will be their God and they shall be my people Can any one that now considers seriously the state of things thus described as it should come to pass ever imagine that the Levitical service was ever calculated for this State Was Gods Worship to be confined to his Temple at Ierusalem when all the Nations of the earth should come to serve him Was the High Priest to make an attonement there when an order of Priesthood different from the Aaronical should be set up Must the Tribe of Levi only attend at the Temple when God would take Priests and Levites out of all Nations that serve him What would become of the Magnificence and glory of the Temple when both City and Sanctuary shall be destroyed and that must be within few prophetical weeks after the Messias is cut off And must the Covenant God made with the Israelites continue for ever when God expresly saith he would make a New one and that not according to the Covenant which he made with them then It is so evident then as nothing can well be more that under the Old Testament such a state of Religion was described and promised with which the Levitical worship would be inconsistent and so that the Ceremonial Law was not at first established upon an immutable reason which was the thing to be proved CHAP. VIII General Hypotheses concerning the Truth of the Doctrine of Christ. The great prejudice against our Saviour among Iews and Heathens was the means of his appearance The difference of the miracles at the delivery of the Law and Gospel Some general Hypotheses to clear the subserviency of miracles to the Doctrine of Christ. 1. That where the truth of a doctrine depends not on evidence but authority the only way to prove the truth of the Doctrine is to prove the Testimony of the revealer to be infallible Things may be true which depend not on evidence of the things What that is and on what it depends The uncertainty of natural knowledge The existence of God the foundation of all certainty The certainty of matters of faith proved from the same principle Our knowladge of any thing supposeth something incomprehensible The certainty of faith as great as that of knowledge the grounds of it stronger The consistency of rational evidence with faith Yet objects of faith exceed reason the absurdities following the contrary opinion The uncertainty of that which is called reason Philosophical dictates no standard of reason Of transubstantiation and ubiquity c. why rejected as contrary to reason The foundation of faith in matters above reason Which is infallible Testimony that there are ways to know which is infallible proved 2. Hypoth A Divine Testimony the most infallible The resolution of faith into Gods veracity as its formal object 3. Hypoth A Divine Testimony may be known though God speak not immediatly Of Inspiration among the Iews and Divination among the Heathens 4. Hyp. The evidences of a Divine Testimony must be clear and certain Of the common motives of faith and the obligation to faith arising from them The original of Infidelity HAving now cleared that the Law of Moses was capable of a repeal I come to the second enquiry whether the miracles of our Saviour did give a sufficient evidence of his power and authority to repeal it I shall not to prevent too large an excursion insist on any other evidences of our Saviours being the promised Mâ—ssias but keep close to the matter of our present debate concerning the evidence which ariseth from such a power of Miracles as our Saviour had in order to his establishing that doctrine which he came to publish to the world The great stumbling-block in reference to our blessed Saviour among both the Iews and learned Heathens was the meanness of his appearance in the world not coming attended with that state and magnificence which they thought to be inseparable from so great a person The Iews had their senses so possâ—ssed with the thundrings and lightnings on mount Sinai that they could not imagine the structure of their Ceremonial worship could be taken down with less noise and terror then it was erâ—cted with And withall collecting all those passages of the Old Testament which seemed to foretell such glorious things of the dayes of the Messias which â—ither refer to his second coming or must be understood in a spiritual sense they having their minds oppressed with the sense of their present calamities applyed them wholly to an external greatness whereby
as a certain Truth and therefore they hope the danger is not so great in neglecting the salvation promised by the Gospel I cannot conceive that men otherwise learned and sober should with so much confidence assert that the rational evidences of a Divine Testimony are insufficient to prove a doctrine true unless it be from hence that they find that notwithstanding the strongest evidences many persons continue in unbelief For say they if these arguments were scientifical and demonstrative as they speak of the truth of the doctrine attested by them then all persons to whom they are propounded must certainly believe But this is very easily answered for we speak not of internal but outward evidence not of that in the subject but of the object or more fully of the reason of the thing and not the event in us for doubtless there may be undoubted truth and evidence in many things which some persons either cannot or will not understand If Epicurus should contend still that the Sun and stars are no bigger then they seem to be will it hence follow that there can be no rational demonstration of the contrary Nay if the way of demonstration be offered him and Telescopes put into his hands yet if he be resolved to maintain his credit and therefore his opinion and will not use the Telescopes or suspect still they are intended only to deceive his sight what possible way will there be of convincing such a person though the thing be in its self demonstrable Now if the strength of prejudice or maintaining of credit can prevail so much in matters of Mathematical evidence to withhold assent what power may we think a corrupt interest may have upon the understanding as to the arguments which tend to prove the truth of that doctrine which is so repugnant to that carnal interest which the heart is already devoted to Our Blessed Saviour hath himself given us so full an account of the original and causes of unbelief in the persons he conversed with that that may yield us a sufficient answer to this objection He tels us the ground of it was not want of light nay there was light sufficient to convince any but that those to whom the light came loved darkness rather then it because their deeds were evil That they could not believe while they received honour one of another and sought not the honour which was of God only i. e. That they were so greedy of applause from each other that they would not impartially search into the truth of that doctrine which did touch their sores so to the quick that they had rather have them fester upon them then go to the trouble of so sharp a cure That the reason so few followed him was because the way was narrow and the gate straight which men must go in at and therefore no wonder so few of the rich and proud pharisees could get in at it they were partly so sweld with a high opinion of themselves and partly so loaden with their riches that they thought it was to no purpose for them to think of going in at so straight a gate while they were resolved to part with neither That the final ground of the rejection of any was not want of evidence to bring them to believe nor want of readiness in Christ to receive them if they did but it was a peevish wilful obstinate malicious spirit that they would not come to Christ nor believe his Doctrine for those import the same but when the most convincing miracles were used they would rather attribute them to the Prince of Devils then to the power of God And though our Saviour presently by rational and demonstrative arguments did prove the contrary to their faces yet we see thereby it was a resolution not to be convinced or yield to the Truth which was the cause why they did not believe Now from this very instance of our Saviours proceedings with the Pharisees by rational arguments I demand whether these arguments of our Saviour were sufficient foundations for a divine assent to that truth that our Saviour did not his miracles by any Diabolical but by Divine power or no If they were then it is evident that rational evidence may be a foundation for Divine faith or that some motives to believe may be so strong as to be sufficient evidence of the truth and certainty of the Doctrine If these arguments were not sufficient proofs of what our Saviour spake then well fare the Pharisees it seems they said nothing but what might be thus far justified that the contrary to it could not be demonstrated And if the evidence of our Sâ—viours miracles were so great as some suppose that the Pharisees could not but be convinced that they were divine but out of their malice and envy they uttered this blasphemy against the Holy Ghost to keep the people from following Christ then we hence infer two things First how strong an evidence there was in the miracles of Christ when it convinced his most resolute enemies that they were divine Secondly what power a corrupt will may have over a convinced understanding For although the will may not hinder conviction yet it may soon stifle it by suggesting those things to the mind which may divert it from those convictions of Truth and seek to find out any ways to disgrace it It would be no difficult task to discover in all those instances wherein the unbelief of men is discovered in the New Tâ—stament that the persons guilty of it did not proceed like rational men or such as desired Truth but were wholly carried away through passion interest prejudice disaffection or some other cause of that nature which may give us a sufficient account why those persons did not believe although there might be clear and undoubted evidence to perswâ—de them to it But although I assert that these rational evidences are sufficient arguments of the truth of the doctrine they come to manifest yet I would not be so understood that I thereby resolve all Religion into a meer act of reason and knowledge and that no more power is required in the understanding to believe the Gospel then to believe a Mathematical demonstration which is another objection some lay in the way of this opinion but it isâ— ot difficult getting over it For the sufficiency which I attribute to rational evidence is not absolute and simple but in suo genere as an objective evidence Notwithstanding this the whole work of the Spirit of God in its peculiar energy and way of operation upon the soul is left entire to its self But then when the spirit works as to the planting of a truly divine faith I do not think that it only perswades the soul of the Truth of a Divine Testimony but withall represents the Truths revealed by that Testimony with all that excellency and suitableness that there is in them that by the most agreeable yet effectual influence
of the spirit upon the soul it cheerfully embraceth that Truth which is revealed and cordially yields up its self in obedience to it This is the Divine faith which the Scripture acquaints us with and not such a one as meerly believes the truth of a Divine Testimony and as to the production of this faith I acknowledge meer rational evidence to be insufficient because they proceed in 2â— very different ways the one is to satisfie mens minds of the truth of the doctrine the other is to bring them effectually to adhere unto it The asserting of the one therefore doth no more tend to destroy the other then the saying that a Telescope will help us to discover very much of the heavenly bodies doth imply that a blind man may see them if he makes but use of them Although therefore the natural man cannot savingly apprehend the things of God yet there may be so much rational evidence going along with Divine revelation that supposing reason to be pure and not corrupted and steeped in sense as now it is it would discover spiritual evidence to be the most real and convincing evidence Thus far we have proved that where there is any infallible Testimony there is sufficient rational evidence going along with it to make it appear that it is from God CHAP. IX The rational evidence of the truth of Christian Religion from Miracles The possibility of miracles appears from God and providence the evidence of a Divine Testimony by them God alone can really alter the course of nature The Devils power of working miracles considered Of Simon Magus Apollonius The cures in the Temple of Aesculapius at Rome c. God never works miracles but for some particular end The particular reasons of the miracles of Christ. The repealing the Law of Moses which had been setled by miracles Why Christ checked the Pharisees for demanding a sign when himself appeals to his miracles The power of Christs miracles on many who did not throughly believe Christs miracles made it evident that he was the Messias because the predictions were fulfilled in him Why John Baptist wrought no miracles Christs miracles necessary for the overthrow of the Devils Kingdom Of the Daemoniacks and Lunaticks in the Gospel and in the Primitivâ— Church The power of the name of Christ over them largely proved by several Testimonies The evidence thence of a Divine power in Christ. Of counterfeit dispossessions Of miracles wrought among Infidels Of the future state of the Church The necessity of the miracles of Christ as to the propagation of Christian Religion that proved from the condition of the publishers and the success of the Doctrine The Apostles knew the hazard of their imployment before they entred on it The boldness and resolution of the Apostles notwithstanding this compared with heathen Philosophers No motive could carry the Apostles through their imployment but the truth of their Doctrine not seeking the honour profit or pleasure of the world The Apostles evidence of the truth of their doctrine lay in being eye-witnesses of our Saviours miracles and resurrection That attested by themselves their sufficiency thence for preaching the Gospel Of the nature of the doctrine of the Gospel contrariety of it to natural inclinations Strange success of it notwithstanding it came not with humane power No Christian Emperour till the Gospel universally preached The weakness and simplicity of the instruments which preached the Gospel From all which the great evidence of the power of miracles is proved OF all rational evidences which tend to confirm the truth of a Divine Testimony there can be none greater then a power of working miracles for confirmation that the Testimony which is revealed is infallible The possibility of a power of miracles cannot be questiond by any who assert a Deity and a Providence for by the same power that things were either at first produced or are still conserved which is equivalent to the other the course of nature may be altered and things caused which are beyond the power of inferiour causes For though that be an immutable Law of nature as to Physical beings that every thing remains in the course and order wherein it was set at the Creation yet that only holds till the same power which set it in that order shall otherwise dispose of it granting then the possibility of miracles the subject of this Hypothesis is that a power of miracles is the clearest evidence of a Divine Testimony which will appear from these following considerations God alone can really alter the course of nature I speak not of such things which are apt only to raise admiration in us because of our unacquaintedness with the causes of them or manner of their production which are thence called wonders much less of meer juggles and impostures whereby the eyes of men are deceived but I speak of such things as are in themselves either contrary to or above the course of nature i. e. that order which is established in the universe The Devil no question may and doth often deceive the world and may by the subtilty and agility of his nature perform such things as may amuse the minds of men and sometimes put them to it to find a difference between them and real miracles if they only make their sâ—nses judges of them And such kind of wonders though they are but spaâ—ingly done and with a kind of secrecy as though they were consulting with Catiline about the burning Rome yet the Devil would have some especially when Ignorance and Superstition are Ascendents to keep up his interest in the world Or else when he is like to be dispossessed and thrown out of all he then tryes his utmost to keep as many to him as may be thus when the Spirit of God appeared in the miracles of our Saviour and his Apostles and the Primitive Church he then conjured up all the infernal powers to do something parallel to keep possession of his Idolatrous Temples as long as he could Thus we find Simon Magus dogging the Apostles as it were at the heels that by his Magick he might stagger the faith of people concerning the miracles wrought by the Apostles after him Apollonius appeared upon the Stage but his wonders are such pittifull things compared with those wrought by Christ or his Apostles that it could be nothing but malice in Hierocles to mention him in competition with Christ. But those things which seem a great deal more considerable then either of these were the cure of a blind man by Vespasian in Egypt mentioned by Tacitus and Suetonius wherein there was a palpable imitation of our Saviours curing the blind man in the Gospel for the man told Vespasian restituturum oculos si inspuisset that he should receive his sight by his spittle so Spartianus tells us of a woman that was cured of her blindness by kissing the knees of the Emperour Adrian and Boxhornius hath produced an old Fable in the Temple of
true Messias as appears by the sequel of the chapter but upon Christs revelation of himself to him he presently believed on him How strangely irrational were the Iews then in rejecting our Saviour when his miracles not only exceeded those of Moses both in number and quality but which was more they saw themselves the miracles which Christ did but they received those of Moses only upon the credit of their Fathers And from the strength of the evidence arising from the power of miracles it is that St. Peter tells the promiscuous Assembly Acts 2. 22. That Iesus of Nazareth was a man approved of God among them by miracles wonders and signs which God did by him in the midst of them as they themselves also knew He appeals to their own knowledge which he would not certainly have done had it not been in a case beyond all dispute among them Which was a thing so notorious among them that we find the Pharisees themselves confessing it What do we For this man doth many miracles Now then in a Nation whose religion had been established by miracles and the certainty of the truth of it among those who then professed it did depend so much upon the constant credit which the report of the miracles done at the setling of their Law had among them what could be a more rational convincing way of proceeding then for our Saviour to manifest by a greater power of miracles in himself the undoubted credentials of his commission from heaven and that he was the true Messias which was foretold by their own most sacred and authentical records Which will appear more Because the power of miracles did evidently declare that he was the very person promised For if the exact correspondency of the event to the predictions in a Nation owning them as Divine be an undoubted evidence that they are exactly fulfilled our Saviour was most certainly the person so often spoken of in the Old Testament For many of the Prophecies of the Old Testament concerning the Messias if they were not fulfilled in Christ in the conditions the Iews have been in since their dispersion which fell out exactly according to the prediction of Christ it is impossible they should be fulfilled at all So that either the predictions must lose their Divine authority or they must be accomplished in our Blessed Saviour For as Tertullian sharply sayes to the Iew Redde statum Iudaeae quem Christus inveniat alium contende venire let the people of the Iews be in their former condition and then plead for a Messias to come For can any thing be more plain then that the Messias was to be born in Bethlehem of Iudea but where is that now and how long since the Iews enjoyed any civil Polity there what is become of the second Temple in the time of which the desire of all Nations should come Is not Ierusalem already destroyed and the oblation there long since ceased which was to come to pass so soon after the Messias and did accordingly Is not the Scepter yet departed from Judah and the Lawgiver from between his feet and is not Shiloh yet come What strange unintelligible weeks were those of Daniel if they were extended to so indefinite a space of time as the Iews pretend and if indefinite what certain ground could from thence be gathered of any time wherein their accomplishment was to be expected but not to expatiate on those things which are already so largely proved beyond all possibility of contradiction by the antient and modern learned writers against the Iews To insist therefore on our present business are not the Prophecies concerning the miracles which the Messias should work exactly fulfilled in Christ Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped then shall the lame man leap as an Hart and the tongue of the dumb shall sing He must be a great stranger in the history of the New Testament that is to seek for an exact fulfilling of this Prophecy Nay and the Iewish Midrasch upon Psal. 146. 8. saith that when Messias comes he should open the eyes of the blind and the Iews themselves often speak of the great miracles which the Messias should do when he appears and therefore out of their own mouths will they be condemned when the miracles of Christ make it so evident that he was the true Messias Hence when Iohn Baptist sent his Disciples to Christ for them to be fully satisfied concerning him Christ gives this answer to them he bids them tell him the blind receive their sight and the lame walk and the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear and the dead raised up c. as though the mentioning of these miracles was sufficient to make it appear to them who he was whom they came to enquire after And therefore it is observable that Iohn Baptist himself though greater then the Prophets nay then whom there was not a greater born of women by our Saviours own Testimony yet of him it is said that he wrought no miracle of which no account can be given so probable and rational as that God in his infinite wisdom was pleased so to order it that the evidence of our Saviours being the Messias might be made more clear by the miracles which he wrought that the minds of people might not be distracted between Iohn and Christ he therefore reserved the glory of miracles wholly to the name of Christ that there might be no pretence of a competition between iohn and him Another reason of the necessity of miracles in our Saviour by way of rational evidence is the overthrowing the power and Kingdom of the Devil in the world For which purpose it is observable that the Devil had scarce ever greater power over the bodies of men as well as their souls then at that time thence we read of such a multitude of Daemoniacks in the Gospel For it seems very harsh to interpret those meerly of Epilepticall and Lunatick persons both because the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are mentioned distinctly and that it appears by the primitive Church afterwards how frequent it was to eject the Devil out of possessed persons Nay so far am I from thinking that the Daemoniacks were meer Lunaticks that I rather think with Vossius that the Lunaticks were truly Daemoniacks only they were not constantly under the power of the Devil but as their paroxysmes returned upon them the Devil loving to fifh in such troubled waters And thence the same person is called a Lunatick in one place who is called a Daemoniack in another because he did ruere in principiis lunationum as the Arabick version expresseth it or as Rusticus Elpidius more fully explains it Repserat in medium rabies horrenda furoris Daemonis afflatu propria qui peste nocivus Allidit captas foedo discrimine mentes Menstrua deciduos cum Luna recolligit
them that believe In my name shall they cast out Devils c. This power then in the Primitive Church had a twofold argument in it both as it was a manifestation of the truth of the predictions of our Saviour and as it was an evidence of the Divine power of Christ when his name so long after his ascension had so great a command over all the infernal spirits and that so evidently that at that time when the Christians did as it were Tyrannize over Satan so in his own territories yet then the greatest of his Magicians had no power to hurt the bodyes of the Christians which is a thing Origen takes much notice of For when Celsus saith from Diogenes Aegyptius that Magick could only hurt ignorant and wicked men and had no power over Philosophers Origen replies first that Philosophy was no such charm against the power of Magick as appears by Maeragenes who writ the story of Apollonius Tyaneus the famous Magician and Philosopher who therein mentions how Euphrates and an Epicurean 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no vulgar Philosophers were catched by the Magick of Apollonius and although Philostratus disowns this History of Maeragenes as fabulous yet he that thinks Philostratus for that to be of any greater credit is much deceived of whom Lud. Vives gives this true character that he doth magna Homeri mendacia majoribus mendaciis corrigere mend one hole and make three but saith Origen as to the Christians this is undoubtedly true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This saith he we are most certain of and have found it by experience true that those who according to the principles of Christianity do worship God over all through Iesus and do live according to the Gospel being constant in their solemn prayers night and day are not obnoxious to the power of any Magick or Devils whatsoever Now then if the Devil who had then so much power over others had none upon the true followers of Christ and if in stead of that they had so great a commanding power over the Devil even in things which tended most to his disadvantage not only dislodging him out of bodies â—â—t out of his Idolatrous Temples what can be more evident then that this power which was so efficacious for the overthrowing the Kingdom of Satan must needs be far greater then the power of Satan is For it is an undoubted Maxime in natural reason that whatever is put out of its former place by force and violence is extruded by something stronger then its self for if the force on either side were equal there could be no disposses sing of either if any thing then be cast out of its former possession unwillingly it is an undenyable proof there was some power greater then his who was dispossessed Now we cannot conceive if there be such malignant spirits as by many undeniable proofs it is evident there are that they should willingly quit their possessions to such a doctrine which tends to the unavoydable ruine of their interest in the world if then the power of this doctrine hath overthrown the Devils Kingdom in the world whereever it hath been truly entertained it must necessarily follow that this power is far above the power of any damned spirits Now what folly and madness was it in the Heathens to worship those for Gods which they could not but see if they would open their eyes were under so great slavery to a power above them which could make them confess what was most to their disadvantage in the presence of their great adorers Neither ought the many counterfeits and impostures which have been in the world in this kind since the establishment of Christian Religion among the advancers of particular interests and designs make us suspect the truth of those things which were done in the first Ages of the Church of Christ. For first it stands to the greatest reason that the strongest arguments for the truth of a Religion ought to be fetched from the ages of its first appearance in the world if then the evidence be undoubted as to those first times we ought to embrace our Religion as true whatever the impostures have been among those who have apparently gone aside from that purity and simplicity of the Gospel which had so great power Then secondly if all that hath been done in this kind of ejecting Devils where Christianity is owned be acknowledged for impostures one of these two things must be supposed as the ground of it either that there was no such thing as a real possession by the Devil or else there was no such thing as a dispossessing him If the first then hereby will be seen a confirmation of our former argument that where Christianity is owned by the power of that the Devil is more curbed and restrained then where it is not or else is much over-run with ignorance and superstition Of the latter the ages of the Christian Church from the 10. Century to the beginning of the 16. current are a clear evidence Of the first all those who have been conversant in the places where Paganism or gross Idolatry do yet reign will bring in their creditable testimonies how tyrannical the power of the Devil is yet among them If it be not so then where careful endeavours have been used for retriving the ancient pâ—rity of Christian doctrine and worship we ought to impute it to the power of him who is stronger then Satan who whereever he comes to dwell doth dispossess him of his former habitations If the second then be entertained as the ground of concluding all things as impostures which are accounted dispossessions of Satan viz. that he never is really dispossessed then it must either be said that where he is once seized there is no possibility of ejecting him which is to say that the Devil hath an absolute and infinite power and that there is no power greater then his which is to own him for God or else that God suffers him to tyrannize where and how he will which is contrary to divine providence and the care God takes of the world and of the good of mankind or else lastly that those persons who pretend to do it are not such persons who are armed so much with the power of Christ nor possessed with such a due spirit of the Gospel which hath command over these infernal spirits And this in the cases pretended by the great Iuglers and Impostors of the Christian world the Popish Priests have been so notorious that none of their own party of any great faith or credit would stand to vouch them And we have this impregnable argument against all such Impostures that the matters which they by such actions would give an evidence to being so vastly different from if not in some things diametrically opposite to the first delivery and design of the Christian faith it is inconsistent with the way used for the confirmation of Christian Religion in the first publishing of
it to attest the truth of such things by any real miracles For so it would invalidate the great force of the evidences of the truth of Christianity if the same argument should be used for the proving of that which in the judgement of any impartial person was not delivered when the truth of the doctriâ—e of Christ was confirmed by so many and uncontrouled miracles But hereby we see what unconceivable prejudice hath been done to the true primitive doctrine of the Gospel and what stumbling-blocks have been laid in the way of considerative persons to keep them from embracing the truly Christian faith by those who would be thought the infallible directors of men in it by making use of the broad-seal of Heaven set only to the truth of the Scriptures to confirm their unwritten and superstitious ways of worship For if I once see that which I looked on as an undoubted evidence of divine power brought to attest any thing directly contrary to divine revelation I must either conclude that God may contradict himself by sealing both parts of a contradiction which is both blasphemous and impossible or that that society of men which own such things is not at all tender of the honour of Christain doctrine but seeks to set up an interest contrary to it and matters not what disadvantage is done to the grounds of Râ—ligion by such unworthy pretences and which of these two is more rational and true let every ones conscience judge And therefore it is much the interest of the Christian world to have all such frauds and impostures discovered which do so much disservice to the Christian faith and are such secret fomenters of Atheism and Infidelity But how far that promise of our Saviour that they which believe in his name shall cast out Devils and do many miracles may extend even in these last ages of the world to such generous and primitive-spirited Christians who out of a great and deep sense of the truth of Christianity and tenderness to the souls of men should go among Heathens and Infidels to convert them only to Christ and not to a secular interest under pretence of an infallible head is not here a place fully to enquire I confess I cannot see any reason why God may not yet for the conviction of Infidels employ such a power of miracles although there be not such necessity of it as there was in the first propagation of the Gospel there being some evidences of the power of Christianity now which were not so clear then as the overthrowing the Kingdom of Satan in the world the prevailing of Christianity notwithstanding force used against it the recovâ—ry of it from amidst all the corruptions which were mixed with it the consent of those parties in the common foundations of Christianity which yet disagreâ— froâ— each other with great bitternâ—ss of spirit though I say it be not of that necessity now when the Scriptures are convâ—yed to us in a certain uninterrupted manner yet God may please out of his abundant provision for the satisfaction of the minds of men concerning the truth of Christian doctrine to employ good men to do something which may manifest the power of Christ to be above the Dâ—vils whom they worship And therefore I should far sooner believe the relation of the miracles of Xaverius and his Brethren employed in the conversion of Infidels then Lipsius his Virgo Hallensis and Asprecollis could it but be made evident to me that the design of those persons had more of Christianity then Popery in it that is that they went more upon a design to bring the souls of the Infidels to heaven then to enlarge the authority and jurisdiction of the Roman Church But whatever the truth of those miracles or the design of those persons were we have certain and undoubted evidence of the truth of those miracles whereby Christianity was first propagated and the Kingdom of Satan overthrown in the world Christ thereby making it appear that his power was greater then the Devils who had possession because he overcame him took from him all his armour wherein he trusted and divided his spoils i. e. dispossâ—ssed him of mens bodies and his Idolatrous Temples silenced his Oracles nonplust his Magicians and at last when Christianity had overcome by suffering wrested the worldly power and Empire out of the Devils hands and employed it against himself Neither may we think because since that time the Devil hath got some ground in the world again by the large spread of Mahometism the general corruptions in the Christian world that therefore the other was no argument of divine power because the truth of Christianity is not tyed to any particular places because such a falling away hath been foretold in Scripture and therefore the truth of them is proved by it and because God himself hath threatned that those who will not receive the truth in the love of it shall be given up to strong de'usions Doth not this then in stead of abating the strength of the argument confirm it more and that nothing is fallen out in the Christian world but what was foretold by those whom God employed in the converting of it But we are neither without some fair hopes even from that divine revelation which was sealed by uncontrouled evidence that there may be yet a time to come when Christ will recover his Churches to their pristine purity and simplicity but withall I think we are not to measure the future felicity of the Church by outward splendor and greatness which too many so strongly fancy but by a recovery of that true spirit of Christianity which breathed in the first ages of the Church whatever the outward condition of the Church may be For if worldly greatness and ease and riches were the first impairers of the purity of Christian Religion it is hard to conceive how the restoring of the Church of Christ to its true glory can be by the advancing of that which gives so great an occasion to pride and sensuality which are so contrary to the design of Christian Religion unless we suppose men free from those corruptions which continual experience still tells the world the Rulers as well as members of the Christian society are subject to Neither may that be wonderd at when such uneveness of parts is now discovered in the great Luminaries of the world and the Sun himself is found to have his maculae as though the Sun had a purple feaver or as Kiroher expresseth it Ipse Phoebus qui rerum omnium in universo naturae Theatro aspectabilium longè pulcherrimus omnium opinione est habitus hoc seculo tandem fumosa facie ac infecto vultu maculis prodiit diceres eum variolis laborare senescentem I speak not this as though an outward flourishing condition of the Church were inconsistent with its purity for then the way to refine it were to throw it into the flames of persecution but that
the advancement of the flourishing condition of the Church is not meerly by outward pomp and grandeur and that the purity of the Church is not inconsistent with a state of outward difficulties which the experience oâ— the Primitive Church gives an irrefragable demonstration of Thus much may serve to shew the necessity of a power of miracles conjoyned with the Christian Doctrine to manifest the truth of it by overthrowing the Kingdom of that great Antichrist the Devil who had usurped so much Tyranny over the world The last reason why a power of miracles was so necessary for confirming the truth of the Gospel is because the Gospel was to be propagated over the world without any other rational evidence then was contained in the miracles wrought for the confirmation of it Now the admirable success which this doctrine found in the world considering all the circumstances of it doth make it clear what certainty there was that the miracles which were wrought were true and they were certain evidences that the doctrine attested by them was from God Now this will appear from these two things That no rational account can be given why the Apostles should undertake to publish such a doctrine unless they had been undoubtedly certain that the Doctrine was true and they had sufficient evidence to perswade others to beleeve it That no satisfactory account can be given considering the nature of the doctrine of Christ and the manner of its propagation why it should meet with so great acceptance in the world had there not been such convincing evidence as might fully perswade men of the truth of it I begin with the first from the publishers of this doctrine in the world All that I here require by way of a Postulatum or supposition are onlythese two things which no man right in his wits I suppose will deny 1. That men are so far rational agents that they will not set upon any work of moment and difficulty without sufficient grounds inducing them to it and by so much the greater the work is the more sure and stedfast had the grounds need to be which they proceed upon 2. That the Apostles or first Publishers of the Christian doctrine were not men distracted or bereft of their wits but acted by principles of common sense reason and understanding as other men in the world do Which if any one should be so far beside his wits as to question if he have but patience and understanding enough to read and consider those admirable writings of theirs which are conveyed to us by as certain uninterrupted a Tradition as any thing in the world hath been and by that time he will see cause to alter his judgement and to say that they are not mad but speak the words of the greatest truth and soberness These things supposed I now proceed to the proving of the thing in hand which will be done by these three things First That the Apostles could not but know how hâ—zardous an employment the preaching of the Gospel would be to them Secondly that no motive can be conceived sufficient for them to undertake such an employment but the infallible truth of the doctrine which they preached Thirdly that the greatest assurance they had themselves of the truth of their Doctrine was by being eye-witnesses of the miracles of Christ. First That the Apostles could not but understand the hazard of their employment notwithstanding which they cheerfully undertook it That men armed with no external power nor cried up for their wit and learning and carrying a doctrine with them so contraâ—y to the general inclinations of the world having nothing in it to recommend it to mankind but the Truth of it should go about to perswade the world to part with the Religion they owned and was setled by their laws and to embrace such a religion as called them off from all the things they loved in this world and to prepare themselves by mortification self-denial for another world is a thing to humane reason incredible unless we suppose them acted by a higher spirit then mankind is ordinarily acted by For what is there so desirable in continual reproaches contumelies what delight is there in racks and prisons what agreeableness in flames and martyrdoms to make men undergo some nay all of these rather then disown that doctrine which they came to publish Yet these did the Apostles cheerfully undergo in order to the conversion of the world to the truth of that doctrine which they delivered to it And not only so but though they did foresee them they were not discouraged from this undertaking by it I confess when men are upon hopes of profit and interest in the world engaged upon a design which they promise themselves impunity in having power on their side though afterwards things should fall out contrary to their expectation such persons may die in such a cause because they must and some may carry it out with more resolution partly through an innate fortitude of spirit heightened with the advantages of Religion or an Enthusiastick temper But it is hard to conceive that such persons would have undertaken so hazardous an employment if beforehand they had foreseen what they must have undergone for it But now the Apostles did foreknow that bonds and imprisonment nay death its self must be undergone in a violent manner for the sake of the doctrine which they preached yet not withstanding all this they go boldly and with resolution on with their work and give not over because of any hardships and persecutions they met withall One of the chiesest of them S. Peter and as forward as any in Preaching the Gospel had the very manner of his death foretold him by Christ himself before his Ascension yet soon after we find him preaching Christ in the midst of those who had crucified him and telling them to their faces the greatness of their sin in it and appealing to the miracles which Christ had done among them and bidding them repent and believe in him whom they had crucified if ever they would be saved And this he did not only among the people who gave their consent to the crucifying of Christ but soon after being conventedâ—ogether â—ogether with Iohn before the Court of Sanbedrin probably the very same which not long before had sentenced Christ to death for a miracle wrought by them with what incredible boldness doth he to their faces tell them of their murdering Christ and withall that there was no other way to salvation but by him whom they had crucified Be it known unto you all saith Peter to the Sanhedrin and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Iesus Christ whom ye have crucified whom God raised from the dead even by him doth this man stand here before you whole Neither is there salvation in any other for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved What
was the great Seal of our Saviours being the Son of God therefore we find the Apostles so frequently attesting the truth of the resurrection of Christ and that themselves were eye-witnesses of it This Iesus saith Peter hath God raised up whereof we all are witnesses And again And killed the Prince of life whom God hath raised up from the dead whereof we are witnesses and both Peter and Iohn to the Sanhedrin For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard And the whole Colledge of Apostles afterwards And we are his witnesses of these things and so is also the Holy Ghost whom God hath given to them that obey him In which words they give them that twofold rational evidence which did manifest the undoubted truth of what they spake for they delivered nothing but what themselves were witnesses of and withall was declared to be true by the power of the Holy Ghost in the miracles which were wrought by and upon believers Afterwards we read the sum oâ— the Apostles Preaching and the manner used by them to perswade men of the truth of it in the words of Peter to Cernâ—lius and his company How God annointed Iesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power who went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed of the Devil for God was with him And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Iews and in Hierusalem whom they stew and hanged on a tree Him God raised up the third day and shewed him openly not to all the people but unto witnesses chosen before of God even to us who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead And he comâ—anded us to â—reach unto the people that it is be which was ordained of God to be the Iudge of quick and dead By all which we see what care God was pleased to take for the satisfaction of the world in point of rational evidence as to the truth of the matters which were discovered concerning our Saviour Christ because he made choice of such persons to be the preachers and writers of these things who were the best abâ—e to satisfie the world about them viz. such as had been eye witnesses of them Now in order to the making it more fully evident what strength there was in this Testimony given by the Apostles to the miracles of Christ we shall more fully manifest the rational evidence which attended it in these following propositions Where the truth of a doctrine depends upon a matter of fact the truth of the doctrine is sufficiently manifested if the matter of fact be evidently proved in the highest way it is capable of Thus it is in reference to the doctrine of Christ for the truth of that is so interwoven with the truth of the story of Christ that if the relations concerning Christ be true his doctrine must needs be Divine and infallible For if it be undoubtedly true that there was such a person as Christ born at Bethlehem who did so many miracles and at last suffered the death of the Cross and after he had lain three dayes in the grave rose again from the dead what reason imaginable can I have to question but that the Testimony of this person was certainly Divine and consequently what ever he preached to the world was most certain and undoubted truth So that if we have clear evidence as to the truth of these passages concerning our Saviour we must likewise believe his doctrine which came attested with such pregnant evidences of a Divine commission which he had from God to the world No Prince can think he hath any reason to refuse audience to an Embassador when he finds his Credentials such as he may rely upon although himself doth not see the sealing of them much less reason have we to question the truth of the doctrine of the Gospel if we have sufficient evidence of the truth of the matters of fact concerning Christ in such a way as those things are capable of being proved The greatest evidence which can be given to a matter of fact is the attesting of it by those persons who were eye-witnesses of it This is the Foundation whereon the firmest assent is built as to any matter of fact for although we conceive we have reason to suspect the truth of a story as long as it is conveyed only in a general way by an uncertain fame and tradition yet when it comes to be attested by a sufficient number of credible persons who profess themselves the cye-witnesses of it it is accounted an unreasonable thing to distrust any longer the truth of it especially in these two cases 1. When the matter they bear witness to is a thing which they might easily and clearly perceive 2. When many witnesses exactly agree in the same Testimony 1. When the matter it self is of that nature that it may be fully perceived by those who saw it i. e. if it be a common object of sense And thus it certainly was as to the person and actions of Iesus Christ. For he was of the same nature with mankind and they had as great evidence that they conversed with Iesus Christ in the flesh as we can have that we converse one with another The miracles of Christ were real and visible miracles they could be no illusions of senses nor deceits of their eyes the man who was born blind and cured by our Saviour was known to have been born blind through all the Countrey and his cure was after as publike as his blindness before and acknowledged by the greatest enemies of Christ at the time of its being done When Christ raised up the dead man at Naim it was before much people and such persons in probability who were many of them present at his death But least there might be any suspition as to him that he was not really dead the case is plain and beyond all dispute in Lazarus who had been to the knowledge of all persons thereabouts dead four dayes here could be no deceit at all when the stone was rowled away and Lazarus came forth in the presence of them all And yet further the death and passion of our Saviour was a plain object of sense done in presence of his greatest adversaries The souldiers themselves were sufficient witnesses of his being really dead when they came to break his bones and spared him because they saw he was dead already At his resurrection the stone was rowled away from the Sepulchre and no body found therein although the Sepulchre was guarded by souldiers and the Disciples of Christ all so fearful that they were dispersed up and down in several places And that it was the same real body which he rose withall and no aëreall vehicle appears by Thomas his serupulosity and unbelief who would not believe unless â—e might put his hands into the hole of his sides and see
in his hands the â—rint of the nails now our Saviour condeseending so far as to satisfie the incredulity of Thomas hath made it thereby evident that the body which our Saviour rose from the grave with was the same individual body which before was crucified and buried in the Sepulchre And we sind all the Apostles together upon our Saviours appearance to them after his resurrection so far from being credulous in embracing a phantasm instead of Christ that they suspâ—cted that it was either a meer phantasm or an evil spirit which appeared among them upon which it is said they were terrified and affrighted and supposed they had seen a spirit Which our Saviour could not beat them off from but by appealing to the judgement of their senses Handle me and see for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have and afterwards more fully to convince them he did eat in the midst of them Now the more suspitious and incâ—edulous the Apostles themselves at first were the greater evidence is it how far they were from any design of abusing the world in what they after preached unto it and what strong conviction there was in the thing its self which was able to satisfie such scrupulous and suspicious persons 2. When many witnesses concurr in the same Testimony Nothing can disparage more the truth of a testimony then the counter witness of such who were present at the same actions but when all the witnesses fully agree not only in the substance but in all material circumstances of the story what ground or reason can there be to suspect a forgery or design in it especially when the persons cannot by any fears or threatnings be brought to vary from each other in it Thus it is in our present case we find no real dissent at all mentioned either as to the birth miracles life death or resurrection of Iesus Christ all the witnesses attest the same things though writing in different places and upon different occasions no alteration in any circumstance of the story out of any design of pleasing or gratifying any persons by it Most of our Saviours miracles not only his Apostles but the people and his very enemies were witnesses of whose posterity to this day dare not deny the truth of such strange works which were wrought by him And for his resurrection it would be very strange that five hundred persons should all agree in the same thing and that no torments or death could bring any of them to deny the truth of it had there not been the greatest certainty in it There can be no reason to suspect such a testimony which is given by eye-witnesses but either from questiâ—ning their knowledge of the things they speak of or their fiâ—elity in reporting them Now there is not the least ground to doubt either of these in reference to those persons who gave testimony to the world concerning the person and actions of our blessed Saviour For first They were such as were intimately conversant both with the person and actions of Iesus Christ whom he had chosen and trained up for that very end that they might be sufficiently qualified to acquaint the world with the truth of things concerning himself after his resurrection from the dead And accordingly they followed him up and down wheresoever he went they were with him in his solitudes and retirements and had thereby occasion to observe all his actions and to take notice of the unspotted innocency of his life Some of his Disciples were with him in his transfiguration others in his agony and bloody sweat they heard the expressions which came from his mouth in all which he discovered a wonderful submission to the will of God and a great readiness of mind to suffer for the good of the world Now therefore the first thing cannot at all be questioned their means of knowing the truth of what they spake Neither secondly is there any reasâ—n to suspect their fidelity in reporting what they knew For 1. The truth of this doctrine wrought so far upon them that they parted with all their worldly subsistence for the sake of it Although their riches were not great yet their way of subsistence in the world was necessary they left their houses their wives and children and all for Christ and that not to gain any higher preferments in this world which had they done it would have rendred their design suspicious to the curious and inquisitive world but they let go at least a quiet and easie life for one most troublesom and dangerous So that it is not how much they parted withall but how freely they did it and with what chearfulness they underwent disgraces persecutions nay death its self for the sake of the Gospel Now can it be imagined that ever men were so prodigal of their ease and lives as to throw both of them away upon a thing which themselves were not fully assured of the truth of It had been the highest folly imaginable to have deceived themselves in a thing of so great moment to them as the truth of the doctrine which they preached was because all their hopes and happiness depended upon the truth of that doctrine which they preached And as Tertullian observes non fas est ulli de suâ religione mentiri for saith he he that sayes he worships any thing be sides what he doth he denyes what he doth worship and transfers his worship upon another and thereby doth not worship that which he thus denyes Besides what probability is there men should lye for the sake of that Religion which tells them that those which do so shall not receive the reward which is promised to those who cordially adhere unto it Nay they declared themselves to be the most miserable of all persons if their hopes were only in this present life Can we now think that any who had the common reason of men would part with all the contentments of this world and expose themselves to continual hazards and at last undergo death its self for the sake of something which was meerly the fiction of their own brains What should make them so sedulous and industrious in preaching such things that they could say necessity was laid upon them yea wo was unto them if they preached not the Gospel when yet they saw so many woes attending them in the preaching of it had there not been some more powerful attractive in the beauty and excellency of the doctrine which they preached then any could be in the ease and tranquillity of this present world Thus we see the fidâ—lity of the Apostles manifested in such a way as no other witnesses were ever yet willing to hazard theirs And therefore Origen deservedly condemns Celsus of a ridiculous impertinency when he would parallel the relations of Herodotus and Pindarus concerning Aristeus Proconnesius with those of the Apostles concerning Christ For faith he did either of those two
venture their lives upon the truth of what they writ concerning him as the Apostles did to attest the truth of what they preached concerning our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ 2. The fidelity of the Apostles is evident in their manner of reporting the things which they deliver For if ever there may be any thing gathered from the manner of expression or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning the particular temper and disposition of the person from whom it comes we may certainly read the greatest fidelity in the Apostles from the peculiar manner of their expressing themselves to the world Which they do 1. With the greatest impartiality not declaring only what was glorious and admirable to the world but what they knew would be accounted foolishness by it They who had sought only to have been admired for the rare discoveries which they brought to the world would be sure to conceal any thing which might be accounted ridiculous but the Apostles fixed themselves most on what was most contemptible in the eyes of the world and what they were most mocked and derided for that they delighted most in the preaching of which was the Cross of Christ. Paul was so much in Love with this which was a stumbling block to the Iews and foolishness to the Greeks that he valued the knowledge of nothing else in comparison of the knowledge of Christ and him crucified Nay he elsewhere saith God forbid that I should glory save in the Cross of Christ. What now should be the reason that they should rejoyce in that most which was most despicable to the world had not they seen far â—reater truth and excellency in it then in the most sublime speculations concerning God or the souls of men in the School of Plato or any other heathen Philosophers That all men should be bound in order to their salvation to believe in one who was crucified at Hierusalem was a strange doctrine to the unbelieving world but if the Apostles had but endeavoured to have suited their doctrine to the School of Plato what rare persons might they have been accounted among the Heathen Philosophers Had they only in general terms discoursed of the Benignity of the Divine nature and the manifestations of Divine goodness in the world and that in order to the bringing of the souls of men to a nearer participation of the Divine nature the perfect Idea of true goodness and the express image of the person of God and the resplendency of his glory had vailed himself in humane nature and had everywhere scattered such beams of light and goodness as warmed and invigorated the frozen spirits of men with higher sentiments of God and themselves and raised them up above the faeculency of this terrestrial matter to breath in a freer air and converse with more noble objects and by degrees to fit the souls of men for those more pure illapses of real goodness which might alwayes satisfie the souls desires and yet alwayes keep them up till the soul should be sunning its self to all eternity under the immediate beams of Light and Love And that after this Incarnate Deity had spread abroad the wings of his Love for a while upon this lower world till by his gentle heat and incubation he had quickned the more plyable world to some degree of a Divine life he then retreated himself back again into the superiour world and put off that vail by which he made himself known to those who are here confined to the prisons of their bodies Thus I say had the Apostles minded applause among the admired Philosophers of the Heathens how easie had it been for them to have made some considerable additions to their highest speculations and have left out any thing which might seem so mean and contemptible as the death of the Son of God! But this they were so far from that the main thing which they preached to the world was the vanity of humane wisdom without Christ and the necessity of all mens believing in that Iesus who was crucified at Hierusalem The Apostles indeed discover very much infinitely more then ever the most lofty Pl tonist could do concerning the goodness and Love of God to mankind but that wherein they manifested the Love of God to the world was that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life And that herein was the Love of God manifested that while we were yet sinners Christ dyed for us And that this was the greatest truth and worthy of all acceptation that Iesus Christ came into the world to save sinners They never dreamt of any divine goodness which should make men happy without Christ No it was their design to perswade the world that all the communications of Gods goodness to the world were wholly in and through Iesus Christ and it is impossible that any should think otherwise unless Plato knew more of the mind of God then our blessed Saviour and Plotinus then Saint Paul Can we think now that the Apostles should hazard the reputation of their own wits so much as they did to the world and be accounted bablers and fools and madmen for preaching the way of salvation to be only by a person crucified between two thieves at Hierusalem had they not been convinced not only of the truth but importance of it and that it concerned men as much to believe it as it did to avoid eternal misery Did Saint Paul preach ever the less the words of truth and soberness because he was told to his face that his Learning had made him mad But if he was besides himself it was for Christ and what wonder was it if the Love of Christ in the Apostle should make him willing to lose his reputation for him seeing Christ made himself of no reputation that he might be in a capacity to do us good We see the Apostles were not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ because they knew it was the power of God to salvation and therefore neither in their preaching or their writings would they omit any of those passages concerning our Saviours death which might be accounted the most dishonourable to his person Which is certainly as great an evidence of their sidelity as can be expected which makes Origen say that the Disciples of Christ writ all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a great deal of candour and love of truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not concealing from the world those passages of the life of Christ which would be accounted most foolish and ridiculous 2. With the greatest plainness and simplicity of speech Such whose design is to impose upon the minds of men with some cunningly devised fables love as much ambiguity as ever Apollo did in his most winding oracles of whom it is said Ambage nexâ Delphico mos est Dco Arcana tegere Servius tells us that Iupiter Ammon was therefore pictured with Rams-horns because his answers
had as many turnings and windings as they had But the horns which Moses was wont to be pictured with did only note light and perspicuity from the ambiguity of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which notes the sending forth of rayes of light like a horn and yet Moses himself was vailed in comparison of the openness and plainness of speech which was in the Apostles Impostors cast a mist of many dark and cloudy words before them but when they are once brought into the open light their vizard falls off and their deformity appears Such persons delight in soaring quite out of the apprehensions of those who follow them and never think themselves better recompenced for their pains then when they are most admired and least understood But never was Christianity more dishonoured then when men brought it from its native simplicity and plainness into a company of cloudy and insignificant expressions which are so far from making men better understand the truth of it that it was certainly the Devils design by such obscure terms to make way for a mysterie to be advanced but it was of iniquity and soon after we see the effect of it in another oracle set up at Rome instead of Delphos and all the pretence of it was the obscurity supposed in Scripture What! darkness come by the rising of the Sun Or is the Sun at last grown so beggarly that he is fain to borrow light of the earth Must the Sâ—ripture be beholding to the Church for its clearness and Christ himselâ— not speak intelligibly unless the Popâ— be his Interpreter Did Christ reveal to the world the Way to salvation and yet leave men to seâ—k which was it till a Guide never heard of in the Scripture come to direct them in the Way to it What strange witnesses were the Apostles if they did noâ— speak the truth with plainness How had men been to sâ—â—k as â—o the truth of Christianity if the Apostles had not declared the dâ—ctrine of the Gospel with all evidence and perspicuity Whom must we believe in this case the Apostles or the Roman oracle The Apostles they tell us they speak with all plainness of speech and for that end purposely lay aside all excâ—llency of words and humane wisdom that men might not be to seek for their mâ—aning in a matter of so great moment that the Gospel was hid to none but such as are lost and whose eyes are blinded by the god of this world that the doctrinâ— revealed by them is a light to direct us in our way to heaven and a rule to walk by and it is a strange property of light to be obscure and of a rule to be crooked But it is not only evident from the Apostles own affirmations that they laid aside all affected obscurity ambiguous expressions and Philosophical terms whereby the world might have been to seek for what they were to believe but it is likewise clear from the very nature of the doctrine they preached and the design of their preaching of it What need Rhetorick in plain truths or affected phrases in giving evidence How incongruous would obscure expressions have been to the design of saving souls by the foolishness of preaching For if they had industriously spoken in their preaching above the capacities of those they spake to they could never have converted a soul without a miracle for the ordinary way of conversion must be by the understanding and how could that work upon the understanding which was so much above it But saith the Apostle we preach not our selves but Christ Iesus the Lord and our selves your servants for Iesus sake If they had sought themselves or their own credit and reputation there might have been some reason that they should have used the way of the Sophists among the Greeks and by declamatory speeches to have inhanceed their esteem among the vâ—lgar But the Apostles disowned and rejected all these vulgar artifices of mean and low-spirited men they laid aside all those enticing words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the way of the Heathen Sophists and declared the Tâ—stimony of God with spiritual evidence they handled not the word of God deceitfully but by manifestation of the truth commended themselves to every mans consâ—ience in the sight of God Now what could be so suiteable to such a design as the greatest plainness and faithfulness in what they spake We find in the testimony of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Origen speaks nothing that is spurious or counterfeit nothing savouring of the cunning craftiness of such as lie in wait to deceive and saith he it is impossible to think that men never bred up in the Sophistry of the Greâ—ks nor experienced in the Rhetorical insinuations used among them could ever be able so suddenly to perswade the world to embrace that which had been a figment of their own brains The truth is the Apostles speak like men very confident of the truth of what they speak and not like such who were fain to fetch in the help of all their Topicks to find out some probable arguments to make men believe that which it is probable they did not believe themselves which was most commonly the case of the great Orators among the Heathens We find no pedantick flourishes no slattering insinuations no affected cadencyes no such great care of the rising and falling of words in the several sentences which make up so great a part of that which was accounted eloquence in the Apostles times These things were too mean a prey for the spirits of the Apostles to quarry upon every thing in them was grave and serious every word had its due weight every sentence brim-full of spiritual matter their whole discourse most becoming the Majesty and Authority of that spirit which they spake by And therein was seen a great part of the infinite wisdom of God in the choice he made of the persons who were to propagate the Doctrine of Christ in the world that they were not such who by reason of their great repute and fame in the world might easily draw whole multitudes to imbrace their dictates but that there might not be the least foundation for an implicit faith they were of so mean rank and condition in the world that in all probability their names had never been hard of had not their doctrine made them famous To this purpose Origen excellently speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I am of opinion saith he that Iesus did purposely make use of such preachers of his doctrine that there might be no place for suspicion that they came instructed with the arts of Sophistry but that it be clearly manifest to all that would consider it that there was nothing of design in those who discovered so much simplicity in their writings and that they had a more divine power which was more efficacious then the greatest volubility of expressions or ornaments of speech or the artifices which were used in the
then these were Had there been any ground of suspicion concerning the design of Christ why could not the Iews prevail with Iudas to discover it as well as to betray his person Iudas had done but a good work if Christ had been such an impostor as the Iews blasphemously said he was what made Iudas then so little satisfied with his work that he grew weary of his life upon it and threw himself away in the most horrid despair No person certainly had been so fit to have been produced as a witness against Christ as Iudas who had been so long with him and had heard his speeches and observed his miracles but he had not patience enough to stay after that horrid fact to be a witness against him nay he was the greatest witness at that time for him when he who had betrayed him came to the Sanhedrim when consulting about his death and told them that he had sinned in betraying innocent blood What possible evidence could have been given more in behalf of our Saviour then that was when a person so covetous as to betray his Master for thirty pieces of silver was so weary of his bargain that he comes and throws back the money and declares the person innocent whom he had betrayed And this person too was such a one as knew our Saviour far better then any of the witnesses whom afterwards they suborned against him who yet contradicted each other and at last could produce nothing which in the judgement of the Heathen Governour could make him judge Christ worthy of death 3. The Apostles were freer from design then any counter-witness at that time could be we have already proved the Apostles could not possibly have any other motive to affirm what they did but full conviction of the truth of what they spake but now if any among the Iews at that time had asserted any thing contrary to the Apostles we have a clear account of it and what motive might induce them to it viz. the preserving of their honour and reputation with the people the upholding their traditions besides their open and declared enmity against Christ without any sufficient reason at all for it now who would believe the testimony of the Scribes and Pharisees who had so great authority among the people which they were like to lose if Christs doctrine were true before that of the Apostles who parted with all for the sake of Christ and ventured themselves wholly upon the truth of our Saviours doctrine 4. None ever did so much to attest the negative as the Apostles did to prove their fidelity as to the affirmative Had sufficient counter-witness been timely produced we cannot think the Apostles would have run so many continual hazards in Preaching the things which related to the person and actions of Christ. Did ever any lay down their lives to undeceive the world if the Apostles were guilty of abusing it 5. The number of such persons had been inconsiderable in comparison of those who were so fully perswaded of the truth of those things which concern our Saviour who were all ready as most of them did to seal the truth of them with their lives Whence should so many men grow so suddenly confident of the truth of such things which were contrary to their former perswasions interest education had they not been delivered in such a way that they were assured of the undoubted truth of them which brings me to the last proposition which is Matters of fact being first believed on the account of eye-witnesses and received with an universal and uncontrouled assent by all such persons who have thought themselves concerned in knowing the truth of them do yeild a sufficient foundation for a firm assent to be built upon I take it for granted that there is sufficient foundation for a firm assent where there can be no reason given to question the evidence which that there is not in this present case will appear from these following considerations 1. That the multitudes of those persons who did believe these things had liberty and opportunity to be satisfied of the truth of them before they believed them Therefore no reason or motive can be assigned on which they should be induced to believe these things but the undoubted evidence of truth which went along with them I confess in Mahumetisme a very great number of persons have for some centuries of years continued in the belief of the doctrine of Mahomet but then withall there is a sufficient account to be given of that viz. the power of the sword which keeps them in aw and strictly forbids all the followers of Mahomet to dispute their religion at all or compare it with any other Therefore I can no more wonder at this then I do to see so great a part of the world under the Tyranny of the greâ—t Turk Neither on the other side do I wonder that such a multitude of those professing Christianity should together with it believe a great number of erroneous doctrines and live in the practice of many gross superstitions because I consider what a strange prevalency education hath upon softer spirits and more easie intellectuals and what an aw an Inquisition bears upon timerous and irresolved persons But now when a great multitude of persons sober and inquisitive shall contrary to the principles of their education and without fear of any humane force which they beforehand see will persecute them and after diligent enquiry made into the grounds on which they believe for sake all their former perswasions and resolvedly adhere to the truth of the doctrine propounded to them though it cost them their lives if this give us not reason to think this doctrine true we must believe mankind to be the most miserable unhappy creatures in the world that will with so much resolution part with all advantages of this life for the sake of one to come if that be not undoubtedly certain and the doctrine proposing it infallibly true It is an observable circumstance in the propagation of Christian Religion that though God made choice at first of persons generally of mean rank and condition in the world to be Preachers of the Gospel God thereby making it appear that our faith did not stand in the wisdom of men but in the power of God and therefore chose the weak things of the world to confound the strong yet soon afâ—er the Gospel was preached abroad in the world we finde persons of great place and reputation of great parts and abilities engaged in the profession of the Christian faith In the History of the Acts we read of Sergius a Proconsul of Dionysius the Areopagite converted to the faith and in the following ages of the Church many persons of great esteem for their excellent learning and abilities such was Iustin Martyr one who before he became a Christian was conversant with all sects of Philosophers Stoicks Peripateticks Pythagoreans and at last was a professed Platonist till he
have believed the doctrine of Christ to be the only way to salvation have been deceived either we must deny altogether a Divine Providence or say the Devil hath more power to deceive men then God to direct them which is worse then the former or else assert that there are no such things at all as either God or Devils but that all things come to pass by chance and fortune and if so it is still more inexplicable why such multitudes of rational and serious men and the most inquisitive part of the world as to such things should all be so possessed with the truth and certainty of these things and the more profane wicked and ignorant any persons are the more prone they are to mock and deride them If such men then see more into truth and reason then the sober and judicious part of mankind let us bid adieu to humanity and adore the brutes since we admire their judgement most who come the nearest to them 3. The multitude of these persons thus consenting in this Testimony could have no other engagement to this consent but only their firm perswasion of the truth of the doctrine conveyed by it because those who unanimously agree in this thing are such persons whose other designs and interests in this world differ as much as any mens do If it had been only a consent of Iews there might have been some probable pretence to have suspected a matter of interest in it but as to this thing we find the Iews divided among themselves about it and the stiffest denyers of the truth of it do yet inviolably preserve those sacred records among them from which the truth of the doctrine of Christ may be undoubtedly proved Had the Christian Religion been enforced upon the world by the Roman Emperours at the time of its first promulgation there would have been some suspicion of particular design in it but it came with no other strength but the evidence of its own truth yet it found sudden and strange entertainment among persons of all Nations and degrees of men In a short time it had eaten into the heart of the Roman Empire and made so large a spread therein that it made Tertullian say Hesterni sumus vestra omnia implevimus urbes insulas castella municipia conciliabula castraipsa tribus decurias palatium senatum forum sola vobis relinquimus Templa We have but newly appeared saith he yet we have filled all places with our company but only your Temples and before speaking of the Heathens Obsessam vociferantur civitatem in agris in castellis in insulis Christianos omnem sexum aetatem conditionem etiam dignitatem transgredi ad hoc nomen quasi detrimento moerent All sorts and conditions of men in all places were suddenly become Christians What common tye could there be now to unite all these persons together if we set aside the undoubted truth and certainty of the doctrine of Christ which was first preached to them by such who were eye-witnesses of Christs actions and had left sacred records behind them containing the substance of the doctrine of Christ and those admirable instructions which were their only certain guides in the way to heaven 4. Because many persons do joyn in this consent with true Christians who yet could heartily with that the doctrine of Christianity were not true Such are all those persons who are sensual in their lives and walk not according to the rules of the Gospel yet dare not question or deny the truth of it Such who could heartily wish there were no future state nor judgement to come that they might indulge themselves in this world without fear of another yet their consciences are so far convinced of and awed by the truth of these things that they raise many perplexities and anxieties in their minds which they would most willingly be rid of which they can never throughly be till instead of having the name of Christians they come to live the life of Christians and become experimentally acquainted with the truth and power of Religion And withall we find that the more men have been acquainted with the practice of Christianity the greater evidence they have had of the truth of it and been more fully and rationally perswaded of it To such I grant there are such powerful evidences of the truth of the doctrine of Christ by the effectual workings of the Spirit of God upon their souls that all other arguments as to their own satisfaction may fall short of these As to which those verses of the Poet Dante 's rendred into Latine by F. S. are very pertinent and significant for when he had introduced the Apostle Peter asking him what it was which his faith was founded on he answers Deinde exivit ex luce profundâ Quae illic splendebat pretiosa gemma Super quam omnis virtus fundatur i. e. That God was pleased by immediate revelation of himself to discover that divine truth to the world whereon our faith doth stand as on its sure foundation but when the Apostle goes on to enquire how he knew this came at first from God his answer to that is larga pluvia Spiritûs Sancti quae est diffusa Super veteres super novas membranas Est syllogismus ille qui eam mihi conclusit Adâ—ò acutè ut prae illâ demonstratione Omnis demonstratio alia mihi videatur obtusa i. e. That the Spirit of God doth so fully discover its self both in the Old and New Testament that all other arguments are but dull and heavy if compared with this It is true they are so to a truly inlightened conscience which discovers so much beauty and glory in the Scriptures that they ravish the soul although it be unable to give so full an account of this unto others who want the eyes to see that beauty with which a heart truly gracious hath We see ordinarily in the world that the attraction of beauty is an unaccountable thing and one may discern that which ravisheth him which another looks on as mean and ordinary and why may it not be much more thus in divine objects which want spiritual eyes to discover them Therefore I grant that good men enjoy that satisfaction to their own Consciences as to the truth of the Doctrine of Christ which others cannot attain to but yet I say that such do likewise see the most strong rational and convincing evidence which doth induce them to believe which evidence is then most convincing when it is seconded by the peculiar energy of the Spirit of God upon the souls of true Believers But yet we see that the power and force of the truth of these things may be so great even upon such minds which are not yet moulded into the fashion of true goodness that it may awe with its light and clearness where it doth not soften and alter by its heat and influence Now whence can it be that such
the Gospel of Christ which did so easily demolish these strong holds and captivate the understandings of men to the obedience of Christ. To which purpose Arnobius excellently speaks in these words to the Heathens Sed non creditis gesta haec Sed qui ea conspicati sunt fieri sub oculis suis viderunt agi testes optimi certissimique auctores crediderunt haec ipsi credenda posteris nobis haud exilibus cum approbationibus tradiderunt Quinam isti fortasse quaeritis gentes populi nationes incredulum illud genus humanum Quod nisi aperta res esset luce ipsa quemadmodum dicitur clarior nunquam rebus hujusmodi credulitatis suae commodarent assensum An nunquid dicemus illius temporis homines usque adeò fuisse vanos mendaces stolidos brutos ut quae nunquam viderant vidisse se fingerent quae facta omninò non erant falsis proderent testimoniis aut puerili assertione sirmarent Cumque possent vobiscum unanimiter vivere inoffensas ducere conjunctiones gratuita susciperent odia execrabili haberentur in nomine Quod si falsa ut dicit is historia illa rerum est unde tam brevi tempore totus mundus ista religione complet us est Aut in unam coire qui potuërunt mentem gentes regionibus dissiâ—â—ae ventis coelique convexionibus dimotae Asseverationibus illectae sunt nudis inductae in spes cassas in pericula capitis immittere se sponte temeraria desperatione voluërunt cum nihil tale vidissent quod eas in hos cult us novitatis suae possit excitare miraculo Imo quia haec omnia ab ipso cernebant geri ab ejus praeconibus qui per orbem totum missi beneficia patris munera sanandis animis hominibusque portabant veritatis ipsius vi victae dedërunt se Deo nec in magnis posuëre despendiis membra vobis projicere viscera sua lanianda praebere The substance of whose discourse is that it is impossible to suppose so many persons of so many Nations to be so far besotted and infatuated as not only to believe a Religion to be true which was contrary to that they were educated in but to venture their lives as well as estates upon it had it not been discovered to them in a most certain and infallible way by such who had been eye-witnesses of the actions and miracles of Christ and his Apostles And as he elsewhere speaks Vel haec saltem fidem vobis faciant argumenta credendi quod jam peromnes terras in tam brevi tempore parvo immensi nominis hujus sacramenta diffusa sunt quod nulla jam natio est tam barbari moris mansuetudinem nesciens quae non ejus amore versa molliverit asperitatem suam in placidos sensus assumpt â tranquillitate migraverit quod tam magnis ingeniis praediti Oratores Grammatici Rhetores Consulti juris ac Medici Philosophiae etiam secreta rimantes magisteria haec expetunt spretis quibus paulò ante sidebant c. Will not this perswade the world what firm foundations the faith of Christans stands on when in so short a time it is spread over all parts of the world that by it the most inhumane and barbarous Nations are softned into more then civility That men of the greatest wits and parts Orators Grammarians Rhetoricians Lawyers Physitians Philosophers who not have for saken then former sentiments and adhered to the doctrine of Christ. Now I say if the power of education be so strong upon the minds of men to perswade them of the truth of the Religion they are bred up under which Atheistically disposed persons make so much advantage of this is so far from weakning the truth of Christianity that it proves a great confirmation of it because it obtained so much upon its first Preaching in the world notwithstanding the highest prejudices from education were against it If then men be so prone to believe that to be most true which they have been educated under it must argue a more then ordinary evidence and power in that religion which unsettles so much the principles of education as to make men not only question the truth of them but to renounce them and embrace a religion contrary to them Especially when we withall consider what strong-holds these principles of education were backed with among the Heathens when the doctrine of Christ was first divulged among them i. e. what plausible pretences they had of continuing in the religion which they were brought up in and why they should not exchange it for Christianity and those were 1. The pretended antiquity of their religion above the Christian the main thing pleaded against the Christians was divortium ab institutis majorum that they thought themselves wiser then their fore-fathers and Symmachus Libanius and others plead this most in behalf of Paganisme servanda est tot seculis fides sequendi sunt nobis parentes qui secuti sunt feliciter suos their religion pleaded prescription against any other and they were resolved to sollow the steps of their ancestors wherein they thought themselves happy and secure Caecilius in Minutius Felix first argues much against dogmatizing in religion but withall sayes it most becomes a lover of truth majorum excipere disciplinam religiones tradit as colere Deos quos à parentibus ante imbutus es timere nec de numinibus ferre sententiam sed prioribus credere So Arnobius tells us the main thing objected against the Christians was novellam esse religionem nostram ante dies natam propemodum paucos nâ—que vos potuisse antiquam patriam linquere in barbaros ritus peregrinosque traduci And Cotta in Tully long before laid this down as the main principle of Pagan religion majoribus nostris etiam nulla ratione reddita credere to believe the tradition of our Fathers although there be no evidence in reason for it And after he hath discovered the vanity of the Stoical arguments about religion concludes with this as the only thing he resolved his religion into mihi unum satis erit majores nostros it a tradidisse It is enough for me that it comes by tradition from our fore-fathers Lactantius fully sets forth the manner of pleading used by the Heathens against the Christians in the point of antiquity Hae sunt religiones quas sibi à majoribus suis traditas pertinacissime tueri ac defendere persiverant nec considerant quales sint sed ex hoc probat as atque veras esse confidunt quod eas veteres tradiderâ—nt tantaque est auctoritas vetustatis ut inquircre in eam scelus esse dicatur The English is they accounted tradition infallible and knew no other way whereby to find the truth of religion but by its conveyance from their fore-fathers How like herein do they speak to those
seek for satisfaction as ever for granting that a Divine power is seen in one and not in the other he must needs be still dissatisfied unless it can be made evident to him that such things are from Divine power and others cannot be Now the main distinction being placed here in the natures of the things abstractly considered and not as they bear any evidence to our understandings in stead of resolving doubts it increaseth more for as for instance in the case of the Magicians rods turning into scrpents as well as Moses his what satisfaction could this yeild to any spectator to tell him that in the one there was a Divine power and not in the other unless it were made appear by some evidence from the thing that the one was a meer imposture and the other a real alteration in the thing it self I take it then for granted that no general discourses concerning the formal difference of miracles and wonders considered in themselves can afford any rational satisfaction to an inquisitive mind that which alone is able to give it must be something which may be discerned by any judicious and considerative person And that God never gives to any a power of miracles but he gives some such ground of satisfaction concerning them will appear upon these two considerations 1. From Gods intention in giving to any this power of doing miracles We have largely made it manifest that the end of true miracles is to be a confirmation to the world of the Divine commission of the persons who have it and that the testimony is Divine which is confirmed by it Now if there be no way to know when miracles are true or false this power is to no purpose at all for men are as much to seek for satisfaction as if there had been no such things at all Therefore if men are bound to believe a Divine testimony and to rely on the miracles wrought by the persons bringing it as an evidence of it they must have some assurance that these miracles could not come from any but a Divine power 2. From the providence of God in the world which if we own we cannot imagine that God should permit the Devil whose only design is to ruine mankind to abuse the credulity of the world so far as to have his lying wonders pass uncontrouled which they must do if nothing can be found out as a certain difference between such things as are only of Diabolical and such as are of Divine power If then it may be discovered that there is a malignant spirit which acts in the world and doth produce strange things either we must impute all strange things to him which must be to attribute to him an infinite power or else that there is a being infinitely perfect which crosseth this malignant spirit in his designs and if so we cannot imagine he should suffer him to usurpe so much tyranny over the minds of men as to make those things pass in the more sober and inquisitive part of the world for Divine miracles which were only counterfeits and impostures If then the providence of God be so deeply engaged in the discovering the designs of Satan there must be some means of this discovery and that means can be supposed to be no other in this case but some rational and satisfactory evidence whereby we may know when strange and miraculous things are done by Satan to deceive men and when by a Divine power to confirm a Divine testimony But how is it possible say some that miracles should be any ground on which to believe a testimony Divine when Christ himself hath told us that there shall arise false Christs and false Prophets and shall shew great signs and wonders in so much that if it were possible they should deceive the very elect and the Apostle tells us that the coming of Antichrist will be with all power and signs and lying wonders How then can we fix on miracles as an evidence of Divine testimony when we see they are common to good and bad men and may seal indifferently either truth or falshood To this I reply 1. Men are guilty of doing no small disservice to the doctrine of Christ when upon such weak and frivolous pretences they give so great an advantage to infidelity as to call in question the validity of that which yeilded so ample a testimony to the truth of Christian religion For if once the rational grounds on which we believe the doctrine of Christ to be true and Divine be taken away and the whole evidence of the truth of it be laid on things not only derided by men of Atheistical spirits but in themselves such as cannot be discerned or judged of by any but themselves upon what grounds can we proceed to convince an unbeliever that the doctrine which we believe is true If they tell him that as light and fire manifest themselves so doth the doctrine of the Scriâ—ture to those who believe it It will be soon replyed that self-evidence in a matter of faith can imply nothing but either a firm perswasion of the mind concerning the thing propounded or else that there are such clear evidences in the thing it self that none who freely use their reason can deny it the first can be no argument to any other person any further then the authority of the person who declares it to have such self-evidence to him doth extend its self over the mind of the other and to ones self it seems a strange way of arguing I believe the Scriptures because they are true and they are true because I believe them for self-evidence implyes so much if by it be meant the perswasion of the mind that the thing is true but if by self-evidence be further meant such clear evidence in the matter propounded that all who do consider it must believe it I then further enquire whether this evidence doth lie in the nâ—ked proposal of the things to the understanding and if so then every one who assents to this proposition that the whole is greater then the part must likewise assent to this that the Scripture is the Word of God or whether doth the evidence lie not in the naked proposal but in the efficacy of the Spirit of God on the minds of those to whom it is propounded Then 1. The self-evidence is taken off from the written Word which was the object and removed to a quite different thing which is the efficient cause 2. Whether then any persons who want this efficacious operation of the Spirit of God are or can be bound to believe the Scripture to be Gods Word If they are bound the duty must be propounded in such a way as may be sufficient to convince them that it is their duty but if all the evidence of the truth of the Scripture lie on this testimony of the Spirit then such as want this can have none at all But if â—astly by this self-evidence be meant
of Rambam or R. Moses Maimon It is said that the King of Persia desired of him a sign and he told him that he should cut off his head and he would rise again which he cunningly desired to avoid being tormented which the King was resolved to try and accordingly executed him but I suppose his resurrection and Mahomets will be both in a day although Maimonides tells us some of the Iews are yet such fools as to expect his resurrection Several other Impostors Maimonides mentions in his Epistle de Australi regione One who pretended to be the Messias because he cured himself of the leprosie in a night several others he mentions in Spain France and other parts and the issue of them all was only a further aggravation of the miseries and captivities of the poor Iews who were so credulous in following Impostors and yet such strange Infidels where there were plain and undoubted miracles to perswade them to believe in our blessed Saviour as the true Messias We freely grant then that many pretended miracles may be done in the world to deceive men with but doth it hence follow that either there are no true miracles done in the world or that there are no certain rules to distinguish the one from the other But as Origen yet further replyes to Celsus as a Woolf doth very much resemble a dog yet they are not of the same kind nor a turtle Dove and a Pigeon so that which is produced by a divine power is not of the same nature with that which is produced by Magick but as he argues Is it possible that there should be only deceits in the world and magical operations and can there be no true miracles at all wrought Is humane nature only capable of Impostures or can none work miracles but Devils Where there is a worse there may be a better and so from the impostures counterfeits we may inferr that there are true miracles wrought by a divine power otherwise it were all one as to say there are counterfeits but no Iewels or there are Sophisms and Paralogisms but no lâ—gitimate demonstrations if then there be such deceits there are true miraclâ—s too all the business is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strictly and severely to examine the pretâ—nders to do them and that from the life and manners of those that do them and from the effâ—cts and consequents of them whethâ—r they do good or hurt in the world whâ—ther thâ—y correct mens manners or bring men to goodness holinâ—ss and truth and on this account we are neither to reject all miracles nor embrace all pretâ—nces but carefully and prudently examine the rational evidences whereby those which are true and divine may be known from such which are counterfeit and Diabolical And this now leads us to the main subjâ—ct of this Chapter viz. What rules we have to â—roceed by in judging miracles to be true or false which may be these following True Divine miracles are wrought in confirmation of some Divine Tâ—stimony Because we have manifested by all the precedent discourse that the intention of miracles is to seal some divine revelation Therefore if God should work miracles when no divine Tâ—stimony is to be confirmed God would set the broad Seal of heaven to a blank If it be said no because it will witness to us now the truth of that Testimony which was delivered so many ages since I answer 1. The truth of that Testimony was sufficiently sealed at the time of the delivery of it and is conveyed down in a certain way to us Is it not sufficient that the Chartâ—r of a Corporation had the Princes broad Seal in the time of the giving of it but that every succâ—ssion of men in that Corporation must have a new broad Seal or else they ought to question their Patent What ground can there be for that when the original Seal and Patent is preserved and is certainly conveyed down from age to age So I say it is as to us Gods Grand Charter of Grace and Mercy to the world through Iesus Christ was sealed by divine miracles at the delivery of it to the world the original Patent viz. the Scriptures wherein this Charter is contained is conveyed in a most certain manner to us to this Patent the Seal is annexed and in it are contained those undoubted miracles which were wrought in confirmation of it so that a new sealing of this Patent is wholly needless unless we had some cause of suspicion that the original Patent it self were lost or the first sealing was not true If the lattâ—r then Christian Religion is not true if the miracles wrought for confirmation of it were false because the truth of it depends so much on the verity and Divinity of the miracles which were then wrought If the first be suspected viz. the certain conveyance of the Patent viz. the Scriptures some certain grounds of such a suspicion must be discovered in a matter of so great moment especially when the great and many Societies of the Christian world do all consent unanimously in the contrary Nay it is impossible that any rational man can concâ—ive that the Patent which we now rely upon is supposititious or corrupted in any of those things which are of concernment to the Christian world and that on these accounts 1. From the watchfulness of Divine providâ—nce for the good of mankind Can we conceive that there is a God who rules and takes care of the world and who to manifest his signal Love to mankind should not only grant a Patent of Mercy to the world by his son Christ and then sealed it by divine miracles and in order to the certain conveyance of it to the world caused it by persons imployed by himself to be recordâ—d in a language fittest for its dispersing up and down the world all which I here suppose Can we I say conceive that this God should so far have cast off his care of the world and the good of mankind which was the original ground of the Grant it self as to suffer any wicked men or malignant spirits to corrupt or alter any of those Terms in it on which mens eternal salvation depends much less wholly to suppress and destroy it and to send forth one that is counterfeit and supposititious instead of it and which should not be discovered by the Christians of that age wherein that corrupt Copy was set forth nor by any of the most learned and inquisitive Christians ever since They who can give any the least entertainment to so wild absurd and irrational an imagination are so far from reason that they are in good disposition to Atheism and next to the suspecting the Scriptures to be corrupted they may rationally suspâ—ct there is no such thing as a God and providence in the world or that the world is governed by a spirit most malignant and envious of the good of mankind Which is a suspicion only becoming those Heathens among
whom it was very frequent who worshipped the devils instead of Gods 2. Because of the general dispersion of Copies in the world upon the first publishing of them We cannot otherwise coâ—ceive but that records containing so weighty and important things would be transcribed by all those Churches which believed the truth of the things contained in them We see how far curiosity will carry men as to the care of transcribing antient MSS. of old Authors which contain only some history of things past that are of no great concernment to us Can we then imagine those who ventured estates and lives upon the truth of the things revealed in Scripture would not be very careful to preserve the authentick instrument whereby they are revealed in a certain way to the whole world And besides this for a long time the originals themselves of the Apostolical writings were preserved in the Church which makes Tertullian in his time appeal to them Age jam qui voles curiositatem melius exercere in negotio salutis tuae percurre Ecclesias Apostolicas apud quasipsae adhuc cathedrae Apostolorum suis locis praesidentur apud quas ipsae authenticae corum literae recitantur sonantes vocem representantes faciem uniuscujusque Now how was it possible that in that time the Scriptures could be corrupted when in some of the Churches the original writings of the Apostles were preserved in a continual succession of persons from the Apostles themselves and from these originals so many Copies were transcribed as were conveyed almost all the world over through the large spread of the Christian Churches at that time and therefore it is impossible to conceive that a Copy should be corrupted in one Church when it would so speedily be discovered by another especially considering these three circumstances 1. The innumerable multitude of Copies wh ch would speedily be taken both considering the moment of the thing and the easiness of doing it God probably for that very end not loading the world with Pandâ—cts and Codes of his Laws but contriving the whole instrument of mans salvation in so narrow a compass that it might be easily preserved and transcribed by such who were passionate admirers of the Scriptures 2. The great number of learned and inquisitive men who soon sprung up in the Christian Church whose great care was to explain and vindicate the sacred Scriptures can we then think that all these Watch-men should be asleep together when the â—vil one came to sow his Tares which it is most unreasonable to imagine when in the writings of all these learned men which were very many and voluminous so much of the Scripture was inserted that had there been corruption in the Copies themselves yet comparing them with those writings the corruptions would be soon discovered 3. The great venâ—ration which all Christians had of the Scripture that they placed the hopes of their eternal happiness upon the truth of the things contained in the Scriptures Can we then think these would suffer any material alteration to creep into these records without their observing and discovering it Can we now think when all persons are so exceeding careful of their Deeds and the Records whereon their estates depend that the Christians who valued not this world in comparison of that to come should suffer the Magna Charta of that to be lost corrupted or imbezzeled away Especially considering what care and industry was used by many primitive Christians to compare Copies together as is evident in Pantaenus who brought the Hebrew Copy of Matthew out of the Indies to Alexandria as Eusebius tells us in Pamphilus and the Library he errected at Caesarâ—a but especially in Origens admirable Hexapla which were mainly intended for this end 3. It is impossible to conceive a corruption of the copy of the Scriptures because of the great differences which were all along the several ages of the Church between those who acknowledged the Scriptures to be Divine So that if one party of them had foisted in or taken out any thing another party was ready to take notice of it and would be sure to tell the world of it And this might be one great reason why God in his wise providence might permit such an increase of heresies in the Infancy of the Church viz. that thereby Christians might be forced to stand upon their guard and to have a special eye to the Scriptures which were alwayes the great eye-sores of hereticks And from this great wariness of the Church it was that some of the Epistles were so long abroad before they found general entertainment in all the Churches of Christ because in those Epistles which were doubted for some tâ—me there were some passages which seemed to favour some of the heresies then abroad but when upon severe enquiry they are found to be what they pretended they were received in all the Christian Churches 4. Because of the agreement between the Old Tâ—stament and the New the Prophesies of the Old Testament appear with their full accomplishment in the New which we have so that it is impossible to think the New should be corrupted unless the old were too which is most unreasonable to imagine when the Iews who have been the great conservators of the Old Testament have been all along the most inveterate enemies of the Christians So that we cannot at all conceive it possible that any material corruptions or alterations should creep into the Scriptures much less that the true copy should be lost and a new one forged Supposing then that we have the same authentick records preserved and handed down to us by the care of all Christian Churches which were written in the first ages of the Church of Christ what necessity can we imagine that God should work new miracles to confirm that dâ—ctrine which is conveyed down in a certain uninterrupted way to us as being seâ—led by miracles undoubtedly Divine in the first promulgation and penning of it And this is the first reason why the truth of the Scriptures need not now be sealed by new miracles 2. Another may be because God in the Scripture hath appointed other things to continue in his Church to be as seals to his people of the truth of the things contained in Scriptures Such are outwardly the Sacraments of the Gospel baptism and the Lords Supper which are set apart to be as seals to confirm the truth of the Covenant on Gods part towards us in reference to the great promises contained in it in reference to pardon of sin and the ground of our acceptance with God by Iesus Christ and inwardly God hath promised his Spirit to be as a witness within them that by its working and strengthning grace in the hearts of believers it may confirm to them the truth of the records of Scripture when they finde the counter part of them written in their hearts by the singer of the Spirit of God It cannot then be with any reason at all supposed
that when a Divine testimony is already confirmed by miracles undoubtedly Divine that new miracles should be wrought in the Church to assure us of the truth of it So Chrysostome fully expresseth himself concerning miracles speaking of the first ages of the Christian Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Miracles were very useful then and not at all useful now for now we manifest the truth of what we speak from the Sacred Scriptures and the miracles wrought in confirmation of them Which that excellent author there fully manifests in a discourse on this subject why miracles were necessary in the beginning of the Christian Church and are not now To the same purpose St. Austin speaks where he discourseth of the truth of religion Accepimus majores nostros visibilia miracula secutos esse per quos id actum est ut necessaria non essent posteris because the world believed by the miracles which were wrought at the first preaching of the Gospel therefore miracles are no longer necessary For we cannot conceive how the world should be at first induced to believe without manifest and uncontrouled miracles For as Chrysostome speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was the greatest miracle of all if the world should believe without miracles Which the Poet Dante 's hath well expressed in the twenty fourth Canto of Paradise For when the Apostle is there brought in asking the Poet upon what account he took the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be the Word of God his answer is Probatio quae verum hoc mihi recludit Sunt opera quae secuta sunt ad quae Natura Non candefecit ferrum unquam aut percussit incudem i. e. the evidence of that is the Divine power of miracles which was in those who delivered these things to the world And when the Apostle catechiseth him further how he knew those miracles were such as they pretend to be viz. that they were true and Divine his answer is Si orbis terrae sese convertit ad Christianismum Inquiebam ego sine miraculis hoc unum Est tale ut reliqua non sint ejus cente sima pars i. e. If the world should be converted to the Christian faith without miracles this would be so great a miracle that others were not to be compared with it I conclude this then with that known saying of St. Austin Quisquis adhuc prodigia ut credat inquirit magnum est ipse prodigium qui mundo credente non credit He that seeks for miracles still to induce him to faith when the world is converted to the Christian faith he needs not seek for prodigies abroad he wants only a looking glass to discover one For as he goes on unde temporibus erudit is omne quod fieri non potest respuentibus sine ullis miraculis nimium mirabiliter incredibiliter credidit mundus whence came it to pass that in so learned and wary an age as that was which the Apostles preached in the world without miracles should be brought to believe things so strangely incredible as those were which Christ and his Apostles preached So that by this it appears that the intention of miracles was to confirm a Divine testimony to the world and to make that appear credible which otherwise would have seemed incredible but to what end now when this Divine testimony is believed in the world should miracles be continued among those who believe the doctrine to be Divine the miracles wrought for the confirmation of it to have been true and the Scriptures which contain both to be the undoubted Word of God To what purpose then the huge outery of miracles in the Roman Church is hard to conceive unless it be to make it appear how ambitions that Church is of being called by the name of him whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved For had they received the Love of the Truth of the Gospel they would have believed it on the account of those miracles and signs and wonders which were wrought for the confirmation of it by Christ and his Apostles and not have gone about by their juglings and impostures in stead of bringing men to believe the Gospel to make them question the truth of the first miracles when they see so many counterfeits had we not great assurance the Apostles were men of other designs and interests then Popish Priests are and that there is not now any such necessity of miracles as there was then when a Divine testimony revealing the truth of Christian religion was confirmed by them Those miracles cannot be Divine which are done now for the confirmation of any thing contrary to that Divine testimony which is confirmed by uncontrouled Divine miracles The case is not the same now which was before the coming of Christ for then though the Law of Moses was confirmed by miracles yet though the doctrine of Christ did null the obligation of that Law the miracles of Christ were to be looked on as Divine because God did not intend the Ceremonial Law to be perpetual and there were many Prophesies which could not have their accomplishment but under a new state But now under the Gospel God hath declared this to be the last revelation of his mind and will to the world by his Son that now the Prophesies of the old Testament are accomplished and the Prophesies of the New respect only the various conditions of the Christian Church without any the least intimation of any further revelation of Gods mind and will to the world So that now the Scriptures are our adaequate rule of faith and that according to which we are to judge all pretenders to inspiration or miracles And according to this rule we are to proceed in any thing which is propounded to us to believe by any persons upon any pretences whatsoever Under the Law after the establishment of the Law its self by the miracles of Moses the rule of judging all pretenders to miracles was by the worship of the true God If there arise among you a Prophet or a dreamer of dreams and giveth thee a sign or a wonder and the sign or the Wonder come to pass whereof he spake to thee saying Let us go after other Gods which thou hast not known and let us serve them thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that Prophet or that dreamer of dreams for the Lord your God proveth you to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. Whereby it is plain that after the true doctrine is confirmed by Divine miracles God may give the Devil or false Prophets power to work if not real miracles yet such as men cannot judge by the things themselves whether they be real or no and
is to say he is no God Which was the reason that Tully said Epicurus did only nomine poncre re tollere Deos because such a notion of God is repugnant to natural light So that if this Idea doth wholly abstract from corporeal phantasms it thereby appears that there is a higher faculty in mans soul then meer imagination and it is hardly conceivable whence a faculty which thus extends its self to an infinite object should come but from an infinite Being especially if we consider 2. That the understanding in forming this Idea of God doth not by distinct acts first collect one perfection and then another and at last unite these together but the simplicity and unity of all these perfections is as necessarily conceived as any of them Granting then that the understanding by the observing of several perfections in the world might be able to abstract these severally from each being wherein they were yet whence should the Idea of the unity and inseparability of all these perfections come The mind may it is true knit some things together in fictitious Idea's but then those are so far from unity with each other that in themselves they speak mutual repugnancy to one another which makes them proper entia rationis but these several perfections are so far from speaking repugnancy to each other that the unity and inseparability of them is as necessary to the forming of this Idea as any other perfection whatsoever So that from hence it appears that the consideration of the perfections which are in the creatures is only an occasion given to the mind to help it in its Idea of God and not that the Idea its self depends upon those perfections as the causes of it as in the clearest Mathematical truths the manner of demonstration may be necessary to help the understanding to its clearer assent though the things in themselves be undoubtedly true For all minds are not equally capable of the same truths some are of quicker apprehension then others are now although to slower apprehensions a more particular way of demonstrating things be necessary yet the truths in themselves are equal though they have not equal evidence to several persons 3. It appears that this is no meer fictitious Idea from the uniformity of it in all persons who have freed themselves from the entanglements of corporeal phantasms Those we call entia rationis we find by experienee in our minds that they are formed ad placitum we may imagine them as many wayes as we please but we see it is quite otherwise in this Idea of God for in those attributes or perfections which by the light of nature we attribute to God there is an uniform consent in all those who have devested their minds of corporeal phantasms in their conceptions of God For while men have agreed that the object of their Idea is a being absolutely perfect there hath been no dissent in the perfections which have been attributed to it none have questioned but infinite wisdom goodness and power joyned with necessity of existence have been all implyed in this Idea So that it is scarce pâ—ssible to instance in any one Idea no not of those things which are most obvious to our senses wherein there hath been so great an uniformity of mens conceptions as in this Idea of God And the most gross corporeal Idea of the most sensible matter hath been more lyable to heats and disputes among Philosophers then this Idea of a being Infinite and purely spiritual Which strongly proves my present proposition that this Idea of God is very consonant to natural light for it is hardly conceivable that there should be so universal a consent of minds in this Idea were it not a natural result from the free use of our reason and faculties And that which adds further weight tâ— this argument is that although Infinity be so necessarily implyed in this Idea of God yet men do not attribute all kind of Infinite things to God for there being conceivable Infinite number Infinite longitude as well as infinite power and knowledge our minds readily attribute the latter to God and as readily abstract the other from his nature which is an argument this Idea is not fictitious but argues reality in the thing correspondent to our conception of it So much may suffice to clear the first proposition viz. that the notion of a God is very suitable to the faculties of mens souls and to that light of nature which they proceed by in forming the conceptions of things Those who deny that there is a God do assert other things on far less evidence of reason and must by their own principles deny some things which are apparently true One would expect that such persons who are apt to condemn the whole world of folly in believing the truth of Religion and would fain be admired as men of a deeper reach and greater wit and sagacity then others would when they have exploded a Deity at least give us some more rational and consistent account of things then we can give that there is a God But on the contrary we find the reasons on which they reject a Deity so lamentably weak and so easily retorted upon themselves and the hypotheses they substitute instead of a Deity so precarious obscure and uncertain that we need no other argument to evince the reasonableness of Religion then from the manifest folly as well as impiety of those who oppose it Which we shall make evident by these two things 1. That while they deny a Deity they assert other things on far less reason 2. That by those principles on which they deny a Deity they must deny some things which are apparently true 1. That they assert some things on far less reason then we do that there is a God For if there be not an infinitely powerful God who produced the world out of nothing it must necessarily follow according to the different principles of the Aristotelian and Epicurean Atheists that either the world was as it is from all eternity or else that it was at first made by the fortuitous concourse of Atoms Now I appeal to the reason of any person who hath the free use of it Whether either of these two Hypotheses urged with the same or greater difficulties c. be not far more weakly proved then the existence of a Deity is or the production of the world by him 1. They run themselves into the same difficulties which they would avoid in the belief of a Deity and nothing can be a greater evidence of an intangled mind then this is To deny a thing because of some difficulty in it and instead of it to assert another thing which is chargeable with the very same difficulty in a higher degree Thus when they reject a Deity because they cannot understand what infinity means both these Hypotheses are lyable to the same intricacy in apprehending the nature of something Infinite For according to the Epicureans
to be deceived I grant the imperfection of our minds in this present state is very great which makes us so obnoxious to errour and mistake but then that imperfection lies in the prâ—neness in mans mind to be led by interest and prejudice in the judgement of things but in such things as are purely speculative and rational if the mind cannot be certain it is not deceived in them it can have no certainty at all of any Mathematical demonstrations Now we find in our own minds a clear and convâ—ncing evidence in some things as soon as they are propounded to our understandings as that a thing cannot be and not be at the same time that a non-entity can have no proper attributes that while I reason and discourse I am these are so clear that no man doth suspect himself deceived at all in them Besides if we had no ground of certainty at all in our judging things to what purpose is there an Idea of true and false in our minds if it be impossible to know the one from the other But I say not that in all perceptions of the mind we have certain evidence of truth but only in such as are clear and distinct that is when upon the greatest consideration of the nature of a thing there appears no ground or reason at all to doubt concerning it and this must suppose the minds abstraction wholly from the senses for we plainly find that while we attend to them we may judge our selves very certain and yet be deceived as those who have an Icterism in their eyes may judge with much confidence that they see things as clearly and distinctly as any other doth Besides there are many things taken for granted by men which have no evidence of reason at all in them Now if men will judge of the truth of things by such principles no wonder if they be deceived But when we speak of clear and distinct perception we suppose the mind to proceed upon evident principles of reason or to have such notions of things which as far as we can perceive by the light of reason do agree with the natures of the things we apprehend if in such things then there be no ground of certainty it is as much as to say our Faculties are to no purpose which highly reflects either upon God or nature It is a noble question as any is in Philosophy What is the certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the truth of things or what ground of certainty the mind hath to proceed upon in its judgement of the truth of such objects as are represented to it Nothing can render the Philosophy of Epicurus more justly suspected to any â—ational and inquisitive mind then his making the senses the only certain conveyers of the truth of things to the mind The senses I grant do not in themselves deceive any but if I make the impressions of sense to be the only rule for the mind to judge by of the truth of things I make way for the greatest impostures and the most erring judgements For if my mind affirms every thing to be in its proper nature according to that Idea which the imagination hath received from the impressions upon the Organs of sense it will be impossible for me ever to understand the right natures of things Because the natures of things may remain the same when all those things in them which affect the Organs of sense may be altered and because the various motion and configuration of the particles of matter may make such an impression upon the senses which may cause an Idea in us of that in the things themselves which yet may be only in the manner of sensation As some Philosophers suppose it to be in heat and cold Now if the mind judgeth of the nature of things according to those Idea's which come from the impressions made upon the Organs of sense how is it possible it should ever come to a right judgement of the natures of things So that in reference even to the grossest material beings it must be the perception only of the mind which can truly inform us of their proper nature and essence Besides there are many Idea's of things in the mind of man which are capable to have properties demonstrated of them which never owed their original to our senses and were never imported to the mind at the Keyes of the senses Such are most Mathematical figures which have their peculiar properties and demonstrations such are all the mutual respects of things to each other which may be as certain and evident to the mind as its self is now it is plain by this that all certainty of knowledge is not conveyed by the senses but our truest way of certain understanding the nature of any thing is by the clear and distinct perception of the mind which is founded on the Truth of our faculties and that however we may be deceived when we do not make a right use of our reason because of the imperfection of our present state yet if we say our mind may be deceived when things are evident and clear to them upon plain principles of reason it is highly to reslect upon that God who gave men rational faculties and made them capable of discerning Truth from falshood 2. That we have clear and distinct perception that necessity of existence doth belong to the nature of God For which we are to consider the vast difference which there is in our notion of the nature of God and of the nature of any other being In all other beings I grant we may abstract essence and existance from each other now if I can make it appear that there is evident reason ex parte rei why I cannot do it in the notion of God then it will be more plain that necessity of existence doth immutably belong to his nature It is manifest to our reason that in all other beings which we apprehend the natures of nothing else can be implyed in the natures of them beyond bare possibility of existence no although the things which do apprehend do really exist because in forming an Idea of a thing we abstract from every thing which is not implyed in the very nature of the thing now existence being only contingent and possible as to any other being it cannot be any ingredient of its Idea because it doth not belong to its essence for we may fully apprehend the nature of the thing without attributing existence to it But now in our conception of a Being absolutely perfect bare possibility or contingency of existence speaks a direct repugnancy to the Idea of kim for how can we conceive that Being absolutely perfect which may want that which gives life to all other perfections which is existence The only scruple which mens minds are subject to in apprehending the force of this argument lies in this Whether this necessary existence doth really belong to the nature of that being whose Idea it is or else
an opinion doth and is sufficiently derided and refuted by Pomponatius himself Now then it being an acknowledged principle in nature that every thing continues in the course it is in till something more powerful put it out if then such things have been in the world which have been real alterations of the course of nature as the Suns standing still in the time of Joshua then there must be something above matter and motion and consequently that there is a God CHAP. II. Of the Origine of the Universe The necessity of the belief of the creation of the world in order to the truth of Religion Of the several Hypotheses of the Philosophers who contradict Moses with a particular examination of them The ancient tradition of the world consonant to Moses proved from the Ionick Philosophy of Thales and the Italick of Pythagoras The Pythagorick Cabbala rather Aegyptian then Mosaick Of the fluid matter which was the material principle of the universe Of the Hypothesis of the eternity of the world asserted by Ocellus Lucanus and Aristotle The weakness of the foundations on which that opinion is built Of the manner of forming principles of Philosophy The possibility of creation proved No arguing from the present state of the world against its beginning shewed from Maimonides The Platonists arguments from the goodness of God for the eternity of the world answered Of the Stoical Hypothesis of the eternity of matter whether reconcilable with the text of Moses Of the opinions of Plato and Pythagoras concerning the praeexistence of matter to the formation of the world The contradiction of the eternity of matter to the nature and attributes of God Of the Atomical Hypothesis of the Origine of the Universe The World could not be produced by a casual concourse of Atoms proved from the nature and motion of Epicurus his Atoms and the Phaenomena of the Universe especially the production and nature of Animals Of the Cartesian Hypothesis that it cannot salve the Origine of the Universe without a Deity giving motion to matter THE foundations of religion being thus established in the Being of God and the immortality of the soul we now come to erect our super structure upon them by asserting the undoubted truth and certainty of that account of the world which is given us in the writings of Moses Which beginning with the world its self leads us to a particular consideration of the Origine of the Universe the right understanding of which hath very great influence upon our belief of all that follows in the Word of God For although we should assert with Epicurus the Being of a Deity if yet with him we add that the world was made by a casual concourse of Atoms all that part of Religion which lies in obedience to the Will of God is unavoidably destroyed All that is left is only a kind of Veneration of a Bâ—ing more excellent then our own which reacheth not to the government of mens lives and so will have no force at all upon the generality of the world who are only allured by hopes or awed by fears to that which of their choice they would be glad to be freed from Besides what expressions of gratitude can be left to God for his goodness if he interpose not in the affairs of the world what dependence can there be on divine goodness if it be not at all manifested in the world what apprehensions can we have of Gods infinite Wisdom and Power if neither of them are discernable in the Being of the world And as the opinion of Epicurus destroys Religion so doth that of Aristotle which attributes eternity to the Universe and a necessary emanation of it from the first cause as light comes from the Sun for if so as Maimonides well observes the whole Religion of Moses is overthrown all his miracles are but impostures all the hopes which are grounded on the Promises of God are vain and fruitless For if the world did of necessity exist then God is no free agent and if so then all instituted Religion is to no purpose nor can there be any expectation of reward or fear of punishment from him who hath nothing else to do in the world but to set the great wheele of the Heavens going So much is it our concernment to enquire into the true Original of the world and on what evidence of reason those opinions are built which are so contrary to that account given of it in the very entrance of the Bâ—oks of Moses Wherein we read the true Origine of the world to have been by a production of it by the omnipotent Will and Word of God This being then the plain assertion of Moses we come to compare it in point of reason with all those several Hypotheses which are repugnant to it which have been embraced in several ages by the Philosophers of greatest esteem in the world Which may be reduced to these four 1. Such as suppose the world to have existed as it is from all eternity 2. Such as attribute the formation of the world as it is to God but withall assert the praeexistence and eternity of matter 3. Such as deny any eternity to the world but assert the Origine of it to have been by a casual concourse of Atoms 4. Such as endeavâ—ur to explain the Origine of the Universe and all appearances of nature meerly by the Mechanical Laws of the motion of matter I begin with those who asserted the eternity of the world as it is among whom Aristotle hath born the greatest name who seems to have arrogated this opinion to himself for when he enquires into the judgment of the Philosophers who had writ-before him he sayes of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all the Philosophers asserted that the world was made though some one way some another And were this true which Aristotle-saith it would be the strongest prejudice against his opinion for if the world had been eternal how should it come to pass that the eldest Philosophers should so readily and unanimously embrace that opinion which asserted the production of the world Was it not a strong presumption of the Novity of the Universe that all Nations to whom the Philosophers resorted had memorials left among them of the first Origine of things And from hence it is observable that when the humour of Philosophizing began to take the Greeks about the XL. Olympiad when we may suppose Thales to flourish the beginning of the world was no matter of dispute but taking that for granted the enquiry was out of what material principle the Universe was formed of which Thales thus delivers his opinion in Tully aquam dixit esse initium rerum Deum autem eam mentem quae ex aqua cuncta fingeret wherein he plainly distinguisheth the efficient from the material cause of the world The prime efficient was God the material principle water It is a matter of some enquiry whether the first
sense of the truth of this Hypothesis and let him extend his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as long as he please which was his great help for correcting the errors of sense viz. as it was in the Roman court when the case was not clear ampliandum est So Epicurus would have the object represented every way it could be before he past his judgement yet this prudent caution would do him no good for this Hypothesis unless he were so wise as to stay till this world were crumbled into Atoms again that by that he might judge of the Origine of it There is but one way left to finde out the truth of things inevident to sense as by Epicurus his own confession all these Atoms are which are now the component particles of bodyes much more those which by their fortuitous concourse gave Being to the world and that is if something evident to sense doth apparently prove it which is his way of proving a Vacuity in nature from motion but though that be easily answered by principles different from those of Epicurus and more rational yet that very way of probation fails him in his present Hypothesis For what is there evident to sense which proves a fortuitous concourse of Atoms for the production of things nay if we grant him that the composition of bodyes is nothing else but the contexture of these insensible particles yet this is far from being an evidence to sense that these particles without any wise and directing providence should make up such bodyes as we see in the world And here when we speak of the evidence of sense we may well ask as the Stoick in Tully doth whether ever Epicurus found a Poeme made by the casual throwing of letters together and if a concourse of Atoms did produce the world cur porticum cur templum cur domum cur urbem non potest why did it never produce a cloyster a temple a house a city which are far easier things then the world I know Epicurus will soon reply that things are otherwise in the world now then when it was first produced I grant it and from thence prove that because no such thing ever happens in the world now as a meerly casual concourse of Atoms to produce any thing Epicurus could have no evidence from sense at all to finde out the truth of his Hypothesis by And as little relief can he finde from his second Criterium viz. Anticipation for by his own acknowledgement all Anticipation depends on the senses and men have it only one of these four wayes 1. By incursion as the species of a man is preserved by the sight of him 2. By proportion as we can inlarge or contract that species of a man either into a Gyant or Pygmy 3. By similitude as we may fancy the image of a City by resemblance to one which we have seen 4. By composition whereby we may joyn different images together as of a horse and man to make a Centaure Now though it be very questionable how some of these wayes belong to a Criterium of truth yet none of them reach our case for there can be no incursion of insensible particles as such upon our senses we may indeed by proportion imagine the parvitude of them but what is this to the proving the truth of the Hypothesis Similitude can do no good unless Epicurus had ever seen a world made so the only relief must be from composition and that will prove the Origine of the world by Atoms to be as true as that there are Centaures in the world which we verily believe These are the only Criteria by which Epicurus would judge of the truth of natural things by for the third Passion relates wholly to things Moral and not Physical and now let any one judge whether the Hypothesis of the Origine of the Universe by Atoms can ever be proved true either by the judgement of sense or by Anticipation The way they had to prove this Hypothesis was insufficient and that was by proving that the bodyes of the world are compounded of such insensible particles Now granting the thing I deny the consequence for what though the composition of bodyes be from the contexture of Atoms doth it therefore follow that these particles did casually produce these bodyes nay doth it at all follow that because bodyes upon their resolution do fall into insensible particles of different size figure and motion therefore these particles must be praeexistent to all bodyes in the world For it is plain that there is now an Universal lump of matter out of which these insensible particles arise and whether they return on the dissolution of bodyes and all these various corpuscles may be of the same uniform substance only with the alteration of size shape and motion but what then doth this prove that because particular bodyes do now emerge out of the various configuration and motion of insensible paerticles of that matter which exists in the world that therefore this whole matter was produced by the casual occursions of these Atoms It will ask more time and pains then is usually taken by the Philosophers either ancient or modern to prove that those things whatsoever they are whether elements or particles out of which bodyes are supposed to be compounded do exist separately from such compounded bodyes and antecedently to them We finde no Aristotelian elements pure in the world nor any particles of matter destitute of such a size figure and motion as doth make some body or other From whence then can we infer either the existence of Aristotles materia prima without quiddity quantity or quality or the Epicurean Atoms without such a contexture as make up some bodyes in the world Our profound Naturalist Dr. Harvey after his most accurate search into the natures and Generation of things delivers this as his experience and judgement concerning the commonly reputed elements or principles of bodyes For speaking of the different opinions of Empedocles and Hippocrates and Democritus and Epicurus concerning the composition of bodyes he adds Ego vero neque in animalium productione nec omnino in ulla corporum similarium generatione sive ea partium animalium sive plantarum lapidum mineralium c. fuerit vel congregationem ejusmodi vel miscibilia diversa in generation is opere unienda praeexistere observare unquam potui And after explaining the way which he conceived most rational and consonant to experience in the Generation of things he concludes his discourse with these words Idemque in omni generatione furi crediderim adeo ut corpora similaria mista elementa sua tempore priora non habeant sed illa potius element is suis prius existant nempe Empedoclis atque Aristotel is igne aqua aëre terra vel Chymicorum sale sulphure Mercurio aut Democriti Atomis utpote natura quoque ipsis perfectiora Sunt inquam mista composita etiam tempore priora element is
which it may be are uncapable of full and particular resolution and those are That the ruine and destruction of man is wholly from himself and that his salvation is from God alone If then mans ruine and misery be from himself which the Scripture doth so much inculcate on all occasions then without controversie that which is the cause of all the misery of humane nature is wholly from himself too which is sin So that if the main scope and design of the Scripture be true God cannot be the author of that by which without the intervention of the mercy of God mans misery unavoidably falls upon him For with what authority and Majesty doth God in the Scripture forbid all manner of sin with what earnestness and importunity doth he woo the sinner to forsake his sin with what loathing and detestation doth he mention sin with what justice and severity doth he punish sin with what wrath and indignation doth he threaten contumacious sinners And is it possible after all this and much more recorded in the Scriptures to express the holiness of Gods nature his hatred of sin and his appointing a day of judgement for the solemn punishment of sinners to imagine that the Scriptures do in the least ascribe the Origine of evil to God or make him the Author of Sin Shall not the judge of all the world do right will a God of Infinite Iustice Purity and Holiness punish the sinner for that which himself was the cause of Far be such unworthy thoughts from our apprehensions of a Deity much more of that God whom we believe to have declared his mind so much to the contrary that we cannot believe that and the Scriptures to be true together Taking it then for granted in the general that God cannot be the author of sin we come to enquire whether the account which the Scripture gives of the Origine of evil doth any way charge it upon God There are only two wayes which according to the history of the fall of man recorded in Scripture whereby men may have any ground to question whether God were the cause of mans fall either first by the giving him that positive Law which was the occasion of his fall or secondly by leaving him to the liberty of his own will First The giving of that positive Law cannot be the least ground of laying mans fault on God because 1. It was most suitable to the nature of a rational creature to be governed by Laws or declarations of the Will of his Maker For considering man as a free agent there can be no way imagined so consonant to the nature of man as this was because thereby he might declare his obedience to God to be the matter of his free choice For where there is a capacity of reward and punishment and acting in the consideration of them there must be a declaration of the will of the Law-giver according to which man may expect either his reward or punishment If it were suitable to Gods nature to promise life to man upon obedience it was not unsuitable to it to expect obedience to every declaration of his will considering the absolute soveraignty and Dominion which God had over man as being his creature and the indispensable obligation which was in the nature of man to obey whatever his Mâ—ker did command him So that God had full and absolute right to require from man what he did as to the Law which he gave him to obey and in the general we cannot conceive how there should be a testimony of mans obedience towards hâ—s Creator without some declaration of his Creators Will. Secondly God had full power and authority not only to govern man by Laws but to determine mans general obligation to obedience to that particular positive precept by the breach of which man fell If Gods power over man was universal and unlimited what reason can there be to imagine it should not extend to such a positive Law Was it because the matter of this Law seemed too low for God to command his creature but whatever the matter of the Law was obedience to God was the great end of it which man had testified as much in that Instance of it as in any other whatsoever and in the violation of it were implyed the highest aggravations of disobedience for Gods power and authority was as much contemned his goodness slighted his Truth and faithfulness questioned his Name dishonoured his Majâ—sty affronted in the breach of that as of any other Law whatsoever it had been If the Law were easie to be observed the greater was the sin of disobedience if the weight of the matter was not so great in its self yet Gods authority added the greatest weight to it and the ground of obedience is not to be fetched from the nature of the thing required but from the authority of the Legislator Or was it then because God concealed from man his counsel in giving of that positive precept Hath not then a Legislator power to require any thing but what he satisfies every one of his reason in commanding it if so what becomes of obedience and subjection it will be impossible to make any probative precepts on this account and the Legislator must be charged with the disobedience of his subjects where he doth not give a particular account of every thing which he requires which as it concerns humane Legislators who have not that absolute power and authority which God hath is contrary to all Laws of Policy and the general sense of the world This Plutarch gives a good account of when he discourseth â—o rationally of the sobriety which men ought to use in their inquiries into the grounds and reasons of Gods actions for saith he Physitians will give prescriptions without giving the patient a particular reason of every circumstance in them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Neither have humane Laws alwayes apparent reason for them nay some of them are to appearance ridiculous for which he instanceth in that Law of the Lacedaemonian Ephori 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which no other reason was annexed but this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they commanded every Magistrate at the entrance of his office to â—have himself and gave this reason for it that they might learn to obey Laws themselves He further instanceth in the Roman custom of manumission their Laws about testaments Solons Law against neutrality in seditions and concludes thence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Any one would easily find many absurdities in Laws who doth not consider the intention of the Legislator or the ground of what he requires 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What wonder is it if we are so puzled to give an account of the actions of men that we should be to seek as to those of the Deity This cannot be then any ground on the account of meer reason to lay the charge of mans disobedience upon God because he required from
Plato and Pythagoras attributed the origine of evil to the malignity of matter and so they make evils to be necessarily consequent upon the Being of things For thus he delivers expresly the opinion of Pythagoras qui ait existente providentia mala quoque necessario substitisse propterea quod sylva sit eadem sit malitia praedita Platonemque idem Numenius laudat quod duas mundi â—â—mas autumet Unam beneficentissimam malignam alteram sc. Sylvam Igitur juxta Platonem mundo bona sua Dei tanquam Patris liberalitate collata sunt mala vero matris sylvae vitio cohaeserunt But Plutarch will by no means admit that Plato attributes the Origine of evil meerly to matter but he makes the principle of evil to be something distinct from matter which he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a confused infinite self-moving stirring principle which saith he he else where calls Necessity and in his de Legibus plainly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a disorderly and malignant Soul which cannot be understood of meer matter when he makes his Hyle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Without form or figure and destitute of all qualities and power of operation and it is impossible saith he that that which is of its self such an inert principle as matter is should by Plato be supposed to be the cause and principle of evil which he elsewhere calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Necessity which often resisted God and cast off his reins So that according to Plutarch Plato acquits both God and Hyle from being the Origine of evil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and therefore attributes it to that malignant spirit which moves the matter and is the cause of all the disorderly motions in the world But what this spirit should be neither he nor any one else could ever understand what darkness and ignorance then was there among the wisest of Philosophers concerning the Origine of evil when they were so consused and obscure in the account which they gave of it that their greatest admirers could not understand them But though Plato seemed so ambiguous in his judgment of the Origine of evil whether he should attribute it to the Hyle or some malignant spirit in it the Stoicks were more dogmatical and plainly imputed the cause of evil to the perversity of matter So Chalcidius tells us that the Stoicks made matter not to be evil in its self as Pythagoras but that it was indifferent to either perrogati igitur unde mala perversitatem seminarium malorum causati sunt they made the perversity of matter the Origine of evil but as he well observes nec expediunt adhuâ— undeâ—â—psa perversitas cum juxta ipsos duo sint initia rerum Dâ—â—â—â— sylva Deus summum praecellens bonum sylva ut censent nec bonum nec malum They give no rational account whence this perversity of matter should arise when according to the Stoicks there are but two principles of things God and matter whereof the one is perfectly good the other neither good nor evil But this perversity they tell us is something necessarily consequent upon the Generation of things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these are affections viz. the disorders in the world which follow the Generation of things as rust comes upon brass and filth upon the body as the counterfeit Trismegistus speaks so Maximus Tyrius saith that evils in the world are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not any works of art but the affections of matter Non potest artifex mutare materiam saith Seneca when he is giving an account why God suffers evils in the world and elsewhere gives thâ—s account why evils came into he world non quia cessat ars sed quia id in quo exercetur inobsequens arti est So that the Origine of evil by this account of it lyes wholly upon the perversity of matter which it seems was uncapable of being put into better order by that God who produced the world out of that matter which the Stoicks supposed to be eternal And the truth is the avoiding the attributing the cause of evil to God seems to have been the great reason why they rather chose to make it matter necessary and coexistent with God and this was the only plausible pretence which Hermogenes had for following the Platonists and Stoicks in this opinion that he might set God far enough off from being the author of sin but I cannot sâ—e what advantage comes at all by this Hypothesis but it is chargeable with as many difficulties as any other For 1. It either destroyes Gods omnipotency or else makes him the approver of evil so that if he be not auctor he must be assentator mali as Tertullian speaks against Hermogenes because he suffered evil to be in matter for as he argues aut enim potuit emendare sed noluit aut voluit quidem verum non potuit infirmus Deus si potuit noluit malus ipse quia malâ— savit fic jam habetur ejus licet non instituerit quia tamen si noluisset illud essâ— non esset ipse jam fecit esse quod noluit non esse quo quid â—st â—urpius si voluit esse quod ipse noluit fecisse adversum semetipsum egit cum voluit esse quod noluit fecisse noluit fecisse quod voluit esse So that little advantage is gained for the clearing the true origine of evil by this opinion for either God could have taken away evil out of matter but would not or else would but could not this latter destroyes Gods omnipotency the former his good-ness for by that means evil is in the world by his consent and approbation for if God would not remove it when he might the Being of it will come from him when if he would have hindred it it would not have been and so God by not rooting out of evil will be found an assertor of it male si per voluntatem turpiter si per necessitatem aut famulus erit mali Deus aut amicus if Gods will were the cause why sin was it reflects on his goodness if Gods power could not hinder it it destroyes his omnipotency So that by this opinion God must either be a slave or a friend to evil 2. This principle overturns the foundations of Religion and all transactions between God and mens souls in order to their welfare because it makes evil to be necessarily existent in the world which appears from hence in that evil doth result from the Being of matter and so it must necessarily be as matter is supposed to be for whatever results from the Being of a thing must be coexistent with it and so what flows from what doth necessarily exist must have the same mode of existence which the Being its self hath as is evident in all the attributes of God which have the same immutability with his nature now then if evil did exist
from eternity together with matter it must necessarily exist as matter doth and so evil will be invincible and unavoidable in the world which if once granted renders Religion useless makes Gods commands unrighteous and destroyes the foundation of Gods proceedings in the day of judgment 3. This opinion makes God not to be the author of good while it denyes him to be the Author of evil For either there was nothing else but evil in this eternal matter or there was a mixture of good and evil if nothing else but evil which did necessarily exist it were as impossible for God to produce good out of it as to annihilate the necessarily existent matter If thâ—re were a mixture of good and evil they were both there either necessarily or contingently how could either of them be contingently in that which is supposed to be necessarily existent and no free agent If they be both there necessarily 1. It is hard conceâ—ving how two such contrary things as good and evil should both necessarily be in the same uniform matter 2. Then God is no more the Author of good then of evil in the world for he is said not to be the Authâ—r of evil because it comes from matter and so it appears good doth too and so God according to this opinion is no more the Author of good then he is of evil But if it be said that good is not in matter but God produced that out of nothing Then I reply 1. If God did produce good out of nothiâ—g why did he not produce matter out of nothing too iâ— he were so powerful as to do the one there could be no de ect of power as to the other What insufficiency is there in Gods nature for producing all things out of nothing if he can produce any thing out of nothing 2. If God did produce good out of evil why could he not have removed all evil out of matter for good could not be produced but by the removing of some evil which was before that good and so God might have removed all evil out of matter And so by not doing it when he might this opinion gives not the least satisfaction in point of reason for acquitting God from being the Author of sin nor for clearing the true Origine of evil Thus we have now compared the account given of it in Scripture with that given by the Heathen Philosophers and find it in every thing more clear rational and satisfactory then theirs is Which doubtless is the reason why the more modern Philosophers such as Hierocles Porphyrie Simplicius and others though otherwise great opposers of Christianity did yet in this side with the Scriptures and attribute the original of evil not to matter but to the Will of man And whoever is seriously conversant with the writings of those Philosophers who were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the sacred succâ—ssion out of the School of Ammonius at Alexandria such as Plotinus Porphyrius Iamblichus and Hierocles will find them wriâ—â— in a higher strain concerning many weighty and importan◠〈◊〉 as of the degeneracy of mens souls from God and tâ—e way of the souls returning to him then the most sublime of the ancient Philosophers had done Which speculations of theirs no doubt arose not so much from the School of Plato and Pythagoras as of that great restorer oâ— Philosophy Ammonius of Alexandria whose Sâ—bolars Herâ—nnius Origen and Plotinus were Who living and dying a â—hristian as Eusebius and Hierom assure us whateveâ— Porphyrius suggests to the contrary did communicate to his Sâ—holars the sublimer mysteries of Divine revâ—lâ—tion togeâ—her wâ—â—h the speculations of the ancienâ— Philoâ—ophers which Holstenius conceives he did with an adjuration oâ— secrecy which he tells us Porphyrius himself acknowledgeth that those three Scholars of Ammonius Herennius Origen and Plâ—tinus were under an obligation to each other not to reveal and discover though it were after violated by them It is an easie matter to conceive what an excellent improvement might be made of the ancient Platonick Philosophy by the advantage of the Scriptures by one who was so well versed in both of them as Ammonius is supposed to have been and how agreeable and becoming would that Philosophy seem which had only its rise from Plato but its height and improvement from those rich and truly divine Truths which were inlaid with them The want of observing this viz. whence it was that those excellent discourses in the later Platonists had their true original hath given occasion to several mistakes among learned men as first the over valuing of the Platonick Philosophy as though in many of the discourses and notions of it it seemed to some who were more in Love with Philosophy then the Scriptures to outgo what is discovered therein concerning the same things A most groundless and unworthy censure when it is more then probable and might be largely manifested were it here a fit opportunity that whatever is truly generous and noble in the sublimist discourses of the Platonists had not only its primitive rise but its accession and improvement from the Scriptures wherein it is still contained in its native lustre and beauty without those paintings and impure mixtures which the suâ—â—â—mest truths are corrupted with in the Platonick writiâ—â— The reason of which is though these Philosophers grew â—â—ddenly rich through the spoyles they had taken out of the Scriptures yet they were loth to be known from whence they had them and would seem to have had that out of their own gardens which was only transplanted from the Sacred writings Therefore we find them not mentioning the Scriptures and the Christian doctrine without some contempt of its meanness and simplicity what ever improvement they had gained by them they would have it less taken notice of by professing their opposition to the Christians as is notorious in those great Philosophers Porphyrius Iamblichus Hierocles Simplicius and oâ—hers It being their design to take so much and no more out of the Christian doctrine as they could well suite with their Platâ—nick notions by which means they so disguised the faces of the Truths they stole that it were hard for the right owners of them to know them again Which was the grand artifice of their great Master Plato who doubtless by means of his abode and acquaintance in Aegypt about the time when the Iews began to flock thither had more certain knowledge of many truths of grand importance concerning the Deity the nature of the soul the Origine of the world then many other Greek Philosophers had but yet therein lay his great fault that he wrapt up and disguised his notions in such a fabulous and ambiguous manner that partly it might be less known from whence he had them and that they might find better entertainment among the Greeks then they were ever like to do in their plain and native dress Which Plato himself seems somewhere to intimate when he saith that what
the testimony and reason of Simplicius and Hierocles is as large and clear in it as the other with expressions much of the same nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mans nature lying between those beings which perpetually contâ—mplate Gâ—a and those which are uncapable of it it sometimes ascends to those and sometimes descends to these according as it observes or rejects the dictates of reason and so by reason of the Indiffâ—rency of the will is lyable to take upon it the siâ— ilituâ—e of God or a beâ—â—st 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And whoever throughly considers this will easily understand how men are the causes of their own evils and become unhappy and miserable through their own choice and self wills Which he brings in by way of explication of that truly golden Pythagorean verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Men are grown miserable through their ownfault And afterwards Hierocles excellently describes the nature of evil in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Both our natural and contracted pravity is nothing elsâ— but the unnatural motion of our free wills according to which saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We dare to contradict the Laws of God â—et being sensible how much we injure our selves when we â—o it and only look at this that we are able to cast off the reins of 〈◊〉 Laws from our necks And he truly saith that it is the greatest abuse of liberty to offend God â—â—en we either do what he forbids or neglect what be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that on both sides men bring misery upon themselves by transgrâ—ssing the divine Law both by not doing what they are commanded and by doing what they are forbidden So that he tully ascribes the Origine of evil to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he calls it the irregular motion of the will of man which we have already shewed to be the doctrine of the Scriptures As to the necessity of the souls recovery from this condition in order to her felicity we have these Philosophers expressing their consent with the Scriptures Porphyrius as St. Austin tells us in the end of his first book De regressu animae doth acknowledge the necessity of a way of recovering souls which should be universal Cum autem dicit Porphyrius nondum receptam unam quandam sectam quae universalem viam animae contineat liberandae nondumque in suam notitiam eandem viam historiali cognitione perlatam proculdubio confitetur esse aliquam sed nondum in suam venisse notitiam But the necessity of the purgation of the soul in order to its felicity is so largely and fully discoursed of by all the Platonists and Pythagoreans that it will be needless to insist upon it Thus far then we finde the account given of the Origine of evil in Scripture to be embraced by the sublimest of the Heathen Philosophers as most rational and satisfactory which was the thing to be proved Neither do we sind only the main of this account acknowledged as rational but we may trace some not obscure footsteps of the truth of the particular circumstances which concern the fall of man among the Heathens such as the Devils envying of mans happiness his disguising himself under the form of a serpent and mans being thrown out of Paradise upon his fall 1. The Devils envying the happiness of man It hath been truly observed by a learned man that the original of that very ancient opinion among the Heathen de invidia Daemonis had its rise from the history of the fall of man which he hath made out so fully that I shall the less need to prove it And that there was an undoubted tradition of some malignant spirits which envyed the 〈◊〉 of mankinde appears by that ample Testimony of 〈◊〉 in his Dio mentioned by the same Author 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plutarch was much troubled to give an account of the apparitions which Brutus and Dio who were learned and Philosophical men were haunted withall and doubts he can give no just account of it unless he embraced that very ancient tradition which yet seemed absurd and incredible viz. that there are certain wicked and malignant Daemons which envy good men and withstand their enterprises by raising fears and troubles to them that so they might hinder them in their pursuit of vertue lest if they continue stedfast and unmovable in good they should be at last partakers of greater felicity then they enjoy There being then so ancient a tradition of such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the learned man mentioned hath more fully shewed in his notes on this place of Plutarch gives a great confirmation to the truth of what the Scripture reports concerning the Devils being so great an instrument in procuring the fall of man To him therefore I refer the inquisitive reader and shall only add to the Testimonies of him cited that of Xenocrates in Plutarch de I side Osiride where he saith that the calamities of life and misfortunes men meet with do not agree with that veneration which we have for the Deity and good spirits 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But that there are in the air some great and potent Beings which are of a surly and malignant nature and rejoyce to do men all the mischief they can Iamblichus in his answer to Porphyrius concerning the Aegyptian mysteries undertakes to give an account of these evil Spirits or Daemons and that from them the Origine of evil in the world is for thus he speaks as he is translated by Ficinus Si verum est quod de Idolis dicebamus improbisque Daemonibus hinc sane exoritur multiplex origo malorum Simulant enim Deorum praesentiam daemonumque bonorum ideoque 〈◊〉 suum jubent esse justum ut ipsi videantur boni sici◠〈◊〉 Dii quoniam vero natura sunt mali rogati mala inferre libenter inferunt atque nobis ad injusta conducunt Hi sunt omnino qui in oraculis mentiuntur fallunt turpia consulunt atque peragunt By which we see he acknowledgeth some spirits whoâ—e natures are wicked and help men to do evil and that these very spirits may sometimes command that which is good lest they should be suspected to be what they are of a wicked and malignant nature which only design the ruine of men By which we have a good account of whatever was commendable delivered by the Heathen oracles which yet might come from the Devil still by this confession of Iamblichus himself For the Devils appearing under the form of a serpent It is very probably conjectured that from hence it was that the Prince of those who contended with Saturn was by that aenigmatical writer Pherâ—cydes Syrius called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Celsus who had so little â—kill in antiquity as to think that the history of Moses was as to many passages of it taken out
not to have a mixture of evil in them and as they have a mixture of evil so they have but a mixture of punishment none lying under so great miseries here but withall they have some share in the comforts of this life And therefore it is less wonder that this part of Divine Providence which concerns the sufferings of good men hath not wanted some among the Heathen Moralists who have made it their design to vindicate it which setting aside what Simplicius on Epictetus and many others have done is fully performed by Seneca in his tract on this very sâ—â—â—â—ct â—â—ur bonis male sit cum sit Providentia as Muretuâ—â— restores the title of that book wherein these following accounts are given of it 1. God brings them up as his children under sharp discipline for their future benefit A good man in Seneca's language is discipulus Dei aemulatorque vera progenies which in the language of the Scripture is one taught of God a follower of God and one born of him Now saith he Parens ille magnificus virtutum non lenis exactor sicut severi patres durius educat God who is the great Father of good men keeps them under discipline while under age and by hardship fits them for the practice of vertue Thence he bids us take notice of the different indulgence of Fathers and Mothers to their Children the Father he hastens them to school suffers them not to be idle on their playdayes makes them toyle and sometimes cry the Mother she is all for holding them in her lap keeping them out of the Sun and from catching cold would not willingly have them either cry or take pains Patrium habet Deus adversus bonos animum illos fortius amat God bears the indulgence of a Father towards his children and loves them with greater severity 2. Good men receive benefit by their sufferings quicquid evenit in suum colorem trahit saith Seneca of a good man which in the language of the Apostle is every thing works together for his good The sea loseth nothing saith he of its saltness by the rivers running into it neither doth a good man by the current of his sufferings And of all benefits which he receives that of the exercise and tryal of his vertue and patience is most discernable Marcet sine adversario virtus as soon as Carthage was destroyed Rome fell to Luxury True wrestlers desire to have some to try their strength upon them cui non industrio otium poena est an active spirit hates idleness and cowardise for etiamsi ceciderit de genu pugnat though his legs be cut off he will fight on his knees 3. It redounds to Gods honour when good men bear up under sufferings Ecce par Deo dignum vir fortis cum mala fortuna compositus It is a spectacle God delights to see a good man combat with calamities God doth in Seneca's phrase quosdam fastidio transire passeth them by in a slight an old wrestler scorns to contend with a coward one who is vinci paratus ready to yeild up presently Calamitates sub jugum mittere proprium magni viri est It argues a noble spirit to be able to subdue miseries 4. It tends to the tryal and increase of their strength Seneca highly extols that speech of the Philosopher Demetrius Nihil infelicius eo cui nihil unquam evenit adversi non licuit enim illi se experiri He is the most unhappy man who never knew what misery meant for he could never know what he was able to bear And as he saith to pass ones life away sine morsu animi without any trouble it is ignorare rerum naturae alteram partem not to know what is upon the reverse of nature Idem licet fecerint qui integri revertuntur ex acie magis spectatur qui sancius redit Though he that comes home sound might fight as well as he that is wounded yet the wounded person hath the more pitty and is most cryed up for his valour The Pilot is seen in a tempest a Souldier in battel and a good man in sufferings God doth by such as Masters do by Scholars qui plus laboris ab his exigunt quibus certior spes est who set the best wits the hardest tasks 5. God exerciseth good men with sufferings to discover the indifferency of those things which men value so much in the world when he denyes them to good men Blindness would be hateful if none were blind but such whose eyes were put out and therefore Appius and Metellus were blind Riches are no good things therefore the worst as well as the best have them Nullo modo magis potest Deus concupita traducere quam si illa ad turpissimos defert ab optimis abigit God could not traduce or defame those things more which men desire so much then by taking them away from the best of men and giving them to the worst 6. That they might be examples to others of patience and constancy For as Seneca concludes nati sunt in exemplar they are born to be patterns to others If to these things we add what the Word of God discovers concerning the nature grounds and ends of afflictions and that glory which shall be revealed in comparison with which exceeding weight of glory these light and momentany afflictions are not at all to be valued then we have a clear and full vindication of Divine Providence as to the sufferings of good men as well as to the Impunity of such as are wicked But how ever from hence we see how far the meer light of reason hath carryed men in resolving these difficulties concerning Gods Providence in the world and what a rational account may be given of them supposing evil of punishment to arise from sin and that there is a God in the world who is ready to punish the wicked and to reward the good Which was the thing to be shewed CHAP. IV. Of the Origine of Nations All mankind derived from Adam if the Scriptures be true The contrary supposition an introduction to Atheism The truth of the history of the flood The possibility of an universal deluge proved The flood universal as to mankind whether universal as to the earth and animals no necessity of asserting either Yet supposing the possibility of it demonstrated without creation of new waters Of the fountains of the deep The proportion which the height of mountains bears to the Diameter of the earth No mountains much above three mile perpendicular Of the Origine of fountains The opinion of Aristotle and others concerning it discussed The true account of them from the vapours arising from the mass of subterraneous waters Of the capacity of the Ark for receiving the Animals from Buteo and others The truth of the deluge from the Testimony of Heathen Nations Of the propagation of Nations from Noahs posterity Of the beginning of the Assyrian Empire The multiplication of mankind