Sermon III. Page 25. Line 1. for once read now for those read these ADVERTISEMENT THE Three remaining Lectures for this Year are to be at St. Paul's on the first Mondays in September October and November But the first Monday in September being the Fast-Day for the Fire of London when there will be in the Morning a Sermon suitable to that Occasion Preached before the Lord Mayor Aldermen and Companies of the City Mr. Boyle's Lecture on that Day is Order'd to be Preached in the Afternoon THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE Scripture-Revelation As to the Proof of it PART III. A SERMON Preach'd at the CATHEDRAL-CHURCH of St. Paul September 2d 1700. BEING The Sixth for the Year 1700 of thâ— LECTURE Founded by the Honourable Robert Boyle Esq By OFSPRING BLACKALL D. D. Rector of St. Mary Aldermary and Chaplain in Ordinary to His MAJESTY LONDON Printed by J. Leake for Walter Kettilby at the Bishop's Head in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1700. St. LUKE XVI 29 30 31. Abraham saith unto him They have Moses and the Prophets let them hear them And he said Nay father Abraham but if one went unto them from the dead they will repent And he said unto him If they hear not Moses and the Prophets neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead IN Order to shew that we have sufficient Reason given us to convince us of the Truth and Authority of the New-Testament and of all the Doctrines that are taught by it I have formerly propounded to shew 1. That we have sufficient Reason to believe that the Books of the New-Testament were written by those Persons who are said to be the Authors thereof 2. That there is sufficient Reason to give full Credit to them in their Relation of those Matters of Fact which they have recorded And 3. That if the Matters of Fact therein recorded are true they are sufficient Proofs of the Truth and Divine Authority of all the Doctrines that are therein taught And the two first of these Points I have I hope already made good I proceed now to the third viz. 3. To shew That the Doctrine of the Gospel is well grounded upon the History of it That if the Matters of Fact recorded in the New-Testament are true they are sufficient Proofs of the Truth and Divine Authority of all the Doctrines that are therein taught And Here by the Doctrines of the Gospel I understand both the Articles of Faith which it proposes to our Belief and the Rules which it prescribes to our Practice Many of the former of which are themselves Parts of the Gospel History as the Incarnation Life Sufferings Death Resurrection and Ascension of our Saviour and the rest of both sorts are taught in the New Testament either by our Saviour himself or by his Apostles And I suppose it will be readily granted that all their Doctrines are true and also of divine Authority if it shall appear that they were commissioned and sent by God to instruct the World for he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God Joh. iii. 34. The single Point therefore to be consider'd at this time is whether there be sufficient Evidence from the Matters of Fact recorded in the History of the New Testament that our Saviour and his Apostles were commissioned and sent by God to instruct the World And first Whether there be sufficient Evidence from thence that our Saviour himself was a Teacher sent from God Now that he said he was sent from God is a Matter of Fact and a part of the Gospel History Joh. xii 49. See Joh. 5.37 38.8.38.14.10 24. I have not spoken of my self but the Father which sent me he gave me a Commandment what I should say and what I should speak And that he said that he was the Messiah which had been foretold by the Prophets is likewise Matter of Fact and a Part of the same History Joh. iv 25 26. The Woman of Samaria saith unto him I know that Messias cometh which is called Christ Mat. 16.16 17. Mar. 9.41 Luke 24.46 Joh. 9.47 when he is come he will tell us all things Jesus saith unto him I that speak unto thee am HE. The Question therefore is whether from the things which are recorded of him by the Evangelists there be sufficient Ground to believe the Truth of either or both these Pretences I say of either or both of them because either of them is a sufficient Reason to receive his Doctrine as True and Divine for which cause therefore I shall not in speaking to this Subject distinguish between the Evidences which the Gospel-History affords of his being a Prophet and those which it affords of his being the Messiah but shall propose them promiscuously as they come to mind And here I shall consider First The Credibility of our Saviour's own Testimony concerning himself and Secondly The Confirmation that was given to this Testimony by God grounding all that shall be said on both these Heads upon the Gospel-History the Truth of which I now take for granted as being I hope already sufficiently prov'd First then I shall consider the Credibility of our Saviour's own Testimony concerning himself when he said that he was sent by God and that he was the Christ the Son of God And I know 't is commonly said that a Man is not to be believed in his own Case And this very thing was objected to our Saviour by the Jews Joh. viii 13. Thou bearest Record of thy self thy Record is not true But this Saying is not without Exception When indeed what a Man witnesses is for his own Benefit his Testimony if it be single may reasonably be rejected especially if any Proof be made that at other times he hath told a Lye or done any other ill thing for his Advantage But otherwise a Man's Testimony concerning himself may be credible nay in some cases it may be more credible than another Man's because he may sometimes be surer of what he says concerning himself than another Man could be And therefore our Saviour who in Joh. v. 31. allows of the Reasonableness of that Saying If I bear witness of my self my Witness is not true yet when this very thing was afterwards objected to him by the Pharisees in the Place before-cited makes answer in the following words Tho' I bear Record of my self Joh. 8.14 yet my Record is true for I know whence I came c. And that the Testimony of our Lord concerning his own divine Mission was such as we might rationally give Credit to tho' we had no other Evidence of it will I suppose sufficiently appear if these following things be consider'd 1. That his whole Life according to the Account that is given of it by the Evangelists which we now build upon as true was in all Respects spotless and unblameable 1 Pet. 2.22 1 Pet. 1.19 He did no Sin neither was Guile found in his Mouth He was a Lamb without blemish and without spot
was For in Matters of common Testimony we make little Difference between Speech and Writing If a Man whom we dare trust sends us a Letter and therein relates such and such things as heard or seen by himself or as well attested to him by unexceptionable Witnesses we give as full Credit to his Letter as we should do to his Words So that in Truth our Case who live now is not very different from theirs who lived in the Apostles Days and heard them saying those same Things which we now read in their Books and if we think those inexcuseable who did not receive their Testimony when given by Word of Mouth we can't in good Reason hold our selves excused if we receive not the same Testimony of the same Persons given under their Hands In one Respect indeed it must be granted that they had the Advantage of us viz. because they might be surer that they heard an Apostle speak than the Nature of the Thing will admit we should be that we read the Words of an Apostle written But we are sure enough of this We have as good moral Certainty of it as we can have of any thing that is not capable of any other than a moral Certainty And if the Words that we read in the New Testament are the Words of the Apostles of Christ we have in some Respects the Advantage of those who lived in those early Times for we have the concurrent Testimony of several of the Apostles written whereas hardly any in those times when a few Persons were to bear Witness to all the World could have more than the Testimony of one single Apostle only by Word of Mouth and many Witnesses are more credible than one And besides there being several Witnesses their Testimony if it be false may be more easily proved so by their Disagreement with one another than the Testimony of one single Witness could be And lastly a Writing which we may review and read over as often as we will and which we may take what time we please to consider of may be more throughly understood and better digested than a Sermon or Discourse only once spoken can well be But if it be granted that the Faith of the first Converts to Christianity which came by Hearing of the Apostles might be built upon more certain and infallible Grounds than ours that comes only by Reading is And some Reasons may perhaps be given hereafter why 't was fit it should be so it is enough however to render our Infidelity inexcusable if the Grounds of Faith that we now have are very rational if they are a sufficient Support for such a Faith as will enable us to please God and to overcome the World And this may be farther said for our Comfort and to make us easie and satisfied with those Grounds and Reasons of Faith which are afforded to us by the written Testimony of the Apostles in the Books of the New Testament that as there is more Certainty in that Belief if it may be called Belief which is grounded upon Demonstration or infallible Evidence so there is more Praise and Vertue in that good Disposition of Mind which makes us rest satisfied with such Grounds of Faith as tho' not absolutely and infallibly certain yet cannot with any good Reason be denied or excepted against According to that Saying of our Saviour to St. Thomas in a like Case with which I shall conclude Joh. 20.29 Thomas because thou hast seen me thou hast believed blessed are they that is they are more blessed their Faith is more excellent and praise-worthy and so will intitle them to a greater Reward who have not seen and yet have believed Which Blessedness that we may all attain God of his great Mercy and Goodness grant for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ c. FINIS ERRATA Pag. 8. l. 19. for then r. them Books Printed for Walter Kettilby at the Bishop's-Head in St. Paul's Church-Yard A Sermon Preach'd before the Honourable the House of Commons at St. Margaret's Westminster January the 30th 1698 9. The Sufficiency of a Standing Revelation A Sermon Preached at the Cathedral Church of St. Paul's Jan. 1st 1699 700. being the first for the Year 1700. of the Lecture Founded by the Honourable Robert Boyle Esq The Sufficiency of the Scripture Revelation as to the Matter of it Being the Second for the Year 1700. of the Lecture Founded by the Honourable Robert Boyle Esq These Three by Ofspring Blackall Rector of St. Mary Aldermary and Chaplain in Ordinary to His Majesty A Perswasive to Prayer A Sermon Preach'd before the King at St. James's A Sermon Preach'd before the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament Assembled in the Abby Church at Westminster Jan. 30th Fifteen Sermons Preached on several Occasions the Last of which was never before Printed These Three by the most Reverend Father in God John Lord Arch-Bishop of York Primate of England and Metropolitan The Faith and Practice of a Church of England Man A False Faith not Justified by Care for the Poor Prov'd in a Sermon Preach'd at St. Paul's Church Mysteries in Religion Vindicated or the Filiation Deity and Satisfaction of our Saviour asserted against Socinians and others with Occasional Reflections on several late Pamphlets These Two by Luke Milbourn a Presbyter of the Church of England Two Sermons of Mr. Young's about Nature and Grace Preach'd at Whitehall THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE Scripture-Revelation As to the Proof of it PART II. TWO SERMONS Preach'd at the CATHEDRAL-CHURCH of St. Paul April 1 st and May 6 th 1700. BEING The Fourth and Fifth for the Year 1700 of the LECTURE Founded by the Honourable Robert Boyle Esq By OFSPRING BLACKALL Rector of St. Mary Aldermary and Chaplain in Ordinary to His MAJESTY LONDON Printed by J. Leake for Walter Kettilby at the Bishop's Head in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1700. St. LUKE XVI 29 30 31. Abraham saith unto him They have Moses and the Prophets let them hear them And he said Nay father Abraham but if one went unto them from the dead they will repent And he said unto him If they hear not Moses and the Prophets neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead THE Point I entred upon the Proof of the last time was this 3. That we have sufficient Reason given us to convince us of the Truth and Authority of the Holy Scripture and consequently of all the Doctrines that are taught by it And for the Proof of this having for Brevity sake confined my Discourse upon it to the Books of the New Testament only the rather because the Authority of that being granted the Authority of the Old Testament cannot reasonably be questioned I propounded to shew 1. That we have sufficient Reason to believe that the Books of the New Testament were written by those Persons who are said to be the Authors thereof 2. That there is sufficient Reason to give full Credit to them in their Relations of those
words fall to the Ground all Israel from Dan even to Beersheba knew that he was established to be a Prophet of the Lord. The before-named Exception having therefore no Place in our Saviour for his Doctrine was Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God Mat. 4.10 and him only shalt thou serve and there being not one of those many Predictions that he gave forth tho' several of them were concerning the most casual Events that could be which has not been in its due time fulfilled we may safely conclude that he was a true Prophet of God and consequently that he ought to be hearkned to in every thing that he said 5. Another Testimony that was given by God to the divine Mission of our Saviour was by the Power of working Miracles more and greater Miracles than ever had been done before since the beginning of the World the Relation of which makes up a great Part of the Gospel-History Mat. 11.4 5. Joh. 10.25 37 38.14.11.15.24 And to these our Saviour himself frequently appeals as to a most evident Proof that he was sent by God and that he was the Son of God Joh. v. 36. The Works which the Father hath given me to finish the same works that I do bear witness of me that the Father hath sent me And indeed what better Evidence can be desired that a Person speaking in the Name of God is sent by him than to see him do the Works of God that is such Works as cannot be done but by the Power of God And that our Saviour's Miracles were such cannot I think be doubted by those who believe they are truly related in the Gospel which it is now supposed they are And if to this it be said that the first Opposers of Christianity both Jews and Gentiles who either saw the Miracles of our Saviour or had such good Assurance thereof from Eye-Witnesses or Credible History that they could not deny them yet were not thereby convinc'd that he was a Prophet of God but rather thought that he did all his mighty Works by Magick Art and by the Help of the Devil I answer 1. That 't is a thing which we cannot be sure of that the true Reason why any of those who saw our Saviour's Miracles or were persuaded of the Truth of them did yet refuse to receive him as a Prophet sent from God was because they were not convinc'd that his Miracles were done by a divine Power for Men do not always act according to their Judgments for we read of some of the Chief Rulers in Joh. xii 42. that they believed on him that is they were convinc'd in their Judgments by the mighty Works that he did that he was the Person he pretended to be but they did not confess him lest they should be put out of the Synagogue for they loved the Praise of Men more than the Praise of God And therefore I think it most probable that they who attributed those Miracles of his which they could not deny to the working of the Devil did not nay could not believe what they said but only said it because they were resolv'd never to receive a Doctrine whatever Evidence was given of the Truth of it that was so contrary as our Saviour's was to their Prejudices Lusts and Worldly Interests and they could not tell what else to say to justifie themselves to the World But 2. If their Blasphemy in ascribing our Saviour's Miracles to the power of the Devil was not meerly malicious 't was however most evidently groundless For 1. Tho' the Devil be without doubt of much greater Power than we are and understanding better than we do the Force of Natural Causes can do many things which to the Eyes of Men may appear Miraculous because it may be past their Skill to give an Account of them by Natural Causes there is no reason however to believe that he can do a true Miracle that is that he can ever alter the Course of Nature or produce any Effect but by the Means of Natural Causes working in such a manner and by such Laws and Rules as God hath appointed And therefore the Apostle calls those strange Appearances which are done by the working of Satan 2 Thes 2.9 Lying Wonders But they were not Lying Wonders which were done by our Saviour they did not only seem to be done but were done and they were Miracles not only in appearance but in truth being many of them such Effects as were evidently above and beyond the Power of Nature and therefore such as could not be done but by a Power Superiour to Nature that is by God's For who but he only who at first brought all things out of nothing Mat. 14. Mark 6. Luke 9. John 6. could with five Loaves and two small Fishes satisfie the Hunger of more than five thousand Persons leaving a Remainder of more than twice the number of Baskets-full of Fragments that there had been of Loaves at the first Luk. 7.11 c. Joh. 11.39 c. Or who could restore to Life a dead Carkass that began to putrefie but he only who first form'd it out of the Dust of the Ground Who could call back the departed Soul and fix it to its former Residence but he only into whose Hands it was returned and who first breathed into our Bodies these Immortal Spirits And as to some other of his Works which may be thought to be such as might be produc'd by the working of Nature only the manner in which they were done plainly shews that they also were done by a Power Superior to Nature for thus a Sick Man may be restor'd to perfect Health in time and by degrees by the use of proper Medicines and such a Cure we reckon Natural But those were plainly Super-natural Cures which were wrought as our Saviour's for the most part were without the use of any Medicines only by a Word speaking and many times at a great distance and by which those who had been long Sick or Infirm or Cripples were restor'd to perfect Health and Strength in an instant of time To suppose therefore that the Devil can thus at his Will alter the Course of Nature is to attribute to him such a Power as is peculiar to the God of Nature who only doth great Wonders Ps 72.18.136.4 But 2. If the Miracles of our Saviour had been only such as we might reasonably think did not exceed the Devil's Power to do yet that they were not wrought by his Help and consequently that they were done by the Power of God is abundantly evident from the Design of them which was to establish a Doctrine the most contrary that could be to the Devil's Interest For to this Purpose the Son of God was manifested that he might destroy the works of the Devil and he did it 1 Joh. 3.8 by preaching to Men to turn from the vanities of Idols to the worship and service of the Living God Act. 14.15
is enough in all Reason and as much as could be expected in this Case supposing there Facts to be true that they are not by any Historians that were of another Religion contradicted or attempted to be disprov'd more than this would have been too much And should we now in some ancient Manuscript History new brought 〈◊〉 Light and bearing the Name of some Jewish or Heathen Author find a large and formal Account of any of those Facts relating to the Christian Religion that are recorded in the Gospel this would give very just ground to suspect that the whole History whatever other Appearance it had of Truth was forged and counterfeit or at least that those Passages speaking honourably of the Christian Religion or the Author of it were knavishly foisted into the Book by some Christian Transcriber For this is indeed the best Argument that is brought to discredit some Passages of this kind that are now to be found in some Heathen or Jewish Historians and particularly in Josephus viz. that they say more than was proper or likely to be said by Heathens or Jews that if those Passages are genuine and the Authors had believed what they themselves wrote they must have been Christians Now this I 'm sure is not fair Dealing that the Paucity and slenderness of those corroborating Testimonies to the Truth of the Christian History that are to be met with in other Historians and that the Multitude and Fulness of such Testimonies should both be urged as Arguments against Christianity And therefore when they are both urged as they are and have been by our Adversaries we may reasonably conclude that the Truth is in the Mean and that there are indeed no more nor no fewer Testimonies of this kind to be met with in other Writers and that they are not either more or less to the Purpose than supposing the Christian History to be true might fairly be expected It only remains then that we enquire whether there be in the Gospel History any intrinsick Evidences of Falshood And 't is pretended by the Adversaries of our Religion that there are many such For there are they say some things related in the Gospel History that are altogether incredible and there is they say oftentimes great Difference in the several Relations of the same Story by the several Evangelists And not only so but there are they say besides in their several Histories compared together some flat Contradictions and Repugnancies I intended therefore at the End of this Discourse if I had had time for it to have spoken largely upon this Subject But because I have not must referr you to those Books that have been written on purpose to give an Account of the difficult Texts of Scripture and to reconcile those that are seemingly repugnant Or for want of such Books to any good Commentary on the Bible in which you will hardly fail to meet with Satisfaction in any Difficulty of this kind if you read it with a Mind disposed to receive satisfaction And I shall conclude this Discourse with only observing in General 1. That the pretended Impossibilities that are said to be related in the Sacred History are only Difficulties They are indeed Events above and beyond the known Power and common Course of Nature but they are such as are easily Credible when they are ascribed as they must be to the Almighty power of God 2. That the Difference that may sometimes be observ'd in the several Relations of the same Story by the several Evangelists is very inconsiderable consisting only in this That one perhaps relates the Story in a different Order of things than another does Or that One tells it briefly another more at large Or One with a few another with more Circumstances Or that some Circumstances are mentioned by each of them which the other had omitted So that this Observation is so far from being a just Objection against the Truth of the History that it is rather a Proof and Confirmation of it For 't is an Argument that the Evangelists did not conferr together in the Writing of their Histories and that they did not Copy or Transcribe from one another but that every one of them reported the Story he wrote in such manner as he himself remembred it to have been and with such Circumstances as he himself took most notice of And 3. As to the Repugnancies and Inconsistences that are said to be in the Evangelical History These we absolutely deny I have not time now to consider or attempt to reconcile all the Places that are pretended to be contradictory to each other but those Passages which seem most liable to this Exception are I think the Relation of Judas's Death and the Account of our Saviour's Genealogy But as to the first There is plainly no Impossibility no Contradiction in it if we should say that after he had hanged himself as St. Matthew Mat. 27.5 Acts 1.18 says he did fall down and his Bowels gush'd out as St. Luke affirms Or it may be that he did not hang himself but only was * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 choaked or suffocated by the violence of his Grief and that the same Passion by which he was strangled made him also fall down headlong and burst assunder in the midst so that all his Bowels gushed out And as to the other when 't is remembred that by the Jewish Law the next of Kin was to raise up Seed to his near Relation that died without Issue Deut. 25.5 by Marrying his Widow and that the First-born of the Woman after such second Marriage was reputed in Law the Son as well as he was the Heir of the Deceased so that consequently the same Person might be the Legal Son of one Man and the Natural Son of another Man tho' it may be difficult perhaps impossible for us at this Distance of Time to say with certainty which of the two different Lines by which our Saviour's Pedigree is deduced from David is the Legal and which the Natural Line it is very easie nevertheless to believe that one is the Legal and that the other is the Natural Line and if so there is plainly no Contradiction between the two Evangelists altho' St. Matthew Mat. 1.16 makes our Saviour to be descended from Solomon and St. Luke from Nathan altho' St. Matthew says that Joseph the Husband of the Blessed Virgin was the Son of Jacob and St. Luke Luâ—e 3.23 that he was the Son of Heli. And now the Truth of the Gospel History being as I hope by what hath bâ—en said sufficiently established I should proceed to shew That if the Matters of Fact related in the New Testament are true they are sufficient Proofs of the Truth and Divine Authority of all the Doctrines that are therein Taught But I am sensible that I have trespassed too much upon your Patience already and so shall reserve this for the Subject of my next Discourse FINIS ERRATA IN