and Veracity God perfectly knows all the several significations of the words that he hath uttered in Scripture and whatver the Reader can apprehend in them and he is also most true and faithful and therefore would not deceive or delude any by his Words Hence he gathers that whatsoever sense may be made of any part of Scripture if it be in it self a Truth it must be own'd for the true meaning of the Spirit of God in that place To this I answer Were all this intended only of the multiplicity of subordinate Senses depending on and deducible from that immediate Sense which is but one the Argument will hold firm For if any thing do truely lie in any Mans words or by due consequence be deducible from them which himself did not mean when he spake them he must needs be charged to be either ignorant or fallacious But being intended as it is by the Author of a multiplicity of collateral and immediate Senses his Argument is a miserable inconsequence Next he attempts to prove this by the Testimony of Learned Men and begins with the Jewish Rabbins whose childish and absurd conceits need no confutation witness that instanced by this Author their proving the multiplicity of Senses out of Psalm 62. 12. the 11. in our English Translation God hath spoken once twice have I heard this that power belongeth unto God That is say they God hath propounded one single Speech but such as I can understand two ways that is many ways a certain number being put for an uncertain by drawing several Senses from it wherein the Power of God consists that he can so order and dispose his Speech as thereby to teach men a multitude of Truths And is not this a goodly gloss upon the Text and an irrefragable proof of the matter in hand Whereas the Psalmists twice hearing what God had once spoken is no more but his diligent and attentive minding of that great and weighty Truth That Power belongs unto God What he further cites out of the Fathers concerning the fecundity of Scripture containing much in a few words is all granted being understood as before of subordinate not coordinate Senses For that the Scripture should be as a formless Mass capable of being turned by Philosophy into a thousand shapes which this Authors conceit tends to never was for ought I can find any part of their meaning 2. Whereas he says Philosophy is a true certain undoubted knowledge of the nature of things demonstrated by Natural Light I ask doth Philosophy comprehend the knowledge of all things Or is the nature of all things discernable by Natural Light There are in Scripture many things Historical Prophetical and Dogmatical the knowledge whereof depends wholly upon Supernatural Revelation What can Philosophy do here And even in those things that are Natural and belong to the cognisance of Philosophy how short is that knowledge that the most learned have attained Therefore whereas this Author so proudly derides our Reformed Divines for complaining of the darkness of Mans Natural Reason if he were not too wise to be taught he might have learnt more modesty from the ancient Philosophers the best and wisest whereof did greatly bewail the darkness of Mans Understanding Even Aristotle who never I think was judged to have disparaged Humane Reason acknowledges that our Understandings even as to the most manifest things in nature are but as the Eyes of the Owl and Bat to the day-light And though both he and others of them being unacquainted with Scripture could not clearly discover the true original of this darkness yet some weak conjectures some of them have made of it and whether by any Tradition received from the Jews or by some other means I shall not enquire some general and confused intimation they had that Man had lost his Primitive Excellency that the Wings of his Soul for so they express it had by some sad fall been so broken that he could not arrive at any considerable measures of knowledge by his greatest industry And hence arose that fond mistake among some of them that the Souls of Men having had a pre-existence before their union with their Bodies and having offended in that State were for a punishment of their Error thrust into these gross terrestial receptacles and that this caused the imperfection and obscurity of Mens Understandings But to those who own the Scripture and may learn from thence what Man 's Primitive State was and how he fell and are any whit acquainted with themselves methinks it should be no strange Riddle that the Mind is clouded and benighted even in things Natural and therefore in Supernatural much more But where is that Philosophy that this Exercitator cryes up for so certain and infallible and which another Author of like Principles does with profane boldness magnifie as equal to the Holy Scriptures for its compleat perfection and infallible certainty Where is it In the Clouds Sure it never was extant among men save in the crazy conceits of some haughty self-admirers 3. As to what our Author speaks of Philosophy being usefull to detect false Interpretations of Scripture I grant that where such false Interpretations are given as do really entrench upon the undoubted Principles of Reason the weakness and folly of them may well be discover'd by Philosophy But all corrupt or perverse expositions are not to be so limited nor is this enough to render Philosophy a sufficient Rule of Interpretation The heathen Philosophers could discover the error of their vulgar Religion but could not direct men to the true and right as I have shewn before The like may be said in the present case 4. Whereas our Exercitator further adds in the close of this Argument that from the beginning of Christianity those who were the most profound Philosophers were generally confessed to be the happiest Interpreters of Scripture I am far from being of his mind none having more corrupted and depraved the Scriptures than Men of greatest eminency for Philosophick Learning which I do not at all impute to Philosophy truly so call'd but to the rashness and folly of Men who being desirous to advance that wherein they would be thought to excell have adventured to make use of their Philosophick Principles in matters of a quite different and more sublime nature But suppose we the utmost that can be supposed That an eminent Philosopher were furnished with all the most necessary accomplishments for the understanding of Scripture and should duely improve them for that end yet this would no more prove Philosophy to be the Supream rule of Interpretation than Grammar or Rhetorick which are every whit as necessary and useful to such a Work if not more No further doth any thing help us in understanding the Scripture than it directs us to those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or evidences of the true sence that lie within the Scripture it self that is by helping us to use the Scripture as the Rule
are upon Scripture-testimony to receive without searching into the manner it being a Mystery infinitely above our reach which therefore he that will boldly intrude into may justly fear to be overwhelm'd with its Glory Or 2. To the Temporal Manifestation of that Eternal Generation a thing being then said to be done when it is manifested to be done And so the words are applied by the Apostle Paul to our Saviours Resurrection whereby as the same Apostle says elsewhere He was declared to be the Son of God with power Though I know there is who understands those words of Christs Resurrection immediately and in it self partly because it was as it were a second Birth to the Humane Nature partly because it was as they conceive the beginning of his Installment into his Regal Office which might be called his Birth by Analogy to what was said before concerning the Roman Emperors I shall not take upon me to determine which of these ways of Explication is to be adhered to But be it what it will this I need not be afraid to say that it is Scripture if any thing that must clear the difficulty and decide the difference it is not Philosophy in its highest Exaltation that can be a sufficient Rule to resolve us the matter in hand being so wholly foreign to the best and clearest Natural Light 3. Then for the last instance Joh. 3. 16. where God is said to love the World though in this as in all other things we are not to measure God by our selves yet this is undoubted that by Gods love to Mankind is every where plainly and clearly meant his Will to do them good discovering it self in answerable effects and the Complacency that he takes in the good that he doth for them or works in them Nor do I think that any man who heedfully reads the Scriptures can take it otherwise And this is no way unbecoming the Divine Perfections but fully agreeing to his Nature and the Manifestations that he hath made of himself both by Natural and Supernatural Light Now as to this distinction which the Exercitator so much applauds condemning all others that are not as fond of it as himself I find sufficient reason to reject it and do affirm that the Words and Sentences of Scripture taken in such a coherence among themselves and connexion with the whole and otherwise than thus they have no sense that is properly theirs do exhibit to the Reader no other sense than what is indeed the Authors meaning being written for no other end but to signifie his mind for our safe guidance to Blessedness And to think that they have any other sense than what is indeed the truemind and meaning of the Author is â—o charge the Holy Scriptures with the vilest Imposture What would we think of that man that should either speâ—k or write so as that his words should carry one meaning and himself intend another Would he not be judged a Deceiver And shall we dare to fasten such a piece of Hypocrisie upon the Holy God and that in a business wherein Mans Everlasting Happiness is concern'd What thoughts have these men of God who can talk thus of the Scriptures that are his acknowledged Word But let it be consider'd before I leave this matter whether our Author do not by this distinction contradict himself For 1. When he is in preparation to his future discourse explaining what he means by the material Object of Interpretation he plainly asserts that Words are first and immediately the signification of the inward Conceptions of the Mind â—and because those Conceptions are representations of things in the Understanding hence the Words that declare those Conceptions are used to signifie and denote things Now if so how comes it about that the Words of Scripture can have a different sense from what the Author intends seeing as the Exercitator acknowledgeth they are signs or notes of the Conceptions of his Mind 2. This same Author when he is proving a multiplicity of true senses in the same Text of Scripture and that whatsoever Interpretations be they never so many and various are given if they be Truths in themselves they are also the true Expositions of that place useth this Argument That else God would be chargeable with deceiving Men by using such Words as he knew Men would be ready to take in such different senses as he never meant This the Author rejects with abhorrence as not agreeing with the Divine Perfections How well he agrees with himself and how this may be reconciled with the forementioned conceit of such a twofold sense as we have been speaking of the simple sense of the Words of Scripture and the true sense of the Speaker let the Reader judge CHAP. VIII 1. A fifth Exception That the plainest Scriptures may be wrested 2. A sixth from the multiplicity of Commentaries and Expositions removed IN the next place it will be said that the plainest Scriptures are liable to be wrested and perverted by Men of corrupt minds therefore they are not perspicuous enough to Interpret themselves Suppose what is indeed too true and sufficiently made good by our Adversaries in this cause that the plainest Scriptures may be perverted So may the best and truest Principles of Reason and Philosophy Nor can any Man devise how to speak or write so but a wicked and malicious Wit may put an absurd or horrid sense upon the most innocent Words And of this I think we have instances enough every day But what is this to the sense which the Words and Sentences of Scripture in such a Contexture and with reference to and dependence upon the Antecedents and Consequents and the whole Tenour of the Authors Discourse do offer to the Reader That the Scripture thus consider'd is of it self liable to such ambiguous senses is a profane and sensless calumny bringing that Holy Volume under the same condemnation with the Devils Oracles that were purposely contrived by that great Enemy of Mankind to cheat and abuse the Pagan World But may some say do not many take the Words of Scripture in a far different sense from what the Author of Scripture intended No doubt they do what then That is not because the Words give them that sense but because they impose that sense upon the Words to make them comply with their own apprehensions In the sixth place the Exercitator argues against the perspicuity of the Scriptures from the multitude of Commentaries Animadversions Interpretations for he loves to heap up words written by Learned Men upon the whole Scripture or the several parts of it whence he concludes it as a thing unquestionable that the Scripture is obscure so obscure that it cannot Interpret its own sense I answer That there are some difficulties in Scripture that may exercise yea and exceed the ablest Wits and that many things in it may be obscure to the Reader for want of using the
What can be the meaning of this that these Principles are written in our Minds I cannot understand any further than this that there is begotten in our Minds a clear perception and firm perswasion of them But the great Question will be By what Act doth God write these in our Minds or beget in us this perception and perswasion of them Surely they will not say that when God creates the Soul of Man this perception or perswasion of these Principles is concreated by him in and with the Soul for if so how is it that during our Infant-state we are such strangers to them and do so continue till we come gradually by observation and experience to be acquainted with them And when we come to discern them and to be perswaded of them how come we to be assured that they are of God There must be some difference between the Testimony and the Thing testified The Principles of Reason are supposed to be the Res testata the Thing testified But what is the Testimony or the Actus Testificandi My perception or perswasion cannot be it for if so then whatsoever I perceive and am fully perswaded of I must believe to come from God and what will that come to at last These Principles of Reason are not Complex Propositions form'd by God in our Minds or suggested to us by a Divine Afflatus this would make every Man an Enthusiast The best account I can give of them is that they are such General Truths as have their foundation in the nature of things and their mutual habitudes and respects which our Reason apprehending doth therein discover the aforesaid Principles thence resulting And because it is God alone who gives to all things their several Beings and constitutes them in such and such habitudes each to other and hath given us our Reason whereby we are enabled to discern them therefore he is said to be the Author of those Principles which lie fundamentally in his Workmanship And we do not take them for Truthus upon the credit of any foregoing testimony that God gives to us of them but we assent to them propter evidentiam râ—i because our Reason sees them perfectly agreeable to the nature of things and thereby finding them to be certainly true thence it gathers that they are of God from whom all Truth comes But now the method of Faith is widely different from this Here we first own the testimony of God speaking in the Scriptures and thence we are perswaded that what the Scripture speaks is true and so we come to embrace the many severals therein asserted by yielding a particular assent to them as we find them But will some say before we believe the Scriptures we must be convinced by Reason that these Scriptures are of God Very true but the effect of such a conviction is not properly Faith but Knowledge And when I know by satisfying Grounds of Reason that the Scripture is indeed the Voice of God then do I by Faith assent to what that speaks as Gods testimony And whereas there are some Truths which are knowable in some measure by Natural Light and yet are revealed likewise in the Scripture it is commonly and truly said by our Divines that as they are received by Natural Light and upon Rational Grounds so they are the Objects of Science but as they are revealed in the Scripture so and only so they are the Objects of Faith which as the Apostle tells us is the evidence of things not seen that is of things not discernable by Natural Light whether of Sense or Reason or at least that are not consider'd as such when we receive them as Objects of Faith which therefore is call'd the evidence of them because it discerns the truth and reality of them in the infallible testimony of the Revealer Now besides what hath been already said it may further be proved that Reason is not any part of the Rule of Faith For 1. Were this granted it would necessarily follow that Scripture of it self is an imperfect Rule and if so it is no Rule at all That cannot be own'd for a Rule that is not adequate and commensurate to what is to be regulated by it The known description of a Rule given by Varinus and so frequently quoted by our best Authors hath never that I know of been questioned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Rule or Canon is an immutable Law and an unerring Measure which at no hand will admit of addition or diminution This is one great Argument used by our Protestant Writers to shut out Popish Traditions from being any part of the Rule of Faith because the Scripture is a perfect and sufficient Rule of it self and must be so or else it cannot be a Rule at all Of which the Reader may see enough for his satisfaction in the Learned Bishop of Down his Ductor Dubitantium Lib. 2. Cap. 3. Rule 14. p. 359 c. And the Argument is every whit as good to exclude Reason as Tradition in this case And that the Scripture is a perfect discovery of the Mind of God so far as is necessary for us to know it I have proved before in my first Argument 2. The Principles of Reason as I have formerly shewed in the proof of my first Proposition have no formal existence any where but in the Minds or Writings of fallible Men considering them as separate from the Scriptures for set the Bible aside there is no Infallible and Authentick Record of those Principles to which we can have recourse And this utterly disables them for being so much as a partial Rule of a Christians Faith 3. Principles of Natural Reason let us suppose them never so fixt and infallible are wholly aliene to matters of supernatural Revelation which are the proper Object of Faith And to measure these by them were as ridiculous as to attempt by a Carpenters Rule to take the distance of the Heavens or to spread a Fowlers Net to catch the Winds However therefore there is as hath been already acknowledged and maintain'd great use of Reason and its Principles in subordination and instrumental subserviency to the knowledge of Divine Matters yet that it is in any degree to be owned as the Rule of our Faith must not will not cannot be allowed by any that are true to the Christian Cause CHAP. XII An Exception of the Exercitator grounded upon a distinction of the Scriptures taken materially or formally propounded and the folly and fallacy of it detected BUt here the Exercitator gives us a distinction which he makes often use of as being very fit for his turn That the Scripture is taken either materially and so it signifies no more but the bare Words Phrases and Sentences of Scripture or formally and so it signifies the sense and meaning of these Words and Sentences Now says he when we say the Scripture is the Rule of Faith we do not mean the bare words but the
Appendix concerning Internal Illumination and other Operations of the Spirit upon the Soul of Man c. CHAP. I. 1. What our Protestant Divines mean by that Illumination of the Spirit which they assert as necessary to the understanding of the Scriptures and the Exercitators censure of it as Enthusiasm approved by Wolzogen 2. The Falshood of that Calumny discovered 3. Wolzogen ' s disingenuity and inconstancy 4. The necessity of the aforesaid Illumination proved 5. In what sense it is supernatural 6. Some of the Exercitators Cavils answered 7. In what sense this Illumination is immediate IN the foregoing Papers designed to clear and vindicate the Protestant Doctrine concerning the Supreme Bule of Interpreting Seripture I have had occasion frequently to deal with the Belgick Exercitator and to take notice of what he hath said that seems to be of any moment so far as concerns that point But whereas he is pleased in the procedure of his Discourse to step out of his way and deridingly to oppose the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches about the Spirits assistance in the Interpretation of Scripture as savouring of Enthusiasm I then waved medling with that part of his Book thinking it more expedient to say something to it in an Appendix by it self this being a Question altogether distinct from that other of the Rule of Interpretation In the Fourteenth Chapter of his oft-mentioned Exercitation he quotes several of our Protestant Authors of great Name and Worth giving in the words of some of them and referring us for others to the cited places The drift of their several Discourses about this point seems to be that there needs an effectual operation of the Holy Spirit to enlighten Mens understandings and cause them rightly to apprehend and readily to approve the Mind of God in Scripture That their meaning may be more clearly propounded we must distinguish of a twofold understanding of Scripture There is a Natural and merely Grammatical perception of the truth of Scripture-Propositions which a Man destitute of the Spirit of Grace may attain by common assistance in the use of ordinary means And there is a Spiritual apprehension of the things themselves contain'd in those Propositions which includes in it a hearty believing and embracing them that is not attain'd without the sanctifying work of the Spirit renewing the mind by enduing it with an heavenly supernatural Light This I find thus express'd and illustrated by the late Reverend Bishop of Norwich Natural Men says he have their Principles vitiated their Faculties bound that they cannot understand spiritual things till God have as it were implanted a new understanding in them framed the heart to attend and set it at liberty to see the Glory of God with open face Though the Veil do not keep out Grammatical Construction yet it blindeth the Heart against the spiritual Light and Beauty of the Word We see even in common Sciences where the Conclusions are suitable to our innate and implanted Notions yet he that can distinctly construe and make Grammar of a Principle in Euclide may be ignorant of the Mathematical sense and use of it Much more may a Man in Divine Truths be spiritually ignorant even where in some respect he may be said to know For the Scriptures pronounce Men ignorant of those things which they see and know In Divine Doctrine Obedience is the Ground of Knowledge and Holiness the best Qualification to understand the Scriptures To this Spiritual Understanding there is need of the aforesaid Supernatural Light And this is that which as far as I can understand our Divines mean when they assert the necessity of the Spirits Illumination Thus speaks the Church of England The Revelation of the Holy Ghost inspireth the true meaning of the Scripture into us In truth we cannot without it attain true saving knowledge Yea of this mind was Erasmus no Enthusiast who thus speaks He erreth vehemently who believes he can ever attain to the true understanding of the Canonical Scriptures unless he be inspired by the same Spirit that endited them And again They have the Book of Scripture but not the Scripture that want the Spirit without which the Scripture is not understood And M. Luther quoting a Speech of Aben-Ezra Sine supra infra i. e. without Points and Accents the Scripture cannot be understood adds a third sine intra without somewhat within viz. the Light of the Holy Spirit Now let us hear the Judgment of the Exercitator and his pretended Answerer Wolzogen about this As for the former If says he the meaning of these Divines were this that no sense of Scripture by what way or method soever found out can be fully certain to any unless by the Natural Light of our understanding we can clearly and distinctly perceive it and be fully perswaded of its truth and that this clear perception and the sense a Man hath of it be that inward perswasion and testimony of the Spirit which they intend this will be granted them But if they mean not the Natural Light of Mans understanding or what is built upon that but a Supernatural Light above and beyond Mans Natural Reason not included in the Mind or acquired by it but infused and inspired from above this says he we disclaim and condemn for Enthusiasm This is the sum of the censure that he passeth upon this Doctrine And Lud. Wolzogen who pretends to take up the Bucklers against him in defence of the Protestant Cause in stead of vindicating the forecited Authors and their Doctrine joins with the Exercitator in the calumny as appears undeniably by his own words for thus he speaks Because the Holy Spirit doth indeed still exert some power in the minds of Men therefore some have believed that he opens the sense of the Scriptures and interprets them to the Faithful Which opinion the Exercitator doth justly decry and determine that it contains mere Enthusiasm Where he expresly approves and applauds what the Exercitator had said against the Doctors of the Reformed Churches charging them with Enthusiasm for maintaining a necessity of a Supernatural Light for a saving perception of the Mind of God in Scripture And himself doth so frequently strike upon this string in several places of his Book that he seems to design the blemishing and defaming of our most eminent Protestant Writers and the Doctrine which they have asserted against Papists and Pelagians These Men cannot be ignorant that the Divines whom they thus impeach have all along in answer to the like imputation from Popish and Socinian Authors expresly and vehemently disclaimed all compliance with Enthusiasts and that some of them have written learnedly and smartly against that sort of Men. They utterly disavow their expecting any such Illumination as was given to the Prophets and Apostles and do plainly deliver their minds that what they assert doth not consist in discovering any new Doctrine unreveal'd in Scripture but in qualifying and
I prove by the following Arguments First Man's Reason though furnished with the best Principles and richest Endowments that Nature affords it in this lapsed State is so darkned and depraved that it not only is much disabled for apprehending the things of God but sets it self against them and therefore it is not in a capacity by its own Principles to interpret Scripture-Doctrines Something Natural Light discovers of God but al as how little The Principles of Natural Knowledge are but general and confused not sufficient to guide Man in the things of greatest concernment It teacheth Man that there is a God but when he comes to determine what an one He is how lame and imperfect how unsuitable and unbecoming are Mens natural apprehensions of him The Apostle says 1 Cor. 1. 21. that in the wisdom of God the World by wisdom knew not God Where he means not the rude and ignorant multitude but the wisest and most accomplished for Natural Abilities these with the study of Philosophy which is the consideration of Gods infinite Wisdom in Creating and Governing the World did not arrive at the right knowledge of God The same Apostle tells us of the unconverted Gentiles Eph. 4. 18. that they had their understandings darkned and were alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that was in them c. and Rom. 8. 7. he says the Carnal Mind 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the wisdom of the Flesh the unrenew'd Mind of Man is enmity against God for it is not subject to the Law of God neither indeed can be But I shall especially insist upon that of the said Apostle in 1 Cor. 2. 14. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness unto him neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned By the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Animal or Natural Man the Apostle means him that is in his meer Naturals having no other wisdom or understanding given him than what is common to him with all Mankind Such an one receives not the things of the Spirit that is he doth not approve of them and embrace them he finds no relish in them and therefore rejects them for they are foolishness unto him he scorns the mysteries of the Gospel as if it were nothing but a heap of phantastick trash a confused medly of absurd unintelligible fancies Neither can he know them says the Apostle because they are spiritually discerned that is he cannot as he is in this unrenew'd state discern the true beauty and excellency of them because they are not to be discerned but by a Spiritual Light and by a Spiritual Faculty which the Natural Man is wholly destitute of Or as the learned Bishop of Down expresseth it They are taught and perceived by the aids of Gods Spirit Revelation and Divine Assistance and Grace Great endeavors have been used to wrest this Scripture Some think to evade the dint of it by alledging that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is meant one that is led by Fleshly Lusts because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometimes taken for the sensitive part of the Soul in opposition to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the Rational To this I answer two things First Suppose this that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Natural Man be taken for one seduced by corrupt and inordinate affections yet this will include all men as they are by nature and as unregenerate witness what the Apostle says Ephes. 2. 1 2 3. And you hath he quickned who were sometimes dead in trespasses and sins wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of the World according to the Prince of the Power of the Air the Spirit that now worketh in the Children of Disobedience Amongst whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the Lusts of our Flesh fulfilling the desires of the Flesh and of the Mind c. It is the condition of all Mankind by our first Apostasie from God to be in bondage to sinful lusts till the Grace of Christ have set us free And this none but a Pelagian will deny Secondly It is evident by the context that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in this place opposed to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Spiritual and the natural man is as the Apostle Jude explains it in his Epistle vers 19. one that is destitute of the Spirit and consequently he is one that hath no higher inward Principle to guide him than his own Reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Learned Grotius Non est idem quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui corporis affectibus gubernatur sed est is qui humanae tantum rationis luce ducitur The Natural is not the same with the Carnal who is swayed by the affections of the Body but it is he who is led only by the light of Humane Reason Or as I find the Greek Scholiast cited by a late Author 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the man that is endued with meer humane wisdom Such an one whatsoever his natural endowments may be and how learned or wise soever according to the best improvement of Natures Light is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So our learned Davinant Philosophus quà Philosophus nihil aliud est quam animalis home ipsa Ratio non illuminata fide ad hanc animalitatem pertinet But let us hear what the Exercitator says to this place The Apostle says he speaks not here of a Man that by Natural Light hath attain'd the right knowledge of Truth and Goodness for a truely wise Man never censures what he does not discern whereas the Man here spoken of is one that knows not the things of the Spirit and yet accounts them foolishness which cannot be meant of the true Philosopher for such an one suspends his judgment of things till such time as he hath attained a clear and distinct perception of them Therefore the Apostle must needs be understood either of a man utterly ignorant or of one that follows the sway of his blind affections Such an one says he receives not Spiritual Things that is the things that belong to the Rational Soul which is a Spirit To this passing by so much of it as is met with already in the former Exception I answer several things First Whereas he says that by the Animal or Natural Man is not meant he that hath by Natural Light attain'd the right knowledge of truth and goodness I say so too for the Apostle means by it one that hath no other than natural light in searching after truth and goodness who may there-therefore easily yea who will certainly mistake having no better guide Secondly Whereas he says a true Philosopher never is rash in his censure of things but always suspends his judgment till he hath attained a clear perception of them and that therefore such an one cannot be thought to judge the things of the Spirit
foolishness before he know them this is all one as if he had said a true Philosopher is a Chimaera for it seems he is one who never determines of any thing till he clearly perceives what it is and then what he determines is undoubtedly true whence it will follow that every true Philosopher is infallible And where was such an one ever yet to be found Certain it is that the most eminent Philosophers not inferior in their Natural Learning to this Exercitator or any of his Companions did in the first breaking out of the Gospel make a mock of the whole Doctrine of Christianity Thus did the Philosophers at Athens when they heard St. Paul and thus did Porphyrie Celsus and others after the Apostles dayes Thirdly When this Author will have no more meant here by things Spiritual but things belonging to the Rational Soul which is a Spirit he is grosly over-seen to speak no worse For the Apostles words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the things of the Spirit of God which certainly is not the Soul of Man but the Holy Ghost And when the Apostle Jude describes the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sensual or natural by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having not the Spirit surely he did not mean they had no Rational Soul but that they were destitute of the Regenerating Spirit of Grace And that of this Spirit the Apostle Paul is to be understood in the place under present consideration the whole tenour of his Discourse from vers 9 to 15. doth undeniably manifest If at least by this Gentlemans good leave the Scripture might be allowed to interpret it self The wofull ignorance and perversness concerning the things of God that discovered it self in the wisest and best civilized part of the World and such as had improved their natural light to as high a pitch as any other we can read of is an abundant evidence of what I assert concerning the darkness and pravity of Mans Reason They became as the Apostle says vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkned professing themselves to be wise they became fools Rom. 1. 21 22. They acknowledged a Deity and that God was to be worshipped but in the manner and way of worship how wofully were they mistaken yea those times and places that were best cultivated and that flourished most in all Humane Learning were of all other the most sottish in their Idolatrous Worships giving religious adoration to Brute Creatures to Dumb Pictures to Diseases and Humane Passions yea to Hellish Furies And whereas some that were more sagacious than the rest as Socrates Cicero and such like saw enough to condemn that way of Religion that was then in use observing the Rites in fashion tanquam legibus jussa non tanquam diis grata as St. Aug. observes out of Seneca yet when they came to enquire and determine of the true Religion they were confessedly at a loss and acknowledged that they could better cry down the wrong than find out the right They had what is indelibly planted in all men a desire of happiness but they were miserably bewilder'd in their search after it And whereas they were some of them sensible of a dreadfull blow that Man's Nature had received discerning a Combat in themselves between their Reason and their Sensual Appetite and saw the World generally over-run with wickedness and consequently vexed with a continual succession of calamities yet as they could never by natures light find out the source and spring of all this and what it was that first brought sin and sorrow upon Mankind so in vain did they weary themselves in inventing ways of reconciling themselves to God and procuring his Favour whom they saw to be displeased and of curing the Maladies of their disordered and discomposed Natures in both which they took such strange and horrid courses as did but increase the evil they lay under and exceedingly multiply their own guilts Now it being thus how can the Principles of Reason and Philosophy be a safe Rule whereby to interpret the Holy Scriptures CHAP. III. 1. Several Exceptions against the foregoing Argument removed viz. That this holds onely where the Scripture is unknown 2. That it strikes not at Right Reason and Sound Principles 3. That Reason is of God And that Truth is not contrary to Truth TO this Argument all the reply that I can conceive will be made may be reduced to a few particulars which I shall briefly dispatch It will be said That this Argument holds of Man's Reason while he is destitute of the Written Word but reacheth not them who have the Scriptures to enlighten them To pass by other Answers that may be gathered from what hath been already said This Exception yields the Cause For it supposeth Man's Reason unable to discover the Mind of God without Scripture Light And if so then whatsoever Revealed Truth is more darkly delivered in any one part of Scripture must receive light from the Scripture it self somewhere else where it speaks more plainly without which Man's Reason notwithstanding the best Natural Principles to assist it would leave him at a loss consequently it is not the principles of Reason and Philosophy that must be the Rule of Interpretation but the Scripture it self as shall be shewn hereafter But say some when we say Reason by its Principles is to Interpret Scripture we mean it of right Reason proceeding upon sound Principles and not of Reason depraved and Principles corrupted I answer these are smooth Words but what do they signifie There were some colour for this reply if uncorrupt Reason either in the Faculty or the Principles were infallibly to be found The Exception speaks of Reason abstractly and in the Idea supposing it freed from all those depravations and entanglements that have captived and debased it Whereas we are speaking of Reason as it is in Men who are to make use of it And we know what is said of Man Gen. 6. 5. God saw that the wickedness of Man was great in the earth and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was onely evil continually Every Man is thus depraved from his birth so that we have all need of renewing in our highest faculties in the Spirit of our Mind Eph. 4. 23. And this original depravation is increased by a farther contracted malignity through vitious habits and deceitfulness of sinfull lusts In the most it remains wholly thus and in the best in this life it is but in part renew'd and therefore in danger to mistake and that grosly in things Spiritual when it goes to work onely by its own natural Principles And whereas it may be thought or said there is no danger so long as Reason performs it works aright I reply how shall that be known by what Rule shall we examine and find out when Reason passeth a right judgment or how shall the Principles that Reason pretends to use in matters of Revelation be tryed
if not by the Scriptures Shall the unquestionable Word of God be brought to the Bar of Man's Reason and be tryed by its Dictates and shall these Dictates of our lame and imperfect Reason in things of God and Eternity be uncontrolable and admitted without any debate in matters of pure Revelation as if they were the only SupremeLaw over-ruling all supernatural discoveries of God's Will do we not know that mens conceptions concerning the Principles of Reason are various Some say one thing is a sound Principle of Reason and others will plead for the contrary besides there is as great a difference in the application of the same Principle to particular cases When Reason alone is the warrant and the guide says the late Bishop of Down a Man shall not alway find out what 〈◊〉 pleasing to God and it will be to no purpose to say that not every Man's Reason but Right Reason shall be the Law for every Man thinks his own Reason right and whole Nations differ in the assignation and opinons of Right Reason and who shall be Judge of all but God This is certain that sundry Philosophers of old who were cried up for Men of strong Reason and many learned Men of late who profess a high esteem of Reason and frequently appeal to that in their Novel Opinions are chargeable with many gross absurdities in their Tenets inconsistent with the plainest principles of natural light Yea are not many learned Atheists reckoned by themselves and others great Masters of Reason What Natural Principle more clear and undoubted than this That two contradictions cannot be true at once Insomuch as it is conceived by some that all Principles that are not thought fit to be proved in any Natural Science if they be truely so may easily be resolved into this one A thing cannot at once be and not be And yet even this Principle of Contradictions hath been denied by some whereof we have a pregnant instance in Weigelius and his Followers and a late Carmelite Frier beside what Aristotle says of some ancient Philosophers Great is Mans proneness to judge according to his inclinations and interests It 's a known observation Such as a Man is such he thinks God to be And according to the prevailing bent of his Heart so are his Conceptions of Truth or Falshood And it was an old complaint Scripturarum esse volumus quae nostra sunt Be it therefore granted that there are some common Maxims wherein all agree being such as shine by their own light and which the Scriptures always suppose Yet these are so general and so few that they will not reach far to be sure not beyond those things that are merely natural And as for those acquired Principles that are drawn by deduction from the former there is so great variety of Mens apprehensions concerning them that they cannot be allowed in this case for a sufficient or tolerable Rule of Judgment For in these we see that those who are for determining all by Maxims of Reason are greatly at odds amongst themselves and some in that variety must needs err if not all But perhaps it will be said That Mens Expositions of Scripture are likewise various and many times erroneous and yet the Scripture is not rejected because that is always the same and incorrupt so though Mens apprehensions about the Principles of Reason be various and mistaking yet the Principles themselves are the same all the World over and continue in all Ages uncorrupt and therefore may well be admitted for a Rule To this I answer As the Scriptures are the same and incorrupt notwithstanding Mens various and erroneous apprehensions and Interpretations so we can tell where to find them and have recourse to them and consult with them they are a standing Record open and obvious to our search But for the Principles of Reason in matters of Religion though they lie fundamentally in the nature of things yet if we lay Scriture aside they are not to be found formally existing any where but in the Minds and Writings of Men who are confessed to be various and liable to mistake and accordingly Natural Principles are variously conceived and may be dangerously perverted so that if we had not the Scriptures as a surer Test to try all by we should be always at great uncertainty and in apparent danger of miscarrying For I take it to be a certain Truth that the Bible is the most perfect comprehension of all Principles of Religion as well Natural as Supernatural Nor know I any of the former of these for of the latter no question is made but what is more evidently and distinctly to be seen in the Scripture than in any other Record whatsoever But Reason say some is of God and therefore cannot deceive us I answer 1. Our Senses also are of God and yet they may and do deceive us 2. Adam's Reason was of God and yet that deceived him even in his first state much more may ours now 3. Though Man's Reason be of God both as to the faculty and all its sound Principles yet every thing that Man's Reason suggesteth is not of God There is as the Philosophers complained a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a spurious and adulterate kind of reasoning And how shall I know whether that which pretends to Reason and to be of God be so indeed but by bringing it to the Test of Scripture where God hath made known his Mind about Matters of Religion for of them I speak more plainly and more fully than by the clearest Beams of Natural Light But it is further replyed That Truth is not contrary to Truth therefore nothing in Scripture can be contrary to Reason Understanding it of sound Reason this is all granted But then let it be considered 1. That every thing is not to be accounted contrary to Reason that Reason cannot reach 2. The former difficulty recurrs How or where shall we be assured that what is alledged for sound Reason is so indeed excepting self-evident Principles which are as I said but General and Few where shall it be tried seeing there have been and are many Maxims or Axioms commonly received among learned Men that will not hold 3. What if there be no contrariety but only an appearance thereof It doth not therefore follow that Scripture is to be controll'd by Reason but if there seem any opposition the dictates of Reason are to be reduced and reconciled to Scripture For the Principles of Reason such I mean as are true and sound may carry an appearing opposition to some Scripture Assertions because perhaps the said Principles though generally received do admit of some limitations and restrictions which through the weakness and imperfection of our Reason we are not aware of In this case it were bold and dangerous to bend the Scripture to those Principles That which is variable and fallible is to be over-ruled by that which is fixed and unerring as the Holy
own Will And if our Reason will not rest satisfied with that it will but weary it self in fruitless inquiries and dangerously miscarry by its bold determinations For instance what account can our Reason give why God should provide a Saviour for lost Man and none for the lapsed Angels Why he should cloath his only begotten Son with our dishonoured nature and expose him to so bitter Sufferings for the Sin of Man Why he should 〈…〉 severely punish the Crucifiers of his Son when what they did was fore-determined by himself in order to Mans Salvation And why he should suffer so much wickedness to be done which himself hates and could if he pleased by his Almighty Power hinder These and many more such instances might be given wherein Mans Reason is puzzl'd as not finding any thing wherein it can acquiesce but the Will and pleasure of God that thus it should be Again God requires we should believe him upon his naked Word though we know not which way that which he says can be And accordingly he so manifests to us his Mind that he will not gratifie our vanity or pride in resolving the queries and satisfying the objections that our curiosity may start about the Truth revealed It is enough for us to know what he hath said and to take it upon the Authority of his word without asking how or why And it is indeed the highest Reason imaginable that we should give absolute credit to what he speaks God's Sovereignty saith the learned Lord Verulam reaches to the whole Man extending itself no less to his Reason than his Will so that it well becomes man to deny himself universally and yield up all to him Wherefore as we are bound to obey the Law of God notwithstanding the reluctancy of our Will so are we also to believe his Word though against the reluctancy of our Reason I shall conclude this with the Words of the learned Grotius who having asserted the Doctrines of Scripture to be no way contrary to sound Reason but agreeable thereunto he he hath this remarkable passage Ultra haec pro comperto aliquid affirmare aut de Dei natura aut de ejus voluntate solo ductu humanae rationis c. How dangerous and deceitfull a thing it is to affirm any thing for certain either of the Nature or Will of God beyond what we have in Holy Writ by the sole conduct of Humane Reason we are taught by the many dissentient opinions not only of Schools but of particular Philosophers among themselves Nor is this any great wonder for if they ran out into very differing apprehensious when they disputed about the nature of their own Mind much more must it needs be so with those who are desirous to determine any thing concerning that Supreme Mind that is so far above us If prudent Men count it dangerous to search into the Counsels of Kings which by all our search we cannot discover who is there so sagacious as can hope by his own conjectures to find out what God will do among those things that depend upon his meer pleasure CHAP. V. A third Argument from the absurdity of resolving a Mans Faith into himself and his own Reason IN the third place If the Sense of Scripture be to be regulated and determined by Natural Principles then the last resolution of a Mans Faith in those points as to the formal object of it will be into Man himself and the dictate of his own Reason For the ultimate reason or ground of our believing in this case will not be the veracity of God speaking in the Scripture but the Voice of our own Reason persuading us from its own Principles when we can see nothing in the Words of Scripture to require it And this plainly falls in with the absurd conceit of the Quakers who commonly profess to own nothing that is laid down in the Bible as the Mind of God but what is witnessed by the light within them Which is no more in other terms than this That they will take nothing from the Scripture but what is agreeable to their own Reason For the light they speak of with which they say every Man comes into the World for which they alledge that in Joh. 1. 9. is nothing else but Mans Reason and the common notions of it which though some of them have heretofore denied yet now their chief Heads and Leaders do openly avow And this is that which they make the standing Rule of what they believe and practise and not the Holy Scriptures We rather say with an ancient Schoolman Apud Aristotelem argumentum est ratio rei dubiae faciens fidem sed apud Christum argumentum est fides faciens rationem The way of arguing in Aristotle's School is by Reason begetting assent but in Christ's School it is by Faith which is instead of all Reason CHAP. VI. A fourth Argument from another absurdity viz. That in Matters of pure Revelation the Mind of God may be better known by Natural Light than by Scripture Or that all supernatural Revelation is to be shut out FOurthly It will follow from this supposal That in matters of pure Revelation the Mind of God may be better known by the common principles of Natural Light than by the Holy Scriptures which carries with it a palpable contradiction For matters of pure Revelation are supposed to be supernatural and if these as laid down in Scripture cannot be understood from the Scripture it self but must have such a Sense given them as the Maxim of Natural Reason shall determine then certainly it is not Revelation but Reason that discovers them And so what need will there be of Scripture Indeed this conceit looks very like that absurd dotage of Weigelius if it be not the same with it that Mans knowledge of all things whatsoever must be fetcht from within himself not from without Tenôris says he omnia nôris omnia enim es non minus quam Deus Which besides many other prodigious absurdities plainly shuts out all supernatural Revelation And that this lies at the bottom of the Exercitators Discourse I find reason enough to suspect if not conclude For besides what he says in his sixth Chapter the first Paragraph which I shall wave insisting on in his Epilogue at the end of his Book he propounds an Objection against his whole Discourse viz. That if Philosophy be the Rule of Interpreting the Holy Scripture then the Scripture is useless and written to no purpose for seeing the truth of all the Senses of Scripture which are to be search'd out and tryed by Philosophy must first be perceived before they be drawn out and examined to what end is it that we should have recourse to Scripture to learn any thing from it This is the Objection which himself makes against his own Position In answer whereto he runs out into a long Harangue of words and as his manner is propounds a frivolous
distinction and tedrously dilates upon it to amuse his Reader But the sum of all comes to this That the words of Scripture are of no further use than as they are signs of conceptions and things and under that consideration they cannot be understood unless the things signified by them be first known at least in some gross and confused manner Whereof he gives us this instance that where we sind in Scripture that God is Omniscient we cannot understand this unless we first know what God is and what Omniscience is Therefore says he all the benefit that any can get by any Book that is written is but this that it stirs up the Mind of the Reader to reflect upon the clear and distinct Idea's of those things in his Mind which the Book treats of not that the Book can of it self bring him to the true knowledge of things much less that it can beget any clear or distinct Ideas in his Mind which were not there before And thus he tells us it is with the Scripture all the use of it is to stir up the Reader or Hearer to think of the things that it propounds and inquire into them and examine them whether they be so as they are there propounded and that they may do this they must make use of Philosophy to try what is there written Therefore adds he the Scripture is to be used not that it should of it self inform us in the truth or render the truth more clear and distinct or make it more firm to us but that it may give us occasion and matter of meditating on those things which perhaps otherwise we should never have minded Therefore says he still the utility and excellency of the Scriptures above other Books consists onely in this That the things it speaks of are of so great concernment to our everlasting blessedness not for any use they are of to instruct us in the Truth This is all the use that he allows the Scripture from whence I think will inevitably follow that he owns the necessity of no knowledge of God or Religion but what is natural And so all supernatural Revelation or at least all necessity of it is denied And if there be no other use of the Written Word but what this Author assigns it it s put into the same rank with a Crucifix or a Deaths Head Indeed the whole design of his Book and of that other Tract that is prefixed to its latter Edition written as is supposed by the same Author is utterly to undermine and overthrow the credit of the Scriptures We need not wonder that he so often derides and calumniates the Protestant Doctrine of the Spirits internal illumination of the Mind which consists in curing the indisposition of the Subject and fitting it for the right understanding of Heavenly Things of which more hereafter in an Appendix to my present Discourse when he will not allow the necessity of so much as an Enternal Light for the Revelation of Supernatural Objects as acknowledging no such things And he that is thus principled must needs be very ignorant of himself and of the ruines that Sin hath made among the whole Race of Adam and the woful depravation of Mans Nature by his first Apostasie But for the Readers full satisfaction about the necessity of Supernatural Revelation I dare commend to his perusal besides many other useful Discourses that might be named that excellent Piece of the Eminently-accomplish'd Sir Charles Wolsly concerning the Reasonableness of Scripture Belief CHAP. VII 1. A fifth Argument That this would open a gap to the most pernicious Errors in Matters of Faith 2. And Practice AGain fifthly This Assertion le ts loose the Bridle to proud and wanton Wits to overthrow the Foundations of Christian Religion for though there be not the least real repugnancy between the Doctrines of Christianity and the Principles of Right Reason and Sound Philosophy which undoubtedly there is not as I have already premised and asserted yet there being no certain and infallible Record of these Principles by which as by the Rule of Judgement particular Mens Reasonings may be tried If Scripture Revelation must be interpreted by Mens Reasonings I know not the any Error that hath ever crept into the Church of Christ either in matter of Faith or Practice since the first publication of the Gospel but may be introduced anew by this Engine The heretical Blasphemies of Servetus and Socinus which sprang up of late years and those of the Marcionites and Manichees that infested the Church in former times together with the loathsome impurities of the Gnosticks who esteemed themselves the only knowing Men or to speak in the new mode the onely Rational Divines have fair way made them by this Trim Device First Let us instance in Matters of Faith whatsoever is said in Scripture about the Creation of the World the Conception of our Saviour in a Virgins Womb the Personal Union of the two Natures the Resurrection of the Body at the last Day these with many more that might be named let them be brought to the Bar of Reason and tried by its Principles as they are to be found in the Minds of Men and what will it come to We have seen already what use some Men have made of this way to subvert the weightiest Truths of the Gospel But here it will be excepted perhaps by some That the Fundamentals of Christian Religion being clear and plain in Scripture there is no fear of this inconvenience To this I answer First If Divine Revelations must be no otherwise received or understood than as Men see ground for them in their own Reason the plainest and clearest Doctrines of Scripture will be rejected I shall here give two Instances as I find them quoted by a late learned Author The one is of Socinus who says That he would not believe Christ to have satisfied for our Sins though he should read it once and again in Scripture the infallibility of the Revealer not being sufficient to establish it unless he had declared it by its causes and effects and so satisfied Mens Reason concerning the possibility of it Smalcius is the other who says That he would not believe the Incarnation of the Son of God though he should meet with it in express terms in the Bible The same Author says elsewhere that by Reason alone we determine the possibility and impossibility of the Articles of Faith To which I might add the bold assertion of a late English Remonstrant in a Volume publish'd some years ago where he says I verily believe that in case any such unchangeableness of Gods love viz. as should assure the Saints infallible perseverance were to be found in or could regularly be deduced from the Scriptures it were a just ground to any considering Man to question their Authority or whether they were from God or no. And a late Belgick Tractator having affirmed that the
his holy Word Men whose glory it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let but others follow the Tract that some have already trodden out to them and they will make the whole Bible one great Cipher utterly insignificant of his Mind and Will by whose Authority it was endited and that which Erasmus feared in his time Ne sub obtentu priscae literaturae caput erigere tentet Paganismus may be unhappily fulfilled in our days CHAP. VIII The sixth and last Argument from one great end of Scripture-Revelation to supply the Defects and correct the Mistakes of our Reason An Exception of the Exercitator answered LAstly One great end of Scripture-Revelation is to help our Understandings in matters of Religion partly by rectifying our mistaken and depraved Reason and keeping us from being misled in the Things of God by the Principles we have received partly by supplying the defects of Reason acquainting it with those things which by its own Natural Light it could never reach being by their sublimity and mysteriousness wholly above it Therefore the Doctrine of Scripture doth in its tendency 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cast down reasonings and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 captivate every Notion or Conception to the obedience of Christ 2. Cor. 10. 5. For any therefore in matter of doubt or difficulty about the Sense of Scripture-Revelation to run to the Principles of Reason is to measure the Rule by that which should be measured by it And what a base dishonour is this to the Sacred Oracles to subject them to the usurp'd Dictatorship of that which is to be regulated by them and to submit themselves to its final Judgement But here the Exercitator replies That in the present case the Divine Oracles are not submitted to the Judgement of Reason or Philosophy but onely the Letters and Syllables the Words and Sentences of Scriture which are nothing but loquaces soni aut horum mutae notae some wordy sounds or the dumb signs of them framed for the purpose by Humane Institution which therefore may without any disparagement be subjected to the Judgement of Reason and Philosophy which are the eminent Gifts of God And for the better managing of this Plea he makes great use of a Discinction which he elsewhere inculcates to wit the consideration of the Scriptures Materially or Formally To this I answer 1. Surely had the Ancient Church been of this Gentlemans Mind they would never have so severely censured the Traditores that delivered up their Bibles to the Persecuters to save their own lives in the days of Dicolesian and it might have been pleaded in their behalf that they did not give up the Divine Oracles but only a heap of Dumb Signs or Characters in Ink and Paper 2. And the same would have justified the rage of Antiochus in tearing and burning the Books of the Law and the madness of the Papists in doing the like at several times by the Protestants Bibles all which might by the help of this shuffle have pleaded for themselves that they did not burn the Holy Scriptures no by no means but only a bundle of unsens'd Characters 3. As for the Exercitators distiction which is the foundation of this conceit I intend to deal with it hereafter when I come to speak of Scripture being its own Interpreter Therefore at present I shall let it pass CHAP. IX The contrary Arguments Examined and Answered the first from some Positions of the Exercitator about the manifold Sense of Scripture c. I Come now to examine what was alledged by the Adverse Part and to answer the Arguments whereby they would prove Reason and Philosophy to be the Scriptures best Interpreter 1. The Exercitator argues from some Positions by him formerly laid down which he supposes himself to have demon stratively proved in his 4th Chapter viz. That the next and immediate Sense of the Scripture is manifold and whatsoever Truths occur to the Readers Mind in the perusal of any Scripture they are all to be taken for the true intended sense and meaning of that Scripture and Philosophy being the true certain and undoubted knowledge of the nature of things demonstratively deduced from the Principles of Natural Light therefore by this the several Truths that lie in the Scripture may be best drawn out and demonstrated and all false Interpretations discovered and consequently this is the infallible Rule of Interpretation This is the Sum of his Argument For answer Here are many things crowded together in this captious Sorites which must be particularly discussed that the vanity and folly of the whole may the better appear 1. He supposes the immediate Sense of Scripture to be manifold and that one and the same Sentence of Scripture affords great variety of different Senses This I deny and do maintain with the consentient Judgment of the Reformed Churches that the Sense of Scripture is but one Thus much I grant 1. That there may be varions applications or accommodations made of one and the same Liâ—eral Sense of Scripture so it be done with due caution and â—o otherwise can that threefold Sense which some speak of Allegoricla Anagogical Tropological be allowed 2. That one single Sentence of Scripture may and frequently doth contain many very weighty Truths in it but these are not Co-ordinate Senses of the same Proposition this is but one the rest are but either some Specials included in their General or some deductions from Scripture Assertions as of Conclusions from their Principles wherein they are virtually comprehended 3. I further grant That sundry passages of Scripture especially in the Old Testament have a mystical Sense besides the Literal to wit when one thing is propounded as a Type representing somewhat else But then the thing signified by the words of Scripture is but one namely that onely which the Literal Sense exhibits which propounds the Type The Antitype is not signified by the words in those Scriptures but by the Type which those words do immediately speak of For example when we find in Numb 21. 8 9. how by God's command Moses set up a Brazen Serpent upon a Pole for the Bitten Israelite to look on that he might be heal'd these words that relate the History signifie no more than what they literally import But the Brazen Serpent there spoken of did indeed signifie somewhat else for it did tipically represent the future Crucifixion of Christ for the Salvation of Sinners as our Saviour himself hath taught us Joh. 3. 14. Indeed this conceit of the multiplicity of Senses serves our Exercitators turn very well because it helps to render the Scripture ambiguous and thereby obscure and that is the principal strength of his Cause of which I shall speak hereafter in due place Mean while let us see what he hath to say for this fancy Two kinds of proof he uses the one from Reason the other from the Testimony of learned Men. His Reasons are drawn from Gods Omniscience
perspicuous Revelation of God's Will Whatsoever may be the ignorance or darkness of Men which hinders them from knowing what God hath said in these Sacred Records yet the objective perspicuity of them is generally asserted by Protestants against the Romanists Not that all Truths revealed in Scripture are so low and common as in their own Nature to be obvious to Man's Understanding but that as to the manner of their delivery they are so laid down in the Scripture as that they may be understood by and from the Scripture yet we mean not that every part or passage of Scripture is clear For that there are many difficulties therein we acknowledge But that the mind of God is somewhere or other in Scripture plainly propounded so far as it is necessary for us to know it one part of it giving Light to another so that the whole Scripture taken together is a Perspicuous Manifestation of his will This is proved by Moses's words in Deut. 30. 12 13 14. Speaking of the Law and the Apostles words Rom. 10. 6. c. Speaking the same of the Gospel Hence the written Word is frequently compared to a Light and is said to give understanding to the Simple Had not the Scriptures been Perspicuous how could Timothy in his Childhood have understood them How could our Saviour out of them have convinced the Sadduces of the Doctrin of the Resurrection Or the Apostles out of them prove irrefragably the truth of their Doctrin against the gainsaying Jews Or how could the Bereans try the Apostles Doctrin by searching the Scriptures These are undeniable Proofs that the Scriptures are Perspicuous and that they have a plain and certain sense obvious to a considerate Reader But all this will signifie nothing if the Scripture have not that Light in it that may discover it self and clear up its own meaning without borrowing Light from some other Principle Now because much of the stress of this Cause lies on this we must a little consider what is said against it The late Romanists do generally cry out that the Scriptures are obscure partly that they may have the fairer colour to take them out of the Peoples hands lest they should mistake or pervert them though none among them have been more guilty of that than their Doctors of greatest name for Learning partly that they may bring in their unwritten Traditions as expository of Scripture-Revelations and partly also that they may establish a necessity of an Infallible Visible Judge here on Earth to Interpret Scriptures and decide all Controversies Yet I know not any of them but will own that many things in the Scripture are clear But there is a late Writer that denies this My next work therefore shall be to deal with him and clear the Truth from his exceptions in some of the following Chapters of this Discourse CHAP. IV. The Exercitators exception against the Scriptures Perspicuity from the ambiguity of words Answered THe Belgick Exercitator whom I have oft mentioned before that he may make sure work rises higher in denying the Scriptures Perspicuity than any that I have ever met with and with confidence affirms the Scripture to be universally obscure and that no part of it is of it self clear and plain and thereupon denies that one part of Scripture can be expounded by another Yea this he laies as the foundation of his main Assertion against the Scriptures Interpreting it self And one great Reason he gives is what he hath taken a great deal of tedious pedantick pains to prove in his third Chapter That all speech being made up of Words and Phrases is abscure and doubtful because the words whereof it consists are capable of different significations and consequently may be taken in a various sense and thus it is with the Scripture it is universally ambiguous and therefore obscure To this I Answer 1. If this Reason hold then there is no Speech or Writing in the World but will fall under the same unhappy fate No Law of the Land no letter of a Friend no Oral Discourse no Treatise of whatsoever Subject and how accurately soever written shall be accounted Intelligible For all Writings and Discourses are made up of the same kind of Words and Phrases and capable of being adorn'd with the same Tropes and Figures that the Scripture is and every whit as liable to be taken in for different senses And thus no man shall know how to speak or write any thing that can be clearly understood and that excellent gift of Speech which God hath bestowed upon men to be an instrument of society and converse shall be of no other use but to be made an Engine of deceit and treachery Secondly if things be thus to what end did this Author trouble himself to Write and others to read this Book of his if all Speeches and Writings be ambiguous and obscure and not to be understood without an Interpreter of what use is this Jewel of his fancy Did he hope to lead the whole World of Interpreters out of their Labyrinths into the right path by such an ignis fatuus that by its ambiguities and uncertainties may scare and amuse them and carry them hither and thither according to the wind of their own imaginations Or hath he attain'd to a faculty above all other Writers even the best and holiest to write in such Words and Phrases as might open his meaning without entangling his Readers in ambiguities If he thinks his Book be free from this blemish methinks he might have had the modesty to conceive that the Pen-men of Scripture knew how to write as well as he If his thoughts of his Book were otherwise he might have kept it to himself and fed the Moths with it Thirdly yet again if it be thus that all words in whatsoever contexture be so ambiguous and obscure what will become of this Infallible Interpreter which our Author would set up For whatsoever Interpretation be made of any Scripture it must be framed in such words as other men use and as all kind of Writings are drawn up in and if when all is done these be obscure what are we the better For certainly according to this Authors argument even the first Principles of Nature and the most unquestionable Maxims of Philosophy when turn'd into Words and Sentences will be as ambiguous and consequently as dark as the Scriptures Fourthly whereas his impeaching the Scriptures of Ambiguity and Obscurity is not only to disable them from expounding themselves but that he may set up Philosophy as the only Interpreter he instances in several Scriptures which he says are thus Ambiguous and Obscure in the clearing whereof Philosophy cannot possibly afford us any help As for Example when he supposeth of our Saviour's Words in Joh. 5. 39. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it 's doubtful whether this be to be taken Imperatively search the Scripture or Indicatively ye do search the Scriptures Can any
which the words offer may be plain and easie when the sense that the Author intends by them which is a clean other thing is very dark and obscure And so confident is the Gentleman in this conceit that he superciliously slights Expositors of Scripture for not minding this distinction and for want hereof taking oft times the simple sense for the true one To make this wild and senseless distinon good he instanceth in several passages of Scripture wherein he would make us believe this Two-fold sense is to be found I shall therefore before I proceed endeavour to clear those Passages or the principal of them Sect. 2. One instance he gives is of those expressions in Scripture The Arme and Finger of God The simple sense of which Words and that which they do of themselves offer to the Reader he sayes is very obvious being known by common use but â—he thinks no Divine so void of Wit as to take that obvious sense for the true meaning of the Author By this it appears this Gentleman conceives that the sense which those Words of themselves offer is proper without any Trope or Figure as if God had a bodily Arme or Finger as a Man hath But by his favour he is greatly out The Arme and Finger of God according to common acceptation with any that are vers'd in the Scriptures have no other than an improper sense nor do they signifie any more than the Power of God though the word Arme or Finger either singly taken or applyed to Men signifies somewhat else according to that known Maxime Verba sunt intelligenda secundum subjectam materiam Words are to be understood according to the subject matter about which they are used And this holds in all manner of Speeches and Writings whatsoever the matter in hand directs to the sense of the Words A second instance is in Joh. 14. 6. where our Saviour says I am the Way the Truth and the Life What obvious sense it is that this Author conceives from common use of speech to be in these words different from our Saviours meaning I cannot divine Nor can I see how they can signifie any more or less to him that is acquainted with the Doctrine of the Gospel than what our Saviour means by them who calls himself The Way by no unapt Metaphor because as himself expounds it in the latter end of the Verse it is by Him that Sinners are to come to the Father that is to Reconciliation with him and fruition of him It is by Him that is by the Merit of his Blood by the Light of his Doctrine by the Conduct of his Pattern and by the Power of his Spirit And herein he is The Truth that is the Substance and real Completion of all the Types and Shadows under the Law and consequently he is The Life by a known Metonyme of the effect for the cause in that he is the Author that is the Purchaser and Bestower of that Eternal Life that Sinners come to enjoy in God A further instance is given in those words of our Saviour This is my Body where he affirms That the plain and easie sense which the words of themselves offer to the Reader is that which the Romish Church takes them in but the sense of our Saviour in speaking them which he grants to be that which the Reformed Churches give of them this he says is dark and obscure But I suppose he cannot be ignorant that there are considerable Doctors of the Romish Church eminent for Learning who have acknowledged that they should never have entertained that sense of the words which asserts Transubstantiation if the Authority of the Church had not moved them And our Writers have abundantly manifested the gross absurdity of that sense and among others Dr. Brevint in his late excellent Discourse of the Mystery of the Romish Mass hath clearly and to great satisfaction proved the Protestant sense of that speech of our Saviours from the very words themselves I cannot well understand by this Authors discourse of what setled Perswasion he is in matters of Religion He now and then insinuates something that carries with it a dislike of the Romanists and their way But it is plain enough by this and many other passages in his Book that the Reformed Churches are little befriended by him Lastly He instances in those Scriptures where God is said to be Lord of Heaven and Earth the King of Nations and King of Kings and where he is said to have begotten a Son Psal. 2. and to have loved the World Joh. 3. 16. In all which he says the obvious but mistaken sense and that which the Vulgar apprehend is that God after the manner of men is a Lord and King and doth beget and love which he esteems to be grosly absurd To these I answer distinctly 1. As for the places where God is called Lord and King and said to Reign over the Nations with all of like import in these we are taught by what we find elsewhere in Scripture to remove from God whatever savours of imperfection and to ascribe nothing to him but what suits with a most excellent and most perfect Being Nor do the aforesaid Expressions in their plain and obvious sense signifie either more or less than that God is the Universal Sovereign of the World Ruling his Creatures with infinite Wisdom and Power according to their different natures and conditions the Inferiour sort by instinct and natural necessity his Intellectual Creatures by Laws as the proper Instrument of Moral Government And what the Exercitators sentiments are about this I cannot conjecture If he be for that Novel Opinion of Thomas Anglus ab Albis that God doth not properly Govern us by Laws as Kings do their Kingdoms but as an Engineer doth his Engine by Physical Motion and that therefore he is call'd our Lord and King only in a Metaphorical sense I must enter a dissent against such an absurd and Atheistical conceit and put him to prove his Assertion and answer the Arguments that are in print against it 2. As for the second Of begetting a Son Psal 2. 7. Interpreters do much differ about it Some conceive the first and immediate sense of the words to respect David whom God had delivered out of his great afflictions and rais'd to a Kingdom which deliverance and exaltation was to him as a second Birth And this they illustrate by what is said of the Roman Emperors that they had two Birth-days the one of their Persons when they came into the World the other of their Empire when they were seated in the Throne and that Christ is here intended only as the Antitype prefigured by David Others understand these words properly and immediately of Christ and that with respect to one of these two either 1. To his Eternal Generation in reference to which he is called the Eternal and only begotten Son of God The truth of which Generation we
right means to understand is confess'd But the multitude of Expositions doth not at all prove the Scripture to be so obscure as to be disabled for being the supreme Rule to Interpret it self For whatsoever Notes or Commentaries are written upon the Bible by Learned Men they are either such as truly conduce to the supposed End the right understanding of the Scripture and consequently to the due practical improvement of what is so understood or they fail of this and do rather darken and cloud the Text. These of the latter sort do not deserve the Honour to be esteemed Interpretations of Scripture for they render the sense of it more inâ—…icate and perplex And truly it hath been no unusual thing for Men that write only to make ostentation of their Learning and draw the eyes of others upon them or to make trial of their Wits in their attempts upon the Scripture to vent some odd Notions that serve rather to amuse than edifie the Reader and leave him more in the dark than when he perused the Text alone without their Gloss as it hath fared with some voluminous Commentators upon Aquinas who under pretence of expounding their Author have run out into so many intricate and frivolous Questions that by that time they have done they have left the Authors Text less intelligible than it was before they medled with it Truly so it is with some that have undertaken to write upon the Holy Scriptures But I take such Mens Writings rather for Depravations than Expositions And the chief cause of this evil hath been what this Exercitator is not well aware of that they made too much use of their Philosophick Notions in their Endeavours to Interpret Scripture-Revelations On the other hand if Commentaries or Annotations on Scripture be such as do contribute any help towards the unfolding of the true sense this hath been chiefly by collecting and comparing the several parts of Scripture together and considering the circumstances of each Text expounded and so fetching the sense of Scripture from the Scripture it self which is the only sure and warrantable way of Interpretation CHAP. IX 1. The third and last Branch of my first Argument the Scriptures Authentickness 2. The Exercitators Exception removed 3. Wolzogen's Exception denying God to be the Interpreter of Scripture answered HAving vindicated the second Branch of my first Argument viz. The Scriptures Perspicuity from the many Exceptions made against it I proceed to the third and last viz. That the Scripture is the only Authentick Record of the Mind and Will of God For it is the certain and undoubted Voice of God himself and what that speaks He speaks And who so fit to Interpret the meaning of his Words as himself Ejus est Interprâ—tari cujus est condere is an approved Rule in the Civil Law He that made the Law is fittest to Interpret it And in the present case the Reason is evident God best knows his own Mind and he hath no where so plainly and fully revealed his Mind as in Scripture Certainly there can be none so sure and infallible Interpreter of these sacred Records as the Holy Spirit that endited them and he Interprets them not by suggesting to us any thing for their understanding which is not there already but by speaking to us more clearly from some part of Scripture what is deliver'd more darkly in others Can any Man or sort of Men in the World pretend to know the Mind of God better than himself or give us better assurance what his Mind is than the Word which himself hath appointed to be written for this very purpose Whatsoever sense may be put upon any Scripture-Assertion and by whomsoever framed it cannot challenge our undoubted reception unless we can discern the Voice of God in it And that is no where to be heard with evidence and assurance especially in matters of Supernatural Revelation which is that we chiefly deal with in this Controversie but from the Scripture it self But here the Exercitator comes in with his Reply For acknowledging that without controversie God is an Infallible Interpreter and that the Scripture is the Voice of God he nevertheless denies that therefore it will follow that the Scripture can be its own Interpreter or the Rule of Interpretation to it self because says he the same Author may write several Treatises and yet it follows not that the one should Interpret the other To this I answer The comparison is very unequal Men write of different Subjects many times and for very different Ends and may withal so far forget themselves or be so unconstant to themselves as to cross in one Discourse what they have written in another But God the Author of Scripture hath designed that whole Volume to one and the same Use and End to be a Declaration of his Mind to Men that they may thereby be directed in their greatest affairs and have a sure Guide to Happiness It is therefore every way most consistent with his Wisdom and Goodness so to order the enditing of Scripture in matters of so great excellency and necessity that his Mind may be known from the Scriptures themselves either by the plainness of the particular Sentences or by the dependence on and connexion with the Antecedents and Consequents or Collation with the more remote parts thereof But there is another Author who pretending to maintain the Protestant Cause against the Exercitator deals less candidly with us than that profess'd Adversary For in stead of answering the aforesaid Exception he says again and again That God is not nor can properly be said to be the Interpreter of Scripture or the Expositor of his own Mind therein And he gives us this strange reason for it Because to this it 's necessary that by an Oracle that is I suppose either by audible Voice or secret instinct he should according to the Enthusiasts fancy expresly pronounce to us that this or that is the sense of such or such a Scripture Unless he do this he cannot be allow'd by this Dictator to be the Interpreter of the Scriptures To this I reply Do we not all acknowledge that the Scripture is the Word of God and that God speaks to us in it and that what that says God says And is it not the usual Language of the Holy Ghost in the Bible that the Scripture saith thus and thus which sure can be no otherwise taken for truth or sense but as the Scripture is the Voice of God to us And Wolzogen himself says several times that in the Scripture God speaks to us after the manner of men And seeing sometimes the Text is so plain that it speaks clearly its own mind and sometimes what is spoken in one part of Scripture is explained by what is spoken in another both which himself acknowledgeth why may it not with as much propriety be said that God is the Interpreter of his own Mind in Scripture though he use no
of Scripture may have correspondency with another and this so far as that the one may expound the other But now the case is alter'd If it be replied in his behalf That these places by him quoted were penned by one and the same Writer and therefore might well have correspondency each with other but this makes nothing for those who interpret one part of Scripture by some other that was not written by the same Hand I rejoin That the first and second Book of Kings were endited by the same Spirit I grant and shall make some use of it in my third Answer to this Authors Objection But that they were both written by the same Hand or suppose they were that the Writer intended by the latter to explain what he had written in the former is more than he or any other for him can prove 3. The Scriptures though written by parts and at several times and by several persons yet they all own God for their Author by whose Spirit they were endited and they are all together to be taken for his Counsel to Sinners And then what injury or incongruity is there in making use of what one hath written more plainly to unfold what was more darkly written by another When we compare the Evangelists together to explain what one says more briefly by what another lays down more fully we do not in this so much inquire into the sense and meaning of the Evangelists as into the Mind of God whose Secretaries they were The like may be said of the Prophets If the Prophets or Apostles spake of their own heads or wrote only a signification of their own private Sentiments there might be some colour for this Objection But the Apostle tells us That no Prophesie of Scripture is of private Interpretation that is the Prophets in their Writings were not the Interpreters of their own Mind but of the Mind of God by whom they were sent and by whose Spirit they were acted as it follows in the next Verse For Prophesie came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost And thus much the Exercitator acknowledgeth where he saith That God is the Author of the Scriptures and that he did always guide his Amanuenses to write the Truth giving them the assistance of his unerring Spirit and that whatsoever they wroteâ—… pure Truth free from all mixture of Fâ—â—shood or Errour But there is another Discourse prefixed to a latter Edition of the so oft-mentioned Exercitation and thought by many to come from the same Author the Writer whereof sticks not to assert this audacious Falshood That the Prophets in their Narkatives and in all matters of Speculation that is whatsoever was not matter of moral Duty did disagree among themselves and â—onsequently that what is said by one is not to be explained by the words of another Which with other passages of like import does at once call in question the whole Truth and consequently the Divine Authority of the Scriptures For if the Pâ—â—men of Scripture elash one against another in their Writings either God was not the Author of whâ—â— they wrote but themselves or the God of Truth must be charged with Falshood for of two diâ—…ent Opinions both cannot be true Whose design it is that the Author of that Theologico-Political Tractat drives except that of the great Enemy of Mankind I know not But he sufficiently manifests a vile esteem of the Holy Scriptures and a desire to beget the like in others For he takes very earnest pains with the utmost of his art and skill to â—â—ke up and exagitate their seeming disagreements as real contradictions casting a great deal of scorn upon all Expositors as Fools or Madmen that attempt to reconcile them His discourse in this and sundry other odious passages which I abâ—or to mention doth apparently tend to promote the cause of the Antiscripturists besides the help 〈◊〉 affords which is not a little to the Romish Interest The Author indeed would seem by some Expressions here and there to intimate his dislike of the Ponâ—ifician Party But we know it is consistent enough with the Politick Principles of Men of that way to speak much more than he hath done against that very Cause that they are studiously projecting under that Covert to advance But I return from this Digression to what I was about If any thing in the Laws of a Kingdom be difficult and perplex and there be something in some other Law of the same Kingdom though written or printed by other hands that speaks more clearly of that matter what wrong is it to the Law or the Law-maker or Printer if a Learned Council comparing one with another expound that which is more dark in one part of the Laws by that which is more perspicuous in another both proceeding from the same Authority and both obliging to the same persons Judge alike in the present case This Objection therefore is of no force But it is further urged That there are some difficult places of Scripture that are no where explained in any other part and some things that being but once spoken in Scripture cannot be explained by any parallel place And here our â—â—ercitator refers us for instances to his great Friend Stapleton For answer 1. Whereas it is said there are difficulties in some parts of Scripture that are no where cleared how does any Man know this Doth it follow that there is no such thing because we cannot find it Do we think our selves of so piercing or capacious understandings that nothing in the Scripture that is intelligible can escape our discovery Those who have acquainted themselves with Antient and Modern Expositors do know that many difficulties which former Interpreters have in vain struggled with and some that they have wholly left untoucht either as not apprehending them to be difficulties or conceiving them insuperable have been made very clear and plain by some later Writers Verily God will have us know that the opening of his Mind doth not depend only or chiefly upon the pregnancy of Mans Wit but upon his gracious assistance and blessing which he affords or withholds when and where himself sees fit Again the Scriptures were penn'd not only for the past and present but for all succeeding Ages of the Church to the end of the World And as some parts of them which peculiarly concern'd some Ages past were perhaps better understood in those Ages than they can be by us now as certainly many things were that belong'd to the Jewish Oeconomy so I know not but we may rationally suppose that some other parts of Scripture which to us seem unintelligible may have special reference to the Church in after-Ages and that those whom they so nearly concern shall have more light afforded for the understanding of them in their days than we have in ours As without doubt some Prophetick Scriptures not
yet accomplished will be made clear by the event when they come to be fulfilled If there be any difficulties in any one part of Scripture which cannot be clear'd from some other by the best inquiry we can make it will be a vain thing to attempt the finding of it out any other way but we must be in such cases content to be ignorant of their meaning Nor yet will those Scriptures be utterly useless or in vain to us if from their obscurity we can learn this needful Lesson the more reverently to adore the Majesty of the written Word and more humbly to acknowledge our own ignorance and weakness And to this may be referr'd what is objected about the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where the sense is not obvious Yet again it is objected If the Scripture be its own sufficient Interpreter what mean those many Rules that Divines give for the right understanding of Scripture If the Scripture it self be the only Rule what need is there of all these Thus the Exercitator who makes a particular enumeration of several Rules that are given by St. Austin and others To this childish Cavil which the Author brings in by the by I answer Whatsoever Rules are given by Divines for the right Interpretation of Scripture such as are sound and good are only to direct the Reader how with most ease and greatest certainty to fetch the sense of Scripture from the Scripture it self Those Rules therefore being but subordinate and ministerial do no way contradict or overthrow this which is the Supreme and Autoâ—ratorical Suppose a Master-workman having a Building to frame imploy some under him who are as yet raw and unskilful till they have gotten some insight into the Carpenters or Masons Art when he shews them as they must have a learning how to use the Square or the Rule or the Plumb-line surely his direction that he gives them doth not at all argue the uselessness or insufficiency of those Instruments for the purpose to which they are designed but rather the contrary so is it in the present case those inferiour and subservient Rules that are prescribed by any for the expounding of Scripture are designed and directed if they be such as they should be to teach Men how to make use of the Supreme Rule the Scripture it self for the better finding out of the Mind of God in it Having confirm'd my Proposition vindicated my Arguments for it and answer'd the Objections against it it is time for me to draw to a Conclusion As for the Exercitator with whom I have mostly dealt in this Controversie when I weigh his Arguments I cannot but wonder at his confidence But he who hath no better Weapons must fight with a Bull-rush And it is now become the mode of Polemick Writers that have Prurient Wits to sharpen their dull Arguments with high confidence in themselves and a proud contempt of their Antagonists in both which this Author excels but it is such an excellency for which no Wise or sober Man will envy him THE Conclusion THE Author whom I have chiefly and designedly dealt with hitherto having engaged himself in a Contest with the whole World of Christian Writers especially with the Expositors of Scripture and having in his own apprehension won the day comes in his Epilogue to make preparation for his Triumph bringing forth his Spoils and telling us how greatly he hath bless'd the World with his Exploits and lest we should be ignorant of our Happiness acquir'd by his Victorious Arms he sets it out in six considerable Points 1. He tells us This new way of Interpretation being sure and infallible will if it be taken forthwith banish all Disputes about the sense of Scriptures and thereby restore Peace to the Christian World But I wonder how this should be effected by Philosophy which is it self so full of Disputes and the Professors whereof are at such variance among themselves Let them first reconcile their own Differences before they undertake so great an Enterprise elsewhere 2. It will be a great ease to the Interpreter because whatever sense he can make of any part of Scripture if Philosophy allow it for a Truth he may be sure it is the sense of that Text this way allowing a plurality of immediate senses in the same Scripture and where it is thus it is easier says he to find the true meaning than where according to the Protestants opinion the sense is but one And yet sure when we speak of inquiring after the sense of Scripture we mean the whole sense not part of it only And if many senses may be more easily found out than one then perhaps our Author may find it an easier thing to gain a thousand Proselytes than one to his new way 3. This will save Men the labour of searching Commentators because in this way they may by their own industry find out the Mind of God without any help from others And so they may according to his Principles without ever looking into the Bible at all 4. By this way we may best find out all Corruptions Depravations and Mutilations of the Original Text whether Hebrew or Greek And is it not pity the Antient Church did not think of this happy Expedient that they might have call'd a Council of Learned Philosophers such as Porphyrie Celsus and others to draw them up a more correct Copy of the Bible 5. 6. By this we may know how to judge of all various Lections which are Genuine which not yea by this we may discover the Errours of Translations made out of depraved Copies or Spurious Readings though we have no skill at all in the Original Tongues Doubtless a singular Receipt that will help a Man to distinguish of Colours in the darkest Mid-night as well as at Noon-day We see what a rare Pampharmacon this AEsculapius hath prescribed which he may well call his Nostrum that can work as great Wonders as the Headsman's Ax that infallibly cures all Diseases with one Blow For that his grand design is utterly to cashier the Scripture as useless and unprofitable is plain enough by sundry passages in his Book but especially that in his Epilogue which I lightly touched at in the first part of my Discourse Chap. 6. but deserves a more severe Castigation The Scripture with him is of no use to instruct us in any thing we know not nor yet to confirm us in what we know All the use he allows it is only this that by reading therein we may be occasion'd and excited to consider of the things there treated of and examine the truth of them by Philosophy And as much as this might be said of the Jews Talmud or the Turks Alcoran Was there ever any who call'd himself a Christian since the Christian Name was heard of that hath manifested a more vile esteem of Gods Written Word or a more bold contempt of the whole Christian Doctrine Hath God in mercy left us this only
That nothing is in the Understanding that hath not been first in the sense Which says he the Divines receiving for an undoubted truth did never call off their minds from their senses and finding the knowledge drawn from thence to be very lame and imperfect and next to nothing they judged all rational knowledge to be no better yet happening by chance sometimes to make use of their mere understanding in the perception of some things and thereby attaining some true and solid knowledge which they found to be of a far other nature than that which they used to fetch from the senses therefore they took this latter kind of knowledge to be something Divine and Supernatural To this I answer 1. By what Power or Authority doth this confident Gentleman break Windows into the breasts of others and take upon him to know the secret thoughts and inward conceptions of their minds Did they ever tell him that this was their apprehension of things or that their Doctrine of Supernatural Light was built upon the Authority of Aristotle or deduced from any of his Axioms Or doth his New Philosophy furnish him with skill sufficient to search the hearts of Men touching their particular Sentiments as he pretends it doth to shew him the mind of God in Scripture-Revelations I think it furnisheth him for both alike But I wish it had taught him better to know himself 2. Neither were Aristotle nor his Followers such Dolts or Blockheads in maintaining the forementioned Axiom as to take it in that absurd meaning that nothing could be received into the Understanding but what is the Object of Sense For they clearly maintain the knowledge of those things that fall not under sense as of God and Angels and of Universals that are abstracted from sense But that all our knowledge of things without us comes in by the Senses especially by those two that are not unfitly called the Senses of Discipline Sight and Hearing is I think evident enough by all Experience besides what we find in Scripture concerning the knowledge we have of God which is either Natural or by Revelation Now as for the former the Apostle sure was not deceived by Aristotle's Axiom when he tells us That the invisible things of God from the Creation of the World are clearly seen being understood by the things that are made even his Eternal Power and Godhead And for the knowledge of things revealed we are taught by the same Apostle that Faith cometh by hearing And our Saviour's most usual method of Preaching by Parables may shew us how requisite it is for Man in this state to have his understanding inform'd even in things Spiritual and Heavenly by the help of sense and sensible Objects The other passage is that where he says That this Supernatural Light is a thing unintelligible he knows not what to make of it nor how to conceive of it Is it says he something ordinary or is it extraordinary To his Demand I answer It is beyond the reach of corrupted and depraved Nature and so it is extraordinary but it is the inseparable priviledge of renew'd Nature and so far it is ordinary for it is communicated to all who partake in the saving Grace of Christ. But 2. Whereas this Author says He knows not what this enlightening of the Spirit is I easily believe him considering what our Saviour says of the Spirit of Truth which he promised to his Disciples That the World could not receive him because it seeth him not neither receiveth him And it is no wonder for Men to speak slightingly or contemptuously of the things they know not Upon which very account many excellent Truths plainly revealed in the Gospel are by audacious Wits exploded and derided as unintelligible Mysteries Yet 3. Me thinks Mens Reason might tell them if it were not wofully blinded by pride prejudice or passion that the unaccountableness of the nature of a thing or of the manner how it is can be no sufficient Argument against its existence The most perspicacious Inquirers into the Secrets of Nature do acknowledge themselves convinced of the certain existence of many things the nature whereof and the manner of their production they are not able to conceive much less to discover Thou knowest not says Solomon what is the way of the Spirit nor how the Bones do grow in the Womb of her that is with Child It is beyond the ken of Mans understanding infallibly to know or demonstratively to prove 1. The way of the Spirit or Soul whether it be produced by Creation or Traduction or what other way And 2. How the Body is form'd in the Womb. I know some learned Men have gone far in their Discoveries but the ablest of them have been put to a stop meeting with some knots which they could not untie I might ask these Curious Questionists How they can solve the many Doubts that may be raised about the Species of sensible Objects and about the Phantasms in the Mind or give us a satisfying account whence they come how they are framed and where it is that they are first received Or I might demand of them Which way the Soul and Body are united to each other and how they come to act one upon another with a thousand more difficulties that occur where the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is unsearchable though the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be undeniable How much more may this be affirm'd of things purely revealed the sublimity whereof so vastly exceeds the former Secondly Another thing these Men dislike is That the Spirits enlightening of the Mind is said to be Immediate 1. Now if the word Immediate be taken as it is sometimes explain'd for such as supersedes Man's use of God's appointed means as if he were to expect some internal voice or impulse to reveal to him the Mind of God we disclaim all Immediate Actings of the Spirit in this sense But if Immediate be taken as it may very properly for such an operation of the Holy Spirit as doth Immediatè attingere mentem that by it self without the interposition of any second cause reacheth the mind of Man so we maintain that there is no effectual operation of the Spirit of God upon the Soul of Man but what is in this sense Immediate For what created Agent is there to come between the Spirit of God and the Soul of Man or that can by its own efficiency come at the Soul of Man to work upon it This nothing can do but an Infinite Spirit If any will say That there is something else comes between the Spirit of God and the Soul of Man in this business let them assign what it is Is it the Scripture it self That can act but Objectively nor can it do that further than it is understood and believed That therefore which works upon the Mind by a proper efficiency to redress the indisposition of the Faculty and to enable it to know and
the largest portion shall know that there is a wide difference between Earth and Heaven and that they are yet but Pilgrims and in their wilderness-state though he sometimes gives them for their encouragement a Pisgah-sight of that Heavenly Canaan towards which they are passing But what must all the forementioned joys and refreshing comforts that the Holy Scripture speaks of and the experience of the Saints bears witness to be counted no better than a juggle or a cheat the transport of frantick raptures or the mere illusion of an Enthusiastick fancy refresh'd with brisk and active spirits and filled with warm and sprightly imaginations Was it such an imaginary comfort that David pray'd for when he says Make me to hear joy and gladness that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice And again Restore to me the joy of thy Salvation And when the Psalmist says In the multitude of my thoughts within me thy comforts delight my Soul And again To the upright there ariseth light in the darkness Is this nothing but the raising of the Blood and the breaking out of the natural spirits from the oppression of melancholick fumes and refreshing the drooping fancy When the Apostle professeth that he was filled with comfort and exceeding joyful in all his tribulations Was this nothing but the effect of a Sanguine Complexion or the product of pleasing Phantasms Did this make Paul and Silas sing in their chains or was it this that cheer'd the hearts of those Blessed Martyrs who with so much joy and triumph embraced the Stake and clapped their half-consumed hands in the midst of the flames To say nothing of the many instances that might be given both in elder and later times of Persons eminent for Wisdom and Holiness who in languishing sicknesses when their Bodies have been so wasted and their strength so impair'd that they could not stir to feed or help themselves the whole frame of nature being broken by cruciating and consuming pains yet have then felt those inward Joys in their Souls which they could not siother but as Men that stood upon the threshold of Glory and had a ravishing sight and sense of the unconceivable pleasures of that other World have with that vigor and alacrity and yet with judgment and prudence poured out Praises and Thanksgivings to their Gracious Redeemer that it hath at once delighted and astonished the hearts of their intelligent Friends that came to visit them I cannot think it possible that the truth of these things should be question'd by any that do indeed believe the Scriptures and have felt the power of the Word upon their hearts But there is a Scoptick Generation of Men whose minds are so tinctur'd with a profane gaiety that the whole Bible is become to them no better than a Play-Book or a Romance upon which they love to exercise their drolling Wits by putting the Doctrines and Discourses of the Prophets and Apostles into a ridiculous dress the better to expose them to the scorn of Infidels as if they read that sacred Volume to no other purpose than as a late Author speaks of some to enable them to blaspheme God in his own stile I have indeed oft wonder'd what should betray any to this fond and iâ—rational conceit of resolving the Agonies of distress'd Consciences and the contrary Joys of serious Christians under assurance into the different temperature of their Bodies and the suitable workings of their Fancy till I met with a piece of new Divinity in a late Belgick Tractator and then I began to suspect out of what Chimny came all this smoke For this account doth that Gentleman give us of the Holy Prophets mentioned in Scripture That their Revelations proceeded from the strength and heighth of Imagination and were diversified according to the different temper and constitution of their Bodies which caused different workings in their fancy Hence he says those Prophets that were of cheerful and debonair complexion prophesied altogether of Peace and Prosperity Victory over Enemies and all things to Mens hearts content these being such things as best suited with their Imaginations On the other side those Prophets that were sad and melancholick or of angry and morose tempers they altogether prophesied of War and Blood-shed Desolation and Destruction these being such things as their drooping and dejected Fancy did most run upon Accordingly he tells us that whatsoever Revelations the Prophets received they did not at all better or advance their Understandings or beget in them any solid knowledge They were good honest Men indeed but none of the wisest for Men of note for Wisdom never were Prophets that being a work that belong'd to the Imagination and not to the Judgment In the same Chapter he undertakes to give us a reason why Josiah when he had heard the Book of the Law read in his ears and was thereby made apprehensive of some impendent calamity would not send to the Prophet Jeremy though then living because forsooth he was a Melancholick Man and one who by his many sufferings and hard usage was grown weary of his life and therefore was not likely to prophesie any good But he chose to send rather to the Prophetess Huldah who being a Woman and so it seems according to the softness of that Sex more inclined to tenderness and compassion was a fitter instrument for God to reveal his Mercy by This is a piece of that Authors Political Atheology And truly I know no kind of Divinity if we may call any such thing by that name from which this conceit that we have under consideration can more fairly be thought to derive its original But if we must look any higher for its pedegree I cannot tell whom to father it upon next to the Father of Lyes unless it be that Arabian Philosopher of great note for Learning who is said to ascribe the Miracles wrought by the Primitive Christians to the power of an exalted Imagination by virtue of which he says they had entertain'd a strong conceit of the Deity of their Master and this fancy in his apprehension was that which wrought such Wonders in Christs Name Whether that which heightened this Pagans confidence to so bold and absurd an assertion were any extraordinary skill he had in the Anatomy of the Brain or the Laws of Mechanism I know not But whatever grounds he might be supposed to have I think none that heartily owns the Christian Name will ascribe such a ridiculous perswasion to the depth of his Philosophy but to the heighth of his Infidelity CHAP. III. 1. Regular Zeal in the Duties of Religion justified 2. And vindicated from the charge of Enthusiasm 3. Madness 4. Dissimulation and placing the whole of Religion in such fervors 5. And of aiming at ill ends I Come now in the last place to speak something of the prejudices taken at those fervors that appear in some in the Exercises of Religion breaking forth
deep Cave in the Mount Parnassus near Apollo's Temple out of which proceeded a cool Air which being driven upward by a certain Wind did turn the minds of the Prophets into Madness who being thus inspired were forced to give Responses to those who came to consult with the Oracle Wolzogen is much briefer in citing this of Justin for he says no more out of him but this That the minds of the Prophets were turned into madness when they were filled with God But I have related it something more largely out of the Author himself that the Reader may the better understand the Historians meaning And is it not a goodly piece of service and greatly for the honour of Religion that a Christian Writer should compare the temper of the Lords Prophets speaking by Inspiration from Heaven to the Fanatick Fury of those Diabolical Prophets that were evidently acted by a blast from Hell He that hath so little Reverence for those Worthies who were infallibly asssted in what they preach'd and wrote as to speak thus reproachfully of them no wonder if he trample upon the Servants of the same Lord now But what do I speak of the dishonour done to the Servants of God by a Man that speaks so irreverently of God himself and his Holy Word in many passages throughout his Book as is obvious enough to the view of every unbyass'd Reader 2. Let it be consider'd what colour there can be for this Imputation when the Persons thus charged are known to be sober and considerate and in all their discourses and affairs as rational as other Men and as composed every way as any of those who thus traduce them As therefore when some said blasphemously of our blessed Saviour He hath a Devil and is mad why hear ye him Others made answer These are not the words of him that hath a Devil As if they had said Men possest or mad do not speak after this rate or carry themselves after this manner So may I say of those who are now reproach'd for Mad-men by a Generation of the same profane temper Examine the behaviour of those who are thus calumniated observe their grave deportment their serious discourse their circumspect carriage their prudent conduct of affairs and let sober Reason judge whether these be the effects of Madness Tush may some say this is nothing Men may have a partial or particular madness that takes them in some things while they remain sober in others They may be very sedate and composed in their other affairs and yet in matters of Religion they may be quite beside themselves For a Reply to this 1. Be it so then perhaps the Objectors may be as much concern'd in this as any others and the charge may be retorted upon themselves though they speak and act like Men of Reason in other things yet it seems in matters of Religion they may be mad Ipsi viderint Let themselves look to it The Prophet Jeremy saith of the Babylonians that they were Mad upon their Idols And I have heard many years ago that Doctor Holdsworth then Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge did in his Speech at the Publick Commencement complain of some in his time that were ad insaniam usque superstitiosi superstitious unto madness But 2. We will not let it go thus The Persons we are speaking of and pleading for are such as can and do give as intelligent an account whensoever required as any other of what they profess and practise in matters of Religion from the unerring Word of Truth This they plead for to this they appeal by the Precepts of this they live and in the hopes of what is there promised through the Grace of Christ they resolve to die And if this be the Cognisance and Character of Mad-men then let us henceforth look for Sober Persons no where but in Taverns Play-Houses and Bedlams and reckon all other for Mad. 3. Many instances might be given of those who while in the days of their vanity they were strangers to the power and life of Godliness had the same contemptible apprehensions of these things and have with a kind of disdain wonder'd what those persons ailâ—d whom they perceived to be zealously affected in matters of Religion above the common rate But after they came to feel the perswasive efficacy of that Regenerating Grace which some are bold to deride changing their hearts they have seen things with other eyes and with indignation wonder'd at themselves that they should be so slight and stupid in matters of so infinite concernment I doubt not but St. Paul while he was a persecuting Pharisee wonder'd at the Christians as a company of Mad-men for what they profess'd and did But afterward when his eyes were open'd to see his errour he counted himself no better than Mad for what he had formerly done agaiâ—st them To which I may add in the last place That many of those who in the days of their health and jollity have derided the persons we speak of for a company of silly distracted Fools when a Death-bed hath awaken'd their Conscience and brought them to a more sober use of their Reason and a more serious view of Eternity have then changed their minds and heartily wisht themselves of the number of those whom they have formerly reproach'd and would be glad to have some of their Oyl to put into their own dying Lamps before they were to engage in their last conflict and pass from hence into another World But however the time is hastening when these Calumniators will be sufficiently convinced of their folly and take their own reproaches home to themselves when that shall be fulfill'd that the Author of the Book of Wisdom tells us That the Righteous Man shall stand with great boldness before the face of such as have afflicted him and made no account of his labours When they see it they shall be troubled with terrible fear and shall be amazed at the strangeness of his Salvation so far beyond all that they looked for And they resenting and groaning for anguish of spirit shall say within themselves This was he whom we had sometimes in derision and a proverb of reproach We Fools counted his life madness and his end to be without honour How is he numbred with the Children of God and his lot is among the Saints But may some say there have been many Pretenders to the Spirit both in former and latter Ages who have abused the World 1. Very true and what will you conclude from thence There likewise have been and are many Pretenders to Learning and Honesty who by their cunning slights and artifices have deceived many Is this any prejudice to Learning and Honesty where they indeed are Or must we resolve that these are no where to be found because of such false Pretenders Is this to argue like Men of Reason 2. The Apostle tells us That the Devil transforms himself into