Again; fuch as the faith is, fuch must the rule be: but the faith is, as before, inward and spiritual, which no mere book can be.

2. If the fcriptures were the general rule, they must have always been a perfect rule, ever fince they were a rule but this is impoffible, fince they were many bundred years in writing, and are now imperfect alfo as to number; how then are they the perfect rule?

That they were not the perfect rule before they were written, must be granted: and that they were many hundred years writing, must also be allowed: and that they are imperfect now, as to number, I prove:

First, "Enoch's Prophecy," is mentioned by Jude, but not extant in the Bible. "The Book of the " Wars of the Lord," Numb. xxi. 14. "The Book "of Jafher," Jofh. x. 13. 2 Sam. i, 18. "The "Book of Nathan," 2 Chron. ix. 29. "The Book "of Shemaiah, 2 Chron. xii. 15. "The Book of "Jehu: the Epiftle of the apostle Paul to the Lao"diceans," Colof. iv. 16. and several others mentioned in the fcriptures, not now extant. And lastly, Luke fays, "That many took in hand to re"late from eye-witneffes the things most surely be"lieved, &c."

6

Peter, thou mayeft find the Lord called the Word, or Reafon, and the Law.' See his ift book Strom. at the end. And before, page 353, he faith, The Law and the Gofpel is the operation of one Lord, who is the virtue and wisdom of God: and the fear which the law had bred, is merciful to falvation: and the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. That fhe (that is, Wifdom) that miniftereth providence, is mistress and good; and the power of both procureth falvation: the one chaftifing as miftrefs; the other • being bountiful, as a benefactor; for one must pass from darkness to life; and, applying his ear to wisdom, first be a fervant, then a faithful minifter, and fo afcend into the number of fons, and ⚫ be brought into the elect adoption of fons. That the law works to make them immortal, that chufe to live temperately and justly.' And again, Evil men do not understand the law; but they that feek the Lord, do understand every good thing.' And the whole firft book of the Stromata is especially to prove the antiquity of the One true religion, or philofophy, as he calls it.

2. Now,

2. Now, it is taken for granted, that John wrote many years after Luke: fome think Luke wrote before Mark. However, Matthew and Mark were not many, and to this day we fee no more than thofe four in our Bibles; and therefore many fuch writings are loft: and if loft, then the fcriptures, as aforefaid, are not perfect; and if imperfect, how can they be the rule of faith, fince the rule of faith must be perfect?

3. My third reafon is this; The fcriptures, however ufeful to edification and comfort, feem not in their own nature and frame to have been compiled and delivered as the general rule, and intire body of faith, but rather written upon particular occafions and emergencies. The doctrines are fcattered throughout the fcriptures; infomuch that thofe focieties, who have given forth verbal confeffions of their faith, have been neceffitated to toss them to and fro, fearch here and search there, to lay down this or the other principle; and then as like the original text as their apprehenfions can render it whereas, were it as plain and diftinct as the nature of a rule requires, they needed only to have given their fubfcription for a confeffion. Befides, here they are proper, there metaphorical: in one place literally, in another myftically to be accepted: moft times points are to be proved by comparing and weighing places coherent; where to allude aptly, and not wrong the fenfe, is difficult, and requires a clear and certain difcerning, notwithstanding the clamours upon us about infallibility. Now from all this, with abundance more that might be faid, plain is it that the fcriptures are not plain but to the fpiritual man: thus Peter faid of Paul's writings, that "in many things "they were hard to be understood?" Therefore not fuch a rule, which ought to be plain, proper, and intelligible.

4. Again, the fcripture cannot be the rule of faith, because it cannot give faith; for faith is the "gift of "God, which overcomes the world:" neither of

Eph. ii. 8. 1 John v. 4.

practice,

practice, because it cannot diftinguish of itself, in all cafes, what ought to be practifed, and what not; fince it contains as well what ought not to be practised, as what ought.

This was the cafe of Chrift's disciples, who had no particular rule in the Old Teftament writings for the abolishing of fome part of the Old Teftament religion on the contrary, they might have pleaded for the perpetuity of it, because Chrift faid unto them, "Do as they fay that fit in Mofes's chair," more reafonably than many who make that a plea now-a-days for their invented worfhips. What then guided them in their declaring void and relinquishing those things? For instance, God gave circumcifion "as a fign for h" And Paul tells the Galatians, " that if they "be circumcifed, Christ should profit them nothing:"" was not this the fpirit of truth, that leads into all truth, that the apoftles made the judge and rule of their doctrine and practice? So faid James, and the affembly of the apoftles, when they told the believers," It seemed good to the Holy Ghoft, and to "us," &c.

<< ever:

These very men that fay it is the rule of faith and life, deviate in their proof from their affertion; for the fcriptures no where fay fo of themselves. Here they fly to meanings and interpretations: the queftion arifes not about the truth of the text, for that is agreed on all hands; but the expofition of it: if then I yield to that man, do I bow to the letter of the text, or to his interpretation? If the latter, as manifeftly I do, is the fcripture, or that man's fenfe of it, my rule? Nay, the perfon fo interpreting makes not the fcripture his rule, but his own apprehenfion, whatever he may fay to gain credit to his conceptions with others; then mine it must needs be, I confenting thereto.

6. How fhall I be affured that thefe fcriptures came from God? I am bound to try all things: if all

h Gen. xvii. 7.

i Gal. v. 1, 2.

k Acts xv. 28.

things,

things, then them among the reft. I would fain know what I must try them with. With the fcriptures? Then the fcriptures must be the rule of my examination and faith concerning themselves, which is improper. If with the fpirit that gave them forth, which fearcheth the deep things of God (a measure of which is given to me to profit withal) then is it most congruous to call the Spirit, by way of excellency, and not the fcriptures, the rule.

7. If the fcriptures are the rule, they must be fo in the original, or copies: if in the original, that is not extant, and fo there would be no rule in being; for the last of it that was extant, was the Evangelift John's history at Ephefus, not feen almost these thoufand years. If the copies must be the rule, it were to be wished we knew which were the nigheft to the original, there being above thirty in number. This is undetermined, and for ought we fee undeterminable. And that which farther confirms what I fay is, the variety of readings which we find amongst those copies, amounting to several thousands. And if the copies cannot, how can the tranflations be the rule, fo various (if not differing) from the true fenfe of the copies in many things, and one from another? Befides, I would fain know of thofe of our prefent age, who thus contend for the fcriptures being the general rule, &c. in oppofition to the fpirit, upon what foot they receive them into this place and authority: is it by tradition or revelation? I mean, the internal teftimony of the fpirit; or the external award and determination of men? If the former, they must unavoidably come over to us; for then the spirit will, and must be both rule and judge: if the latter, I ask how are they affured that they are not miferably abused by carelessness or defign; fince we fee, that ufing the utmost diligence, both tranflation, tranfcription and printing, are fubject to numerous mistakes, and thofe fometimes very material, against which the fcripture of itself can be no fence?

But

But admit there were no ground for any fuch objection, I farther demand of our adverfaries, if they are well affured of thofe men that first collected, embodied, and declared them authentic by a publick canon? Which we read was in the council of Laodicea, held three hundred and fixty years after Chrift, though not as they are now received: during which time they had been toffed and tumbled through many hands, and of many judgments and opinions. Some were received, and fome rejected, and doubtless many thousands of times tranfcribed; and it is not improbable that they were alfo abused. If they mifs in their judgment here, they are gone till they come to us. I fay, how do they know that these men rightly difcerned true from fpurious? Either their judgment was infallible in the matter, or it was not: if it were, then there was fuch a thing as infallibility fince the apostles days, which is a contradiction to yourselves. But be it fo that they were infallible; how came you to be affured they were fo? Not by inspiration; for that is dangerous doctrine with you: which way was it then? Not by tradition: was it by the fcripture? That were to say that the fcripture tells you that those men that collected it for true, were right in their judgment: but we are yet to find any fuch place; and if it were fo, that would but beg the question. I cannot fee any other ground, befides your very great indulgence to their choice; which you call Popery, and believing as the church believes, in other folks. But if thefe men were fallible, as your opinion makes them, and their own determinations prove them, what then? Doubtless your condition will be very uncertain.

Now, fure it is, that fome of the fcriptures taken in by one council for canonical, were rejected by another as apocryphal; and that which was left out by the former for apocryphal, was taken in by the latter for canonical. Now visible it is, that they contradicted each other, and as true that they both erred, respecting the present belief: for your canon and catalogue vary from theirs, and, let me fay without offence, from

any