A Treatise of Knowledge and Love, Part 1 · Chapter 6

A Treatise of Knowledge and Love · Part 1 · Chapter 6

p. 46Chap. 6.

What are the unknown things, and uncertainties, which we muſt not pretend a certain knowledge of.

SOmewhat of this is ſaid already, Cap. 3. But I am here to come to more particular inſtances of it. But becauſe that an enumeration would be a great Volume of it ſelf, I ſhall begin with the more general, that I may be excuſed in moſt of the reſt; or mention only ſome particulars under them as we go.

I. A very great, if not the far greateſt part of that part of Philoſophy called Phyſicks, is uncertain (or certainly falſe) as it is delivered to us in any methodiſt that I have yet ſeen; whether Platoniſts, Peripateticks, Epicureans, (the Stoicks have little, but what Seneca gives us, and Barlaam Collecteth, I know not whence, as making up their Ethicks, and what in three or four Ethical writers is alſo brought in on the by, and what Cicero reporteth of them) or in our Noveliſts, Patricius, Teleſius, Campanella, Thomas White, Digby, p. 47Carteſius, Gaſſendus, &c. Except thoſe whoſe modeſty cauſeth them to ſay but little, and to avoid the uncertainties; or confeſs them to be uncertainties. To enumerate inſtances would be an unſeaſonable digreſſion. Gaſſendus is large in his Confeſſions of uncertainties. I think not his Brother Hobs, and his ſecond Spinoſa worth the naming. Nor the Paracelſians and Helmontians as giving us a new Philoſophy, but only as adding to the old. There needs no other teſtimony of uncertainty to a man that hath not ſtudied the points himſelf, than their lamentable difference, and confutation of each other, in ſo many, very many things; even in the great Principles of the Science.

Yet here no doubt, there are certainties, innumerable certainties, ſuch as I have before deſcribed. We know ſomething certainly of many things, even of all ſenſible objects. But we know nothing perfectly and comprehenſively, not a worm, not a Leaf, not a Stone, or a Sand, not the Pen, Ink or Paper, which we write with; not the hand that writeth, nor the ſmalleſt particle of our bodies; not a hair or the leaſt accident. In every thing neareſt us, or in the world, the uncertainties and incognita are far more than that which we certainly know.

II. If I ſhould enumerate to you the many uncertainties in our common Metaphyſicks, (yea about the Being of the Science) and our common Logick, &c. It would ſeem unſuitable to a Theological diſcourſe. And yet it would not be unuſeful, among ſuch Theologues as the Schoolmen, who reſolve more of their doubts by Ariſtotle than by the Holy Scriptures; doubtleſs, as Ariſtotles Predicaments are not fitted to the kinds of beings, ſo many of his diſtributions and orders, yea and precepts are arbitrary. And as he left room and reaſon for the diſſent of ſuch as Taurellus, Carpenter, Jacchaeus, Gorlaeus, Ritſchel, and abundance more, ſo have they alſo for mens diſſent from them. Even Ramus hath more adverſaries than followers. Gaſſendus goeth the right way, p. 48by ſuiting verba rebus, if he had hit righter on the nature of things themſelves. Moſt novel Philoſophers are fain to make new Grammars and new Logicks, for words and notions, to fit their new conceptions, as Campanella, and the Paracelſians, Helmontians, (and if you will name the Behmeniſts, Roſicrucians, Weigelians, &c.) Lullius thought he made the moſt accurate Art of notions; and he did indeed attempt to fit words to things: but he hath miſt of a true accompliſhment of his deſign, for want of a true method of Phyſicks in his mind, to fit his words to. As Cornelius, Agrippa, See a book written long ſince this called the Samaritan of excellent uſe, by Mr. Jones of Suffolk.who is one of his chief commentators, yet freely confeſſeth in his lib. de Vanitate Scientiarum, which now I think of; I will ſay no more of this, but deſire the Reader to peruſe that laudable book, and with it to read Sanchez his Nihil Scitur, to ſee uncertainty detected, ſo he will not be led by it too far into Scepticiſm. As alſo Mr. Glanviles Scepſis Scientifica.

As for the lamentable uncertainties in Medicine, the poor world payeth for it. Anatomy as being by ocular inſpection hath had the beſt improvement; And yet what a multitude of uncertainties remain? Many thouſands years have millions yearly died of Feavers, and the medicating them is a great part of the Phyſicians work; and yet I know not that ever I knew the man, that certainly knew what a Feaver is. I crave the pardon of the Maſters of this noble art for ſaying it; It is by dear experience that I have learnt how little Phyſicians know; having paſſed through the tryal of above thirty of them on my own Body long ago, meerly induced by a conceit that they knew more than they did, and moſt that I got was but the ruine of my own body, and this advice to leave to others, [Highly value thoſe few excellent men, who have quick and deep conjecturing apprehenſions, great reading and greater Experience, and Sober, Careful, Deliberating minds, and had rather do too little than too much: But uſe them p. 49in a due conjunction with your own experience of your ſelf: But for the reſt, how Learned ſoever, whoſe heads are dull, or temper precipitant, or apprehenſions haſty or ſuperficial, or reading ſmall, but eſpecially that are young, or of ſmall experience, love and honour them, but uſe them as little as you can, and that only as you will uſe an honeſt ignorant Divine, whom you will gladly hear upon the certain Catechiſtical Principles, but love not to hear him meddle with Controverſies. So uſe theſe men in common eaſie caſes, if neceſſary, and yet there the leſs the better, leſt they hinder nature that would Cure the Diſeaſe. If you diſlike my counſel, you may be ſhortly paſt blaming it; for though their ſucceſſes have Tongues, their miſcarriages are moſtly ſilent in the Grave. O how much goeth to make an able Phyſician? But enough of ſuch inſtances.

III. But though Errors in Politicks the World payeth yet much dearer for, I muſt not be too bold in talking here. But I will confeſs that here the uncertainties are almoſt all in the Applicatory part, and through the incapacity of the minds of men: For the truth is the main Principles of Policy are part of the Divine Law, and of true Morality, and in themſelves are plain, and of a ſatisfying Certainty, could you but get mens heads and hearts into a fitneſs duely to conſider and receive them.

IV. But to come nearer to our own profeſſion, there is much uncertainty in thoſe Theological Concluſions, which are built on ſuch premiſes, where any one of theſe Phyſical, Metaphyſical or Logical Uncertainties are a part; yea, though it be couched in the narroweſt room, even in one ambiguous term of Art, and ſcarce diſcerned by any but accurate obſervers. With great pomp and confidence many proceed to their Ergo's, when the detection of the fraud not only of an uncertain Medium, but of one ambiguous ſyllable, will marr all. And the concluſion can be no ſtronger or furer, than the more weak and doubtful of the premiſes.

p. 50V. When the Subject is of ſmall and abſtruſe parts, far from the Principles and Fundamentals of the Matter, uſually the Concluſions are uncertain. Nature in all matters beginneth with ſome few great and maſter parts, like the great boughs or limbs of the Tree, or the great Trunks and Maſter Veſſels in our bodies; and from thence ſpring branches, which are innumerable and ſmall: And it is ſo in all Sciences, and in Theology it ſelf. The great Eſſential and Chief Integral parts, are few, and eaſily diſcerned: But two grand Impediments hinder us from a Certain knowledge in the reſt: one is the great Number of Particles, where the underſtanding is loſt, and, as they ſay, ſeeketh a Needle in a bottle of Hay, or a leaf in a Wood; and the other is the Littleneſs of the thing, which maketh it undiſcernible to any but accurate and ſtudious minds. And therefore how much ſoever men that trade in little things, may boaſt of the ſublimity of them, and their own ſubtilty, their perceptions uſually are accompanied with uncertainty; though in ſome caſes an uncertain knowledge, known to be ſo, is better than none.

VI. Yea, though the Matters themſelves may be more bulky, yet if in knowing and proving them, we muſt go through a great number of Syllogiſms and Inferences, uſually the concluſion is very uncertain to us, whatever it may be to an extraordinary accurate and prepared mind: For 1. We ſhall be ſtill jealous (or may be) leſt in ſo many terms and mediums ſome one of them ſhould be fallacious and inſufficient, and weaken all. And we are ſo conſcious of our own weakneſs, and liableneſs to forget, overſee or be miſtaken, that we ſhall or may ſtill fear leſt we have miſt it, and be overſeen in ſomething, in ſo long a courſe and ſeries of arguings.

VII. Thoſe parts of Hiſtory which depend meerly on the credit of Mens Wiſdom and Honeſty, and ſo are meerly of Humane Faith, muſt needs be uncertain. For the concluſion p. 51can be no ſurer than the premiſes, All men as ſuch are liars, that is, untruſty, or ſuch as poſſibly may deceive. 1. They may be deceived themſelves. 2. And they may deceive others where they are not themſelves deceived. Every man hath ſome Paſſion, ſome Ignorance, ſome Error, ſome Selfiſh intereſt and ſome Vice. This age, if we never had known other inſtance, is ſo ſad a proof of this, that tears are fitter than words to expreſs it, moſt confident reporters totally differ about the moſt notorious matters of Fact. I muſt not name them, but I pity ſtrangers and poſterity. If it come eſpecially to the characterizing of others, how ordinarily do men ſpeak as they are affected? And they are affected as ſelf-intereſt and paſſion leadeth them, with Cochlaeus, Bolſeck, and ſuch others, what villains were Luther, Zwinglius, Calvin, &c. with their faithfulleſt acquaintance; what Good and Holy men (ſaving Luthers animoſity?) If the Inquiſitors Torment Proteſtants, or Burn them, is it not neceſſary that they call them by ſuch odious names as may juſtify their fact? If they baniſh and ſilence faithful, holy, able, Miniſters, they muſt accuſe them of ſome villanies which may make them ſeem worthy of the puniſhment, and unworthy to Preach the Goſpel of Chriſt! what different characters did Conſtantius and Valens and their party on one ſide, and Athanaſius and the Orthodox on the other ſide, give of one another? What different characters were given of Chryſoſtom? How differently do Hunnerichus and Genſericus on one ſide, and Victor Uticenſis and other Hiſtorians on the other ſide, deſcribe the Biſhops and Chriſtians of Africk, that then ſuffered? They were Traytors and Rebels, and Rogues, and Enemies to the King, and Hereticks to Hunnerichus: But to others, they are Holy blameleſs Men, and thoſe were Tyrants and Hereticks that Perſecuted them. What difference between the Hiſtories of the orthodox, and that of Philoſtorgius, and Sondius? What different Characters do Euſebius and Eunapius give of Conſtantine? and Eunapius p. 52and Hilary, &c. give of Julian? What different Characters are given of Hildebrand on one ſide, and of the Emperours Henrys on the other ſide, by the many Hiſtorians who followed the ſeveral parts? How falſe muſt a great number of the Hiſtorians on one ſide be? I know that this doth not make all Humane Faith and Hiſtory uſeleſs. It hath its degree of credibility anſwerable to its uſe. And a wiſe man may much conjecture whom to believe. 1. A Man that (like Thuanus) ſheweth modeſty and impartiality, even towards Diſſenters. 2. A man that had no notable intereſt to byas him. 3. A man that manifeſteth otherways true honeſty and conſcience. 4. Suppoſing that he was himſelf upon the place, and a competent Witneſs.

But there is little or no Credit to be given, 1. To a factious, furious railer. 2. To one that was a flatterer of Great Men, or depended on them for preferment, or lived in fear of ſpeaking the truth, or that ſpeaketh for the intereſt of his Riches and Honour in the World; or for his engaged perſonal reputation, or that hath eſpouſed the intereſt of a ſect or faction. 3. There is little credit to be given to any Knave and Wicked Man. He that dare be Drunk, and Swear and Curſe, and be a Fornicator or covetous Worldling, dare Lie for his own Ends. 4. Nor to the honeſteſt man that taketh things by rumours, hear-ſay and uncertain reports, and knoweth not the things themſelves.

But how ſhall ſtrangers and poſterity know when they read a Hiſtory, whether the Writer was an honeſt Man or a Knave? A man of credit, or an impudent Liar? Both may be equal in confident aſſerting, and in the plauſibility of the narrative. Meer humane belief therefore muſt be uncertain.

From whence we ſee the pitiful caſe of the ſubjects of the King of Rome (for ſo I muſt rather call him than a Biſhop.) Why doth a Lay-man believe Tranſubſtantiation, or any other Article of their Faith? Becauſe the Church faith p. 53it is Gods Word. What is the Church that ſaith ſo? It is a faction of the Popes, perhaps at Laterane, or forty of his Prelates at the Conventicle of Trent. How doth he know that theſe men do not lie? Becauſe God promiſed that Peters Faith ſhould not fail, and the Gates of Hell ſhould not prevail againſt the Church; and the Spirit ſhould lead the Apoſtles into all truth. But how ſhall he know that this Scripture is Gods Word? And alſo that it was not a total failing, rather than a failing in ſome degree that Peter was by that promiſe freed from? Or that the Spirit was promiſed to theſe Prelates which was promiſed to the Apoſtles? Why, becauſe theſe Prelates ſay ſo! And how know they that they ſay true? Why, from Scripture, as before.

But let all the reſt go. How knoweth the Lay-man that ever the Church made ſuch a decree? That ever the Biſhops of that Council were lawfully called? That they truely repreſented all Chriſts Church on Earth? That this or that Doctrine is the decree of a Council, or the ſence of the Church indeed? Why, becauſe the Prieſt tells him ſo. But how knoweth he that this Prieſt ſaith true, or a few more that the man ſpeaketh with: there I leave you: I can anſwer no further; but muſt leave the credit of Scripture, Council and each particular Doctrine, on the credit of that poor ſingle Prieſt, or the few that are his companions. The Lay-man knoweth it no otherwiſe.

Q. But is not the Scripture it ſelf then, ſhaken by this, ſeeing the Hiſtory of the Canon and incorruption of the Books, &c. dependeth on the word of Man?

Anſ. No. 1. I have elſewhere fully ſhewed how the Spirit hath ſealed the ſubſtance of the Goſpel. 2. And even the matters of fact are not of meer humane Faith. For meer humane Faith depends on the meer honeſty of the reporter: but this Hiſtorical Faith dependeth partly on Gods atteſtation, and partly on Natural proofs. 1. God did by Miracles atteſt the reports of the Apoſtles and firſt Churches, 2. The p. 54conſent of all Hiſtory ſince, that theſe are the ſame writings which the Apoſtles wrote, hath a Natural Evidence above bare humane Faith. For I have elſewhere ſhewed, that there is a concurrence of humane report or a conſent of hiſtory, which amounteth to a true Natural Evidence, the Will having its Nature and ſome neceſſary acts, and nothing but neceſſary aſcertaining cauſes, could cauſe ſuch concurrence. Such Evidence we have that K. James, Q. Elizabeth, Q. Mary, lived in England: that our Statute books contain the true Laws, which thoſe Kings and Parliaments made whom they are aſcribed to. For they could not poſſibly rule the Land, and over-rule all mens intereſts, and be pleaded at the Bar, &c. without contradiction and detection of the fraud, if they were forgeries: (though it's poſſible that ſome words in a Statute Book may be miſprinted. There is in this a Phyſical Certainty in the conſent of men, and it depends not as humane Faith, upon the honeſty of the reporter; but Knaves and Liars, have ſo conſented, whoſe intereſts and occaſions are croſs, and ſo is it in the caſe of the hiſtory of the Scripture Books: which were read in all the Churches through the World, every Lords day, and contenders of various opinions took their Salvation to be concerned in them.

VIII. Thoſe things muſt needs be uncertain to any man, as to a particular Faith or Knowledge, which are more in number than he may poſſibly have a diſtinct underſtanding of; or can examine their Evidence whether they be certain or not. For inſtance the Roman Faith containeth all the Doctrinal decrees, and their Religion alſo all the Practical decrees of all the approved General Councils, (that is, of ſo much as pleaſed the Pope, ſuch power hath he to make his own Religion.) But theſe General Councils (added to all the Bible, with all the Apocrypha) are ſo large, that it is not poſſible for moſt men to know what is in them. So that if the queſtion be whether this or that Doctrine be p. 55the Word of God, and the proof of the affirmative is, becauſe it is decreed by a General Council, this muſt be uncertain to almoſt all men, who cannot tell whether it be ſo decreed or no: Few Prieſts themſelves knowing all that is in all thoſe Councils: So that if they knew that all that is in the Councils is Gods Word; they know never the more whether this or that Doctrine (e. g. the immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, &c.) be the Word of God. And if a Heathen knew that all that is in the Bible is the Word of God, and knew not a word what is in it, would this make him a Chriſtian or Saint him?

You may object, that moſt Proteſtants alſo know not all that is in the Scripture. Anſ. True; nor any one. And therefore Proteſtants ſay not that all that is in the Scripture is neceſſary to be known to Salvation, but they take their Religion to have eſſential parts, and integral parts and accidents. And ſo they know how far each is neceſſary. But the Papiſts deride this diſtinction, and becauſe all truths are equally true, they would make men believe that all are equally Fundamental or Eſſential to Chriſtianity: But this is only when they diſpute againſt us; at other times they ſay otherwiſe themſelves, when ſome other intereſt leads to it, and ſo cureth this impudency.

It were worthy the enquiry whether a Papiſt take all the Bible to be Gods Word, and de fide, or only ſo much of it as is contained particularly in the decrees of Councils? If the latter, then none of the Scripture was de fide, or to be particularly believed for above 300 years, before the Council of Nice. If the former, then is it as neceſſary to Salvation to know how old Henoch was, as to know that Jeſus Chriſt is our Saviour?

IX. Thoſe things muſt needs be uncertain which depend upon ſuch a number of various circumſtances as cannot be certainly known themſelves. For inſtance, the common rule by which the Papiſt Doctors do determine what particular p. 56Knowledge and Faith are neceſſary to Salvation, is that ſo many truths are neceſſary as are ſufficiently propounded to that perſon to be known and believed. But no man living, learned nor unlearned, can tell what is neceſſary to the ſufficiency of this propoſal. Whether it be ſufficient, if he be told it in his Childhood only, and at what Age? Or if he be told it but once, or twice, or thrice, or how oft? whether by a Parent or Layman that can not tell him what is in the Councils? or by a Prieſt that never read the Councils? and whether the variety of natural capacities, bodily temperaments, education and courſe of Life before, do not make as great variety of proportions to be neceſſary to the ſufficiency of this Propoſal? And what mortal man can truly take the meaſure of them? And how then can any man be Certain what thoſe points are which are neceſſary for him to believe?

X. Thoſe things are uncertain which depend upon an uncertain Author or Authority. For inſtance, the Roman faith dependeth on the expoſition of the Scriptures by the conſent of the Fathers, and on the Tradition of the Church, and the decrees of an authorized Council. And here is in all this, little but uncertainties.

1. It is utterly uncertain who are to be taken for Fathers, and who not. Whether Origen, Tatianus, Arnobius, Lactantius, Tertullian, and many ſuch, be Fathers or not. Whether ſuch a man as Theophilus Alexandrinus, or Chryſoſtom was the Father, when they condemned each other. Whether ſuch as are juſtly ſuſpected of Hereſy, (as Euſebius) or ſuch as the Romaniſts have caſt ſuſpicions on (as Lucifer Calaritanus called a Heretick, Socrates, Sozomens falſly called Novatians, Hilary, Arelatenſis Condemned by the Pope Leo, and Claud. Turovenſ. Rupertus Tuitienſ. and ſuch others.) When the ancients renounced each others Communion, (as Martin did by Ithacius and Idacius and their Synod,) when they deſcribe one another as ſtark Knaves, as Socrates doth Theophil. Alexandrin. p. 57and Sulpitius Severus doth Ithacius, which of them were the Fathers.

2. How ſhall we know certainly which are the true uncorrupted writings of theſe Fathers among ſo many forgeries and ſpurious Scripts?

3. How ſhall it be known what expoſition the Fathers conſented on, when not one of a multitude, and but few in all have commented on any conſiderable parts of the Scripture, and thoſe few ſo much often differ?

4. When in the Doctrine of the Trinity it ſelf Petavius largely proveth that moſt of the writers of the three firſt Centuries after the Apoſtles were unſound, and others confeſs the ſame about the Millennium, the corporeity of Angels and of the Soul, and divers other things; doth their conſent bind us to believe them? If not, how ſhall we know in what to believe their conſent, according to this Rule?

2. And as to the Church, they are utterly diſagreed among themſelves, what that Church is which hath this authority.

1. Whether the Pope alone. 2. Or the Pope with a Provincial Council. 3. Or the Pope with a General Council. 4. Or a General Council without the Pope. 5. Or the univerſality of Paſtors. 6. Or the univerſality of the people with them.

3. And for a Council. 1. There is no certainty what number of Biſhops, and what conſent of the Comprovincial Clergy is neceſſary to make them the true repreſentatives of any Church. 2. And more uncertain in what Council the Biſhops had ſuch conſent. 3. And uncertain whether the Popes approbation be neceſſary. (The great Councils of Conſtance and Baſil determining the contrary.) 4. And uncertain which were truly approved. 5. And moſt certain that there never was any General Council in the world (unleſs you will call the Apoſtles a General Council) but only General Councils of the Clergy of one Empire (with now and then a ſtragling Neighbour,) even as we p. 58have General Aſſemblies and Convocations in this Kingdom: And who can be certain of that faith which dependeth upon all, or any of theſe uncertainties?

XI. That muſt needs be an uncertainty which dependeth on the unknown thoughts of another man. For inſtance, with the Papiſts the Prieſts intention, which is the ſecret of his heart, is neceſſary to the being of Baptiſm, and Tranſubſtantiation. And ſo no man can be certain whether he or any other man be baptized or not. Nor whether it be Bread or Chriſts Body which he eateth. We confeſs that it is neceſſary to the being of a Sacrament, that the Miniſter do ſeem or profeſs to intend it as a Sacrament; But if the reality of his intent be neceſſary to the being of it, no man can be certain that ever he had a Sacrament.

XII. It is a hard thing to be certain on either ſide, in thoſe controverſies which have multitudes, and in a manner equal ſtrength, of Learned, Judicious, Well-ſtudyed, Godly, Impartial men for each part. I deny not but one clear-headed man, may be certain of that which a multitude are uncertain of, and oppoſe him in. But it muſt not be ordinary men, but ſome rare illuminated perſon, that muſt get above a probability, unto a Certainty, of that which ſuch a company as aforeſaid are of a contrary mind in.

XIII. There is great uncertainty in matters of private impulſe. When a man hath nothing to prove a thing to be Gods will, but an inward perſwaſion or impulſe in his own Breaſt, let it never ſo vehemently incline him to think it true, it's hard to be ſure of it. For we know not how far Satan or our own diſtempered Phantaſies may go. And moſt by far that pretend to this, do prove deceived. That which muſt be certain, muſt be ſomewhat equal to Prophetical Inſpiration. Which indeed is its own Evidence: But what that is, no man can formally conceive but he that hath had it. Therefore we are bid to Try the Spirits.

p. 59XIV. It is a hard thing to gather certainties of Doctrinal concluſion from Gods Providences alone. Providential changes have their great uſe, as they are the fulfilling or execution of the word. But they that will take them inſtead of the Scripture, do uſually run into ſuch miſtakes, as are rectifyed to their coſt, by ſome contrary work of Providence ere long. Theſe times have fully taught us this.

XV. It is hard to gather Doctrinal certainties from Godly mens Experiences alone. Even our Experimental Philoſophers and Phyſicians find, that an experiment that hits ofttimes, quite miſſeth afterwards on other Subjects, and they know not why. A courſe of effects may oft come from unknown cauſes. And it's no rare thing for the common Prejudices, Selfconceitedneſs, or corruption of the weaker and greater number of good people, which needeth great repentance and a cure, to be miſtaken, for the Communis Senſus Fidelium, the Inclination and Experience of the Godly. Eſpecially when conſent or the honour of their Leaders or Themſelves hath engaged them in it. In my time, the common ſenſe of the ſtricteſt ſort was againſt long hair, and taking Tobacco and other ſuch things, which now their common practice is for. In one Countrey the common conſent of the ſtricteſt party is for Arminianiſm. In another they are zealouſly againſt it. In Poland where the Socinians are for ſitting at the Sacrament, the Godly are generally againſt it. In other places they are for it. In Poland and Bohemia where they had holy, humble, perſwading Biſhops, the generality of the Godly were for that Epiſcopacy, as were all the ancient Churches, even the Novatians: But in other places it is otherwiſe. So that it's hard to be certain of Truth or Error, Good or Evil, by the meer Conſent, Opinion or Experience of any.

XVI. But the laſt and great inſtance is, that in the holy Scriptures themſelves, there is a great inequality in point of Certainty, yea many parts of them have great uncertainty; Even theſe that follow.

p. 60I. Many hundred Texts are uncertain through various Readings in ſeveral Copies of the Original. I will not multiply them on Capellus his opinion. Though Claud. Saravius (Who got the Book Printed) and other worthy men approve it. I had rather there were fewer Varieties, and therefore had rather think there are fewer. But theſe that cannot be denied muſt not be denied: Nor do I think it fit, to gather the diſcrepancies of every odd Copy and call them Various readings. …ut it is paſt denial that the world hath no one ancient Copy which muſt be the Rule or Teſt of all the reſt, and that very many Copies are of ſuch equal credit, as that no man living can ſay that this, and not that where they differ hath the very words of the Holy-Ghoſt; And that even in the New Teſtament alone the differences or various Readings, of which no man is able to ſay which is the right, are ſo great a number as I am not willing to give every reader an account of; Even thoſe that are gathered by Stephanus and Junius and Brugenſis, and Beza, if you leave out all the reſt in the appendix to the Polyglot Bible. In all or moſt of which we are utterly uncertain which Reading is Gods Word.

II. There are many hundred words in the Scriptures that are ambiguous, ſignifying more things than one; and the context in a multitude of places determineth not the proper ſenſe; ſo that you may with equal Authority tranſlate them either thus or thus: The Margin of your Bibles giveth you no ſmall number of them. It muſt needs here be uncertain which of them is the Word of God.

III. There are many hundred Texts of Scripture, where the Phraſe is General, and may be applyed to more particulars than one: In ſome places the ſeveral particulars muſt be taken as included in the General. (And where there is no neceſſity, a General Phraſe ſhould not be expounded as if it were particular.) But in a multitude of Texts the General is put for the particular, and muſt be interpreted, but of one p. 61ſort, and yet the context giveth us no certain determination which particular is meant. This is one of the commoneſt uncertainties in all the Scriptures. Here it is Gods will that we be uncertain.

IV. In very many paſſages of the Hiſtory of Chriſt, the Evangeliſts ſet both Words and Deeds in Various Orders, one ſets this firſt, and another ſets another firſt. (As in the order of Chriſts three Temptations, Mat. 4. and Luk. 4. And many ſuch like.) Though it is apparent that Luke doth leſs obſerve the order than the reſt, yet in many of theſe caſes it is apparent that it was Gods will to notifie to us the Matter only, and not the Order. And that it muſt needs be uncertain to us, which was firſt ſaid or done, and which was laſt.

The ſame is to be ſaid of the time and place of ſome ſpeeches of Chriſt recorded by them.

V. Many of Chriſts Speeches are recorded by the Evangeliſts in various words.It is moſt probable that Chriſt and the Apoſtles then ſpake in the Chaldee called Hebrew, and ſo that the four Goſpels are but tranſlations of Chriſts words, and ſo not the the words, but the ſence was Chriſts: And what wonder then if the tranſlating Evangeliſts uſe divers words? Even the Lords Prayer it ſelf, Mat. 6. and Luk. 11. Beſides that Matthew hath the doxology which Luke hath not (which Grotius and many others think came out of the Greek Liturgy into the Text.) And even in Chriſts Sermon in the Mount, and in his laſt Commiſſion to his diſciples, Mat. 28.18, 19, 20. and Mar. 16. Now in ſome of theſe caſes (as of the Lords Prayer) it is uncertain whether Chriſt ſpake it once or twice: (Though the former is more likely.) In moſt of them, it is plain that it was the Will of Gods Spirit to give us the true ſenſe of Chriſts ſayings in various words, and not all the very words themſelves: For the Evangeliſts that differ do neither of them ſpeak falſly, and therefore meant not to recite all the very words: If you ſay that one giveth us the true words and another the true ſenſe, we ſhall p. 62never be certain that this is ſo, nor which that one is. So that in ſuch caſes no man can poſſibly tell which of them were the very words of Chriſt.

VI. There are many Texts of the Old Teſtament recited in the New, where it is uncertain whether that which the Penman intended was an Expoſition or Proof of what he ſaid, or only an Alluſion to the Phraſe of Speech, as if he ſhould ſay, [I may uſe ſuch words to expreſs my mind or the matter by.] As Matth. 2.23. He ſhall be called a Nazarene. So v. 16, 17. Rom. 10.6, 7, 8, 18. and others. I know the Excellent Junius in his Parallels hath ſaid much, and more than any other that I know, to prove them all, or almoſt all to be expoſitory and probatory Citations: But withal confeſſing that the generality of Ancient and Modern Expoſitors think otherwiſe, he thereby ſheweth a great uncertainty; when he himſelf ſaith not that he is Certain of it; and few others thought it probable.

VII. There are many Texts cited in the New Teſtament out of the Septuagint, where it differeth from the Hebrew: Wherein it is utterly uncertain to us, whether Chriſt and his Apoſtles intended to juſtifie abſolutely the tranſlation which they uſe, or only to make uſe of it as that which then was known and uſed for the ſake of the ſenſe which it contained. If they abſolutely juſtifie it, they ſeem to condemn the Hebrew, ſo far as it differeth. If not, why do they uſe it, and never blame it? It ſeemeth that Chriſt would hereby tell us, that the ſenſe is the Gold, and the words but as the Purſe; and we need not be over-curious about them, ſo we have the ſence. As if I ſhould uſe the vulgar Latine, or the Rhemiſts Tranſlation with the Papiſt, becauſe he will receive no other.

VIII. There are many Aenigmatical and obſcure expreſſions, which a few Learned men only can probably conjecture at, & few or none be certain of the full ſenſe. If any certainly underſtand much of the Prophecies in Daniel and the Revelations, p. 63it muſt needs be very few: When Calvin durſt not meddle with the latter: And though moſt of the famous Commentators on the Revelations are ſuch as have peculiarly made it their Study, and ſet their minds upon it above all other things, and rejoiced in conceit that they had found out the true ſenſe which others had overſeen, (as men do that ſeek the Philoſophers Stone) yet how few of all theſe are there that agree? And if ten be of nine minds, eight of them at leaſt are miſtaken. Franc. du Jon, the Lord Napier, Brightman, Dent, Mede, and my godly Friend Mr. Stephens yet living, (ſince dead,) with many others, have ſtudied it thus with extraordinary diligence, but with different ſucceſſes: And Lyra with other old ones turn all quite another way. And then come Grotius and Dr. Hammond and contradict both ſides, and make it all (ſaving a few Verſes) to have been fulfilled many Ages ſince. And can the unlearned, or the unſtudied part of Miniſters then, with any modeſty pretend a certainty, where ſo many and ſuch men differ?

I know it is ſaid, Bleſſed is he that readeth, Rev. 1.3.Rev 1:3and they that hear the words of this Prophecy, and keep thoſe things which are written therein: But that proveth no more than 1. That ſome of it (as ch. 1, 2, 3.) is plain and commonly intelligible. 2. That it is a deſirable thing to underſtand the reſt; and worthy mens endeavour in due time and rank; and he that can attain to certainty may be glad of it.

I paſs by the darkneſs of many Types and Prophecies of Chriſt in the Old Teſtament, and how little the Jews or the Apoſtles themſelves, till after Chriſts Reſurrection, underſtood them. With very many other obſcurities, which yet are not written in vain, nay, which make up the true perfection of the whole.

IX. There are very many proverbial Speeches in the Scripture, which are not to be underſtood as the words properly p. 64ſignifie, but as the ſenſe of thoſe Proverbs then was among the Jews. But diſuſe hath ſo totally obliterated the knowledge of the ſenſe of many of them, that no man living can certainly underſtand them.

X. There are many Texts which have words adapted to the Places, the Animals, the Utenſils, the Cuſtoms, the Coins, the Meaſures, the Vegetables, &c. of that place and time, which are ſome hard, and ſome impoſſible now to be certainly underſtood: And therefore ſuch as Bochart, Salmaſius, Caſaubone, Scaliger, &c. have done well to add new Light to our conjectures; but leaving great uncertainty ſtill.

XI. Becauſe the Jewiſh Law is by Paul plainly ſaid to be ceaſed or done away, it remaineth very difficult to be certain of abundance of paſſages in the Old Teſtament, how far they are obligatory to us? For when they now bind no otherwiſe than as the continued Law of nature, or as reaſſumed by Chriſt into his ſpecial Law, where the latter is not found, in the former there is often inſuperable difficulty. For moſt lyeth upon the proof of a parity of Reaſon, which puts us upon trying caſes hardly tryed, unleſs we knew more of the reaſon of all thoſe Laws. (As about Vows and Diſpenſations, Num. 30. about prohibited degrees of Marriage, and ſuch like; which makes Divines ſo much differ about the obligation of the Judicials, (of which ſee Junius vol. 1. p. 1861, &c. de Polit. Moſ. obſerv.) and about Uſury, Prieſthood, Magiſtrates power in Religion, and many ſuch.

XII. There are abundance of Texts which only open the ſubſtance of the matter in hand to us, and ſay nothing about abundance of difficulties of the manner, and many circumſtances, (as the manner of the Divine influx, and the Spirits operation on the Soul, &c.) And here all that which is unrevealed muſt needs be unknown.

p. 65XIII. There are many Precepts which were local, perſonal, particular, It is very hard to be ſure what the Apoſtles ſetled as an Univerſal perpetual Law, in Church matters, and what they ſetled only as ſuited to that time and place by the common rule of doing all to Edification: I will have Mercy and not Sacrifice being a ſtanding Rule, it's hard to plead their uſe of any Rites againſt common good: Perhaps more is mutable than moſt think.and ſo temporary, and bind not univerſally all Perſons, at all times afterwards: Such as the Rechabites Precepts from their Father, and ſuch as the Love Feaſts, the Kiſs of Love, Womens Veil and long Hair, Mens being uncovered, &c. Now it is very hard to know in all inſtances whether the Precepts were thus temporary or univerſal and durable: which makes Divines differ about the Anointing of the Sick, the Office of Deacons and Deaconeſſes, the Power of Biſhops, and Extent of their Dioceſſes, the Eating things ſtrangled, and Blood, (againſt which Chr. Beckman in his Exercit. hath abundance of ſhrewd Arguments, though few are of his mind.) In theſe caſes few reach a Certainty, and none ſo full a Certainty as in plainer things.

XIV. It is very hard to be Certain when, and how far Examples of holy men in Scripture bind us: Though I have elſewhere proved that wherever the Apoſtles practice was the Execution of their Commiſſion for ſetling Church Orders, in which Chriſt promiſed them the help of his Spirit, their Practice was obligatory. Yet in many inſtances the obligation of Examples is very doubtful: Which occaſioneth the Controverſies about imitating John Baptiſt's Life in the Wilderneſs, and Anna, and about Lent, and about Baptizing by dipping over Head, and about the Lords Supper, whether it ſhould be Adminiſtred to a Family, or at Evening only, or after Supper, or Sitting, or in a private Houſe, &c. And about waſhing Feet, and many Church Orders and Affairs.

XV. There are many things in Scripture that are ſpoken but once or twice, and that but as on the by, and not very p. 66plainly: And we cannot be ſo Certain of any Doctrine founded on theſe, as on paſſages frequently and plainly written.

XVI. There are ſo many ſeeming differences in Scripture, eſpecially about Numbers, as that if they be reconcileable, few or none in the World have yet found out the way. If we mention them not our ſelves, ſuch paultry Fellows will do it, as Bened. Spinoſa in his Tractatus Theolog. Polit. I will not cite any, but deſire the Learned Reader to conſider well of what that Learned and Godly man,Without approving all that is in it, I may wiſh the Reader to peruſe Father Simon's ſecond Book now newly Printed in London. Ludov. Capellus ſaith in his Critic. Sacr. l. c. 10. and l. 6. c. 7, 8. (I own not his ſuppoſition of a better Hebrew Copy uſed by the Sept.) I think an impartial conſiderer of his inſtances will confeſs, that as God never promiſed all or any of the Scribes or Printers of the Bible any infallible Spirit, that they ſhould never write or print a word falſly, and as it is certain by the various Lections that many ſuch there have been in many and moſt Books; ſo there is no one Scribe that had a promiſe above the reſt, nor any one Hebrew or Greek Copy which any man is ſure is abſolutely free from ſuch miſwritings. For how ſhould we be ſure of that one above all the reſt? And I wiſh the Learned Reader to conſider Bibliander's Preface to his Hebr. Grammar, and Caſaubone's Exercit. 1. § 28. and Pellicanus his Preface to his Coment. on the Bible. Hierom on Mic. 5.2. is too groſs, de Matth. 2. Quod Teſtimonium nec Haebraico nec 70 Interpretibus convenire, &c. Let him read the reſt that will, which is harſher; he that will not confeſs miſwritings of numbers, and ſome names and words heretofore, as well as ſome miſprintings now, doth but by his pretended Certainty tempt men to queſtion the reſt for the ſake of that, and injureth the Sacred Word.

XVII. We have not the ſame degree of Certainty of the Canonicalneſs or Divineneſs of every Book of Scripture: p. 67Though they are all Gods Word, they have not all the ſame Evidence that they are ſo. The New Teſtament had a fuller Atteſtation from Heaven for its Evidence to man, than moſt of the Old had. And of the New Teſtament, it was long before many Churches received the Epiſt. to the Hebrews, the ſecond of Peter, Jude, Revel. &c. Even in Euſebius days, in his Praepar. Evangel. he ſheweth that they were not received by all. And of the Old Teſtament, Moſes, and the Pſalms and Prophets have fuller Atteſtation than the reſt. And indeed, as it is probable that the Chronicles were written in or after Ezra's time at ſooneſt, ſo they do in ſo many places differ in numbers from the Book of Kings, where all would agree with the reſt of the Hiſtory, if thoſe numbers were but reduced to thoſe in the Kings, that if any man ſhould doubt of the Divine Authority of that Book, that thereby he may be the leſs tempted to queſtion any others, I ſhould not think his Error inconſiſtent with Salvation. Put but that man to prove what he ſaith, who aſſerteth that we have equal Evidence of the Divinity of the Chronicles, Canticles, Eſther, as we have of Moſes, the Prophets, the Pſalms, and the New Teſtament, and you ſhall quickly find that he did but pretend an equal degree of Certainty which indeed he had not. The Papiſts pretend that they are as certain of the Divinity of the Apocrypha, as we are of the reſt: But they do but pretend a Certainty, for Intereſt and Cuſtom ſake.

XVIII. Though it be to be held that Certainly the Holy Writers had no falſhoods in Doctrine or Hiſtory, but delivered us the Truth alone, yet no one of them delivereth us all the Truth, no not of many particular Hiſtories, and Speeches of Chriſt which they mention: And therefore we muſt ſet them altogether for the underſtanding of them: (As in the inſtance of Chriſts appearing and the Angels Speeches after his Reſurrection.) And when all's done we have not all that Chriſt ſaid and did, but all that was neceſſary to p. 68our Faith and Salvation. For as Paul citeth Chriſt, ſaying, It is more honourable to give, than to receive, ſo John tells us that the World could not contain the Books that ſhould be written, we muſt take heed therefore how far we go with Negatives, of ſuch unmentioned things.

XIX. Though all that the Holy Writers have recorded is true, (and no falſhood in the Scripture but what is from the error of Scribes and Tranſlators) yet we are not certain that the Writers had not human infirmites in the Phraſe, Method and Manner of expreſſion. It is apparent that their ſtyle, yea their Gifts were various, as Paul oft openeth them, 1 Cor. 12. &c. Therefore Paul rather than Barnabas was the Chief Speaker. And Apollo was more eloquent than others: Hence ſome were of Paul and ſome of Apollo and ſome of Cephas: And Paul is put to vindicate his miniſterial abilities to the Corinthians. Therefore though weaker mens gifts put no ſinful imperfection into the Scriptures, yet a humane natural imperfection of ſtyle, and order might be more in ſome than others. It is certain that they were not all perfect in Knowledge and Holineſs. And how far every Sermon which they Preached was free from all that Imperfection (any more than Peters carriage, Gal. 2.) we are uncertain. And how far their Writings had a promiſe of being free from Natural modal imperfections more than their Preachings, we know not fully. And yet God turned this weakneſs of theirs to the confirmation of our Faith; ſhewing us that Heavenly power, and not human wiſdom and ability did his work. As Davids ſling in conquering Goliath ſhewed Gods power. And out of the mouths of Babes doth God ordain ſtrength, and the weak things of the World are uſed to confound the ſtrong.

XX. Laſtly, though all be certainly true which they have recorded, yet we have not the ſame degree of Certainty, that no Writer erred through lapſe of memory in ſome leſs material paſſage, as we have that they infallibly delivered us the p. 69Goſpel. But this I have ſaid ſo much of already in a ſmall Book called More Reaſons for the Chriſtian Religion, that I muſt now refer you thither for the reſt.

Q. But if there be ſo many things either uncertain or leſs-certain▪ what is it that we are or may be fully certain of?

Anſ. 1. What you are or are not certain of your ſelf, you ſhould know if you know your ſelf without my telling you.

2. I deny not but you may come to a Certainty of all thoſe things which are never ſo difficult, that have any aſcertaining evidence; if you live long enough, & ſtudy hard enough, and have an extraordinary meaſure of Divine illumination: I do not meaſure others by my ſelf: You may know that which I know not. God may bleſs your ſtudies more, as being better men and fitter for his bleſſing: he may give you extraordinary Inſpirations, or Revelations if he pleaſe. But I am thankful for my low degree, and confeſs my ignorance.

3. But I have told you before what Certainties we have. 1. We are certain of things ſenſible. 2. And of our Elicite and Imperate acts. 3. And of Natural principles. 4. And of clear inferences thence. 5. And of the Truth of all the Certain holy Scriptures which are Evidently the Word of God 6. And particularly therein of the plain Hiſtorical parts. 7. And of all that which is the main deſign and ſcope of the Text in any Book or Chapter. 8. And of all that which is purpoſely and often repeated, and not only obſcurely once ſpoken on the by. 9. Therefore we may be Certain of all that is neceſſary to Salvation: of every Article of the Creed; of every Petition in the Lords Prayer, and every neceſſary common duty: We may be Certain of the Truth and Senſe of all the Covenant of Grace concerning the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoſt, his Relation to us, and our Relation and Duty to him, and of the benefits of the Covenant; of the neceſſity and nature of Faith, Repentance, Hope, Love, Obedience, Patience, &c. It's tedious to recite all, in a word, all that is of common p. 70neceſſity, and all (how ſmall ſoever) which is plainly revealed and expreſſed. 10. And you may be certain of the fulfilling of much of this Holy Word already by ſufficient Hiſtory and Experience.