The Account Audited and Discounted, Exercitation 1 · Section 20 – Section 21
Section 20. What Feſtus meant by, foreign, Acts. 25.19. is not much material, it's like he ſpake it with ſcorn enough, &c.
THe three queſtions here between us, are not much worth debating; being but about the ſenſe of ſome few words. p. 62. n. 3.1. Whether the word foreign, be here taken in an ill ſenſe, by Feſtus: It ſeemes to me and many others, to be taken in an ill ſenſe; if the Doctor will needs think otherwiſe, let him enjoy his own opinion. The very Heathens (and ſuch was Feſtus) branded Religion, which they did not like, by the Name of Superſtition; ſurely, that was, in oppoſition to Religion, their own at leaſt, which they thought to be the trueſt. 2. p. 63. n. 5The next is of thoſe words (foreign,) which may be taken two wayes; either, his, or theirs; Pauls onelyonly, or the Jews alſo: The Doctor is for the former, and renders the words, his Superſtition: and ſomething being ſaid to it, in this Section, he takes no notice of it, (unleſs it be, to ſay, I give no reaſon of what I ſay) I ſhall therefore produce my reaſon there, and adde another ſtrength to it: I ſaid, from a parallel Scripture, Acts 23.29. Paul was accuſed of queſtions, foreign, of their Law, not of Pauls own Religion: To which I now adde a ſecond, Acts 18, 15. foreign, a queſtion of your Law; ſaid Gallio, one of Feſtus his rank. Let's ſee if his reaſon be better, then theſe two Scriptures, joyn'd with that, c. 25, 19. Thus he gives it, [The Jewes accuſation againſt Paul, is plainly mentioned in this place.] Well, ſo it is, p. 63. n. 6.in the other two places; what then? [How then, could their own Superſtition be the matter of their charge againſt him?] I could bluſh, or pitty ſuch argumentation; Apply it to the other Texts afore, Acts 18.15. [If it be, foreign,] That is (as the Doctor laboured to prove, numb. 5.) [An accuſation, or queſtion—of your Law.] Ask now, how could their own Law, See Acts 21.28. Teaches againſt the people, and againſt the Law.be the matter of their charge againſt him? I forbear the other place: And I adde, (if it were worth the while) the context carries it to my ſenſe; Thoſe words, were ſpoken to Agrippa concerning Pauls caſe; [Againſt whom, when the Accuſers ſtood up, they brought no accuſation of ſuch things as I ſuppoſed; but had certain queſtions againſt him, of their own Superſtition,] their own Law; the words afore immediately, being ſpoken of them, not of him; And if he ſhould ſay, but one part of the accuſation was, about one Jeſus, which was dead, &c. and ſo of Pauls Religion; the anſwer will be, that this is a distinct accuſation from the former; and ſo will conclude, it was, of theirs, as well as his: The former may include his, but his will not imply theirs. But too much of this. n. 7.The 3. is, [Whether, Feſtus put Jeſus, under the notion of a Daemon, or dead Heros.] My exception to it was, [That Paul affirmed him to be alive not in part, as thoſe departed Daemons were ſuppoſed, but in the whole man, as raiſed from the dead.] The Doctor makes a little retreat, as if he would yield to my reaſon; [I ſhall not, becauſe I need not, make it a matter of controverſie with any.] But it was, but to come on again with more force: [Yet I had this conſideration, to incline me to it, the immediate ſubjoyning of One Jeſus, whom Paul contended to live; to be Superſtes, &c.] But in citing theſe words, he ſhould have looked to the other words, 1. One Jeſus, foreign, which was, or had been dead, ſo the word ſignifies, (ſayes he, numb. 8.) Whom Paul affirmed to be alive, or live again; as the words together, do import. As for his other additions, they are not to the purpoſe; but conjectures of his own, and I liſt not to follow him.
But if he yield in the leaſt, to have miſtaken, he will recriminate, and throw dirt in his Adverſaries face; p. 64 n. 8.[That in this one proof, I have, ſtrained more, then he, in his Criticiſme.] Wherein will that appear. [1. When I read the text, they had many questions, when the word is, foreign, ſome.] But ſure that's no ſtrain; For verſe 7. I found, they laid many complaints againſt Paul; and in the text, there were three at leaſt, two concerning their own Superſtition, the word is plural, and another concerning one Jeſus, &c. Et tria ſunt omnia: we may ſay, many of three: 2. [That I read, both, and alſo; when no ſuch thing in the Greek, or Engliſh.] But I pray, if thoſe be diſtinct queſtions, of their Superſtition, and of one Jeſus, as the word, foreign, concerning, twice repeated, He leaves out the ſecond foreign, and ſayes, foreign n. 8. Is this fair.does fairly ſuggeſt; may not an Interpreter (ſo was I there) ſay, queſtions both concerning their own Superſtition, and alſo concerning one Jeſus, &c. 3. The third is long, and I know not well how to contract it: I ſaid, Paul was accuſed of Sedition, ſeducement, profanation of the Temple, &c. he returns, [Paul had cleared himſelf from thoſe: and ſo in Feſtus Judgement, Paul was not guilty of any thing, but onelyonly of his own Religion, and one Jeſus: by way of explication, (and foreign,) being exegetical, &c.] But 1. what though Paul had anſwered ſome of thoſe charges (being innocent in all) yet might not Feſtus tell Agrippa, they had many queſtions againſt him? as verſe 7. it is ſaid. 2. That Paul was not charged with any thing, but his own Superſtition, and one Jeſus, is a meer begging the queſtion. 3. So is the next that, (foreign, And) is here exegetical: which is proved falſe by the double, foreign, concerning; noted before, which would have been but once, had, foreign, been exegetical. And which is worſe, the accuſation had not been in the plural, not ſome queſtions, but a queſtion, concerning one Jeſus. I wiſh the Doctor did not here ſtrain his wits againſt the light: having ſaid at firſt he would not make it a controverſie with any: At laſt, he comes of with a Charientiſmus: [If all were granted, p. 65. n. 10.that I deſire, that the Superſtition ſpoken of was not Saint Pauls, but the Jewes; then be will ſay, it ſhall ſigniſie the Jewes Religion ſimply, without any Character of ill, or good laid upon it.] And why did he not ſave all this long vitiligation, by ſaying ſo much at firſt, and himſelf and me all this trouble? Yet I hope it may do good, one way or other, and then no cauſe to repent.
Section 21. What Epicurus doctrine was, or what Heathens thought of the word, foreign, we are not much ſolicitous, &c.
THat the Doctors intention was, (in his large diſcourſe, out of Heathens, concerning the word, p. 66. n. 1. &c.foreign,) [To lead us away in a miſt, from the true and proper ſenſe of the word amongſt Chriſtans,] may probably be conceived by theſe things. 1. That having acknowledged the word Superſtition, to be capable to ſignifie, [the giving of falſe Worſhip to the true God, pag. 59. n. 3. as well as Worſhip to falſe Gods;] In all his diſcourſe of Superstition afore, and his vindication now, he never exemplifies any Species of the former, amongſt Chriſtians. 2. Nay profeſſes, [That he believes, there is onelyonly one Special kinde of Superſtition, whereof any Proteſtants are guilty, except that, of making obſervations of ominous things, &.] Surely, the Worſhip of Daemons, cannot well be charged upon any Proteſtants (though upon Papiſts.) Nor are there many Proteſtants, [that dogmatize, or impoſe as neceſſary ſuch things, as the Law of Chriſt hath not made neceſſary.] And ſo it will be very hard to finde a Superſtitious Proteſtant; which was the deſigne of the Doctor, when he took upon him, to vindicate the Church of England and himſelf, from the guilt of Superstition. But if there be one kinde of Superſtition to Worſhip the true God, prout non debet, in a manner which he might not, as Aquinas; or with falſe Worſhip, as the Doctor ſayes, ſurely many Proteſtants, (and the Doctor for one) will be found guilty of more Superſtition, then he is willing yet to acknowledge: and ſo he may keep his wit to himſelf, numb. 2.
That the Heathens took the word ſometimes in an ill ſenſe, he cannot deny, but ſayes, p. 67. n. 5.[So they did Religion too.] That's rather to my advantage; but I let it paſs, taking his confeſſion: I therefore did appeal to Chriſtian Authors, and amongſt them, I believe, it will trouble the Doctor for all his great reading, to finde one Greek Author, that ever uſed foreign, in a good ſenſe, for true Religion; or any Latine Author (excepting but ſome Papiſts) that ever uſed Superſtitio in a good ſenſe, for true Religion: ſome Etymologists, and Gloſſaries that ſpeak of the word, foreign, have an eye to the ſenſe of it amongſt Heathens, who took the thing in a good ſenſe; but profeſs, that Chriſtians take the word and thing, in an ill ſenſe. The reſt of this Chapter is, foreign, and ſo I paſs it by.